Item 11. Approval of Resolution Adopting the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy
City of Ocoee ▪ 1 N. Bluford Avenue ▪ Ocoee, Florida 34761
Phone: (407) 905-3100 ▪ www.ocoee.org
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date: February 7, 2023
Item #: 11
Contact Name: Stephen Krug Department Director: Stephen Krug
Contact Number: Ext. 6002 City Manager: Robert Frank
Subject: Approval of Resolution Adopting the Orange County Local Mitigation
Strategy. (Public Works Director Krug)
Background Summary:
The City adopted Orange County's existing Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS) in March 2018, giving the City the
potential to qualify for FEMA pre-disaster mitigation grants when available. The County adopted a new
Revised LMS in August 2022. FEMA has again 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. Benefits of adopting the
LMS are:
• Demonstrating to FEMA the City is working to increase our flood resiliency through mitigation planning to
improve disaster reimbursement eligibility.
• Eligibility for additional FEMA disaster and flood related grants
• Eligibility for additional points with the insurance Community Rating System Program
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:
Should the City Commission approve a resolution adopting the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy to
open the potential for the City to obtain pre-disaster mitigation grant funds?
Recommendations:
City staff recommends the Honorable Mayor and City Commissioners approve the resolution adopting the
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in order for the City to apply for pre-disaster mitigation grant funds.
Attachments:
1. Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy
2. Resolution
Financial Impacts:
Adoption of the Local Mitigation Strategy provides the potential to obtain pre-disaster mitigation grant funding.
Page 78 of 307
City of Ocoee ▪ 1 N. Bluford Avenue ▪ Ocoee, Florida 34761
Phone: (407) 905-3100 ▪ www.ocoee.org
Type of Item: Consent
Page 79 of 307
Orange County
Local Mitigation Strategy
2021
Adopted: January 11, 2022
Revised: August 17, 2022
Page 80 of 307
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Page 81 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
Table of Contents Page i
Table of Contents
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................................................. i
Record of Changes.............................................................................................................................................................................. iv
Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................................................. 1
Orange County Board of County Commissioners’ Adoption Resolution ....................................................................... 3
SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................................... 4
Purpose ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 4
Scope ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 4
SECTION 2 – PLANNING PROCESS AND CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................. 7
Table 1: Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group Membership ................................. 7
LMS Committees ....................................................................................................................................................................... 10
Plan Update Participation ...................................................................................................................................................... 11
Update Process 2021 ............................................................................................................................................................... 11
Stakeholders ....................................................................................................................................................... 13
Public................................................................................................................................................................... 13
Existing Plans, Studies, Reports, and Technical Information Integration ............................................................ 14
Incorporation of the LMS into Other Documents ........................................................................................................ 15
Updates: Evaluate, Maintain, and Revise – Monitoring ............................................................................................ 17
Table 2: Schedule for Evaluation, Maintenance, and Revision ..................................................................... 18
Plan Adoption Process ............................................................................................................................................................ 20
SECTION 3 – HAZARD RISK AND VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................... 21
Demographics ............................................................................................................................................................................ 22
Population Characteristics .................................................................................................................................. 22
Table 3: Estimated Population Totals by Municipality, 2019 ........................................................................ 22
Table 4: Population by Race, 2019 .......................................................................................................................... 23
Vulnerable Populations ...................................................................................................................................... 24
Figure A: Population by Age of Persons with Special Needs in Orange County .................................. 25
Table 5-A: 2019 Housing Units in Orange County, FL .................................................................................... 28
Table 5-B: 2021 Parcel Stock in Orange County, FL ......................................................................................... 28
Table 6: Year Structure Built in Orange County ................................................................................................. 29
Hazard and Vulnerability Assessment Tool Methodology ....................................................................................... 30
Figure B: Orange County LMS Hazard and Vulnerability Assessment Tool ........................................... 33
Hazard/Risk Identification and Vulnerability Descriptions ............................................................................. 35
Diseases and Pandemic ....................................................................................................................................... 35
Animal ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 36
Human ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 36
Plant/Agriculture .................................................................................................................................................................. 37
Extreme Temperatures ....................................................................................................................................... 41
Drought ................................................................................................................................................................................... 41
Figure C: 20-Year Drought Comparison for Orange County, FL (2001 – 2021) .................................... 42
Table 7: Categorical U.S. Drought Monitor Statistic Drought Severity Classification ......................... 43
Table of Contents
Page 82 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
Table of Contents Page ii
Freezes/Winter Storms ...................................................................................................................................................... 46
Table 8: Historical Winter Weather in Orange County ................................................................................... 47
Heat Waves ............................................................................................................................................................................ 49
Table 9: Record Temperature Extremes, 1892 - 2021 ..................................................................................... 50
Figure D: Heat Index Chart ......................................................................................................................................... 51
Floods .................................................................................................................................................................. 53
Table 10: Historic Lake Flooding Elevations ........................................................................................................ 54
Table 11: Total Area in Floodplains in Orange County, FL ............................................................................ 56
Figure E: Floodplains in Orange County, FL ........................................................................................................ 56
Table 12: Storm Events – Rainfall Amount ........................................................................................................... 57
Table 13: Development Criteria ............................................................................................................................... 57
Table 14: NFIP and CRS Communities in Orange County, FL ....................................................................... 58
Figure F: Flooding Locations in Orange County ................................................................................................ 60
Table 15: Repetitive Flood Loss Properties in Orange County, FL ............................................................. 61
Table 16: Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Zones ......................................................................................... 62
Severe Thunderstorms ........................................................................................................................................ 64
Hail ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 65
Table 17: Hail Event Magnitudes in Orange County, FL (1960 - 2021) .................................................... 66
Table 18: Hail Event in Orange County, FL, 2015 – 2021 ............................................................................... 66
Lightning ................................................................................................................................................................................. 68
Table 19: Annual Lightning Strikes in Orange County, FL ............................................................................. 69
Tornados ................................................................................................................................................................................. 72
Table 20: Tornado Strikes in Orange County, FL 1950-2021 ........................................................................ 73
Figure G: Map of Tornado Strikes in Orange County, FL, 1950-2021 ....................................................... 75
Table 21: Enhanced Fujita Scale for Tornados ................................................................................................... 76
Sinkholes/Land-subsidence................................................................................................................................. 79
Table 22: Sinkholes in Orange County, FL, 1961 - 2021 ................................................................................. 79
Figure H: Map of Sinkhole Locations in Orange County, FL, 1961 - 2014 .............................................. 81
Hazardous Materials ........................................................................................................................................... 83
Table 23: Hazardous Materials Incidents in LEPC District VI, FL.................................................................. 86
Table 24: Superfund Sites in Orange County, FL ............................................................................................... 87
Figure I: Extremely Hazardous Substance Facilities in Orange County, FL ............................................. 88
Terrorism/CBRNE ................................................................................................................................................ 92
Cyberterrorism .................................................................................................................................................... 97
Tropical Systems ................................................................................................................................................. 99
Table 25: Tropical Systems within Borders of Orange County, FL, 1950 – 2015 ................................ 100
Figure J: Tropical Systems 50 Statute Miles from Orange County, FL, 1950 – 2021 ......................... 101
Table 26: Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale .............................................................................................. 102
Table 27: Building Exposure by Occupancy Type in Orange County, FL ............................................... 104
Table 28: HAZUS-MH for Building Damage (#), 10-year Event in Orange County, FL..................... 104
Table 29: HAZUS-MH for Building Damage (#), 20-year Event in Orange County, FL..................... 105
Table 30: HAZUS-MH for Building Damage (#), 50-year Event in Orange County, FL..................... 105
Table 31: HAZUS-MH for Building Damage (#), 100-year Event in Orange County, FL .................. 105
Table 32: HAZUS-MH for Building Damage (#), 500-year Event in Orange County, FL .................. 105
Table 33: HAZUS-MH for Incomes Losses in Orange County, FL ............................................................. 107
Wildfires ............................................................................................................................................................ 109
Table 34: Fires by Cause in Orange County, FL: 1980 - 2020 .................................................................... 110
Page 83 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
Table of Contents Page iii
Table 35: Wildland Fires per NFIRS in Orange County, FL: 2010 – 2016* ............................................ 111
Figure K: Chart of WUI Population Areas in Orange County, FL ............................................................... 112
Figure L: Map of WUI Population Areas in Orange County, FL ................................................................. 113
Figure M: Chart of Burn Probability in Orange County, FL ......................................................................... 116
Figure N: Map of Burn Probability in Orange County, FL ............................................................................ 117
SECTION 4 – STRATEGIC GOALS AND CAPABILITIES ........................................................................................................ 120
Goals and Objectives ............................................................................................................................................................. 120
Authorities, Policies, Programs, and Resources .......................................................................................................... 122
Strategies for Implementation ........................................................................................................................................... 123
Table 36 – Orange County LMS Strategic Projects .......................................................................................... 124
Prioritization Methodology ................................................................................................................................................. 125
Plan Update and Project Progress .................................................................................................................................... 129
Appendix A – Orange County LMS Updates and Public Participation ....................................................................... 130
Appendix B – Orange County LMS Hazards Quick Reference ....................................................................................... 132
Appendix C – Orange County LMS Working Group and Committee By-Laws ....................................................... 134
Appendix D – Project Priority List History.............................................................................................................................. 137
Annex 1 – Orange County LMS Project Submission Form Template.......................................................................... 169
Annex 2 – Orange County LMS Project Priority Submission Form Guide ................................................................. 170
Annex 3 – Orange County LMS Adoption Resolutions .................................................................................................... 171
Annex 4 – Orange County LMS Project Priority List .......................................................................................................... 172
Annex 5 – Orange County LMS Active Initiatives List ....................................................................................................... 173
Page 84 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
Record of Changes Page iv
Record of Changes
Date Description of Change Page and/or Section
8/17/2022 Updated resolution dates Page 3
8/17/2022 Added resolutions Annex 3
Record of Changes
Page 85 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
Executive Summary Page 1
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
Greater Orlando Aviation Authority, 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
or letter by eleven (11) municipalities, one (1) aviation authority, one (1) drainage district,
, and one (1) university:
• Orange County (unincorporated)
• City of Apopka
• City of Belle Isle
• Town of Eatonville
• City of Edgewood
• City of Maitland
• Town of Oakland
• City of Ocoee
• City of Orlando
• Town of Windermere
• City of Winter Garden
• City of Winter Park
• Greater Orlando Aviation
Authority
• Ranger Drainage District
• University of Central Florida
Following approval of this updated LMS, a new formal adoption resolution or letter 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
Executive Summary
Page 86 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
Executive Summary Page 2
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 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 continues to occur, and as the tourism capital of the world, Orange County
has 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 the Orange County LMS Working Group presses on, the 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.
Page 87 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
Orange County Board of County Commissioners’ Adoption Resolution Page 3
Orange County Board of County Commissioners’ Adoption Resolution
Annex 3 contains the full Orange County Board of County Commissioners’ Adoption resolution that was
presented to the Board in 2022 for the unincorporated county.
The signed adoption resolutions for the other jurisdictions can be found in Annex 3.
Name of Jurisdiction Type of
Jurisdiction
Adoption
Date
Orange County (unincorporated) County 1/11/2022
City of Apopka City 2/2/2022
City of Belle Isle City 2/1/2022
Town of Eatonville Town
City of Edgewood City 1/18/2022
City of Maitland City 12/13/2021
Town of Oakland Town 3/22/2022
City of Ocoee City
City of Orlando City 4/25/2022
Town of Windermere Town 2/8/2022
City of Winter Garden City 2/24/2022
City of Winter Park City
Greater Orlando Aviation Authority Aviation Authority 2/16/2022
Ranger Drainage District Drainage District 1/12/2022
University of Central Florida University 11/29/2021
Orange County Board of County Commissioners’ Adoption Resolution
Page 88 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 1 - Introduction Page 4
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, human-
caused, or technological 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
strategies 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, human-caused, 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 update and revision. As per Florida Administrative Code (FAC)
27P-22, the LMS Working Group and associated LMS plan is required to receive federal
funds post-disaster, such as the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and other pre-
disaster sources, such as the Pre-Disaster Mitigation and Flood Mitigation Assistance
Programs.
Members of the Orange County LMS Working Group take part in conducting a hazard
identification and 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
Section 1 - Introduction
Purpose
Scope
Page 89 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 1 - Introduction Page 5
cause fatalities or injuries to people, property damage, infrastructure damage that effects
the operation(s) of the County or its jurisdictions, 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
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 early 2018, the National Institute of Building Sciences issued the “Natural Hazard
Mitigation Saves: 2017 Interim Report” that reported mitigation funding “can save the
nation $6 in future disaster costs for every $1 spent on hazard mitigation.” This estimate
was based off of 23 years of federally funded grant projects provided by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the U.S. Economic Development administration
(EDA), and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). 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, human-caused, 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
Page 90 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 1 - Introduction Page 6
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
Page 91 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 2 – Planning Process and Considerations Page 7
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 typically 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
First
Name Last Name Agency Title/Position Committee
Participation
Albert English Town of Eatonville Director – Public
Works
Art King Valencia College
Bea Meeks City of Edgewood City Clerk
Bob Boyd Orange County Public
Schools
Bob Francis City of Belle Isle
Brandon Lawrence City of Maitland Fire
Department
Bryan Garey
University of Central
Florida Emergency
Management
Steering
Cliff Frazier Florida Forest Service
Corey Bowles City of Ocoee Fire
Department
Dan Hagedorn City of Winter Park Fire
Department
Fire Chief
Dan Niederman Orange County Office of
the Medical Director
Daniel Negron Orange County Public
Works Department
Vice-Chair and
Planning
David Hamstra
City of Maitland Public
Works / Pegasus
Engineering
Dawn Mullins Ranger Drainage District Planning
Dominic Mezzatesta City of Orlando/UCF
Section 2 – Planning Process and Considerations
Page 92 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 2 – Planning Process and Considerations Page 8
First
Name Last Name Agency Title/Position Committee
Participation
Doug Gaines City of Ocoee
Eric Alberts Orlando Health Planning
Gary Rudolph University of Central
Florida
Hazem El-Assar Orange County Traffic
Engineering
Humberto Castillero Orange County Traffic
Engineering
Jacinta Mathis Town of Eatonville
James Benderson Town of Eatonville
Jason McCright Vista Lakes Community
Development District
Jim Hunt City of Orlando Public
Works Department
Planning
Jim Sula City of Maitland Fire
Department
John Corfield Orlando Health Planning
John Mulhall Orange County
Emergency Management
Staff
John Miller Ocoee Fire Department Fire Chief
John Petrelli Orange County Risk
Management Division
Jose Canas Orange County Fiscal
and Operational Support
Jose Gainza City of Winter Garden Fire Chief
Joseph Thalheimer
University of Central
Florida Emergency
Management
Emergency Manager
Juan Salazar Orange County Risk
Management Division
Karen Gilbert City of Winter Park
Police Department
Kate Hardie Orange County Public
Schools
Planning
Keila Walker-Denis Greater Orlando Aviation
Authority
Assistant Director –
Airport Operations Planning
Kevin Roesner City of Winter Park
Police Department
Laura Houston City of Belle Isle Police
Department
Lauraleigh Avery Orange County
Emergency Management
Director – Emergency
Management
Leylah Saavedra
City of Maitland Public
Works / Pegasus
Engineering
Page 93 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 2 – Planning Process and Considerations Page 9
First
Name Last Name Agency Title/Position Committee
Participation
Lihua Wei City of Orlando
Engineering Division
Luz Bossanyi Florida Division of
Emergency Management
Manny Soto City of Orlando Steering
Matt McGrew City of Winter Garden
Mentha Antoine American Red Cross Planning
Michelle Cechowski
East Central Florida
Regional Planning
Council
Mike Drozeck Orange County Public
Works Department
Mike Parker Town of Oakland Public
Works
Director
Mike Galura Town of Windermere
Mira Tanna
City of Orlando Office of
Business and Financial
Services
Misael Lugo Town of Eatonville
Nat Prapinpongsa
none
City of Orlando Public
Works Department
Orville Watson Orange County Utilities
Dept.
