Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Item #08 Approval of Resolution Adopting Local Mitigation Strategy
t I ocoee florida AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET Meeting Date: March 6, 2018 Item # R Reviewed By: Contact Name: Stephen C. Krug Department Director: Contact Number: 6002 City Manager: /// Subject: Resolution Adopting Local Mitigation Strategy. Background Summary: The City has been working with FEMA to obtain reimbursement for costs expended during Hurricane Irma in 2017. FEMA indicated the City has the potential to qualify for pre-disaster mitigation grants when available. The first step in the grant application process is to adopt a Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS). FEMA recommended the City adopt the existing Orange County LMS as the document was prepared in anticipation of local municipalities utilizing the plan. The County LMS is thorough in detailing potential hazards which could also occur in the City of Ocoee. Some potential pre-disaster mitigation projects for the City would include increasing the existing vehicle fuel storage, storm hardening City structures along with upgrading and adding generators. Public Works recommends approval of the resolution adopting the County LMS to open the potential for the City to obtain pre- disaster mitigation grant funds. Issue: Request the City Commission approval of a resolution adopting the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy to open the potential for the City to obtain pre-disaster mitigation grant funds. Recommendations: Recommend the City Commission approve the resolution adopting the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in order for the City to apply for pre-disaster mitigation grant funds. Attachments: Resolution Adopting Local Mitigation Strategy. Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy. Financial Impact: Adoption of the Local Mitigation Strategy provides the potential to obtain pre-disaster mitigation grant funding. Type of Item: (please mark with an “x") Public Hearing For Clerk's Dept Use: Ordinance First Reading X Consent Agenda Ordinance Second Reading Public Hearing Resolution Regular Agenda X Commission Approval Discussion&Direction Original Document/Contract Attached for Execution by City Clerk Original Document/Contract Held by Department for Execution Reviewed by City Attorney N/A Reviewed by Finance Dept. 71.,_Diaja N/A Review ed by ( ) N/A 2 of the CITY OF OCOEE Regarding LOCAL MITIGATION STRATEGY Resolution No. WHEREAS, the areas of the City of Ocoee are vulnerable to the human and economic costs of natural,technological and societal disasters; and WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Ocoee recognize the importance of reducing or eliminating those vulnerabilities for the overall good and welfare of the community; and WHEREAS, Section 322 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. §5165, as amended by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, provides for States and local governments to undertake a risk-based approach to reducing risks to natural hazards through mitigation planning; and WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has implemented various hazardous mitigation planning provisions through regulation at 44 CFR §201.6 requiring local governments to have a FEMA approved Local Mitigation Strategy ("LMS") in order to apply for and/or receive project grants; and WHEREAS, 44 CFR §201.6(d)(3) requires local jurisdictions to review and revise their LMS to reflect changes in development, progress in local mitigation efforts, and changes in priorities, and resubmit it for approval within five (5) years in order to continue to be eligible for mitigation project grant funding; and WHEREAS, the representatives and staff of Orange County government have identified, justified and prioritized a number of proposed projects and programs needed to mitigate the vulnerabilities of areas of the City of Ocoee to the impacts of future disasters; and WHEREAS, these proposed projects and programs have been incorporated into the 2016 edition of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy that has been prepared and issued for consideration and implementation by the communities of Orange County. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF OCOEE: Section 1. The City of Ocoee hereby accepts and approves its designated portion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy. Section 2. The staff of Orange County and the City of Ocoee are requested and instructed to pursue available funding opportunities for implementation of the proposals designated therein. Section 3. The City of Ocoee will, upon receipt of such funding or other necessary resources, seek to implement the proposals contained in its section of the strategy. Section 4. The City of Ocoee will continue to participate in the updating and expansion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead. Section 5. The City of Ocoee will further seek to encourage the businesses, industries and community groups operating within and/or for the benefit of Orange County and the City of Ocoee to also participate in the updating and expansion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead. Section 6. Effective Date. The resolution shall take effect upon the date of its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2018. APPROVED: ATTEST: CITY OF OCOEE,FLORIDA Melanie Sibbitt, City Clerk Rusty Johnson, Mayor (SEAL) FOR USE AND RELIANCE ONLY APPROVED BY THE CITY OF OCOEE BY THE CITY OF OCOEE,FLORIDA COMMISSION AT A MEETING APPROVED AS TO FORM AND HELD ON ,2018, LEGALITY THIS DAY OF UNDER AGENDA ITEM NO. ,2018. Sheffield,Lowman & Wilson P.A. By: Scott Cookson, City Attorney Orange County Local Mitigation StrategY 2016 „ . '..,.--..,• , '. ,--- Itti..... _ ff.” (C77.:, te l • • f j�.. .i f , 1 , -- .r � _ -• 4�,. "i44-217.111. .� - f GNCyia.1WAN2E "�$CY MANAGE o%� �' oge Fpt Z EMAP 4: ii C6 TY Amommimmk ,CCAEDITATION pao0" GOVERNMENT Rw_ F L O R I D AU6 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Record of Changes iv Executive Summary 1 Orange County Board of County Commissioners'Adoption Resolution 3 SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION 4 Purpose 4 Scope 4 Table 1: Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group Membership 6 LMS Committees 8 Plan Update Participation 8 Update Process 9 Stakeholders 11 Public 12 Existing Plans, Studies, Reports, and Technical Information Integration 12 Incorporation of the LMS into Other Documents 13 Updating, Evaluating, and Monitoring 15 Plan Adoption Process 17 Demographics 18 Population Characteristics 19 Table 2: Population Totals by Municipality, 2010 19 Table 3: Population by Race, 2010 20 Vulnerable Populations 20 Figure A: Population by Age of Persons with Special Needs in Orange County 21 Table 4-A: 2010 Housing Units in Orange County, FL 24 Table 4-8: 2015 Parcel Stock in Orange County, FL 24 Table 5: Year Structure Built in Orange County 25 Hazard and Vulnerability Assessment Tool Methodology 26 Figure B: Orange County LMS Hazard and Vulnerability Assessment Tool 29 Hazard Identification, Vulnerability, and Risk Descriptions 31 Diseases and Pandemic 31 Animal 31 Human 32 Plant/Agdculture 33 Extreme Temperatures 37 Drought 37 Table 6: Orange County Drought Occurrences, 2001 -2015 38 Table 7: Categorical U.S. Drought Monitor Statistic Drought Severity Classification 39 Freezes/Winter Storms 41 Table 8: Historical Winter Weather in Orange County 43 Table of Contents Page i Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Heat Waves 45 Table 9: Record Temperature Extremes, 1892-2013 45 Floods 48 Table 10: Historic Lake Flooding Elevations 49 Table 11: Total Area in Floodplains in Orange County, FL 51 Figure C: Floodplains in Orange County, FL 52 Table 12: Storm Events-Rainfall Amount 53 Table 13: Development Criteria 53 Table 14: NFIP and CRS Communities in Orange County, FL 54 Table 15: Repetitive Flood Loss Properties in Orange County, FL 57 Table 16: Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)Zones 58 Severe Thunderstorms 61 Hail 61 Table 17.a.: Hail Event Magnitudes in Orange County, FL (date) 61 Table 17.b.: Hail Event in Orange County, FL, 2010-2014 62 Lightning 64 Table 18: Annual Lightning Strikes in Orange County, FL 64 Tomados 68 Table 19: Tornado Strikes in Orange County, FL 1950-2014 69 Figure D: Map of Tornado Strikes in Orange County, FL, 1950-2014 70 Table 20: Enhanced Fujita Scale for Tornados 71 Sinkholes/Land-subsidence 74 Table 21: Sinkholes in Orange County, FL, 1961 -2014 75 Figure E: Map of Sinkhole Locations in Orange County, FL, 1961 -2014 76 Table 22: Hazardous Materials Incidents in LEPC District VI, FL 80 Table 23: Superfund Sites in Orange County, FL 81 Figure F: Extremely Hazardous Substance Facilities in Orange County, FL 82 Terrorism/CBRNE 86 Table 24: Tropical Systems within Borders of Orange County, FL, 1950-2015 92 Figure G: Tropical Systems 50 Statute Miles from Orange County, FL, 1950-2015 93 Table 25: Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale 94 Table 26: Building Exposure by Occupancy Type in Orange County, FL 96 Table 27: HAZUS-MH for Building Damage(#), 10-year Event in Orange County, FL 96 Table 28: HAZUS-MH for Building Damage(#), 20-year Event in Orange County, FL 97 Table 29: HAZUS-MH for Building Damage(#), 50-year Event in Orange County, FL 97 Table 30: HAZUS-MH for Building Damage(#), 100-year Event in Orange County, FL 97 Table 31: HAZUS-MH for Building Damage(#), 500-year Event in Orange County, FL 98 Table 32: HAZUS-MH for Incomes Losses in Orange County, FL 99 Wildfires 101 Table 33: Fires by Cause in Orange County, FL: 1980 -2014 102 Table 34: Wildland Fires per NFIRS in Orange County, FL: 2010-2016* 103 Figure H: Chart of WUI Population Areas in Orange County, FL 104 Figure I: Map of WUI Population Areas in Orange County, FL 104 Figure J: Chart of Bum Probability in Orange County, FL 107 Figure K: Map of Burn Probability in Orange County, FL 109 SECTION 4-STRATEGIC GOALS AND CAPABILITIES 112 Goals and Objectives 112 Table of Contents Page ii AOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Authorities, Policies, Programs, and Resources 114 Strategies for Implementation 115 Table 35-Orange County LMS Strategic Projects 116 ioritization Methodology 118 Plan Update and Project Progress 122 Appendix A-Orange County LMS Updates and Public Participation 123 Appendix B-Orange County LMS Hazards Quick Reference 170 Appendix C-Orange County LMS Working Group and Committee By-Laws 170 Appendix O-Project Priority List History 173 Annex 1 -Orange County LMS Project Submission Form Template 202 Annex 2-Orange County LMS Project Priority Submission Form Guide 205 Table of Contents Page iii Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Record of Changes Date Description of Change Page and/or Section Record of Changes Page iv AOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Executive Summary Orange County is threatened by a variety of different types of natural, technological, and human-caused hazards. These hazards can endanger the overall well-being of residents, visitors, and other municipalities; threaten private business operations; and compromise the quality of life experienced in the County. Several years ago, a group of agencies in and around Orange County, joined together to establish a Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group (LMS Working Group) that addressed these hazards. They formulated potential solutions to them to reduce or eliminate the threats and the impacts. This planning process involved takes into account all of the hazards that may affect Orange County while developing effective mitigation measures to lessen the overall impact to the community. The LMS Working Group is a multi-jurisdictional group and includes representatives from around Orange County in its hazard mitigation planning efforts. The planning process for the update of this plan was led by the Orange County Office of Emergency Management and brought together a core group, known as the LMS Planning Committee, whose members included: Orange County Public Works, Orange County Public School District, the City of Orlando, Reedy Creek Improvement District, Ranger Drainage District, the University of Central Florida, Orlando Health, and the American Red Cross. Other representatives to the LMS Working group include County agencies, municipalities, private sector, and non-profit groups. In addition to the unincorporated county, the Orange County LMS has been formally adopted via resolution by eleven (11) municipalities and one (1) university: • Orange County (unincorporated) • City of Ocoee • City of Apopka • City of Orlando • City of Belle Isle • Town of Windermere • Town of Eatonville • City of Winter Garden • City of Edgewood • City of Winter Park • City of Maitland • University of Central Florida • Town of Oakland Following approval of this updated LMS, a new formal adoption resolution must be obtained from each entity seeking to adopt the document. The LMS Planning Committee has also conducted research on historical occurrences to identify a number of hazards that may threaten Orange County. In order to estimate the risks, impacts, or vulnerabilities to the different affected areas of the County by each hazard, a series of outreach events was conducted in communities around the Executive Summary Page 1 A Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 County. For each hazard, an historical impact survey was conducted that looked at the damages felt by members of the public, their property, the geographic and natural environment, the economy, and emergency preparedness efforts and operations. An analysis was completed to evaluate any potential consequences to members of the public, property, critical facilities or infrastructure, the natural environment, the economy, emergency responders, or public confidence in government operations. The information resulting from these analytical methods will be used by the LMS Working Group to help prioritize its actions prior to future disasters taking place. The LMS Working Group will also take into consideration the probability of occurrences, vulnerabilities, extent of damages, impacts, and overall risks to the populations, their property, and facilities and neighborhoods of the County in order to identify, validate, and rank specific projects from sponsoring agencies that will help to diminish or eliminate the negative impacts sustained during a disaster. A listing of these prioritized projects or initiatives is included as part of the LMS document. As the initiatives are developed over time, both now and in the future, the LMS Working Group must continue to provide new information and research on hazard occurrences and brief the community on changes in probabilities, vulnerabilities, and risks. As development in Orange County continues to occur, and as the tourism capital of the world, we have a rich mixture of diverse historical neighborhoods, a strong business environment, and an exciting variety of arts and cultural venues with endless leisure and entertainment opportunities, the potential for impacts grows as well. Implementing our mitigation strategy will be essential to help to preserve our community and improve its ability to handle a disaster when it occurs. Our multi- jurisdictional approach allows our participating communities to become more resilient to the effects of major disasters as well. As we press on, this strategy must continue to be updated, reviewed, and revised in the future to account for any changes in risks and address emerging hazards. Our County has had plenty of experience with dealing with disasters in the past, several of which have shaped the way we prepare for, respond to, and mitigate for the future. The ever-changing conditions of hazards means we must also find ways of incorporating new participation from our jurisdictions, public sector agencies, and our private sector and non-profit partners. The revision process and future versions of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy will be used as a means to inform and involve our general public and other interested groups so that they can fully participate in making our communities more resilient to the impacts of disasters that take place in the years to come. Executive Summary Page 2 AOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Orange County Board of County Commissioners' Adoption Resolution Executive Summary Page 3 it 'J( �I)L `� of the ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Regarding LOCAL MITIGATION STRATEGY Resolution No. .201.-FM 06 WHEREAS, the areas of unincorporated Orange County are vulnerable to the human and economic costs of natural, technological and societal disasters; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of County Commissioners recognize the importance of reducing or eliminating those vulnerabilities for the overall good and welfare of the community; and WHEREAS, Section 322 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. §5165, as amended by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, provides for States and local governments to undertake a risk-based approach to reducing risks to natural hazards through mitigation planning; and WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has implemented various hazardous mitigation planning provisions through regulation at 44 CFR §201.6 requiring local governments to have a FEMA approved Local Mitigation Strategy ("LMS") in order to apply for and/or receive project grants; and WHEREAS, 44 CFR §201.6(d)(3) requires local jurisdictions to review and revise their LMS to reflect changes in development, progress in local mitigation efforts, and changes in priorities, and resubmit it for approval within five (5) years in order to continue to be eligible for mitigation project grant funding; and WHEREAS, the representatives and staff of Orange County government have identified, justified and prioritized a number of proposed projects and programs needed to mitigate the vulnerabilities of unincorporated areas of Orange County to the impacts of future disasters; and WHEREAS, these proposed projects and programs have been incorporated into the 2016 edition of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy that has been prepared and issued for consideration and implementation by the communities of Orange County. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ORANGE COUNTY: Section 1. Orange County hereby accepts and approves its designated portion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy. Section 2. The staff of Orange County are requested and instructed to pursue available funding opportunities for implementation of the proposals designated therein. Section 3. Orange County will, upon receipt of such funding or other necessary resources, seek to implement the proposals contained in its section of the strategy. Section 4. Orange County will continue to participate in the updating and expansion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead. Section 5. Orange County will further seek to encourage the businesses, industries and community groups operating within and/or for the benefit of Orange County to also participate in the updating and expansion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead. [REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] Section 6. Effective Date. The resolution shall take effect upon the date of its adoption. ADOPTED THIS DAY OF FEB 2 1 2017 ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA By: Board of County Commissioners By: sa Jacobs ,r r►'/ ll.Orange Cou _r`0_,. l `fsr �eft ATTEST: Phil Diamond, CPA, County Comptroller " .' w As Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners • IA! By: Deputy C)/is I \ , s:V`wndilMttomeys-atlmMYnchenry Illekocal megaton strategy msolutionkesolution drat 12916-romialmd.doc A Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Section 1 - Introduction The Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS) is a strategic plan that addresses mitigation activities taking place in County. Mitigation is defined as an effort that permanently reduces loss of life, injury, and property damage caused by natural or man-made hazards by lessening the impact of disasters. Actions taken now, prior to the next disaster, help reduce the human, physical, and financial consequences later. Purpose Local Mitigation Strategies are required under Section 322 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act) as enacted under the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA2K) in order to be eligible to receive federal hazard mitigation grants. The mitigation plan identifies potential hazards and vulnerabilities, researches historical occurrences and probability rates of return, and determines their impacts. Based on this information, vulnerable areas and populations are determined and anticipated risks are evaluated. The LMS Working Group then sets goals and objectives for the overall mitigation strategy to be implemented. Various partnering agencies then submit specific projects or mitigation actions to reduce risk to people, buildings, the economy, critical infrastructure, and the environment. Projects and/or programs must be long-term solutions that decrease or are also cost effective . As Florida is a state that experiences many types of hazards, Florida has built a comprehensive mitigation planning program that remains one of the most proactive programs in the United States. The LMS Working Group was established to make the whole community more resistant to natural and technological hazards by identifying and prioritizing mitigation projects. Following a disaster, the LMS Working Group convenes to discuss these projects and evaluate ways to implement them to reduce or eliminate the threats from future hazards. Scope The Orange County LMS Working Group serves as the county's multi-jurisdictional, multi-hazard mitigation advisory group and is responsible for the annual update of the LMS, along with the five(5) year revision. As per Florida Administrative Code (FAC) 27P-22, the LMS Working Group and associated LMS plan is required to receive federal disaster funds under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP). Members of the Orange County LMS Working Group take part in conducting a vulnerability assessment where the hazards that may impact residents are evaluated. A hazard is considered to be any event or condition with the potential to cause fatalities, injuries, property damage, infrastructure damage, agricultural loss, environmental damage, business interruption, or other structural and financial loss. The extent that the impacts that are felt as the result of a hazard and the probability of occurrence or SECTION 1 - Introduction Page 4 eOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 recurrence are weighed as part of the assessment. Associated vulnerabilities are analyzed and taken into consideration, such as population demographics, economic loss, or geopgraphic areas that may be susceptible to a hazard. Other risks and a prioritized project list to address those hazards is created. In 2005, a study by the National Institute of Building Sciences reported to the U.S. Congress that, on average, every dollar spent on mitigation yields four dollars in future benefits. Hazard mitigation is extremely important because of this fact. Hazard mitigation is defined as any action taken to reduce or eliminate the long term risks to human life and property from natural, man-made, or technological hazards. A hazard is any event or condition with the potential to cause fatalities, injuries, property damage, infrastructure damage, agricultural loss, environmental damage, business interruption, or other structural and financial loss. As Orange County's communities continue to grow, hazard mitigation will play an even more important role in protecting our citizens and their health, safety, and welfare. Hazard mitigation aims to make human development and the natural environment safer and more resilient. Hazard mitigation generally involves altering the built environment to significantly reduce risks and vulnerability to hazards so that life and property losses can be avoided or reduced. Mitigation can also include removing the built environment from disaster prone areas and maintaining natural mitigating features, such as wetlands or floodplains. Hazard mitigation makes it easier and less expensive to respond to and recover from disasters by breaking the damage and repair cycle. Examples of hazard mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, the following: • Development of mitigation standards, regulations, policies, and programs • Land use/zoning policies • Strong building codes and floodplain management regulations • Dam safety program and levee systems • Acquisition of flood prone and environmentally sensitive lands • Retrofitting, hardening, or elevating structures and critical facilities • Relocation of structures, infrastructure, and facilities out of vulnerable areas • Public awareness or education campaigns • Improvement of warning and evacuation systems Benefits of hazard mitigation include: • Saving lives and protecting public health • Preventing or minimizing property damage • Minimizing social dislocation and stress • Reducing economic losses • Protecting and preserving infrastructure • Reducing legal liability of government and public officials • Reduced expenses for response and recovery efforts SECTION 1 - Introduction Page 5 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Section 2 — Planning Process and Considerations The Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group is comprised of representatives from Orange County with a variety of government agencies at the municipal, county, and regional levels, private sector, education, healthcare, non-profit organizations, and interested citizens. The LMS Working Group has standing meetings that are conducted on the second Wednesday of each quarter (February, May, August, and November). These meetings are designed to update the members on current and ongoing mitigation activities; present information on hazards, vulnerabilities, and risk from subject matter experts; review mitigation methods and tactics; provide an overall update on new or emerging technologies or research methods; and to solicit input on new or potential mitigation projects from organization representatives and municipalities. Below is a list of LMS Working Group members from a variety of local organizations in the public sector from the municipal, county, and regional levels; private sector; education; and non-profit sector. Table 1: Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group Membership Name Agency Position Committee Participation Ralphetta Aker Orange County Public Works Division Manager Department Eric Alberts Orlando Health Manager Steering, Planning Mike Baker Orange County Public Works Assistant Project Manager Department Michelle Beaumon City of Orlando Lauren Bradley Rollins College Public Information Officer Al Butler City of Ocoee Capital Improvement Projects Manager Tom Draper Greater Orlando Aviation Director of Airport Authority Operations George Orange County Department of Intelligence Officer Fesselmeyer Corrections Dennis Foltz Town of Oakland Town Manager Cliff Frazier Florida Forest Service Wildfire Mitigation Specialist DougAssistant Support Services Gaines City of Ocoee Director William Graf South Florida Water Management Intergovernmental & District Outreach Representative Nate Haney Orange County Public Works Citizen Services Coordinator Department Eric Hill MetroPlan Orlando Director of Systems Management and Operations Jim Hunt City of Orlando Deputy Public Works Director Rodney Kapel Universal Orlando Emergency Manager SECTION 2 — Planning Process and Considerations Page 6 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Braden Kay City of Orlando Sustainability Project Manager Reed Knowlton Orange County Capital Projects Financial Advisor Division Michael Lingerfelt Lingerfelt International President Rodney Lynn Orange County Public Works Chief Engineer Department Hayley Markman University of Central Florida Assistant Planner Planning John McElwee Orange County Risk Management Senior Safety & Loss Division Prevention Analyst Jason McCright Vista Lakes Community Development District Development District Representative Lucas McCurdy Coastal Reconstruction Director of Business Relations Matthew McGrew City of Winter Garden Fire Chief Bea Meeks City of Edgewood City Clerk Robert Mitchell Reedy Creek Improvement Assistant Chief Planning District Jeff Morgan University of Central Florida Emergency Manager Tanya Naylor Reedy Creek Improvement Emergency Manager District Daniel Negron Orange County Public Works Engineer III — LMS Vice Planning Department Chair Mike Parker Town of Oakland Public Works Director John Petrelli Orange County Risk Management Manager Division Ron Plummer Orange County Office of Emergency Manager Emergency Management Mary Prescott Wedgefield Homeowners' President Association Scott Rayburn Rollins College Safety and Emergency Planning Coordinator Jennifer Rodriguez Orange County Public Schools Director of Emergency Management Assistant Vice President for Paul Rooney Valencia College Safety, Security, and Risk Management Ari Schein University of Central Florida Emergency Management Coordinator Robert Smith Town of Windermere Town Manager Lee-Ann Snipes City of Orlando Senior Administrative Assistant Manny Soto City of Orlando Emergency Manager— LMS Steering, Chair Planning Rich Steiger Orange County Facilities Manager Management Jason Taylor Orange County Office of Emergency Management Emergency Management Specialist— LMS Coordinator SECTION 2 — Planning Process and Considerations Page 7 a` Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Keila Walker Greater Orlando Aviation Emergency Manager Planning Authority Anthony MetroPlan Orlando Transportation Engineer Washington Orville Watson Orange County Utilities Safety Administrator Steering Department Will Watts City of Maitland Assistant Chief Lihua Wei City of Orlando Project Manager II Jim White City of Winter Park Fire Chief Gail Wilds Wedgefield Homeowners' Firewise Coordinator Association LMS Committees The LMS Working Group utilizes a committee structure, made up of volunteers from the LMS Working Group members, to discuss mitigation projects and activities in further depth. There are two standing committees: the Steering Committee and the Planning Committee; the roles and responsibilities of each committee can be found in Appendix C — LMS Working Group By Laws. The Steering Committee is charged with providing the overall direction and guidance that the LMS Working Group should be taking. They are tasked with the oversight and coordination of actions or decisions made by the LMS Working Group. The Planning Committee is tasked with identifying, analyzing, and monitoring the hazards that may threaten Orange County. They are also responsible for reviewing, ranking, and prioritizing potential mitigation projects. The Planning Committee meets several times each year on an as-needed basis to review projects. The Committee held meetings on August 22, 2013 to begin the process of implementing a new Project Submittal Form and explain the process for project sponsors to submit new projects or update current projects. Subsequent meetings were held throughout the year for the purpose of initiating the annual review and revision of the Local Mitigation Strategy document, along with the five-year plan update. The LMS Plan Update is another responsibility of the Planning Committee. Plan Update Participation The LMS document was developed by the LMS Planning Committee in accordance with the Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (44 CFR 201.6) as established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The principal planning effort was directed by the Orange County Office of Emergency Management (OCOEM) and accomplished through a combined collaborative effort of various agencies and organizations represented on the LMS Working Group. The Planning Committee consists of the following LMS members: • Orange County Office of Emergency Management • Orange County Public Works SECTION 2 — Planning Process and Considerations Page 8 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 • Ranger Drainage District • Orange County Public School District • University of Central Florida • City of Orlando • Orlando Health • Reedy Creek Improvement • American Red Cross District Update Process The Orange County LMS Working Group and Planning Committee used the Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide (FEMA, 2011) to initially review the 2009-2010 Orange County LMS. Based upon the preliminary review, the plan update met the crosswalk requirements, but several sections would need a substantive revision based upon new information and processes to be compliant with the guidance. A complete review of every section of the Orange County LMS was conducted and the plan was redeveloped using the 2014 Florida Local Mitigation Strategy Crosswalk and corresponding standards under the Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP). The following is a description of the review process to show changes the development of several of the sections and priorities from the previous plan: • Executive Summary and Introduction Section: These sections include an overview of the plan, an introduction, a discussion on the scope and purpose of the document, along with goals and objectives, and the participants in the planning process. This section was revised to reflect the current approach taken by the Orange County LMS Working Group and Planning Committee. • Mitigation Planning Organization: This section was deemed to be unnecessary to the plan and could be included in other sections. • Mitigation Planning Process: The Planning Process from the previous 2009-2010 plan was reviewed, but it contained information on the development process from another earlier iteration of the plan from 2003-2004 instead of the more recent version. Most of the information here would be eliminated. • Orange County Demographics and Land Use The facts and figures here will be updated and revised based on the 2010 Census and other statistical estimates provided by the University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) and the Metro Orlando Economic Development Commission (MOEDC). New information from the revised County Comprehensive Plan was also incorporated. SECTION 2 — Planning Process and Considerations Page 9 Orange CountyLocal Mitigation Strategy2016 \-�- 9 9 • Hazard Identification and Vulnerability Analysis Several new hazards were identified as potential or emerging trends with other hazards classified as "threats" and not"hazards." Most of the historical occurrences were updated to include current events, facts, or figures since the previous update. Other assessment tools had to be utilized with the lack of maintenance to the Mapping for Emergency Management, Parallel Hazard Information System (MEMPHIS). Other methodologies for a hazard and vulnerability tool were assessed. • Mitigation Responsibilities This section was deemed to be unnecessary to the plan and could be included in other sections. • Development of Mitigation Initiatives Several Planning Committee meetings and Working Group meetings were devoted to hammering out revisions to the Project Priority List and Project Submission Form in order to more accurately rank older projects and receive information on new projects. Much of this section was revised to reflect the changes discussed. However, some of the information on funding sources and benefit cost ratios remains unchanged from its source information. • Implementation and Maintenance of the LMS The section is important due to turnover from the membership of the Working Group. The aftermath of heightened activity from 2004-2005 hurricane seasons was followed by a period of time with a lack of federally funded mitigation activity followed by a nation-wide recession and several key changes in the Working Group leadership, including committee chairs and coordinators. This meant a "brain drain" of expertise from the Working Group. Coupled with reduced frequency of meetings to nearly annual meetings, it was determined that a new approach was needed. Substantive revisions to this section are needed to ensure future compliance with FEMA and State requirements, as well as EMAP Standards. • Deleted, Deferred and Completed Projects This section was updated accordingly based on relevant information. • Appendices This section was updated accordingly based on relevant information. Several portions were deemed to be unnecessary and were eliminated. Meeting Summaries and Attendance for each Planning Committee Meeting can be found in Appendix A; below is a brief overview of each meeting. SECTION 2 — Planning Process and Considerations Page 10 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 • The Kick-Off meeting for the LMS Planning Committee's review of the LMS document was held on January 15, 2014; this meeting reviewed the Goals & Objectives of the previous LMS and changes were recommended, along with reviewing the way mitigation projects are developed and submitted. • The next meeting on March 26, 2014 reviewed and approved the changes to the Goals & Objectives. A comprehensive list of anticipated Hazards and sub- hazards was developed; some of the previous hazards were refined, while others were removed or termed differently. Assignments were made for committee members to conduct research on historical occurrences, probability or return rates, vulnerability, extent, impact or damage, and risk. • The June 25, 2014 meeting introduced a new Hazard and Vulnerability Assessment Tool with a rough draft assigning probability, vulnerability, extent, impact or damage, and relative risk. The committee made recommendations as to the information being collected and how it was displayed or formatted. • This meeting on July 23, 2014 brought the Committee together to discuss the incoming hazard data as well as to talk about any identified gaps in information. Solutions to overcome any arising challenges were also brought up for resolution. Agendas and Sign-In sheets for all Planning Committee and Working Group meetings to discuss the LMS Update will be included in Appendix A. The draft revisions of all of the LMS sections were distributed to each of the LMS Planning Committee members for their initial review and comment(s). Upon further revision, the draft was made available to all Working Group members and stakeholders. A follow up meeting will be conducted to review the final draft to approve all of the revised sections. Stakeholders Each regularly scheduled and publicly noticed quarterly LMS Working Group meetings over the past year contained a Plan Update section where Working Group members can receive information on the status of the LMS document. Our stakeholders are comprised primarily of our Working Group members that include County organizations and agencies, municipal and regional representatives, private and non-profit sector members, and others involved in hazard mitigation activities at all levels. Stakeholders are identified through their role in mitigation actions and initiatives, recommendations from current members, or other related agencies or programs; invitations are sent out by the LMS Coordinator. Each LMS Working Group meeting includes an opportunity for the current Working Group members to identify new or potential stakeholders. Once they are invited to the Working Group meetings, they have an opportunity to provide feedback in the overall planning process. As required by Florida Administrative Code 27P-22.004, the LMS SECTION 2 — Planning Process and Considerations Page 11 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Coordinator, on behalf of the Working Group, will send out annual invitations by mail, e- mail, and/or phone call to those identified agencies/organizations that may have a stake in the LMS planning process. Additional individuals or representative groups within, and around Orange County, will also be identified and invited accordingly. Public Members of the public are also welcomed to these meetings to obtain their input in the planning process. Separate public participation activities will also be used to solicit input to involve the community to include their comments and reactions as part of the planning process and to provide basic community outreach and public information on the basics of mitigations and its benefits. In the past, the drafts and final drafts of the LMS updates were made available to local area public libraries and posted to the County website. By providing multiple venues and methods for members of the public to view the LMS update, both in hardcopy and electronic means, the Orange County Local Mitigation Working Group increases the potential for public comment of its draft and final versions of the document. Once the plan has been approved by the State of Florida and FEMA, and adopted by the Board of County Commissioners, it will continue to be made available to our community as a public document. Existing Plans, Studies, Reports, and Technical Information Integration Throughout the planning process, the LMS Planning Committee reviewed and evaluated a variety of other existing plans, studies, reports, and other technical information. This included documents from local jurisdictions and municipalities, County departments and agencies, surrounding counties, regional entities, and the State of Florida Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan. The information contained in these plans, studies, reports, and information sources were included throughout the LMS to better reinforce the relationship between the LMS planning process, growth management, land use, and emergency management documents already being used within Orange County. The source documents include, but are not limited to: • Orange County Comprehensive Plan, 2010-2030 • Orange County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP), 2013 • Orange County Public Works Emergency Operations Plan, 2013 • Orange County Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan (PDRP), 2012 • Orange County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) (draft), 2014-2015 • Orange County Disaster Housing Strategy, 2012 • Orange County Traffic and Shelter Operations Manual for Coastal Evacuations, 2014 • Orange County InfoMap FEMA Flood Zones, 2014 (accessed) • Orange County Stormwater Management Division Lake Index, 2009 • Orange County Repetitive Flood Loss Properties Database, 2013 • Orange County Severe Repetitive Flood Loss Properties Database, 2013 • Orange County Annual Rainfall Report, 2012 SECTION 2 — Planning Process and Considerations Page 12 sAA: Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 • Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP) Orange County, Florida Assessment Report, 2013 • Southern Wildfire Risk Assessment Summary Report for Orange County, 2014 • City of Orlando Growth Management Plan, 2009 • Municipal Flood Plain Ordinances, various • Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA) for Orlando/Orange Urban Area Security Initiative, 2012 • Central Florida Regional Domestic Security Task Force (RDSTF) Inland Regional Evacuation Plan, 2012 • Central Florida RDSTF Regional Response Plan, 2012 • St. Johns River Water Management District Lands Assessment Implementation Plan for Property in Orange County, 2012 • South Florida Water Management District Strategic Plan, 2012-2017 • State of Florida Multi Year Training Exercise Plan, 2015-2017 • State of Florida Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2013 • State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection Sinkhole Database, 2014 (accessed) • National Weather Service Weather Events Report, 2014 • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps, 2014 (accessed) • FEMA Community Rating System (CRS) Program, 2013 The incorporation of elements from these other documents was designed to increase the compatibility of the LMS document with existing standards and to analyze the hazards that can occur in Orange County. One of the most effective methods to integrate the LMS is the sharing of similar goals and objectives. This includes agreement with floodplain ordinances, county and municipal comprehensive plans, land development codes, strategic plans, building codes, emergency management plans, etc. Incorporation of the LMS into Other Planning Efforts The Orange County Office of Emergency Management (OCOEM) is responsible for incorporating the LMS into its plans, such as the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) and the Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan (PDRP). The response and recovery strategies, and the processes developed in other plans, provide a prime example where the LMS has been a driving force. During the planning process, the Office of Emergency Management reviewed the LMS for consistency and identified opportunities to link the LMS to the revised plans. Both of the previously mentioned plans rely heavily on the hazard and vulnerability assessment portion of the LMS. In subsequent revisions, those plans will do the same. Another critical area for the incorporation of mitigation information is in the area of the Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP). There are several EMAP standards where the Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (NIRA) document is pivotal for compliance criteria under Standard 4.3. Orange County has used the LMS in the past as one of the documents to show compliance. Therefore, the LMS serves as a SECTION 2 — Planning Process and Considerations Page 13 0Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 keystone document for Orange County's continued accreditation compliance. Standard 4.4 focuses Hazard Mitigation. The LMS is one of several ways that Orange County's Emergency Management Program can provide technical assistance for mitigation codes and ordinances. For example, all structural retrofits of existing buildings or construction of new buildings must meet the minimum requirements found in the Florida Building Code (FBC) 2000 (and later), as well as other national standards like the American Society for Civil Engineering (ASCE) 7-98 (and later), American Red Cross (ARC) 4496 Standards for Hurricane Evacuation Shelter Selection, and/or Enhanced Hurricane Protection Area (EHPA) recommended design levels. The Florida Fire Prevention Code deals with the design, construction, erection, alteration, modification, repair, and demolition of buildings, structures, and facilities and is generally enforced by the state, county, or municipal Fire Marshal. The Code is part of Florida Statute (F.S.) Chapter 633. The State also adopted the National Fire Protection Association's Standard 1, Fire Prevention Code, but this does not include a building, mechanical, or plumbing code. Land-use ordinances are instituted by Florida Statute (F.S.) Chapter 163 and Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) Rule 9J-5. The Growth Management Act of 1985 requires that every local government in Florida adopt a comprehensive plan to guide growth and development and must include elements that address future land us, housing, transportation, infrastructure, conservation, recreation and open space, intergovernmental coordination, and capital improvements. The Orange County Comprehensive Plan that is developed and written by the Orange County Community, Environmental & Development Services (CEDS) Planning Division. The most recent version was amended January 17, 2015 and went into effect on March 30, 2015. OCOEM staff is also involved in the development of other county, municipal, regional, and statewide plans. Those opportunities for input can connect the Orange County LMS to other plans, policies, and procedures outside of Emergency Management when another plan is under development. OCOEM should consider making those policies and initiatives consistent with the LMS. The Comprehensive/Growth Management Plans at the county and municipal levels serve as an example. Their planning process includes looking at both short- and long-term needs and addressing gaps and initiatives through policy changes, land use development, and budgetary considerations. Typically, though, they have not focused on hazard mitigation components as part of their designs. The Orange County LMS Coordinator has spoken to some of those involved with the County's Comprehensive Plan to see about attending coordination meetings for the future to represent the goals and objectives of the LMS, as well as provide portions of the hazards analysis and vulnerability assessment so that those priorities are represented. Other potential opportunities for further integration of mitigation information may be in local building code amendments or enforcement, development or revision of local floodplain ordinances, or other land use regulations for developments. SECTION 2 — Planning Process and Considerations Page 14 e Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Public education and outreach concerning hazards, vulnerabilities, and potential mitigation solutions is a large component of the OCOEM and its staff. Several events are held each year where groups of residents are provided with information on some of the hazards we face in Orange County. OCOEM regularly provides information to a variety of resident groups, businesses, non-profits, and other partnering agencies on actions they can take to reduce or eliminate the impacts from a disaster. Orange County hosts an annual Hurricane Expo where government agencies and private sector members provide disaster solutions or demonstrate mitigation tactics, such as screens and shutters, disaster supplies and kits, and flood-proofing buildings. The LMS Coordinator has met with a local area Firewise Neighborhood in Wedgefield to discuss their wildfire mitigation techniques and has incorporated their tactics into the Community Wildfire Protection Plan for implementation countywide or for other neighborhoods looking to become Firewise. Several crossover components of the Community Rating System (CRS) and the LMS are being evaluated to determine what, if any, additional points could be awarded for public education and outreach activities. By incorporating hazard mitigation information and/or actions into public outreach efforts, the LMS goals and objectives are made known to our stakeholders and the general public. The ultimate aim of the LMS is to provide those in our County with a means to reduce or eliminate the impacts from a hazard and rebound back to normal after a disaster. Updating, Evaluating, and Monitoring The information contained in the LMS document must be updated over time as changes within the growing community of Orange County affects the vulnerability and potential risks faced. This update process will require the continued participation of the public, as well as personnel within Orange County and its municipalities. Consideration for Federal and/or State requirements must be taken into account. In addition, changes in development trends and land use policies that are outlines in the growth management plans may change how the various strategies and mitigation initiatives are implemented within the county. Further development of building codes, construction materials, data sources, or other applicable legislation, procedures, and guidelines will impact future planning methods. Disaster events or emergency incidents can also alter mitigation plans or reveal new vulnerabilities. These changes will need to be reflected in the LMS. New projects will also be added to the list as the life of the document lengthens. As projects or initiatives are completed, there may be positive changes that have increased the resilience of our community that will factor into the future plan updates. These are all changes that will occur on an ongoing basis that need to be reflected in the LMS document to keep it current with the status of the county. Every five years, the LMS document is submitted to the State and to FEMA for review, as well as to ensure that any and all legal updates or new information requirements are incorporated into the existing document. The update process, which includes an evaluation of the active plan, as well as public participation and to allow for proper SECTION 2 — Planning Process and Considerations Page 15 , Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 review, should begin at least one year before the expiration of the plan and should be initiated by the LMS Coordinator. Submittal to the State for preliminary review should be six months before the expiration to allow for additions or corrections. Public workshops, which require a public meeting notice to be submitted for purposes of public awareness, will occur during this span of time (approximately six months) to allow for public input. A periodic evaluation of the plans should also take place before the update process begins. The LMS Working Group and Planning Committee should be comprised of the representation from the county, its jurisdictions, Orange County's Office of Emergency Management, as well as any other volunteers from the Working Group. The Planning Committee should meet at least once a year, or following a disaster declaration, to review the concurrent crosswalk, incorporate any hazard event information, and identify any existing deficiencies in the document. The Chair of the Planning Committee (Vice Chair of the Working Group) and/or the LMS Coordinator will deliver their evaluation of the document at the first LMS Working Group Meeting of the calendar year to coincide with the submittal of the Annual Report sent to the State of Florida, Division of Emergency Management's Mitigation Bureau. In order to monitor this document so that it remains current and applicable to Orange County, the LMS Working Group is required to meet, at minimum, once per year. The general consensus has determined that this is too infrequent and the Working Group should meet about four times per year, or once a quarter, to discuss changes in mitigation initiatives, projects, and other issues within the county related to hazard mitigation. These quarterly meetings give the Working Group the opportunity to receive an update of current mitigation projects that are underway, submit for consideration and rank new mitigation projects, and to hear about the progress of completed mitigation projects. Other considerations should be made to track the implementation of the LMS and to help ensure that the listed goals and objectives are being met. It is essential that all facets of the community be represented at the Working Group meetings, including the public, to ensure that the plan is staying up to date with all aspects of the community. Section 2 of this document contains a description of the update process that provides more detailed information on how the local governments, non-profits, community members, and private sector participation will continue to be involved in the on-going mitigation planning and updating process. There is a standardized format for project submittals that covers particular elements of each project which is detailed in Section 4. Projects can be submitted throughout the planning period where they will be evaluated by the Planning Committee, approved by the Working Group, and then included in the LMS. It is through this schedule of meetings, currently facilitated by LMS Coordinator, that the LMS document will be monitored, evaluated and updated for Orange County. SECTION 2 — Planning Process and Considerations Page 16 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Plan Adoption Process Once the LMS has been reviewed by the State and/or FEMA and is found to have met all of the compliance criteria established in the Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool (44 CFR 201.6), the plan will received letter with a status of "approved pending adoption." Upon receiving this letter, the Orange County Board of County Commissioners will be presented with an Adoption Resolution (page vi) for signature approval. Members of the public will be given a final opportunity for comments at the Board of County Commissioners' meeting. Continued public participation and education is critical for the implementation of the LMS. Other jurisdictions wishing to adopt the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy will then be presented with similar adoption resolutions for their governing bodies to adopt as well. In all, there are thirteen (13) entities that plan to adopt the Orange County LMS. Copies of each signed adoption resolution will be presented to the State of Florida, Division of Emergency Management Mitigation Bureau for review and incorporation into the plan. SECTION 2 — Planning Process and Considerations Page 17 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Section 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment The identification of hazards that have the ability to impact Orange County and its municipalities is a crucial step in the process of creating and maintaining a Local Mitigation Strategy. By determining what populations, properties, and areas of the county are most vulnerable to these various hazards, measures can be taken to help prevent or reduce the vulnerabilities and/or their impact(s). This section is directly related to fulfilling the requirements set forth in the Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP), Standard 4.3 "Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and Consequence Analysis,"and Standard 4.4 "Hazard Mitigation." The particular sub-standards will be noted throughout the following sections to assist Orange County and its jurisdictions with accreditation measures in the future. The following hazards and sub-hazards are based on the various natural, technological, and/or human-caused disasters (based on EMAP Standard 4.4.5) that have been identified as having potential to impact Orange County and are as follows: • Diseases and Pandemic • Severe Thunderstorms o Animal o Hail o Human o Lightning o Plant/Agriculture o Tornados • Extreme Temperatures • Sinkholes/Land-subsidence o Drought • Hazardous Materials o Freezes/Winter Storms • Terrorism/CBRNE o Heat Waves • Tropical Systems • Floods • Wildfires A review of historical data, previous disaster declarations, information provided by the National Weather Service (NWS), and other research was conducted for this section for natural, human-caused, and technological hazards. This section will describe each hazard, its potential impact(s) to the County, as well as list previous occurrences, vulnerabilities, probability of occurrence, and the associated risk(s). Other types of hazards that exist elsewhere in the nation but do not significantly impact the County, or are without recorded occurrences, include: avalanche, coastal erosion, earthquake, expansive soils, tsunamis, or volcano eruptions. Also refer to the updated Appendix B of this document for the Hazards Quick Reference Table for summarized information for Orange County's hazards. Demographics Before the hazards are examined, a description of the county's population characteristics and demographics, land uses, development trends, housing, and income levels of its residents is provided. These aspects of the county are examined in order to determine the levels of vulnerability for different areas of the county and to assist in future land use planning activities. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 18 ° Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Population Characteristics Orange County has a land area of about 903 square miles (or 578,195 acres) and total area of 1,003 square miles. According to the U.S. Census Bureau (USCB), the total resident population in 2010 was 1,145,956, which yielded a density of 1,268.45 persons per square mile. Around 35.72 % of the County's 2010 population resided in its thirteen incorporated municipalities (Table 2) with the remainder living in the unincorporated County. Table 2: Population Totals by Municipality, 2010 Municipalities Population Percentage of Total Totals County Population Apopka 41,542 3.625% Bay Lake 47 0.004% Belle Isle 5,988 0.523% Eatonville 2,159 0.188% Edgewood 2,503 0.218% Lake Buena Vista 10 0.001% Maitland 15,751 1.374% Oakland 2,538 0.221% Ocoee 35,579 3.105% Orlando 238,300 20.795% Windermere 2,462 0.215% Winter Garden 34,568 3.017% Winter Park 27,852 2.431% Unincorporated 736,657 64.283% Orange County Total 1,145,956 100% Source: U.S. Census Bureau,2010 The most recent population projection for Orange County in 2013 is listed at 1,202,978 according to the USCB. This would mean a growth rate of 4.976% from 2010. As one of the fastest growing counties in Florida, its proportion of the region's six-county population (which includes Brevard, Lake, Osceola, Seminole, and Volusia Counties) has actually decreased from 41.72% in 1960 to 36.12% in 2010 as the surrounding counties have developed. Orange County Still comprises over a third of the region's population (36.12% in 2010). Orange County is primarily a metropolitan county and is the hub of the Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, Florida Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 19 • A\ Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 The age of the population of Orange County has come down slightly since the previous census. The Median age fell from 34.3 in 2000 to 33.8 in 2010, according to the USCB American Community Survey (ACS). The age group distributions for the county are changing as a result. The current age group distribution reflects the youthful trend with the largest population group of 25 — 54 at 40.68% of the total population; in addition, the 18 — 24 age group was the third highest group at 11.35%. The 55 — 65 population comprised only 9.6% of the population. The elderly and very young may be potentially vulnerable populations and special considerations must be made in their care. The second highest age group was 28.97% for the 0 — 17 years of age. The 65 and over group was the smallest age group at just 9.4%. Table 3: Population by Race, 2010 Race Number Percentage White 728,795 63.6% Black 238,241 20.8% American Indian 4,532 0.4% / Native Alaskan Asian 56,581 4.9% Hawaiian / 1,266 0.1% Pacific Islander Other 77,216 6.8% Two Race 39,325 3.4% Total 1,145,956 Source: U.S. Census Bureau,2010 Vulnerable Populations There are several other population groups who require special attention for planning considerations due to their increased vulnerability. These populations 1. Special Needs Populations Orange County makes considerations for the needs of persons requiring special medical attention through the People with Special Needs (PSN) Program. This program is designed for an Orange County resident or visitor that, during times of disaster evacuation, has no other alternative and/or requires transportation assistance to evacuate their home and/or has a health/medical condition that requires medical attention by skilled medical professional(s) in a shelter environment. As of 2012, there were over 3,830 people on the county's special needs registry. During a disaster situation, people who are listed on this registry will SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 20 Orange CountyLocal Mitigation Strategy2016 9 9 be notified ahead of time to make plans for their transport and safety to a nearby shelter, if the need arises. Figure A shows the age groups of persons with special medical needs in Orange County. The PSN program also provides emergency preparedness information to special needs citizens throughout the year by participating in community events. In addition, persons registered with the PSN Program receive emergency preparedness information annually. PSN Program staff is also available for community presentation. The PSN Program is also responsible for the management of Special Needs Shelters during times of disaster by developing the necessary equipment and staff utilized to operate a Special Needs Shelter. The PSN Program partners with local emergency responder agencies to ensure that residences of persons housed in a Special Needs Shelter are safe for them to return home. In addition, the PSN Program provides information on disaster related services that may be needed. Figure A: Population by Age of Persons with Special Needs in Orange County 1000 900 882 808 800 700 600 565 500 400 376 34o 3 293 00 208 200 117 100 93 85 25 38 o I I I I r ■ I 0-9 10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-79 60-69 70-79 80-89 90-100 >100 Unlmown Source: Orange County Emergency Medical Services Office,2012 2. Disabled Population According to the 2010 USCB ACS, Orange County has an estimated 106,000 individuals with a disability. Some of these individuals may be registered with our SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 21 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 PSN Program described previously. Others may have "access or functional needs," which may be described as physical, sensory, mental health, and cognitive and/or intellectual disabilities affecting their ability to function independently without assistance. Planning for accommodating our Functional Needs Support Services (FNSS) clientele has been a growing focus over the past few years to ensure that all populations have access to general population shelters while at the same time trying to reserve our Special Needs Shelters for those critical cases. These individuals may have various forms of disabilities including, but are not limited to: • Deaf and/or Hard of Hearing • Blind and/or Visually Impaired • Physical Disabilities • Mental Disabilities • Medical Disabilities 3. Farm Worker Populations The Orange County Health Department licenses two permitted labor camps in Orange County. However, in recent years, this has been a declining program in Orange County primarily due to weather freezes and the decline of farming in Orange County as development continues to occur. 4. Tourism and Seasonal Populations According to a news article from the Orlando Sentinel,' the Orlando market, which encompasses a metropolitan area from Kissimmee in Osceola County, Orlando in Orange County, and Sanford in Seminole County, hosted 62 million visitors during the 2014 year with an estimated 4 million of those being international travelers. Approximately 80% of the domestic visitors were here for recreational purposes. In order to accommodate these visitors, Orange County has about 454 hotels with more than 117,000 guest rooms. The number of hotel rooms is expected to increase over the next few years as additional attractions continue to be built. This fluctuating population of visitors and seasonal guests means that on any given day, there could be about 170,000 additional people in Orange County.2 Most of these visitors are temporary tourists; however, there is a seasonal influx of longer-term visitors during the late-fall and winter months (November to March). Many international visitors are seasonal as well and may stay for several weeks during various points in the year. The additional tourist and seasonal populations have the potential to put stress on the emergency management systems that are currently in place. Additional capacity for emergency shelters has been included as 1 http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-10-01/business/os-orlando-international-visitors-brazil- 20131001 1 visit-orlando-george-aguel-orlando-tourism 2 http://media.visitorlando.com/press-kits/english-press-kit/orlando-overview/ SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 22 A � Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Orange County is a "host county" to accommodate visitors to the area and other coastal counties'evacuations. On top of that, the travel and tourism industry is one of the largest employment sectors in Orange County with 370,000 employees directly or indirectly employed in support of these growing services. In 2011, there was a total of $31.7 billion in domestic and international visitor spending that was generated by travel and tourism in Orange County. This, in turn, produced $7 billion in revenue from local and state taxes. According to VisitOrlando, each Orange County household would have to pay an additional $6,000 in taxes without the revenue generated by the travel and tourism industry.3 The reliance on the travel and tourism industry is a potential vulnerability as well. If a large-scale disaster were to occur in Orange County, it may discourage tourists from visiting the area temporarily during the initial response and short-term recovery phase. Until Orange County returns to normal, the number of visitors could decline, which means impacts to total revenue as well as tax revenue. The market/industry may take some time to recover from significant impacts, which places this particular vulnerability high at the list for mitigation. 5. Non-English Speaking Orange County is made up of a diverse population that speaks languages other than English. According to the USCB ACS in 2010, 702,172 individuals (67.43%) spoke English as their first language while 339,229 people spoke a language other than English (32.57%). A multitude of other languages are spoken in Orange County. The most prominent foreign languages include: Spanish, French Creole, and Portuguese. Spanish is the largest single foreign language spoken with 235,300 people (22.59%). French Creole is next with 24,455 (2.44%) followed by Portuguese at 12,804 (1.23%). Providing outreach and education information or interpretation services prior to, during, and following disasters are critical to helping protect our community. This can add a layer of complexity to our emergency preparedness roles. 6. Transient Population Orange County's current transient population is estimated at 6,500 individuals. A homeless person is defined by the State as an individual: • Sleeping in a place not meant for human habitation • Sleeping in an homeless emergency shelter • Living in transitional housing having come into that housing from the street or from a homeless emergency shelter 3 http://www.visitorlando.com/community/industry-fast-facts/ SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 23 AOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 According to the Health Care Center for the Homeless there are 150 transient camps within the county. These are located throughout the community, but are mainly on the east side of the county (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). 7. Inmate Population The Orange County Jail serves as the County's central correctional facility. This facility is the 3rd largest jail system in the State of Florida with more than 1,700 employees, including over 1,000 certified correctional employees. The jail's population stands at over 3,600 inmates. These populations are vulnerable due to their inability to easily relocate to another facility without advanced notice and many logistical needs for security and protection to prevent an inmate escape. No notice events, such as tornados and hazardous materials incidents may also make it difficult to shelter-in-place for such a concentrated population. 8. Housing According to the USCB estimate in 2013, there were a total of 490,993 housing units in Orange County. This includes apartments, houses, mobile homes, boats, recreational vehicles and vans. A breakdown of these figures is shown in Table 4-A. Table 4-A: 2010 Housing Units in Orange County, FL Types of Housing Number Percentage Occupied housing units 415,790 84.7% Owner-occupied housing units 238,762 574% Renter- occupied housing units 177,028 42.6% Vacant housing units 75,203 15.3% Source:U.S. Census Bureau,2010 For Orange County, our most vulnerable housing units are those that are not secured to a foundation, such as mobile homes, boats, recreational vehicles or vans. According to the USCB ACS estimates in 2013, approximately 4.2% of all occupied housing in Orange County was mobile homes. There are over 145 mobile home parks within Orange County with 4,737 manufactured homes as well. There were 147 boat, recreational vehicle, van, etc. housing units, or less than 0.03%. Table 4-B: 2015 Parcel Stock in Orange County, FL Types of Housing Number Percentage Single Family Residential 277,882 62.40% Residential Condos 52,792 11.85% Town homes 18,207 4.09% Timeshares 70 0.02% SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 24 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Multi-Family 3,989 0.90% Apartment Complexes 842 0.19% Hotels 284 0.06% Mobile Home Parks 145 0.03% Manufactured Homes 4,737 1.06% Vacant Residential 24,945 5.60% Commercial 22,127 4.97% Other 39,313 8.83% Total 445,333 100.00% Source: Orange County Property Appraiser website,http.//www.ocpafl.org/ Another potential vulnerability is the age of the housing structure. Well over half of all housing structures in Orange County (53.5%) were built prior to the implementation of the Florida Building Code in 1992. Refer to Table 5 for further information. This may mean an increased vulnerability as the standards developed following the devastation of Hurricane Andrew may not exist in many of these homes. There is some likelihood that many of the homes may have been brought up to the code due to renovations or other work to meet compliance. However, if they have not been, then a large number of homes may be more susceptible to many of the natural/severe weather and tropical system hazards to which Orange County is subjected to on an annual basis. The replacement value on these homes, especially some of the older homes, may also be higher in order to bring them up to the code requirements. Keep in mind that these numbers do not reflect commercial or industrial structure, only housing structures. Table 5: Year Structure Built in Orange County Year Structure Built Number Percentage Built 1939 or earlier 8,020 1.6% Built 1940 to 1949 8,740 1.8% Built 1950 to 1959 37,717 7.7% Built 1960 to 1969 39,413 8.0% Built 1970 to 1979 64,464 13.1% Built 1980 to 1989 104,548 21.3% Built 1990 to 1999 100,921 20.6% Built 2000 to 2009 124,709 25.4% Built 2010 or later 2,461 0.5% SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 25 (I) Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 TOTAL 490,993 Source:U.S. Census Bureau,2013 estimate Hazard and Vulnerability Assessment Tool Methodology The Planning Committee proposed the use of a Hazard and Vulnerability Assessment Tool based of a model developed by Kaiser Permanente, which is used by local area hospitals to systematically address hazards and prioritize planning, mitigation, response, and recovery activities. Several components were modulated to account for differing needs and focuses. The following factors were used to determine the overall risk of each hazard: the probability of future instances; the severity of the hazard, including the magnitude felt by the human impacts, property impacts, spatial impacts, and economic impacts; and mitigation measures currently in place to address the hazard(s). Based on these inputs, the overall vulnerability generated a score which represents the relative risk for the hazards. Note: the Orange County Planning Committee has tried to provide the most comprehensive information possible for each potential hazard. In some instances the information was incomplete or there was only partially available data; the Committee should plan to continue its research, seek out further analytical tools or databases, and include new information in the LMS whenever possible as part of its annual monitoring. Using the formula "Risk = Probability * Severity," each potential hazard described in this section is ranked by level of relative risk, probability, and severity. These scales are defined below: Probability Scale —This scale takes into effect the likelihood that Orange County will be impacted by the hazard within a given period of time or the return rate of a hazard and is based on the historical data, estimated return periods, recurrence, or chance of occurrence. • 0 = None — Although the hazard is noted, no previous occurrence has been recorded; or less than a 0.1% chance of occurrence; or a 1,000-year event or greater. • 1 = Low —The hazard has occurred 10 years or more ago; or greater than 0.1% to 1.0% chance of occurrence; or a 100-year event. • 2 = Moderate —The hazard has occurred in the past 6 to 10 years; or greater than 1.0% to 2.0% chance of occurrence; or a 50-year event. • 3 = High —The hazard to occurred in the past 1-5 years; or greater than 2.0% chance of occurrence; or less than a 50-year event. Severity Scale — based on the magnitude of the hazard and the on-going mitigation measures in place to counteract those hazards. The severity describes how intense a hazard may be felt and comprised of its impacts, as well as any mitigation actions to offset the impacts. SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 26 AOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Magnitude— the degree to which impacts may be felt or a measured intensity: Human Impacts—Possibility of death or injury to the population • 0 = None— No possibility of death or injury • 1 = Low — Less than 2 deaths or 10 injuries reported or expected • 2 = Moderate— Between 2 — 5 deaths or 10 — 25 injuries reported or expected • 3 = High — More than 5 deaths or 25 injuries reported or expected Property Impacts—Physical losses and damages to property, buildings, or other critical infrastructure • 0 = None — No possibility of physical loss and/or damage • 1 = Low— Physical losses and/or damages are reported or expected to be less than $10,000 • 2 = Moderate — Physical losses and/or damages are reported or expected to be between $10,000 and $1,000,000 • 3 = High — Physical losses and/or damages are reported or expected to be greater than $1,000,000 Spatial Impacts—Amount of geographk area affected • 0 = None — No geographic area affected • 1 = Low — Up to 25% of total area or jurisdiction affected • 2 = Moderate— 26%-50% of total area or jurisdiction affected • 3 = High — 50% or more of total area or jurisdiction affected Economic Impacts(Interruption of businesses, infrastructure, or government services) • 0 = None — No interruption of services or no more than 12 hours • 1 = Low — Interruption of services between 1 — 3 days • 2 = Moderate— Interruption of services between 3 — 7 days • 3 = High — Interruption of services greater than 7 days Mitigation —methods, tactics, or plans used to address vulnerabilities to offset impacts felt by the jurisdiction Preparedness—Specialized Plans that address a particular hazard • 0 = High — Specific plan dedicated to this hazard • 1 = Moderate— Hazard is addressed in multiple plans • 2 = Low — Hazard is addressed in one plan • 3 = None — No plans address this hazard SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 27 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Training and Exercising —as part of a multi-year training and exercise plan • 0 = High — Yearly training and exercising • 1 = Moderate — Training and exercising completed every other year • 2 = Low— Rarely trained or exercised • 3 = None — No training or exercising on this hazard Logistics—Availability of specialized equipment, teams, or support • 0 = High — Highly specialized equipment, teams, or support available • 1 = Moderate —Some specialized equipment, teams, or support available • 2 = Low — Minimal equipment, teams, or support available • 3 = None — No specialized equipment, teams, or support available Relative Risk — Risk is culmination of all of these factors to determine the overall exposure of the county and its municipalities to danger, harm, or losses. Relative risk is used to bring a level of parity to all of the variables that go in to the assessment of the threats that may impact our community as compared to each of the hazards. The risk scoring is based on a 0% to 100% scale and is calculated using the below formula: Probability x (Magnitude-Mitigation) = Relative Risk • - Risk scoring is less than 30% • Medium — Risk scoring is between 31% to 60% • — Risk scoring is 61% or greater Please note that the scoring of the main hazard is an average of the scoring for the sub-hazards. If there is any difference of scoring, these items will be noted. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 28 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Figure B: Orange County LMS Hazard and Vulnerability Assessment Tool ORANGE COUNTY LMS HAZARD AND VULNERABILRY ASSESSMENT TOOL sEVORTv-rota m11De-smwltorn PROBABIUTY RISK HUMAN IMPACT PROPERTY IMPACT FN\1RONMENTAI. PROGRAM PREPAREDNESS TRAINING LOGISTICS OPERATIONS EXERCISE HAZARD Multi-year Training Likelihadthis will Possibility of death l'hysicallosses and Amman of Interruption of Equipment,Teams, Speciih_ed Plans ad"or krercise Relative threat occur or injury damages hnwronment Affected services Planning and or Support 0=Specific Plan 0=No threat I=Addressed in 0=Yearly 0=Highly 0=None 0=None 0=None 0=None I=10+years ° other plans I=Every other Specialized 1=Low 1=Low l=Up to 25% 1=Low SCORE 2=6-10 yrs2=Addressed in year I=Moderate 0-100% 3=1-5 yrs 2=hfoderate 2=Moderate 2=26-50% 2=Moderate one plan 2=Rarely 2=Minimal 3=High 3=High 3-51%or more 3=High 3=No plans 3=None 3=None address Diseases and Pandemic 2 1 3 2 3 2 2 1 48% Animal 2 I 3 2 3 2 2 I 44% Human 3 2 2 I 3 I 0 0 43% Plant lAgriculture 2 I 3 2 3 2 3 2 51% Extreme Temperatures 3 1 1 2 2 2 3 2 54% Drought 3 0 I 2 3 2 2 2 57% Freezes I Winter Stouts 2 I I 2 2 2 3 2— 41% Heat Waves 3 I I I 2 • 3 3 62% Floods • - 3 1 2 2 g2fi""7.11 1 1-r m „ 0 43% • Severe Thunderstorms 3 1 2. 12 2 3 1 59% • Ilan 3 0 2I I 2 3 2 52% Lightning 3 I i 2 I I 2 3 I 52% Tornados— 3 ---3 • 3 2 3 I 2 I - Sinkhoks/Land-subsidence 3 1 3 1 2 1 3 2 62% Hazardous Materials 3 2 I 1 2 0 0 0 29% TerrorismlCBRNE 2 3 3 I 3 0 0 0 32% Tropical Systems 3 3 3 3 3 1 0 1 67% Wildfires 3 1 3 1 3 1 1 1 52% \141111\I 31%0% SECTION 3—Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 29 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 This page intentionally left blank SECTION 3—Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 30 eOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Hazard Risk Identification and Vulnerability Descriptions The following section identifies and describes the potential hazards for Orange County and its jurisdictions. Each potential hazard and sub-hazard that has been identified for Orange County has been evaluated and analyzed by the Planning Committee. A hazard and vulnerability assessment is conducted as a process of defining, identifying, and classifying vulnerabilities and their risks to Orange County and its municipalities. For the following section, hazards will be briefly described, along with any sub-hazards. Each hazard will then have a listing of previous occurrences (as applicable), the location of the affected area(s), and the extent of damages. Other factors, such as those measured by the Hazard and Vulnerability Assessment Tool, will be discussed here to present the overall risk of each hazard. This includes: the probability of future instances; the severity of the hazard, including the magnitude felt by the human impacts, property impacts, spatial impacts, and economic impacts; mitigation measures currently in place to address the hazard(s); the overall vulnerability; and the relative risk for the hazards. Diseases and Pandemic Description: Diseases and Pandemic are caused by a number of different microbiological organisms such as bacteria, viruses, fungi, parasites, or other pathogens. According to the Orange County Health Department there are a variety of diseases that can affect animals, humans, and plants/agriculture in Orange County. For the most part, these diseases have been mild in nature with minimal impacts or widespread casualties in Orange County. The majority of diseases or pandemic outbreaks are controlled by the Health Department and most of the trends we see are reported by physicians, hospitals, laboratories, or other medical providers and community partners. Several diseases present an annual threat to Orange County. Societal, environmental and technological factors impact the occurrence and persistence of diseases worldwide, as new diseases emerge or new vulnerabilities present themselves each year. Old diseases may even reappear or develop drug- resistant strains in animals or humans, such as malaria, tuberculosis, or bacterial pneumonias. Many diseases can be carried by infected people, animals, and/or insects. There are even those that can contaminate local agriculture and impact the crop harvest. iroal There are a number of diseases that can be transmitted amongst Orange County's animal population, both for pets as well as livestock. The State of Florida's SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 31 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Animal Industry oversees the reporting of these diseases. • Avian Influenza • Hoof and Mouth • Rabies • Swine Influenza There have been isolated reports of these Animal diseases, but none to the degree to cause large impacts or losses in Orange County. However, there is still a chance that these diseases or others could create significant impacts in the future. Human Human diseases can be caused by a range of pathogens with varying symptoms and effects, from mild to lethal. Many of these are regularly occurring, such as influenza or its many different strains that circulates across the United States and overseas. Most healthy people recover from the flu without problems, but certain people, such as children, elderly, or individuals with compromised immune systems, are at a higher risk fr serious complications. Due to the large visitor populations that come to Orange County, there is a higher chance for exposure to many types of human diseases from all over the country or even the world. During 2013-2014 Orange County experienced a handful of cases of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) from international travelers. The monitoring for Ebola and preparedness efforts were significantly higher over the past year as well due to its outbreak in West African countries, but no cases occurred in Florida. Tuberculosis has also seen a higher than normal rate of occurrence, especially in the transient and farm worker populations. In 2015-2016, the Zika virus, another mosquito-borne virus, made an appearance primarily through travel-related cases around the country with several hundred people in Orange County being infected. As is the case with emerging infectious diseases, it is tough to predict where, when, and how many people may be affected, or how long the effects may last. Human diseases can come in a variety of different pathogens, each with their own varying degrees of infection, symptoms, and lethality. Some of these that have been diagnosed in Orange County are listed below; however, this is by no means a comprehensive list of possible diseases that exist or may come to exist in the future. • Botulism • Dengue Fever • E. Coli • Hepatitis A, B, and C • Influenza strains • Meningitis (Bacterial & Mycotic) • Salmonellosis SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 32 AOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 • Tuberculosis • West Nile Virus • Zika Virus Public health systems in Orange County and support from other health and medical providers help to create an extensive network for monitoring infection trends. Plant /Agriculture Florida is among the top three agriculture-producing states in the nation with Orange County listed as the 9`h highest county for the value of agricultural products in 2007 at $270 million. These industries are susceptible to many hazards including freezes, droughts, and exotic pests or diseases. Agricultural crops are grown predominantly in the rural areas of the county, including the eastern and northwestern portions of the county. Most crops are vulnerable to the effects of some kind of disease or pest/infestation. As a result, much like the rest of Florida, growers in Orange County uses large volumes of pesticides to help promote healthy crops. Silviculture and agriculture, especially citrus production, plays a role in the Orange County economy. The main threats to the Orange County agriculture industry are: • Citrus Canker • Fungal diseases • Huanglongbing (or Citrus Greening) Previous Occurrences: Orange County has already experienced some significant occurrences of diseases over the years, such as various influenza strains like H1N1 in 2009, Norovirus in 2010 and 2012, MERS in 2014, and West Nile virus in 2014. Most of these cases were isolated instances with relatively minor impacts to those affected. Other diseases, like Tuberculosis and Influenza occur each year or along a seasonal cycle. These impact a significant number of people. Tuberculosis cases numbered 72 in 2012 and 57 in 2013 in Orange County. Influenza cases are typically higher in Orange County than other surrounding counties due to the higher population, more dense/urban locations, and access to monitoring and reporting from healthcare agencies, like hospitals and urgent care facilities. Several diseases that do not naturally occur in the State were imported into the Orange County, such as malaria, Dengue Fever, and Chikungunya fever. The instances of the imported diseases were relatively few in number and did not typically spread. In addition, the past couple of years has seen a world-wide awareness of pandemic diseases, like Ebola, although there were no incidents in the entire State of Florida. Other infectious diseases, the Zika virus, saw several hundred instances, but the lethality is extremely low. There have been cases of pregnant women whose offspring have developed microcephaly and other severe fetal brain defects. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 33 A Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 There has not been a large scale epidemic or pandemic of animal, human, or plant/agriculture diseases in Orange County. They have stayed relatively isolated or on a small scale. Location: All of Orange County may be susceptible to diseases and pandemic, whether animal, human, or plant/agriculture. The centrally developed urban areas would be more likely to transmit human diseases or contain outbreaks whereas the more rural areas would be able to sustain the impacts from livestock/animal diseases. Plant or agricultural diseases would be found on or near farmlands and other agricultural properties. While these diseases do not acknowledge political boundaries, they can have an impact on the individuals who run the services and systems of the County-wide infrastructure, businesses, and government services. Extent: Three terms are commonly used to classify disease impacts: endemic, epidemic, and pandemic. An endemic is present at all times at a low frequency, like chicken pox. An epidemic is a sudden severe outbreak of disease, much as the bubonic plague was during Middle Ages in Europe. A pandemic is an epidemic that becomes very widespread and affects a whole region, a continent, or the world, such as the 1957 flu pandemic caused at least 70,000 deaths in the U.S. and 1-2 million deaths worldwide. Fears of pandemic outbreaks have risen in recent years as new diseases enter our populations. Orange County's growing visitor population, foreign residents, transportation network, and international travelers may also play a role for increasing the likelihood of infection. Our growing resident population may also increase the extent that most areas of the county could become exposed to a disease as it can travel more quickly and creates difficulty in preventing the spread of infection. Expectations are that Orange County would first experience an epidemic with smaller-scale outbreaks; every attempt would be made by the public health system in place to address this type of incident. If the public health system were to become overwhelmed, or if the rate of spread were to reach a tipping point, a pandemic level could be reached in a worst-case scenario. The most likely situation for a pandemic in Orange County would likely be from a strain of Influenza; this is the scenario public health agencies are preparing for their operations and are focusing on for their prevention activities. Probability: There is a high probability that Orange County will experience some form of disease every 1 — 5 years and, depending on the different types of pathogens, there may be multiple diseases that can impact Orange County at multiple points throughout the year. While many of the diseases are cyclical in nature with a high rate of occurrence, most will not reach the epidemic or pandemic state. Historically, influenza pandemics have occurred every 11-39 years. It has been more than 30 years since the last pandemic. Many experts consider influenza pandemic to be inevitable, yet no one knows when the next one will occur. Impacts: There have been injuries associated with diseases in Orange County where SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 34 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 people or animals have been hospitalized for periods of time or, in some cases, have resulted in death. While there has not been a large scale pandemic to cause large scale deaths, the very nature of some of these pathogens do have the potential to be lethal, especially in vulnerable populations like children, the elderly, transient populations, or others. Buildings, infrastructure, and critical facilities have some potential for impact by this hazard. However, the impacted areas are undefined so exact value of dollar loss cannot be determined. The spatial extent of damage as a result of disease outbreak is noted as high, the incident is expected to encompass more than 50% of the total land mass of Seminole County. Pandemics have always been a continuing risk for Orange County and the State of Florida. Pandemic refers to the global spread of a disease, while an epidemic is localized to a geographic region. An influenza pandemic occurs when there is a worldwide spread of a new strain of influenza. Economic impacts or interruption of service may be associated with disease and pandemic outbreak. There may also be some law enforcement/security issues if a large-scale pandemic were to occur. Infectious disease control would also impact social services, mass care, and healthcare systems. Economic losses may be seen in terms of lost revenue to individuals due to sickness or impact supply chains, worker populations, and/or tourism dollars. Mitigation Measures Orange County's Health Services (ESF-8) is the lead agency if a pandemic outbreak were to occur. On a day-by-day basis, they conduct mitigation measures that include epidemiological surveillance, public outreach, and distribute medicine for treatment. They also track the trends of possible outbreaks throughout the county while monitoring the state, country, and world for potential issues. They also maintain plans to address mainly human diseases and conduct annual exercises and periodic training. There are also more specialized teams that are equipped to deal with human diseases. Animal and plant/agriculture diseases do not tend to have as much preventative measures. Vulnerability: Any place where living creatures gather has the potential to be vulnerable to diseases and pandemics. Orange County has several urban areas where populations are more densely concentrated, such as Orlando, Ocoee, Maitland, Winter Garden, Apopka, and Winter Park. Other vulnerable areas may present themselves at area theme parks where visitors or seasonal residents from around the world are present. This may allow human diseases to be more easily transmissible, especially in vulnerable populations like children and the elderly. On the positive side, there are a number of local area hospitals, medical clinics, and other healthcare providers that monitor for potential epidemiology and infectious disease. Systems are in place to provide medicines and other mass prophylaxis through Points of Dispensing (PODs) in case of epidemic or SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 35 ,_ Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 pandemic and additional support can be brought in through other State agencies. This helps to decrease the vulnerability of the county and its municipalities. Meanwhile, less densely populated municipalities or rural areas of the unincorporated county that are used for agriculture, silviculture, or raising livestock are more susceptible to animal and plant diseases. There are monitoring systems in place around the county, such as sentinel chickens, that are used to detect the presence of certain pathogens, like Dengue Fever or West Nile virus that are spread by mosquitos. Other State agencies are also on hand to help provide additional support, supplies, or equipment to identify, assess, or treat diseases found in animal or plant/crops that reduces the vulnerability of the county and its municipalities. There are several different vulnerable populations that exist for Diseases and Pandemic. Farm workers could potentially impact the spread of plant or agriculture diseases without realizing they are carrying mold, bacteria, or viral agents on their clothing or footwear. Those workers that come into contact with animal may potentially help spread pathogens to other animal populations as well. Children, elderly, inmates, and transient populations may be the most vulnerable to human diseases, as well as those with specials needs whose immune systems may be compromised. Seasonal visitors may also be susceptible to human diseases as they may come into contact with large numbers of people from all over the world. Risk: Medium — 48% overall; Animal — 44%, Human — 43%, and Plant/Agriculture — 51% As previously stated, the most likely pandemic Orange County would face would be from a strain of Influenza. This type of pandemic would occur when a new influenza virus emerges for which there is little or no immunity for humans. This new virus could then begin to cause serious illness, and spread easily from person-to-person. There have not been any significant human diseases or epidemics within Florida in the last five years making the probability low. However, Orange County has occasionally experienced small-scale health related incidents such as a heightened threat to the H1N1 Influenza virus in 2009. Diseases, especially when they reach an epidemic or pandemic phase, can result in thousands of people becoming ill or dying. Property impacts for animals and plants/crops could reach into the millions of dollars in damages as well. This hazard could also disrupt government services and businesses due to sickness or quarantine efforts of individuals/employees, as well as cause major disruption in our critical infrastructure (electrical, telecommunication, roadways, water, wastewater, etc.) through the absence of the individuals who maintain these systems and operations. These disruptions would generally be isolated, but could potentially include the multiple portions around the County thereby making the impact to diseases equally felt countywide. SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 36 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Extreme Temperatures Orange County, as a whole, can experience natural temperature changes throughout the year; generally the temperatures are characteristic of a tropical climate, but its geography has it situated on the southern fringe of the humid subtropical climate zone. There are two main climatic seasons each year. The first is warm with good amounts of rainfall that lasts from May until late September. The second is drier and relatively cooler, from late October through April, which has less rainfall. The county's warm and humid climate is due to a low, flat elevation near the center of Florida peninsula. Several types of sub-hazards are associated with Orange County's Extreme Temperatures: drought, freezes/winter storms, and heat waves. Each of these hazards has its own list of previous occurrences, affected locations, extent of damages, probability of future incidents, impacts, vulnerabilities, and overall risks. As such, these sub-hazards will each be described and evaluated separately. nought Description: Drought is basically a deficiency of precipitation over an extended period of time, resulting in a water shortage for some type of activity, group, or an environmental sector. Drought should be considered relative to some long-term average condition of balance between precipitation and "evapotranspiration" (i.e., evaporation plus transpiration) in a particular area, a condition often perceived as"normal." It is also related to the timing (i.e., principal season of occurrence, delays in the start of the rainy season, occurrence of rains in relation to principal crop growth stages) and the effectiveness (i.e., rainfall intensity, number of rainfall events) of the rains. Other climatic factors such as high temperature, high wind, and low relative humidity are often associated with it in many regions of the world and can significantly intensify its severity. When drought begins, the agricultural sector is usually the first to be impacted because of its heavy dependence on stored soil water. Those who rely on surface water (i.e., reservoirs and lakes) and subsurface water (i.e., ground water), for example, are usually the last to be affected. A short-term drought that persists for three to six months may have little impact on these sectors, depending on the characteristics of the hydrologic system and water use requirements. Previous Occurrences: Since 2000, there have been 12 periods of drought of varying seventies. The average length of the drought period is approximately 7.5 months with an average severity between a D2 — D3. Several droughts saw a peak of a D4, the most severe type of drought, in 2000-2001, 2009, 2010-2011, and 2011-2012. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) made a drought declaration for Orange County as a primary county in 2012 and a contiguous county in 2013. SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 37 l Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Table 6: Orange County Drought Occurrences, 2001 -2015 Drought Period Peak Drought Drought Period End Number of Severity Start months Category February 2000 September 2001 17 D4 October 2001 June 2002 8 D1 June 2004 June 2004 1 D1 March 2006 July 2006 4 D2 August 2006 September 2006 2 D1 October 2006 April 2008 18 D2 May 2008 July 2008 2 D1 January 2009 June 2009 6 D4 July 2010 October 2011 15 D4 December 2011 June 2012 7 D4 January 2013 June 2013 6 D2 November 2013 February 2014 4 D1 Average 7.5 D2.25 Source: U.S.Drought Monitor, Tabular Data Archive, Categorical Statistic type Location: All of Orange County is equally able to experience drought conditions as the lack of soil moisture is felt all of the county. However, the degrees to which the impacts of drought may affect an area differ based upon the social, environmental, or economic effects. Rural areas of the unincorporated County and its jurisdictions, such as Apopka, Winter Garden, or Oakland may be more susceptible to the impacts from drought as their local economies are dependent upon plants, crops, agriculture, silviculture, or livestock. Other areas that are affected by drought due to its impact on water systems for commercial, industrial, or tourism economies such as Bay Lake, Lake Buena Vista, or Winter Park may also be impacted. Residential communities may also be affected by long term or severe droughts, as the homes or other structures that attract residents are situated by water sources could dry up and become less desirable, such as in Belle Isle, Edgewood, Maitland, Orlando, Ocoee, Windermere, and Winter Park. All jurisdictions and municipalities could be impacted by this hazard. Extent: The categorical U.S. Drought Monitor statistic is the percent of the area in a certain drought category. This ranges from "None"to "D4,"with a comprehensive list of impacts corresponding to the severity of the drought. The Drought Monitor uses these labels to denote general drought areas by the intensity of the impacts being felt at that time based upon soil moisture deficits. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 38 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Table 7: Categorical 11.5. Drought Monitor Statistic Drought Severity Classification Category Description Possible Impacts None No drought No impacts conditions Abnormally Dry Going into drought: short-term dryness slowing planting, growth of crops DO (not a drought) or pastures. Coming out of drought: some lingering water deficits; pastures or crops not fully recovered Some damage to crops, pastures; streams, reservoirs, or wells low, some ;i Di Moderate Drought water shortages developing or imminent; voluntary water-use restrictions requested D2 Severe Drought Crop or pasture losses likely; water shortages common; water restrictions im.osesl. D4 Extreme Drought Major crop/pasture losses; widespread water shortages or restrictions spread water shortages or restrictions D4 Exceptional Exceptional and widespread crop/pasture losses; shortages of water in Drought reservoirs, streams, and wells creating water emergencies Source: U.S. Drought Monitor Probability: The likelihood of drought returning in Orange County is high as it is likely for an occurrence, in some form, to be nearly annual. However, the severity for each incident is variable and can range anywhere from a D1 (moderate drought) to D4 (exceptional drought). A lower severity is more likely to occur and generally precedes the higher severity for many weeks before the greater impacts are felt. Drought conditions have generally improved since the last peak drought period in 2012. Weather outlooks extend only so far, but as new data is gathered and interpreted, these predictions can change. At this time, our nation is moving into an El Nino weather system for the next few months, which typically means a period of time of above average precipitation and cooler temperatures. This is not a guarantee that drought will not occur in the coming years though. Impacts: Drought is usually associated with long periods of intense heat and/or small amounts of precipitation. Drought usually does not directly affect humans, but extreme heat associated with a drought period can cause injury and even death, particularly among our vulnerable populations, such as children, elderly citizens, transient populations, and/or other special needs populations. Injuries and potential deaths are most likely to impact rural or economically disadvantaged areas that lack air conditioning and immediate medical care. The largest impact for periods of prolonged drought is the financial impact to the agriculture industry for crops or livestock. Severe drought would likely damage or possibly destroy crops prior to harvest or limit the number of livestock that could be reared. Exceptional droughts would devastate much of the agricultural and ornamental plants sector for Orange County. According to the Small Business Administration (SBA), there has not been a disaster loan issued for drought from 2008 to 2015. This does not eliminate the fact that drought has SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 39 A Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 potentially affected agricultural businesses over the past several years, only that there has not been a declared disaster by the SBA related to drought. While drought may not have a measurable effect on residences, public facilities, or critical infrastructure, there are other consequences that could be felt. Impacts to water supplies or water utilities would likely be the worst-case scenario for a period of severe to exceptional drought. Extended periods of drought over a number of months, or even years, could have long-term environmental impacts on the area, including species endangerment, changes to the local agricultural makeup, and produce prices. Much of the citrus industry in Orange County has seen losses in production due to drought over the past several years. There is also an increased risk for sinkhole formation after a long period of drought conditions is followed by a downpour in precipitation. Flooding is another potential hazard associated with drought as the dry ground cannot absorb the sudden amount of moisture. Wildfires may also be more likely to occur during drought conditions as the soil moisture can impact vegetative growth, which provides a fuel source for the fire. Mitigation Measures As a result of recurring droughts, the local St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) and the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) have imposed watering restrictions for landscaping irrigation in Florida to improve efficient use of water resources that can become scarce during drought periods. Limiting the number of days per week and the time of day watering occurs has helped to reduce drought impacts and conserve our water resources for some of the most necessary places. Orange County has adopted ordinances for water use and drought resistant landscaping to help reduce watering needs during drought. Other jurisdictions, such as Apopka, Maitland, Ocoee, Winter Garden, and Winter Park have adopted similar types of ordinances. Drought generally has not made its way into many of Orange County's preparedness plans, but it is addressed in the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP). Very little training and exercise are conducted in relationship to drought due to its slow-moving, long-term nature. Concerted efforts by the Water Management Districts and Land-Use or Growth Management groups to help prevent the impacts from drought are where most of the mitigation efforts are focused, but very little logistical support is dedicated to drought mitigation or relief. Vulnerability: Orange County is vulnerable to drought due to how widespread its impacts can be felt across the entire county and its jurisdictions. While the impacts themselves have not directly resulted in loss of life or many casualties, the absence of soil moisture that indicates drought are mainly determined by our weather patterns and how much rain falls in Orange County. This hazard can be somewhat unpredictable as to when it occurs, or at least how severe it will be, and that in part makes Orange County and its jurisdictions vulnerable to it. SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 40 A` Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Orange County has experienced only minimal impacts to property with very little directly caused by drought. However, there have been economic impacts experienced in the past to agriculture, crops, and plants that have brought about moderate losses to the county. Orange County and its jurisdictions are equally vulnerable to droughts. Populations that are directly vulnerable to drought are limited, but may include those groups whose employment is directly tied to soil moisture, such as farm workers. Associated hazards, such as heat waves, sinkholes, wildfires, and even flooding may be exacerbated due to drought conditions in Orange County. Other populations may be affected by these resulting or associated hazards, such as the transient population that are looking for refuge from the conditions caused by drought. The tourist, visitors, and seasonal residents may also be discouraged to visit or relocate to Orange County because of these associated hazards. The natural environment of Orange County and its jurisdictions is also vulnerable to the effects of drought as smaller water bodies can dry up or recede, and further impacts to neighborhoods, homes, and other communities may experience the secondary hazards associated with drought such as wildfire, sinkholes, and heat wave. Periods of drought may also worsen flood conditions if and when a substantial amount of rain arrives. Stormwater/runoff may increase as the ground has hardened and is unable to absorb the moisture quickly enough. This can cause ponding or flooding in areas that might not usually be susceptible to flooding. Our critical infrastructure may not be directly vulnerable to drought as most buildings are not impacted by the drought itself; however, other related conditions may affect water lines or damage the ground near power lines or gas pipelines that could create a utility outage. These conditions would require long periods of drought and are an extreme instance, but could potentially occur in Orange County. Risk: Medium — 57% Due to the high rate of return for drought and the anticipated severity, but with few mitigation measures currently in place, this hazard is scored as a Medium relative risk. In addition, drought has great potential to be a long-term hazard and can persist for many months or even years with little to no abatement. Existing policies, legislation, and action by Water Management Districts and Land-Use/Growth Management have helped to curb the impacts in Orange County. For the most part though, the hazard on its own does not impact residents or visitors to Orange County and its jurisdictions; it is the associated hazards that can create the most disruption. Freezes / Winter Storms SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 41 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Description: A winter storm is defined as a storm that can range from a few hours of moderate snow to blizzard-like conditions with wind-driven snow that can last for days. Winter storms can impede visibility, affect driving conditions, and can have an impact on communications, electricity, or other critical services. Winter storms can range from several states to one county. Orange County is not generally susceptible to winter storms, because temperatures rarely reach snow- producing levels. This does not mean that snow and winter weather is unheard of, but it is a rare occurrence. The climactic conditions for long lasting winter storms are also not favorable. Temperatures, however, can reach freezing levels low enough to cause damage to crops and water lines/pipes. Freezing occurs when temperatures are below freezing (32° F) over a wide spread area for a significant period of time. Freezing temperatures can damage agricultural crops and burst water pipes in homes and other buildings. Frost, often associated with freezes can increase damaging effects. Frost is a layer of ice crystals that is produced by the deposit of water from the air onto a surface that is at, or below, the freezing point. A freeze warning is issued to make the public and agricultural interests aware of anticipated freezing conditions over a large area. Similarly, a hard freeze is issued under the same conditions as a freeze warning, but the temperatures may stay well below 28° F for the duration of four hours or more. Previous Occurrences: During the winter season, humidity is normally lower and the temperatures are more moderate, but they can easily change back and forth from high to low. Temperatures can dip below the freezing mark on an average of 2.4 nights per year. The lowest recorded temperature was 18 °F, which was set on December 28, 1894. These low temperatures caused great damage to the burgeoning citrus industry in Orange County and are known as the "Great Freeze of 1894-1895." Because the winter season is dry and freezing temperatures usually occur only after cold fronts have passed, snow is exceptionally rare in Orange County. The only accumulation ever to occur in the county, at least since written records began, was in 1948. It is also quite possible that accumulations occurred in connection with the Great Blizzard of 1899. Flurries, ice, and other winter weather have also been sporadically observed in 1989 and 2006. More recently, a handful of freezes were recorded in 2003, 2009, and 2010, some of which caused damage mainly to the citrus crops. These events are recorded in the table below with data comprised from the National Weather Service (NWS) and the Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States (SHELDUSTM). There have not been any significant freezes or winter storms in Orange County since 2010. A freeze warning was issued for some parts of Central Florida for February 20, 2015; Orange County received a wind-chill advisory. Winter temperatures since 2011 have approached freezing on a few occasions, but either did not dip below the temperature thresholds or for a long enough time to be considered a freeze. SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 42 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Table 8; Historical Winter Weather in Orange County Start Date End Date Winter Estimated Crop Adjusted Crop Weather Type Damages ($) Damage(2013 $) 03/23/1968 03/25/1968 Winter Weather* $3,676 $24,611 01/10/1977 01/21/1977 Winter Weather* $746,269 $2,868,787 01/21/1985 01/23/1985 Winter Weather* $74,627 $161,569 02/23/1989 02/23/1989 Winter Weather* $1,136,360 $2,134,863 12/22/1989 12/25/1989 Winter Weather* $746,269 $1,402,005 01/24/2003 01/24/2003 Winter Weather* $10,000 $12,661 01/21/2009 Frost/Freeze $0 $0 01/02/2010 01/13/2010 Frost/Freeze* $840,000 $897,402 12/14/2010 Frost/Freeze $0 $0 12/27/2010 12/29/2010 Frost/Freeze* $1,110,000 $1,185,853 Total Estimated Damages $4,667,201 $7,501,898 *Note: Information obtained from SHELDUST"' Source: NWS and SHELDUSTM Location: While all of Orange County is equally vulnerable to freezes and winter storms. The degree that the impacts of freezes or winter storms may affect an area can differ based upon the social, environmental, or economic effects. Rural areas of the unincorporated County and its jurisdictions, such as Apopka, Winter Garden, or Oakland may be more susceptible to the impacts of cold weather as their local economies are dependent upon plants, crops, agriculture, silviculture, or livestock. Other more densely populated areas, like Maitland, Ocoee, and Orlando, may have higher vulnerable populations, like the elderly, transient that may be vulnerable to cold weather, freezes, or winter storms. Extent: The extent of damages for freezes and winter storms is based on the temperature and the length of time that temperature stays below freezing. Orange County has experienced mostly moderate freezes. The worst case scenario would be a severe, or"hard," freeze where the temperature stays well below 28° F for the duration of four hours or more, but these are few in number. When they do occur, they can cause significant damages to agriculture, especially to the citrus industry. In 2010, the freeze damaged between 6 — 10 percent of the orange and grapefruit crop. Orange County can expect much the same for any future freeze and winter storm incidents with moderate freezes being the majority of occurrences with only a handful of hard freezes. Winter storms will be minor in their severity due to their infrequency with only small amounts of property damage to be expected. Probability: A review of SHELDUSTM data indicates that the likelihood and probability of future occurrences of freezes and/or winter storms in Orange County will be about once every five (5) years. While the potential for moderate freezes may SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 43 ® Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 be expected every one to two years, severe freezes, which cause the highest crop losses, may be expected on average once about every 10+ years. Impacts: Orange County has not experienced high amounts of human impacts directly due to freezes or winter storms. Property damage to residences or other buildings has also been low with only minor physical losses. These are caused mainly by burst water pipes or outdoor faucets that are not insulated. The spatial impacts can be felt by the entire county during a freeze or winter storm, but typically when they occur, the impacted areas are isolated. For economic impacts, rural areas like Apopka, Winter Garden, and Oakland are more susceptible due to their agricultural lands. Urban areas can also be impacted as their vulnerable populations are greater in number. Other crops like citrus, ornamental plants, and livestock may also be at risk from a freeze of winter storm. In Table 8, the Estimated and Adjusted Crop Damages from Winter Weather and Frost/Freezes that have occurred in Orange County are listed from the past several decades. According to SHELDUSTM, the total Adjusted Crop Damages (2013 dollars) is estimated to be $7.5 million since 1968. The most recent record frost/freeze occurrence happening in late 2010 and was estimated to have caused $1.185 million in damages (adjusted value). Many times, there is a good deal of notice prior to most of these frost/freeze incidents, so that most areas can prepare prior to the storm. In some cases, though, the temperature may drop more rapidly or hold for longer than anticipated. Mitigation Measures In general, there are relatively few mitigation measures enacted by the County or its jurisdictions in regards to freezes or winter storms due to their infrequency. Freezes and cold weather are identified as a hazard and are addressed by the Orange County CEMP. There are no trainings or exercises conducted in regards to this hazard in at least the past decade. There is very little equipment, teams, or other logistical support to address this hazard. Vulnerability: Orange County and its jurisdictions are all equally vulnerable to freezes and winter storms due to how widespread its impacts can be felt across the entire county and its jurisdictions. As stated before, the occurrence of the hazard is infrequent with few impacts to life safety and property. While the impacts themselves have not directly resulted in loss of life or many casualties, the results are mainly determined by weather patterns. This hazard can be somewhat unpredictable as to when it occurs, or at least how severe it will be, and that in part makes us vulnerable to it. Orange County has experienced only minimal impacts to property with very little directly caused by freezes and winter storms. However, there have been economic impacts experienced in the past to agriculture, crops, and plants that have brought about moderate losses to the county. Orange County and its jurisdictions are equally vulnerable to freezes and winter storms. Transient populations would be vulnerable during a freeze or winter storms and would need to seek an overnight shelter. Farm workers may be impacted if agricultural crops suffered from freeze conditions. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 44 Orange CountyLocal Mitigation Strategy2016 9 9 Risk: Medium — 41% Due to the moderate rate of return for freezes and winter storms, the anticipated severity, but with few mitigation measures currently in place, this hazard is scored as a Medium relative risk. Freezes have some potential to persist for a few hours to even a couple of days; winter storms could last longer if conditions were favorable, but historically they have only lasted up to a few of days. For the most part though, this hazard does not greatly impact residents or visitors to Orange County and its jurisdictions and only has mild property damages; the impacts are felt mainly by the agriculture industry. Heat Waves Description: The middle of Orange County's summer season is quite humid with high temperatures usually in the lower to mid-90s° F, while low temperatures rarely fall below 70° F. The humidity can act like a buffer and typically prevents actual temperatures from exceeding 100 °F. However, the heat index to over 110 °F (43 °C). The city's highest recorded temperature is 103 °F, set on September 8, 1921. During the summer months, strong thunderstorms occur in the afternoon almost daily, which can help to cool the temperature slightly. A heat wave, which is different from a drought, is when temperatures are abnormally and uncomfortably hot for an extended period of time. This event could continue from one day to several weeks. Heat waves are often accompanied by high humidity and can have a great impact on lives, including heat strokes, heat exhaustion, and even death. Heat kills by pushing the human body beyond its limits. In a humid environment like we have in Orange County, evaporation is slowed and the body must work harder to maintain a normal temperature. All of Orange County is susceptible to heat wave conditions. Previous Occurrences: Orange County has experienced thirty six (36) days of record temperatures over 100° F since 1892 with nine (9) days even higher (refer to Table 9). While individual days of record temperatures may not equal a heat wave, these record days are usually flanked by multiple days of high temperatures. According to SHELDUSTM, there are two (2) dates that were recorded as hazard instances for heat: on 07/03/1997 with one (1) recorded death; and 06/01/1998. No property damages or crop damages were reported as a direct result of either of these occurrences. Table 9: Record Temperature Extremes, 1892 - 2013 Date Record Temperature 09/08/1921 103 05/31/1945 102 08/18/1916 101 SECTION 3 - Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 45 eOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 08/16/1918 101 06/18/1921 101 08/01/1922 101 06/06/1927 101 07/28/1936 101 07/02/1998 101 Source: ThreadEx Long-Teem Station Extremes for America(http://threadexrcc-ace.org/threadex/process mco ) Location: People living in cities or in urbanized areas, like Orlando, Apopka, Belle Isle, Eatonville, Edgewood, Maitland, Ocoee, Winter Garden, and Winter Park may be more susceptible to the effects of a heat wave due to the Heat Island effect. This occurs where developed urban areas are hotter than nearby rural areas. Heat islands can affect communities by increasing summertime peak energy demands and air conditioning costs, as well as other environmental aspects such as air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, and water quality. There can also be a higher propensity for heat-related illnesses and mortality. Other more rural locations like the eastern and northwestern parts of the unincorporated Orange County, Oakland, Windermere, and the outskirts of other developed cities can also be vulnerable to the effects of heat waves Extent: Much as with other climate-related hazards, the temperature is the best scale for this hazard. Below is the Heat Index Chart (Figure 2) provided by the NWS that shows that caution should be used at temperatures starting at 80° F. The NWS issues an advisory when the heat index is anticipated to exceed 105° F — 110° F for at least two consecutive days. With increased temperatures and humidity come increased health effects from prolonged exposure and/or physical activity. Various disorders can range from mild cases of sunburn to more serious illnesses like heat cramps, heat exhaustion, and heat stroke. Orange County and its jurisdictions regularly experience air temperatures well over 80° F. For a period of about five (5) months each year from May to September the average hovers in the high 90s° F with high humidity. The heat index regularly climbs over 100° F during these months as well, but it is rarely sustained for more than a few days. The record temperature experienced in Orange County reached its maximum at 103° F; we could reasonably expect a temperature similar to this high point to occur again in the future. Orange County expects that heat waves will continue to occur mainly in these summer months. Figure 2: Heat Index Chart SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 46 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Relative Humidity (`)/ by National Weather Service Gray, ME F 40 45 50 ® 60 65 70 m 80 85 90 95 100 With Prolonged Exposure 110 and/or Physical Activity 108 " 111 Heat Index 106 119ijnolil 104 (Apparent mi Heat stroke or sunstroke 'IF a) 102 E119 BEE= Temperature) highly likely 100 MEE L. Danger 98 105 ®B�����ECIII � ®�® Sunstroke, muscle cramps. 96E 1 j�10038106 " ®�1 ��046 32 and'or heat exhaustion likely 1.112 Egi •1= 92 �9i4/ 96 99 101 108®116 EMS Extreme Caution 90 • 95 97 100103 06 109 Sunstroke. muscle cramps, 88 " 0 93 95 0100103BEEBb and/or or heat exhaustion possible 86 85 87 0 89 91 93 95 97 100 102 105 108 EM 84 83 84 0 86 0 89 90 92 94 96 98 100 r Caution DDDD p 84 m 86 88 89 90 mo • Fatigue possible 80 80 80 ni 81 82 82 a0 84 85 86 86 Source.' NWS Probability: The likelihood of long periods of high temperatures and heat waves returning to Orange County is high as it is likely for an occurrence, in some form, to be nearly annual. The severity for each incident is variable. High temperatures occur normally in the summer months and may peak for many days during a heat wave. Weather outlooks extend only so far, but as new data is gathered and interpreted, these predictions can change. At this time, our nation is moving into an El Nino weather system for the next few months, which typically means a period of time of above average precipitation and cooler temperatures. This is not a guarantee that heat waves will not occur in the future years. Impacts: The impacts for heat wave are very similar to drought. Loss of life or other injuries that have been recorded as a direct result of heat waves are very low with only one reported death from 1997, according to SHELDUSTM. The potential for casualties in the future will persist, especially in vulnerable populations like children, the elderly, transient populations, or other individuals with special needs that are vulnerable to high temperatures. Visitors to Orange County that are not acclimated to higher temperatures and humidity may also be at risk to the various heat disorders. There have not been any reported cases of property damage to buildings or infrastructure at this time. While this does not mean that there have not been damages, if there were these would be relatively minor. The entire county may be geographically impacted. Rural areas also experience heat waves, but, as stated before, people in urban areas may be more susceptible because of the SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 47 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Heat Island effect. There have not been any major economic impacts reported. Damages to crops because of heat wave Orange County's warm climate attracts many visitors and part-time residents throughout the year, but most visitors may not be deterred by a heat wave. Due to increased usage for water utilities or electricity for air conditioning, there may be temporary power outages, called brown outs, that could impact the County and its jurisdictions. Overall, the impacts from heat wave are minor. Mitigation Measures In general, there are relatively few mitigation measures enacted by the County or its jurisdictions in regards to heat waves. Heat waves and other extreme temperatures are identified as a hazard and are addressed by the Orange County CEMP. There are no trainings or exercises conducted in regards to this hazard in at least the past decade. There is no equipment, teams, or other logistical support to address this hazard. Vulnerability: While all of Orange County and its jurisdictions are just as likely to experience a heat wave, the cities and urban areas may be considered more vulnerable as they typically have replaced open lands and vegetation that help retain moisture with buildings, roads, pavement, and other impermeable surfaces that stay dry. Parks, open land, and water bodies within a city help to reduce temperatures in isolated areas, which are fortunately present in many locations throughout the jurisdictions in Orange County. High temperatures are a near guarantee with heat waves returning likely as well. Their impacts have been historically low in Orange County for human, property, and economic damages and losses. With very few mitigation measures currently in place those, this increases the vulnerability to this hazard. Risk: Medium — 41% Due to the moderate rate of return for heat waves, the lower anticipated severity, but with few mitigation measures currently in place, this hazard is scored as a Medium relative risk. Freezes have some potential to persist for a few hours to even a couple of days; winter storms could last longer if conditions were favorable, but historically they have only lasted up to a few of days. For the most part though, this hazard does not greatly impact residents or visitors to Orange County and its jurisdictions and only has mild property damages; the impacts are felt mainly by the agriculture industry. Floods Description: Flood or flooding refers to the general or temporary conditions of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from the overflow of inland or tidal water and of surface water runoff from any source. Waters can collect in areas called floodplains that are defined as any land areas susceptible to being inundated by water from any flooding source. In Orange County and most of its jurisdictions, that flood source is normally rain that exceeds the carrying capacity SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 48 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 of its drainage systems. Tropical systems like tropical depressions, tropical storms, or hurricanes can also bring with them large amounts of falling water. The average annual rainfall in Orlando is 50.6 inches (1,290 mm), the majority of which occurs in the period from June to September. The months of October through May are Orlando's driest season. Other bodies of water like rivers, lakes, streams, wetlands, or even overburdened stormwater systems, can also cause flooding through rising waters where water systems collect. Low lying areas and/or poorly drained land can also accumulate rainfall through ponding on the surface. Floodplains help to store water for eventual release after the end of the storm. In many communities, flooding can cause severe impacts and justifies the importance of carrying flood insurance. Previous Occurrences: Orange County is at a higher elevation than most of the surrounding counties and serves as the headwaters for many of the major rivers in the area, including: Shingle Creek, Reedy Creek, Cypress Creek, and the Little Econlockhatchee River. This translates into a decreased amount of extended flooding periods as compared to surrounding counties as much of our waterways flow away from the county and its jurisdictions. Historical information on past floods in Orange County is sparse. The largest flood event in recent memory occurred in 1960 as a result of Hurricane Donna. Heavy rainfall in the early spring and late summer of 1960 left the soil saturated and resulted in a higher than normal water table. When Hurricane Donna passed through the area that September, it caused extensive flooding across Orange County. The flooding associated with this hurricane has been estimated to be between a 50-year (2% probability) to a 100-year event (1% probability) for portions of the county. Flooding can also originate due to excessive rainfall that collects in other water bodies. The table below lists lakes in Orange County with their corresponding record high point. All elevations shown are referenced to the North American Vertical Datum (NAVD). The table shows the historic peak, the date of the historic peak, and the date of the first year of record keeping. Table 10: Historic Lake Flooding Elevations Flooding Source Historic Peak Date of Historic First Year (Feet NAVD) Peak of Records Lake A•o•ka 68.39 October 1936 1935 Lake Barton 95.12 Au.ust 1960 1960 Little Lake Barton 94.37 Au•ust 1960 1960 Ba Lake 91.10 Au.ust 1960 1960 Lake Beauclair 62.58 Jul 1968 1960 Lake Bell 90.41 Au.ust 1960 1959 Lake Bessie 101.22 August 1960 1960 Black Lake 97.37 Au•ust 1960 1960 Lake Blanche 99.89 August 1960 1960 SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 49 eOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Lake Bosse 63.40 August 1960 1960 Lake Butler 100.89 September 1960 1933 Lake Cane 98.90 August 1960 1959 Lake Carlton 62.61 November 1975 1960 Lake Catherine 92.57 August 1960 1960 Lake Charity 71.54 October 1960 1960 Clear Lake 95.56 October 1960 1951 Lake Conway 88.08 August 1960 1960 Lake Cora Lee 73.65 November 1960 1960 Crooked Lake 76.96 December 1960 1960 Lake Destiny 90.36 October 1960 1960 Lake Dora 64.79 1927 1927 Lake Down 100.74 January 1960 1960 Lake Fairview 89.10 August 1960 1959 Lake Faith 71.34 November 1960 1960 Little Fish Lake 100.86 August 1960 1960 Lake Fuller 67.49 September 1960 1960 Lake Gandy 74.31 August 1960 1960 Lake Georgia 60.43 October 1959 1959 Lake Hart 63.88 September 1945 1941 Lake Herrick 80.05 November 1960 1960 Lake Hiawassa 81.42 November 1960 1960 Lake Holden 91.01 September 1960 1959 Lake Hope 72.89 October 1960 1960 Lake Irma 55.34 September 1960 1959 Lake Jessamine 92.86 September 1960 1959 Johns Lake 97.55 August 1960 1959 Lake Kilarney 84.28 August 1960 1959 Lawne Lake 91.54 September 1960 1959 Lake Lockhart 74.51 August 1960 1960 Long Lake 79.53 October 1960 1959 Lake Maitland 66.68 September 1960 1945 Lake Mann 93.41 September 1960 1959 Lake Mary 93.36 August 1960 1960 Lake Mary Jane 63.79 March 1960 1949 Lake Ola 72.79 November 1975 1959 Lake Orlando 85.40 August 1960 * Lake Phillips 63.96 September 1960 1960 Lake Pinelock 94.23 September 1960 1959 Lake Pleasant 81.27 December 1960 1959 Pocket Lake 57.27 September1960 1959 Lake Rose 86.09 November 1960 1960 Lake Rowena 74.33 September 1945 1945 Lake Ruby 116.34 August 1960 1960 Big Sand Lake 99.52 November 1960 1959 Little Sand Lake 100.90 August 1960 1960 Lake Shadow 83.30 August 1960 1960 Lake Sheen 100.05 August 1960 1960 Lake Sherwood 87.46 October 1960 1960 South Lake 94.78 August 1960 1960 SECTION 3- Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 50 A`\ Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Spring Lake 100.76 September 1960 1960 Lake Steer 85.98 November 1960 1960 Lake Sue 72.74 September 1964 1960 Lake Telfer 59.19 September 1960 1960 Lake Tibet 99.83 October 1960 1960 Trout Lake 73.93 December 1960 1959 • Turkey Lake 95.94 August 1960 1960 Lake Warren 86.57 August 1960 1960 Lake Waunatta 62.04 September 1960 1960 Source: Orange County Public Works,Storm water Management Division Location: Orange County has twelve (12) major watersheds with over 690 waterbodies, several of which may experience flooding. The County's eastern border is the St. Johns River, with some conservation lands that may flood occasionally. Lake Apopka is Orange County's largest lake with a surface area of 30,800 acres (48.125 square miles) with an average depth of 15.4 feet. Orange County's Public Works regularly monitors over 150 lakes as part of its lake index. They have also tracked rain gauge data since 1986 with fourteen (14) gauges scattered around the county as most recently reported. There are twelve (12) Stage and Flow gauges for several prominent waterways that have sensors installed that can measure in "real-time"that helps provide accurate and reliable rainfall recordings during weather events to alert residents and emergency management officials when conditions are nearing flood conditions or if inundation should be anticipated in floodplains. Floodplains in the Unincorporated Orange County are quite prevalent with over a third (37.48%) of the land area in a 100-year or 500-year floodplain. Other jurisdictions with high total areas of floodplain include: Belle Isle (60.47%), Maitland (28.10%), and Windermere (36.59%). Table 11: Total Area in Floodplains in Orange County, FL Total Area in Total Area in Total Area Jurisdiction 100-Year 500-Year Floodplain Floodplain Floodplain (%) (%) (%) A•o•ka, Ci of 10.56 0.04 10.60 Ba Lake Ci of 2.00 0.00 2.00 Belle Isle Ci of 59.21 1.26 60.47 Eatonville, Town of 19.76 2.34 22.10 Ed•ewood, Ci of 23.37 1.40 24.77 Lake Buena Vista, Ci of 0.001 0.00 0.001 Maitland Ci of 27.83 0.27 28.10 Oakland Town of 13.14 0.00 13.14 Ocoee Ci of 13.67 0.11 13.78 Orange Coun Unincorsorated 35.80 1.68 37.48 Orlando, Ci of 19.09 0.63 19.72 Windermere, Town of 36.59 0.00 36.59 SECTION 3- Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 51 eOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Winter Garden, City of 24.67 0.13 24.80 Winter Park, City of 21.66 0.61 22.27 Source: Orange County Public Works,Storm water Management Division Figure C: Floodplain in Orange County, FL v., 0 1 2 4 6 8 M il y � -3 i {, 4 • '4.. P ° ' 4) '' x=683085.0D3 y=1475135.173 441 \Igfq o ■ 1 -'1es-Sh:apes 1111 SK-'fe_•Shapes w I, r-,-)CIP ' %49 ..,A...-1 v-.1.,,jr, I. _ -,--410,_ i t `1►� _ , _ V -\ t-1 Nk ..; . -,. -. •,,,,,' ' .1. •'• , i---• - .' •7 .L. .431 .11, 0 ... . i... ‘ . .-4,:..,,; Apt „. fir--t 91,:' 1 - ir 4 ./.4. '44_; 1,41 , 6 ---: .-- 4,_ - ,„, - - - tic' raL t' '.g‘ iftrit{ 441 it''' i * 1 .:1,,4 , I . "V*, , I, .> Id'Ai A PI Si'‘V,.'A-r, ..1, '„, 14 ,3 - . ; '' 4 ' jou ' Salk. s ► Source. Orange County InfoMaps While there is no standard rainfall depth that will create flooding conditions throughout the county, some areas may be more flood-prone than others. The western portion of Orange County is characterized by high recharge areas with many land-locked systems. These areas are typically affected by the total amount of rainfall during a storm event rather than the intensity of the storm. In contrast, the flatter eastern portion of Orange County is characterized by riverine systems, such as the Little Econlockhatchee River, Boggy Creek, the Big Econlockhatchee River, and the St. Johns River. These parts are more sensitive to storm intensities, or the rate of rainfall. The ground water table in the eastern portion of Orange County is also generally much closer to the land surface, which hampers soil infiltration during a storm event. Most storm events in Orange County, or approximately 90% of storms, create one (1) inch or less of rain. Based on studies conducted by Orange County Public Works, flooding problems generally begin with the mean annual storm, or 4.5 inches in 24 hours. However, portions of the county have experienced localized problems with 2 — 3 inches of rainfall. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 52 tow Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Table 12: Storm Events—Rainfall Amount Storm Event Rainfall Amount Mean Annual/ 24 hour 4.5 inches 10 Year/ 24 hour 7.5 inches 25 ear/ 24 hour 8.6 inches 100 ear/ 24 hour 10.6 inches Source: Orange County Public Works,Storm water Management Division Orange County's current development code calls for the use of increasingly higher storm event mitigation depending on what is being constructed or developed. The more critical structures are designed to a higher standard as their function is essential to operations in Orange County. Table 13: Development Criteria Description Storm Event Roadwa seconda 10- ear Ponds 25- ear to 100- ear Residential Homes/Commercial Sites 100- ear Roadwa 50-year to 100- ear Critical Facilities 500- ear Source: Orange County Public Works,Stormwater Management Division Some areas of Orange County are more flood-prone than others. The floodplain map above (Figure 3) shows those areas of Orange County that are designated as being within the 100-year and 500-year floodplain as delineated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as part of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The NFIP was created to help provide a means for property owners to financially protect themselves. The NFIP offers flood insurance to homeowners, renters, and business owners if their community participates in the NFIP. Participating communities agree to adopt and enforce ordinances that meet or exceed FEMA requirements to reduce the risk of flooding. The unincorporated area of Orange County takes part in NFIP, as do the jurisdictions of Apopka, Belle Isle, Eatonville, Edgewood, Maitland, Oakland, Ocoee, Orlando, Windermere, Winter Garden, and Winter Park. Currently, there are three entities that do not take part in the NFIP: Bay Lake, Lake Buena Vista, and the Reedy Creek Improvement District. In addition, three (3) of these communities participate in the Community Rating System (CRS) that recognizes and encourages community floodplain management activities that exceed the minimum NFIP standards. Most communities that do not participate in the CRS program may lack the manpower or funding compared to those locations that are a part of the CRS. The CRS may place a burden on communities due to increased documentation, annual SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 53 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 certification requirements, and need for dedicated resources, such as permitting staff, review staff, maintenance, etc. Table 14: NFIP and CRS Communities in Orange County, FL Initial Flood Initial Flood NFIP Hazard Insurance CRS Entry Jurisdiction Community Boundary Rate Map Date and ID Map (FHBM) (FIRM) Class Identified Identified 10/01/1993, Apopka, City of 120180 07/19/1974 09/29/1978 Class 7 Belle Isle, Ci of 120181 07/19/1974 09/15/1978 Eatonville Town of 120182 07/19/1974 12/01/1978 Ed•ewood Ci of 120183 07/19/1974 09/29/1978 Maitland Ci of 120184 07/19/1974 09/05/1979 Oakland, Town of 120663 12/06/2000 Ocoee, Ci of 120185 08/02/1974 11/01/1978 Orange County 120179 01/30/1976 12/01/1981 10/01/1991, Unincor•orated Class 5 10/01/1993, Orlando, City of 120186 08/02/1974 09/03/1980 Class 6 Windermere Town of 120381 04/22/1977 12/18/1984 Winter Garden, Ci of 120187 07/19/1974 09/29/1978 Winter Park Ci of 120188 10/18/1974 11/15/1979 Source: FEMA,NFIP,and CR5 Orange County has participated in the NFIP program since the early 1980's. The County's Stormwater Management Division continues to implement and enforce all aspects of the NFIP. Listed below are some of the efforts undertaken to continue to comply with NFIP requirements: a. Review all development projects impacting the FEMA established floodplain. b. Ensure compensating storage is provided when projects affect the floodplain. c. Ensure no development is impacting the designated floodway. d. Issue floodplain permits ensuring compliance with FEMA regulations. e. Review Elevation Certificates to ensure structures were built at the appropriate elevation. f. Continue to update FEMA floodplain maps as new data becomes available. g. Initiate new flood studies to amend/update floodplain mapping (several on-going projects). h. Mitigate known flooding problems by constructing drainage improvements. i. Maintain primary and secondary drainage systems. Primary systems include major canals, ponds, control structures, drain wells, and pump stations. The secondary system is composed of stormwater conveyance to the primary system. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 54 A Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 There are other activities that the County's Stormwater Management Division engages the community in on a yearly basis to help promote the NFIP and CRS programs, as well as to bring a general level of flood awareness to the residents of Orange County. a. Flood prevention and flood insurance information on the county website. b. Community meetings at Home Owner's Associations (HOAs). c. Participation in community wide outreach (e.g. Annual Hurricane Expo). d. Flood prevention and flood insurance yearly mailing to all residents within floodplain (approximately 225,000 letters). e. Handouts and reference material available to the public at the County Public Works Department Office. f. Copy of FEMA flood insurance maps available at the Orange County Public Libraries. g. Floodplain layer available through the Orange County Public InfoMap, an online GIS tool Extent: Due to the generally flat topography in Orange County, just a few inches of rain can mean the difference between "Normal High Water Elevations" (NHWE) and 100-year flood levels. Orange County's Public Works monitors 120 lakes as part of its lake monitoring program. They have also tracked rainfall data since 1986. The current rainfall network consists of 14 gauging stations scattered throughout the county. There are 12 stage sensors and flow is calculated at several prominent waterways. The gauging stations have sensors that measure data in "real-time,"which provide accurate and reliable rainfall data during weather events that can be used to alert residents and emergency management officials of potential flooding. In 2010, Orange County's rainfall gauges measured 1,852 different"storms"that are defined as a rainfall event that does not have a gap or inter-event dry period of more than four continuous hours with rainfall. Of these, only 54 instances (2.9%) recorded rainfall of more than 2.00 inches. The number of storms that last longer than 6.00 hours numbered 250 storms (13.5%). From 1940 — 2010, Orange County's average annual rainfall was 51.68 inches with a minimum of 30.38 inches and a maximum of 68.74 inches. Since 2000— 2010, seven (7) years saw higher than average rainfall: 2001 — 2005 and 2008-2009. Rainfall is closely tied to flooding. The following page contains a map of the routine flooding locations across Orange County as determined in April of 2016. These locations range from depths of one (1) inch up to eighteen (18) inches. The amount of rainfall has a direct relationship to flood depths. For instance four (4) inches of rainfall across a wide area could generate over twelve (12) inches of flood water depth. As much of Orange county is urbanized and runoff amounts have increased, this tends to be the case. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 55 0Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 G" I I I I lcj g po, ( 1,11 . ,,... , . 4VF •ak .. . • . / i It..111%,..ala r 0 '' a v ll; 1 • " — -1. , - . 4 .,,,, ,, ...,.....,..........- _ 'a...g....,- QIN., tiRow-or . v ER -,--- it! I - le-r-7.1" --- tvatiNtook cit, , ta IPMICallr, iirika e iiiiiiiirlirtralMIL ' 10.1 11101111:0 1151111,ir. . Taitikla i CR c,� _ '1-4= „-4.- ti.. 111 ,1t�JlM.. o.. .rte _ 'PayeiNtiaLimirmily416,1_ ill. Viiill' ILS , R1-'-,_ 1 ill i I I, iimel „TM I I 1 lia-diffiii AilmilL.4.A- . 9171==-'4411.. ,ezw, i NI w10c illit ,,,....tria, ,\ :. �r 1 t ilill, �t`l �,��- 7.___ 0 *fa I�u111 1011 Ti `.�.. aIle o o 1 T m ~' *111 m - a ISI[ o 0 - 43f 11111 1 1I ▪ 21 v =t • _ a Cr 7 0 d 0 II I I II o1�. - 1! 2 o rr t1: N rt� � • F f - ft tf • 1 II P' LE I I I F ICJ SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 56 ,`A Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 The Orange County Public Works Stormwater Division tracks floods that occur in Orange County. Several specific locations scattered around the county have routinely experienced at least six (6) inches of flooding and are considered to be major flooding spots. They include: Haver Lake, Oak Lake, Lakewood Pointe drive, Alexandria Place, Reams Road and Ficquette Road, and Saffron Plum Lane. A few of these locations were severely flooded in 2008 as Tropical Storm Fay drenched the area. The depth of six (6) inches is the Stormwater Division's line of demarcation as to what is considered to be major flooding. For example, there are dozens of other locations throughout the county are typically less than six (6) inches of floodwaters, but are considered to be localized or historical flooding. The majority of Repetitive Flood Loss (RFL) incidents occur during years with higher than average rainfall. Since 1978, RFL properties are any insurable building for which two or more claims of more than $1,000 were paid by the NFIP within any rolling 10-year period. These properties are any insurable building for which two or more claims of more than $1,000 were paid by the NFIP within any rolling ten-year period, since 1978. There are 18 RFL properties in the jurisdictions of Orange County: Unincorporated County (10); Ocoee (2); Orlando (3); Winter Garden (1); and Winter Park (2). These properties account for a total of 61 repetitive flood claims. There is also one (1) Severe Repetitive Loss property, which, as defined, must have at least four (4) NFIP claim payments (including building and contents) over $5,000 for each flood event. The cumulative amount of such claims payments must exceed $20,000; or for which at least two separate claims payments (building payments only) have been made with the cumulative amount of the building portion of such claims exceeding the market value of the building. For both previously listed items, at least two of the referenced claims must have occurred within any ten-year period, and must be greater than 10 days apart (Source: FEMA). Table 15: Repetitive Flood Loss Properties in Orange County, FL Occupancy Flood Number Jurisdiction of Type Zone Losses Ocoee, Ci of Single Famil AE 3 Ocoee, Ci of Single Famil X 2 Orange Coun Unincor••rated MGM= AE 2 Orange Coun Unincorp•rated MEM= AE 2 Orange Coun Unincorporated EWER= X 4 Orange Coun Unincorporated EIMEE1=1 AE 2 Orange Coun Unincor•orated CEME I X 2 Orange Coun Unincor•orated FECIEMIll A03 2 Orange Coun Unincor•orated MEE= X 2 Orange Coun Unincorporated Non-Residential X 4 Orange Coun Unincor.orated RECIERMII X 2 SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 57 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Orange County Unincorporated Single Family X 12* Orange County Unincorporated Single Family AE 2 Orange County Unincorporated Non-Residential X 2 Orange County Unincorporated Single Family X 2 Orlando, City of Single Family X 2 Orlando, City of Non-Residential X 4 Orlando, City of Non-Residential X 4 Winter Garden, City of Single Family X 2 Winter Park, City of Single Family AE 2 Winter Park, City of Single Family X 2 TOTAL 61 *Note: denotes Severe Repetitive Loss(SRL)property Source: Florida Division of Emergency Management, 12/31/2013 Probability: The classification of floodplains is due in part to the probability or return rate of a level of water. For instance, 100-year floods are calculated to be the level of flood water expected to be equal or exceeded every 100 years on average. This means that a flood has a 1% chance of being equaled or exceeded in magnitude in any single year; a 500-year floodplain has a 0.2% chance. These locations may include areas adjoining a stream, river, or other body of water. Flooding has the potential to occur every year, but the severity can significantly change with each occurrence. While Flooding is still possible in years with less than average rainfall, Repetitive Flood Loss (RFL) properties tend to occur when there is higher than average rainfall during that year. FEMA uses its Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) to show different floodplains with different zone designations that may help to categorize the potential for flooding (refer to Table 16). These are primarily for insurance rating purposes, but the zone differentiation can be very helpful for other floodplain management purposes. Table 16: Flood Insurance Rate Map(FIRM)Zones Zone Description Zone A: The 100-year or base floodplain. There are six(6) types of A Zones: The base floodplain is mapped by approximate methods, i.e., Base Flood A Elevations(BFEs) are not determined. This is often called an unnumbered A Zone or an approximate A Zone. A1-30 These are known as numbered A Zones (e.g.,A7 or A14). This is the base floodplain where the FIRM shows a BFE (old format). AE The base floodplain where base flood elevations are provided. AE Zones are now used on new format FIRMs instead of A1-A30 Zones. AO The base floodplain with sheet flow, ponding, or shallow flooding. Base flood depths (feet above ground) are provided. AH Shallow flooding base floodplain. BFEs are provided. A99 Area to be protected from base flood by levees or Federal Flood Protection Systems under construction. BFEs are not determined. AR The base floodplain that results from the decertification of a previously accredited flood protection system that is in the process of SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 58 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 being restored to provide a 100-year or greater level of flood protection. Zone V and VE: V The coastal area subject to a velocity hazard (wave action) where BFEs are not determined on the FIRM. VE The coastal area subject to a velocity hazard (wave action) where BFEs are provided on the FIRM. Zone B and X Area of moderate flood hazard, usually the area between the limits of the 100- (shaded) year and 500-year floods. B Zones are also used to designate base floodplains of lesser hazards, such as areas protected by levees from the 100-year flood, or shallow flooding areas with average depths of less than one foot or drainage areas less than 1 square mile. Zone C and X Area of minimal flood hazard, usually depicted on FIRMs as above the 500- (unshaded) year flood level. Zone C may have ponding and local drainage problems that don't warrant a detailed study or designation as base floodplain. Zone Xis the area determined to be outside the 500-year flood and protected by levee from 100-year flood. Zone D Area of undetermined but possible flood hazards. Source: FEMA Impacts: On a state level, freshwater flooding associated with tropical cyclone events is one of the leading causes of death, accounting for more than half (59%) of all storm-related deaths and nearly two-thirds (63%) for in-land counties from 1970 to 2000 (Edward Rappaport, Tropical Prediction Center). There have been no recorded instances for loss of life associated with flooding in Orange County or its jurisdictions. Flooding may also inundate potential evacuation routes. Flooded roads can often result in fatal accidents. Rainfall associated with tropical systems varies by the size of the storm, forward speed, and other meteorological factors. The rainfall associated with a hurricane is expected to be from 6-12 inches, with possibly higher amounts, while the greatest rainfall amounts occur from weaker storms that move slowly or stall over an area for extended periods of time. Currently listed RFL properties have recorded over 61 different flood claims to property, with significant losses for both for building damage and contents. NFIP records since 1978 indicate that the total losses are about $2.5 million, with about 500 claims at an average claim of$4,800. The geographic area that is affected because of a flood is relatively small with inundation occurring specifically in lower lying areas or near obstructed stormwater management structures like drains and culverts. The area of Orange County that is situated in a 100-year floodplain is considerable though. Economic impacts have the potential to be high as several properties related Orange County's critical infrastructure are situated in floodplains or near water bodies that can flood. In the past, these impacts felt have been moderate with isolated utility outages, but the potential still exists for critical facilities to be impacted. Mitigation Measures There are a number of current mitigation measures being undertaken by Orange County and its jurisdictions regarding flooding. Perhaps one of the biggest steps is participating in the NFIP. CRS communities should continue to work towards recertifying their jurisdictions or achieving higher class levels. Other communities that are SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 59 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 at risk of flooding should be encouraged to participate in the CRS as well. Orange County has addressed its flood hazard in multiple other plans. Training and Exercise on flooding occurs at least every other year with simulated events geared towards the impacts from flooding and damage assessment. There are some logisitical support equipment and teams used by Orange County and its jurisdictions to mitigate flood hazards, including a sandbag program and other public works equipment that can be deployed prior to or after a flood event. Warning systems like stafe and flow gauges and rainfall monitors, as well as public notification systems allow Orange County alert is residents and visitors to the potential for flooding, especially in areas that are prone to inundation. Vulnerability: Orange County and its jurisdictions are situated near the middle of the state. Two major river systems flow from Orange County: the St. Johns River that flows north towards Jacksonville, and Hunter's Creek which flows south to the headwaters of the Everglades. A network of other rivers, streams, canals, and creeks crisscross the county. Due to its relatively flat topography, falling water tends to collect and pond in certain low lying areas. There are several large water bodies that can cause issues of rising water as well. With over one-third of the county area being in a 100-year floodplain, the flood hazard can be very prevalent, especially in years with higher than average rainfall. Much of Orange County's jurisdictions are also developed, which increases the amount of impermeable surface and creates the need for a robust infrastructure system to handle and redirect large amounts of water away from structures. Flooding that occurs in the more urban areas tends to be the result of localized flooding where stormwater drainage systems become overwhelmed due to run-off or obstructed drains, but once cleared, the flood waters recede quickly. The more rural parts of the county, especially those near significant waterways, may experience a more typical flood that can last for a couple of days with slowly receding flood waters. Significant structural losses to buildings and contents help to place the County's vulnerability to this hazard fairly high. Several mitigation activities that are in place, such as the various monitors, gauges, and public notification systems help to reduce our exposure to flood. All jurisdictions participate in the NFIP with a handful taking part in the CRS. Risk: Medium — 43% There is a high probability that Orange County will experience flooding in the future. The potential rate of return of a flood incident is about 2.33 years. The amount of area that resides in the 100-year flood plain for the unincorporated county is high, but most other jurisdictions are less than 25% of their area. Previous property damages since 1978 total about $2.5 million with over 500 claims. Since there have not been any reported serious injuries or deaths and the mitigation systems that are already in place have received a good deal of attention and resources, the County's overall risk to this hazard is moderate. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 60 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Severe Thunderstorms Description: The State of Florida is considered the thunderstorm capital of the United States. Thunderstorms are a common occurrence in Orange County and its jurisdictions, especially during the hot summer months. A mid-afternoon thunderstorm is almost a daily event. Thunderstorms are created when warm, moist air rises and meets cooler air; these storms can produce lightning, high winds, hail, tornados, and heavy rain, which can cause flooding. Only about 10% are considered severe, according to NOAA. In order to be considered severe, the NWS states that the thunderstorm must include one of three characteristics: produces winds greater than 58 miles per hour, produces hail that is 0.75 inches in diameter or greater, or produces tornados. Thunderstorms, hail, and lightning affect a relatively small area when compared to other weather events, like tornados or tropical systems. The typical thunderstorm is about 15 miles in diameter and lasts an average of 30 minutes. Despite their small size, all thunderstorms can be dangerous. Of the estimated 100,000 thunderstorms that occur each year in the United States, about 10 percent are classified as severe. The Severe Thunderstorm hazard is comprised of three (3) other sub-hazards, including: hail, lightning, and tornados. The sub-hazards are described in further detail below. Hail Hail is composed of ice and range widely in size. Hailstorms are closely associated with thunderstorms, which form the hail stones as they cycle through the storm clouds multiple times. The hailstones are suspended by the strong upward motion of the air until the weight of the hail can no longer be carried by the updraft of wind and they fall to the ground. Hail stones generally fall at faster rates as they grow in size, though other factors such as melting, friction, wind, and rain or other hail stones can slow them down. Severe weather warnings are usually issued for hail when the stones reach a damaging size, causing serious property damage to automobiles and structures, as well as agricultural interests. Previous Occurrences: Many times hail is combined with other severe weather hazards. Since 1960, there have over 226 recorded hail events in Orange County with a magnitude greater than 0.75" size hail according to NWS data. The most common hail size was 0.75" with 93 occurrences, followed by 1.00" (60) and 0.88" (30). In some cases, multiple hail events were recorded on the same day, but they were in a different location or were of a different magnitude (size). Table 17.a.: Hail Event Magnitudes in Orange County, FL (date) Hail Size Number (inches) of Events SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 61 ,`_, Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 0.00 2 0.75 93 0.88 30 1.00 60 1.25 5 1.50 4 1.75 26 2.25 1 2.75 4 3.00 1 TOTAL 226 Source: NWS Table 17 b.: Hail Event in Orange County, FL, 2010-2014 Magnitude 6/18/2011 ORLANDO 1.00 Date Location (In Inches) 7/15/2011 AZALEA PARK 1.00 6/2/2010 EASTBROOK 0.88 7/15/2011 UNION PARK 1.00 6/2/2010 GOLDENROD 1.00 3/31/2012 LAKE PICKETT 0.75 6/2/2010 GOLDENROD 1.25 4/20/2012 APOPKA 0.75 ORLANDO 4/20/2012 TANGELO PARK 1.00 MAGUIRE 7/4/2012 OAKLAND 0.88 6/3/2010 AIRPORT 0.88 7/8/2012 WINDERMERE 0.75 KINGSWOOD 7/8/2012 ORLOVISTA 1.00 6/15/2010 MANOR 0.88 7/8/2012 GOTHA 1.00 6/19/2010 UNION PARK 0.75 WALT DISNEY 3/30/2011 LAKE PICKETT 0.75 3/24/2013 WORLD 1.00 3/30/2011 UNION PARK 1.00 4/14/2013 MAITLAND 0.75 (MCO)ORLANDO 4/14/2013 EASTBROOK 0.88 4/19/2011 INTL AR 0.88 4/14/2013 MAITLAND 1.00 (MCO)ORLANDO 5/23/2013 CHRISTMAS 1.00 4/19/2011 INTL AR 1.00 5/23/2013 CHRISTMAS 1.50 5/11/2011 UNION PARK 0.88 9/6/2013 ORLANDO 0.88 5/11/2011 UNION PARK 1.00 5/26/2014 TANGELO PARK 1.00 5/13/2011 PINE CASTLE 1.00 6/27/2014 TANGELO PARK 1.00 5/14/2011 BEULAH 0.88 AVERAGE HAIL SIZE 0.94 5/27/2011 SKY LAKE 1.00 5/28/2011 MC DONALD 0.88 Source: NWS From 2010 to 2014, there were 35 hail events that took place across Orange County and its jurisdictions. According to the NWS, the average hail size was 0.94 inches Location: Hail has the ability to occur anywhere in the County and its jurisdictions. SECTION 3 - Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 62 eOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Recordkeeping by the NWS for the location for hail did not occur until 1994. Location information prior to that does not appear to have been maintained in the NWS data. Since the unincorporated County covers the largest area, the majority of reported hail events took place there. Other municipalities that cover a large area, such as Orlando, Apopka, Maitland, Windermere, Winter Garden, and Winter Park have all had multiple hail events recorded. Extent: Hail has been recorded as large as 3.00" in Orange County, but larger hail could possibly form in some extreme circumstances. The more likely to occur, though, is smaller sized hail less than 1.00" in size. Most hail events last for only a short duration of several minutes as the severe thunderstorm passes through. During this time, there can be damages caused to property, such as building roofs and vehicles that are exposed to the elements. Probability: The likelihood of hail is high as it is a frequent occurrence in Orange County, mainly due to its direct relationship with severe thunderstorms. From 1960 to 2014, there were 226 recorded instances of hail. This means that, on average, there are more than four (4) hail events per year. The highest number of occurrences in one year was in 1999 with 24 hail events. Hail can occur throughout the year, as early as February to October; the height of the hail season is in the late spring to summer months as the probability for thunderstorm activity is at its peak as well. Impacts: There have been fairly moderate impacts due to hail in Orange County. To date, there has been no loss of life or reported casualties to people. There have been some property damages though; other property damages, especially to vehicles from visitors or those driving through the county and they may not be recorded by the NWS. Reported property damages are listed at $60,300 from three (3) hail events. SHELDUSTM reports much more significant damages for both property damage ($31,623,066.67) and crop damage ($500,500.00) in its statistics. Spatial impacts have been fairly isolated as hail does not generally affect large areas of the county or its municipalities all at once. Economic impacts to critical infrastructure have been minor at best. No outages for utilities were reported, but hail storms have the potential to impact electrical lines or transformers if their size were to be large enough to cause significant damage. Fortunately, no such effects have been recorded. An increased number of hail events could lead to a greater amount of overall damage, even though individual events do not produce a large amount of damage on their own. Mitigation Measures Due to its high frequency but low impacts, hail can be difficult to mitigate on a large scale basis. Property owners could install impact resistant roofing materials to help prevent severe impacts from larger sized hail. This hazard is mentioned in the Orange County CEMP, but very few other plans. Training and exercise on hail does not occur with any degree of regularity. Very little logistical resources or support teams are devoted to hail on its own, but it may be included as part of a SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 63 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 response to other associated hazards like severe thunderstorms, lightning, or tornados. Vulnerability: Orange County and its jurisdictions are vulnerable to the effects from hail due to its frequency and probability for return. Fortunately, reported damages from the NWS remain relatively low and with no loss of life or injuries. Spatial impacts are limited to a small location, but nearly all of the jurisdictions in Orange County have experienced hail at some point in time. They are likely to experience it again. Risk: Medium — 52% The overall risk from hail is categorized as a medium threat mainly because of the low impacts. Even with a high probability for occurrence with only minor mitigation measures currently in place, Orange County has not be severely impacted by hail in the past. The potential for impacts to occur is moderate, especially to property, buildings, vehicles, and other infrastructure assets that could be compromised by hail damage. Hail is generally a component of other hazards that may have more significant impacts in Orange County. Lightning -- Lightning is one of the other products of severe thunderstorms that can cause damages, casualties, or deaths. Lightning is basically a giant electrical charge that sparks in the atmosphere or between the atmosphere and the ground. In the initial stages of development of a thunderstorm, the air acts as an insulator between the positive and negative charges in the cloud and between the cloud and the ground. When the difference in charges becomes too great, the capacity of the air to act as an insulator breaks down. Then there is a rapid discharge of electricity that is seen in the form of lightning. Lightning can occur between opposite charges within the thunderstorm cloud (intra-cloud lightning) or between opposite charges in the cloud and on the ground (cloud-to-ground lightning). One of the main dangers of this hazard is that lightning cannot be forecasted. Previous Occurrences: Actual occurrences of lightning strikes in Orange County and its jurisdictions are nearly too numerous to count. Table 18 shows the annual lightning strikes from March 2009 to December 2015 with a total of 468,053 strikes over the past several years. Table 18: Annual Lightning Strikes in Orange County, FL Year Number of Strikes *2009 66 017 2010 53 494 2011 32 943 2012 40,082 SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 64 A Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 2013 39,645 2014 53,124 2015 182,748 TOTAL 468,053 `Note: Lightning stoke data began in March 2009 Source: Earth Networks Weather Stations in Orange County,2009-2015 Instead, the focus of the hazard should be placed on lightning strikes that caused severe damage or impacts, either through loss of life, injuries, and/or property damages. According to SHELOUSTM data, there have been 70 lightning events since 1960 with associated damages across Orange County. The NWS data has far fewer recorded events, with 33 instances of lightning strikes where damages, injuries, or casualties occurred. The NWS data only goes as far back as 1996 though. Location: Lightning has the ability to occur anywhere in the County and its jurisdictions. Since the unincorporated County covers the largest area, the majority of reported lightning strikes seem to have taken place in its boundaries. Other municipalities that cover a large area, such as Orlando, Apopka, Maitland, Ocoee, Windermere, Winter Garden, and Winter Park have all had multiple lightning events recorded. Extent: There is no official severity scale or magnitude range associated with lightning at this time. Lightning can heat the surrounding air to as much as 50,000° F, which is five times as hot as the temperature of the sun. When air is heated, it expands rapidly and creates the sound of thunder. To measure the extent for the lightning hazard, Orange County utilized information collected from Earth Networks/Weather Bug that provide support to its array of weather stations around the county that records lightning strikes during the period of March 2009 to December 2014. Using a Geospatial Information System (GIS), we were able to plot lightning strike density throughout Orange County. Each 'raster,"or cell, on the map represents an area of about thirteen (13) acres (757 square feet). It then measured the number of lightning strikes with a one (1) mile radius of the cell area for a one (1) year period. The data was split into years because the lightning strikes would be so dense that there would not be enough contrast. Density values range from zero (0) strikes to upwards of 121 lightning strikes within a one (1) mile radius. The worst case scenario for the number of lightning strikes occurring within a mile of a single raster would be over 121 strikes within a one (1) mile radius. Referring to Table 18, each year, from 2009 to 2015, saw varying numbers of lightning strikes. A pattern was not easily detected visually on each map. However, some of the commonalities from year to year are that the eastern portions of unincorporated Orange County near the Bithlo, Christmas, and Wedgefeld neighborhoods, as well as areas along the St. Johns River experience a high density of lightning strikes as the sea breeze develops into thunderstorm SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 65 A Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 systems. Other small pockets of lightning strike activity were also present in the urbanized portions of the county in Orlando, Maitland, and Winter Park. Unincorporated areas of south central Orange County near the various theme park attractions and International Drive also recorded high densities of lightning strikes. Since 1960, the SHELDUSm recorded 70 lightning strikes that impacted people, property, or natural environments. A worst case scenario for a lightning strike in Orange County would be measured by the amount of damages, injuries, or casualties caused by a single event. On August 22, 2010, several houses in Windermere were struck by lightning, which destroyed the homes. Property damages were estimate at over $2 million. During one particular lightning event on August 16, 2011, there was a report of eight (8) injuries at a local theme park. Three (3) guests and five (5) employees were all taken to the hospital as a precaution as they were not directly struck by lightning and were released the next day. Two men were struck and killed by lightning on August 16, 1998 while they were fishing in a canoe on Lake Mack in Orlando. The above listed events are the direct damages caused by lightning. These do not account for the indirect damages that lightning can create as they relate to other hazards, such as with wildfire. Probability: The probability of lightning strikes in Orange County and its jurisdictions will remain high as it is directly tied to the likelihood of severe thunderstorms. The lightning strikes that cause property damages, injuries, or casualties should be more infrequent. There are thousands of cloud-to-ground lightning strikes that may occur in Orange County each year. So far, there have been 70 lightning strikes have caused damages or losses since 1960. This is not a comprehensive list of all of the lightning strikes that occur in Orange County. This number represents only a small portion of total strikes that take place and does not include cloud-to-cloud strikes or other lightning without impacts. Due to its unpredictability, lightning has the potential to cause damages during each strike. Lightning has the potential to strike during each month of the year. Much like hail, the height of lightning activity is in the late spring to summer months as the probability for thunderstorms is at its height. Impacts: Since 1960, there have been 79 reported injuries and 16 deaths associated with 70 lightning strikes in Orange County. Property damages are reported by SEHLDUSTM to be over $3.48 million over 54 years. The last reported property damages and injuries from lightning were both in 2011 with the most recent death occurring in 2004. Awareness about the dangers of lightning has certainly improved over the years with far fewer injuries and deaths taking place. Spatial impacts are fairly isolated for a lightning strike, even though a severe thunderstorm system can cover large areas of the County. Critical infrastructure services may be interrupted temporarily during a lightning strike with power failures the most likely of these. Other utilities may experience short disruption because of a power failure, but most critical systems have generator back-ups to SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 66 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 avoid an issue. Most power failures are restored within a few hours to a few days following a severe thunderstorm system, depending on the size of the weather system and the number of outages or downed power line. More complex systems may require further time for complete restoration of services. Technology and detection equipment can play a huge role in preventing injuries from lightning. Other systems for emergency notification could also be important to let those individuals who are participating in outdoor activities to let them know to take cover, especially with the number of visitors that Orange County has at its theme parks, sporting events, and recreational activities. Public outreach to let people know"When thunder roars, go indoors!" has also be increasing, with the posting of signs and posters at public parks, schools, and recreational venues. Lightning can also create other hazards that we are impacted by in Orange County, such as wildfires. Keep in mind that the above listed events are the direct damages caused by lightning. These figures do not account for the indirect damages that lightning can create as they relate to these other hazards. Mitigation Measures: Due to its high frequency but low impacts, lightning can be difficult to mitigate on a large scale basis. Property owners could install lightning rods or use non-conductive building materials to help prevent severe impacts from lightning strikes. This hazard is mentioned in the Orange County CEMP, but very few other plans. Training and exercise on lightning may be covered as an ancillary hazard for first responders for during an event, but very rarely, if ever, as a stand-alone hazard. Some logistical resources or support teams are devoted to responding to the effects of lightning, but mainly for electrical restoration. Other resources are included as part of a response to other associated hazards like severe thunderstorms, hail, or tornados. Vulnerability: Orange County and its jurisdictions are vulnerable to the effects from lightning due to its frequency and probability for return. Fortunately, reported damages from the NWS remain moderate and with some loss of life and several injuries. Spatial impacts are limited to a small location, but nearly all of the jurisdictions in Orange County have experienced lightning strikes at some point in time. They are likely to experience it again. Risk: Medium — 52% The overall risk from lightning is categorized as a medium threat mainly because of the low impacts. With a high probability for occurrence with only minor mitigation measures currently in place, Orange County has had some severe impacts from lightning in the past. The potential for impacts to occur is moderate, especially to property, and individuals who participate in outdoor activities that are unable to find cover during a thunderstorm. Lightning remains very unpredictable, but its impacts can be reduced through better detection technology, public outreach, and emergency notification systems. Lightning is SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 67 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 considered by some to be a component of other hazards that may have more significant impacts in Orange County, but awareness of this hazard appears to be on the rise. Tornados Tornados are violently rotating, massive columns of air that is in contact with both the surface of the earth and its cloud base. A tornado's wind speed normally ranges from 40 mph to more than 300 mph. They are also described by several names, such as"twisters,""vortexes," or"cyclones." "Funnel clouds" are shaped like their name but do not make contact with the ground. Not all tornados have visible funnel-shaped clouds. "Waterspouts," which form over water bodies, are usually weaker than their land-based counterparts. Waterspouts occasionally move inland, becoming tornadoes and causing damage and injuries. Although most people associate tornados with the Midwest, Florida has nearly as many tornados as many mid-western States. Florida tornados are generally of short duration and have a narrower path. These funnel clouds can be spawned by hurricanes and appear predominantly along the right-front quadrant of the storm. While tornados are more prevalent in west-central Florida, southeast Florida, and portions of the panhandle, Orange County has seen many of these types of severe weather events over the years. Previous Occurrences: Florida basically has two tornado seasons. The summer tornado season runs from June until September and has the highest frequencies of storm generation, with usual intensities of EF-0 or EF-1 on the Enhanced Fujita Scale (prior to 2007, tornados were classified using the Fujita Scale, or F-Scale). This includes those tornadoes associated with land-falling tropical cyclones. Orange County sees the most frequency of tornados in the month of June. The deadly spring season, from February through April, is characterized by more powerful tornadoes because of the presence of the jet stream, strong cold fronts, and strong thunderstorms. These storms can move at speeds of 30 to 50 mph, produce dangerous downburst winds, large hail, and usually the most deadly tornados. February is the peak month for Orange County during the spring season. According to data from the NWS, there have been a total of 53 tornados in Orange County from 1950 to 2015 (Table 19). The most frequent storms were weaker tornados classified as an F/EF-0 with 23 events and F/EF-1 numbered at 18 reported tornados. Stronger storms, like F/EF-2 reported 9 events and F/EF-3 tornados with 3 occurrences. Orange County has not experienced anything stronger than an F/EF-3. Since 1950, the State of Florida has only experienced one (1) F/EF-4 tornado and no instances of an F/EF-5 magnitude. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 68 ,A Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Table 19: Tornado Strikes in Orange County, FL 1950-2014 Date Magnitude Location Property Injuries Deaths Damage ($) 05/15/1950 F Orlando 25,000.00 0 0 05/15/1950 F2 Unincorporated Orange County 25,000.00 0 0 04/02/1959 F2 Unincorporated Orange County 250,000.00 9 1 02/25/1961 F1 Orlando 2,500.00 0 0 06/08/1963 Fl Winter Garden 2,500.00 0 0 04/28/1964 F2 Unincorporated Orange County 250,000.00 0 0 06/05/1967 F2 Orlando 2,500,000.00 0 0 Hillsborough, Polk, Lake, 11/09/1968 F1 Unincorporated Orange County, 500,000.00 3 0 and Windermere 04/19/1969 F1 Orlando and Maitland 250,000.00 0 0 05/13/1971 FO Unincorporated Orange County - 0 0 02/03/1972 F1 Unincorporated Orange Coun 25,000.00 0 0 03/31/1972 F1 Apopka 30.00 0 0 03/31/1972 F1 Unincorporated Orange County 30.00 0 0 01/28/1973 F2 Orlando 2,500,000.00 16 0 05/25/1973 FO Unincorporated Orange County 25,000.00 1 0 08/06/1975 F1 Ocoee 25,000.00 0 0 05/12/1976 FO Orlando 25,000.00 1 0 02/24/1977 FO Unincorporated Orange County 2,500.00 0 0 01/08/1978 F2 Windermere 25,000.00 0 0 01/08/1978 F2 Unincorporated Orange County 2,500,000.00 23 0 06/10/1978 FO Unincorporated Orange County 25,000.00 0 0 07/01/1978 FO Orlando 250.00 0 0 12/24/1978 F1 Apopka 25,000.00 0 0 12/24/1978 F1 Apopka 25,000.00 0 0 03/19/1981 F3 Unincorporated Orange County 2,500,000.00 1 0 06/10/1981 FO Unincorporated Orange County - 0 0 06/20/1981 FO Winter Park 25,000.00 0 0 06/21/1981 F1 Unincorporated Orange County 250,000.00 0 0 06/21/1981 FO Apopka 250.00 0 0 06/21/1981 FO Unincorporated Orange County 2,500.00 0 0 08/27/1981 FO Apopka 2,500.00 0 0 04/29/1982 F1 Orlando 25,000.00 0 0 09/10/1982 FO Eatonville 30.00 0 0 02/02/1983 F2 Orlando 250,000.00 0 0 02/02/1983 FO Winter Park 250.00 1 0 02/02/1983 F2 Orlando 2,500,000.00 9 0 04/23/1983 F1 Apopka 2,500.00 0 0 05/20/1986 FO Apopka 25,000.00 0 0 11/09/1990 F1 Eatonville 250,000.00 9 0 03/03/1991 F1 Unincorporated Orange County 250,000.00 0 0 02/25/1992 F1 Orlando 250,000.00 11 0 SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 69 tr) Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 01/07/1995 Fl Orlando 500,000.00 0 0 06/01/1997 FO Orlando 20,000.00 0 0 02/22/1998 F3 Winter Garden 15,000,000.00 70 3 02/23/1998 F3 Unincorporated Orange County 5,000,000.00 5 0 06/03/2001 FO Unincorporated Orange County - 0 0 06/13/2006 FO Apopka 10,000.00 0 0 10/07/2006 FO Apopka 70,000.00 0 0 11/07/2006 FO Orlando 40,000.00 0 0 07/15/2009 EFO* Unincorporated Orange County 25,000.00 0 0 09/19/2011 EFO* Unincorporated Orange County - 0 0 12/10/2012 EFO* Unincorporated Orange County - 0 0 03/29/2014 EFO* _1 Unincorporated Orange County - 0 0 TOTALS 53 Tornados 36,005,840.00 159 4 *Note: The Enhanced Fujita Scale was not implemented until 2007 Source: NWS Counties that experienced property damages, injuries, or casualties that did not occur in the boundaries of Orange County were not included in the Table 19. Some of the tornados originated in neighboring counties, but may have impacted parts of Orange County. Location: Tornados have the ability to occur anywhere in the County and its jurisdictions. Since the unincorporated County covers the largest area, the majority of reported tornados seem to have taken place in its boundaries. Other municipalities that have experienced a tornado are: Orlando, Apopka, Eatonville, Ocoee, Windermere, Winter Garden, and Winter Park. More urban areas have an increased number of structures and a denser population, which means that a tornado in these parts of the County can increase the likelihood that a tornado will cause property damage or human casualties. Rural areas are just as likely to experience a tornado, but the impacts may be lower. In addition, jurisdictions with numbers of manufactured homes or mobile homes may be the most susceptible to the effects of a tornado. The image below shows the approximate location and path of each of the above listed tornados, courtesy of the NWS. Figure D: Map of Tornado Strikes in Orange County, FL, 1950-2014 SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 70 • e•---- Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 MtUora S. TOW tr" Map Satellite Earth ° ' Canto • 1 Lake , ary Brevard County National S '" atrI ` r up Geneva Game Refuge * a k , ria t Wekiva Lo ,wood 040 L' Lake Apopka ir Springs Restoration Area a Alta• onrr Oviedo Mimsi/ ate i v Laky dna Seminole Ranch Clar ¢ y Titusville j tette •ark Conserve°fart Area If CV .Pine Hills n Alafaya Bitt . .I • - t Orlovis 2J Orlandgl,/T I* '1• -1 1 5o*tttttwe` Orlando d nway Heights. ' is Wedgefield CD rndwr $.4.= a Butler Oak Ridge I Q Doctor Phillips * ify 52a r. w Williamsburg Southeast ° z9 - Ort-" , .r'A Meadow •• (,'r Woods ° Hunters Creekat ALJus. cig Source: NWS Extent: Unlike hurricanes, which produce wind speeds of similar values over relatively widespread areas as compared to tornados, the maximum winds in tornados are often confined to extremely small areas and vary tremendously over very short distances, or even within the funnel itself. Originally, the Fujita Scale was used to rate tornado intensity and was based on damages to structures and vegetation. Since 2007, the Enhanced Fujita Tornado Scale, or"EF Scale," has become the definitive scale for estimating wind speeds within tornados based upon the damage done to buildings and structures. The EF Scale is used extensively by the NWS in forensically investigating tornados and by engineers in correlating damage to buildings. All tornadoes are now assigned an EF Scale number. Table 20 outlines the Enhanced Fujita Scale. The strongest tornadoes max out in the EF5 range (more than 200 mph). Table 20: Enhanced Fujita Scale for Tornados Funnel Size Speed Damage Damage Assessment (mph) Light Peels surface off some roofs; some damage to gutters or 65 — 85 Damage siding; branches broken off trees; shallow-rooted trees a ushed over. Moderate Roofs severely stripped; mobile homes overturned or badly 86— 110 Damage damaged; loss of exterior doors; windows and other glass broken. EF-2 111 — 135 Considerable Roofs torn off well-constructed houses; foundations of frame Damage homes shifted; mobile homes com.letel destro ed; lane SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 71 rA, Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 trees snapped or uprooted; light-object missiles generated; cars lifted off ground. Entire stories of well-constructed houses destroyed; severe Severe damage to large buildings such as shopping malls; trains EF-3 136— 165 Damage overturned; trees debarked; heavy cars lifted off the ground and thrown; structures with weak foundations blown away some distance. EF-4 166— 200 Devastating Well-constructed houses and whole frame houses completely Damage leveled; cars thrown and small missiles generated. Strong frame houses leveled off foundations and swept away; Incredible automobile-sized missiles fly through the air in excess of 100 >200 Damage m (300 ft); steel reinforced concrete structure badly damaged; high-rise buildings have significant structural deformation; incredible phenomena will occur. Source: NOAA Storm Prediction Center Orange County has experienced a total of 53 tornados since 1950, comprised mainly of 41 weaker tornados, F/EF-0 and F/EF-1. There have only been 12 stronger storms that have touched down inside the borders of Orange County that have been greater than an F/EF-2 during that same time frame. The peak occurrences of two (2) F/EF-3 tornados struck Winter Garden in 1998. The severity extent that Orange County will most likely experience in the future is the weaker tornados like F/EF-0 and F/EF-1. From a worst case perspective, though, the upper extent of what Orange County and its jurisdictions may experience is an EF-3 tornado. These stronger tornados that bring higher winds and more damages are less likely to occur, but are not improbable. Probability: With 53 tornados occurring in the span of 64 years, there is a good chance that Orange County will experience a tornado on average about once every 1 — 3 years. These will generally be weaker storms as measured by the Enhanced Fujita Scale. More severe storms have occurred less frequently in the past, but based upon the frequency of severe thunderstorms forming across Orange County, and its jurisdictions, there is equal potential for those stronger tornados each year. For this reason, the probability for a tornado to occur is categorized as high. Impacts: Tornados have caused severe impacts in Orange County and its jurisdictions. Records indicate that there have been at least four (4) reported casualties and more than 159 injuries in Orange County. If you include tornados that originated in other areas around Orange County, these human impacts would be even higher. The 1998 seven (7) tornados that struck East Central Florida are considered to be the deadliest tornado event in Florida history with a total of 42 casualties and 260 injuries. One of the tornados formed in Lake County as an F/EF-3 and veered into the western portion of Orange County. It continued into Winter Garden, Oakland, Ocoee, and portions south of Apopka. Three (3) people in Orange County died with over 70 injured. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 72 eOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Total property damages for the 53 recorded tornados in Orange County are listed at over $36 million. The 1998 tornado mentioned previously caused over $15 million worth of property damages alone. This was the single most costly tornado to have occurred in Orange County. Refer to Table 19 for figures on other property damages from tornados in Orange County. Spatial impacts are typically small and isolated as Florida does not experience very large tornados. The swath of damages for the more intense tornados in Orange County was of course larger than the weaker systems. The widest path for a tornado in Orange County was 500 yards from an F/EF-1 tornado in 1969 with a path length of 5.6 miles. The longest path was an F/EF-1 from the 1968 that ran 69.3 miles from Hillsborough County through Polk and Lake County, until it finally reached Orange County and stopping near Windermere. Economic impacts from tornados can be devastating as well, causing disruptions to utilities, downed power lines, blocked roadways, and wind-borne debris can impact critical infrastructure and other buildings. The response efforts could last for several days or weeks even, depending upon the severity, with recovery for homes, businesses, and other structures taking even longer. Mitigation Measures Due to their prevalence, Orange County has taken several steps to mitigate the hazard. There are multiple other plans that address tornados as a hazard. Where tornados can strike is not as predictable as all of Orange County and its jurisdictions have the same probability of being hit. For this reason, training and exercise drills take place to help familiarize response personnel with their roles and responsibilities, as well as outlining their actions to respond to a tornado event. Because tornados can spawn from tropical systems like hurricanes or tropical storms, there is usually some emphasis placed on the possibility for tornados during the annual State Hurricane Exercise. Other support supplies and equipment have been purchased by the County as part of their anticipated response to tornado events. The County also has a Citizen Assistance Response Team that has gone out to neighborhoods to help residents with debris from fallen trees and putting up tarps on impacted roofs so that water leaks do not enter the building. Vulnerability: Because of the unpredictable pattern of storms and tornados and the relatively high frequency of recurrence, all of the Orange County and its jurisdictions are highly vulnerable to damage. As the number of structures and people increase, the potential damage and injury rates increase. Mobile and modular homes, substandard housing, apartment complexes, and/or housing projects may be extremely susceptible to damage and destruction from wind or wind-borne debris during a tornado event. Depending on the severity or magnitude of the tornado, Orange County has experienced several casualties and a number of injuries due to this hazard. Property damages have also been high as a result of tornadic activity. Even SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 73 IA% Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 though the storms usually affect a small width or an isolated geographic area, the path can stretch for miles. Building codes in the State of Florida were designed mainly for tropical systems like hurricanes, but tornados are more compact. Their concentrated wind strength can weaken the structure's envelope and compromise the building. Other wind-borne debris can impact property, structures, vehicles, and power lines. This disrupts the daily operations of the County and municipalities until normalcy can be reestablished. Risk: The overall risk from tornados is categorized as a high threat mainly because of the significant impacts this hazard poses to humans, properties, and economics. In addition, there is a high probability for an occurrence to affect our area. The mitigation measures that are currently in place can help to reduce recovery times, but this hazard will still occur. Tornados remain very unpredictable, but its impacts can be reduced through better detection technology, public outreach, and emergency notification systems. Tornados are the most significant of the severe thunderstorm associated hazards and awareness of this hazard appears to be on the rise. Orange County's Office of Emergency Management has distributed NOAA weather radios for the past several years and plans to continue to do so to help residents receive important warnings when severe weather happens. The NWS and other media outlets now have improved radar capabilities that can detect potential cyclone activity to issue watches, warnings, and other advisories. Sinkholes / Land-subsidence Description: Sinkholes are a common feature of Florida's landscape due to the state's karst topography. This karst topography is terrain produced by the process of erosion associated with the chemical weathering and dissolution of carbonate rock and can include caves, disappearing streams, springs, and underground drainage systems, all of which occur in Florida. A sinkhole is a type of land- subsidence that is formed when the carbonate layers of limestone or dolomite that lie beneath the ground's surface are eroded away, being dissolved by flowing groundwater that is acidic. During this point, the water helps to support the walls of the cavity, but over time, if the water table drops, the support provided by the groundwater disappears and the cavity erodes further. In addition, the weight from the ground above the void increases stress on the cavern and the collapse occurs, taking with it whatever objects may have been located above. This collapse is usually an abrupt event and can have the potential to be catastrophic to infrastructure, roadways, homes or other buildings situated on the surface above the sinkhole. Previous Occurrences: According to the Florida Department of Environmental SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 74 'A\ , Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Protection (FDEP) Florida Geological Survey (FGS) Subsidence Incident Report (SIR) database, there have been 195 sinkholes reported by citizens in Orange County from 1961 to 2014. These land subsidence events have not been verified by a geologist, but are rather reports from citizens when a land subsidence occurred that they were aware of. The most number of sinkholes that reported to the FGS in one (1) year was in 1981 with 23 instances. This included the Winter Park Sinkhole (1981) that was reported to have been over 107 feet deep, with a length of 350 feet by a width of 350 feet. There have not been any significant sinkholes that have occurred since 2010. Table 21: Sinkholes in Orange County, FL, 1961 -2014 Depth Number of (feet) Sinkholes 102 29 39 25 -49 15 50-99 7 2 1 TOTAL 195 Source: FDEP FGS SIR The number of reported sinkholes received by the FDEP FGS SIR is very different from the number of property insurance claims received. Between 2006 — 2010 Orange County had over 510 claims filed, or 2.06% of all claims filed in the State of Florida during the same time period. Location: The geology of the state has a lot to do with sinkhole locations in Orange County is comprised of three different areas: Area I, Area II, or Area III. • Area I is described as bare or thinly covered limestone where sinkholes are few, generally shallow and broad, and develop gradually where solution sinkholes dominate. This encompasses most of Lake Apopka and the restoration found to its north. • Area II occurs where the cover is 30 to 200 feet thick and consists mainly of incohesive and permeable sand where sinkholes are few, small, of small diameter and develop gradually, dominated by cover-subsidence sinkholes. Large portions of the eastern, south western, and south-central County and some parts of Orlando, Belle Isle, and Edgewood are in this category. • Area III has cover 30 to 200 feet thick as well. However, it is comprised of cohesive clayey sediments of low permeability where sinkholes are most numerous, of varying size, and develop abruptly. Cover-collapse sinkholes are more prevalent in this area that includes such as parts of Apopka, Maitland, Oakland, Ocoee, Orlando, Windermere, Winter Garden, and Winter Park. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 75 +.-- 'AN Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Sinkholes can be found throughout Orange County, though they seem to be concentrated in certain areas. The unincorporated County has about 104 reported sinkholes in its boundaries, primarily in the northwestern, central, and southwestern portions. Other jurisdictions with a prevalence of sinkholes include: Apopka, Maitland, Ocoee, Orlando, Windermere, and Winter Park. Others like Belle Isle, Eatonville, Edgewood, Oakland, or Winter Garden have relatively few, though not unheard of, instances of reported sinkholes. Figure E: Map of Sinkhole Locations in Orange County, FL, 1961 -2014 jZ Reported Sinkhole Locations ", 1961 -2014 o • • o j January 2015 o 0 ti 1 Q Sinkholes(195 Total Count) o i t. • 1,_�• i Depth 0 <5 feet(102 Count) 000 • 5 9 feet(29 Count) I. • 10 24 Mel(39 Count/ ' .O 1 Q 25.49 feel(I S Count/ •a• 1'1' 01 Q 50.99 feel(7 Count) • (00.199 lee((2 Count) 044-—0--- r 'i CgO OD 0 0 0 °' %.,tel e • '200 Meth Count) O O a (� ylou�ille • tcp n",I'.n A Jj 0 000 0 9 oOpA o -"—\._,_ O O O O O e Oaklea.,e!., t(cn 0 0 00 0 O ' o o 0 e me I. 4 ' o • o • a c' BeNe l9k y ' I 0 125 25 5 75 10 Maes Source: FDEP FGS SIR Extent: Sinkholes in Orange County come in a variety of widths, lengths, and depths. There have been a couple of sinkholes that have been recorded at depths over 100 feet. One sinkhole was reported to the FGS as being 250 feet in depth and would be the worst case scenario. Most sinkholes, though, are less than five (5) feet deep. With 195 sinkholes reported to FGS, the average depth of a sinkhole in Orange County is 11.35 feet, with an average length and width of 22.05 feet and 22.08 feet, respectively. The smaller sinkholes are most commonly the cover-subsidence type that is found mainly in the Area II of the county's geology. These types of sinkholes develop slowly over weeks, months, or even years creating depressions in the ground that can cause building foundations to shift or cracks in floors and walls. They are responsible for the majority of SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 76 AOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 sinkhole related damage that is reported to home insurance companies in the State of Florida, but they do not receive much attention. The large, cover-collapse sinkholes are generally deeper and are in Area III. They develop much more rapidly with catastrophic consequences to buildings, roadways, or other structures by forming open holes in the earth. These events receive the majority of attention and media coverage, such as the Winter Park Sinkhole (1981). For future occurrences, Orange County will continue to mainly experience the smaller, cover-subsidence sinkholes and may occasionally have more severe instances of cover-collapse. Probability: The return rate of sinkholes in Orange County amounts to nearly 4 instances per year since 1961. For this reason, the probability of recurrence of sinkholes in Orange County is high while the extent of damages will be variable based upon the severity of the subsidence. Weather events, like drought, flood, or tropical systems can have an effect on the number of sinkholes that take place as the subsidence is the result of the dissolving of our limestone bedrock. Rapid changes in the water table elevation due to drought, heavy rainfall, or pumping are some of the key triggers for sinkhole formation. Surface loading due to new construction development, well drilling, or new water drainage patterns from runoff can also factor in to subsidence events, but these are less common. Impacts: Direct impacts due to sinkholes are difficult to determine as FDEP FGS does not currently track damage estimates for each of the reported sinkholes that have occurred previously in Orange County. Some of the estimated side effects across the State have included decreases in home values due to sinkholes, as well as a significant increase in insurance premiums. Loss estimates from the entire State were reported at greater than $1.4 billion across 24,671 claims from 2006 to 2010. Orange County has not experienced any human impacts for loss of life or injuries related to this hazard. Property damages for Orange County are not currently tracked as noted previously. According to the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation, from 2006 to 2010 there were approximately 510 property insurance claims made in Orange County for sinkhole damage. The average expense for both open and closed claims was $9,936.35, which would mean about $5,067,538.50 total insurance expenses for Orange County sinkhole claims. While this is not an exact dollar for dollar amount of actual property damages, this is the most current and available data that exists. Spatial impacts are relatively low as sinkholes are generally isolated incidents. Some sinkholes may occur at or around the same time as other sinkholes, but generally there is some separation of time between incident reports. They do not affect large geographic areas, but some like the notable sinkhole in Winter Park from 1981 can draw large amounts of attention. Economic impacts have a moderate level of risk, especially to the insurance industry. Sinkholes obviously SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 77 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 have the potential to impact critical infrastructure, roadways, bridges, and water bodies. Disruption of services could also potentially occur as electric, water, sewer, gas, and telecommunications utilities have underground service lines that could be damaged or exposed as the result of a sinkhole. Mitigation Measures Sinkhole awareness has been on the rise in the State of Florida. A pilot study program in the North Central Florida region is currently underway and will be implemented statewide in the next few years to help determine the potential sinkholes by creating a predictive model using geospatial information systems (GIS) and probability statistics. This planning project hopes to enhance other mitigation strategies. As this plan is not yet in place, sinkholes are discussed as a hazard in other plans maintained by the County. Sinkholes as a hazard are generally not exercised and there are limited training courses conducted on sinkhole mitigation. Public Works departments in Orange County and its jurisdictions do have some logistical support in the remediation of sinkholes to assist with stabilization, but this occurs on a case by case basis. Vulnerability: Orange County is very vulnerable to sinkholes as they are a recurring hazard that can be highly unpredictable in where they occur or how often. Property insurance claims have been on the rise in Orange County, so it is reasonable to expect that further incidents will continue to occur in the future. The overall impacts are mainly to property and economic disruptions. These subsidence events are geographically isolated to a concentrated area and normally occur in certain portions of the County. While there have not been any reported losses of life or casualties due to sinkholes, other parts of the state have seen them, so there is some potential that this could take place in Orange County. The severity of sinkholes varies from large incidents that are cover-collapses to smaller depressions that are cover-subsidence. Though property insurance coverage may not be enough to properly mitigate this hazard for the future, other mitigation measures are tough to come by for this hazard due in part to its unpredictable nature. Risk: The overall risk from sinkholes is a high threat mainly because of the significant impacts this hazard poses to property and economics. In addition, there is a high probability for multiple occurrences in our County that will affect residents and even businesses. The mitigation measures that are currently in place can only help so much as this hazard remains very unpredictable. Some impacts may be reduced through better research and predictive modeling as a result of the pilot study. Further training and exercises related to this hazard are needed so that first responders and emergency managers are better aware of what can or should be done to address sinkholes as a major hazard. SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 78 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Hazardous Materials Description: Hazardous materials (HazMat) are those substances that are used every day in a variety of industrial and commercial applications. These are deemed to be dangerous due to their toxic nature, through flammability, radioactivity, explosive, corrosive, oxidizing, asphyxiating, bio-hazardous, pathogenic, or allergenic nature. Orange County and its jurisdictions have a variety of these hazardous materials that are moved into, out of, thru, or within their boundaries. The accidental or purposeful release or spill of these volatile substances into the environment where human, plant, and/or animal life could be endangered comprises this hazard. Many times, these types of incidents are caused by accidents that occur due to human error(s). They are often unpredictable, no- notice events that can cause significant loss of life, property damage, and economic disruption. The use of hazardous materials, such as chemicals, toxic substances, and radiological materials, have become commonplace in both urban and rural communities. The transportation of these agents or elements has become commonplace in our society, with uses across the board from industry to agriculture, medical procedures to water treatment, communications to research, and other technological uses. Leaks, spills, or releases can also occur from the containers that are transported on the multi-modal network that crisscrosses Orange County and poses a threat to a large number of residents and visitors. The primary hazard identified for analysis in Orange County and its jurisdictions are chemicals; however, we do recognize that other dangerous materials that are transported to, from, thru, and within Orange County by highway, surface roads, airports, and rail lines. It is also important to note that this hazard is related to the spill or release of the materials and is separate from the terrorism hazard that will be discussed later. For chemicals, the types of Extremely Hazardous Substances (EHS) are described in Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) of 1986. These refer to various chemicals that could cause serious health effects following short-term exposure from accidental releases. The State of Florida passed a law, referred to as the Emergency Planning and Community Right-To- Know Act (EPCRA) in 1988, for the local regulation of these chemicals. For the first time, passage of the EPCRA allowed emergency planners, responders, and the public access to facility-specific information regarding the identification, location, and quantity of particular hazardous materials at fixed sites. The law requires facilities that maintain certain chemicals at particular threshold quantities to report annually to state and local emergency officials. In addition, facilities must immediately notify officials of any releases of harmful chemicals that have the potential to result in offsite consequences or impacts to the environment or atmosphere. This information is utilized to prepare emergency SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 79 ®, Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 plans for hazardous materials incidents, to allow responders to receive training based on specific known threats, and to inform and educate the public regarding the chemicals present in their communities. Orange County has more than 700 fixed facility locations that report the presence of chemicals with over 200 sites having an EHS in mandated threshold amounts. Previous Occurrences: According to a report from the State Watch Office (SWO), since 2001 there have been 136 HazMat incidents from a mixture of transportation and fixed facilities, as well as a variety of involved chemicals. Most of the releases that are transportation related involve petroleum chemicals or non-EHS chemicals. There were 106 reported spills such as gasoline, diesel fuel, automotive oil, ethylene glycol, propane, or a mixture of these. There were also nine (9) reports of a release of an EHS chemical which were mainly from fixed facilities. The SWO utilizes contacts from facilities, county watch offices, transportation operators, and other first responders for their information. This is not a comprehensive account of all HazMat incidents that take place in Orange County. In addition to these reports, the State Emergency Response Commission (SERC) maintains information on various HazMat incidents that are reported statewide that include releases with evacuations, injuries, or fatalities. Some transportation incidents may have included information on injuries or fatalities due to trauma from an automotive accident and are not directly related to a chemical exposure. The classification is determined by the local area medical examiner and is reported to the SERC. Table 22 contains information related to reported HazMat incidents that have occurred in the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) District, a six (6) county district that includes Brevard, Lake, Orange, Osceola, Seminole, and Volusia Counties. The reported incidents originated at both fixed facilities and transportation incidents for petroleum and non-petroleum chemicals. On average, there are a higher number of transportation incidents than fixed facility incidents. These occurrences are the more notable incidents that are reported to the SWO and/or the SERC and do not include every release of hazardous materials that may occur within Orange County. Table 22: Hazardous Materials Incidents in LEPC District VI, FL Incident Type 2010— 2011 — 2012— 2013— Average* 2011 2012 2013 2014 Fixed Facili Non-Petroleum 39 28 32 40 35 Fixed Facili Petroleum 33 27 31 25 29 Trans•ortation with Petroleum 93 114 125 126 115 Trans.ortation without Petroleum 37 32 37 21 32 TOTAL 202 201 225 212 210 *Rounded to the nearest whole number Source: State Emergency Response Commission(SERC) SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 80 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Other previous occurrences in Orange County can be found in the list of Superfund sites in Table 23. These sites were designated under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) that are polluted places that require a long-term response and monitoring to clean up contaminations. None of the sites listed have been deleted or partially deleted from the list. Table 23: Superfund Sites in Orange County, FL ID Facility Reason Added Proposed Listed Construction Number Name Completed Soil and groundwater contamination by pesticides, Chevron petroleum products and VOCs, FLD0040 Chemical Co. including xylene from waste 01/18/1994 05/31/1994 02/10/1998 64242 (Ortho disposal practices at a former Division) pesticide formulation plant. Contaminated soil has been removed. Soil and groundwater contamination by poor waste handling processes and intentional dumping by a former industrial waste handling FLD0559 City Industries, business. The site was 45653 Inc. abandoned with around 1,200 06/24/1988 10/04/1989 03/02/1994 drums of hazardous waste and thousands of gallons of sludge in storage tanks. Wastes and contaminated soil were removed in 1983-4; groundwater is being treated. Orlando Soil and groundwater are FLD9841 Former contaminated by coal tar waste 69235 Gasification products. This site is listed as a Plant Superfund Alternative Site. FLD0499 Zellwood 85302 Ground Water 12/30/1982 09/08/1983 09/16/2003 Contamination Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List of Superfund sites in Florida Location: There are 213 fixed facilities in Orange County that hold chemicals that are designated as Extremely Hazardous Substances (EHS). These facilities can be found in almost all of the jurisdictions in Orange County, including: Apopka, Bay Lake, Eatonville, Lake Buena Vista, Maitland, Ocoee, Orlando, Winter Garden, Winter Park, and across the Unincorporated County. Releases of chemicals have the potential to occur at each of these facilities. The County conducts a hazards analysis of each facility every other year to determine the chemical's vulnerability zone radius and the approximate population in any critical facilities located within that zone that would need to evacuate. Critical SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 81 o Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 facilities include schools, hospitals and other medical facilities, fire stations, and police stations. This information is provided to the individual facility, first responders, the LEPC, and the SERC/State. Figure F: Extremely Hazardous Substance Facilities in Orange County, FL I i Extremely Hazardous Substance Facilities l`— � a., ___ S,�s 4 January 2015 _ e • E+G•en,Ma:a.7wa SAaor•t Faa.w • - e. 41.1r1"6:- fir''-*-'1 Qom . Mots Park • \ / .1\ . t_ _s . . i .. ••_. . • gm. it r 4_ -, titra :-'71::-'71:v L • �S'n Ila. --- tki- . ... . - - ; r - i , , • •/ •_,_ I • ., I C•N Source: E-Plan-Emergency Response Information System,2013 Chemical Inventories Precise locations for other transportation-based releases are more difficult to obtain. They generally occur along major transportation routes, such as the interstate highways, toll roads, state roads, and significant county roads. Petroleum products are the primary chemical spills from these incidents, but they are less significant. Rail lines may also experience releases of chemicals of an increased severity and quantity. A passive transportation of chemicals in Orange County utilizes a pipeline system for natural gas that is managed by Peoples Gas System. This pipeline enters Orange County in the northwestern portion of the county around Apopka and moves south to Osceola County. Other spurs come off of this main line towards downtown Orlando and east towards Brevard County. Of the four (4) previously mentioned Superfund sites, two (2) are in the Unincorporated County and the other two (2) are in Orlando; of these, one (1) is listed as a Superfund Alternative site. The environmental remediation and clean-up/construction has been completed on all of these sites. All of these sites have the human exposure and SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 82 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 groundwater migration under control. The future use for these sites will be limited for the foreseeable future and they will continue to be monitored and evaluated. Extent: The release of HazMat incidents have been numerous over the past several years, most of which have been relatively minor or involving less severe chemicals. The majority of spills are related to petroleum products that mainly pose a threat due to their flammability. There have been a few severe releases that have taken place in Orange County and its jurisdictions. On December 14, 2004 Orange County Fire Rescue responded to possible nitric acid explosion in the Unincorporated Orange County where the acid was exposed to water from the sprinkler system. There were no serious injuries or damages to the structure. Then on March 31, 2008, the Diamond R Fertilizer Plant in Winter Garden had a chemical reaction that involved ammonium nitrate and created a significant amount of smoke in the building. Due to smoke in the area, the City of Winter Garden issued a mandatory evacuation of the surrounding residential areas to the east, west and south; a temporary shelter was established at a local area elementary school. Residents who were not immediately evacuated were instructed to"shelter-in-place"through a mass notification system that was issued by the County Warning Point. The incident was brought under control a few hours later and the shelter was closed and residents were allowed to return home. More recently, a chemical explosion occurred in downtown Orlando on September 26, 2013. A vacant warehouse was being used for storage of an experimental fuel, named "carbo-hydrillium," when the gas cylinder ruptured and combusted, which shook several high-rise buildings in the urban area nearby. A large hole in the building opened up, about 50 feet wide by 20 feet high on the north-side of the building. All of the windows were broken and debris was scattered over a 100 foot area around the rear of the building. There was no fire present when responders arrived, along with no injuries or fatalities. The chemical had a sudden release of pressure as it was being stored inside an incompatible gas cylinder. Several buildings in the vicinity evacuated as a precaution, but there were no other reported damages other than the impacts to the warehouse itself. It is anticipated that releases of chemicals and spills of petroleum products will continue to occur in Orange County and its jurisdictions. The majority of these will not be severe, but there is always some potential for a large scale release to occur. Facilities that store chemicals are scattered about the County and those with EHS chemicals are concentrated in the industrial areas. These areas are not as populated, but other facilities are located in more commercial and/or residential areas that may increase the chance of exposure. Probability: There are over 200 fixed facilities that house extremely hazardous SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 83 A Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 substances in Orange County. The probability of an incident occurring is high as there will continue to be hazardous materials present through the continued use of chemicals at fixed facilities and their transport to, from, through, and within Orange County and its jurisdictions. With Orange County being part of a large metropolitan area and centrally located in the State, it is a primary highway and freight passage in the region for goods that are being transported north and south on the Florida peninsula to Jacksonville or Miami, as well as east or west between Daytona Beach/Port Canaveral and Tampa. The likelihood for transportation incidents is amplified due to the number of possible encounters that can occur in a multi-modal setting. The most likely incident that may occur would involve a petroleum product spilling onto a roadway or other impermeable surface that would then require some kind of clean-up. Other releases at fixed facilities will also continue to happen. While the number of instances will be likely be lower than the transportation incidents, the chemicals involved, such as EHS chemicals like chlorine, ammonia, sulfur dioxide, will be greater in their severity than petroleum products. The degree to which these releases or spills impact the county, either in quantity, severity, or location is an unknown variable. Continued emergency