Steering
Penni Long Orange County Public
Schools
Phillip Francom Orange County Fire
Rescue Department
Rachel Reid Orlando Health
Reed Knowlton Orange County Capital
Projects Division
Rhonda Anderson Town of Eatonville
Rich Steiger Orange County Facilities
Management
Richard Earp City of Apopka Planning
Richard Campanale City of Ocoee Public
Works
Robert Smith Town of Windermere
Rodney Kapel Universal Orlando
Scott Rayburn Rollins College
Scott Brown Town of Windermere
Public Works
Sean Wylam City of Apopka Fire
Department
Fire Chief
Sean Gallagher Florida Forest Service
Stockton Reeves Center for Public Safety
Page 94 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 2 – Planning Process and Considerations Page 10
First
Name Last Name Agency Title/Position Committee
Participation
Susan Davis St. John's River Water
Management District
Tanya Naylor Reedy Creek
Improvement District
Tanya Elliott-Moore Town of Windermere Director
Teri Curtis Orange County
Convention Center
Todd Stalbaum Orange County Health
Services
Tom Draper Greater Orlando Aviation
Authority
Will Watts City of Maitland Fire
Department
Fire Chief
William Graf South Florida Water
Management District
Yolanda Quiceno City of Belle Isle City Clerk
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
potential hazards that may threaten Orange County, mainly the natural hazards, though
there are a few human-caused or technological hazards that have been profiled as well.
The complete list of the hazards applicable to Orange County is found in the most recent
Orange County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP). The Planning
Committee is 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.
LMS Committees
Page 95 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 2 – Planning Process and Considerations Page 11
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 Schools
• Orange County Public Works
• City of Orlando
• Greater Orlando Aviation
Authority
• Orlando Health
• Ranger Drainage District
• Reedy Creek Improvement
District
• University of Central Florida
Update Process 2014-2016
The Orange County LMS Working Group and Planning Committee used the 2020 FL
Review Tool to initially review the 2016 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 updated using the 2020 Florida Local
Mitigation Strategy Crosswalk
The following is a description of the review process:
• Executive Summary and Section 1 - Introduction:
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.
• Section 2 – Planning Process and Considerations:
The Planning Process from the previous 2016 plan was reviewed and
utilized for the 2021 update. Minor information was updated, including the
update of the LMS Committees and 2021 update process.
• Section 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment
o Orange County Demographics and Land Use
Plan Update Participation
Update Process 2021
Page 96 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 2 – Planning Process and Considerations Page 12
The facts and figures here were updated and revised based on the
2019 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.
o 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.
• Section 4 – Strategic Goals and Capabilities:
This section was reviewed and no major changes were specifically
identified.
• Appendices
This section was updated accordingly based on relevant information.
Appendix A and D was updated with new information.
• Annexes
This section was updated accordingly based on relevant information.
Annex 4 and 5 were updated with new information
Meeting Summaries and Attendance for each Planning Committee Meeting can be found
in Appendix A; below is a brief overview of each meeting.
• The Kick-Off meeting for the LMS Planning Committee’s review of the LMS
document was held on May 18, 2021; this meeting reviewed the Goals & Objectives
of the previous LMS and changes were recommended, along with reviewing the
LMS plan hazards and vulnerability analysis.
• The next meeting on June 6, 2021, brought the Committee together to discuss the
update process and needed information from stakeholders.
• The meeting on August 11, 2021, brought the Committee together to discuss the
updated draft to include the hazard/vulnerability analysis as well as to talk about
any identified gaps in information.
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 review and comment(s). Upon further revision,
Page 97 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 2 – Planning Process and Considerations Page 13
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 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. For the current review/update
process, no public comments were provided. Comments provided by the public are
typically received and reviewed for incorporation into the plan by the LMS Committee
during scheduled meetings. 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.
Public
Stakeholders
Page 98 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 2 – Planning Process and Considerations Page 14
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), 2018
• 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
• 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
Existing Plans, Studies, Reports, and Technical Information
Integration
Page 99 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 2 – Planning Process and Considerations Page 15
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 Documents
The Orange County Office of Emergency Management (OCOEM) and its participating
jurisdictions are responsible for incorporating the LMS into their 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 (HIRA) document is
pivotal for compliance with the standards. Orange County has used the LMS in the past
as one of the reference documents to show compliance, along with the CEMP.
Therefore, the LMS serves as a keystone document for Orange County’s continued
accreditation compliance.
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
Incorporation of the LMS into Other Planning Efforts
Page 100 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 2 – Planning Process and Considerations Page 16
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.
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
Page 101 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 2 – Planning Process and Considerations Page 17
means to reduce or eliminate the impacts from a hazard and rebound back to normal
after a disaster.
Updates: Evaluate, Maintain, and Revise – 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 outlined 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. For the 2021 update, there have been no significant changes in development
in the county or its jurisdictions that have resulted in revisions to this document.
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
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
Updates: Evaluate, Maintain, and Revise – Monitoring
Page 102 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 2 – Planning Process and Considerations Page 18
Emergency Management’s Mitigation Bureau no later than January 31 of each year, as
per FAC 27P-22.
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 the schedule of meetings (found in Table 2), currently facilitated
by LMS Coordinator, that the LMS document will be monitored, evaluated and updated
for Orange County.
Table 2: Schedule for Evaluation, Maintenance, and Revision
Year Quarter 1 Quarter 2 Quarter 3 Quarter 4
Adoption
of LMS
(Year 0)
J A J O
F LMS Adopted
by Orange
County BCC
M Working
Group
Meeting
A Working
Group
Meeting
N Working
Group
Meeting
M J S D
Year 1 J Maintenance:
Annual
Report
submitted to
FDEM
A J Evaluation:
Planning
Committee
Meeting for
any
needed
changes
O Record any
updates to
the hazard
occurrence
data in
plan
F Working
Group
Meeting
M Working
Group
Meeting
A Working
Group
Meeting
N Working
Group
Meeting
M J S D
Page 103 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 2 – Planning Process and Considerations Page 19
Year 2 J Maintenance:
Annual
Report
submitted to
FDEM
A J Evaluation:
Planning
Committee
Meeting for
any
needed
changes
O Record any
updates to
the hazard
occurrence
data in
plan
F Working
Group
Meeting
M Working
Group
Meeting
A Working
Group
Meeting
N Working
Group
Meeting
M J S D
Year 3 J Maintenance:
Annual
Report
submitted to
FDEM
A J Evaluation:
Planning
Committee
Meeting for
any
needed
changes
O Record any
updates to
the hazard
occurrence
data in
plan
F Working
Group
Meeting
M Working
Group
Meeting
A Working
Group
Meeting
N Working
Group
Meeting
M J S D
Year 4 J Maintenance:
Annual
Report
submitted to
FDEM
A Revision:
Revised
LMS
submitted
to FDEM
for review
J Revision:
Public
Workshop
for Input
O Record any
updates to
the hazard
occurrence
data in
plan
F Working
Group
Meeting
M Working
Group
Meeting
A Working
Group
Meeting
N Working
Group
Meeting
M J S D Revision:
Required
changes
from
review re-
submitted
for
Approval
by FDEM
Year 5
(Updated
J A J O
Page 104 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 2 – Planning Process and Considerations Page 20
LMS
Submittal)
F Revision:
LMS Adopted
by Orange
County BCC
M A N
M J S D
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 (annex 3) 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 fourteen (14) 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.
Plan Adoption Process
Page 105 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 21
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). The particular requirements of the
standards will be addressed 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 that have been identified as having potential to impact
Orange County and are as follows:
• Diseases and Pandemic
o Animal
o Human
o Plant/Agriculture
• Extreme Temperatures
o Drought
o Freezes/Winter Storms
o Heat Waves
• Floods
• Severe Thunderstorms
o Hail
o Lightning
o Tornados
• Sinkholes/Land-subsidence
• Hazardous Materials
• Terrorism/CBRNE
• Tropical Systems
• 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).
Due to State requirements for the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
(CEMP), Orange County is required to include the following hazards: Civil Disturbances,
Critical Infrastructure Failure, Major Transportation Incidents, Mass Migration,
Radiological Nuclear accidents and Special Events. As these hazards were considered to
have minimal impacts, they were excluded from an in-depth analysis and as such are
not included or otherwise mentioned in the Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS).
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 LMS Hazards Quick Reference Table for
summarized information for Orange County’s hazards and the associated risk and
vulnerability assessment and consequence and impact analysis.
Section 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment
Page 106 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 22
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.
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 2019 was 1,393,452, which yielded a density of 1,543 persons
per square mile. Around 35.25 % of the County's 2019 population resided in its
thirteen incorporated municipalities (Table 3) with the remainder living in the
unincorporated County.
Table 3 : Estimated Population Totals by Municipality, 2019
Municipalities Population
Totals
Percentage of Total
County Population
Apopka 53,447 3.84%
Bay Lake 61 0.00%
Belle Isle 7,010 0.50%
Eatonville 2,321 0.17%
Edgewood 2,899 0.21%
Lake Buena Vista 4 0.00%
Maitland 17,765 1.27%
Oakland 3,014 0.22%
Ocoee 46,305 3.32%
Orlando 280,832 20.15%
Windermere 3,430 0.25%
Winter Garden 43,648 3.13%
Winter Park 30,522 2.19%
Unincorporated
Orange County
902,194 64.75%
Total 1,393,452 100%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau ACS, 2019
Demographics
Population Characteristics
Page 107 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 23
The most recent population projection for Orange County in 2019 is listed at 1,393,452
according to the USCB American Community Survey (ACS). This would mean a growth
rate of 21.6% from 2010. Orange County largest in the eight-county region (which
includes Brevard, Lake, Marion, Orange, Osceola, Seminole, Sumter, and Volusia
Counties). Orange County still comprises nearly a third of the region’s population
(32.7% in 2019) despite the region adopting two additional counties (Marion and
Sumter Counties) in recent years. Orange County is primarily a metropolitan county
and is the hub of the Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, Florida Metropolitan Statistical Area
(MSA).
The age of the population of Orange County has risen since the previous census. The
Median age rose from 33.8 in 2010 to 35.6 in 2019, according to the USCB ACS. The
age group distributions for the county are changing as a result. The current age group
distribution reflects the youthful low median age with the largest population group of 25
– 54 at 44.2% of the total population; in addition, the 18 – 24 age group was the third
highest group at 11.5%. The 55 – 65 population comprised only 10.8% 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
22.8% for the 0 – 17 years of age. The 65 and over group was the smallest age group
at just 10.7%.
Table 4 : Population by Race, 2019
Race Number Percentage
White 885,678 63.56%
Black 291,789 20.94%
American Indian
/ Native Alaskan
3,205 0.23%
Asian 71,902 5.16%
Hawaiian /
Pacific Islander
1,115 0.08%
Other 89,320 6.41%
Two Race 50,164 3.60%
Total 1,393,452
Source: U.S. Census Bureau ACS, 2019
Page 108 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 24
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 June 2021,
there were over 3,758 people who had registered with the County’s special needs
program with about 2,818 considered to be active/engaged registrants. During a
disaster situation, people who are listed on this registry will 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.
Vulnerable Populations
Page 109 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 25
Figure A : Population by Age of Persons with Special Needs in Orange County
Source: Orange County Emergency Medical Services Office, 2021
2. Disabled Population
According to the 2019 USCB ACS, Orange County has an estimated 137,715 civilian
non-institutionalized individuals with a disability. Some of these individuals may be
registered with our 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. 2017 USCB ACS estimated that the County had
approximately 3,758 farmworkers, accounting for 3.32% of the State total.
Page 110 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 26
4. Tourism and Seasonal Populations
According to Visit Orlando,1 the Orlando market, which encompasses a metropolitan
area from Kissimmee in Osceola County, Orlando in Orange County, and Sanford in
Seminole County, hosted a record number of visitors during the 2019 year with an
estimated 69.29 million domestic visitors, with 6.49 million international travelers for
a total of 75.79 million tourists. Approximately 84% of the domestic visitors were
here for recreational purposes. Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic in 2020, there was a
drop of over 50% from 2019 in visitors to the Orlando market.
In order to accommodate these visitors, Orange County has about 450 hotels with
more than 127,000 guest rooms.2 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 thousands of additional people visiting Orange County area attractions.
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 Orange County
is a “host county” to accommodate visitors to the area and other coastal counties’
evacuations.
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 2019, 813,017 individuals (62.07%) spoke
English as their first language while 496,741 people spoke a language other than
English (37.93%). A multitude of other languages are spoken in Orange County. The
most prominent foreign languages include: Spanish, Haitian, and Portuguese.
Spanish is the largest single foreign language spoken with 356,492 people (27.22%).
Haitian is next with 45,662 (3.49%) followed by Portuguese at 15,678 (1.20%).
Providing outreach and education information or interpretation services prior to,
1 https://visitorlando.widen.net/s/hrmrzsb5dq/vo-2021-orlando-visitor-volume-2020
2 https://www.visitorlando.com/media/research/orlando-data/
Page 111 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 27
during, and following disasters are critical to helping protect our community. This can
add a layer of complexity to our emergency preparedness roles.
6. Homeless Population
Orange County’s current homeless population is estimated at 3,638 individuals.3 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
According to the Homeless Services Network and Central Florida Commission on
Homelessness (HSNCFL) there are 26 transient camps within the county. These are
located throughout the community, but are mainly on the east side of the County.
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 is
estimated to be 3,265 inmates, according to the 2020 BEBR statistics. 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 American Community Survey (ACS), through the American Fact
Finder webpage, estimated that in 2019 there were a total of 556,898 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 5-A.
3 Source: https://www.hmiscfl.org/community_snapshot/
Page 112 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 28
Table 5 -A : 2019 Housing Units in Orange County, FL
Types of Housing Number Percentage
Occupied housing units 457,949 82.2%
Owner - occupied housing units 262,330 57.3%
Renter - occupied housing units 195,619 42.7%
Vacant housing units 98,949 17.8%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey, 2019
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 2019, there were 844 boat, recreational
vehicle, van, etc. housing units, or less than 0.2%. The ACS states that approximately
3.8% of all occupied housing in Orange County was mobile homes. The Orange
County Property Appraiser estimates that there are 125 mobile home parks with 5,375
manufactured homes within the County.
Table 5 -B : 2021 Parcel Stock in Orange County, FL
Parcel Type Number Percentage
Single Family Residential 302,798 68.80%
Residential Condos 51,257 11.65%
Townhomes 24,289 5.52%
Timeshares 75 0.02%
Multi-Family 4,119 0.94%
Apartment Complexes 1,066 0.24%
Hotels 315 0.07%
Mobile Home Parks 125 0.03%
Manufactured Homes 5,375 1.22%
Vacant Residential Land 22,343 5.08%
Commercial 23,505 5.34%
Agricultural/Industrial 4,851 1.10%
Total 440,118 100.00%
Source: Orange County Property Appraiser website, http://www.ocpafl.org/
Another potential vulnerability is the age of the housing structure. Just under half of
all housing structures in Orange County (48.1%) were built prior to 1990, which is
before the implementation of the Florida Building Code in 1992. Refer to Table 6 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
Page 113 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 29
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 6 : Year Structure Built in Orange County
Year Structure Built Number Percentage
Built 1939 or earlier 7,035 1.3%
Built 1940 to 1949 8,653 1.6%
Built 1950 to 1959 38,723 7.0%
Built 1960 to 1969 37,477 6.7%
Built 1970 to 1979 66,519 11.9%
Built 1980 to 1989 109,140 19.6%
Built 1990 to 1999 106,127 19.1%
Built 2000 to 2009 113,343 20.4%
Built 2010 to 2013 22,914 4.1%
Built 2014 or later 46,997 8.4%
Total 556,898 100%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2019 estimate
Page 114 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 30
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.
Hazard and Vulnerability Assessment Tool Methodology
Page 115 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 31
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.
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 geographic 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
Page 116 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 32
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
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
• Low – Risk scoring is less than 30%
• Medium – Risk scoring is between 31% to 60%
• High – 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.
Page 117 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 33
Figure B: Orange County LMS Hazard and Vulnerability Assessment Tool
Page 118 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 34
This page intentionally left blank
Page 119 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 35
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. While
these potential hazards that may threaten Orange County are mainly natural hazards,
there are a few human-caused or technological hazards that have been profiled as well.
The complete list of the hazards applicable to Orange County is found in the most
recent Orange County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP). A
hazard/risk identification 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, the 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.
Hazard/Risk Identification and Vulnerability Descriptions
Diseases and Pandemic
Page 120 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 36
Animal
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
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 for 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.
On January 11, 2020, Chinese health authorities preliminarily identified more than 40
human infections with novel coronavirus in an outbreak of pneumonia under
investigation in Wuhan City, Hubei Province, China. Chinese health authorities
subsequently posted the full genome of the so-called “novel coronavirus 2019”, or
“2019-nCoV”, in GenBank ®, the National Institutes of Health genetic sequence
database.
Animal
Human
Page 121 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 37
On February 11, 2020 the World Health Organization announced an official name for
the disease that is causing the 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak, COVID-19 and
declared it a pandemic outbreak on March 11, 2020.4
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
• Coronavirus
• Dengue Fever
• E. Coli
• Hepatitis A, B, and C
• Influenza strains
• Meningitis (Bacterial & Mycotic)
• Salmonellosis
• 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 9th 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)
4 Florida Department of Health – Novel Coronavirus (2019nCoV)
Plant / Agriculture
Page 122 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 38
Previous Occurrences: Orange County has already experienced some significant
occurrences of diseases over the years, such as the COVID-19 Pandemic in 2020
and 2021, 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.
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 2020 COVID-19 pandemic caused over 600,000 deaths
in the U.S. and over 4 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
Page 123 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 39
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.
Impacts: There have been injuries associated with diseases in Orange County where
people or animals have been hospitalized for periods of time or, in some cases,
have resulted in death. The nature of some of these pathogens 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. The resulting impacts of and outbreak can vary from complete shut-
down of a facility, limited use, or added protective actions to slow or stop the
spread.
The spatial extent of damage as a result of disease outbreak is noted as high, the
incident can be expected to encompass more than 50% of the total land mass of
the 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
Page 124 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 40
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. During 2020 the County
developed the OC Strategic Response to COVID-19 Playbook to document
and assist in potential future pandemic/infectious disease incidents.
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
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%
Page 125 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 41
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. Prior to the COVID-19 Pandemic that started in 2020, 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.
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.
Drought
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
Extreme Temperatures
Drought
Page 126 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 42
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, the longest duration of drought (D1-D4) in Florida
lasted 124 weeks beginning on April 11, 2006 and ending on August 19, 2008.
The most intense period of drought occurred the week of February 27, 2001
where D4 (Exceptional Drought) affected 39.08% of Florida land.
No major drought events have taken place since the last LMS update.
The figure below shows a 20-year comparison of drought by condition for
Orange County. D4 drought conditions are defined as conditions where
exceptional and widespread crop/pasture losses occur as well as shortages of
water which create water emergencies.
Figure C : 20-Year Drought Comparison for Orange County, FL (2001 – 2021 )
Source: The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA's) National Integrated Drought Information
System (NIDIS) (https://www.drought.gov)
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,
Page 127 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 43
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.
Table 7 : Categorical U.S. Drought Monitor Statistic Drought Severity Classification
Category Description Possible Impacts
None No drought
conditions
No impacts
D0 Abnormally Dry
(not a drought)
Going into drought: short-term dryness slowing planting, growth of crops
or pastures. Coming out of drought: some lingering water deficits;
pastures or crops not fully recovered
D1 Moderate Drought
Some damage to crops, pastures; streams, reservoirs, or wells low, some
water shortages developing or imminent; voluntary water-use restrictions
requested
D2 Severe Drought Crop or pasture losses likely; water shortages common; water restrictions
imposed
D4 Extreme Drought Major crop/pasture losses; widespread water shortages or restrictions
spread water shortages or restrictions
D4 Exceptional
Drought
Exceptional and widespread crop/pasture losses; shortages of water in
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
Page 128 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 44
is moving into an El Niño 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 2021. This does not eliminate the fact that drought has
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
Page 129 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 45
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.
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.
Page 130 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 46
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
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
Freezes / Winter Storms
Page 131 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 47
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 Table 8
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.
Table 8 : Historical Winter Weather in Orange County
Start Date End Date Winter
Weather Type
Estimated Crop
Damages ($)
Adjusted Crop
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 SHELDUSTM
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,
Page 132 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 48
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
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 9, 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
Page 133 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 49
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.
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,
Heat Waves
Page 134 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 50
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 - 202 1
Date Record
Temperature
09/08/1921 103
05/31/1945 102
08/18/1916 101
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-Term Station Extremes for America (http://threadex.rcc-acis.org/threadex/process_records)
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 C) 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
Page 135 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 51
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 D : Heat Index Chart
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 Niño weather system for the next few months, which
typically means a period of time of above average precipitation and cooler
Page 136 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 52
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
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
Page 137 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 53
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
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.
There have been no major flooding events during the last 5-year update to
Floods
Page 138 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 54
this document.
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). Table 10 shows the historic peak, the date of the
historic peak, and the date of the first year of record keeping.
Table 1 0 : Historic Lake Flooding Elevations
Flooding Source Historic Peak
(Feet NAVD)
Date of Historic
Peak
First Year
of Records
Lake Apopka 68.39 October 1936 1935
Lake Barton 95.12 August 1960 1960
Little Lake Barton 94.37 August 1960 1960
Bay Lake 91.10 August 1960 1960
Lake Beauclair 62.58 July 1968 1960
Lake Bell 90.41 August 1960 1959
Lake Bessie 101.22 August 1960 1960
Black Lake 97.37 August 1960 1960
Lake Blanche 99.89 August 1960 1960
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
Page 139 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 55
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
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, Stormwater 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 120 lakes as part of its lake monitoring
program. Orange County has also tracked rain gauge data since 1986 with
twenty three (23) gauges scattered around the County. There are fourteen (14)
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.
Page 140 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 56
Floodplains in the Unincorporated Orange County are quite prevalent with over a
third (38.42%) of the land area in a 100-year or 500-year floodplain. Other
jurisdictions with high total areas of floodplain include: Belle Isle (60.15%),
Maitland (28.08%), and Windermere (36.62%).
Table 11 : Total Area in Floodplains in Orange County, FL
Jurisdiction
Total Area in
100-Year
Floodplain
(%)
Total Area in
500-Year
Floodplain
(%)
Total Area
Floodplain
(%)
Apopka, City of 10.64 0.03 10.67
Bay Lake, City of 1.80 0.00 1.80
Belle Isle, City of 58.88 1.27 60.15
Eatonville, Town of 22.03 2.26 24.29
Edgewood, City of 23.78 1.38 25.16
Lake Buena Vista, City of 0.02 0.00 0.02
Maitland, City of 26.00 2.08 28.08
Oakland, Town of 13.15 0.00 13.15
Ocoee, City of 14.34 0.11 14.45
Orange County Unincorporated 36.64 1.78 38.42
Orlando, City of 26.34 1.04 27.38
Windermere, Town of 36.62 0.00 36.62
Winter Garden, City of 24.54 0.13 24.67
Winter Park, City of 21.88 2.27 24.15 Source: Orange County Public Works, Stormwater Management Division
Figure E : Floodplains in Orange County, FL
Source: Orange County Public Works, Stormwater Management Division
Page 141 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 57
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.
Table 1 2 : Storm Events – Rainfall Amount
Storm Event Rainfall Amount
Mean Annual/ 24 hour 4.5 inches
10 Year / 24 hour 7.5 inches
25 year / 24 hour 8.6 inches
100 year / 24 hour 10.6 inches
Source: Orange County Public Works, Stormwater 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 1 3 : Development Criteria
Description Storm Event
Roadway (secondary) 10 Year / 24 hour
Ponds 25-year to 100-year / 24 hour
Residential Homes/Commercial Sites 100 year / 24 hour
Roadway 50-year to 100-year / 24 hour
Critical Facilities 500-year / 24 hour Source: Orange County Public Works, Stormwater Management Division
Some areas of Orange County are more flood-prone than others. The floodplain
map above (Figure D) shows those areas of Orange County that are designated
as being within the 100-year (1% probability) and 500-year (0.2% probability)
Page 142 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 58
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. The County
and participating jurisdictions will undertake the efforts listed in the plan to
continue to comply with NFIP requirements.
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
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
Jurisdiction
NFIP
Community
ID
Initial Flood
Hazard
Boundary
Map (FHBM)
Identified
Initial Flood
Insurance
Rate Map
(FIRM)
Identified
CRS Entry
Date and
Class
Apopka, City of 120180 07/19/1974 09/29/1978 10/01/1993,
Class 8
Belle Isle, City of 120181 07/19/1974 09/15/1978
Eatonville, Town of 120182 07/19/1974 12/01/1978
Edgewood, City of 120183 07/19/1974 09/29/1978
Maitland, City of 120184 07/19/1974 09/05/1979
Oakland, Town of 120663 12/06/2000
Ocoee, City of 120185 08/02/1974 11/01/1978
Orange County
Unincorporated 120179 01/30/1976 12/01/1981 10/01/1991,
Class 5
Orlando, City of 120186 08/02/1974 09/03/1980 10/01/1993,
Class 6
Windermere, Town of 120381 04/22/1977 12/18/1984
Winter Garden, City of 120187 07/19/1974 09/29/1978
Winter Park, City of 120188 10/18/1974 11/15/1979
Source: FEMA, NFIP, and CRS
Page 143 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 59
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.
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 twenty three (23) gauging
stations scattered throughout the county. There are fourteen (14) 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
Page 144 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 60
reliable rainfall data during weather events that can be used to alert residents
and emergency management officials of potential flooding.
In 2018, Orange County’s rainfall gauges measured 4,006 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, 103 instances
(2.57%) recorded rainfall of more than 2.00 inches. The number of storms that
last longer than 6.00 hours numbered 250 storms (6.24%). From 1940 – 2018,
Orange County’s average annual rainfall was 53.82 inches with a minimum of
32.45 inches and a maximum of 72.53 inches. Since 2000 – 2018, nine (9) years
saw higher than average rainfall: 2001 – 2005, 2008 – 2009, and 2017 – 2018.
Rainfall is closely tied to flooding. The following page contains a map of the
routine flooding locations across Orange County as determined in July of 2021.
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.
Figure F : Flooding Locations in Orange County
Source: Orange County Public Works, Stormwater Division
The Orange County Public Works 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.
Page 145 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 61
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 : R epetitive F lood L oss Properties in Orange County, FL
Jurisdiction Occupancy
Type
Flood
Zone
Number
of
Losses
Ocoee, City of Single Family AE 3
Ocoee, City of Single Family X 2
Orange County Unincorporated Single Family AE 2
Orange County Unincorporated Single Family AE 2
Orange County Unincorporated Single Family X 4
Orange County Unincorporated Single Family AE 2
Orange County Unincorporated Single Family X 2
Orange County Unincorporated Single Family A03 2
Orange County Unincorporated Single Family X 2
Orange County Unincorporated Non-Residential X 4
Orange County Unincorporated Single Family X 2
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
Page 146 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 62
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, 1/31/2017
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 to have a 1% chance to be equal or exceeded in any given
year. A 500-year floodplain has a 0.2% chance of being equaled or exceeded in
any given year. 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 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:
A
The base floodplain is mapped by approximate methods, i.e., Base Flood
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
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
Page 147 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 63
BFEs are provided on the FIRM.
Zone B and X
(shaded)
Area of moderate flood hazard, usually the area between the limits of the 100-
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
(unshaded)
Area of minimal flood hazard, usually depicted on FIRMs as above the 500-
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 X is 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
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
Page 148 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 64
assessment. There are some logistical 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 Shingle 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.
Severe Thunderstorms
Description: The State of Florida is considered the thunderstorm capital of the United
Severe Thunderstorms
Page 149 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 65
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 259 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 101 occurrences, followed by 1.00” (73) and
0.88” (33). 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).
Hail
Page 150 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 66
Table 17 : Hail Event Magnitudes in Orange County, FL (1960 - 2021)
Hail Size
(inches)
Number
of Events
0.00 2
0.75 101
0.88 33
1.00 73
1.25 8
1.50 5
1.75 32
2.25 1
2.75 4
3.00 1
TOTAL 261
Source: NWS
Table 18 : Hail Event in Orange County, FL, 2015 – 2021
Date Location Magnitude
(In Inches)
6/1/2015 OAKLAND 1.75
7/5/2015 OCOEE 0.75
3/28/2016 TANGELO PARK 0.75
6/1/2016 DOCTOR
PHILLIPS
0.75
7/12/2016 BEULAH 0.75
4/4/2017 LAKE PICKETT 1.5
7/4/2017 EATONVILLE 0.88
7/4/2017 MAITLAND 1
7/20/2017 SKY LAKE 1
3/20/2018 WESTWOOD 1.75
3/20/2018 PINE CASTLE 1
3/20/2018 CONWAY 1.25
3/20/2018 BITHLO 1
6/7/2018 TAFT 0.88
5/5/2019 UNION PARK 1
5/5/2019 UNION PARK 1
7/19/2019 DUBSDREAD 1.25
7/19/2019 WINTER
GARDEN
1.75
7/19/2019 WINTER
GARDEN
1.75
5/21/2020 TANGELO PARK 1.75
5/21/2020 (MCO)ORLANDO
INTL AR
0.88
5/21/2020 UNION PARK 0.75
5/21/2020 UNION PARK 1.25
5/21/2020 UNION PARK 1
5/22/2020 WINTER
GARDEN
1
5/22/2020 CLARCONA 1
6/22/2020 CONWAY 0.75
8/9/2020 CLARCONA 1
4/11/2021 FAIRVILLA 1
4/11/2021 WINTER PARK 1.75
4/11/2021 MAITLAND 1
4/11/2021 UNION PARK 1
AVERAGE HAIL SIZE 1.12
Source: NWS
From 2015 to 2021, there were 32 hail events that took place across Orange
County and its jurisdictions. According to the NWS, the average hail size was
1.12 inches
Location: Hail has the ability to occur anywhere in the County and its jurisdictions.
Page 151 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 67
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 2021, there were 261 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
Page 152 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 68
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 19 shows the annual
lightning strikes from 2010 through 2020 with a total of 1,024,219 strikes over
the past ten years.
Lightning
Page 153 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 69
Table 1 9 : Annual Lightning Strikes in Orange County, FL
Year Number of
Strikes
2010 53,494
2011 32,943
2012 40,082
2013 39,645
2014 53,124
2015 182,748
2016 121,471
2017 124,619
2018 151,990
2019 108,064
2020 116,039
TOTAL 1,024,219
Source: Earth Networks Weather Stations in Orange County, 2010 – 20120
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 NOAA, 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 from 2010 through 2020. 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
Page 154 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 70
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 19, each year, from 2010 through 2020, 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
Wedgefield neighborhoods, as well as areas along the St. Johns River experience
a high density of lightning strikes as the sea breeze develops into thunderstorm
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, there have been over 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
Page 155 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 71
with 70 lightning strikes in Orange County. Property damages are reported by
NOAA have been approximately $5.03 million over 60 years. The last reported
property damages came in 2019; injuries from lightning last occurred in 2018
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 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
Page 156 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 72
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 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
Tornados
Page 157 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 73
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 68 tornados in
Orange County from 1950 to 2021 (Table 20). The most frequent storms were
weaker tornados classified as an F/EF-0 with 32 events and F/EF-1 numbered at
21 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.