planning, accuracy for inventory reporting, and preparedness training must continue to occur to help reduce the number of occurrences. Impacts: The potential impacts to humans due to a HazMat release would potentially be severe, depending on the chemical, the quantity released, and the location where incident occurred. Several scenarios have been conducted by the LEPC to show the possible outcomes of a large-scale release at some of the chemical facilities in Orange County or from multi-modal transportation sources. Historically speaking, though, the number of injuries or deaths has been relatively low, making it a moderate impact overall. Property damage information was not available at this time as there is not a mechanism used to track this type of data. In most cases, the property damages are low due as a HazMat release or spill without any other catalysts will produce localized damages. Other factors that may increase property damages, such as fire, explosions, releases of pressure, water reactivity, or the presence of other chemicals can all exacerbate the emergency response and destroy or further damage buildings. The geographic area that is impacted during a hazmat/chemical release is relatively small, depending on the type of chemical or other environmental factors like temperature, wind speed, or topography. It is possible that certain chemicals in larger quantities could disturb a greater area, but it is unlikely that this would cover more than 25% of the land area of the county. All of the jurisdictions may be impacted by various releases at some point and may encompass larger proportions of their municipality if a release were to occur. SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 84 A Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 The economic impact is difficult to quantify due to a release or spill of a hazardous material. It is possible that severe interruptions may follow after an incident, especially if an incident occurred at critical facilities, utility stations, or closures to transportation networks. Other outreaching economic impacts due to a spill or release may negatively impact the industrial area where the incident took place, such as the Superfund sites. Businesses that may need to evacuate or"shelter-in-place"would be affected during a release and could not operate. Residential neighborhoods and the real estate market may experience difficulty for sale of homes, condos, or apartments if an incident creates long-term issues. Most cases would see short-term impact where individuals would be evacuated and would return to normal after several hours. Road or rail closures could create heavy traffic and schedule delays; while this is mainly an inconvenience for most, there may be other ramifications to emergency service vehicles that may have trouble operating or obtaining access to the incident. Mitigation Measures. There are numerous of mitigation measures employed for this hazard. Preparedness planning activities like the County's Hazards Analysis program help to provide local area responders, the LEPC District, and the State with information on the quantity, type, and storage methods of chemicals at fixed facilities, as well as calculating vulnerability zones for evacuation purposes. The LEPC also maintains a District-wide Hazardous Materials Emergency Plan that addresses direction and control, notification, public information, protective actions, and recovery and reentry. Training courses and exercises are routinely conducted in Orange County by various agencies and departments. Because of this, there are several groups of highly skilled teams of Hazardous Materials Technicians that operate specialized equipment with a high level of support. Vulnerability: Orange County and its jurisdictions are moderately vulnerable to a release or spill of hazardous materials, mainly due to their prevalence in the County, as well as the high probability that a release will occur. The number of previous incidents is high, especially for transportation-based petroleum spills. Other releases at fixed-facilities are much lower, but the EHSs would have a much greater expected severity if a catastrophic failure happened. The impacts have been relatively low in the past, but the potential for damages to property, humans, and the economy are moderate. Most of the smaller municipalities do not have large numbers of EHS facilities within their jurisdictional boundaries. The Unincorporated County and Orlando are more vulnerable because of this. Most all jurisdictions are within close proximity to major roadways, highways, toll roads, interstates, airports, or rail lines. The presence of a multi-modal transportation network that carries large amounts of HazMat increases the vulnerability across the board to all of the municipalities. Transportation incidents with non-petroleum products are relatively few. The types of substances being transported using these various methods, the location, quantity, and topography of where the release might occur is an unknown variable and increases the vulnerability. SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 85 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Risk: Even with a high probability of incidents, minor to moderate anticipated or potential impacts, and a moderate vulnerability, the risk of hazardous materials is low. This is a result of the significant amount of mitigation measures that take place in the county to prepare for a release in advance. Training happens on a regular basis throughout the year and an exercise with a HazMat-based scenario is conducted by the LEPC on, at least, a bi-annual basis, if not more frequently. The specialized equipment and HazMat teams provide a consistently high level of support for responding the incidents. Terrorism / CBRNE Description: Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as "the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives." It is the use of force or violence committed by an individual or group of varying degrees of organization that may be foreign or domestic in origin. These actions are carried out against persons that are considered to be civilians or non-combatants, as well as their property, in violation of the criminal laws of the United States for purposes of intimidation, coercion, or ransom. In many cases, the use of basic armaments like guns or knives is the primary weapons, but these may limit the damage that results. In some cases, harmful substances are used against the target in the attack(s) for catastrophic results and have been termed "weapons of mass destruction,"which includes: chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or explosion (CBRNE) materials. Previous Occurrences: Early in the morning on Sunday, June 12, 2016, a gunman entered a nightclub in the City of Orlando and committed the deadliest mass shooting in modern U.S. history. In the immediate response, members of the Orlando Police Department engaged in a three-hour standoff with the shooter. The shooter barricaded himself inside the building with several people that were taken as hostages. A Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) Team entered the club just after 5:00 a.m. in an attempt to rescue the hostages. Gunfire was exchanged with the gunman and the shooter was shot dead. In the aftermath, 49 victims were confirmed dead, 53 were hospitalized. Reports of explosives and/or suspicious devices later turned out to be false. The City of Orlando Emergency Operations Center (EOC) was activated for eleven (11) days following this tragedy. Personnel and supporting agencies from around the area provided assistance to the on-scene incident command, provided public information, and coordinated support services for victims' families and next of kin. While the immediate threat has ended, the city and local areas are still healing from the wounds, both physical and emotional, that SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 86 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 were inflicted during this tragic incident. This type of event is unprecedented in the City of Orlando and Orange County. Much of the information and analysis is still in process and will be for some time to come. There have not been any other documented terrorist incidents, nor have any incidents involved the malicious use of CBRNE materials, in Orange County or its municipalities. There have been several threats that have taken place, but they did not materialize or were stopped before they could be carried out. Nevertheless, it is very important for authorities to take all precautions and act accordingly. Due to the magnitude of damage and injury that could occur if a terrorist event were to occur, especially considering the recent tensions at home and abroad, this issue should be taken into consideration when planning for disasters. Efforts should also be made to enhance training, equipment and supplies to Orange County emergency agencies, domestic security resources, and intelligence gathering, analysis, and dissemination from fusion centers. Location: The single documented instance of a terrorist incident occurred within the City of Orlando, just south of the downtown area on Orange Avenue. Orange County contains an abundance of potential targets, critical infrastructure, or key resources that may present a high profile or a perceived weakness that would open the location to an attack. A terrorism incident would more than likely be located in an area that is more densely populated, such as our urban areas, attractions, or event venues. For the purposes of this document, and in the interest of public safety, the precise location(s) will not be discussed or listed here; law enforcement, emergency management, and other domestic security focused agencies do maintain information related to their jurisdiction's critical facilities. Other facilities and locations that may be potentially threatened also conduct exercises and hold training courses for their employees and staff to help prepare for various scenarios involving terrorism or CBRNE materials. Extent: While we can never predict what target a terrorist will choose, we do know that there are some factors that may be used when selecting a potential target that could create a worst case scenario. Terrorists want to achieve one or more of the following: • Produce a large number of victims and mass panic • Attack places that have a symbolic value • Get the greatest possible media attention There are a number of high profile targets in Orange County that, if other incidents were to take place, would produce a mass casualty incident. Local area residents, visitors, and businesses would be placed into panic. There would also be a great deal of national and international concern due to travelers and visitors that come to Orange County and its municipalities. Several of the local area institutions may represent an ideology that some terrorist organizations, both foreign and domestic, are opposed to and would consider attacking. SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 87 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Other events that Orange County hosts throughout the year, or even on a less frequent basis, receive a great deal of attention. Preparation to help prevent terrorist activity is heightened in advance of these activities. Because of the significance of these establishments or events, any incident would create a large media response and generate continued exposure. Athletic events, parades, concerts, political rallies, or other mass gatherings may all have some potential for a terrorist event. Probability: Even with a recent recorded instance (2016), the overall probability of recurrence is low. This may be due in part to the continued intelligence analysis and information sharing by law enforcement agencies at the local, state, and federal levels. Another factor may be the result of heightened awareness and the mentality of it being important to engage in the concept of"See Something, Say Something." This situational awareness is critical to helping keep the number of occurrences low. However, with the number of potential targets, locations, and/or events that take place in Orange County and its municipalities, the potential for a terrorist incident to occur again remains high. Based on this, the overall probability for a terrorist event to happen is a moderate likelihood; Orange County and its municipalities constantly prepare for such events. Impacts: The impacts from a terrorist event would potentially be severe to loss of life, property, and economic impact. Based on information from the nightclub shooting in 2016, there was an enormous loss of life and resulting injuries. The physical building itself was severely damaged, both inside and out. Other nearby buildings and vehicles were inflicted with minor damage as well. The long-term economic impacts cannot be measured at this time. During the days following the shooting though, several surrounding businesses were closed for business. Traffic along Orange Avenue, a major thoroughfare in Orlando, was re-routed around the incident as investigators conducted their forensic review at the scene. Local area hospitals were effectively shut down as they immediately responded to the rapid influx of patients to the emergency room. Other impacts to the surrounding communities, including psychological and mental health impacts, cannot be measured. In some sense, the community did band together with an immediate outpouring of support to the families and friends of victims, survivors, and others that were affected by this tragedy. We are still in the process of gathering information related to the measureable impacts for this single incident. The following discussion is based on some of the scenarios that have been developed through the county-wide and regional exercise program. This includes exercises where Orange County and its jurisdictions have participated in discussion or performance based exercises. They may also have acted as part of the Regional Domestic Security Task Force (RDSTF) or the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) as many of the scenarios involve a multi-agency, multi- jurisdictional response. SECTION 3 - Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 88 e Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 In the various exercise scenarios, casualties could be great in numbers. Estimates range anywhere from just a few individuals to hundreds in human injuries and deaths. A terrorist event does not have to injure or kill anyone, but the use of CBRNE materials, or even conventional weapons, almost guarantees that there would be victims, either from bystanders, responders, or even the terrorists themselves. Property impacts may also reach catastrophic losses depending on the location of the incident or if CBRNE materials are used. Anticipated damages to buildings, vehicles, or other property could be minimal with a cost of just a few thousand dollars or quite extensive where destruction could total hundreds of millions of dollars. The geographic area of a terrorist incident is generally isolated in spatial components. In Orange County, potential targets are spread out around the unincorporated areas, as well as the municipalities. The jurisdictions with higher population concentrations, attractions, and event venues are the more likely areas. An incident involving CBRNE components would certainly extend the affected area though. Depending upon the type of incident, its potential target, and/or the device(s) used, there may also be some environmental impacts associated with terrorism. CBRNE devices would certainly have cascading effects to the environment but the range of damage would vary. The target itself may be contribute to the harm, especially for some of the critical infrastructures related to electric and water utilities. Economic impacts could also range from minor disruptions in critical infrastructure and services to large-scale outages and shut downs. Terrorist attacks that concentrated on utility services or other such infrastructure would create more severe interruptions for that sector. Businesses and industry could also be severely impacted; incidents at local attractions or theme parks would have an effect on our tourism economy, which brings in an estimated $57 billion in annual revenue according to the Orlando/Orange UASI Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA) from 2012. Depending on the location, materials used, and severity of the attack, other infrastructure such as transportation networks, hospitals and healthcare facilities, and educational facilities would also be affected as a result of a terrorist incident. Government services might also be placed under strict security following an attack. The time to recover from such an incident would vary greatly; some sectors may be more affected than other following an incident, but nearly all would experience a disruption. Mitigation Measures Mitigation measures for terrorism are fairly robust due to the high potential of an incident occurring. There are several specific plans that deal with terrorism, including the County's CEMP, the THIRA, and other plans developed in conjunction with local law enforcement in the county, as well as the region, state, and nation. The local fusion center, the Central Florida Intelligence Exchange (CFIX) continuously distributes information and analysis to recognized partnering agencies and SECTION 3- Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 89 A\` Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 individuals that have been previously vetted. Training courses and exercise opportunities are also very common with at least annual scenarios that contain an element of potential terrorist activity. This hazard is included as part of the local, regional, and state Training and Exercise Plan (TEP). There are also dedicated equipment, teams, and support resources dedicated to addressing possible terrorist plots, investigating potential leads, and continuous evaluation(s) of likely targets, critical infrastructure, and key resources. While these mitigation measures may not fully prevent other terrorist events or stop all activities prior to their execution, they do serve to lessen the effects an incident may have by providing a wide range actions to mitigate the impacts and affected people, property, economy, and environment. Vulnerability: There is some amount of vulnerability present in Orange County to the hazard of terrorism. The number of potential targets in our county with its attractions, event venues, and critical infrastructure is the main reason this hazard is included here, as well as the enormous impacts that could affect the County and its jurisdictions. Extreme loss of life, property damage, and economic and service disruptions would abound in the event of a terrorist incident, especially if another or larger magnitude type of event were to happen. In consideration of this possibility, many mitigation measures have been put into place to help prevent, prepare, or avoid an incident of this type. Risk: Medium — 32% Despite the multitude of mitigation actions, the unpredictability of terrorist events and the large number of potential targets means that this hazard has the potential to occur again in the future. It is unknown just how near or far in the future that may be, but the risk is ever present as shown from the recent tragedy that occurred in June 2016. Severe impacts to loss of life, property damage, and service disruptions would result if an event were to happen in Orange County. Terrorism remains a moderate risk to which Orange County is vulnerable. Several plans currently exist to address the hazard and are regularly updated. Training is conducted on a normal basis throughout the year with exercise scenarios that are created to help responders address their actions in an emergency. The specialized equipment, teams, or support takes several forms, one of which is the RDSTF, which is the culmination of a number of disciplines, such as law enforcement, fire/rescue, emergency medical services, emergency management, hospitals, public health, schools, and businesses. The fusion center (CFIX) provides intelligence, analysis, and information sharing to a broad range of partnering agencies and individuals as well. These organizations provide a high level of support for responding to, recovering from, preparing for, and preventing terrorist incidents. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 90 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Tropical Systems Description: Tropical systems, like tropical storms or hurricanes, are one of the most destructive natural hazards. They can cause considerable amounts of damage and property losses in Florida and Orange County. These storms are characterized by sustained high velocity winds circulating around a moving low- pressure center. They form and develop over warm water due to atmospheric instability and have the ability to impact entire regions and can affect the lives of thousands of people, homes, and businesses. Mitigating the hazards associated with tropical cyclones is an important and on-going endeavor. Sometimes referred to as coastal storms due to their approaching pathways to Florida, the impacts can be felt farther inland as the sheer size of these storms encompasses more than just coastal communities. There are various degrees of tropical cyclones that may affect the state of Florida, and, more specifically, Orange County: tropical depressions, tropical storms, and hurricanes. • Tropical depressions(TD/SD) are a loose grouping of storms containing large amounts of rain associated with a moving low pressure system with a maximum of sustained winds at less than 39 mph. For the scope of this document, tropical depressions were not tracked as they are not "named storms," although they do have a moderate rate of recurrence. • Tropical storms(TS/SS) contain a similar moving low pressure system carrying massive amounts of rain with better organization and a slight counter-clockwise rotation or circulation with sustained winds of 39 to 73 mph. The center of the storm, or the "eye," may be present but difficult to discern. • Hurricanes(H1, H2, H3, H4, H5) have a full rotation around the low pressure center with a distinct eye. These storms can create a variety of severe weather related hazards, and they can dump a torrential amount of rain across a large area. Depending upon the category of the storm (Hl, H2, H3, H4, or H5), they can also produce sustained winds anywhere from 74 to over 157 mph with even higher gusts. Other related hazards are tornados, lightning, and flood conditions. Previous Occurrences: Orange County has experienced 37 different tropical systems that have all come within 65 miles within the center point of the County. Due to the large size of most tropical systems, the occurrences listed below in Table 24 will be those systems whose"eye" or center point of the system crossed the border of Orange County. There have been a total of 13 systems that qualify under this caveat, with all of them impacting at least the Unincorporated County. Other municipal areas that were impacted are also listed in Table 24. The other 24 systems came within close range to Orange County and its jurisdictions, but their impacts were more indirect, such as rain, elevated winds and gusts, and possible evacuations from surrounding areas to Orange County. SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 91 w` Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Table 24: Tropical Systems within Borders of Orange County, FL, 1950—2015 Storm Date of Magnitude Greatest Area(s) of Direct Name Impact Crossing Orange Magnitude Impact(s) within Orange County Border of System County Easy 09/06/1950 Winter Garden, Ocoee, A•o•ka =WM 10/18/1950 H1 Ocoee, A.o•ka Unnamed 06/18/1959 TD H1 Unincorporated Orange 1959 Coun Donna 09/11/1960 A.o•ka Cleo 08/28/1964 Unincorporated Orange Coun Brenda 06/19/1968 TD H1 Unincorporated Orange Coun Jenny 10/04/1969 TD Unincorporated Orange Coun Subtropical 06/25/1974 Unincorporated Orange 1 1974 Coun Subtropical 09/13/1976 TD Windermere, Ocoee, 3 1976 A.o•ka Dennis 08/18/1981 H1 Unincorporated Orange County Gabrielle 09/14/2001 H1 Bay Lake, Lake Buena Vista, Orlando, Winter Park Winter Garden, Ocoee, Henri 09/06/2003 TD Orlando, Eatonville, Maitland Charley 08/14/2004 H1 Lake Buena Vista, Orlando, Eatonville Source: Natioanal Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Historical Hurricane Tracks Location: Tropical systems have crisscrossed Orange County with storm approaches from a variety of approaches. Each and every jurisdiction in Orange County has experienced a tropical system of some kind with varying degrees of severity and magnitude. The storm tracks in Figure 7 are the tropical systems that have passed within 65 miles from the center of Orange County. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 92 e...m. Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Figure G: Tropical Systems 50 Statute Miles from Orange County, FL, 1950—2015 {Ir' 4:::!* . , s 6 I , H5 144 H3 fri 15/SS :ET r N/A 1.4'' a, .1. Sart and 1 L .7a •' - t 1ii •,z, - it f • 14't -" _ ,1. %_ 1 :F s-� a • ',1—•'-••-i,,)4rtjz. `ynngs _al'.' LNi• ( .tp,e•.y � I '' v • aVi �ji. ' 7 r '. - ► I ,• r• :4 .,to n q ., .. ; ' '4 lr- SIF . F I .. .tr �' t i i.' 1 . ;qtr V ItL11.11.^ , r. •-ft: ' .1r• ! Garden 1,,•�c t f µ � `l 41. v^� I - t� , h . •« . o "t' afi i'rP4y� l _t, •nttno . t _ f c � ! _ ; ,-;e7.—... a . I: .• t 4-,•_.:0,-1, s :O .1 �. R ►�' /:1•. — I. ,, 4/ • ..i• la •ark t't. ,1 _ 'r �'�' . � 1. � • "rZ'R_ .�� A• V^ « �' s` • ✓lki ' ;�: , l'-p'v r =- /4 ' . . I, • . r7( - ''--- r . :al., ' ''''.:1 ' .A -i +f --. I�r,r 0 r :..1..Z z• '11-1/2-7%,-.", ->` '` a ..•. ,.1 _ . ape .1. _� ..44‘--:-/::''.. »n, .raj► r ^.... ...-'i •"?_' 1 .Rock a: ca �! ••'4 ''it l .1i , ',� m ice" .-1' .' ti •'..i of t 1 1•': �. 1. : . v . if -1,- .,. . ...-.1 t.;ayr. � :.,# ,1 St Cla;,•.�'; i,,�' 1 �j`�t.�{` • • a '0:f1 ` s Source: Natioanal Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAH),Historical Hurricane Tracks Extent: Many types of tropical systems have entered into Orange County with differing levels of severity and magnitude. The Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale in Table 25 is the main measurement tool for hurricane magnitude. Using the metric of tropical systems that have come within 65 miles from the center of Orange County, there have been a total of 88 systems since the year 1842. The weaker systems, like tropical storms, have been more prevalent in the past with 47 systems coming within range of Orange County. The more severe storms are less frequent. The worst case scenario for hurricane that could be experienced in Orange County could be high as a Category 5, but this is not likely due to the geographic location of the county being an inland, non-coastal county. Hurricane force winds tend to die down just after they experience a landfall. While a couple of Category 4 storms are the highest magnitude hurricanes to have passed by Orange County, no direct hits higher than a Category 3 have been experience by Orange County or its jurisdictions. With this in mind, the likelihood for the extent of a hurricane would be from a tropical storm up to a Category 3. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 93 fittair. Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Table 25: Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale Wind Estimated Category Speed Types of Damage Due to Winds Return Period Low pressure system will cause slight damage from wind and rain: Damage due to winds from tropical/sub-tropical storms may TD/SD* <39 mph occur at several points, like the roof, windows and siding, air N/A conditioners, as well as damage to property and automobiles. Water damage may result in flooding, mold, interior damages, or sewage system back-ups. High winds will produce minor damage from wind and rain: Damage due to winds from tropical/sub-tropical storms may TS/ 39-73 mph occur at several points, like the roof, windows and siding, air N/A conditioners, as well as damage to property and automobiles. Water damage from rain may result in flooding, mold, interior damages, or sewage system back-ups. Very dangerous winds will produce some damage: Well-constructed frame homes could have damage to roof, Hi 74-95 mph shingles, and vinyl siding and gutters. Large branches of 10— 11 years trees will snap and shallowly rooted trees may be toppled. (9.1 — 10%) Extensive damage to power lines and poles likely will result in power outages that could last a few to several days. Extremely dangerous winds will cause extensive damage: Well-constructed frame homes could sustain major roof and 22 — 28ears H2 96-110 mph siding damage. Many shallowly rooted trees will be snapped 28y o or uprooted and block numerous roads. Near-total power loss (3.58 —4.55/o) is expected with outages that could last from several days to weeks. Devastating damage will occur: Well-built framed homes may incur major damage or removal 111-129 of roof decking and gable ends. Many trees will be snapped 39— 53 years mph or uprooted, blocking numerous roads. Electricity and water (1.89 — 2.56%) will be unavailable for several days to weeks after the storm passes. Catastrophic damage will occur: Well-built framed homes can sustain severe damage with 130-156 loss of most of the roof structure and/or some exterior walls. 85 — 120 years mph Most trees will be snapped or uprooted and power poles (0.83 — 1.18%) downed. Fallen trees and power poles will isolate residential areas. Power outages will last weeks to possibly months. Most of the area will be uninhabitable for weeks or months. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 94 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Catastrophic damage will occur: A high percentage of framed homes will be destroyed, with 157 mph or total roof failure and wall collapse. Fallen trees and power 220— 340 years higher poles will isolate residential areas. Power outages will last for (0.29— 0.45%) weeks to possibly months. Most of the area will be uninhabitable for weeks or months. Note: *-Tropical Depressions and Tropical Storms and other sub-tropical systems are not typically part of the Saftir-Simpson Hurricane Scale. Information presented here is from open source. Source: NOAA National Hurricane Center Probability: The vast majority of Atlantic Ocean tropical cyclones occur during a period of time from June 1st to November 30th each year, also known as "Hurricane Season." Through data collected from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Hurricane Center, probabilities were created for the estimated return periods of hurricanes to coastal regions of Florida based upon their storm category. Since Orange County is an inland county, there is an assumption that each storm that hits the coast will probably decrease in its intensity before reaching Clay County, this making the estimated return period slightly lower. The probability of a hurricane impacting Orange County sometime in the future, either directly or indirectly, is a near certainty. The Florida peninsula has historically received the highest number of tropical system activity in the nation. The category of a storm or its pathway for a strike is not as well-known and is contingent upon a number of factors. The return rates for weaker systems like tropical depressions and tropical storms are more frequent. As noted in Table 25, the return period for a Category 1 hurricane is a 10- to 11-year event (or about 10-11% each year), whereas a Category 5 is a 220- to 340-year event (0.29 — 0.45% each year). Orange County and its jurisdictions are much more likely to experience a lower category of hurricane, storm, or depression than the more severe systems. Impacts: Impacts that have been experienced specifically by Orange County and its jurisdictions have been difficult to track using databases that record weather- related disasters like SHELDUSTM or the NWS information. This is due in part to the large size of the storm and the great region and state-wide impacts, damages, and losses that are felt are not broken down county by county, jurisdiction by jurisdiction. In addition, the events tracked by these sources do not align with the tropical systems that directly hit Orange County's borders. SHELDUSTM estimates that there have been 11 tropical systems for Orange County with 45.9 injuries and 0.66 deaths since 1960. A brief open source search for hurricane related deaths in Orange County returned minor results: the Miami Herald reported a story following Hurricane Charley in 2004 that claimed three (3) deaths occurred in Orange County as a result of the storm. Two (2) of these were traffic related just prior to and during the eye of the storm approaching the county. The other was caused during the clean-up phase while dealing with the large amounts of debris when the victim fell from a tree that was being cut. SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 95 W4"61. Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 SHELDUS'"' also measured over $30.8 million in property damages with $53.3 million in crop damages (adjusted to 2014 dollars) for a total of $84.1 million. In an effort to provide better information as part of this vulnerability assessment, a probabilistic assessment using software called HAZUS-MH was used to look at likely impacts to Orange County if tropical system events of varying return periods were to occur. HAZUS-MH is a regional multi-hazard loss estimation model that was developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the National Institute of Building Sciences. The primary purpose of HAZUS-MH is to provide a methodology and software application to develop multi-hazard losses at a regional scale. These loss estimates would be used primarily by local, state and regional officials to plan and stimulate efforts to reduce risks from multi-hazards and to prepare for emergency response and recovery. Table 26: Building Exposure by Occupancy Type in Orange County, FL Occupancy Exposure Percent of Number of Percent of Type (in $1,000's) Total BuildingsTotal Exposure (%) Buildings (%) Agricultural 184,323 0.1 455 0.12 Commercial 18,045,087 14.4 12,479 3.28 Education 5,412,087 4.3 291 0.08 Government 5,700,162 4.6 1,087 0.29 Industrial 4,802,674 3.8 3,485 0.92 Reli.ious 1,867,583 1.5 769 0.20 Residential 89,213,279 71.2 360,959 95.11 TOTAL 125,225,195 100.0 379,525 100.0 Source: HAZUS-MH The total dollar value for all building types located in Orange County is over $125.2 billion (2006 dollars) with 379,525 buildings, as shown in Table 26. Based on the return period of the storm, HAZUS-MH calculates the number of buildings that would be impacted and their expected damage: none, minor, moderate, severe, and destruction. This analysis will also compare the 10-, 20-, 50-, 100-, and 500-year events to show the various levels of anticipated impacts related to the hazard of tropical systems for Orange County for property damages. As to be expected, the more severe the tropical system, the more damages sustained across all building occupancy types. Due to the probabilistic nature of these figures, they have been rounded to the nearest whole numbers; for that reason, the simple arithmetic will have some discrepancies. Table 27: HAZUS-MH for Building Damage (#), 10-year Event in Orange County, FL gi 11F Occupancy None Minor Moderate Severe Destruction Type A.ricultural 452 3 0 0 0 Commercial 12,415 64 0 0 0 Education 289 2 0 0 0 SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 96 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Government 1,081 6 0 0 0 Industrial 3,465 20 0 0 0 Religious 766 3 0 0 0 Residential 359,391 1,438 124 6 0 TOTAL 377,859 1,535 125 6 0 Source: HAZUS-MH Table 28: HAZUS-MH for Building Damage(#), 20-year Event in Orange County, FL Occupancy None Minor Moderate Severe Destruction Type Agricultural 413 32 7 3 0 Commercial 12,186 275 17 1 0 Education 284 7 0 0 0 Government 1,060 25 2 0 0 Industrial 3,390 88 6 0 0 Religious 746 21 1 0 0 Residential 350 017 9,485 1,423 32 2 TOTAL 368,097 9,933 1,458 36 2 Source: HAZUS-MH Table 29: HAZUS-MH for Building Damage (#), 50-year Event in Orange County, FL Occupancy __, • _ r . Type None Minor Moderate Severe Destruction11. 1 Agricultural 406 37 8 3 0 Commercial 11,010 1,205 246 17 1 Education 259 27 5 0 0 Government 960 105 21 1 0 Industrial 3,095 325 61 3 0 Religious 686 73 10 0 0 Residential 312,677 38,793 9,230 217 42 TOTAL 329,093 40,565 9,582 243 43 Source: HAZUS-MH Table 30: HAZUS-MH for Building Damage(#), 100-year Event in Orange County, FL Occupancy None Minor Moderate Severe Destruction Type Agricultural 352 48 30 20 5 Commercial 9,773 1,744 775 179 9 Education 216 43 24 8 0 Government 820 157 85 25 0 Industrial 2,865 429 158 33 0 Religious 619 105 36 8 0 Residential 270,427 62,954 22,916 3241 1,421 TOTAL 285,073 65,479 24,023 3,515 1,435 Source: HAZUS-MH SECTION 3 - Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 97 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Table 31: HAZUS-MH for Building Damage(#), 500-year Event in Orange County, FL Occupancy None Minor Moderate Severe Destruction Type Agricultural 241 95 63 44 12 Commercial 4,316 3,056 3,300 1,728 79 Education 102 69 74 46 0 Government 351 235 287 214 0 Industrial 1,245 817 880 542 2 Religious 291 228 170 80 0 Residential 131,785 124,957 79,750 17,595 6,872 TOTAL 138,331 129,457 84,524 20,247 6,966 Source: HAZUS-MH These losses indicate that any hurricane would cause property damages of some kind to each building type. The spatial impacts from a tropical system may vary greatly depending on the type of storm that affects Orange County. However, most systems are quite large and can encompass the entire county. While impacts would generally be felt worst in the northeast quadrant of a system moving though Orange County and its jurisdictions, other severe weather-related hazards would spawn from the tropical system that would extend beyond the eye of the storm. Economic impacts and disruption of services would also be significant. Utility outages for electric, water, and sewer would be some of the more immediate issues that would result in a tropical cyclone impacting Orange County. Large amounts of debris would also result from the high winds and torrential rains, which might cause utility and power lines to be down. Debris would also cut off transportation routes for first responders getting access to incident scenes once the winds recede. Most critical infrastructure is hardened to withstand damage related to high winds and most impacts from debris, as well as elevated above the base flood elevation. Back-up generators at these facilities would help provide power to the most important assets and keep critical operations going. In 2004 following Hurricane Charley, electric utilities reported over 415,000 customers were without power. There were 400 out of the 626 lift stations operated by Orange County that were without power resulting in sewage system backups. There were also 425 inoperable traffic signals that complicated roadway traffic following the storm. Other impacts to the economy would be slower to react and recover following a tropical system. Businesses and industries that cannot operate after a storm and would stay closed until normal conditions, like electric power, utilities, and other essential services, were restored or until roadways are cleared of debris and schools are reopened. Since the storms of 2004, many businesses and industries saw the benefits of being prepared before a storm. Grocery stores, gas stations, pharmacies, and other big box retailers installed generators and purchased emergency supplies in order to keep their facilities open as soon after the system left the area. Employees at other commercial or industrial businesses that SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 98 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 cannot open quickly enough would not be able to work, to sell their products or services, and would suffer losses to wages and income. Table 32 shows in detail the probabilistic losses that Orange County would experience for both capital stock losses and income losses for varying storm severities. Table 32: HAZUS-MH for Incomes Losses in Orange County, FL Income Losses 10-year 20-year 50-year 100-year 500-year (in $1,000's) Event Event Event Event Event Cost Building 111,798 480,107 1,664,578 3,130,107 12,200,418 Capital Damage Stock Cost Contents 16,070 67,569 242,284 818,287 3,741,705 Losses Damage Inventory Loss 0 95 1,441 7,077 74,768 Relocation 2,082 17,818 83,643 355,692 1,551,433 Loss Capital Related 0 231 7,300 21,142 161,559 Income Losses Losses Wages Losses 0 391 27,464 72,136 416,254 Rental Income 7,523 30,687 137,347 191,298 963,313 Loss TOTAL 137,473 596,897 2,164,057 4,595,738 19,109,451 Source: HAZUS-MH Mitigation Measures: Tropical systems receive a good deal of focus for preparedness and mitigation actions in Florida. Hurricanes, tropical storms, and tropical depressions are mentioned in other emergency management plans like the County's CEMP for overall response actions and the PDRP for the long-term recovery strategy. The Orange County Sheriff's Office (OCSO) maintains a Traffic and Shelter Operations Plan that is updated annually that looks at evacuation responsibilities, reverse lane operations, signage, and staffing emergency shelter; this plan would be for any evacuation for any hazard. Orange County participates in the annual State Hurricane Exercise that takes place in May. This exercise focuses on a statewide response to a tropical system(s) scenario with multiple counties that are impacted. In addition, training classes in response operations for hurricanes is an on- going endeavor with courses in damage assessment, electronic incident management systems for resource tracking of incidents, call center operations, and periodic review of the Emergency Operations Center protocols. There are several teams in Orange County that have been used for hurricane response operations, such as the Citizens'Assistance Response Team (CART) and Senior Assistance Team (SAT) that utilizes fire department personnel to address resident issues following a storm system. This may include putting tarps on roofs, cutting fallen trees, and SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 99 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 other needs for neighborhoods. Community Emergency Response Teams (CERT) are also scattered around the county that are comprised of residents who have received additional training for emergency response in their neighborhoods. First aid, fire suppression, triage, treatment, and transport of victims are among some of the topics covered in their training. All of these additional support teams have received some backing, but that have been stretched thin for personnel, equipment, and supplies to assist areas of Orange County and its jurisdictions following a hurricane that may pass through. Vulnerability: Orange County is highly vulnerable to the effects of tropical systems, whether it is direct impacts or indirect consequences. The size of this hazard could encompass the entire county and all of its jurisdictions, as well as entire regions of the State. It has also been nearly a decade since the last hurricanes passed through Orange County. The 2004 hurricane season saw systems like Charley, Frances, and Jeanne within just weeks of each other that stretched resources in the County and across the State. Since then, neighborhoods have developed in new areas, transportation networks have been expanded, and trees have grown taller; all this can increase the needs placed on emergency services during a hurricane. The frequency of tropical systems for the most severe storms is quite low, but smaller cyclones, storms, and depressions with shorter return periods that have come through the County and its jurisdictions can cause moderate damages as well. The potential for injuries and deaths is always present; continuous warnings and notifications to keep people out of the storm have improved over the past several years. General public awareness about the dangers these tropical systems bring with them is also getting better through events like the annual Hurricane Expo hosted by the Orange County Office of Emergency Management. Property impacts for new construction has also benefited through better building codes. As the severity of the storm increases, though, more property damage is likely to occur through wind-borne debris to other non- structural property. Other impacts to the economy and disruption of services would also be contingent upon storm severity, but most critical infrastructure is equipped to handle the more frequent types of tropical systems we see. Risk: The overall risk from tropical systems is categorized as a high threat mainly because of the significant impacts this hazard poses to humans, structures and property, the geographic area, and the disruption to economics and services. In addition, there is a high probability for a tropical cyclone to affect our area. The mitigation measures that are currently in place can help to reduce recovery times, but this hazard will still occur. Hurricanes are slightly more predictable than other severe weather, but it is not a perfect science. While impacts can be reduced through better detection technology, public outreach, and emergency notification systems, it is incumbent upon responders to continue to plan, train, exercise, and equip themselves in preparation for an incident. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 100 AOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Tropical systems are the most well-known of the hazards we experience in Orange County and awareness of this hazard continues to be on the rise, especially for residents that are new to the area or to Florida in general. Orange County's Office of Emergency Management has distributed NOAA weather radios for the past several years and plans to continue to do so to help residents receive important warnings when severe weather happens. The NWS and other media outlets now have improved their modeling capabilities for storm tracks and will continue to issue watches, warnings, and other weather advisories. Wildfires Description: Wildfire is defined by the Florida Forest Service (FFS) as "any fire that does not meet management objectives or is out of control." Wildfires occur in Orange County nearly every year to some degree. They are a part of the natural cycle of Florida's fire-adapted ecosystems. Many of these fires are quickly suppressed before they can damage or destroy property, homes and lives. Orange County's wildfire season generally runs from January through May when the weather is cooler, rainfall amounts are lower, and vegetative fuel is dry. A combination of these factors, along with moderate winds, makes conditions just right for the spread of fire. There are different types of wildfires that occur in Orange County: • Surface Fires: burn along the forest floor consuming the litter layer and small branches on or near the ground. • Ground Fires: smolder or creep slowly underground. These fires usually occur during periods of prolonged drought and may burn for weeks or months until sufficient rainfall extinguishes the fire, or it runs out of fuel. • Crown Fires: spread rapidly by the wind, moving through the tops of the trees. • Wildland/Urban Interface (WUI) Fires: fires occurring within the WUI in areas where structures and other human developments meet and intermingle with undeveloped wildland or vegetative fuels. Homes and other flammable structures can become fuel for WUI fires. Previous Occurrences: Orange County experiences wildfires nearly every year in some Fashion, but most of these are relatively small brushfires and do not require vast amounts of resources to put out. Over the past five (5) years, there have not been any significant wildfires in Orange County. The Florida Forest Service (FFS) lists only one (1) "significant"wildfire in Orange County during the period of March 2011 to March 2016. This significant fire was called the "Whispering Pines"fire and occurred on May 27, 2011 due to a lightning strike in south-central area of Orange County, east of Orlando and south of the Beachline (SR-528). The fire burned 3,924 acres and was fully contained on June 3, 2011. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 101 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 The most prevalent cause of wildfires in Orange County is due to lightning strikes, both in number of fires, as well as acres burned. As discussed in the Severe Thunderstorms, Lightning sub-hazard, Orange County experiences a number of lightning strikes each year, especially in the summer. Even though the thunderstorms bring rain with them, it is generally not enough moisture to stop the formation of a brush fire. In some rare situations, these lightning strike fires can smolder in the undeveloped areas without detection for a few days; during this time, the fire may slowly spread to other areas until it has grown in size. Table 33: Fires by Cause in Orange County, FL: 1980-2014 Cause Number % Acres0/0 of Fires Burned Campfire 41 1.6 2,945.9 3.3 Children 207 8.0 4,506.5 5.0 Debris Burn 173 6.6 4,910.4 5.5 Debris Burn -Authorized (Broadcast/Acreage) 3 0.1 54.6 0.1 Debris Burn -Authorized (Piles) 3 0.1 4.5 0.0 Debris Burn - Unauthorized (Piles) 9 0.4 417.3 0.5 Debris Burn - Unauthorized (Yard Trash) 10 0.4 275.1 0.3 Equipment Use 36 1.4 545.5 0.6 Equipment-Agriculture 5 0.2 80.9 0.1 Equipment- Recreation 1 0.0 1.4 0.0 Equipment-Transportation 6 0.2 154.6 0.2 Incendiary 515 19.8 11,550.5 12.8 Lightning 743 28.6 38,642.2 42.9 Miscellaneous- Breakout 5 0.2 871.6 1.0 Miscellaneous- Fireworks 5 0.2 38 0.0 Miscellaneous- Power Lines 13 0.5 93 0.1 Miscellaneous- Other 235 9.0 10,422.6 11.6 Railroad 9 0.4 32.3 0.0 Smoking 49 1.9 1,496.3 1.7 Unknown 532 20.1 13,078.7 14.5 TOTAL 2,419 83,084.9 Source: Florida Forest Service: January 1, 1980-May 6,2014 The most devastating wildfire season in Florida's recent history was in 1998 when a series of wildfires caused major damage in north central Florida, including to Orange County. An unusually wet, mild winter that had encouraged plant growth was followed by very hot, dry conditions that turned the heavy growth into prime wildfire fuel. The early summer of 1998, weather conditions had created a perfect scenario for destructive wildfire, and by July 22 a total of 2,277 fires had burned almost a half million acres of forest in Brevard, Flagler, Orange, Putnam, Seminole, and Volusia counties and destroyed 340 homes and SECTION 3- Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 102 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 33 businesses.4 Statewide there were 4,902 wildfires that consumed 506,976.7 acres of land that year. In 2004, Hurricanes Charley, Frances, and Jean contributed to an increase in fuel loads across central Florida which has heightened the probability of occurrence of greater intensity fires which are harder to contain and apt to spread rapidly. On average, areas that typically had 10 tons of dead wood per acre had an additional 6 tons of dead wood per acre after the 2004 hurricane season. This led to an increased need for prescribed fire in central Florida, including Orange County.5 In April and May of 2009, another outbreak of 44 wildfires burned approximately 9,540 acres that were scattered from southeast Orange County to southern Volusia County.6 This incident required the establishment of the Orlando-Volusia Wildfire Complex which included a Florida Forestry Service (FFS) Type II Incident Management Team (IMT), over 100 forestry firefighters, and numerous pieces of specialized equipment from all over the state in support of the incident. The Orange-Volusia Complex encompassed parts of Orange, Volusia, Seminole, and Brevard Counties. The majority of the fires in the complex were in Orange County with over 3,000 acres. According to a report on the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) that was accessed by the Orange County Fire Rescue Department (OCFRD) Planning &Technical Services Division, there were 363 wildland fires from March 2010 to March 2016 (please refer to Table 34). These fires burned a total of 2,371.46 acres, or an average of 6.53 acres per fire. These fires are typically smaller in nature and do not require additional coordination or support from agencies outside of the OCFRD. Table 34: Wild/and Fires per NFIRS in Orange County, FL: 2010-2016* Year Number Acres Average of Fires Burned Burned 2010 71 158.35 2.23 2011 92 1 590.86 17.29 2012 66 257.98 3.90 2013 56 144.42 2.58 2014 38 132.83 3.50 2015 30 57.02 1.90 2016* 10 30.00 3.00 Total 363 2,371.46 6.53 *Note: Figures for 1016 end in March 4 Prince,Nick(2010). "1998 Florida Wildfires." Retrieved from http://www.seesouthemforests.org/case-studies/fire 5 Orange County Fire Rescue(2005). "A Prescribed Fire Policy for Orange County Fire Rescue." Retrieved from http://www.usfa.dhs.ciov/pdf/efop/efo38559.pdf 6 InciWeb(2009). "Orlando-Volusia Complex." Retrieved from http://www.inciweb.org/incident/1649/ SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 103 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Source: NFIRS Reports, accessed March 28,2016 Location: Much of Orange County is considered an urbanized, metropolitan area, but there is a large amount of land area that is still undeveloped and covered in forest and wetlands. These areas are mainly is the eastern, southwest, and northwest portions of the County. As a result, many areas of the County are susceptible to wildfires and may be caused by a number of reasons, such as: lightning strikes, arson, or escaped yard debris burns. Periods of drought or long periods of dry conditions may also increase the onset of wildfires, as well as their severity. Another area of concern for wildfires is residential districts located in the WUI or where the natural vegetation meets homes and communities. According to the Southern Wildfire Risk Assessment Portal (SouthWRAP) Summary Report, it is estimated that 98% of Orange County's population, or 1,119,902 people, live within the WUI. Figure H: Chart of WUI Population Areas in Orange County, FL WUI Percent of WUI Percent of WUI Housing Density Population Population WUI Acres Acres IIILT lhs/40ac 540 0.0% 26,637 8.8% ■ lhs/40ac to 1hs/20ac 647 0.1% 12,405 4.1% lhs/20ac to 1hs/10ac 2,084 0.2% 17,683 5.8% ■ 1hs/lOac to ihs/sac 5,294 05% 22,841 7.5% ihs/sac to 1hs/2ac 18,912 13% 34,968 11.5% ihs/2ac to 3hs/lac 470,608 42.0% 135,875 44.8% GT 3hs/lac 621,817 55.5% 52,664 17.4% Total 1,119,902 100.0% 303,073 100.0% Source: SouthWRAP Summary Report,2014 Figure I: Map of WUI Population Areas in Orange County, FL SECTION 3 - Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 104 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 fk •0 1. E;, '` ,} 4* ``e Orange County 9 •! `1 �k ' i1,^ Wildland Urban Interface • i- ter„ ;- 11 •' •` ,1kt . f •"- n 1.LT 1 hs/40 ac .. �,, ..4h . •.... ` , 11 2-1 hs140 to 1 hs/20 ac `*C L� IL.) '. • ■3-1 hs/20 to 1 hs/10 ac • ^•F _r V � '. • - T., , • .y 04-1hs/10to1 hs/5 ac k ^tit �' m6'104 , 1 11j ■5-1 hs/5 to 1 hs/2 ac ir.�1` A ` _ * II 6-1 hs/2 to 3 hs/ac � i Air; 4 : i •i• i. ■7-GT 3 hs/ac 1014c 11 ik I 46— e• ii ir!ft .i.. ' 0 '4inelutib:.5.r iiki, ; , , 4,44 . iiirric.i , .„,.,.. i • -,a _it sift._ t.,:ii 1. --- - t • rer- i. •—{ ,. b 1. ' / \0 2:5 5.5 1l Miles .is sk • NO '.R^t oa• 10/29/2014 D 'e . 