Table 20: Tornado Strikes in Orange County, FL 1950-202 1
Date Magnitude Location Property
Damage ($) Injuries Deaths
05/15/1950 F1 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 F1 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
11/09/1968 F1
Hillsborough, Polk, Lake,
Unincorporated Orange County,
and Windermere
500,000.00 3 0
04/19/1969 F1 Orlando and Maitland 250,000.00 0 0
05/13/1971 F0 Unincorporated Orange County - 0 0
02/03/1972 F1 Unincorporated Orange County 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 F0 Unincorporated Orange County 25,000.00 1 0
08/06/1975 F1 Ocoee 25,000.00 0 0
05/12/1976 F0 Orlando 25,000.00 1 0
02/24/1977 F0 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 F0 Unincorporated Orange County 25,000.00 0 0
07/01/1978 F0 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 F0 Unincorporated Orange County - 0 0
06/20/1981 F0 Winter Park 25,000.00 0 0
06/21/1981 F1 Unincorporated Orange County 250,000.00 0 0
06/21/1981 F0 Apopka 250.00 0 0
06/21/1981 F0 Unincorporated Orange County 2,500.00 0 0
Page 158 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 74
08/27/1981 F0 Apopka 2,500.00 0 0
04/29/1982 F1 Orlando 25,000.00 0 0
09/10/1982 F0 Eatonville 30.00 0 0
02/02/1983 F2 Orlando 250,000.00 0 0
02/02/1983 F0 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 F0 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
01/07/1995 F1 Orlando 500,000.00 0 0
06/01/1997 F0 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 F0 Unincorporated Orange County - 0 0
06/13/2006 F0 Apopka 10,000.00 0 0
10/07/2006 F0 Apopka 70,000.00 0 0
11/07/2006 F0 Orlando 40,000.00 0 0
07/15/2009 EF0* Unincorporated Orange County 25,000.00 0 0
09/19/2011 EF0* Unincorporated Orange County - 0 0
12/10/2012 EF0* Unincorporated Orange County - 0 0
03/29/2014 EF0* Unincorporated Orange County - 0 0
7/24/2014 EF0* Christmas - 0 0
9/1/2016 EF0* Unincorporated Orange County 21,000.00 0 0
7/7/2017 EF0* Unincorporated Orange County - 0 0
12/9/2018 EF0* Unincorporated Orange County 40,000.00 0 0
6/6/2020 EF0* Unincorporated Orange County - 0 0
6/6/2020 EF0* Unincorporated Orange County - 0 0
6/6/2020 EF1* Belle Isle 956,000.00 0 0
TOTALS 60 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 20.
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
Page 159 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 75
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 G : Map of Tornado Strikes in Orange County, FL, 1950-2021
Source: NOAA
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 21 outlines the Enhanced Fujita Scale. The strongest tornadoes max out in
the EF5 range (more than 200 mph).
Page 160 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 76
Table 21: Enhanced Fujita Scale for Tornados
Size
Funnel
Speed
(mph)
Damage Damage Assessment
EF-0 65 – 85 Light
Damage
Peels surface off some roofs; some damage to gutters or
siding; branches broken off trees; shallow-rooted trees
pushed over.
EF-1 86 – 110 Moderate
Damage
Roofs severely stripped; mobile homes overturned or badly
damaged; loss of exterior doors; windows and other glass
broken.
EF-2 111 – 135 Considerable
Damage
Roofs torn off well-constructed houses; foundations of frame
homes shifted; mobile homes completely destroyed; large
trees snapped or uprooted; light-object missiles generated;
cars lifted off ground.
EF-3 136 – 165 Severe
Damage
Entire stories of well-constructed houses destroyed; severe
damage to large buildings such as shopping malls; trains
overturned; trees debarked; heavy cars lifted off the ground
and thrown; structures with weak foundations blown away
some distance.
EF-4 166 – 200 Devastating
Damage
Well-constructed houses and whole frame houses completely
leveled; cars thrown and small missiles generated.
EF-5 >200 Incredible
Damage
Strong frame houses leveled off foundations and swept away;
automobile-sized missiles fly through the air in excess of 100
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 68 tornados since 1950, comprised
mainly of 53 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 68 tornados occurring in the span of 71 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
Page 161 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 77
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.
Total property damages for the 68 recorded tornados in Orange County are
listed at over $37 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 20 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
Page 162 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 78
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
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: High – 71%
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.
Page 163 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 79
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
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 22 : Sinkholes in Orange County, FL, 1961 - 202 1
Depth
(feet)
Number of
Sinkholes
< 5 102
5 – 9 29
10 – 24 39
25 – 49 15
50 – 99 7
100 – 199 2
> 200 1
TOTAL 195
Source: FDEP FGS SIR
Sinkholes / Land-subsidence
Page 164 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 80
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.
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.
Page 165 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 81
Figure H : Map of Sinkhole Locations in Orange County, FL, 1961 - 2014
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 214 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
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
Page 166 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 82
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
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
Page 167 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 83
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: High – 62%
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.
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
Hazardous Materials
Page 168 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 84
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
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.
Page 169 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 85
Previous Occurrences: According to a report from the State Watch Office (SWO), from
2016 to 2020 there have been 447 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 or fixed facility related involve
petroleum chemicals or non-EHS chemicals. There were 369 reported spills such
as gasoline, diesel fuel, automotive oil, ethylene glycol, propane, or a mixture of
these. There were also 77 reports of non-petroleum release incidents. 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.
Page 170 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 86
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 23 contains information related to
reported HazMat incidents that have occurred within Orange County. 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 23 : Hazardous Materials Incidents in LEPC District VI, FL
Incident Type 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Average*
Fixed Facility
Non-Petroleum 5 12 11 9 14 10
Fixed Facility
Petroleum 7 11 16 12 15 12
Transportation with
Petroleum 63 52 69 69 65 64
Transportation
without Petroleum 4 2 5 3 3 3
TOTAL 79 77 101 93 97 89 *Rounded to the nearest whole number
Source: State Emergency Response Commission (SERC)
Page 171 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 87
Other previous occurrences in Orange County can be found in the list of
Superfund sites in Table 24. 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 24: Superfund Sites in Orange County, FL
ID
Number
Facility
Name
Reason Added Proposed Listed Construction
Completed
FLD0040
64242
Chevron
Chemical Co.
(Ortho
Division)
Soil and groundwater
contamination by pesticides,
petroleum products and VOCs,
including xylene from waste
disposal practices at a former
pesticide formulation plant.
Contaminated soil has been
removed.
01/18/1994 05/31/1994 02/10/1998
FLD0559
45653
City Industries,
Inc.
Soil and groundwater
contamination by poor waste
handling processes and intentional
dumping by a former industrial
waste handling business. The site
was abandoned with around 1,200
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.
06/24/1988 10/04/1989 03/02/1994
FLD9841
69235
Orlando
Former
Gasification
Plant
Soil and groundwater are
contaminated by coal tar waste
products. This site is listed as a
Superfund Alternative Site.
- - -
FLD0499
85302
Zellwood
Ground Water
Contamination
12/30/1982 09/08/1983 09/16/2003
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Superfund_sites_in_Florida
Page 172 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 88
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
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 I : Extremely Hazardous Substance Facilities in Orange County, FL
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
Page 173 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 89
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
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.
Page 174 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 90
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
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.
Page 175 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 91
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.
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
Page 176 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 92
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.
Risk: Low – 29%
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,
Terrorism / CBRNE
Page 177 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 93
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
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
Page 178 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 94
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.
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.
Page 179 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 95
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.
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. 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.
Page 180 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 96
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
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
Page 181 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 97
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.
Cyberterrorism
Description: A cyberattack is defined as a malicious computer-to-computer attack
through cyberspace that undermines the confidentiality, integrity, or availability
of a computer (or network), data on that computer, or processes and systems
controlled by that computer. National Security Presidential Directive
54/Homeland Security Presidential Directive 23 (NSPD-54/HSPD-23) defines
cyberspace as the interdependent network of information technology
infrastructures, and includes the Internet, telecommunications networks,
computer systems, and embedded processors and controllers in critical
industries.
Threats to cyber space are regarded as one of the most serious economic and
national security challenges in this day in age for the United States. As the
Director of National Intelligence (DNI) recently testified before Congress, “the
growing connectivity between information systems, the Internet, and other
infrastructures creates opportunities for attackers to disrupt telecommunications,
electrical power, energy pipelines, refineries, financial networks, and other
critical infrastructures.5
The duration of a cyberattack is dependent on the complexity of the attack, how
widespread it is, how quickly the attack is detected, and the resources available
to aid in restoring the system. One of the difficulties of malicious cyber activity is
that it could come from virtually anyone, virtually anywhere.
Location: While cyber risks and threats are mainly thought of as not having specific
locations, there are physical sites that would be impacted. Locations at risk could
include government agencies, institutions of higher education, medical facilities,
and various private sector entities.
Extent: As most day-to-day activities rely on the Internet in one aspect or another, any
person or infrastructure is susceptible to cybersecurity threats. Energy pipelines,
specifically U.S. natural gas pipelines, have been cited by DHS as targets of
cyberattack. While information on these attacks is not publicly available
knowledge, cyber security officials warn that, with sufficient access, a hacker
5 Director of National Intelligence, Annual Threat Assessment of the Intelligence Community for the Senate Armed
Services Committee, Statement for the Record, March 10, 2009, at 39.
Cyberterrorism
Page 182 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 98
could “manipulate pressure and other control system settings, potentially reaping
explosions and other dangerous conditions.”6
Probability: Based on the growing sophistication and political climate, there is a high
probability of future cyberattack events within Orange County.
Impacts: The public is heavily reliant on technology for daily life, including cell phones,
handheld devices such as tablets, and computers. Any disruption to this
technology caused by a cyberattack would impair the ability for the public to
conduct basic activities, such as communications, mobile banking, and work.
Property and facilities may become either uninhabitable or unusable as a result
of a cyberattack, particularly if their infrastructure if reliant on technology for
sustainability.
Cyberattacks can interfere with emergency response communication and
activities. Given that many first responders rely on technology both at operations
center and in the field, a cyberattack could impair the ability to communicate.
For example, many agencies rely on technology to notify and route responders to
the scene of the emergency. More specifically, 911 dispatch centers rely on
technology which makes them vulnerable to cyber exploits. Considering all of
these factors, cyberattack/cyberterrorism would generally have a high impact to
Orange County and its jurisdictions.
Mitigation Measures: The 2019 UASI THIRA addresses Cybersecurity and identified that
all critical infrastructure has cyber incident plans/annexes that are reviewed on a
regular basis. Much of the critical infrastructure also has dedicated IT/Cybersecurity
departments. Additionally, the region has a Region Cyber Response Plan to coordination
region efforts.
Vulnerability: There is some amount of vulnerability present in Orange County to the
hazard of cyberterrorism. A significant majority of critical infrastructure systems
are in some way tied to technology, oftentimes through virtual operations and
supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems. Therefore, a
cyberattack could disable the vast majority of systems which control these pieces
of critical infrastructure, as well as traffic control, dispatch, utility, and response
systems. Targeted cyberattacks can impact water or wastewater treatment
facilities. The disruption of the virtual systems tied to this infrastructure could
cause water pollution or contamination and subsequent environmental issues..
Risk: High – 62%
Despite the multitude of mitigation actions, the unpredictability of cyberterrorism
events and the large number of potential targets means that this hazard has the
potential to occur again in the future and often occurs on a daily basis at a smaller
scale.
6 Florida State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2013
Page 183 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 99
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 (H1, 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 38 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 25
will be those systems whose “eye” or center point of the system crossed the
border of Orange County. There have been a total of 14 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 25. The other
24 systems came within close range to Orange County and its jurisdictions, but
Tropical Systems
Page 184 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 100
their impacts were more indirect, such as rain, elevated winds and gusts, and
possible evacuations from surrounding areas to Orange County.
Table 2 5 : Tropical Systems within Borders of Orange County, FL, 1950 – 2015
Storm
Name
Date of
Impact
Magnitude
Crossing Orange
County Border
Greatest
Magnitude
of System
Area(s) of Direct
Impact(s) within Orange
County
Easy 09/06/1950 TS H3 Winter Garden, Ocoee,
Apopka
King 10/18/1950 H1 H3 Ocoee, Apopka
Unnamed
1959 06/18/1959 TD H1 Unincorporated Orange
County
Donna 09/11/1960 H3 H4 Apopka
Cleo 08/28/1964 TS H5 Unincorporated Orange
County
Brenda 06/19/1968 TD H1 Unincorporated Orange
County
Jenny 10/04/1969 TD TS Unincorporated Orange
County
Subtropical
1 1974 06/25/1974 SS SS Unincorporated Orange
County
Subtropical
3 1976 09/13/1976 TD SS Windermere, Ocoee,
Apopka
Dennis 08/18/1981 TS H1 Unincorporated Orange
County
Gabrielle 09/14/2001 TS H1 Bay Lake, Lake Buena Vista,
Orlando, Winter Park
Henri 09/06/2003 TD TS
Winter Garden, Ocoee,
Orlando, Eatonville,
Maitland
Charley 08/14/2004 H1 H4 Lake Buena Vista, Orlando,
Eatonville
Irma 09/10/2017 TS H5 Unincorporated Orange
County
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 J are the tropical systems that have
passed within 65 miles from the center of Orange County.
Page 185 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 101
Figure J : Tropical Systems 5 0 Statute M iles from Orange County, FL, 195 0 – 2021
Source: Natioanal Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 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 26 is the main measurement tool for hurricane magnitude. Using the
metric of tropical systems that have come within 65 miles from Orange County,
there have been a total of 132 systems since the year 1842. The weaker
systems, like tropical storms, have been more prevalent in the past with 108
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.
Page 186 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 102
Table 26: Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale
Category Wind
Speed Types of Damage Due to Winds
Estimated
Return
Period
TD/SD* <39 mph
Low pressure system will cause slight damage from
wind and rain:
Damage due to winds from tropical/sub-tropical storms may
occur at several points, like the roof, windows and siding, air
conditioners, as well as damage to property and automobiles.
Water damage may result in flooding, mold, interior damages,
or sewage system back-ups.
N/A
TS/SS* 39-73 mph
High winds will produce minor damage from wind and
rain:
Damage due to winds from tropical/sub-tropical storms may
occur at several points, like the roof, windows and siding, air
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.
N/A
H1 74-95 mph
Very dangerous winds will produce some damage:
Well-constructed frame homes could have damage to roof,
shingles, and vinyl siding and gutters. Large branches of trees
will snap and shallowly rooted trees may be toppled. Extensive
damage to power lines and poles likely will result in power
outages that could last a few to several days.
10 – 11 years
(9.1 – 10%)
H2 96-110 mph
Extremely dangerous winds will cause extensive
damage:
Well-constructed frame homes could sustain major roof and
siding damage. Many shallowly rooted trees will be snapped
or uprooted and block numerous roads. Near-total power loss
is expected with outages that could last from several days to
weeks.
22 – 28 years
(3.58 – 4.55%)
H3 111-129
mph
Devastating damage will occur:
Well-built framed homes may incur major damage or removal
of roof decking and gable ends. Many trees will be snapped or
uprooted, blocking numerous roads. Electricity and water will
be unavailable for several days to weeks after the storm
passes.
39 – 53 years
(1.89 – 2.56%)
H4 130-156
mph
Catastrophic damage will occur:
Well-built framed homes can sustain severe damage with loss
of most of the roof structure and/or some exterior walls. Most
trees will be snapped or uprooted and power poles 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.
85 – 120 years
(0.83 – 1.18%)
Page 187 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 103
H5 157 mph or
higher
Catastrophic damage will occur:
A high percentage of framed homes will be destroyed, with
total roof failure and wall collapse. Fallen trees and power
poles will isolate residential areas. Power outages will last for
weeks to possibly months. Most of the area will be
uninhabitable for weeks or months.
220 – 340 years
(0.29 – 0.45%)
Note: * - Tropical Depressions and Tropical Storms and other sub-tropical systems are not typically part of the
Saffir-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
26, 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. 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.
Page 188 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 104
In an effort to provide 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 27 : Building Exposure by Occupancy Type in Orange County, FL
Occupancy
Type
Exposure
(in $1,000’s)
Percent of
Total
Exposure (%)
Number of
Buildings
Percent of
Total
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
Religious 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 27.
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 28 : HAZUS -MH for Building Damage (#), 10-year Event in Orange County, FL
Occupancy
Type None Minor Moderate Severe Destruction
Agricultural 452 3 0 0 0
Commercial 12,415 64 0 0 0
Education 289 2 0 0 0
Government 1,081 6 0 0 0
Industrial 3,465 20 0 0 0
Religious 766 3 0 0 0
Page 189 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 105
Residential 359,391 1,438 124 6 0
TOTAL 377,859 1,535 125 6 0
Source: HAZUS-MH
Table 29: HAZUS -MH for Building Damage (#), 2 0 -year Event in Orange County, FL
Occupancy
Type None Minor Moderate Severe Destruction
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 30: HAZUS -MH for Building Damage (#), 50-year Event in Orange County, FL
Occupancy
Type None Minor Moderate Severe Destruction
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 31: HAZUS -MH for Building Damage (#), 100-year Event in Orange County, FL
Occupancy
Type None Minor Moderate Severe Destruction
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
Table 32: HAZUS -MH for Building Damage (#), 500-year Event in Orange County, FL
Page 190 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 106
Occupancy
Type None Minor Moderate Severe Destruction
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
cannot open quickly enough would not be able to work, to sell their products or
Page 191 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 107
services, and would suffer losses to wages and income. Table 33 shows in detail
the probabilistic losses that Orange County would experience for both capital
stock losses and income losses for varying storm severities.
Table 33: HAZUS -MH for Incomes Losses in Orange County, FL
Income Losses
(in $1,000’s)
10-year
Event
20-year
Event
50-year
Event
100-year
Event
500-year
Event
Capital
Stock
Losses
Cost Building
Damage
111,798 480,107 1,664,578 3,130,107 12,200,418
Cost Contents
Damage
16,070 67,569 242,284 818,287 3,741,705
Inventory Loss 0 95 1,441 7,077 74,768
Income
Losses
Relocation
Loss
2,082 17,818 83,643 355,692 1,551,433
Capital Related
Losses
0 231 7,300 21,142 161,559
Wages Losses 0 391 27,464 72,136 416,254
Rental Income
Loss
7,523 30,687 137,347 191,298 963,313
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
other needs for neighborhoods. Community Emergency Response Teams
Page 192 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 108
(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: High – 67%
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.
Page 193 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 109
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 2021. 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.
Wildfires
Page 194 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 110
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.
Tab le 34: Fires by Cause in Orange County, FL: 1980 - 2020
Cause Number
of Fires % Acres
Burned %
Campfire 53 1.9 3,104.3 3.0
Children 217 7.6 4,518.2 4.3
Debris Burn* 173 6.1 4,910.4 4.7
Debris Burn – Authorized (Broadcast/Acreage) 8 0.3 1,283.6 1.2
Debris Burn – Authorized (Piles) 5 0.2 5.6 0.0
Debris Burn – Unauthorized (Piles) 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Debris Burn – Unauthorized (Yard Trash) 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Equipment Use* 15 0.5 514.7 0.5
Equipment – Agriculture 19 0.7 333.3 0.3
Equipment – Recreation 36 1.3 545.5 0.5
Equipment – Transportation 10 0.4 110.5 0.1
Incendiary 1 0.0 4.5 0.0
Lightning 2 0.1 426.4 0.4
Miscellaneous – Breakout 11 0.4 180.2 0.2
Miscellaneous – Fireworks 584 20.5 12,355.7 11.8
Miscellaneous – Power Lines 832 29.1 42,072.7 40.2
Miscellaneous – Other 7 0.3 1,016.7 1.0
Railroad 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Smoking 11 0.4 48.0 0.1
Unknown 20 0.7 127.0 0.1
TOTAL 2,856 104,734.5
*Fire cause no longer used.
Source: Florida Forest Service: January 1, 1980 – December 31, 2020
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
Page 195 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 111
33 businesses.7 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.8
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.9 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 35). 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 3 5 : Wildland Fires per NFIRS in Orange County, FL: 2010 – 2016*
Year Number
of Fires
Acres
Burned
Average
Acres
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 2016 end in March
7 Prince, Nick (2010). “1998 Florida Wildfires.” Retrieved from http://www.seesouthernforests.org/case-studies/fire
8 Orange County Fire Rescue (2005). “A Prescribed Fire Policy for Orange County Fire Rescue.” Retrieved from
http://www.usfa.dhs.gov/pdf/efop/efo38559.pdf
9 InciWeb (2009). “Orlando-Volusia Complex.” Retrieved from http://www.inciweb.org/incident/1649/
Page 196 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 112
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 1,119,870 people, live
within the WUI.
Figure K : Chart of WUI Population Areas in Orange County, FL
Housing Density WUI Population
Percent of WUI Population
WUI Acres Percent of WUI Acres
LT 1hs/40ac 540 0.0 % 26,644 8.8 %
1hs/40ac to 1hs/20ac 647 0.1 % 12,441 4.1 %
1hs/20ac to 1hs/10ac 2,084 0.2 % 17,702 5.8 %
1hs/10ac to 1hs/5ac 5,294 0.5 % 22,822 7.5 %
1hs/5ac to 1hs/2ac 18,906 1.7 % 34,969 11.5 %
1hs/2ac to 3hs/1ac 470,608 42.0 % 135,908 44.8 %
GT 3hs/1ac 621,791 55.5 % 52,637 17.4 %
Total 1,119,870 100.0 % 303,123 100.0 %
Source: SouthWRAP Summary Report, 2021
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 L, 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.
Page 197 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 113
Figure L : Map of WUI Population Areas in Orange County, FL
Source: SouthWRAP Summary Report, 2021
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 231,268 acres, or
about 36% of the total land area of 642,751 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;”
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 187,499 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 15,612 acres, or
2.4% of the land area, falling in the category.
Page 198 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 114
“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 130,296 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 16,592 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 124,663 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 13,920 acres, or 2.2% of the land
area, in this category.
The “Fire Type – 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 193,155 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 413,446 acres, or
64.3% of the land area.
• 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.10 This is the smallest portion in Orange
County with only 5,019 acres, or 0.8% of the county.
10 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.
Page 199 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 115
• 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.11 There are 31,133 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.
11 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.
Page 200 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 116
Figure M : Chart of Burn Probability in Orange County, FL
Class Acres Percent
1 16,032 3.6 %
2 24,697 5.6 %
3 29,489 6.7 %
4 22,878 5.2 %
5 77,676 17.5 %
6 94,519 21.4 %
7 94,537 21.4 %
8 74,073 16.7 %
9 8,701 2.0 %
10 0 0.0 %
Total 442,602 100.0 %
Source: SouthWRAP Summary Report, 2021
In Figure M and Figure N is information on Orange County’s Burn Probability
(BP). Figure M 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 N 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.
Page 201 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 117
Figure N : Map of Burn Probability in Orange County, FL
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.
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
Page 202 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 118
acres of land. Based on Table 35, 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.12 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
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.
12 Mercer, D. E., Pye, J. M., Prestemon, J.P., Butry, D.T., & Holmes, T.P. (2000). Economic Effects of Catastrophic Wildfires:
Assessing the Effectiveness of Fuel Reduction Programs for Reducing the Economic Impacts of Catastrophic Forest Fire
Events. Retrieved from http://www.fl-dof.com/publications/joint_fire_sciences/jfs_pdf/economic_effects.pdf
Page 203 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 3 – Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Page 119
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 2,856 fires with
104,734.5 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.
Page 204 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 4 – Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 120
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 2021 update, the Planning Committee
felt that it was important to review/confirm 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 2021
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.
Objective 2.3: Ensure communities are aware of available mitigation funding
Section 4 – Strategic Goals and Capabilities
Goals and Objectives
Page 205 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 4 – Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 121
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
government’s ability to plan for and mitigate the impacts of future
vulnerability.
Page 206 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 4 – Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 122
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.
Authorities, Policies, Programs, and Resources
Page 207 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 4 – Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 123
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.
In 2021, the LMS Working Group reviewed all major components of the LMS document
with an emphasis on hazards and mitigation goals and objectives. The updated hazard
information was accepted and the goals and objectives were confirmed with no
changes.
Strategies for Implementation
Page 208 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 4 – Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 124
Table 3 6 – 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
Annex 4 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.
Annex 5 contains the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS) Active
Initiatives List. This list includes the most current action items that were submitted to
the LMS Planning Committee for review and ranking. In order to be favorably
considered for inclusion to the list, the initiative should score at least twenty (20) points
out of a forty one (41) total. All of the qualifying initiatives are then presented to the
full Working Group for a motion to include them on the list. The mitigation initiatives
are linked to the strategic projects and sub-projects found in Annex 4. Annex 5 is
updated usually on a quarterly basis, or at the most recent Orange County LMS Working
Group meeting when new projects are added or older projects are revised.
Page 209 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 4 – Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 125
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.
Prioritization Methodology
Page 210 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 4 – Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 126
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
Page 211 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 4 – Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 127
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. 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
Page 212 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 4 – Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 128
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.
Page 213 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
SECTION 4 – Strategic Goals and Capabilities Page 129
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.
Plan Update and Project Progress
Page 214 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX A – Orange County LMS Updates and Public Participation Page 130
Appendix A – Orange County LMS Updates and Public Participation
List of Meetings:
LMS Planning Committee Meeting, February 10, 2016
LMS Planning Committee Meeting, March 23, 0216
LMS Working Group Meeting, May 3, 2016
LMS Planning Committee Meeting, August 5, 2016
LMS Working Group Meeting, August 10, 2016
LMS Working Group Meeting, November 16, 2016
LMS Working Group Meeting, February 8, 2017
LMS Working Group Meeting, May 25, 2017
LMS Working Group Meeting, October 11, 2017
LMS Working Group Meeting, November 8, 2017
LMS Planning Committee Meeting, February 8, 2018
LMS Planning Committee Meeting, May 25, 2018
LMS Planning Committee Meeting, July 20, 2018
LMS Working Group Meeting, February 14, 2018
LMS Working Group Meeting, May 30, 2018
LMS Working Group Meeting, July 25, 2018
LMS Working Group Meeting, November 14, 2018
LMS Working Group Meeting, February 13, 2019
LMS Working Group Meeting, May 22, 2019
LMS Working Group Meeting, August 21, 2019
LMS Working Group Meeting, November 13, 2019
Appendix A – Orange County LMS Updates and Public
Participation
Page 215 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX A – Orange County LMS Updates and Public Participation Page 131
LMS Working Group Meeting, August 26, 2020
LMS Working Group Meeting, November 11, 2020
LMS Working Group Meeting, February 10, 2021
LMS Working Group Meeting, June 9, 2021
LMS Working Group Meeting, August 11, 2021
Page 216 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX B – Orange County LMS Hazards Quick Reference Page 132
Appendix B – Orange County LMS Hazards Quick Reference
Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Summary
Hazard Name People Property Environment Program
Operations
Risk –
Relative
Threat
Diseases and
Pandemic Low High Moderate High Moderate
52%
Animal Low High Moderate High Moderate
44%
Human High Moderate High High Moderate
57%
Plant/Agriculture Low High Moderate High Moderate
51%
Extreme
Temperatures Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate
54%
Drought None Low Moderate High Moderate
57%
Freezes/Winter
Storms Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate
41%
Heat Waves Low Low Moderate Low High
62%
Floods Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate
43%
Severe
Thunderstorms Low Moderate Low Moderate Moderate
59%
Hail None Moderate Low Low Moderate
52%
Lightning Low Moderate Low Low Moderate
52%
Tornados High High Moderate High High
71%
Sinkholes/Land-
subsidence Low High Low Moderate High
62%
Hazardous
Materials Moderate Low Low Moderate Low
29%
Terrorism/CBRNE High High Low High Moderate
32%
Cyberterrorism Low Moderate High High High
62%
Tropical Systems High High High High High
67%
Wildfires Low High Low High Moderate
52%
Appendix B – Orange County LMS Hazards Quick Reference
Page 217 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX B – Orange County LMS Hazards Quick Reference Page 133
Consequence and Impact Analysis Summary
Hazard Name Public Responders
Continuity
of
Operations
Property,
Facilities, and
Infrastructure
Environment Economic
Condition
Public
Confidence
Diseases and
Pandemic Moderate Low Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate
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
Temperatures Low Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate
Drought Low Low Low Moderate High Moderate Moderate
Freezes/Winter
Storms Low Low Low Low Moderate Low Low
Heat Waves Moderate Low Low Low Moderate Low Low
Floods Moderate Moderate High High High Moderate Moderate
Severe
Thunderstorms Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate
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-
subsidence Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate
Hazardous
Materials High High High Moderate High Moderate Moderate
Terrorism/CBRNE High High High High Moderate High High
Cyberterrorism High Moderate High High Moderate High High
Tropical Systems High High High High Moderate High High
Wildfires Moderate Moderate Moderate High Moderate Moderate Moderate
Page 218 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX C – Orange County LMS By-Laws Page 134
Appendix C – Orange County LMS Working Group and Committee By-Laws
ARTICLE I. PURPOSE 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 during the
even-numbered years. 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 Working Group and Committee
By-Laws
Page 219 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX C – Orange County LMS By-Laws Page 135
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 during the even-numbered years. The candidate for the Vice-
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 Group’s various activities. OEM shall provide a staff member who
will administrate the meetings, provide technical support, record keeping,
subject matter expertise, and liaise with the State of Florida Division of
Emergency Management (FDEM) Bureau of Mitigation.
Other clerical support may include taking attendance and meeting minutes
and/or notes for the Working Group and its Committees; correspond with the
State, county agencies, its jurisdictions, and other partners; assisting
mitigation grant applicants with submitting projects and/or documentation for
funding consideration; and other duties as necessary to promote mitigation
activities in Orange County.
The LMS Coordinator will also oversee the plan’s update process, which
includes the evaluation, maintenance, revision, and monitoring for compliance
with all relevant criteria for approval and adoption of the Orange County
Local Mitigation Strategy.
D. MEETINGS and VOTING
Page 220 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX C – Orange County LMS By-Laws Page 136
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. All
meetings of the Working Group are considered to be public meetings and are
openly advertised to obtain participation from members of the public.
Committee Meetings should be held at least twice a year, or more often, as
needed, at the discretion of the Committee’s chairperson.
ARTICLE IV. ADOPTION OF AND AMENDMENTS TO THE 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.
Page 221 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 137
Appendix D – Project Priority List History
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy – COMPLETED PROJECTS, 1999 - 2021
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Belmont Estates - Drainage
Improvement 20 Orange County Public Works -
Stormwater Management 05/06/15 PDM $649,105.00 12 Months
Bonnie Brook - Canal Erosion /
Electric Panel Repair 22 Orange County Public Works -
Stormwater Management 05/06/15 PDM $366,838.00 6 Months
Wildfire Public Education 38 Orange County Fire Rescue
Department 7/31/1999 General Fund $ 25,000.00 12 Months
A-09 Facilities / Fixed Assets /
Audit and Assmnt 35 City of Orlando 3/22/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 93,400.00 12 Months
Infrastructure Protection and
Disaster Assessment 35 Orange County Building Division 1/12/2007 EMPA,
General Fund $ 266,805.00 12 Months
Provision of wildland firefighting
gear 35 Orange County Fire Rescue
Department 7/31/1999 General Fund $ 150,000.00 12 Months
Conway Middle School shelter
retrofit 35 Orange County on behalf of Orange
County Public Schools 2/20/2005 HMGP $ 400,000.00 5 Years /
August 2010
Appendix D – Project Priority List History
Page 222 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 138
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Fortification of Operations
Building 35 Orange County Sheriff’s Office 12/12/2001
HMGP, PDM,
General Fund,
HLS Grants
$ 175,983.00 12 Months
Fortification of the John L.