'nl Southern Wildfire Risk Assessment Y-� (^�' • http//www soutMmwildhrmsk.com Source: SouthWRAP Summary Report,2014 People living within the WUI are at risk to the potential impacts of wildfire. The location of where people are living in this interface is contingent upon how dense the homes are, measured as houses per acre. This is one of the key components for determining how wildfires will impact residents. Referring to Figure 9, these dense housing areas are located in many of the municipalities in Orange County, such as: Belle Isle, Winter Park, Edgewood, Maitland, Ocoee, Eatonville, and Winter Garden. Extent: The SouthWRAP Summary Report looks at several outputs of wildfire behavior to determine how bad a wildfire may be if and when it was to occur in Orange County. Fire behavior is the manner in which a fire reacts to environmental influences like fuels, weather, and topography. A large portion of acreage in Orange County is considered "non-burnable:" this amount us 231,266 acres, or about 36% of the total land area of 642,700 acres. Fire behavior characteristics like the rate of spread, flame length, fire intensity scale, and fire type are all used to determine what areas may need mitigation treatment, especially if they are located in close proximity to homes, businesses, or critical facilities. The "Rate of Spread" is the speed with which a fire moves in a horizontal direction across the landscape. This is usually measured in "chains per hour;" SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 105 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 one (1) chain is equal to 66 feet, or 1.1 feet per minute. The rate is spread is influenced by fuels present, weather conditions, and topography. The rate of spread with the largest percentage is in the 50 — 150 chains per hour (55 — 165 feet per minute) with 187,514 acres falling into this category, or 29.2% of the land area. This is anticipated to be the most likely rate of spread for wildfire in Orange County; however, the most severe rate would be 150+ chains per hour. This is a relatively small rate of spread for Orange County at 15,640 acres, or 2.4% of the land area, falling in the category. "Flame Length" is defined as the distance between the flame tip and the midpoint of the flame depth as the base of the flame, which is generally the ground surface. This indicator shows the intensity of the fire in feet and how much heat is being generated. The longer the flame, the more heat is being released. Just like rate of spread, flame length is influenced by environmental factors like weather, fuels, and the slope of the terrain. The largest portion of Orange County with the most likely flame length is located in 130,343 acres, or 20.3% of the land area, where it would measure 8 — 12 feet. The worst case scenario could produce a flame length of 30+ feet, but only 16,597 acres, or 2.6% of the land area would be likely to produce these taller flames. Similar to the Richter scale for earthquakes, the"Fire Intensity Scale" (FIS) provides a standard scale to measure the potential wildfire intensity. FIS consists of five (5) classes where the order of magnitude between classes is ten- fold. The minimum class, Class 1, represents very low wildfire intensities and the maximum class, Class 5, represents very high wildfire intensities. In all of Orange County, the FIS class that is most prevalent is Class 4, High intensity, with 124,707 acres, or 19.4% of the land area. This translates to large flames, up to 30 feet in length where a direct attack by trained firefighters, fire engines, and dozers is generally ineffective, but indirect might be more effective. There is significant potential for harm or damage to life and property. The greatest intensity is a Class 5 and Orange County has 14,486 acres, or 2.3% of the land area, in this category. The "Fire Tvoe— Extreme" represents the potential fire type under the extreme percentile weather category, which represents the average weather based on the top three percent fire weather days in the analysis period. It is not intended to represent a worst case scenario weather event, but rather is based on fuel availability, weather conditions, and the landscape elevation changes. There are two (2) primary fire types, surface fire and canopy fire. Canopy fire can be further divided into passive canopy and active canopy fire. The"non- burnable"fire type is 193,246 acres, or 30.1% of the total land area. • Surface fire is a fire that spreads through surface fuel without consuming any overlying canopy fuel. Surface fuels include grass, timber litter, shrub/brush, slash, and other dead or live vegetation within about six (6) feet of the ground. This is the largest acreage in Orange County with 413,399 acres, or 64.3% of the land area. SECTION 3— Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 106 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 • Passive Canopy fire is a type of crown fire in which the crowns of individual trees or small groups of trees burn, but solid flaming in the canopy cannot be maintained except for short periods.' This is the smallest portion in Orange County with only 4,995 acres, or 0.8% of the county. • Active Canopy fire is a crown fire in which the entire fuel complex (canopy) is involved in flame, but the crowning phase remains dependent on heat released from surface fuel for continued spread.8 There are 31,060 acres for this fire type, or 4.8% of the county's land. Active canopy fires would be the worst case scenario wildfire in Orange County. For Orange County, many of the areas that would encounter the worst of these fire behaviors are located in the eastern and northwestern parts of the County. Fortunately, these parts of the County are mostly undeveloped and are not heavily populated, so the risk to homes and businesses is greatly reduced. There are several critical facilities that operate in these locations though, such as utility facilities, power lines, water lines, pipelines, etc. The areas with the potential for significant fire behavior are adjacent to the County's population centers and that is where the WUI exists. This means the population densities are much higher and the potential for impacts and damage is increased. Based on the previous occurrences, the immediate effects from fire are fairly low due to the presence of professional firefighting organizations. There are also several proactive fuel reduction programs conducted in the county, including: the Florida Forestry Service, Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), Orange County Environmental Protection Division, Orange County Parks and Recreation Division, and the St. Johns and South Florida Water Management Districts. Probability: Orange County experiences wildfires nearly every year to some degree. Most of the fires are surface or brush fires that are not very large or extensive in their damages. They are handled much in a routine fashion. Other large fires, like the ones described previously in 1998, 2004, and 2009, have required a multi-agency, multi-jurisdictional response to combat the wildfire. These are much less frequent, but there is usually a large amount of fuel available for the fire that is built up over the years due to the low frequency in between occurrences. Figure 1; Chart of Burn Probability in Orange County, FL 'Scott,J.H.,&Reinhardt,E.D.(2001).Assessing the Crown Fire Potential by Linking Models of Surface and Crown Fire Behavior. Ft.Collins,CO, Rocky Mountain Research Station:USDA Forest Service,Research Paper RMRS-RP-29. 8 Scott,J. H., &Reinhardt, E. D.(2001).Assessing the Crown Fire Potential by Linking Models of Surface and Crown Fire Behavior. Ft.Collins,CO,Rocky Mountain Research Station: USDA Forest Service, Research Paper RMRS-RP-29. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 107 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Class Acres Percent 1 15,870 3.6% 2 24,661 5.6% 3 29,669 6.7% 4 22,563 5.1% II5 77,820 17.6% Ed 6 94,339 21.3% 7 94,302 21.3% 8 73,858 16.7% 9 9,446 2.1% 10 0 0.0% Total Source: SouthWRAP Summary Report,2019 In Figure 10 and Figure 11 is information on Orange County's Burn Probability (BP). Figure 10 is a chart of the burn probability for the entirety of Orange County, which includes the entire incorporated area and all of the municipalities. Each jurisdiction has its own burn probability based on the same methodology used by the SouthWRAP Summary Report. Figure 11 depicts the probability of an area that could burn given current landscape conditions, percentile weather, historical ignition patterns, and historical fire prevention and suppression efforts. This map is not intended to show the return rate or interval between fires; is also does not predict the path a wildfire might take or how large a fire might become. Based on simulated fires with different ignition locations and weather streams, the generated probabilities modeled in this map show the areas that would be most susceptible to a wildfire incident. Again, the areas with the highest probability for a wildfire are the undeveloped, less populated areas of Orange County in the eastern and northwestern portions of the unincorporated county. The municipalities of Apopka, Oakland, Ocoee, Orlando, Windermere, and Winter Garden are those jurisdictions with the higher burn probabilities. The developed areas of Orange County that are not directly in the WUI are more insulated from the effects of wildfire. These other jurisdictions, like Belle Isle, Eatonville, Edgewood, Maitland, and Winter Park, are not as susceptible to wildfire due to the lack of fuel sources that contribute to the spread of wildfires. This is not to say that the jurisdictions in Orange County that are not within the WUI would not experience a wildfire, but the likelihood of a wildfire spreading into their boundaries is lower. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 108 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Figure K: Map of Burn Probability in Orange County, FL 4i.:,....-.." - `' a� uP. ; .\'E:• , Orange County P'� ;�; ..q . , , : t�,=�4��1 �. ;gin • {r.• _ _ - Q°' �� . . • Bum Probability 11C 0,,, • .... L____„ , r•6 \........,I;ti c' 1(Lowest Probability) r«ns!• ' t� • •e airimi 5 t ■3 tr \..--.. i • 111-e:- illgiV , '•• . _ •'. - • • ...T1 rg 4 •' 1 mip r t� 4 VimIA _ 6 ,.. .601. . .1 tip„...vitell'1 i . . .\..z;, ... ,4t. ,!,,,- 1111 7 111111 4 v4--fif illatift..titil womolsor. -• sr �; ■ 10(Highest Probability) �jao9s� �K_�..• 1� tl'Afr`•?/it iia i: .a i , illfL. '-Z ., 0044 . 643101 1 .."il k.., 41f ttf4 -- .,•_, ogle .!4;, „Al li\ i , 4017 ;....,F)- idg -4 i . . . . , • - ... -4. •-. * . .... lir' • . le V4 ' 1-;-••• • - 1 lrqb yt ... A. • I . ` ilk k :4/1 , . I. N 111 4 1:169.' . • •.- `I' \ lc�s • 0 3.75 S.5 11 44 iii* t �z, a I t 1 • :" times 14% 6• 4 �% -• -° •, • ost.:10/29/2014 . •_ 7 \--$ Southern WaWhre R.sk Assessment Oav!•nparjY > .1T f� _ • wwW http'//wsouthemw, Rrensk.tom Source : SouthWRAP Summary Report,2014 Impacts: While there have been several large wildfires that have taken place in Orange County in the past, there has not been a significant wildfire event over the past five (5) years. During this time, there have fortunately not been a drastic number of injuries or deaths because of this hazard, either from residents or responders. While it is rare, there is some potential for impacts on humans to occur, but they usually occur during the beginning stages of wildfires when sudden flare-ups result from high wind conditions or changing weather. Generally speaking, though, most people have an opportunity to evacuate the area and avoid harm. Responders are at the greatest risk during the fire suppression process. Property damages and impacts can be much more severe as homes, businesses, and other structures cannot move out of harm's way. According to a report funded by the Joint Fire Science Program, the total damages from the 1998 fires ranged from $622 — 880 million. The bulk of the losses were incurred by timberland owners and the tourism industry. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 109 AOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Depending on their size, wildfires can sometimes cover thousands of acres and send smoke across multiple counties that impact the air quality for miles. Most fires in Orange County are much smaller events and consume a couple dozen acres of land. Based on Table 34, the number of acres burned and the number of fires averages to 6.53 acres per fire. The Joint Fire Science Program report also estimated that the economic impact to Orange County was also very high as the county lost approximately $110 million in tourist revenues that summer. This was attributed in part to both the hot, dry conditions that may have served as a deterrent to visitors and the nationwide media coverage that detailed the extent and side effects of the 1998 wildfires. These combined factors may have served to discourage travel to the state. The 1998 wildfires also caused an increase in hospital visits for respiratory conditions, especially among children and the elderly.9 Other disruptions for electric and gas utilities may occur as many of the high voltage lines or pipelines that cross eastern Orange County are cut through the wooded areas. Wildfires and drought are closely linked hazards, water utilities may also suffer indirectly due to the dry conditions. Transportation routes are also affected by wildfires and can shutdown roadways. Mitigation Measures Due to the common occurrence of wildfires, there are a variety of mitigation actions that are conducted in Orange County. The Office of Emergency Management is working on the Community Wildfire Protection Plan, a specific plan to address the wildfire hazard, but it is not yet complete. Other plans also discuss wildfire, such as the CEMP. The Wedgefield subdivision is located in the eastern portion unincorporated county and, as part of the WUI, is surrounded by heavily wooded areas with high burn probabilities. Due to their proximity in the WUI, the residents here developed a plan to address their vulnerability and became a Firewise Community in 2002, the first designated community in Florida. A Firewise Community provides public education and outreach to neighborhoods about the threats wildfires pose and mitigation tactics that can be implemented by residents to help keep their homes safer. Training occurs on a normal basis for wildfire suppression from a firefighting standpoint for fire departments and the Florida Forestry Service. Exercises are less common than the trainings, but would be closer to about every other year. Wildfire preparedness receives a moderate amount of logistical consideration as prescribed burnings are conducted routinely to reduce the supply of fuel for wildfires, as weather conditions allow. In times of 9 Mercer, D. E., Pye,J.M. Prestemon,J.P.,Putty, D.T.,&Holmes,T.P.(2000).Economic Effects of Catastrophic Wildfires: Assessing the Effectiveness of Fuel Reduction Programs for Redudng the Economic Impacts of Catastrophic Forest Fire Events. Retrieved from htto://www.II-dof.com/publications/joint fire sdenres/ifs ndf/economic effects.odf SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 110 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 drought or high winds, prescribed burning is less commonly used to prevent a planned event from getting out of control and turning into a disaster event. Vulnerability: Due to the amount of forested areas and availability of fuel sources, Orange County is very vulnerable to wildfires. Their common occurrence increases this vulnerability for much of the County, especially in the Wildland- Urban Interface (WUI), which is where structures and other development meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland areas. This creates an environment where fire can move between vegetative and structural fuels. Historical events have shown that large wildfires can and do occur in Orange County and have far reaching impacts to its jurisdictions, air quality, and even the economy. Risk: Medium — 52% The overall risk for wildfire in Orange County and its jurisdictions is a moderate risk. Contributing factors would be the high probability, property damages, and economic impacts. The number of wildfires since 1980 is at 2,491 fires with 83,084.9 acres burned. Property damages have been sizable to the timberland industry with some impacts to homes and other structures. The number of homes at risk is increasing as development near and within the WUI continues to occur. Firewise Communities like Wedgefield are a good example of how neighborhoods should prepare themselves in case of wildfire. While the geographic area that is affected can be relatively small, there is some potential for large wildfire complexes to develop that would require a multi-agency, multi- jurisdictional response. Injuries and loss of life have been kept to a minimum, but the risk is an ever present one, especially to responders that fight the fires. Some wildfires are prevented as they are the result of human activity, but many of the forest fires are caused by naturally by lightning strikes, which are difficult to prevent. Mitigation actions will continue to alleviate some of these risks so that when a wildfire occurs, the impacts will not devastate our County or its jurisdictions. SECTION 3 — Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 111 AOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Section 4 — Strategic Goals and Capabilities Goals and objectives help capture the overall purpose of the plan and assist with determining possible new directions for hazard mitigation efforts. Setting goals and objectives ensures that Orange County is moving in the right direction for hazard mitigation planning by providing ways that success can be measured for the reduction or avoidance of long-term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards. It is important that both the goals and objectives are reviewed for continuing relevance to the vision of the county regarding hazard mitigation. For the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2015 update, the Planning Committee felt that it was important to revise its previous goals and objectives and try to align them with the State of Florida Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan. The intent was to help bring the goals and objectives to a more strategic level and to provide consistency between the State and the County's newly revised goals and objectives. Goals and Objectives The following definitions for goals and objectives will be used: • Goal: a broad, long-term vision that should be accomplished with regard to hazard mitigation. • Objective: the approach to be taken in order to achieve the goal(s). The following list represents the newly revised goals and objectives by for the 2015 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy. Goal 1: Implement an effective comprehensive countywide hazard mitigation plan. Objective 1.1: Educate the public, elected officials, and other key stakeholders in Orange County on the application of mitigation practices and the benefits of mitigation. Objective 1.2: Identify and pursue methodologies that will enhance mitigation successes. Objective 1.3: Integrate mitigation practices throughout county and municipal plans, programs, and policies. Goal 2: Support county, municipal, and regional mitigation strategies. Objective 2.1: Maintain current risk assessment information in coordination with local communities. Objective 2.2: Assist in integrating hazard mitigation into county and municipal planning efforts, such as ordinances, policies, and procedures. SECTION 4 — Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 112 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Objective 2.3: Ensure communities are aware of available mitigation funding sources and their cycles. Objective 2.4: Assist local planning efforts in the integration of new information, data, research, and emerging trends for disasters and their potential consequences. Objective 2.5: Conduct all possible actions to mitigate hazards identified in the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy. Goal 3: Increase public, non-profit, and private sector awareness of, support for, and involvement in hazard mitigation. Objective 3.1: Work with other local jurisdictions and area entities to incorporate mitigation concepts and information into their outreach efforts. Objective 3.2: Educate private sector in Orange County about potential hazards, vulnerabilities, mitigation concepts, and partnership opportunities. Objective 3.3: Educate risk management and insurance entities on mitigation incentives for residents, non-profits, private sector, municipalities, and county agencies. Objective 3.4: Support hazard mitigation research and development of public outreach events promoting the message of the benefits of mitigation in the community. Goal 4: Support mitigation initiatives and policies that protect the county's culture, commerce and economy, tourism, residences, transportation systems, recreation and natural resources. Objective 4.1: Continue to identify potentially vulnerable areas and support smart growth and development in Orange County. Objective 4.2: Support land acquisition programs that reduce or eliminate potential future losses due to natural hazards and that are compatible with the protection of culture or natural resources. Objective 4.3: Support restoration and conservation of natural resources wherever possible. Objective 4.4: Seek mitigation opportunities that reduce economic losses and promote responsible growth. Objective 4.5: Retrofit existing county and local facilities. Objective 4.6: Participate in activities that will further the county and local SECTION 4—Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 113 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 government's ability to plan for and mitigate the impacts of future vulnerability. Objective 4.7: Coordinate effective partnerships between county and local jurisdictions for floodplain management. Authorities, Policies, Programs, and Resources Orange County currently utilizes several existing planning mechanisms, such as comprehensive land use planning, comprehensive emergency management planning, post-disaster redevelopment strategies, capital improvement planning, and building codes to guide mitigation efforts in County. The adopted Local Mitigation Strategy recommends that local municipalities address natural hazard planning and mitigation measures in their comprehensive plans. Land use regulations or flood plain ordinances that are currently in place are an excellent beginning. The incorporation of other policies or programs, such as the Community Rating System or Firewise Community standards, would also help to expand and/or improve their current mitigation practices at the most local level possible. Specifically, one of the goals of the Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group is to "support mitigation initiatives and policies that protect the county's culture, commerce and economy, tourism, residences, transportation systems, recreation and natural resources." The Orange County Growth Management Department will conduct periodic reviews of the County's comprehensive plans and land use policies, analyze any plan amendments, and provide technical assistance to other local municipalities in implementing these requirements. The Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) is a critical component of the County's emergency operations and response plan that is implemented by the OEM. This plan provides the overall direction of the Orange County Emergency Response Team (OCERT). In addition, the Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan (PDRP) is a strategic plan that will be used to oversee long-term recovery efforts following an incident. It is recommended that future iterations of these plans incorporate mitigation planning as part of the transition plan following a disaster and during or after the recovery. The capital improvement planning that occurs in the future will also contribute to the goals in the Local Mitigation Strategy to incorporate mitigation measures to county and local government buildings prior to new construction. Related to this are building codes that are largely implemented at a state level with Florida Building Codes. They are a necessary component of shelter retrofits and hardening projects to ensure that critical facilities are operational before, during, and after hazards have occurred. Orange County will review and revise the Local Mitigation Strategy to meet the changing needs of the county. This review process will ensure that pre-disaster planning and mitigation initiatives are attainable and cost effective. SECTION 4 —Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 114 A Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Strategies for Implementation One of the main aims for this most recent iteration of the Local Mitigation Strategy was to allow the document to become more "strategic,"and focus less on the minutia and "wish-list" mentality that the document had become. In order to accomplish this, a thorough analysis of each of the projects had to be conducted. Previously, the 2009- 2010 Plan contained approximately 250 "Current-Active" on a large spread sheet with projects dating back to 1999. The vast majority of the projects were added in 2005 following Hurricanes Charlie, Frances, and Jeanne. By 2012, the number of projects was reduced to about 160 separate projects as several had been completed. Most projects were either deferred until a later time when funds or resources became available. Many were just deleted due to inactivity. Much of the specific information for each of the projects had been lost due several reasons, including: turnover in staff at each of the varying sponsoring agencies, changes in priorities, or a lack of available mitigation grant funding. Many of the projects had sat on the priority list for nearly a decade without any further consideration or evaluation as to whether they were achievable projects that could be completed. In addition, the scoring of the projects was incomplete as the project evaluation categories were left off of the main spreadsheet. In 2015, the LMS Planning Committee decided that it would be best for the Orange County LMS Working Group to adopt a simplified project priority list. The overhaul of the outdated project list would allow flexibility for a variety of projects, encourage more "shovel-ready" projects, as well as provide a more strategic platform for mitigation projects in Orange County. In looking at the existing projects and their descriptions, the Planning Committee found several trends in the types of projects that had been submitted over the years. The Committee developed eight (8) broad based projects with nine (9) additional sub-projects as a starting point for a new priority list. This single change in the Project Priority List represents a fairly substantial change in goals, objectives, and priorities as defined in the previous 2009-2010 Local Mitigation Strategy. It helps to move the Project Priority List away from a "wish list" and into a list of actionable items. It aids in the strategic composition of the mitigation plan and allows stakeholders to move away from a competitive perspective and into a more collaborative mindset. Having a proactive project priority list also makes the Working Group and sponsoring organizations more likely to pursue mitigation grant funds. SECTION 4 —Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 115 e Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Table 35—Orange County LMS Strategic Projects Rank Project Name & Description 1 Improve Stormwater Drainage Measures 1.1 Perform Engineering Studies 1.2 Retrofit and Upgrade Flood Control Devices for New and Existing Structures 1.3 Clear Waterways of Debris 1.4 Elevate Structures in Floodplains 2 Provide Public Outreach and Responder Training 3 Harden and Retrofit New and Existing Structures 3.1 Emergency Shelter Retrofits 3.2 Perform Engineering Studies 3.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure for New and Existing Structures 3.4 Back-Up Power Systems and Generators 3.5 Historic Preservation 4 Identify and Detect Hazards 5 Purchase and Install Emergency Notification Systems 6 Acquire Property and Equipment 7 Enhance Public Safety and Prevention Efforts 8 Preserve and Restore Environmentally Sensitive Areas Source: Orange County LMS Project Priority List 2016-08-10 The next page contains the entire Orange County Project Priority List that identifies each project, the components of its score with a total priority score, the location or responsible agency/jurisdiction for implementing the project, the hazard(s) mitigated, as well as any relevant mitigation goals and/or objectives that are established through this plan. In addition, the Project Priority List includes potential mitigation funding sources, if applicable matching funds are required, along with an estimated cost of the project and an estimated timeframe to completion. This Project Priority List was a complete reimagining of the mitigation cycle and process, so all of the projects are new; none have been deferred or deleted at this point. Many of these projects are strategic in nature, so while an individual mitigation task or initiative may have a completion timeframe, several of the overarching projects are ongoing or continuing projects that will continue to be applicable for several years to come. SECTION 4—Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 116 • Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL M7IGAT1ON STRATEGY PROJECT PRIORITY UST-210116 ..cd.lowsrs a>qc cf '::::.ii. `a1 ?� r ` :. a 4/1"0:N ` '`#` oda it tat c� ,�'a` ` .3';', 'Qct b• , i°� ye��` }�e`' <It Baa 6 c� ad a� Qct Qct &- •..• ' ♦. %. ` lb\ W ce O 4 ,fr 2't ,r - 1 Dr<inaa<Improve hkaca titer 3 1 2 4 3 4 2 4 3 2 I 31 All Jeriedielione Flood: 4.5.4.7 FMAP.1fi104.PEM Ye: 187.466,440 Current NIA 1Ycar P"'"En OrInge Couwy, grworrnq 2 2 3 2 2 3 4 3 3 3 I 28 Orlando. Flood: L2,4.4 FMAP,HMGP,POM Ye-. 5835,000 Currant WA 6Mowh: et Stndi<e Eateaville Retrofit and Upgrade Orange County, Floods, Flood control Device: 1 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 2 1 27 Orlando' Sink6ole•.ILand. 4.5,4.7 FMAP,MMOP.POM Yee 171.341.053 Corrnt WA tTear For New ad Existing Winder One .1Y.ideec1 12 Structure: Ranger Orainagy, Clear Waterw1104 3 3 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 2 1 27 0rang1Couwy. Floods 4.3 FMAP,IIMGP,PDM Yee 513,734,387 Grant WA 1Year t) Debris Orlando _ Ek""St"'"'"Strvcturi2 1 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 1 26 Orange County Floods 4.7 EMAP,HMG'',POM Ye: 0850.000 Current WA (Year 14 Floodolain: , Ai,Haemds, 2 Provide Public Outreach 3 2 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 0 31 OOrange County, 0,,......, 11,1.1 PDCCPM,EMPG,SHSGP.Ye: 860,000 Carets WA 6Mowhs and Responder Training coee Pandemic Widfir< Harden and Retrofit New F J and Esi,tina Svuctwe. 4 3 I 4 2 3 2 3 3 2 1 24 All Jaindictloas Ag,4la:all 44,4.1 HM M GP,PD ,CMG Yee $22.187,382 Cxreat WA (Year Emttq<ncy Shclt<r Croaga County, Ail�haards, Retrofit: 3 3 I 4 2 l 2 4 3 2 1 23 Orl�y�.�yy Tr NS 45 1M GP,PDM,C08G tr 16,300,000 Carew WA IYcm ).1 Eatohe�i SlCF Trak., Fncme Pea wm Engineering 2 2 1 2 2 l 4 3 3 3 I 23 dangeLouwy, All�j4aude, 12.44 WIMP,4131.1.C300 Yes 1740,000 Corral WA 6Moaths 1a studiesOrlao ods r ndFloOrange Conan, All Maa>rdc, Conical Facilities and Orlando.Belle E11r<me We a,n0tere for New 3 2 I 0 2 4 2 4 3 1 1 27 Me.Ealonwla. Tempermans, 4.4 HMGP.PDM.C1380 Yes 111.538.102 Current WA 21'am: 2nd(1111,19 Stru<rara a UCF,Ranger Floods.Tropical 31 _ Canaria4.14411. Back-Up Power SY<tcmc Orange Cant', ATI-Haaards, 2 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 3 1 25 Orlando. 44 HMGP,PDM,008G Yes 42.378,843 Carats WA 6 Month: ad Generators Windermere, Floods ).e Hierork Prelervation I 2 2 3 2 3 2 3 2 1 1 22 0,4r.dOrangCoati, Floods,Tropical 4A HMGP,PDM,C13803 Ye: 4625.141 Cement WA 2Year: )s On>nde Syyteens AII�Hemde, 4 Idaw ify and Detect l 3 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 0 27 Orange County, Sinkholes tl and. 21.11.1.1 D Ha:xdc Winter Park Sabsid<wgS<vcre Pm. Yes 5370,000 Conant WA 6Month: Theaderslormc Purchase 1641n:tall All-Henardc, 5 EMrgency Notisic<lion 4 3 2 2 1 1 3 3 4 3 0 26 UCF Severe 3.1,3.4 EM PG.UASI,511SOP Ye: 13.016,000 Carent WA 6 Months Suetenn - - Thunder:lorna Acquit Property and orange eounq' AIbHnrde, 6 2 2 1 3 2 3 2 2 3 3 1 24 Orlando.Belle 42 HM DP,DOM.'MAP Ye: 516288,000 currant WA 6 Month: Egaipawnt Isle 11CF Flood: 7 CnAann public S'l'y and 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 0 24 Orlando AII-Ha:ards 22 EM PG.UASI,SHSOP Yes 11,500.000 Carew WA 1Year Proration Effgres Prc:erre ad Restore Flood:,Sevara NM OP.COBQ DDM, 6 Env.ranmutally Sensitive 3 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 1 1 23 Orlando Thunderstorms, 4.3 FMAP Y<: 12.650.000 Carew WA 2Year: Areas Treokal 01eterre SECTION 4-Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 117 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Prioritization Methodology • Sponsoring agencies can submit new projects for consideration, or they can propose a more detailed "initiative"that is related to a project or sub-project. The initiatives will be evaluated using a more objective methodology through an initiative submittal form that was developed by the Planning Committee. The submittal form will collect the necessary information from the initiative sponsor for each task so that it can be properly assessed by the Planning Committee. The intended result will be a better mitigation action item for implementation that will not sit on a wish list for several years. A copy of the "Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS) Project Submission Form Template can be found in Annex 1. There is also a copy of the complete guidance document that accompanies the submittal form and provides sponsors with the framework necessary to complete the application in Annex 2. The submittal form looks at a total of ten (10) components with responses ranging from a score of zero (0) to four (4) points; there is also a one (1) point tie breaker question for environmental acceptability. The highest potential score is forty-one (41) points. The scoring methodology below was designed to be as objective as possible and account for various types of sponsoring agencies, organizations, and jurisdictions. Below is an excerpt from the submittal form guidance that explains the score values and walk applicants through the form. 1. Select from the drop down menu the estimated total population number that will receive a benefit from this project. Benefits may be direct or indirect. 0 — Less than 10,000 people benefited 1 — 10,000 to 24,999 people benefited 2 — 25,000 to 74,999 people benefited 3 — 75,000 to 149,999 people benefited 4 — 150,000 or more people benefited 2. Select from the drop down menu the percentage of the population that will benefit from this project. A percentage measurement will help provide leverage for communities that do not have large population numbers. This percentage should directly correlate to the total population from Item 8. 0— Less than 5% benefited 1 — 5% to 24% benefited 2 — 25% to 49% benefited 3 — 50% to 74% benefited 4— More than 75% benefited 3. Select form the drop down menu the estimated cost of the project. This is the monetary cost to implement the project based upon estimates or quotes. The approximation should be as accurate as possible. SECTION 4—Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 118 A Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 0 — More than $5,000,000 1 — $1,000,000 to $4,999,999 2 — $250,000 to $999,999 3 — Less than $249,000 4 — No Cost ($0) 4. Select from the drop down menu the cost benefit of the project. The cost benefit includes any possible outcomes that the project may produce. This assessment may be based on monetary benefits like damages avoided for buildings, inventory, and contents; non-monetary benefits, such as protection of life or safety, may be more difficult to quantify. 0 — No cost Benefit ($0) 1 — Less than $249,999 2 — $250,000 to $999,999 3 — $1,000,000 to $4,999,999 4 — More than $5,000,000 5. Enter the estimated benefit to cost ratio. The benefit to cost ratio will consist of the total cost benefit of the initiative (Item 11) divided by the total expense of the initiative (Item 10). This number should be at least 1.0 or higher, meaning that all potential projects should provide greater benefits than costs. 0— Less than 1.00 1 — Between 1.00 and 1.49 2 — Between 1.50 and 1.99 3 — Between 2.00 and 2.49 4— Greater than 2.50 6. Select from the drop down list whether the proposed project is consistent with other plans and/or programs. This may involve researching various county/municipal documents, such as the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan, the Post- Disaster Redevelopment Plan, the Community Wildfire Protection Plan, the Floodplain Management Plan, the Capital Improvement Plan, or other programs, studies, or feasibility assessments. Projects do not have to be listed specifically by name, only that they are consistent with the mission, purpose, and/or scope of the reference plan or program. 0 — Initiative may be inconsistent with other plans or programs 1 — Initiative is not listed in another plan or program 2 — Initiative is included in one other plan or program 3 — Initiative is included in two other plans or programs 4 — Initiative is included in several other plans or programs SECTION 4 —Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 119 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 In addition, please list all associated plans or programs below the dropdown in the text box that include the project for consistency. When applicable, at least one (1) plan or program should be included to demonstrate consistency. 7. Select from the drop down menu the feasibility of implementation. This category involves how easy a project may be to complete, or the amount of time it will take to accomplish/implement. Factors to take into account when estimating the feasibility may include the physical location, scale or scope of the project, costs and expenses, population affected, susceptibility to other hazards, etc. 0— Very difficult to put into place due to extremely complex requirements 1 — Difficult to put in place because of significantly complex requirements 2 — Somewhat difficult to put in place because of complex requirements 3 — Not anticipated to be difficult to put in place 4— Relatively easy to put in place within 1 year 8. Select from the drop down menu the probability of community acceptance. This item may involve surveying the community, analyzing demographic information, and/or determining the need of the project where the project will be implemented. Sensitive issues may impact the scoring for this item. This category is intended to serve as a kind of"litmus test"of the population and its views on the project(s). 0 —Would be strongly opposed by nearly all of the population 1 — Would be strongly opposed by a significant percentage of the community 2 — Would be somewhat controversial with a small percentage of the community 3 — Of benefit only to those directly affected and would not adversely affect others 4— Likely to be endorsed by the entire community 9. Select from the drop down menu the probability of receiving funding. This question is related to Item 5, as funding sources may be intended for particular mitigation projects to address a certain hazard, timeline for implementation, or type of project proposed. 0— No potential funding identified/likely 1 — Only source of funding is a mitigation grant for full funding 2 — Grant funding likely but difficult to obtain the match portion 3 — Local match is readily available 4 — Full funding from local budget 10.5elect from the drop down menu the estimated time needed to complete the project. This includes the total time needed upon receiving funding until competition. This may involve calculating feasibility of implementation, cost, location, and population impact. 0 — Greater than two (2) years SECTION 4 —Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 120 eOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 1 —Two (2) years 2 — One (1) year 3 — Six (6) months 4— Less than six (6) months 11.Select from the drop down menu the project's environmental acceptability. Some projects may contain a component where any work that is performed must meet guidelines that limit or reduce the environmental impacts. Environmental acceptability may require back-up documentation, such as an Environmental & Historic Preservation (EHP) determination form, environmental impact analysis/assessment, engineering study/report, etc. These do not have to be provided at the time of submittal of the project, but they may be requested if a project is submitted for grant funding consideration. This question will be used as a "tiebreaker,"so the project sponsors should select their choice for evaluation by the Planning Committee. 1 — Yes 0 — Not Applicable -1 — No Once the Project Submission Form is completed, there are several options on the electronic form in the top left corner that you may select: Clear Form, E-Mail Form, Print Form, or Save Form. The form should be sent electronically using the "E-mail Form" button, which will automatically send your form to the current LMS Coordinator and to the Orange County Office of Emergency Management (OEM) at ocoem@ocfl.net. You will be sent an e-mail response once your project has been received for review. You may also select the "Print Form" button to print a copy of the form for your records. Please do not send a hardcopy of the form or a scanned printout of the form to the LMS Coordinator; only e- mail the electronic form. The Orange County LMS Planning Committee will review submitted projects at their next meeting. The Planning Committee will review the Project Submittal Form's self- assessment and determine if it agrees with the responses selected. Upon review, the Planning Committee will either deny the project request or it will recommend the project for approval. If the project is denied, the LMS Coordinator will send an e-mail to the primary and secondary contact informing them of the Planning Committee's decision and the explanation of denial. The LMS Coordinator may ask for further information from the sponsor, or suggest that the project be revised and resubmitted for consideration by the Planning Committee. If the project is recommended for approval, the form will be signed by the Planning Committee Chair and will present the Committee's recommendation to the whole Working Group at the next meeting. The Working Group will take a vote to approve the project and add it to the Project Priority List. The Chair of the Working Group will sign the form for the approved project. SECTION 4 —Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 121 A Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 To ensure that the project is reviewed in a timely manner, it should be submitted to the LMS Coordinator or Orange County OEM four (4) weeks prior to the regularly scheduled LMS Working Group Quarterly Meetings. These meetings usually occur the second Wednesday of February, May, August, and November each year. Please note that due to unforeseen circumstances; these meetings may be moved and will be noticed to the Orange County Office for Agenda Development with the correct date and time. Plan Update and Project Progress This plan is a completely new update from previous Local Mitigation Strategies that takes a much more strategic approach to mitigation and how it views projects. The prioritization methodology places emphasis on a prepared approach to mitigation tasks and initiatives. The update has taken a couple of years from the initial vision to its completion with input from a variety of sources, public agencies and jurisdictions at all levels of government, non-profits, and even the private sector. Since the approval of the initial Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy, there has been a great deal of progress. Over 152 mitigation projects have been completed since 1999. A total of 38 projects have been deferred, mostly due to lack of funding, changing priorities, or changes in sponsoring agency/jurisdiction personnel. Only 18 projects have been deleted as many of the projects were no longer needed or further development in the county and its jurisdictions made the project no longer necessary. In order to preserve the historicity of this progress, these projects have been maintained, but as they are no longer as relevant to the County's overall mitigation strategy and direction, they will not continue to be tracked on the current projects list. Further information can be found in Appendix D. SECTION 4 —Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 122 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Appendix A — Orange County LMS Updates and Public Participation List of Meetings: LMS Working Group Meeting, February 12, 2014 LMS working Group Meeting, June 11, 2014 LMS Working Group Meeting, November 12, 2014 LMs Working Group Meeting, February 18, 2015 LMS Working Group Meeting, May 6, 2015 LMS Planning Committee Meeting, November 11, 2015 LMS Working Group Meeting, November 18, 2015 LMS Planning committee Meeting, December 16, 2015 LMS Working Group Meeting, February 10, 2016 LMS Working Group Meeting, May 3, 2016 LMS Working Group Meeting, August 10, 2016 APPENDIX A— Orange County LMS Updates and Public Participation Page 123 AGENDA Local Mitigation Strategy Meeting E Wednesday, February 12, 2014 10:00 a.m. Orange County Emergency Operations Center 6590 Amory Ct. Winter Park, FL 32792 I. Welcome and Introductions II. Previous Information A. *Approval of Meeting Minutes from November 13, 2013 B. Working Group Membership Update C. Current Projects Update III. New Information A. *New Initiatives B. State Hazard Mitigation Plan Newsletter C. Other Handouts and Publications D. Be Ready Florida presents `Making Mitigation Happen" Workshop (refer to flyer) E. Project Submittal Form Guidance Document for Implementation F. LMS 2014-2015 Update 1. Goals and Objectives 2. Planning Committee Meeting Schedule 3. Hazards and Data Profiles G. Hazards Awareness IV. Presentations A. Claudia Lozano - FDEM Mitigation Bureau, "How a Project Becomes a Contract" B. Safe Rooms for Orange County V. Open Discussion VI. Upcoming Meetings (tentative) May 21, 2014 Orlando Emergency Operations Center 1 110 George DeSalvia Way Orlando, FL 32807 August 13,2014+ Orange County EOC November 12,2014 TBD February 11, 2015 Orange County EOC 4 Meetings coincide with OCERT Meeting dates * Denotes Action Item Cr�� r g\,,,,,,,,._ v� O bo / M ii o '{� d CSS �- i f (� C� go 4 3.. 2 ! .b .,v `g - 0 Jt 0 s VO 1 M (� do ++ a M a r co do r 00 ° rt- o 0 2 2 c) 4_ 4) g ' t) t io CI_ z F- >" o o z 4 0 �J QU • o '� _ %615r - d) W W ki -- '1'i V U f o. �- C7 1 c o E . , � ''1 g 3 ` A f 2,'--I. ( \I z a ' � `fin -� W fp > O O Ce = 2I U --1 T-1' t .-14-' -)>K0 .„.-L a cu ....+ N 1 O -a z5 O . a 2 "I re c zZ .ri -;1 f P" , 1 C.:1- z ` : a ==_ O c L v c o 'Lit! -4cc Wu > c S • ` z 06 CC L. W O z c4 3 z' O 0 CZa. k.6 1 47 .____ , , 'CI 'C"Tmi 0-' 04141° i 6V jr" (s- .. - .;4‘ "1 cu l Fri.; ,, .GtLl '+'!G r ri 1111V- 'ki kis.. r M. O IN sai z E — 0 40 VI cU Z CD --i. a. cc a o � g `t W ao L W a t (9 1 >- W :2 Q z c o 0 W co S o W N O o 2 w +-a N Q � J WCC c > a � CDi L.) 0 o W V 0 tip cu ~ z .• Z W Q Ce 6. 'du 0 ,..,..z .--r- -I W Q o (41 . 0 ,... ...._._ .. , ,,e • 1 ..,,t,- -, y, --,- 0 cI 4.-„ , „ %, + P I nowci '._rte—■► , ,.WII.0 ed .�' Orange County is Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group ) Wednesday,February 12,2014 10:00 a.m. MINUTES A meeting of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group was held Wednesday,February 12, 2014,at 10:00 a.m.,at the Orange County Emergency Operations Center in Winter Park,Florida. Mr. Soto called the meeting to order at 10:00 a.m.with the following members: PRESENT Greg Fisher—Rollins College Manan Pathak—Orange County Planning Division Jen Fleischman—University of Central Florida Bayrex Rodriguez—Rollins College Jim Hunt—City of Orlando Manny Soto,Chair—City of Orlando Emergency Hayley Markman—University of Central Florida Management Daniel Negron—Orange County Public Works Orville Watson—Orange County Utilities Guests: Spencer Kostus,Lake County Emergency Management;Claudia Lozano and Levan Zhizhilashvili, State of Florida Division of Emergency Management Mitigation Bureau LMS Staff Present: Jason Taylor,LMS Coordinator WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS Mr. Soto welcomed everyone said it was good to see those present. He asked everyone to introduce themselves. II. PREVIOUS INFORMATION A. *Approval of Meeting Minutes from November 13,2013 Mr. Hunt made a motion to approve the meeting minutes from November 13, 2013; seconded by Mr. Watson. Motion carried unanimously. B. Working Group Membership Update Mr.Taylor asked if there were any membership updates or suggestions. Mr.Joseph Mastandrea now works for Hillsborough County and Mr. Taylor suggested inviting Ms. Jennifer Rodriguez as his replacement. Municipalities are still a vital component of the LMS that are not being represented at the meetings. Risk Management/Facilities had prior representation on the working group,but due to turnover,there are not currently any participants. Mr.Taylor will reach out to these departments. C. Current Projects Updates Mr.Taylor asked if there were any changes to the Current Projects List. Ms. Fleischman stated that there were four(4)projects that could be removed as"Completed"from the Project Priority List. The City of Orlando stormwater projects are moving along,but Mr.Hunt added that they will need to find staff to manage these projects as they spend down some of their reserve funds for the fiscal years. They are working on three (3) Repetitive Flood Loss (RFL) projects, with one (1) project already resolved with a drainage improvement. There are no further project updates and no other projects were mentioned as being underway at this time. D. *Review Changes to the Initiatives List There were no changes to the Initiatives List at this time. No further discussion followed. 1 IH. NEW INFORMATION This item was placed on hold for later in the meeting so that the guest speakers could make their presentation. IV. PRESENTATIONS A. FDEM Mitigation Bureau,"How a Project Becomes a Contract" Ma Claudia Lozano and Mr. Levan Zhizhilashvili gave a presentation the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and the steps a potential project goes through to become a completed mitigation project. The purpose of this presentation was to provide information to Working Group members that a project goes through to be submitted and in order to be enacted. Mr. Taylor will have a copy of their presentation for any who are interested in seeing it IH. NEW INFORMATION A. New Initiatives 1. Additional project suggestions or ranking Mr. Taylor asked if there were any new projects to be added to the LMS. This item is on hold until the new Project Priority List Ranking Matrix is finally implemented. Mr. Taylor would like to develop new metrics as part of the LMS Plan revision process to reduce duplication of effort. B. State Hazard Mitigation Plan Newsletter The State's Newsletter was not available this quarter due to personnel changes at the State. Mr. Taylor will be sure to include the newsletter for the next meeting. C. Other Handouts and Publications Mr.Taylor had a couple of other handouts available,including a Notice of Funding Availability for a disaster declaration for Severe Storms and Flooding in North Florida. A FEMA checklist for power outages was also distributed. Mr. Taylor also had a copy of a large document detailing Recommended Integration Practices: Strengthening the Floodplain Portions of the Local Mitigation Strategy"if anyone was interested in reviewing it. D. Be Ready Florida presents"Making Mitigation Happen"Workshop Mr.Taylor passed out a flyer for the"Making Mitigation Happen" Workshop to be held on Saturday, May 17th at Orange County's Internal Operations Center in Orlando. This workshop has been held in the past at the City of Orlando's Emergency Operations Center. Mr.Taylor was planning to attend as a representative of the Orange County LMS Working Group to let attendees know about its existence. E. Project Submittal Form Guidance Document for Implementation Mr. Taylor passed out the Priority List Project Submittal Form Guidance Document. This guide will help project applicants to fdl out the new project font that will be utilized by the LMS Working Group's Planning Committee. The Committee will be able to better rank incoming projects and provide feedback to applicants as to the individual values of the scoring criteria. Mr.Taylor asked the Working Group to please review this document and send any revisions or additions to him in two weeks'time so that he could incorporate those suggestions. F. LMS 2014-2015 Update Mr.Taylor gave an update on the status of the LMS Plan Revision process. The Planning Committee met on January 15, 2014 to revise the Working Groups Goals and Objectives. In an effort to be in sync with the state, the Planning Committee suggested Goals and Objectives based on the State's Enhanced Hazard Mitigation Plan and whittled the Goals down to four(4)headings: I. Implement an effective comprehensive countywide hazard mitigation plan. 2 2. Support county,municipal,and regional mitigation strategies. 3. Increase public,non-profit,and private sector awareness of,support for,and involvement in hazard mitigation. 4. Support mitigation initiatives and policies that protect the county's culture, commerce and economy, tourism, residences, transportation systems, recreation and natural resources. Each goal has subsequent objectives; these are significantly reduced from the previous plan and are more focused on the mitigation aspects instead of response. The Planning Committee should start to meet regularly in order to tackle the revisions that will need to be made. It is Mr.Taylor's goal to have the draft submitted to the State by the end of September so that they can review the document. However,substantive contributions from the Planning Committee will be needed,so it is imperative that the group meet frequently during this time frame. The next component will be putting together the hazard profiles and identifying any new vulnerable areas of the county. G. Hazards Awareness Mr.Taylor explained that the purpose of the Hazards Awareness is to allow members of the Working Group to share information concerning trends or upcoming potential hazards to all areas of Orange County. Mr. Fisher informed the group that former Governor Jeb Hush would be at the Rollins College campus on March 20 for a speaking engagement. Ms. Fleischman and UCF will be holding KNIGHTSHARE,a public outreach event that will have static displays and other booths/vendors on their campus on March 17-21. Mr.Negron stated that lake levels around Orange County are at below normal levels, so there is very low risk of flooding as we go into early spring. Mr. Soto announced that February 24-28 is Hazardous Weather Awareness Week and that them will be social media pushes being distributed by the city of Orlando,Orange County, and Orange County Public Schools. There is also some potential for severe weather tonight. No further discussion followed. IV. PRESENTATIONS(CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS) B. Safe Rooms for Orange County Mr. Taylor brought up a citizen request concerning the adding of a home safe-room to the County's LMS Project Priority List. His concerns were that if we do this for one home-owner,there will be an expectation that we do it for all. The addition of a project onto the list is not a guarantee for funding though,but there may be other ways to help;for instance,a residential mitigation outreach project or a "catch-all" project. Mr. Pathak added that perhaps our group should talk to the Home Owners' Associations in the county to offer such a project. A project like this would be contingent on an HMGP,which would mean a presidentially declared disaster. No further discussion followed. V. OPEN DISCUSSION Mr. Taylor opened the floor to Open Discussion for other awareness items or upcoming events. Ms. Fleischman is drafting a letter to the State in order for UCF to become a jurisdiction to be included under the Orange County LMS. No further discussion followed. 