Cassady Jr. Building 35 Orange County Sheriff's Office 11/18/2001 General Fund,
HLS Grants $ 228,905.00 12 Months
Critical Facility Duty Officer
Initiative 34 Orange County Sheriff’s Office 1/23/2002 General Fund $ 822,000.00 12 Months
A-82 Lift Stations Vegetation
Removal 33 City of Orlando 2/21/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 35,000.00 12 Months
Prescribed burns 33 Orange County Fire Rescue
Department 7/31/1999 General Fund $ 20,000.00 12 Months
Fortification of the
Communications Center 33 Orange County Sheriff’s Office 12/12/2001
HMGP, PDM,
General Fund,
HLS Grants
$ 419,896.00 12 Months
Page 223 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 139
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Fortification of the Sheriff's
Central Complex 33 Orange County Sheriff’s Office 1/23/2002
HMGP, PDM,
General Fund,
HLS Grants
$ 358,825.00 12 Months
Juvenile Assessment Center
project 32 Orange County Facilities
Management Division 2/23/2005 HMGP, PDM $250,000.00 /
$40,268.00
12 Months /
September
2012
Protect exterior of Public Works
Dept. building 32 Orange County Public Works
Department 10/23/2001 HMGP, PDM $ 75,000.00 12 Months
Fortification of Orange County
S.O. Substations 32 Orange County Sheriff’s Office 1/23/2002
HMGP, PDM,
General Fund,
HLS Grants
$ 309,700.00 12 Months
Katherine Street Sewage Pump
Mitigation 32 Town of Eatonville 3/18/2002
CBDG,
HMGP, PDM,
General Fund
$ 47,000.00 12 Months
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
Page 224 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 140
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
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 $ 2,964.00 12 Months
Hardening of Police Station 31 City of Apopka 1/30/2005 HMGP $ 15,000.00 2 Years
Cassidy Building Project 31 Orange County Facilities
Management Division 2/23/2005 HMGP, PDM $582,220.00
/$393,688.08
12 Months
/October
2009
Reinforce Roof of Fire Rescue
Headquarters 31 Orange County Fire Rescue
Department
1/2/2008-
Updated HMGP, PDM $ 1,000,000.00 12 Months
Wildfire Education-Fire Wise
Community- USA 00003 31 Orange County on behalf of
Wedgefield Firewise Community 1/31/2005 General Fund,
PDM, HMGP $ 57,500.00 12 Months
8100 Presidents Dr. Operations
Facility 31 Orange County Utilities Department 2/23/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 480,000.00 12 Months
Page 225 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 141
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Computer System Vulnerability
Reduction 31 Town of Oakland 1/21//2001
CBDG,
HMGP, PDM,
General Fund
$ 14,000.00 12 Months
Storm Shutters for Wastewater
buildings 30 City of Apopka 3/18/2002
CBDG,
HMGP, PDM,
General Fund
$ 50,000.00 12 Months
Hazard Mitigation GIS Software 30 Orange County Growth
Management Department
1/1/2006-
Updated General Fund $ 341,583.00 12 Months
Tractor to maintain firebreaks 30 Orange County on behalf of
Wedgefield Firewise Community 1/31/2005 General Fund,
PDM, HMGP $ 75,000.00 12 Months
Lake Hiawassee Drainwell
Replacement 30 Orange County Public Works
Department 12/9/2004 HMGP, PDM $ 330,000.00 12 Months
Install outfalls in lieu of current
drainwells: 29 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 100,000.00 12 Months
Library Roof 29 University of Central Florida 2/18/2005 HMGP E&G
Funding $ 921,114.00 8/11/2009
Page 226 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 142
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Physical Plant Bldg Retrofit 29 University of Central Florida 2/18/2005 HMGP E&G
Funding $ 34,733.00 6/30/2008
Purchase of an SUV with winch
attachment 28 City of Edgewood 4/25/2002
EMPA,
HMGP,
Community
Assistance
Program -
State
$ 35,000.00 12 Months
Maitland Fire Department
Advanced Terrorism Trng 28 City of Maitland 10/23/2001
Chemical
Emergency
Preparedness
and
Prevention
Technical
Assistance
Grants
Program,
EMPA
$ 10,000.00 12 Months
EOC Construction 28 City of Ocoee 7/31/1999 General Fund,
HMGP $ 200,000.00 12 Months
Big Econlockhatchee River
Basin Land Acquisition 28 Orange County Public Works
Department 8/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 8,267,000.00 12 Months
Installation of bypass system
from Lake Valarie 28 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 1,000,000.00 12 Months
Page 227 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 143
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Emergency Preparedness
Training 28 Town of Eatonville 12/18/2001 EMPA, CBDG $ 20,000.00 12 Months
Fire Station #2-Emergency Fuel
Facility 27 City of Apopka 11/14/2004
CBDG,
HMGP, PDM,
General Fund
$ 20,000.00 5 Months
Maitland Fire Department
Automated Infrastructure
Inventory
27 City of Maitland 12/12/2001 5 Months
Mobile Communications trailer 27 City of Ocoee 7/31/1999 EMPA, HMGP $ 100,000.00 12 Months
Page 228 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 144
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Provide flood prevention for
Fire St. #4 27 City of Ocoee 4/25/2002
Watershed
Program and
Flood
Prevention ,
NFIP,
Pollution
Prevention
Incentives for
States
$ 50,000.00 6 Months
A-57 WASTEWATER DIV 17
STATIONARY GENERATORS 27 City of Orlando 1/29/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 832,000.00 2 Years
Urban Search and Rescue
Equipment 27 City of Winter Park 10/15/2006-
Updated CBDG, EMPA $ 700,000.00 12 Months
Canal Bank Protection 27 Orange County Public Works
Department 10/4/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 1,200,000.00 12 Months
Canal Profiles for Flood Control 27 Orange County Public Works
Department 10/4/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 1,200,000.00 12 Months
Hurricane hardening Eastern
Water Reclamation 27 Orange County Utilities Department 2/23/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 771,000.00 12 Months
Page 229 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 145
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Hurricane hardening of control
building 27 Orange County Utilities Department 2/7/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 150,000.00 12 Months
UCF Data Center Retrofit 27 University of Central Florida 2/7/2005 HMGP, UIMP
Funding $ 551,715.00 8/6/2010
Generator for Police Dept./City
Hall 26 City of Edgewood 4/25/2002 EMPA, HMGP $ 33,597.00 12 Months
Hazmat Training 26 City of Edgewood 4/25/2002
Chemical
Emergency
Preparedness
and
Prevention
Technical
Assistance
Grants
$ 10,000.00 5 Months
Stormwater outfall construction 26 City of Ocoee 7/31/1999 General Fund,
PDM, HMGP $ 350,000.00 12 Months
Install wind-resistant doors on
fire station 26 City of Winter Garden 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 40,000.00 12 Months
Upgrade emergency backup
generator system 26 City of Winter Garden 3/18/2002
HMGP,
CBDG, PDM,
General Fund
$ 10,000.00 12 Months
Electronic Weather Stations 26 City of Winter Park 2/12/2007-
Updated
CBDG,
General Fund,
EMPA
$ 1,800.00 6 Months
Page 230 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 146
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
East Orange Community
Center project (Countywide) 26 Orange County Facilities
Management Division 2/23/2005 HMGP, PDM
$314,295.00 /
Building A -
$55,605.00
Building C -
$46,939.00
Building D -
$39,452.00
12 months /
May 2012
Health Central Roof
Enhancement 26 Orange County on behalf of Health
Central Hospital 1/29/2005 HMGP $ 630,000.00 6 Months
Installation of stormwater
control structure 26 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 315,000.00 12 Months
Lake Sherwood pumping
station installation 26 Orange County Public Works
Department 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 1,434,000.00 12 Months
Powers DR/Balboa DR Flood
Control 26 Orange County Public Works
Department 5/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 100,000.00 12 Months
First Ave. and Oakdale St.
Drainage Improvements 26 Town of Windermere 1/31/2005
HMGP,
General
Revenue Fund
$114,304.87 2/2/2010
Page 231 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 147
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Campus Shelter Retrofits 26 University of Central Florida 2/7/2005 HMGP, UIMP
Funding $ 2,103,824.00 12/13/2013
Emergency Generator for LS #9 25 City of Apopka 3/18/2002
CBDG,
HMGP, PDM,
General Fund
$ 45,000.00 12 Months
Flood prevention for Lakeshore
Dr. 25 City of Ocoee 1/30/2009-
Updated
General Fund,
PDM, HMGP $ 300,000.00 5 Years
A-40 OFD STA 7
ENHANCEMENT 25 City of Orlando 1/26/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 50,000.00 12 Months
Generators for Critical Facilities 25 City of Winter Garden 1/14/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 74,550.00 12 Months
Upgrade generator/ shutter two
water treatment plants 25 City of Winter Garden 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 100,000.00 12 Months
Page 232 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 148
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
33rd Street Prison Complex
Project 25 Orange County Facilities
Management Division 2/23/2005 HMGP, PDM
$2,542,000.00 /
VVB - $42,561.00
CEP - $41,587.99
CAB -
$820,849.00
12 Months /
September
2010
500 Radiological Pagers 25 Orange County Fire Rescue
Department 2/1/2007 UASI $ 100,000.00 6 Months
Disaster Resistant
Neighborhoods (Countywide) 25
Orange County on behalf of the
American Red Cross of Central
Florida
11/8/2002 General Fund,
EMPA $ 10,000.00 12 Months
Bearhead Lake Area Flood
Control 25 Orange County Public Works
Department 8/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 340,000.00 12 Months
Border Lake outfall/pumping
station installation 25 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 606,000.00 12 Months
Page 233 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 149
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Control structure/outfall pipeline
installation 25 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 194,000.00 12 Months
Flood protection study 25 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 447,000.00 12 Months
Install outfalls in lieu of current
drainwells 25 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 4,259,000.00 12 Months
Lake Buchanan Drainwell
Replacement: 25 Orange County Public Works
Department 10/4/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 80,000.00 12 Months
Lake Douglas outfall installation 25 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 224,000.00 12 Months
Reaves Rd. Drainage
Improvements 25 Orange County Public Works
Department 1/31/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 87,000.00 12 Months
12th Ave. and Oakdale St.
Drainage Improvements 25 Town of Windermere 12/9/2004
HMGP,
General
Revenue Fund
$124,901.00 5/18/2010
Emergency Generator for LS #2 24 City of Apopka 3/18/2002
CBDG,
HMGP, PDM,
General Fund
$ 45,000.00 12 Months
Page 234 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 150
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Emergency Generator for LS
#25 24 City of Apopka 3/18/2002
CBDG,
HMGP, PDM,
General Fund
$ 40,000.00 6 Months
Emergency Generator for LS
#32 24 City of Apopka 3/18/2002
CBDG,
HMGP, PDM,
General Fund
$ 40,000.00 12 Months
Belle Isle West Flood Mitigation 24 City of Belle Isle 1/30/2005 HMGP $ 123,190.00 12 Months
Hal Martson Community Center
project 24 Orange County Facilities
Management Division 2/23/2005 HMGP, PDM $300,000.00
/$119,246.00
12 Months
/January
2012
Retrofitting of Orange County
fire stations 24 Orange County Fire Rescue
Department 2/7/2005 HMGP, PDM $900,000.00 /
$621,567.00
5 Years /
July 2010
Bonnie Brook Subdivision
Flooding 24 Orange County Public Works
Department 1/31/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 225,537.00 12 Months
Edgewater Vegetated Slope 24 Orange County Public Works
Department 10/4/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 525,000.00 12 Months
Page 235 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 151
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
High water level outfall
installation 24 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 149,000.00 12 Months
Install diversion box for
Minnesota AV runoff: 24 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 1,572,000.00 12 Months
Lake Rhea flowway easement 24 Orange County Public Works
Department 5/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 189,000.00 12 Months
Maitland BLVD Sedimentation
Basin 24 Orange County Public Works
Department 8/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 1,110,000.00 12 Months
Obtain a flowway easement 24 Orange County Public Works
Department 5/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 189,000.00 12 Months
Obtain access to drainage
canal 24 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 344,000.00 12 Months
Obtain easement from Lake
Bryan 24 Orange County Public Works
Department 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 1,640,000.00 6 Months
Windermere Rd-Roberson Rd.
Drainage Improvements 24 Orange County Public Works
Department 12/9/2004 HMGP, PDM $ 230,516.00 12 Months
Page 236 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 152
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Construction of a drainage
system along Bancroft 24 Ranger Drainage District 12/9/2004 HMGP, PDM $ 200,000.00 10/31/2010
Apopka Community
Center/Emergency Shelter 23 City of Apopka 1/30/2005 COMPLETED $ 1,500,000.00 3 years
Emergency Generator for LS
#18 23 City of Apopka 3/18/2002
CBDG,
HMGP, PDM,
General Fund
$ 40,000.00 2 Years
Lake Conway Shore Flood
Mitigation 23 City of Belle Isle 1/30/2005 HMGP $ 177,550.00 12 Months
Health Dept./Medical Clinic
Project 23 Orange County Facilities
Management Division 2/23/2005 HMGP, PDM $1,554,440.00 /
$158,734.65
5 Years /
July 2010
Bonnie Lou DR Drainwell
Replacement 23 Orange County Public Works
Department 8/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 68,000.00 12 Months
Crane Strand System Flood
Control 23 Orange County Public Works
Department 8/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 162,000.00 12 Months
Drainwell Replacement-Lake
Sherwood 23 Orange County Public Works
Department 1/31/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 500,000.00 12 Months
Page 237 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 153
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Fern Creek Drainwell
Replacement 23 Orange County Public Works
Department 5/22/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 105,000.00 12 Months
Hydrologic evaluation of Little
Sand Lake 23 Orange County Public Works
Department 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 430,000.00 12 Months
Install sedimentation/retention
pond 23 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 250,000.00 12 Months
Isle of Pines/Lake and Pines
Estates Subdivisions 23 Orange County Public Works
Department 8/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 300,000.00 12 Months
Lake Lotta Drainwell Installation 23 Orange County Public Works
Department 1/30/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 380,000.00 12 Months
Lake Olivia-West Drainwell
Replacement 23 Orange County Public Works
Department 8/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 116,000.00 12 Months
Londonderry Hills Subdivision
Flood Control 23 Orange County Public Works
Department 5/24/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 10,000.00 12 Months
Page 238 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 154
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Stormwater line installation 23 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 258,000.00 12 Months
A-77 Al Coith Park/Euclid Ave-
Gore St Drain Improvement: 22 City of Orlando 2/23/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 760,000.00 12 Months
Fairways Mobile Home Park 22 Orange County Fire Rescue
Department
5/30/2009-
Updated COMPLETED $ 250,000.00 12 Months
Gulfstream Mobile Home Park 22 Orange County Fire Rescue
Department 1/31/2005 COMPLETED $ 250,000.00 12 Months
Community Outreach for
Holden Heights residents 22
Orange County on behalf of the
Holden Heights Front Porch
Association
Ongoing General Fund,
HLS Grants $ 250,000.00 12 Months
Bates RD Erosion Control 22 Orange County Public Works
Department 5/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 500,000.00 12 Months
Mckinnon Road Drainage
Improvements 22 Orange County Public Works
Department 12/9/2004 HMGP, PDM $ 465,000.00 12 Months
Purchase of outflow path 22 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 671,000.00 12 Months
Page 239 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 155
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Purchase property for detention
basin 22 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 574,000.00 12 Months
Big Sand Lake Drainwell
Installation 21 Orange County Public Works
Department 1/31/2005 HMGP, PDM,
General Fund $ 97,725.00 12 Months
Bulova DR Flood Control 21 Orange County Public Works
Department 5/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 190,000.00 12 Months
Install a pump station and
outfall pathway 21 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 933,000.00 12 Months
Installation of
sedimentation/retention pond 21 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 753,000.00 12 Months
Pennington Road Drainage
Improvements - Added -
West Lake Fairview Drainage
Improvement
20 City of Orlando 10/19/2009 PDM $ 450,000.00 2 Years
Page 240 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 156
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Retrofitting to two Great Oaks
Village facility 20 Great Oaks Village 2/7/2005 HMGP, PDM
$906,110.00 /
Evans Dining Hall
- $33,290.00
GOV Youth
Shelter -
$71,957.00
GOV Drainage
Project -
$170,132.00
12 Months /
Evans Dining
Hall -
January
2010
GOV Youth
Shelter -
January
2010
GOV
Drainage
Project -
October
2012
Walker Middle School shelter
retrofit 20 Orange County on behalf of Orange
County Public Schools 2/20/2005 HMGP $ 300,000.00 5 Years /
March 2012
Disaster Planning for Small
Business (Countywide) 20
Orange County on behalf of the
American Red Cross of Central
Florida
11/8/2002 General Fund,
EMPA $ 20,000.00 6 Months
Barry ST Flood Control 20 Orange County Public Works
Department 10/4/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 350,000.00 12 Months
Page 241 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 157
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Christmas Park stormwater
development 20 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 3,181,000.00 12 Months
Conduct study of Sunflower
Trail watershed 20 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 1,765,000.00 12 Months
Elba Dredge and Grade 20 Orange County Public Works
Department 10/4/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 1,110,000.00 12 Months
Install Lake Robert Drainwell 20 Orange County Public Works
Department 1/30/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 380,000.00 12 Months
Installation of bypass system
from Lake Valarie 20 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP, PDM $ 883,000.00 12 Months
Maitland Chain Control
Structure 20 Orange County Public Works
Department 5/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 552,000.00 12 Months
Master drainage plan for
Plantation Estates 20 Orange County Public Works
Department 3/18/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 896,000.00 12 Months
Page 242 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 158
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Oak Park Road Drainage
System Installation (OS) 20 Orange County Public Works
Department 12/12/2008 HMGP, PDM $ 1,200,000.00 12 Months
Outfall pipeline replacement 20 Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 PDM, HMGP $ 2,800,000.00 12 Months
Emergency Response Team
equipment purchase 20 Orange County Sheriff's Office 2/1/2006 HLS Grants $ 100,000.00 2 Months
Riser Barrels Drainage Project 20 Ranger Drainage District 9/21/2009 HMGP $ 3,614,425.00 9/30/2012
Jones AV Stormwater
Restoration 19 Orange County Public Works
Department 5/23/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 2,011,000.00 12 Months
Kingswood Manor Subdivision
Flood Control 19 Orange County Public Works
Department 5/22/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 550,000.00 12 Months
Randolph AV Area Flood
Control 19 Orange County Public Works
Department 5/22/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 650,000.00 12 Months
Riverside Acres Pipe Arch
Replacement/Land Acquire 18 Orange County Public Works
Department 5/23/2002 HMGP,
PDMM $ 1,500,000.00 12 Months
Melville Street Drainage Project 18 Ranger Drainage District 9/21/2009 HMGP $ 655,062.00 8/31/2012
Page 243 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 159
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Funding
Source Actual Cost Projected
Timeframe
Beggs RD/Overland RD
Drainage Improvements 17 Orange County Public Works
Department 10/4/2002 HMGP, PDM $ 1,000,000.00 12 Months
A-83 Englewood Homeowner
Rehabilitation Initiative 15 City of Orlando 2/22/2005 HMGP, PDM $ 550,000.00 12 Months
Community Disaster Education:
Community Disaster Education
Program (Countywide)
15
Orange County on behalf of the
American Red Cross of Central
Florida
11/8/2002 General Fund,
EMPA $ 10,000.00 12 Months
Subcontract to clear roots 15 Orange County on behalf of
Wedgefield Firewise Community 12/9/2004 General Fund,
PDM, HMGP $ 10,000.00 12 Months
Maxim Parkway, Marlin Street,
Ascot Avenue Drainage Project 15 Ranger Drainage District 9/21/2009 HMGP $ 694,008.00 8/31/2012
Memorial MS Shelter Retrofit 14 Orange County on behalf of Orange
County Public Schools 2/20/2005 HMGP $ 500,000.00 12 Months /
August 2009
Work Release Facility Project Orange County Facilities
Management Division 2/23/2005 HMGP $516,545.00
12 Months /
February
2012
Page 244 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 160
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy – DEFERRED PROJECTS, 1999 - 2021
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Potential
Funding
Source
Estimated Cost Reason it was
Deferred
Cathodic Protection 32 University of Central Florida 5/25/2017 HMGP $999,999
Information
gaps for project
application
Ranger Drainage District
(Emergency Pumps) 32 Ranger Drainage District 5/3/2016 HMGP $249,999
Terminology of
emergency
pumps
A-01 Acquisition and Rehab of
Special Needs Facility 20 City of Orlando 2/23/2008 HMGP,
PDM $ 6,000,000.00
Corrections Compound Water
Tower N/A Orange County Corrections
Department N/A PDM $1.5M to $2M Lack of Funds
Hazard Mitigation Educational
Campaign N/A Orange County Office of
Emergency Management N/A
Any funding
source
available
$ 10,000.00
Page 245 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 161
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Potential
Funding
Source
Estimated Cost Reason it was
Deferred
People with Special Needs
Shelter Generator or Transfer
Switch for Emergency
Generator
N/A Orange County on behalf of
Orange County Public Schools N/A PDM $ 1,000,000.00 Lack of Funds
Emergency Power Project N/A Orange County on behalf of the
Salvation Army N/A PDM $ 50,000.00 New Priorities
Identified
Black Lake Floodplain
Restoration N/A Orange County Public Works
Department N/A PDM $ 50,000.00 New Priorities
Identified
Crane Strand Erosion Control N/A Orange County Public Works
Department N/A PDM $ 50,000.00 New Priorities
Identified
Design replacement for frontal
panel wall for the Main Utility
Plant
N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 500,000.00 Lack of Funds
Drainage mitigation for
Engineering III building N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 500,000.00 Lack of Funds
Drainage mitigation for Health
and Public Affairs I and II
building
N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 500,000.00 Lack of Funds
Drainage mitigation for Math
and Physics Building N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 500,000.00 Lack of Funds
Drainage mitigation for the
Howard Phillips Hall building N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 200,000.00 New Priorities
Identified
Page 246 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 162
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Potential
Funding
Source
Estimated Cost Reason it was
Deferred
Drainage mitigation for the
Library building N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 750,000.00 Lack of Funds
Drainage mitigation of
Academic Village residence
halls
N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 150,000.00 New Priorities
Identified
Drainage mitigation of Teaching
Academy building N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 250,000.00 Lack of Funds
Hazard Mitigation Plan N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 100,000.00 New Priorities
Identified
Remove/replace existing roof
and penthouse from Main Utility
Plant
N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 350,000.00 New Priorities
Identified
Wildfire Mitigation Project N/A University of Central Florida N/A PDM $ 30,000.00 New Priorities
Identified
County Courthouse Building
Shuttering project N/A Orange County Facilities
Management Division 2/23/2005 $ 245,000.00
Bearhead Lake Area Flood
Control N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 8/23/2002 General
Fund $ 600,000.00 Lack of Funds
Border Lake outfall/pumping
station installation N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 General
Fund $ 560,000.00 Lack of Funds
Page 247 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 163
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Potential
Funding
Source
Estimated Cost Reason it was
Deferred
Christmas Park stormwater
development N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 General
Fund $ 450,000.00
By the request
of the Public
Works Dept.
Director
Crane Strand System Flood
Control N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 8/23/2002 General
Fund $ 200,000.00
By the request
of the Public
Works Dept.
Director
Edgewater Vegetated Slope N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 10/4/2002 General
Fund $ 100,000.00 Lack of Funds
Elba Dredge and Grade N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 10/4/2002 General
Fund $ 200,000.00 Lack of Funds
Flood protection study N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 General
Fund $ 100,000.00 Lack of Funds
High water level outfall
installation N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 General
Fund $ 100,000.00 New Priorities
Identified
Install outfalls in lieu of current
drainwells N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 General
Fund $ 400,000.00 New Priorities
Identified
Page 248 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 164
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Potential
Funding
Source
Estimated Cost Reason it was
Deferred
Install sedimentation/retention
pond N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 General
Fund $ 150,000.00
By the request
of the Public
Works Dept.
Director
Install stormwater control
structure N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 General
Fund $ 600,000.00
By the request
of the Public
Works Dept.
Director
Isle of Pines/Lake and Pines
Estates Subdivisions N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 8/23/2002 General
Fund $ 40,000.00
By the request
of the Public
Works Dept.
Director
Plan and install outfall from
Lake Price N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 General
Fund $ 100,000.00 Lack of Funds
Purchase property for detention
basin N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 General
Fund $ 1,000,000.00 Lack of Funds
Retrofit culverts along Apopka
Blvd N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 General
Fund $ 500,000.00
By the request
of the Public
Works Dept.
Director
Stormwater line installation N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 General
Fund $ 300,000.00 Lack of Funds
Page 249 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 165
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Potential
Funding
Source
Estimated Cost Reason it was
Deferred
Stormwater systems retrofit: N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 General
Fund $ 560,000.00 New Priorities
Identified
Upgrade Park Manor N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 General
Fund $ 1,500,000.00
By the request
of the Public
Works Dept.
Director
Upgrade pump station N/A Orange County Public Works
Department 7/31/1999 General
Fund $ 250,000.00 New Priorities
Identified
Page 250 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 166
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy – DELETED PROJECTS, 1999 - 2021
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Potential
Funding
Source
Estimated
Cost
Reason project was
Deleted
Mesh Network Electric Outage
Detection 34 University of Central Florida 5/25/2017 HMGP $999,999
Unable to receive
funding for
mitigation
Repair of Emergency Storm
water Pop-off Pipe from C-2 37 Greater Orlando Aviation
Authority 05/30/18 HMGP $230,000
Unable to receive
funding for
mitigation
Blue Lot By-pass Canal Clean-
out 34 Greater Orlando Aviation
Authority 05/30/18 HMGP $850,000
Unable to receive
funding for
mitigation
Drilling of new aquifer wells 35 Orange County Utilities
Department 2/1/2008 General
Fund
$
1,000,000.00 No longer needed.
Flood prevention on SR 50 30 City of Ocoee 7/31/1999 DELETED FDOT Funds 2 years
Station 62 Shuttering Project 29 City of Winter Park 2/12/2005
CBDG,
General
Fund,
HMGP
$
15,000.00
Windows had a
storm-rated film
applied instead.
Storm shutters for Landfill
Administrative Office 29 Orange County Utilities
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP,
PDM
$
80,000.00
Page 251 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 167
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Potential
Funding
Source
Estimated
Cost
Reason project was
Deleted
Maitland Fire Department EOC
Retrofit 28 City of Maitland 2/7/2005
EMPA,
HMGP,
PDM,
General
Fund
$
53,000.00
Project reassessed,
reassigned and
completed
September 2013.
Senior Center Retrofit 28 City of Maitland 2/23/2005 HMGP $
69,550.00
Facility not qualified
as approved shelter
due to structural
design to minimum
State wind loading
requirement. The
facility structural
design was not as
an essential facility.
Storm shutters for Public Works
Garage (OS) 26 City of Winter Garden 7/31/1999
HMGP,
CBDG,
PDM,
General
Fund
Structural improvements to
Police Dept. 26 City of Winter Garden 3/18/2002 HMGP,
PDM
$
50,000.00
Police Department
moved into the old
City Hall Building.
Storm shutters for L.B. McLeod
Transfer Station 24 Orange County Utilities
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP,
PDM
$
80,000.00
Page 252 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
APPENDIX D – Project Priority List History Page 168
Project Name
Total
Priority
Score
Responsible Agency Date
Approved
Potential
Funding
Source
Estimated
Cost
Reason project was
Deleted
East Orlando/Azalea Park
System Flood Control 23 Orange County Public Works
Department 5/23/2002 HMGP,
PDM
$
2,899,110.00
Lake Rose Hill Flood Control 23 Orange County Public Works
Department 10/4/2002 HMGP,
PDM
$
318,000.00 No longer needed.
Storm shutters for Porter
Transfer Station 23 Orange County Utilities
Department 7/31/1999 HMGP,
PDM
$
90,000.00
Storm shutters for City Hall 22 City of Winter Garden 7/31/1999
HMGP,
CBDG,
PDM,
General
Fund
$
80,000.00
A new building was
built for City Hall.
A-03 Communications
Response Unit N/A City of Orlando 12/6/2002 HLS Grants $
50,000.00
Equipment was
obtained through
the region and the
city no longer
needed the asset.
County Administration Building
Hardening project N/A Orange County Government 3/1/2007 General
Fund
$
275,000.00
Fire Station Refurbishment and
Expansion N/A Town of Eatonville 12/6/2002 General
Fund
$
10,000.00
Eatonville's FD was
disbanded.
Purchase of (3) Apparatus
Units N/A Town of Eatonville 12/6/2002 General
Fund
$
600,000.00
Eatonville's FD was
disbanded.
Page 253 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
ANNEX 1 – Orange County LMS Project Priority Submission Form Template Page 169
Annex 1 – Orange County LMS Project 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 254 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
ANNEX 2 – Orange County LMS Project Priority Submission Form Guide Page 170
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 255 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
ANNEX 3 – Orange County LMS Adoption Resolutions Page 171
Annex 3 – Orange County LMS Adoption Resolutions
The following pages are the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS) Adoption
Resolutions signed and submitted by the various participating jurisdictions. Those
jurisdictions that have adopted the Orange County LMS are able to directly apply for
federal mitigation grant funding.
Annex 3– Orange County LMS Adoption Resolutions
Page 256 of 307
2022-M-02
APPROVED BY ORANGE
COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
BCC Mtg. Date: Jan. 11, 2022
RESOLUTION
of the
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Regarding
LOCAL MITIGATION STRATEGY
Resolution No. ---
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 recognizes 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 provision~ 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 2021 edition of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy that has been prepared
and issued for consideration and implementation by the communities of Orange County.
Page 257 of 307
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] I
Page 258 of 307
Section 6. Effective Date. The resolution shall take effect upon the date of its
adoption.
ADOPTED THIS _jjTH_ DAY OF __ J_a_n_ua_ry~--' 2022
ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA
By: Board of County Commissioners
By~~jff~
Orange County Mayor
ATTEST: Phil Diamond, CPA, County Comptroller
As Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners
v'atu. ~ By:_'L"_~_ ... __________ _
Deputy Clerk
Page 259 of 307
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APOPKA, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING AND APPROVING THE DESIGNATED PORTION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL MITIGATION STRATEGY. WHEREAS, the areas of the City of Apopka are vulnerable to the human and economic costs of natural, technological and societal disasters; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Apopka 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 state 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 Apopka 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 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF APOPKA: Section 1. City of Apopka hereby accepts and approves its designated portion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy. Page 260 of 307
Section 2. The staff of Orange County and the City of Apopka are requested and instrncted to pursue available funding oppottunities fot· implementation of the proposals designated therein. Section 3. City of Apopka will, upon rnceipt of such funding or other necessary resources, seek to implement the proposals contained in its section of the strategy. Section 4. City of Apopka will continue to participate in the updating and expansion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead. Section 5. City of Apopka 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 Apopka to also participate in the updating and expansion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead. Section 6. adoption.. Effective Date. The resolution shall take effect upon the date of its ADOPTED THIS 2nd DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022 ~~ Susan M. Bont~L Clerk Page 261 of 307
l
?.