3 VI. UPCOMING MEETINGS The next meeting will be .. • -__... -. e :- -:::: Cserg.,DeSelvie-Way-ia Orlando,FL lune 11, 2014 at the Orange County Emergency Operations Center located at 6590 Amory Ct.in Winter Park,FL. Upcoming Meetings August 13,2014+ November 12,2014 (TBD) February 11,2015+ May 13,2015 (TBD) + Meetings coincide with OCERT Meeting dates No further discussion followed. VII. *ADJOURNMENT There being no further business,the meeting adjourned at 12:03 p.m. *Denotes action item 4 Meeting Notice f1 + Board Name: Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy lJ 4 Working Group r, AT Date: WEDNESDAY, June 11th, 2014 Location: Orange County Emergency Operations Center fit WEityWNT r..+• 6590 Amory Ct. Winter Park, FL 32792 Time: 10:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. For further information call (407) 836-9805. Section 286.01.05,Florida Statutes states that If a person decides to appeal any decision made by a board, agency,or commission with respect to any matter considered at a meeting or hearing,he or she will need a record of the proceedings,and that,for such purpose,he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal Is to be basad. In accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), If any person with a disability as defined by the ADA needs special accommodation to participate in this proceeding, then not later than two business days prior to the proceeding,he or she should contact the Orange County Communications Division at(407)836-5631. Para mayor informacidn en espanol,per favor flame al(407)836-3111. i3D. p This form was developed by Orange County Agenda Development Office. Alterations to this form's layout or wording are not permitted. To contact Agenda Development, please phone(407)-836-5426. `JRO[MCY� yCT AGENDA Q Local Mitigation Strategy Meeting ' ) Wednesday, June 11, 2014 ('!` . 1000 a.m. Orange County Emergency Operations Center 6590 Amory Ct. Winter Park, FL 32792 I. Welcome and Introductions II. Previous Information A. *Approval of Meeting Minutes from February 12, 2014 B. Working Group Membership Update C. Current Projects Update III. New Information A. *New Initiatives B. Handouts and Publications C. LMS 2014-2015 Update 1. Goals and Objectives 2. Hazards and Data Profiles 3. Planning Committee Meeting Schedule D. Hazards Awareness IV. Presentations A. Manny Soto — City of Orlando Emergency Management, "2014 Hurricane Season Preview" B. Clint Kromhout - FDEP Florida Geological Survey, "Sinkhole Pilot Study" V. Open Discussion VI. Upcoming Meetings (tentative) August 13,2014+ Orange County EOC November 12,2014 TBD February 11,2015 Orange County EOC May 13,2015 TBD + Meetings coincide with OCERT Meeting dates * Denotes Action Item yoa, \'yap W ov l ,j P '� 1 PA I W w A `O S Q H r W CU -1--) C ' '.I� r CO V1 [ J ,d g _o2 ......- ) -----V ---t)" ...1.-. d - q qi 4 • _ z CL d act f ti L cam- .- 3 ‘ 7.1', `i i C r--' (t./ ',....- , ,....„.4 __.....„ >. ,,., ._. - 1 , W /ry > o 4- © e� 0 ce .1/ to o 4 i' , W v —I xJ 3 :- '-- w .11 W Ce C Ip Qom , a ) -s ``6 - r.� w ��` •- ' i \-1- � ___S _._,_ C w Or r u ° o L 4 C W V ° �r1 '. WG) H •• c- \._____---) r S> ..) ►u S LLI al 1 t......., _4, - ---2 i-2. ---6 .1._ c3 O 0 , 1 0 4 i A ..;i_ ......, v .4._, .,__ .-.\--- .1.4 ..,4i?.. -.. J 04 a = .-_,- tjt:‘ .‘ i 16kA Nr i ,,,1 a w. LLI C r rt; Z E UJ W IV tIl MI t s Z C13u < . 2 = o) u o ce 5 = a. i b @) $ 0 U w L 0 0 (') p E c % • ) ›- W 1 V fo WQ y3 � CCv, o - -- LU - = 2oZ WGC c71-1 U. 20 r V N -- - 8 L � J Z CU W V p o W V • Z bp 2W CC L W 0 3 w If 0 LI 4- : - en - 0 3 t1 ' r / An 2 a"--1 40 no CL T :. IdOrange County I. Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group Elired Wednesday,June 11,2014 10:00 a.m. MINUTES A meeting of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group was held Wednesday,June 11,2014, at 10:00 a.m.,at the Orange County Emergency Operations Center in Winter Park,Florida. Mr.Soto called the meeting to order at 10:07 a.m.with the following members: PRESENT Michael Baker—Orange County Public Works Lee-Ann Snipes—City of Orlando Jen Fleischman—University of Central Florida Manny Soto,Chair—City of Orlando Emergency Cliff Frazier—Florida Forestry Service Management Nate Haney—Orange County Public Works Rich Steiger—Orange County Facilities Hayley Markman—University of Central Florida Management Tanya Naylor—Reedy Creek Emergency Orville Watson—Orange County Utilities Management Lihua Wei—City of Orlando Daniel Negron—Orange County Public Works Guests: Clint Kromhout—Florida Department of Environmental Protection,Florida Geological Survey LMS Staff Present: Jason Taylor,LMS Coordinator I. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS Mr. Soto welcomed everyone said it was good to see those present. He asked everyone to introduce themselves. II. PREVIOUS INFORMATION A. *Approval of Meeting Minutes from February 12,2014 Mr. Watson made a motion to approve the meeting minutes from February 12,2014; seconded by Mr. Frazier. Motion carried unanimously. B. Working Group Membership Update Mr.Taylor asked if there were any membership updates or suggestions. It was suggested by Mr. Soto that the Membership Roster be sent out to the Working Group to review and suggest other members. Mr.Taylor will send out the roster prior to the next meeting. No names were added at this time. C. Current Projects Updates Mr. Taylor asked if there were any changes to the Current Projects List. Ms. Fleischman stated that she had sent a list to Mr.Taylor a couple of weeks ago for their completed or closed out projects. Ms. Snipes added that she is working on the City of Orlando's list for their projects,but would like to use the new form that is under development. Mr.Taylor added that the new form needs to be modified to reflect the new LMS Plan Update. There are no further project updates and no other projects were mentioned as being underway at this time. No further discussion followed. III. NEW INFORMATION A. New Initiatives 1. Additional project suggestions or ranking 1 Mr. Taylor stated that this agenda item is on hold until the new Project Priority List Ranking Matrix is finally implemented. The Planning Committee will be developing new metrics as part of the LMS Plan revision process at an upcoming meeting. Mr.Taylor had discussed with Mr. Reed Knowlton a possible mitigation project regarding the Orange County Courthouse. Mr. Haney asked if there are funding sources that might be available to harden the Public Works Building. Mr. Taylor explained that there were not,at this time,larger grant funds available for that magnitude of a project;however, there are some smaller funds,like the Pre-Disaster Mitigation(PDM)grant that might be applicable. B. Handouts and Publications Mr. Taylor had a couple of other handouts available, including the State Hazard Mitigation Plan Newsletter, a series on Wildfires and the Wildland Urban Interface(WUI). Other handouts included outreach materials used by the Office of Emergency Management. C. LMS 2014-2015 Update Mr.Taylor gave an update on the status of the LMS Plan Revision process. 1. The Goals and Objectives were discussed at our previous meeting. No changes at this time. 2. Hazard and Data Profiles were discussed by the Planning Committee at their previous meeting on March 26ib,2014;most of the hazards were identified and the Committee will be collecting information on the frequency of the occurrences, their impacts,vulnerable areas,and associated risks. 3. Planning Committee Schedule will be once about every three to four weeks until the Plan is complete. The next meeting will be scheduled for June 25th,2014 at 10:00 a.m. D. Hazards Awareness Mr.Taylor explained that the purpose of the Hazards Awareness is to allow members of the Working Group to share information concerning trends or upcoming potential hazards to all areas of Orange County. There were no items at this time for Hazards Awareness. No further discussion followed. IV. PRESENTATIONS A. 2014 Hurricane Season Preview Mr. Soto gave a brief presentation on the 2014 Hurricane Season. Currently, everything is quiet in the Atlantic, but the Pacific has some activity. The current condition of the El Nido creates a lot of wind shear and stalls development of tropical cyclones in the Atlantic Ocean. The National Hurricane Center indicates that this year will be a mild season with near normal or below normal activity. However,storms that do develop will tend to be stronger systems. The prediction calls for 8 —13 named storms, 3—6 hurricanes,and 1 —2 major hurricanes. B. Sinkhole Pilot Study Mr. Clint Kromhout delivered a presentation on the Sinkhole Pilot Study taking place in North Central Florida in Columbia,Hamilton, and Suwannee Counties. He covered the different types of sinkholes and the differences between cover subsidence(slow)and cover collapse(fast)events. The majority of claims in Florida are the cover subsidence,but the more memorable and more sever are cover collapse. Mr. Kromhout talked about the causes of sinkholes and how the Florida geology in certain areas favors the Kant topography which leads to the formation of the sinkholes. The pilot study was undertaken by the State of Florida using Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funding to cover the cost of the study. The area of study was chosen due to the high amount of geopmorphic diversity (different types of geology). Once the pilot is complete, it will take two additional years to complete the project and replicate the methodology across the entire State of 2 Florida. The purpose of the study is not intended to have adverse effects on home values or make insurance rate determinations;however, they would like to see more insurance choices created with better available data and possible improvement to the building code. Mr. Kromhout asked that if anyone had information on sinkhole locations or activity in Orange County to please share that information with his group as they progress into the next phases of the study. Mr. Haney suggested that the County's 3-1-1 system may have that information on reported sinkholes/depressions. No further discussion followed. V. OPEN DISCUSSION Mr.Taylor opened the floor to Open Discussion for other awareness items or upcoming events. Ms. Fleischman is sent a letter to the State Division of Emergency Management to notify them that UCF has adopted the Orange County LMS and would like to be recognized as a jurisdiction under the LMS plan. Ms. Snipes stated that if her office receives sinkhole complaints that they refer callers to the County. She would also like to see a few examples of projects using the new LMS Project Submission Form. Mr.Kromhout passed out a Sinkhole FAQ list concerning the pilot study. No further discussion followed. VI. UPCOMING MEETINGS The next meeting will be August 13,2014 at the Orange County Emergency Operations Center located at 6590 Amory Ct.in Winter Park,FL. Upcoming Meetings August 13,2014+ November 12, 2014 Orlando Emergency Operations Center February 11,2015+ May 13,2015 (TBD) + Meetings coincide with OCERT Meeting dates No further discussion followed. VII. *ADJOURNMENT There being no further business,the meeting adjourned at 11:38 a.m. *Denotes action item 3 d �tr_r AGENDA Local Mitigation Strategy Meeting Wednesday, November 12, 2014,. 10:00 a.m. Orlando Emergency Operations Center 110 N. Andres Ave. (110 George De Salvia Way) Orlando, FL 32807 I. Welcome and Introductions II. Previous Information A. *Approval of Meeting Minutes from June 11, 2014 B. Working Group Membership Update C. Current Projects Update III. New Information A. *New Initiatives B. Handouts and Publications C. LMS 2014-2015 Update D. Community Rating System (CRS) Recertification Update E. Hazards Awareness IV. Presentations A. Michael Lingerfelt, President of Architecture and Design - "The Value of Building Codes with Enforcement" B. Jason Taylor, LMS Coordinator — "Southern Group of State Foresters Wildfire Risk Assessment Portal (WRAP)" Demonstration V. Open Discussion VI. Upcoming Meetings (tentative) February 11,2015 + r Orange County EOC May 6,2015 TBD (date moved due to GHC) August 12,2015 Orange County EOC November 18,2015+ TBD (date moved to Veteran's Day) + Meetings coincide with OCERT Meeting dates * Denotes Action Item ' In') r' a vil V� _ 6 1.` ,i 4~ oft x M N /, . t t- a up i 1\''' %I-) ' - PI\ W ee C ;� M ^� �, h I W Wk V ,5 fin cCO vz CO a S �y �/ 1N. f •�'"1� 0 k t� 1 O 2..... >, o „...1., --5:- -1-, to 0 4 J ‘t, -- t) , - x w O E � d -4- .� c V W Y o 3 „.--1 !` 1 si w % imr -13 0 0 cl -;•• g i WT:)- : . C: t ce 3 2 p p ,, W U 0 --� N w --- .� 1 c v1 u co ,_ 1 ...,) rz , :, , ..- . ,) ,,..) ,, 5 -0 --,t „I Ur . ,3. _a E 0 g i p `c A '>---.. c. ! I ,� k ' z � 0 "1µT---1y //...t.r`�( i lu, _ tet A ik. i 0 y� yo_ / W In 2 o W Ca + A W rf r z E 1 W C) V buo 0 1 ea y Z m 2 O 2 o < V • NIa LAG w o GI ; W to L 1 MJ c >- W o Z a o co - W tQ > f OG = 2 0 2 W t.) -J N o :`r 2w ' " Ci +.j N Q , ,r W = u _ -4 Z .� E M .401 cu e O 5 o z V ( W d Z bo Z W t 3 Q v > a t O a `J j--' a 5.-•-"i C CI)6 _ V„oere, Orange County `• • Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group Wednesday,November 12,2014 10:00 a.m. MINUTES A meeting of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group was held Wednesday,November 12, 2014,at 10:00 a.m.,at the City of Orlando Emergency Operations Center in Orlando,Florida. Mr.Taylor called the meeting to order at 10:09 a.m.with the following members: PRESENT Michelle Beauman—City of Orlando Hayley Markman—University of Central Florida Cliff Frazier—Florida Forestry Service Jason McCright—Vista Lakes Community Bill Johnson—Orange County Public Schools Development District Braden Kay—City of Orlando Daniel Negron—Orange County Public Works Curtis Knowles—Orange County Public Schools Orville Watson—Orange County Utilities Reed Knowlton—Orange County Capital Projects Gail Wilds—Wedgefield Firewise Guests: Michael Lingerfelt—President of Architecture Design LMS Staff Present: Jason Taylor,LMS Coordinator I. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS Mr. Taylor welcomed everyone said it was good to see those present. He asked everyone to introduce themselves. IL PREVIOUS INFORMATION A. *Approval of Meeting Minutes from June 11,2014 Ms. Markman made a motion to approve the meeting minutes from June 11, 2014; seconded by Mr. Watson. Motion carried unanimously. B. Working Group Membership Update Mr. Taylor introduced several new members to the LMS Working Group who were in attendance today. Ms.Beauman,Mr. Johnson,Mr.Kay,and Mr.McCright. Mr.Taylor asked if there were any membership updates or suggestions. It was suggested by Mr. Taylor that current members encourage others in their professional circles to attend the Working Group, especially those from municipal organizations. Mr.Taylor noted that he will also send out the current membership roster as a follow- up to today's meeting. No new members were added at this time. C. Current Projects Updates Mr. Taylor asked if there were any changes to the Current Projects List. He informed the Working Group that the newest version of the Project Submission Form had been sent out via e-mail the other day. A Project Submission Form will be required for ALL currently listed projects for ranking and prioritization by the Planning Committee. Current projects must be submitted by December 31,2014 or they will risk being removed from the Project Priority List at the next meeting. Mr. Taylor will send out a follow-up e-mail with the form,guidance document, and the current projects list. He will also make phone calls to representative agencies to let them know this information. At this time there are no further project updates and no other projects were mentioned as being underway at this time. No further discussion followed. 1 III. NEW INFORMATION A. New Initiatives 1. Additional project suggestions or ranking Mr. Taylor said that with the implementation of the new Project Submission Form, be will be accepting new projects for consideration. Upon review by the Planning Committee and approval by the Working Group, project can be added to the Project Priority List. lust like with the current projects update, Mr. Taylor will send out the new form, the guidance document, and the current project list. Mr. Taylor also had considered using a file sharing system to make all of these documents available, such as Dropbox.com; Mr. Watson stated that his County Department bad discouraged use of these types of websites. Mr.Taylor will check to make sum that his Department will support its use for file sharing. At this time there are no new initiatives for consideration. B. Handouts and Publications Mr.Taylor had a several handouts available,including the"Homeowner's Guide to Retrofitting,"the 2014 National Preparedness Report for Mitigation,and an overview of a new tool being used by the Southern Group of State Foresters called the "Wildfire Risk Assessment Portal," or South WRAP. Mr. Taylor will be demonstrating the system later in the meeting today. Other handouts included preparedness checklists from Agility Recovery for Tornado,Flooding,and Social Media. C. LMS 2014-2015 Update Mr. Taylor gave an update on the status of the LMS Plan Revision process. Currently,the plan has been outlined and all requirements of the crosswalk document have been addressed. Mr. Taylor is working on filling in the narrative portions and compiling the historical occurrences data for each of the hazards. Some of the identified 'threats"discussed by the Planning Committee that do not have any quantifiable data for occurrences, seventy, extent, damages, probability, or impacts will more than likely be removed from the LMS as"hazards." A couple of these threats would be very difficult to meet financial thresholds in order to receive a presidential declaration and thereby mitigation finding. Mr.Taylor will have the draft document finished and sent to the State by mid-December for their review. The LMS must receive approval from the State by February 2015 for continuation. D. Community Rating System(CRS)Recertification Mr.Negron announced to the Working Group that Orange County had received its recertification for the Community Rating system(CRS)at a Class 5. This means that residents of Orange County can receive a 25% reduction for their flood insurance. The CRS operates under a point system where certain activities or actions performed by the jurisdiction are awarded points; for every 500 points you receive put you at a higher class. The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which Orange County participates, requires those who live in flood zones to purchase flood insurance. Orange County is in one of the highest CRS Class levels in the entire State of Florida. Mr.Negron is working with Mr.Taylor to look at opportunities to increase the number of points Orange County can receive for its CRS certification. Annual recertification takes place on October 1 with every third year marking a more intense and in depth recertification process. Mr.Taylor commended Mr.Negron for his work on the CRS. E. Hazards Awareness Mr. Taylor explained that the purpose of the Hazards Awareness is to allow members of the Working Group to share information concerning trends or upcoming potential hazards to all areas of Orange County. Mr. Knowles stated that the School District was going to have their kick-off meeting to update thea Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan and others,such as the infectious disease plan with an Ebola Annex. With the recent events,there has been an increase in activity associated with such pandemic diseases. Ms. Markman added that UCF is running parallel and meeting with their Health Center. They are pushing public education and referring to their pandemic disease plan. 2 Mr. Watson agreed that they have been seeing increased chatter about Ebola, water treatment, and discussing if their operations or processes would be any different due to the potential outbreak. Mr. McCright added that his profession has observed staggering costs associated with the clean up and decontamination of purported Ebola items. Mr. Frazier informed the group that the potential for wildfires is on the rise and that an arsonist set 3— 4 fires the week before last. Low humidity with windy conditions make the wildfire season that much more active, similar to the 1997 season. Ms. Wilds added that her neighborhood has not seen much rain recently. She thanked Mr.Taylor for providing her with the South WRAP report for Wedgefield. Ms. Mariunan stated that UCF's Landscape and Natural Resources department is doing prescribed burning around the University. Mr. Taylor encouraged those with smart phones to download the County apps, OCFL Alert and OC 311. A text-based alerting tool, OCAlert is also available for registration. No further discussion followed. IV. PRESENTATIONS A. "The Value of Building Codes with Enforcement" Mr. Michael Lingerfelt,FAIA, LEED AP, is the President of Architecture and Design for Lingerfelt International. lie is a local area architect and served as the Director of Project Architecture & Engineering for Walt Disney Imagineering. Mr.Lingerfelt gave a presentation on the capabilities of the American Institute of Architects'Disaster Assistance Committee and their contributions. He has trained hundreds of architects,engineers,and building officials and inspectors around the United States to conduct building damage assessments in communities affected by disaster. He has personally conducted assessments/evaluations in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina (2004), the Northridge, CA Earthquake (1994), Birmingham, AL tornadoes(2011),and multiple fires and floods in California. He is also an instructor for FEMA's "HURRIPLAN: Resilient Building Design for Coastal Communities"course. This course expresses the important role that zoning plays in a pre-and post- disaster environment and bunging the community together to identify their needs for municipal planning during rebuilding. Mr. Lingerfelt has trained individuals in Orange County and the City of Orlando to conduct damage assessments;his group has Memorandums of Understanding(MOUs)with both jurisdictions to assist with conducting safety evaluations for damaged buildings and estimating costs to replace or rebuild structures in our area. B. Demonstration of the Wildfire Risk Assessment Portal(WRAP) Mr. Taylor gave a demonstration of the Southern Group of State Foresters' new planning tool, the Wildfire Risk Assessment Portal. The portal has a Public Viewer component and a Professional Viewer component. Mr. Taylor worked with the Florida Forestry Service to obtain access to the Professional Viewer. This tool allows mitigation planners to identify a Planning Project area. Mr. Taylor has created several Planning Project areas for the entire County, Unincorporated County, all thirteen(13)municipalities and a couple of neighborhoods. The tool will also generate a boilerplate documentation that analyzes the geospatial information system and its various layers, showing the data,graphics, and maps of the Planning Project area. Each document is about fifty(50)pages long and describes each of the terms and their importance. If anyone would like to request a particular area,please let Mr. Taylor know and he will be happy to assist. 3 No further discussion followed. V. OPEN DISCUSSION Mr. Taylor opened the floor to Open Discussion for other awareness items or upcoming events. Ms.Wilds informed the group that Orange County Fire Rescue Station 86 will be holding their Open House event on December 13,2014 from 1:00 PM—3:00 PM. No further discussion followed. VI. UPCOMING MEETINGS The next meeting will be February 11,2015 at the Orange County Emergency Operations Center located at 6590 Amory Ct. in Winter Park,FL. Upcoming Meetings Meeting Location February 11,2015+ Orange County EOC May 6,2015 (Location TBD;date moved due to the Governor's Hurricane Conference) August 12,2015+ Orange County EOC November 18, 2015 (Location TBD;date moved due to Veteran's Day) + Meetings coincide with OCERT Meeting dates No further discussion followed. VII. *ADJOURNMENT There being no further business,the meeting adjourned at 11:59 a.m. *Denotes action item 4 (4.,.. .\ d AGENDA • Local Mitigation Strategy Meeting �ac,Y,edP•te Wednesday, February 18, 2015 `""� ••" 10:00 a.m. Orange County Emergency Operations Center 6590 Amory Ct. Winter Park, FL 32792 I. Welcome and Introductions II. Previous Information A. *Approval of Meeting Minutes from November 12, 2014 B. Working Group Membership Update C. Current Projects Update III. New Information A. *New Initiatives B. Handouts and Publications C. Hazards Awareness IV. Presentations A. LMS 2014-2015 Update V. Open Discussion VI. Upcoming Meetings (tentative) May 6,2015 Orange County Alternate EOC(tentative) August 12, 2015+ Orange County EOC November 18,2015 TBD (meeting moved for observation of Veteran's Day) February 10, 2016+ Orange County EOC + Meetings coincide with OCERT Meeting dates * Denotes Action Item a - \a � '_ � y�;f d ice" ` � " y t� a U ��,���_ �J� 'A Q. ) ;i (htz\ M Cab ' m 0 ".9 ,9cr. r, , r bG n cry 84 e W • 8Q t C :1 Q. e q r H qi •1 a a W a) ' -. 1 -c -.....it, 4 1 kj MOVI , T i- -- -- z .., O --.- 4 tz _ >4 v., (, o v__ _ � 0 . CL a _.,. II. 4 •-•..._ . .. 1 -:ak 1 F 0 T ..5Th Q.._,) a. ,,s- w 1 ' r , ..,. . _ " . _) 3 (f, ..., . 0 E es 2 : ' t .-',; ,-... L 1 f . :--,__ > W :se- < t u o V CSG 3 2 L1 o - -5 vi i W V J r-I m 3 +' 3" -- W CC = 0000 i n) �--1-- % 3 r v Z cu D 417 L. ° o o u_ o W V ., w _ :� kr\ ) Z o Z W '2! 9i ' 2 -.7--- 0 0 '•4 --T' N \.,..) ' ,. ....7....z___- \._,„ --a- - 4 , . z--,,, g': 11,..5g „.. ,,,_ ..., ..... ,,,,. , _.=_ ..,,,i , , , MO co moi► "ti ".ww ,O '' O : •., a e.,.., : ,.. er, K, , 4 r 0-- m N to:: ) ix.,� W = .%-: n t Q W G1 (� ro ---c9;--kk --.... t c l `• ) 9 ^Z co 2 1k_ 1 >" LLJ '_-- < -k--1, --;- --4 i V .0 o o L -s-' A z0,2 1 , W co S o cl W C ' LL 43 = 00 µ I. MINI U zi _ .•.+ a = ., V o o LL - J..% W V ba z Lu - o Q o > FQ 3 OC L W D '4- cT.4 1.14 0.-' -1 1.„(i. N. 'j.- VI ..1 4 I )-...e:fr. , • ' n P . •4^z•: 0 id ra a. CI IS Q,dwEMc_ Orange County a Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group Wednesday,February 18,2015 - 10:00 a.m. MINUTES A meeting of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group was held Wednesday,February 18, 2015,at 10:00 a.m.,at the Orange County Emergency Operations Center in Winter Park,Florida. Mr.Taylor called the meeting to order at 10:04 a.m.with the following members: PRESENT Eric Alberts—Orlando Health Daniel Negron—Orange County Public Works Mike Baker—Orange County Public Works Lee-Ann Snipes—City of Orlando Public Works Cliff Frazier—Florida Forestry Service Manny Soto—Orlando OEM Mike Galura—Town of Windermere Keila Walker—Orlando Health Nate Haney—Orange County Public Works Orville Watson—Orange County Utilities Jim Hunt—City of Orlando Public Works Tracy Watson—University of Central Florida Frankie Lumm—American Red Cross Gail Wilds—Wedgefield Firewise Hayley Markman—University of Central Florida LMS Staff Present: Jason Taylor,LMS Coordinator I. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS Mr. Taylor welcomed everyone said it was good to see those present. He asked everyone to introduce themselves. II. PREVIOUS INFORMATION A. *Approval of Meeting Minutes from November 12,2014 Mr.Lumm made a motion to approve the meeting minutes from November 12,2014; seconded by Mr. Baker. Motion carried unanimously. B. Working Group Membership Update Mr. Taylor introduced a couple of new members to the Working Group, like Ms. Watson and Mr. Galura. He also asked if there were any members who should be invited. Mr.Taylor displayed the membership roster that he maintains. Some members were removed from the list as they were no longer with their respective agency or no longer filled that role. Changes were noted on the roster. Any membership recommendations can be sent to Mr.Taylor at any point at Jason.taylor@ocfl.net or by phone at 407-836-9805. C. Current Projects Updates Mr. Taylor asked if there were any changes to the Current Projects List. He informed the Working Group that the newest version of the Project Submission Form and Guidance document we made available via e-mail that was sent just the other day. A couple of minor tweaks were made due to some format issues. A new Project Submission Form will be required for ALL "Current" listed projects for ranking and prioritization by the Planning Committee. Current projects must be submitted by May 1, 201.5 or they will risk being removed from the Project Priority List. Mr. Taylor will send out a follow-up e-mail with the form, guidance document, and the current projects list. He will also make phone calls to representative agencies to let them know this 1 information. A suggestion was made by Mr.Hunt to include a participation point on the LMS Project Submitral Form for those sponsoring agencies that regularly participate in the LMS. Mr.Taylor will bring this up at a Planning Committee meeting for project ranking discussions, but at this time,no additional points planned to be added on the form in order to limit the number of form revisions. At this time there are no further project updates and no other projects were mentioned as being underway at this time. No further discussion followed. IH. NEW INFORMATION A. New Initiatives 1. Additional project suggestions or ranking Mr. Taylor said that with the implementation of the new Project Submission Form, he will be accepting new projects for consideration; his preference would be to limit the number of "new" projects in favor of updating the "current" projects. Upon review by the Planning Committee and approval by the Working Group, the project(s) can be added to the Project Priority List. He is still working to make this information available on the Orange County website as well. At this time there are no new initiatives for consideration. B. Handouts and Publications Mr. Taylor had a several handouts available, including -Educate Yourself: Before a Flood," information on the Governor's Hurricane Conference2015 National Seasonal Preparedness Messaging Calendar,and the Executive Order on Federal Flood Risk Management Standard. Other handouts included preparedness checklists from Agility's 11 Common Disaster Planning Mistakes. C. Hazards Awareness Mr. Taylor explained that the purpose or the Hazards Awareness is to allow members of the Working Group to share information concerning trends or upcoming potential hazards to all areas of Orange County. Mr.Alberts talked about infectious diseases they've been seeing at the hospitals,including MERS,COV,Measles, Scarlet Fever,and Bird Flu,along with the impacts to government employees handling these cases. Mr. Soto let the group know about a Social Media course being offered at his EOC on June 11. Mr.Frazier stated that the wildfire risk right now was low due to the Drought Index levels being low,but this is just how the 1998 seasons started as well. Mr. Alberts noted that they have been seeing an increase in transportation related accidents in the County, and with SunRail and OIA adding service,this could be on the rise. Mr.Soto recommended holding a presentation from the I-4 Ultimate Group as well. Mr. Lumm added that there is a website with that information that is available as well. Other upcoming events with the Orlando Eye and Orlando City Soccer events may pose other risks and threats. Ms. Wilds let the group know about their National Fire Preparedness Day on May 2v1 and that she received a grunt from State Farm to conduct some activities. Mr.Taylor mentioned that the Hurricane Expo,Conference,and Exercise would all be coming in May/June. Ms. Markman talked about KNIGHTSHARE in March for the UCF Campus and the Whole Community Exercise. No further discussion followed. IV. PRESENTATIONS A. LMS 2014-2015 Update Mr.Taylor gave an update on the status of the LMS. The preliminary information has been submitted to the State for review,but there are several pieces that are missing from the Plan at this time. Mr. Taylor will work on getting these completed. No further discussion followed. V. OPEN DISCUSSION 2 Mr.Taylor opened the floor to Open Discussion for other awareness items or upcoming events. Mr.Alberts asked where the best place for information on threats(not hazards)should be located. Mr. Taylor suggested that the Threat Hazard Identification Risk Assessment(THIRA) would be the best place. Other plans may be the CEMP or PRDP. No further discussion followed VI. UPCOMING MEETINGS The next meeting will be May 6, 2015 at the Orange County Emergency Operations Center located at 6590 Amory Ct. in Winter Park,FL. Upcoming Meetings Meeting Location May 6,2015 Orange County EOC(date moved due to the Governor's Hurricane Conference) August 12,2015+ Orange County EOC November 18,2015 (Location TBD;date moved due to Veteran's Day) February 10,2016+ Orange County EOC + Meetings coincide with OCERT Meeting dates No further discussion followed. VII. *ADJOURNMENT There being no further business,the meeting adjourned at 11:48 a.m. "Denotes action item 3 AGENDA Local Mitigation Strategy Meeting AP�'-) Wednesday, May 6, 2015 10;00 a.m. Orange County Emergency Operations Center 6590 Amory Ct. Winter Park, FL 32792 I. Welcome and Introductions II. Previous Information A. *Approval of Meeting Minutes from February 18, 2015 B. Working Group Membership Update C. Current Projects Update III. New Information A. *New Initiatives B. Handouts and Publications C. LMS 2014-2015 Update D. Hazards Awareness IV. Presentations A. Arcadis Grant Funding Team Presentation V. Open Discussion VI. Upcoming Meetings (tentative) August 12, 2015+ Orange County EOC November 18,2015 TBD(meeting moved for observation of Veteran's Day) February 10,2016+ Orange County EOC May 11, 2016 TBD Subject to change due to GHC + Meetings coincide with OCERT Meeting dates * Denotes Action Item Alo *) r• i, f t 51.1kuijt � � H '1-4.-...0 T, -- La (rj.. -/'"" ..0) > /...) INN -( CC n 47 Hc •r, w w , ,�, Z E U J / 4 LU W 1 ) 1 VI c I / \If '; ) 4...„ %.-) • . 0 q 4 Ci ri \•:: ir"a !,1 - O CL y 0 V-- S p E . , s ZC O 0 c5 r'a 3.. / ,.. :..) -3.--,.. .," j UJ ni a V) • W n= S W \ 9 t.` ' �, t�.j ila. Z I r • • w p C > �l ,4 , LU V W , f ,, s :t 0 CU H •. z ' � S - .s - Z tin Z +W -0 7fg 5 a ru > a Z Ct D ^� r`: �J O O w a t -� ar• a 1 J Ln \ ,� l" L 0 ,k,-- *)r�: ri f ar 1,, ,,,:,..$,. 4; �i dam_ •!____, ce 4.. . z t 111 41Z CO O 2 Cte) 1 -........ e i 1:H , g ta E ;..i 4 '--1',4 '' (ii.) e W Cams nu 2 ''a k , 3 C. d U fl. V u 1 A -, 3 . * )1' uu m e I u 12 •C M I. N Z c co I z J W ca Oa c -� 9 41) LLI t.,) _1 en ! ....v I . 3‘' 2 aw +, ;--1 `' ' 4N 0 'J W �j O Pm° Im 0 ° ...- a 60_ szi 3 6 2 1\) ' c W u V3 C.7 a) 1:: 1 1) ,Q 6--) rW CC O O1 3-- _..... ‘ 11.11111...4 16 : ...4: r- (-) 0 t.tc) �; I 20a-}�/. x i — C § : Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group ..credrted Wednesday,May 6,2015 10:00 a.m. MINUTES A meeting of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group was held Wednesday,May 6,2015, at 10:00 a.m.,at the Orange County Emergency Operations Center in Winter Park,Florida. Mr.Taylor called the meeting to order at 10:08 a.m.with the following members: PRESENT Thomas DePaul—University of Central Florida Scott Rayburn—Rollins College Frankie Lumm—American Red Cross Manny Soto—Orlando OEM Wes Johnson—Orange County Neighborhood Joe Thalheimer—University of Central Florida Preservation&Revitalization Division Anthony Washington—MetroPlan Orlando Hayley Markman—University of Central Florida Orville Watson—Orange County Utilities LMS Staff Present: Jason Taylor,LMS Coordinator Guest(s): Aaron Henderson,ARCADIS WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS Mr. Taylor welcomed everyone said it was good to see those present. He asked everyone to introduce themselves. II. PREVIOUS INFORMATION A. *Approval of Meeting Minutes from February 18,2015 Mr. Taylor suggested tabling the meeting minutes from February 18, 2015 due to several errors they contained. These minutes along with today's minutes will be presented at the next regularly scheduled meeting. The Working Group concurred. No further action. B. Working Group Membership Update Mr.Taylor introduced a couple of new visitors to the Working Group,like Mr.DePaul,Mr.Johnson, and Mr. Thalheimer. He also asked if there were any members who should be invited. Any membership recommendations can be sent to Mr. Taylor at any point at Jason.taylor@ocfl.net or by phone at 407-836-9805. C. Current Projects Updates Mr. Taylor asked if there were any changes to the Current Projects List. He informed the Working Group that the newest version of the Project Submission Form and Guidance document were made available via e-mail to the members. Mr. Taylor informed the Working Group that the Planning Committee recommended that the list of "Current"projects must be updated sometime in the next few weeks; they also recommended that if Sponsors do not submit an updated Project Submission Form by a particular date that the project should be removed from the"Current"project list and be placed on the"Deleted"list instead. Mr. Soto made a motion that all projects that do not receive an updated Project Submission Form by July 31'`, 2015 will be removed from the "Current" list and placed on the "Deleted" list at the next regular meeting of the Working Group in August 2015. Seconded by Mr. Lumm. Motion carried unanimously. 1 Mr. Taylor will send out a follow-up e-mail with the form, guidance document, and the torrent projects list. He will also make phone calls to representative agencies to let them know this information. At this time there are no further project updates and no other projects were mentioned as being underway at this time. No further discussion followed Ea. NEW INFORMATION A. New Initiatives I. Additional project suggestions or ranking Mr. Taylor notified the Working Group that the Planning Committee went through the review and ranking process with a handful of new mitigation projects at their meeting on May 5, 2015. Several best practices were discovered during this process. Written meeting notes will be distributed at the next LMS Working Group Meeting. It was also helpful to have the sponsoring agency present to answer specific questions about the project and to provide subject matter expertise on each project. Primary and Secondary contacts will be invited to Planning Committee Meetings. A Planning Committee Co-Chair was also appointed to avoid any conflict of interest as the reviewed projects were submitted by Orange County Public Works Stormwater Division,who is also the Chair of the Planning Committee. Ms. Keila Walker will serve as this committee's Co-Chair. Mr. Lumm also suggested that when the Committee marks the criteria as "Disagree" that the reasoning be placed in the text box on the back page to document the rationale. Mr.Watson made a motion to Approve the following projects to the LMS Project Priority List: I) 2015-001: Bonnie Brook—Pump Motor Replacement with a score of 25; 2) 2015-002: Belmont Estates—Drainage Improvement with a score of 19; 3) 2015-003: Bithlo South(Phase 1)—Drainage Improvement with a score of 15; 4) 2015-004: Bonnie Brook—Canal Erosion/Electric Panel Repair with a score of 21; Seconded by Mr.Soto. Motion carried unanimously. B. Handouts and Publications Mr. Taylor had a several handouts available, including "social Media & Disaster Communications Checklist," "Flood Preparedness Checklist," and the Executive Summary from the "Planning for Post-Disaster Recovery: Next Generation" Report from the American Planning Association on the Vision of a Resilient Community. C. LMS 2014-2015 Update Mr. Taylor gave a brief update on the LMS 2014-2015 Update. Several of the items that the State considered missing were added to the plan,revised to meet the criteria, or removed for consistency. One of the items was better information on the historical occurrences for the sub-hazard of Lightning. Mr. Taylor contacted Earth Networks who is the County's vendor for its weather stations. Earth Networks has been recording lightning strike data for a few years now,so Mr.Taylor,in coordination with the Fire Department GIS created a "Lightning Density Map" to measure how many lightning strikes occurred within a 1 mile radius of each raster(or pixel)on the map from 2009 -2014. While there is not a conclusive pattern, one of the similarities between each years was the prevalence of lightning strikes on the eastern border near the St.Johns River as well as the southwestern portion of the County near many of its tourist attractions. Mr.Taylor will continue to work on the update and submit the information to the State for its review as soon as possible. The next step of approval from the State will be to have each participating jurisdiction to adopt the LMS via resolution. D. .Hazards Awareness This item was postponed to the Open Discussion section so that the presenter today could start. No further discussion followed. 2 IV. PRESENTATIONS A. ARCADIS Grant Funding Team Presentation Mr. Henderson was here to give a presentation on Disaster Funding Approaches that local communities could take advantage of for mitigation projects, as well as a basic introduction to conducting a Benefit-Cost Analysis. No further discussion followed. V. OPEN DISCUSSION Mr. Taylor explained that the purpose of the Hazards Awareness is to allow members of the Working Group to share information concerning trends or upcoming potential hazards to all areas of Orange County. Mr.Taylor announced that the Governor's Hurricane Conference would be taking place this next week, May 10 — 15* here in Orlando at the Rosen Shingle Creek. Orange County Emergency Management is also taking part in the annual State Hurricane Exercise on May 22"d at the EOC. The Orange County Hurricane Expo will be held on June eat the Central Florida Fairgrounds from 9:00 e.m. —2:00 p.m. Mr. Soto stated that the Social Media Training class is being held at his facility on June 11th from 8:00 am.—5:00 p.m. Mr.Johnson added that he and Mr. Freeman would be conducting a workshop on the Neighborhood Emergency Response Plan (NERP) this weekend, May 9'"at the County Internal Operations Center (IOC-I) tum 9:00 a.m. — 12:00 p.m. Mr. Lumm said that there is a Mitigation Webinar series that starts this afternoon and is taking place over the next few months;Mr.Taylor will not be able to attend that first session today,so if anyone does attend,be would appreciate any notes from it. Ms.Markman stated that UCF is getting ready for the hurricane season by distributing 1,600 VIA Radios to students on campus. VI. UPCOMING MEETINGS The next meeting will be August 12,2015 at the Orange County Emergency Operations Center located at 6590 Amory Ct.in Winter Park,FL. Upcoming Meetings Meeting Location August 12,2015+ Orange County EOC November 18,2015 Location TBD;date moved due to Veteran's Day February 10,2016+ Orange County EOC May 11,2016 Location TBD; subject to change due to the Governor's Hurricane Conference + Meetings coincide with OCERT Meeting dates No further discussion followed. VII. *ADJOURNMENT There being no further business,the meeting adjourned at 12:20 p.m. *Denotes action item 3 �p0[MC[y' t -y / AGENDA )Local Mitigation Strategy Planning Committee Meeting (4oredeed Wednesday, November 11, 2015 10:30 a.m. Orange County Emergency Operations Center 6590 Amory Ct. Winter Park, FL 32792 I. Welcome and Introductions II. Consolidation of Orange County Project Priority List A. Mitigation Ideas Document B. Examples 1. Clay County, FL 2. Miami-Dade, FL 3. Lake County, FL 4. Broward County, FL III. Potential Categories and Sub-Categories for Projects A. Emergency Notifications B. Environmental Restoration C. Hardening and Retrofits 1. Back-Up Power 2. Critical Facilities and Infrastructure 3. Engineering Studies 4. Historic Preservation 5. Shelter Retrofit D. Hazard Detection E. Outreach and Training F. Property and Equipment Acquisition G. Safety and Prevention H. Stormwater Drainage 1. Elevation 2. Engineering Studies 3. Retrofits and Upgrades 4. Waterway Clearance IV. Project Reviews and Information Submittal V. Open Discussion VI. Upcoming LMS Working Group Meetings November 18,2015 Orange County EOC—Room 111 (meeting moved for observation of Veterans Day) February 10,2016+ Orange County EOC May4,2016 TBD Changed due to Governors Hurricane Conference August 10,2016+ Orange County EOC + Meetings coincide with OCERT Meeting dates Trivia for Today: On the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month of 1918, an armistice, or temporary cessation of hostilities, was declared between the Allied nations and Germany in the First World War,then known as'The Great War." Commemorated as Armistice Day beginning the following year, November 11th became a legal federal holiday in the United States in 1938. In the aftermath of World War ll and the Korean War,the name Armistice Day was changed in 1954 in recognition of a holiday dedicated to American veterans of all wars. What is the proper spelling of today's holiday? a. Veterans Day b. Veteran's Day c. Veterans' Day Meeting Notice R ,i Board Name: Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy �7i',.411: Working Group pp I t Date: WEDNESDAY, November 18th, 2015 I,�l'll\)� Location: Orange County Emergency Operations Center om l rot ;. - - 6590 Amory Ct. Winter Park, FL 32792 Time: 10:00 a.m. -- 12:00 p.m. For further information call (407) 836-9805. Section 286.0103,Florida Statutes states that W a person derides to appeal any decision made by a board, agency,or commission with respect to any matter considered ata meeting or lining,he or she wilt need a record of the proceedings,and that,for such purpose,he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings Is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal Is to be based. in accordance with the Americans with ijlsabllries Act (ADA), it any person with a disability as defined by the ADA needs special accommodation to participate In this proceeding, then not later than two business days prior to the p'oceeding,he or she shodd contact the Orange County Communications Division et(407)836-5631. Para mayor irformandn en espanoi,por favor name al(407)836-3111. This form was Ceveloped by Orange County Agenda Development Office. Alterations to this tonnes layout or WO ruing are not permitted To co-tact Ayende Development, please phone(407)-836-5425. ;,f i / lihr.. 1 i 10 ii, 0 , rN, in N- c ti to LQ �' M M `q n• D J 0� , .O � ( Q CC ++ 5d 0 ,z ,,) N o~�n vb .%) bo W C c Z ° N U ttO q 4 & 0 4- ' o1 4_, 0 (.1_ 9 C:" N -g _.1--- ›. ;4=i M1 74,0 -r - ,., W b.0 O I w � � —� S% a s Q...1 ncl" it; u 2 .4_,r 1 3 .4 te-)- E L' < :2 ,) i ri) Uj .cE 2 '/ d 7 ''' i k.- —c; 4 Z = r0 O s W sp E �' 4 - �, .3 W y J 0 r �� �� 4 W r-1 u.; i�. 1 .L U Z a) .n s— 4 °§ O - d LI sw O § o �dd u 0 ° z J 4� s . . ..z 23 LT, Lt.' , ,_„ -8 — _ q 1 < S . 1 Ni 2- cc 4 ,_ cs, ,5, I.. .,� 1 /CS H 0 r a 11/R...: ' 0. k�` AGENDA °°.....,.. Local Mitigation Strategy Meeting �a�.►� Wednesday, November 18, 2015 "• °•"" ° �� 10:00 a.m. Orange County Emergency Operations Center - Room 111 6590 Amory Ct. Winter Park, FL 32792 I. Welcome and Introductions II. Previous Information A. *Approval of Meeting Minutes from May 6, 2015 B. Working Group Membership Update C. Current Projects Update III. New Information A. *New Initiatives B. Handouts and Publications C. Hazards Awareness IV. Presentations A. Presentation on "Disaster Mitigation and the Benefits of an LMS" by David Block, FDEM B. Presentation on Revised Orange County Project Priority List, Mitigation Tasks, and overall Strategy V. Open Discussion VI. Upcoming Meetings (tentative) February 10,2016+ Orange County EOC May 4,2016 TBD Changed due to GHC August 10,2016+ Orange County EOC November 9,2016 TBD + Meetings coincide with OCERT Meeting dates * Denotes Action Item it .00. „„i„...8 il ‘ r . tl *- .'4 ks r ". ,....,_ 4) % ‘V, - ,- cam., t 1 ,_ r • '-'3(.- ? 1 %.-- 0•••' :s:".r \It LI ^1\ W C CT. ' t rI , f� i-- CI) ‹) • u - 4 ?., c,-- W r .. 4 .1--.' U a -. - • '...',' .-i- V 2 iv a7+- c7 `. 4 ..� v O lit u • c'. 1 •-• .. . 164 ,‘;,1 - ). t ".?j,__ E c < , , r-• --- • vii L\z-1., -;:,1 . :sQ t —3, d il s. 06 _ F.., ... 6-) t4,3, - (..,..,) .:::: 4, ,.,.) , ,..,, u., . C _, i '2 = '''' '"' 1 1 j 0 ___,L., Z � f ..i " a ! O = -. o 1 J W U -fir, �v' W -`- s •.-?� (.9 W 1.... a• i; . A :.4 1 .,, s_i, F f LC \' t r-) -4 3 M R ti./ L 6,-/041; :-<.-st Z �!ii liL.*:101' 0/3 i -z• 4\40 i m- 0_, ). N II � CG ++ It' Q ' • (.1 ,. , Z E 4 W w i N -z V b4 - ') C. HLiy, 0 i -- Lo E e < t `i bUj :2 0 --4 .‘ -2 .0 ZC 0 , W m �5S e .0 v, W Li J 00 •i ✓) W CCX00 J � �— b,1 '---11' r Z LI' au L' w 0 Ugw ki) o z 4 -- to a)Z , 1 4, :,,, ,,- 1:: ui � t < ei ii ICC ! :3 CC 0 O -__ 14;4 0 (`: °I 46 - - I 1 -nr03'd, : O Cor)814 4141 fi'' '' '‘. it (9) ii.' ' o f t...1 Cd 40 (ri i vta :1%3 ‘(i:,): Pc1v W C t' ' rr- PI" .• $ Z E c W ai 4 ) t% 2a, 2 ...r. . Ir) 2 CU aiw im: p �� O CZ Q t O aC O. L U L) Q W 2 '- E c < ' �--- >- Lu 'COit) V . o, 'r Z co "E_ co: *-Ti W co V` w v) iri W N . O : a ' ' W4) NI cZ c tri' 9 L' I ( -:' flu uO p S 0 W U0 Zho z W Z D g MLJ g az a 0 6151... . . .g...2 I &.' 1.°3: • .r . \--.) C5' P . —I � . , ice = W. Ig cr,A AGENDA Local Mitigation Strategy Planning Committee Meeting (4frifedired')Wednesday February 10 2016It. k�, �, 10:00 a.m. Orange County Emergency Operations Center 6590 Amory Ct. Winter Park, FL 32792 I. Welcome and Introductions II. Review of Orange County Project Priority List A. Projects B. Mitigation Tasks/Initiatives III. Mitigation Plan Information Needs A. Extent/Worst Case - Floods, Lightning, Wildfire B. Previous Occurrences - Floods, Lightning, Wildfire C. Impacts - Drought, Freezes/Winter Storms, Floods, Wildfire D. Vulnerability - Drought, Hail, Lightning, Tornados, Sinkholes, Wildfire E. Existing Authorities, Policies, Programs, and Resources for Municipalities F. Incorporation of Hazard Mitigation into Information, Actions, Data, Planning Mechanisms for Municipalities G. Development Changes H. Public Participation IV. Project Reviews and Information Submittal V. Open Discussion VI. Upcoming LMS Working Group Meetings May 4, 2016 TBD 1 Changed due to GHC August 10, 2016+ ' Orange County EOC November 9, 2016 TBD February 8, 2017+ Orange County EOC + Meetings coincide with OCERT Meeting dates Trivia for Today: On this day in 1996, after three hours, world chess champion Gamy Kasparov loses the first game of a six-game match against Deep Blue, an IBM computer capable of evaluating 200 million moves per second. Man was ultimately victorious over machine, however, as Kasparov bested Deep Blue in the match with three wins and two ties and took home the $400,000 prize. An estimated 6 million people worldwide followed the action on the Internet. N. i� J '''‘ illcolo i 0 osbtN N czc rJ, tr. W = T t GJ - a N W Q? :7 j- („) co N •t- B 4 i 2 '7 1 Z co I � - Y �, `' I `,, a d. (3 1 g 2 E 9 4 Q) c) 6 '; b. ' L V� c, CL 1- L.) 1 t '° --4?' ' i -°°.1`-i 61 ---d 7 s W „ F I (-A > W c Q t s 7 �' �, U co • W m Q ” =--) o , I G A rz 14, _ W Ce C O j tr. ow D . , �: c L L U 01 W V W C9 a 1- .. v 1J ico Z 4A Z w F -- c 1 00 i . „_ ( -� !� 4. Meeting Notice i t Board Name: Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group Date: TUESDAY, May 3rd, 2016 Location: City of Orlando Emergency Operations Center o Y D A 110 N. Andes Ave. (George DeSaivia Way) Orlando, FL 32805 Time: 2:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. For further information call (407) 836-9805. Section 216.0103, Florida Statutes states that If a person decides to appeal any decision made by a board, agency,or commission with respect to any matter considered at a meeting or hearing,he or aha will need a record of the proceedings,sod that,for such purpose,he may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record Includes tie testimony and evidence open which the appeal Ir to be based. In accordance 'Nth the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), If any person with a disability as defined by the ADA needs special accommodation to participate In this proceeding, then not later than two business days prior to the proceeding,he or she should contact the Orange County Communications Division at(407)836-5631. Para mayor Information en espafol,par favor Mame al(407)B36-3111. Posted 1. • / _ d By i(Gdf jateVSTadtA tAalLa This form was developed by Orange County Agenda Development Office. Alterations to this form's layout or wording are not permitted. To contact Agenda Development, please phone(407)-836-5426. AGENDA .°..... ; , elk Local Mitigation Strategy Meeting Tuesday, May 3, 2016 •• . ��.,.. 2:00 p.m. City of Orlando Emergency Operations Center 110 N. Andes Ave. Orlando, FL 32807 I. Welcome and Introductions II. Previous Information A. *Approval of Meeting Minutes from November 18, 2015 B. Working Group Membership Update C. Current Projects Update III. New Information A. *New Initiatives 1. Planning Committee Update a. 2015-014: Orlando, Downtown Rec Generator b. 2015-016: Orlando, Leu Gardens Shutters c. 2015-017: Orlando, Mennello Museum d. 2015-020: Orlando, Greenwood Cemetery Restoration e. 2015-025: Orlando, TMDL Diagnostic Study B. Handouts and Publications C. LMS Status and Information Needs D. Hazards Awareness IV. Presentations A. Community Rating System Enhancements Project - Daniel Negron V. Open Discussion VI. Upcoming Meetings (tentative) August 10,2016+ Orange County EOC November 9,2016 TBD February 8,2017+ Orange County EOC May 10, 2017 TBD + Meetings coincide with OCERT Meeting dates * Denotes Action Item fy` AGENDA ......,......, Local Mitigation Strategy Meeting liesip: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 •• •- „,,_ ,, 10:00 a.m. Orange County Emergency Operations Center 6590 Amory Ct. Winter Park, FL 32792 I. Welcome and Introductions II. Previous Information A. *Approval of Meeting Minutes from May 3, 2016 B. Working Group Membership Update C. Current Projects Update III. New Information A. *New Initiatives 1. Planning Committee Update a. 2015-014: Orlando, Downtown Rec Generator b. 2015-016: Orlando, Leu Gardens Shutters c. 2015-017: Orlando, Mennello Museum d. 2015-020: Orlando, Greenwood Cemetery Restoration e. 2015-025: Orlando, TMDL Diagnostic Study B. Handouts and Publications C. LMS Status and Information Needs D. Hazards Awareness IV. Presentations A. Community Rating System Enhancements Project - Daniel Negron V. Open Discussion VI. Upcoming Meetings (tentative) August 10, 2016+ Orange County EOC November 9,2016 TBD February 8,2017+ Orange County EOC May 10,2017 TBD + Meetings coincide with OCERT Meeting dates * Denotes Action Item 0`. Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Appendix B — Orange County LMS Hazards Quick Reference J Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Summary Program Risk — Hazard Name People Property Environment Relative Operations Threat Diseases and Moderate Low High Moderate High Pandemic 48% Animal Low High Moderate High Mod grate 44 /o Human Moderate Moderate Low High Moderate 43% Plant/Agriculture Low High Moderate High Moderate 51% Extreme Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Temperatures 54% Drought None Low Moderate High Moderate 57 /0 Freezes/Winter Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Storms 41% Heat Waves Low Low Moderate Low High 62% Floods Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate 43% Severe Low Moderate Low Moderate Moderate Thunderstorms 59% Hail None Moderate Low Low Moderate 52% Lightning Low Moderate Low Low Moderate 52% Tornados High High Moderate High High 71 /0 Sinkholes/Land- Low High Low Moderate High subsidence 62% Hazardous Moderate Low Low Moderate Low Materials 29% Terrorism/CBRNE Moderate High High Low High 3 /o Tropical Systems HighHigh High High High 67% Wildfires Moderate Low High Low High 5 /o APPENDIX B — Orange County LMS Hazards Quick Reference Page 170 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Consequence and Impact Analysis Summary Continuity Property, Economic Public Hazard Name Public Responders of Facilities, and Environment Condition Confidence Operations Infrastructure Diseases and Moderate Low Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Pandemic Animal Moderate Low Low Low Moderate Low Low Human High Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Plant/Agriculture Moderate Low Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Extreme Low Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Temperatures Drought Low Low Low Moderate High Moderate Moderate Freezes/Winter Low Low Low Low Moderate Low Low Storms Heat Waves Moderate Low Low Low Moderate Low Low Floods Moderate Moderate High High High Moderate Moderate Severe Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Thunderstorms Hail Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Lightning Moderate Low Low Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Tornados High High High High Moderate High High Sinkholes/Land- Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate subsidence _ Hazardous High High High Moderate High Moderate Moderate Materials Terrorism/CBRNE High High High High Moderate High High Tropical Systems High High High High Moderate High High Wildfires 1 Moderate Moderate Moderate High Moderate Moderate Moderate APPENDIX B—Orange County LMS Hazards Quick Reference Page 170 eOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Appendix C — Orange County LMS Working Group and Committee By-Laws ARTICLE I. PURPOSES OF THE ORANGE COUNTY LMS WORKING GROUP The purpose of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS) Working Group is to decrease the vulnerability of the residents, governments, businesses, and institutions of Orange County to the future human, economic, and environmental costs of natural, technological, and human-caused disasters. The Orange County LMS Working Group will develop, monitor, implement, and maintain a comprehensive plan for hazard mitigation which will be intended to accomplish purpose. ARTICLE II. MEMBERSHIP Participation in the Orange County LMS Working Group is voluntary by all entities. Membership in the Working Group is open to all jurisdictions, non-profit organizations, and individuals that have a role in mitigation and the purposes of the Working Group. ARTICLE III. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE The organizational structure of the Orange County LMS Working Group shall consist of two (2) permanent committees: Steering Committee and Planning Committee. Other temporary subcommittees as determined by the Working Group and/or Steering Committee may also be created and established; these may include, but are not limited to: Public Information, Marketing, Volunteer Coordination, or LMS Plan Review and Update subcommittees. A. STEERING COMMITTEE The Steering Committee should be comprised of a variety of different county agencies, municipalities, non-profit organization, and private sector partners. Membership is voluntary and shall consist of the Working Group participants. The Steering Committee shall provide general direction of the overall working group and is the group responsible for the oversight of other committees, subcommittees, and ensuring that the processes that have been put into place are followed. The Steering Committee will be led by the Chair of the Working Group, who is voted on by the participants of the Working Group at the first calendar meeting of the Working Group every other year. The candidate for the Chair position shall be selected by a plurality of votes. The Chair shall sign any required official correspondence of the Working Group or Steering Committee. Committee Members should be in good standing regarding attendance to the Working Group Meetings, meaning that they should not miss more than two (2) Working Group Meetings per year. APPENDIX C— Orange County LMS By-Laws Page 170 AOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 B. PLANNING COMMITTEE The Planning Committee should be comprised of a variety of different county agencies, municipalities, non-profit organization, and private sector partners. Membership is voluntary and shall consist of the Working Group participants. The Planning Committee is responsible for reviewing the various mitigation projects, initiatives, and tasks that comprise the County's Mitigation Strategy. The items submitted for consideration shall be reviewed as needed and ranked according to the current methodology being used. The Planning Committee should meet at least twice a year, but may meet more frequently, dependent upon the workload. The Planning Committee shall be led by the Vice-Chair of the Working Group, who is voted on by the participants of the Working Group at the first calendar meeting of the Working Group every other year. The candidate for the Chair position shall be selected by a plurality of votes. Committee Members should be those agencies or groups that have a high degree of involvement in mitigation project implementation. This includes, but is not limited to: emergency management, fire/rescue, public schools, public works, engineering, building, facilities, code enforcement, property, environmental, or non-profits. C. PROGRAM STAFF The LMS Working Group and its Committees and subcommittees shall be supported by the Orange County Office of Emergency Management (OEM). The Program Staff member will serve as the LMS Coordinator and support the Working Groups various activities. OEM shall provide a staff member who will administrate the meetings, provide technical support, subject matter expertise, and liaise with the State of Florida Division of Emergency Management Bureau of Mitigation. Other clerical support may include meeting minutes and notes, correspondence with the State, jurisdictions, county agencies, and other partners, as well as D. MEETINGS and VOTING Meetings of the Working Group and its Committees shall be conducted in accordance with Robert's Rules of Order. Regular meetings of the Working Group should occur at least quarterly (every three [3] months) and advance public notice should be given within at least ten (10) working days. Committee Meetings should be at least twice a year, or more often as needed at the discretion of the Committee's chairperson. All meetings of the Working Group are considered to be public meetings and are openly advertised to obtain participation from members of the public. APPENDIX C—Orange County LMS By-Laws Page 171 AOrange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 ARTICLE IV. ADOPTION OF AND AMENDMENTS TOTE BYLAWS These Bylaws may be adopted and/or amended by a two-thirds majority vote of the participants in attendance. All proposed changes should be provided to the Steering Committee, who will decide by a simple majority on whether or not to bring up the amendment for a vote of the Working Group. The Working Group is an on-going group dedicated to provide assistance to the mitigation strategy for Orange County and its jurisdictions. APPENDIX C—Orange County LMS By-Laws Page 172 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Appendix D— Project Priority List History Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy—COMPLETED PROJECTS, 1999 -2016 Total Date Funding Projected Project Name Priority Responsible Agency Approved Source Actual Cost Timeframe Score Wildfire Public Education 38 Orange County Fire Rescue 7/31/1999 General Fund $ 25,000.00 12 Months Department A-09 Facilities/Fixed Assets/ 35 City of Orlando 3/22/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 93,400.00 12 Months Audit and Assmnt Infrastructure Protection and 35 Orange County Building Division 1/12/2007 EMPA, $ 266,805.00 12 Months Disaster Assessment General Fund Provision of wildland firefighting 35 Orange County Fire Rescue 7/31/1999 General Fund $ 150,000.00 12 Months gear Department Conway Middle School shelter 35 Orange County on behalf of Orange 2/20/2005 HMGP $ 400,000.00 5 Years/ retrofit County Public Schools August 2010 Fortification of OperationsHMGP, PDM, Building 35 Orange County Sheriff's Office 12/12/2001 General Fund, $ 175,983.00 12 Months HLS Grants APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 173 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Fortification of the John L. 35 Orange County Sheriffs Office 11/18/2001 General Funtl, $ 228,905.00 12 Months Cassady Jr.Building HLS Grants Critical Facility Duty Officer 34 Orange County Sheriffs Office 1/23/2002 General Fund $ 822,000.00 12 Months Initiative A-82 Lift Stations Vegetation 33 City of Orlando 2/21/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 35,000.00 12 Months Removal Prescribed burns 33 Orange County Fire Rescue 7/31/1999 General Fund $ 20,000.00 12 Months Department Fortification of the HMGP, PDM, Communications Center 33 Orange County Sheriffs Office 12/12/2001 General Fund, $ 419,896.00 12 Months HLS Grants Fortification of the Sheriffs HMGP, PDM, Central Complex 33 Orange County Sheriffs Office 1/23/2002 General Fund, $ 358,825.00 12 Months HLS Grants APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 174 Q Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 12 Months/ Juvenile Assessment Center Orange County Facilities $250,000.00/ September project 32 Management Division 2/23/2005 HMGP,PDM $40 268.00 September 2012 Protect exterior of Public Works32 Orange County Public Works 10/23/2001 HMGP, PDM $ 75,000.00 12 Months Dept. building Department Fortification of Orange County HMGP, PDM, S.O.Substations 32 Orange County Sheriffs Office 1/23/2002 General Fund, $ 309,700 00 12 Months HLS Grants Katherine Street Sewage Pump CBDG, Mitigation 32 Town of Eatonville 3/18/2002 HMGP. PDM, $ 47,000 00 12 Months General Fund Hardening of Fire Station#1 31 City of Apopka 2/23/2005 HMGP $ 17,728.00 12 Months Hardening of Fire Station#2 31 City of Apopka 2/23/2005 HMGP $ 29,315.00 5 Years Hardening of Fire Station#3 31 City of Apopka 1/30/2005 $ 29,315.00 12 Months Hardening of Fire Station#4 31 City of Apopka 1/30/2005 HMGP $ 2,96400 12 Months APPENDIX D-Project Priority List History Page 175 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Hardening of Police Station 31 City of Apopka 1/30/2005 HMGP $ 15,000.00 2 Years Orange County Facilities $582,220.00 12 Months Cassidy Building Project 31 Management Division 2/23/2005 HMGP, PDM /$393,688.08 /October 2009 Reinforce Roof of Fire Rescue Orange County Fire Rescue 1/2/2008- Headquarters 31 Department Updated HMGP, PDM $ 1,00Q000.00 12 Months Wildfire Education-Fire Wise Orange County on behalf of General Fund, 31 1/31/2005 $ 57.500.00 12 Months Community-USA 00003 Wedgefield Firewise Community PDM, HMGP 8100 Presidents Dr.Operations 31 Orange County Utilities Department 2/23/2005 HMGP,PDM $ 480000.00 12 Months Facility Computer System Vulnerability CBDG, Reduction 31 Town of Oakland 1/21//2001 HMGP, PDM, $ 14,00000 12 Months General Fund Storm Shutters for Wastewater CBDG, buildings 30 City of Apopka 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM, $ 50,00000 12 Months General Fund APPENDIX 0—Project Priority List History Page 176 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Hazard Mitigation GIS Software 30 Orange County Growth 1/1/2006- General Fund $ 341,583.00 12 Months Management Department Updated Tractor to maintain firebreaks 30 Orange County on behalf of 1/31/2005 General Fund $ 75,000.00 12 Months Wedgefield Firewise Community PDM,HMGP Lake Hiawassee Drainwell30 Orange County Public Works 12/9/2004 HMGP, PDM $ 330,000.00 12 Months Replacement Department Install outfalls in lieu of current Orange County Public Works 29 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 100,000.00 12 Months drainwells. Department Library Roof 29 University of Central Florida 2/18/2005 HMGP EBG $ 921,114.00 8/11/2009 Funding Physical Plant Bldg Retrofit 29 University of Central Florida 2/18/2005 HMGP E&G $ 34 73300 6/30/2008 Funding EMPA, HMGP, Purchase of an SUV with winch 28 City of Edgewood 4/25/2002 Community $ 35,000.00 12 Months attachment Assistance Program- State APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 177 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Chemical Emergency Preparedness and Maitland Fire Department 28 City of Maitland 10/23/2001 Prevention $ 10,000.00 12 Months Advanced Terrorism Trng Technical Assistance Grants Program, EMPA EOC Construction 28 City of Ocoee 7/31/1999 General Funtl, $ 000,00000 12 Months HMGP Big Econlockhatchee RiverOrange County Public Works 28 8123/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 8,267,00000 12 Months Basin Land Acquisition Department Installation of bypass systemOrange County Public Works 28 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 1,000,000.00 12 Months from Lake Valerie Department Emergency Preparedness 28 Town of Eatonville 12/18/2001 EMPA,CBDG $ 20,000.00 12 Months Training Fire Station#2-Emergency Fuel CBDG. Facility 27 City of Apopka 11/14/2004 HMGP, POM, $ 20.00005 Months General Fund APPENDIX D-Project Priority List History Page 178 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Maitland Fire Department Automated Infrastructure 27 City of Maitland 12/12/2001 5 Months Inventory Mobile Communications trailer 27 City of Ocoee 7/31/1999 EMPA, HMGP $ 100,000.00 12 Months Watershed Program and Flood Provide flood prevention for Prevention Fire SL 1W 27 City of Ocoee 4/25/2002 NFIP, $ 50,000.00 6 Months Pollution Prevention IIncentives for I States APPENDIX D-Project Priority List History Page 179 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 A-57 WASTEWATER DIV 17 27 City of Orlando 1/29/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 832,000.00 2 Years STATIONARY GENERATORS Urban Search and Rescue 27 City of Winter Park 10/15/2006- CBDG,EMPA $ 700,000.00 12 Months Equipment Updated Canal Bank Protection 27 Orange County Public Works 10/4/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 1,200000.00 12 Months Department Canal Profiles for Flood Control 27 Orange County Public Works 10/4/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 1,200000.00 12 Months Department Hurricane hardening Eastern 27 Orange County Utilities Department 2/23/2005 HMGP,PDM $ 771,000.00 12 Months Water Reclamation Hurricane hardening of control 27 Orange County Utilities Department 2/7/2005 HMGP,PDM $ 150,000.00 12 Months building UCF Data Center Retrofit 27 University of Central Florida 2/7/2005 HMGP, UIMP $ 551 715.00 8/6/2010 Funding Generator for Police Dept./City 26 City of Edgewood 4/25/2002 EMPA,HMGP $ 33,597.00 12 Months Hall APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 180 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Chemical Emergency Preparedness and Hazmat Training 26 City of Edgewood 4/25/2002 Prevention $ 10,000.00 5 Months ' Technical Assistance Grants Stormwater outfall construction 26 City of Ocoee 7/31/1999 General Fund, PDM,HMGP $ 350 )00.00 12 Months Install wind-resistant doors on 26 City of Winter Garden 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 4Q000.00 12 Months fire station Upgrade emergency backup HMGP, generator system 26 City of Winter Garden 3/18/2002 CBDG,PDM, $ 10,000.00 12 Months General Fund 2/12/2007- CBDG, Electronic Weather Stations 26 City of Winter Park Updated General Fund, $ 1,800.00 6 Months EMPA $314,295.00/ Building A- East Orange Community Orange County Facilities $55,605.00 12 months/ Center project(Countywide) 26 Management Division 2/23/2005 HMGP, PDM 646.9 469 g C- May 2012 $46,939.00 Building 0- $39A52.00 Health Central Roof26 Orange County on behalf of Health 1/29/2005 HMGP $ 630,000.00 6 Months Enhancement Central Hospital APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 181 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Installation of stormwater Orange County Public Works control structure 26 Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 315,000.00 12 Months Lake Sherwood pumping 26 Orange County Public Works 3/18/2002 HMGP. PDM $ 1,434,000.00 12 Months station installation Department Powers DR/Balboa DR Flood Orange County Public Works 5/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 100,000.00 12 Months Control Department First Ave.and Oakdale St. HMGP, Drainage Improvements 26 Town of Windermere 1/31/2005 General $114,304.87 2/2/2010 Revenue Fund Campus Shelter Retrofits 26 University of Central Florida 2/7/2005 HMGP, UIMP $ 2103,824.00 12/13/2013 Funding CBDG, Emergency Generator for LS#9 25 City of Apopka 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM, $ 45,000.00 12 Months General Fund Flood prevention for Lakeshore 25 City of Ocoee 1/30/2009- General Fund, $ 300,000.00 5 Years Dr. Updated PDM, HMGP A-40 OFD STA 7 25 City of Orlando 1/26/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 50,000.00 12 Months ENHANCEMENT Generators for Critical Facilities 25 City of Winter Garden 1/14/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 74,550.00 12 Months APPENDIX 0—Project Priority List History Page 182 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Upgrade generator/shutter two 25 City of Winter Garden ; 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 100.00000 12 Months water treatment plants $2,54z,o00.00/ 33rd Street Prison Complex Orange County Facilities WB-$48561.00 12 Months/ Project 25 Management Division 2/23/2005 HMGP, PDM CEP-$41,587.99 September CAB- 2010 $820,849.00 500 Radiological Pagers 25 Orange County Fire Rescue 2/1/2007 UASI $ 104000.00 6 Months Department Disaster Resistant Orange County on behalf of the General Fund, Neighborhoods(Countywide) 25 American Red Cross of Central 11/8/2002 EMPA $ 10,000.00 12 Months Florida Bearhead Lake Area Flood 25 Orange County Public Works 8/23/2002 HMGP,PDM $ 340,OOO.00 12 Months Control Department Border Lake outfall/pumpingOrange County Public Works 25 7/31/1999 HMGP,PDM $ 606,000.00 12 Months station installation Department APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 183 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Control structure/outfall pipeline25 Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 HMGP,PDM $ 194,000.00 12 Months installation Department Flood protection study 25 Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 447,000.00 12 Months Department Install outfalls in lieu of current 25 Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 4,259,000.00 12 Months drainwells Department Lake Buchanan Drainwell 25 Orange County Public Works 10/4/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 80,000.00 12 Months Replacement: Department Lake Douglas outfall installation 25 Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 224,00000 12 Months Department Reaves Rd. Drainage Orange County Public Works Improvements 25 Department 1/31/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 87000.00 12 Months HMGP, 12th Ave.and Oakdale St. Drainage Improvements 25 Town o(Wintlermere 12/9/2004 General $124,901.00 5/18/2010 Revenue Fund CBDG, Emergency Generator for LS#2 24 City of Apopka 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM, $ 45,000.00 12 Months General Fund Emergency Generator for LS CBDG, #25 24 City of Apopka 3/18/2002 HMGP,PDM, $ 40000.00 6 Months General Fund APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 184 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Emergency Generator for LS CBDG, #32 24 City of Apopka 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM, $ 40,000.00 12 Months General Fund Belle Isle West Flood Mitigation 24 City of Belle Isle 1/30/2005 HMGP $ 123,190.00 12 Months Hal Martson Community Center Orange County Facilities $300,000.00 12 Months project 24 Management Division 2/23/2005 HMGP, PDM /$119 246.00 /January 2012 Retrofitting of Orange County 24 Orange County Fire Rescue 2/7/2005 HMGP, PDM $900,000.00/ 5 Years I fire stations Department $621,567.00 July 2010 Bonnie Brook Subdivision 24 Orange County Public Works 1/31/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 225,53]00 12 Months Flooding Department Edgewater Vegetated Slope 24 Orange County Public Works 10/4/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 525,000.00 12 Months Department High water level outfall 24 Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 HMGP. PDM $ 149,000.00 12 Months installation Department Install diversion box for 24 Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 1 572000.00 12 Months Minnesota AV runoff. Department APPENDIX D-Project Priority List History Page 185 '+R Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Lake Rhea flowway easement 24 Orange County Public Works 5/23/2002 HMGP,PDM $ 189,000.00 12 Months Department Maitland BLVD Sedimentation Orange County Public Works 24 8/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 1,110,000.00 12 Months Basin Department Obtain a flowway easement 24 Orange County Public Works 5/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 189,000 00 12 Months Department Obtain access to drainageOrange County Public Works 24 7/31/1999 HMGP,PDM $ 344,000.00 12 Months canal Department Obtain easement from lakeOrange County Public Works 24 3/18/2002 HMGP,PDM $ 1,640,000.00 6 Months Bryan Department Windermere Rd-Roberson Rd. Orange County Public Works Drainage Improvements 24 Department 12/9/2004 HMGP,PDM $ 230,516.00 12 Months Construction of a drainage P4 Ranger Drainage District 12/9/2004 HMGP, POM $ 200,000.00 10/31/2010 system along Bancroft Apopka Community 23 City of Apopka 1/30/2005 COMPLETED $ 1,500,000.00 3 years Center/Emergency Shelter CMG, Emergency Generator for LS #18 23 City of Apopka 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM, $ 40,000.00 2 Years General Fund APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 186 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 I Lake Conway Shore Flood 23 City of Belle Isle 1/30/2005 HMGP $ 177,550.00 12 Months Mitigation Health Dept./Medical Clinic Orange County Facilities $1,554,440.00/ 5 Years/ Project 23 Management Division 2/23/2005 HMGP, PDM $158,734.65 July 2010 Bonnie Lou DR Drainwell Orange County Public Works 8/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 68,000.00 12 Months Replacement Department Crane Strand System Flood23 Orange County Public Works 8/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 162,000.00 12 Months Control Department Drainwell Replacement-Lake23 Orange County Public Works 1/31/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 500,000.00 12 Months Sherwood Department • Fern Creek Drainwell Orange County Public Works 5/22/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 105,000.00 12 Months Replacement Department Hydrologic evaluation of Lithe 23 Orange County Public Works 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 430,000.00 12 Months Sand Lake Department Install setlimentationlretention23 Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 HMGP. PDM $ 250,000.00 12 Months pond Department APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 187 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Isle of Pines/Lake and Pines23 Orange County Public Works 82312002 HMGP,PDM $ 300,000.00 12 Months Estates Subdivisions Department Lake Lotto Drainwell Installation 23 Orange County Public Works 1/30/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 380,000.00 12 Months Department Lake Olivia-West Drainwell Orange County Public Works Replacement 23 Department 8/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 116,000.00 12 Months Londonderry Hills Subdivision23 Orange County Public Works 5/24/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 10,000.00 12 Months Flood Control Department Stormwater line installation 23 Orange County Public Warks 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 258.000.00 12 Months Department A-77 Al Coith Park/Euclid Ave- 22 City of Orlando 2/23/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 760,000.00 12 Months Gore St Drain Improvement: Fairways Mobile Home Park 22 Orange County Fire Rescue 513012009- COMPLETED $ 250,000.00 12 Months Department Updated Gulfstream Mobile Home Park 22 Orange County Fire Rescue 1/31/2005 COMPLETED $ 250,000.00 12 Months Department APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 188 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Orange County an behalf of the Community Outreach for 22 Holden Heights Front Porch Ongoing General Funtl, $ 250,000.00 12 Months Holden Heights residents Association HLS Grants Bates RD Erosion Control 22 Orange County Public Works 5/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 500,000.00 12 Months Department Mckinnon Road Drainage 22 Orange County Public Works 12/9/2004 HMGP, PDM $ 465,000.00 12 Months Improvements Department Purchase of outflow path 22 Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 671,000.00 12 Months Department Purchase property for detention 22 Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 574000.00 12 Months basin Department Big Sand Lake Drainwell Orange County Public Works HMGP, PDM, Installation 21 Department 1/31/2005 General Fund $ 97,725.00 12 Months Bulova DR Flood Control 21 Orange County Public Works 5/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 190,000.00 12 Months Department Install a pump station andOrange County Public Works 21 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 933,000.00 12 Months outfall pathway Department Installation of 21 Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 753,000.00 12 Months sedimentation/retention pond Department APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 189 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Pennington Road Drainage Improvements- Added- 20 City of Orlando 10/19/2009 PDM $ 450.000.00 2 Years West Lake Fairview Drainage Improvement 12 Months/ Evans Dining $906,110.00/ Hall- Evans Dining Hall January -$33,290.00 2010 GOV Youth GOV Youth Retrofitting to two Great Oaks Shel20 Great Oaks Village 217/2005 HMGP, PDM Shelter- ar- Village facility $7195700 January GOV Drainage 2010 Project- GOV $170132.00 Drainage Project- October 2012 Walker Middle School shelter20 Orange County on behalf of Orange 2/20/2005 HMGP $ 300,000.00 5 Years/ retrofit County Public Schools March 2012 Disaster Planning for Small Orange County on behalf of the General Fund. Business(Countywide) 20 American Red Cross of Central 11/8/2002 EMPA $ 20,000.00 6 Months Florida APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 190 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Barry ST Flood Control 20 Orange County Public Works 10/4/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 350,000.00 12 Months Department Christmas Park stonnwater Orange County Public Works 20 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 3,181,000.00 12 Months development Department Conduct study of Sunflower20 Orange County Public Works 7/3111999 HMGP, PDM $ 1,765,000.00 12 Months Trail watershed Department Elba Dredge and Grade 20 Orange County Public Works 10/4/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 1,110,000.00 12 Months Department Install Lake Robert Drainwell 20 Orange County Public Works 1/30/2005 HMGP, POM $ 380,000.00 12 Months Department Installation of bypass system20 Orange County Public Works 7/3111999 HMGP, PDM $ 883,000.00 12 Months from Lake Valerie Department Maitland Chain Control 20 Orange County Public Works 5/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 552,000.00 12 Months Structure Department Master drainage plan for 20 Orange County Public Works 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 896,000.00 12 Months Plantation Estates Department APPENDIX D-Project Priority List History Page 191 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Oak Park Road Drainage 20 Orange County Public Works 12112/2008 HMGP,PDM $ 1,200.000.00 12 Months System Installation(OS) Department Ouffall pipeline replacement 20 Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 PDM, HMGP $ 2,800,000.00 12 Months Department Emergency Response Team 20 Orange County Sheriffs Office 2/1/2006 HLS Grants $ 100,000.00 2 Months equipment purchase Riser Barrels Drainage Project 20 Ranger Drainage District 9/21/2009 HMGP $ 3,614,425.00 9/30/2012 Jones AV Stormwater 19 Orange County Public Works 5/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ Z011,000 00 12 Months Restoration Department Kingswood Manor Subdivision19 Orange County Public Works 5/22/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 550,000.00 12 Months Flood Control Department Randolph AV Area Flood Orange County Public Works 19 5/22/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 650,000.00 12 Months Control Department Riverside Acres Pipe Arch HMGP Orange County Public Works 5/23/2002 HMGP, $ 1,500,000.00 12 Months Replacement/Land Acquire Department PDMM Melville Street Drainage Project 18 Ranger Drainage District 9/21/2009 HMGP $ 655,062.00 8/31/2012 Beggs RD/Overland RD 17 Orange County Public Works 10/4/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 1.000,000 00 12 Months Drainage Improvements Department APPENDIX 0—Project Priority List History Page 192 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 A-83 Englewood Homeowner 15 City of Orlando 2/22/2005 HMGP,PDM $ 550.000.00 12 Months Rehabilitation Initiative Community Disaster Education: Orange County on behalf of the General Fund, Community Disaster Education 15 American Red Cross of Central 11/8/2002 EMPA $ 10,000.00 12 Months Program(Countywide) Florida Subcontract to clear roots 15 Orange County on behalf of 12/9/2004 General Fund, $ 10.000 00 12 Months Wedgefield Firewise Community PDM, HMGP Maxim ParkwMarlin Stree15 Ranger Drainage District 9/21/2009 HMGP $ 694,008.00 8/31/2012 Ascot Avenue Drainage Project Memorial MS Shelter Retrofit 14 Orange County on behalf of Orange 2/20/2005 HMGP $ 500,000.00 12 Months/ County Public Schools August 2009 Orange County Facilities 12 Months/ Work Release Facility Project Management Division 2/23/2005 HMGP $516,545.00 February 2012 APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 193 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 . Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy—DEFERRED PROJE 1999 - 2016 iii: .: Total Date Potential Reason it was Project Name Priority Responsible Agency Approved Funding Estimated Cost Deferred Score Source A-01 Acquisition and Rehab of 20 City of Orlando 2/23/2008 HMGP, $ 6,000,000.00 Special Needs Facility PDM Corrections Compound Water N/A Orange County Corrections N/A PDM $1.5M to$2M Lack of Funds Tower Department Hazard Mitigation Educational Orange County Office of Any funding Campaign N/A N/A Emergency Management source $ 10,000.00 available People with Special Needs Shelter Generator or Transfer N/A Orange County on behalf of N/A PDM $ 1,000,000.00 Lack of Funds Switch for Emergency Orange County Public Schools Generator Emergency Power Project N/A Orange County on behalf of the N/A PDM $ 50,000.00 New Priorities Salvation Army Identified Black Lake FloodplainN/A Orange County Public Works N/A PDM $ 50,000.00 New Priorities Restoration Department Identified APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 194 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Crane Strand Erosion Control N/A Orange County Public Works N/A PDM $ 50000.00 New Priorities Department ' Identified Design replacement for frontal panel wall for the Main Utility N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 50ff 000.00 Lack of Funds Plant Drainage mitigation for N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 50ff 000.00 Lack of Funds Engineering III building Drainage mitigation for Health and Public Affairs I and II N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 500,000.00 Lack of Funds building Drainage mitigation for Math N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 50ff 000.00 Lack of Funds and Physics Building _ Drainage mitigation for the N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 200,000.00 New Priorities Howard Phillips Hall building Identified Drainage mitigation for the N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 750,000.00 Lack of Funds Library building Drainage mitigation of New Priorities Academic Village residence N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 1$0,000 00 Identified halls • Drainage mitigation of Teaching N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 250,000.00 Lack of Funds Academy building Hazard Mitigation Plan N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 10 00 New Priorities 0000 Identified Prid Remove/replace existing roof New Priorities and penthouse from Main Utility N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 3$0,000 00 Identified Plant APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 195 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Wildfire Mitigation Project N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 30,000.00 New Priorities Identified County Courthouse BuildingN/A Orange County Facilities 2/23/2005 $ 245,000.00 Shuttering project Management Division Bearhead Lake Area Flood Orange County Public Works General N/A 8/23/2002 $ 600,000 00 Lack of Funds Control Department Fund Border Lake outfall/pumping N/A Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 General $ 560,000.00 Lack of Funds station installation Department Fund By the request Christmas Park starmwaterN/A Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 General $ 060,000.00 of the Public development Department Fund Works Dept. Director By the request Crane Strand System Flood N/A Orange County Public Works 8/23/2002 General $ 200.000.00 of the Public Control Department Fund Works Dept. Director Edgewater Vegetated Slope N/A Orange County Public Works 10/4/2002 General $ 100,000.00 Lack of Funds Department Fund Elba Dredge and Grade N/A Orange County Public Works 10/4/2002 General $ 200000.00 Lack of Funds Department Fund APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 196 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Flood protection study N/A Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 General $ 104000.00 Lack of Funds Department Fund High water level outfallN/A Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 General $ 100,000.00 New Priorities installation Department Fund Identified Install outfalls in lieu of currentN/A Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 General $ 400,00400 New Priorities drainwells Department Funtl Identified By the request Install sedimentation/retention Orange County Public Works General of the Public pond N/A Department 7/31/1999 Fund $ 191309000. Works Dept. Director By the request Install stormwater control Orange County Public Works General of the Public structure N/A Department 7/31/1888 Fund $ 600,000.00 Works Dept. Director By the request Isle of Pines/Lake and Pines Orange County Public Works General of the Public Estates Subdivisions N/A Department 8/2312002 Fund $ 40,000.00 Works Dept. Director Plan and install outfall fromOrange County Public Works General N/A 7131/1999 $ 100,000.00 Lack of Funds Lake Price Department Fund Purchase property for detentionOrange County Public Works General N/A 7/3"999 $ 1,000.000.00 Lack of Funds basin Department Fund APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 197 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 By the request Retrofit culverts along Apopka N/A Orange County Public Works 7131/1999 General $ $00,000.00 of the Public Blvd Department Funtl Works Dept. Director Stonnwater line installation N/A Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 General $ 300,000.00 Lack of Funds Department Fund Stormwater systems retrofit: N/A Orange County Public Works 7/31/1888 General g 560,000.00 ri Department Fund IdentifiedNewPorities By the request Upgrade Park Manor N/A Orange County Public Works 7/31/1999 General $ 1,500,000.00 of the Public Department Fund Works Dept. Director Upgrade pump station N/A Orange County Public Works 7/31/1898 General $ 250000.00 New Priorities Department Funtl Identified APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 198 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy— DELETED PROJECTSA1999 - 2016 Total pTotal Agency Approved Potential Responsible Responsible Date Estimated Reason project Priority Project Name Priority Funding AgencyCost was Deleted Score Score g y pp Source Orange County Orange Drilling of new aquifer County General $ No longer 35 Utilities wells 35 Utilities 2/1/2008 Fund 1,000,000.00 needed. Department Department 30 City of Ocoee Flood prevention on SR 30 City of 7/31/1999 DELETED FDOT Funds 2 years 50 Ocoee City of Winter Station 62 Shuttering City of CBDG, $ Windows had a 29 Park Project 29 Winter Park 2/12/2005 General 15,000.00 storm-rated film Fund, HMGP applied instead. Orange County Storm shutters for Orange County $ 29 Utilities Landfill Administrative 29 Utilities 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM 80,000.00 Department Office Department Project Maitland Fire EMPA, reassessed, 28 City of Maitland Department EOC 28 City of 2/7/2005 HMGP, PDM, $ reassigned and Retrofit Maitland General 53,000.00 completed Fund September 2013. APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 199 '! Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Facility not qualified as approved shelter due to structural design to 28 City of Maitland Senior Center Retrofit 28 City of 2/23/2005 HMGP $ minimum State Maitland 89,550.00 wind loading requirement. The facility structural design was not • as an essential facility. Storm shutters for City of HMGP. 26 City of WinterCBDG,PDM, Public Works Garage 26 Winter 7/31/1999 Garden (OS) Garden General Fund Police City of Department 26 City of Winter Structural improvements 26 Winter 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM $ moved into the Garden to Police Dept. Garden 50000.00 old City Hall Building. • Orange County Storm shutters for L.B. Orange County $ 24 Utilities McLeod Transfer 24 Utilities 80,000.00 HMGP, PDM 80,000.00 Department Station Department Orange Orange County East Orlando/Azalea County $ 23 Public Works Park System Flood 23 Public 5/23/2002 HMGP, PDM Z899,110 00 Department Control Works Department Orange County Lake Rose Hill Flood Orange $ No longer 23 Public Works Control 23 County 10/4/2002 HMGP, PDM 318,000.00 needed. Department Public APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 200 0 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Works Department Orange County Orange 23 Utilities Storm shutters for 23 County 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ Department Porter Transfer Station Utilities 9400000 Department • HMGP, City of A new building 22 City of Winter Storm shutters for City 22 Winter 7131/1999 CBDG,PDM, $ was built for Garden Hall Garden General 80,000.00 City Hall. _ Fund • Equipment was obtained A-03 Communications Ciry of $ through the N/A City of Orlando Response Unit N/A Ciianof 12/6/2002 HLS Grants 50,000.00 region and the city no longer needed the asset. • County Administration Orange N/A Orange County Building Hardening N/A County 3/1/2007 General $ Government project Government Fund 275,000.00 Town of Fire Station Town of General $ Eatonville's FO N/A Eatonville Refurbishment and N/A Eatonville 12/6/2002 Fund 10,000.00 was disbanded. Expansion N/A Town of Purchase of(3) N/A Town of 12/6/2002 General $ Eatonville's FD Eatonville Apparatus Units Eatonville Fund 600,000.00 was disbanded. APPENDIX D—Project Priority List History Page 201 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Annex 1— Orange County LMS Project Priority Submission Form Template The following pages are the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Project Priority Submission Form Template that is used by the Planning Committee to review and rank various projects, tasks, and initiatives submitted for consideration. ANNEX 1 —Orange County LMS Project Priority Submission Form Template Page 202 O;gE ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL MITIGATION STRATEGY(LMS) -E •-•••.. 4 PROJECT SUBMISSION FORM n tl GENERAL INFORMATION REQUIRED 1� I:IACKUII,\1 1) Sponsor name, address, e-mail, and phone number of primary and secondary contact for project: PRIMARY CONTACT SECONDARY CONTACT NAME NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS CITY STATE -- CITY STATE -- PHONE ZIP CODE PHONE ZIP CODE E-MAIL E-MAIL SPONSOR(S) PROJECT NAME 2) Narrative summary of the proposed project: (550 Character Limit) 3) Explanation for the need of the proposed project and what problem it addresses: (550 Character Limit) 4) Where is the project located?(List the Physical Address;if none,then use Let/Long) 5) List Potential funding sources for the proposed project: (List at least 1 option) 1. 3. ` 2. 4. 6) Associated Community Mitigation Goals and Objectives: FOR COMMITTEE REVIEW: AGREE: DISAGREE: Select a Goal/Objective 0 0 7) Hazard that proposed project will mitigate: AGREE: DISAGREE. ISelect a Hazard 0 0 8) Total Population Benefited Countywide: AGREE: DISAGREE: Select Total Population 0 0 9) Percentage of Jurisdictional Population Benefited: AGREE: DISAGREE: Select Percentage of Population Benefited 0 0 OW ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL MITIGATION STRATEGY(LMS) =•- • Ni`- PROJECT SUBMISSION FORM EA� C�jt'.CT 1 �4ccredded GENERAL INFORMATION REQUIRED 1) Sponsor name, address, e-mail, and phone number of primary and secondary contact for project: PRIMARY CONTACT SECONDARY CONTACT NAME NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS CRY STATE -- CITY STATE -- PHONE IP CODE PHONE ZIP CODE E-MAIL E-MAIL SPONSOR(S) PROJECT NAME 2) Narrative summary of the proposed project: (550 Character Limit) 3) Explanation for the need of the proposed project and what problem it addresses: (550 Character Limit) 4) Where is the project located?(List the Physical Address;if none,then use Lat/Long) 5) List Potential funding sources for the proposed project: (List at least 1 option) 1. 3. 2. 4. 6) Associated Community Mitigation Goals and Objectives: FOR COMMITTEE REVIEW: AGREE: DISAGREE: Select a Goal/Objective 0 0 7) Hazard that proposed project will mitigate: AGREE: DISAGREE: Select a Hazard O 0 8) Total Population Benefited Countywide: AGREE: DISAGREE: Select Total Population 0 0 9) Percentage of Jurisdictional Population Benefited: AGREE: DISAGREE: Select Percentage of Population Benefited 0 0 10) Cost of Initiative: AGREE: DISAGREE: 'Select Cost C Q 11) Cost Benefit of Initiative: AGREE: DISAGREE: Select Cost Benefit O C 12) Estimated Benefit to Cost Ratio: AGREE: DISAGREE: Select Ratio O O 13) Consistency with other Plans and Programs: AGREE: DISAGREE: Select a Consistency O O List the Plans and Programs Below: 14) Feasibility of Implementation: AGREE: DISAGREE: Select Feasibility O C 15) Probability of Community Acceptance: AGREE: DISAGREE: Select Probablitly of Acceptance O Q 16) Probability of Receiving Funding: AGREE: DISAGREE: Select Probability of Recieving Funding 0 Q 17) Upon receiving funding,what is the estimated time needed to complete the project? AGREE: DISAGREE: Select Estimated Time Needed Q Q 18) Is this project environmentally acceptable? (Tiebreaker) AGREE: DISAGREE: Select if Project is Environmentally Acceptable O O ITEMS BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY THE ORANGE COUNTY LMS PLANNING COMMITTEE Items 8 through 17 will receive an individual score of 0 to 4. The Total Score will range from 0 to 40,with 40 being the highest possible score. TOTAL SCORE FOR ITEMS (8-17): 0 FTPROJECT REQUEST DENIED: I I PROJECT RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: OC LMS Planning Committee Chair Date APPROVED BY OC LMS WORKING GROUP: OC LMS Chair Mr.Manny Soto Date Received on: I I Reviewed by Committee on: I I Tracking Number: - Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2016 Annex 2— Orange County LMS Project Priority Submission Form Guide The following pages are the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Project Priority Submission Form Guide. This guide will help to explain the various components that are used by the Planning Committee to review and rank various projects, tasks, and initiatives submitted for consideration. This guide may change to reflect various changes to priorities in mitigation projects, tasks, and initiatives. ANNEX 2—Orange County LMS Project Priority Submission Form Guide Page 205 &4`.0004tr, ...MCT MAMAOE4N�` Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy `� credited --- - -- COt tO1TAT10M�ROOw� Project Submission Form Guide 1. In the "Primary Contact"field,enter the first and last name, mailing address, phone number, and e-mail address. In the "Secondary Contact"field, enter a back-up contact's first and last name, mailing address, phone number, and e-mail address. In the "Sponsor(s)" field, enter the agency responsible for the submittal, maintenance, and completion the project. In the "Project Name"field, enter the designated title of the proposed project. This will be how the project is referenced on the Orange County LMS Project Priority List. 2. In the "Narrative Summary" field, explain the main purpose of the project; however, be brief(limit of 550 characters).The narrative should include a general project description with enough information for the Planning Committee to obtain a basic understanding of the project being proposed. 3. The "Explanation for the need" section (limit of 550 characters) should address the valid reason(s) as to why this project is important, problem(s) that the project will attempt to correct, and the potential solution(s) that will be used to address the problem(s). It will be up to the Planning Committee to determine the validity of this need and/or solution(s)to the problem(s). If further information needs to be submitted,such as a project history, engineering studies, drawings, or other details,you may attach additional pages as needed. 4. Enter the location of the project. At a minimum, include the physical address of the project. If a physical address is not available, please use latitude and longitude coordinates. The addition of the jurisdictional/municipal boundary of the property or who has ownership of the property is preferred but not required. 5. Enter potential funding sources for the proposed project. Funding sources may include mitigation grants, such as: Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM), Community Development Block Grant(CDBG), Residential Construction Mitigation Program (RCMP), Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (FMAP), etc. Other funding options may include general revenues, capital improvements, or other such sources. At least one (1)funding source is required, but up to four(4) options may be identified. The sponsoring agency should ensure that the funding source(s) are appropriate for the project being submitted. 6. Select one (1) community mitigation goal or objective from the drop down list that most closely relates to your projects overall goal. These goals are identified in the most recent version of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy. 7. Select one (1) hazard from the drop down list that your project will most likely mitigate. These hazards are identified in the most recent version of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy. If there are multiple hazards that this project would mitigate,then select "All-Hazards." 0 fyJWE.Cv /`NtwpLM CT MANApf-414, hyo _ C� / \ Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy ` (Accredrted J CCA�OITATIOM�AG4RA Project Submission Form Guide 8. Select from the drop down menu the estimated total population number that will receive a benefit from this project. Benefits may be direct or indirect. 0—Less than 10,000 people benefited 1-10,000 to 24,999 people benefited 2—25,000 to 74,999 people benefited 3—75,000 to 149,999 people benefited 4—150,000 or more people benefited 9. Select from the drop down menu the percentage of the population that will benefit from this project. A percentage measurement will help provide leverage for communities that do not have large population numbers. This percentage should directly correlate to the total population from Item 8. 0—Less than 5% benefited 1—5%to 24%benefited 2—25%to 49% benefited 3—50%to 74% benefited 4—More than 75%benefited 10. Select form the drop down menu the estimated cost of the project. This is the monetary cost to implement the project based upon estimates or quotes. The approximation should be as accurate as possible. 0—More than $5,000,000 1—$1,000,000 to$4,999,999 2—$250,000 to$999,999 3—Less than $249,000 4—No Cost ($0) 11. Select from the drop down menu the cost benefit of the project. The cost benefit includes any possible outcomes that the project may produce. This assessment may be based on monetary benefits like damages avoided for buildings, inventory,and contents; non-monetary benefits, such as protection of life or safety, may be more difficult to quantify. 0—No cost Benefit ($0) 1—Less than $249,999 2—$250,000 to$999,999 3—$1,000,000 to$4,999,999 4—More than $5,000,000 12. Enter the estimated benefit to cost ratio. The benefit to cost ratio will consist of the total cost benefit of the initiative (Item 11) divided by the total expense of the initiative ' d��Rurtr `4 ( ____1111-Mted •t MCC MAMA 6i MEN�� o c Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy EM p�- Project Submission Form Guide ""A"°"." (Item 10). This number should be at least 1.0 or higher, meaning that all potential projects should provide greater benefits than costs. 0—Less than 1.00 1—Between 1.00 and 1.49 2—Between 1.50 and 1.99 3—Between 2.00 and 2.49 4—Greater than 2.50 13. Select from the drop down list whether the proposed project is consistent with other plans and/or programs. This may involve researching various county/municipal documents, such as the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan,the Post-Disaster Redevelopment Plan,the Community Wildfire Protection Plan, the Floodplain Management Plan,the Capital Improvement Plan, or other programs, studies, or feasibility assessments. Projects do not have to be listed specifically by name, only that they are consistent with the mission, purpose, and/or scope of the reference plan or program. 0—Initiative may be inconsistent with other plans or programs 1—Initiative is not listed in another plan or program 2—Initiative is included in one other plan or program 3—Initiative is included in two other plans or programs 4—Initiative is included in several other plans or programs In addition, please list all associated plans or programs below the dropdown in the text box that include the project for consistency. When applicable, at least one (1) plan or program should be included to demonstrate consistency. 14. Select from the drop down menu the feasibility of implementation. This category involves how easy a project may be to complete, or the amount of time it will take to accomplish/implement. Factors to take into account when estimating the feasibility may include the physical location, scale or scope of the project, costs and expenses, population affected, susceptibility to other hazards, etc. 0—Very difficult to put into place due to extremely complex requirements 1—Difficult to put in place because of significantly complex requirements 2—Somewhat difficult to put in place because of complex requirements 3—Not anticipated to be difficult to put in place 4— Relatively easy to put in place within 1 year 15. Select from the drop down menu the probability of community acceptance. This item may involve surveying the community, analyzing demographic information, and/or determining the need of the project where the project will be implemented. Sensitive / tM J�� 1tar • Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy ited � w►�pOR°~ Project Submission Form Guide OCtt°Iurw issues may impact the scoring for this item. This category is intended to serve as a kind of"litmus test" of the population and its views on the project(s). 0—Would be strongly opposed by nearly all of the population 1—Would be strongly opposed by a significant percentage of the community 2—Would be somewhat controversial with a small percentage of the community 3—Of benefit only to those directly affected and would not adversely affect others 4—Likely to be endorsed by the entire community 16. Select from the drop down menu the probability of receiving funding. This question is related to Item 5, as funding sources may be intended for particular mitigation projects to address a certain hazard,timeline for implementation, or type of project proposed. 0—No potential funding identified/likely 1—Only source of funding is a mitigation grant for full funding 2—Grant funding likely but difficult to obtain the match portion 3— Local match is readily available 4—Full funding from local budget 17. Select from the drop down menu the estimated time needed to complete the project. This includes the total time needed upon receiving funding until competition.This may involve calculating feasibility of implementation, cost, location, and population impact. 0—Greater than two (2)years 1—Two (2)years 2—One (1)year 3—Six(6) months 4—Less than six (6) months 18. Select from the drop down menu the project's environmental acceptability. Some projects may contain a component where any work that is performed must meet guidelines that limit or reduce the environmental impacts. Environmental acceptability may require back-up documentation, such as an Environmental & Historic Preservation (EHP) determination form, environmental impact analysis/assessment, engineering study/report,etc. These do not have to be provided at the time of submittal of the project, but they may be requested if a project is submitted for grant funding consideration. This question will be used as a "tiebreaker," so the project sponsors should select their choice for evaluation by the Planning Committee. 1—Yes 0—Not Applicable -1—No stoimc . ®"" Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy ( 1---.) Project Submission Form Guide 4e0""° "°"'"°°"O Once the Project Submission Form is completed,there are several options on the electronic form in the top left corner that you may select: Clear Form, E-Mail Form, Print Form, or Save Form. Make sure to save your form throughout the data entry process. You can use the "Save Form" option to do so. The "Clear Form" button will completely erase all data from the form. You may want to use the button if you are submitting multiple projects with varying information, or if you made an error that needs to delete any currently entered information. The form should be sent electronically using the "E-mail Form" button,which will automatically send your form to the LMS Coordinator at iason.tavlor@ocfl.net, and to the Orange County Office of Emergency Management(OEM) at ocoem@ocfl.net. You will be sent an e-mail response once your project has been received for review. You may also select the "Print Form" button to print a copy of the form for your records. Please do not send a hardcopy of the form or a scanned printout of the form to the LMS Coordinator; only e-mail the electronic form. The Orange County LMS Planning Committee will review submitted projects at their next meeting. The Planning Committee will review the Project Submittal Form's self-assessment and determine if it agrees with the responses selected. Items 8 through 17 will receive an individual score of 0 to 4. The Total Score will range from 0 to 40,with 40 being the highest possible score (or 41 if the tiebreaker point is used). Upon review, the Planning Committee will either deny the project request or it will recommend the project for approval. If the project is denied, the LMS Coordinator will send an e-mail to the primary and secondary contact informing them of the Planning Committee's decision and the explanation of denial. The LMS Coordinator may ask for further information from the sponsor, or suggest that the project be revised and resubmitted for consideration by the Planning Committee. If the project is recommended for approval,the form will be signed by the Planning Committee Chair, and will present the Committee's recommendation to the Orange County LMS Working Group. The Working Group will take a vote to approve the project and add it to the Project Priority List. The Chair of the Working Group will sign the form for the approved project. To ensure that your project is reviewed in a timely manner, it should be submitted to the LMS Coordinator or Orange County OEM four(4)weeks prior to the regularly scheduled LMS Working Group Quarterly Meetings. These meetings usually occur the second Wednesday of February, May, August, and November each year. Please note that due to unforeseen circumstances;these meetings may be moved and will be noticed to the Orange County Office for Agenda Development with the correct date and time.