3
RESOLUTION NO. 22-08
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Resolution
4 WHEREAS, the (jurisdiction's name) are vulnerable to the human and economic costs of natural,
ti technological and societal disasters;
6 WHEREAS, the (jurisdiction's governing board) recognizes the importance of reducing or eliminating
7 those vulnerabilities for the overall good and welfare of the community;
8 WHEREAS, Section 322 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42
9 U.S.C. 5165, as amended by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 provides for States and local governments to
10 undertake a risk-based approach to reducing risks to natural hazards through mitigation planning;
lJ WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has implemented various hazard mitigation
12 planning provisions through regulation at 44.CFR 201.6 requiring local governments to have a FEMA
13 approved Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS) in order to apply for and/or receive project grants;
14 WHEREAS, 44 CFR 201.6(d)(3) requires local jurisdictions to review and revise their LMS to reflect
15 changes in development, progress in local mitigation efforts, and changes in priorities, and resubmit it for
16 approval within five (5) years in order to continue to be eligible for mitigation project grant funding;
1 7 WHEREAS, the representatives and staff of (jurisdiction's name) have identified, justified and
18 prioritized a number of proposed projects and programs needed to mitigate the vulnerabilities to the
19 impacts of future disasters; and
20 WHEREAS, these proposed projects and programs have been incorporated into the 2009 edition of the
21 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy that has been prepared and issued for consideration and
2?. implementation by the communities of Orange County.
23
24 Now therefore, be it resolved on this day, February 1, 2022 that,
25
Resolution 22-08 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Resolution - 1 OF 3
Page 262 of 307
1
3
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1 ?.
l3
] 4
15
16
17
18
1. The City of Belle Isle hereby accepts and approves its designated portion of the Orange County Local
Mitigation Strategy,
2. The staff of the City of Belle Isle are requested and instructed to pursue available funding
opportunities for implementation of the proposals designated therein,
3. The City of Belle Isle will, upon receipt of such funding or other necessary resources, seek to
implement the proposals contained in its section of the strategy, and
4. The City of Belle Isle will continue to participate in the updating and expansion of the Orange County
Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead, and
5. The City of Belle Isle will further seek to encourage the businesses, industries and community groups
operating within and/or for the benefit of the City of Belle Isle to also participate in the updating
and expansion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead.
ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Commission of the City of Belle Isle held at City Hall 1600
Nela Avenue, Belle Isle, FL 32809, on the February 1, 2022.
NICHOLAS FOURAKER, MAYOR
1 9 So resolved, Attest:
2]
22
23
24
25
City Attorney
Resolution 22-08 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Resolution -2 OF 3
V
Page 263 of 307
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
11
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF ORANGE
I, YOLANDA QUICENO, CITY CLERK OF BELLE ISLE, FLORIDA, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing
Resolution 22-08 was duly and legally passed and adopted by the Belle Isle City Council in session
assembled. At this session, a quorum of its members was present on the /g;y day of -k,/,'P,t.~
~ r C
2022 .
Qu iceno, City Clerk
.••• -;_ti,flliJ······; YOLANDA QU!CENO
[f~1 No tary Public · State of Flo rida
~~~; Comm ission II HH 045091
·-.. ~.~! .. ~./ My Comm . Expires Nov 11 , 2024
Bonded through National Notary Ami.
Resolution 22-08 Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Resolution -3 OF 3
Page 264 of 307
Resolution 2022-01
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Resolution
WHEREAS, the City of Edgewood is vulnerable to the human and economic
costs of natural, technological and societal disasters;
WHEREAS, the Edgewood City Council recognizes the importance of reducing
or eliminating those vulnerabilities for the overall good and welfare of the
community;
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;
WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has implemented
various hazard 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;
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;
WHEREAS, the representatives and staff of the City of Edgewood have
identified, justified and prioritized a number of proposed projects and programs
needed to mitigate the vulnerabilities to the impacts of future disasters; and
WHEREAS, these proposed projects and programs have been incorporated into
the 2009 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 on this 18th Day of January, 2022, that,
1. The City of Edgewood hereby accepts and approves its designated
portion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy,
2. The staff of City of Edgewood are requested and instructed to pursue
available funding opportunities for implementation of the proposals
designated therein,
RESOLUTION 2022-02
Page 265 of 307
3. The City of Edgewood will , upon receipt of such funding or other
necessary resources , seek to implement the proposals contained in its
section of the strategy , and
4. The City of Edgewood will continue to participate in the updating and
expansion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years
ahead , and
5 . The City of Edgewood will further seek to encourage the businesses ,
industries and community groups operating within and/or for the benefit of
City of Edgewood to also participate in the updating and expansion of t he
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead .
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Edgewood held Edgewood City Hall 405 Bagshaw Way , Edgewood , FL 32809 ,
on the 18th day of January 22 .
Bea Meeks , City Clerk
2
RESOLUTJO r 2022-02
Page 266 of 307
RESOLUTION
of the
GREATER ORLANDO AVIATION AUTHORITY
R egarding
LOCAL MITIGATION STRATEGY
rJ'/ l&/JaJq
3 .)-J .
101a.qq
WHEREAS, while the ar eas under th e jurisdiction of the G reater Orlando Aviation
Authority are owned b y the C ity of Orlando , th e Greater Orlando Aviation Authority operates
and co ntrol s th e Orlando International Airport and the Orlando Executive Airport pursuant to
that certain Amended a nd Restated Operation a nd Use Agreement, dated A ugu st 3 1, 2015 , by
and between the C it y of Orlando and the Greater Orlando Aviation Authority; and
WHEREAS, the areas of the Greater Orlando Aviation Authority are v ulnerabl e to th e
human and economic costs of natural, technological and societal di sasters; and
WHEREAS, the Greater Orlando Aviation Authority recognizes th e importa nc e 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. §5 165 , as amended by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 , prov id es
for States and local governments to unde11ake a risk-based approach to reducing ri sks to natural
hazards through mitigation planning; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has implemented variou s
hazardous mitigation planning provisions thro ug h regulation at 44 CFR §20 1.6 requiring local
governments to have a FEMA approved Local Mitigation Strategy ("LMS ") in order to app ly for
and/o r receive project grants; and
WHEREAS, 44 CPR §20 1.6(d)(3) requires local jurisdictions to review and revise their
LMS to reflect changes in development, progress in local mitigation effo11s , 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 a nd the Greater
Orlando Aviation Authority will identify, justify and prioritize a number of proposed projects
and programs needed to mitigate the vulnerabilities of areas of the G reater Orlando Aviation
Authority to the impacts of foture disasters ; and
WHEREAS, these proposed projects and programs w ill be incorporated into the
2021 edition of th e Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy that has been prepared and issued
for consideration and impl ementation by the communities of Orange County.
Page 267 of 307
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE GREATER ORLANDO
AVIATION AUTHORJTY:
Section 1. The G reater Orlando Av iat io n Authority hereby accepts and approves its
d esignated portion of the Oran ge County Local Mitigation Strategy.
Section 2. The s taff of Orange Co un ty and the G reater O rl a nd o Aviati on Authority
are r equested and instructe d to purs ue available funding opportunities fo r imple mentation of t he
proposal s designated th erein.
Section 3 . The Greater Orlando Aviation Authority w ill , upon rece ipt of s uch
funding or other necessary r esources, seek to impl ement the proposals contained in it s sectio n of
the strategy.
Section 4. T he Greater Orlando Avia ti on Authority w ill continue to partic ipate in the
updating and ex pan sion of the Orange County Local M iti gation Strategy in the years ah ead.
Section 5. The Greater Orlando Avia ti on A utho rity w ill further seek to e n courage the
businesses, indus tries and community gro ups operating w ithin and/or for the benefit of Orange
County and the Greater Orlando Av iation Authority to a lso participa te in the upd atin g and
expansion of th e Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead.
Section 6 . Effective Date. The re so lution s ha ll take effect upo n the date of it s
adoption. r7f"
ADOPTEDTHIS /b DAYOF -c;re£,vr 022
N AUTHORJTY
-ood, C ha irm a n
~~ Yi ( ~ t.fbt 't l VYlA__ a M. Farmer, A ss is tant Secretary
Page 268 of 307
RESOLUTION NO. 16-2021
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MAITLAND, FLORIDA,
APPROVING MAITLAND'S PORTION OF THE 2021
ORANGE COUNTY LOCAL MITIGATION PLAN; AND
PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, the City of Maitland is vulnerable to the human and economic costs of
natural, technological and societal disasters; and
WHEREAS, the Maitland governing body recognizes 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
hazard 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 City of Maitland have identified, justified
and prioritized a number of proposed projects and programs needed to mitigate the vulnerabilities
to the impacts of future disasters; and
WHEREAS, these proposed projects and programs have been incorporated into the 2009
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 Council of the City of Maitland,
.Florida, that:
SECTION 1. Majtland hereby accepts and approves its designated portion of the Orange
County Local Mitigation Strategy.
SECTION 2. The staff of Orange County and Maitlandare requested and instructed to
pursue available funding opportunities for implementation of the proposals designated
therein.
SECTION 3. Maitland will, upon receipt of such funding or other necessary resources,
seek to implement the proposals contained in its section of the strategy.
Page 269 of 307
SECTION 4. Maitland will continue to participate in the updating and expansion of the
Orange County T ,ocal Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead.
SECTION 5. Maitland will further seek to encourage the businesses, industries and
community groups operating within and/or for the benefit of the City of Maitland 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 by the City Council of the City of Maitland, Florida, on the
13 1" Day of December, 2021.
CITY OF MAITLAND
ATTEST:
~~ )pfd~
MARIA WALDROP, CITY CilERK
Page 270 of 307
~£solution
Resolution No. 2022-03
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy Resolution
WHEREAS, the Town of Oakland is vulnerable to the human and economic costs of
natura], technological and societal disasters;
\VHERF..AS, the Town Commission recognizes the importance of reducing or
eliminating those vulnerabilities for the overall good and welfare of the community;
WHF..REAS, 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 of2000 provides for
States and local governments to undertake a risk-based approach to reducing risks to natural
hazards through mitigation planning;
\.VHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has implemented various
hazard 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;
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;
WHEREAS, the representatives and staff of Town of Oakland have identified, justified
and prioritized a number of proposed projects and programs needed to mitigate the
vulnerabilities lo the impacts off uture disasters; and
WHEREAS, these proposed projects and programs have been incorporated into the 2009
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 on this 22nd Day of March 2022 that,
1. The Town of Oakland hereby accepts and approves its designated portion of the Orange
County Local Mitigation Strategy,
2. The staff of the Town of Oakland are requested and instructed to pmsue available
funding opportunities for implementation of the proposals designated therein,
3. The Town of Oakland will, upon receipt of such funding or other necessary resources,
seek to implement the proposals contained in its section of the strategy, and
4. The Town of Oakland will continue to participate in the updating and expansion of the
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead, and
' ' Page 271 of 307
5. The Town of Oakland will furthe r seek to encourage the businesses, industries and
community groups operating within and/or for the benefit of the Town to also participate
in the updating and expansion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the
years ahead.
ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Commission of the Town of Oakland held at the
Oakland Meeting Hall on March 22, 2022.
ATTEST:
Elise Hui , fown Clerk
~ --
Page 272 of 307
:t: CITY OF
6~0RLAND0
RESOLUTION NO.: ·1:io':i 1.s e.o,
WHEREAS, the areas within the City of Orlando are vuJnerable to the human and
economic costs of natural, technological and societal disasters; and
WHEREAS, the City of Orlando City Council recognizes 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 of2000 provides for
States and local governments to undertake a risk-based approach to reducing risks to natural
hazards through mitigation plamring; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has implemented various
hazard mitigation planning provisions through regulation at 44.CFR 201.6 requiring local
governments to have a FEMA approv ed 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 the City of Orlando have identified, justified
and prioritized a number of proposed projects and programs needed to mitigate the
vulnerabilities to the impacts of future disasters; and
WHEREAS, these proposed projects and programs have been incorporated into the 2021
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 Council of the City of Orlando,
Florida:
Section 1. The City of Orlando hereby accepts and approves its designated portion of the
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy.
Section 2. The staff of the City of Orlando are requested and instructed to pursue
available funding opportunities for implementation of the proposals designated therein.
1 City Council Meeting: ':l -]..5 -2=+-
ltem: E;.-t Documen ta ry : µ..o'1 J..5 EO I
Page 273 of 307
Section 3. The City of Orlando 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 Orlando will continue to participate in the updating and expansion
of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead.
Section S. The City of Orlando will further seek to encourage the businesses, industries
and community groups operating within and/or for the benefit of the City of Orlando to
also participate in the updating and expansion of the Orange County Local Mitigation
Strategy in the years ahead.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Resolution shall take effect upon its passage.
DONE AND RESOLVED in regular session this 2-5~y of April 2022.
A1TEST:
:riuouio E ~
Stephanie Iletdcria, City Cleek
Laurie E. Nossair 'u:p6~Lf
(SEAL)
2
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
LEGALITY for the use and reliance of the
c~~,.Flo~1 ~·
dg,i.,.-..,(., 25 , 2022
Alison C. Brackins
Assistant City Attorney
City Council Meeting: Li -u -22..
Item :,£.-a . Documentary:_p..o':1 ~eo \
Page 274 of 307
THETOWNOF
lllllinbtrmtn
Resolution# 2022-01
Town of Windermere Adopting Orange County's Local Mitigation
Strategy Resolution
WHEREAS, the Town of Windermere is vulnerable to the human and
economic costs of natural, technological and societal disasters;
WHEREAS, the Town Council of Windermere recognizes the importance
of reducing or eliminating those vulnerabilities for the overall good and welfare of
the community;
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;
WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has
implemented various hazard 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;
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;
WHEREAS, the representatives and staff of the Town of Windermere
have identified, justified and prioritized a number of proposed projects and
programs needed to mitigate the vulnerabilities to the impacts of future disasters;
and
Page 275 of 307
WHEREAS, these proposed projects and programs have been
incorporated into the 2009 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 on this February 8, 2022 that,
1 . The Town of Windermere hereby accepts and approves its designated
portion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy,
2. The staff of the Town of Windermere are requested and instructed to
pursue available funding opportunities for implementation of the proposals
designated therein,
3. The Town of Windermere will, upon receipt of such funding or other
necessary resources, seek to implement the proposals contained in its
section of the strategy, and
4. The Town of Windermere will continue to participate in the updating and
expansion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years
ahead,and
5. The Town of Windermere will further seek to encourage the businesses,
industries and community groups operating within and/or for the benefit of
the Town of Windermere to also participate in the updating and expansion
of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead.
ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Town Council of the Town of Windermere
held at 520 Main St. Windermere, FL 34786 on the February 8, 2022.
So resolved, ATIEST:
...
Page 276 of 307
RESOLUTION NO. 22-03
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF WINTER GARDEN, FLORIDA, ADOPTING ORANGE
COUNTY LOCAL MITIGATION STRATEGY RESOLUTION.
WHEREAS, the City of Winter Garden are vulnerable to the human and economic
costs of natural, technological and societal disasters; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission recognizes 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 hazard 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 the City of Winter Garden have
identified, justified and prioritized a number of proposed projects and programs needed
to mitigate the vulnerabilities of areas of the City of Winter Garden to the impacts of
future disasters; and
WHEREAS, these proposed projects and programs have been incorporated into
the 2021 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
WINTER GARDEN, FLORIDA:
1. The City of Winter Garden hereby accepts and approves its designated portion of
the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy,
Resolution No. 22-03
Page 1 of 2
Page 277 of 307
2. The staff of the City of Winter Garden are requested and instructed to pursue
available funding opportunities for implementation of the proposals designated
therein,
3. The City of Winter Garden will, upon receipt of such funding or other necessary
resources, seek to implement the proposals contained in its section of the
strategy, and
4. The City of Winter Garden will continue to participate in the updating and
expansion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead,
and
5. The City of Winter Garden will further seek to encourage the businesses,
industries and community groups operating within and/or for the benefit of the
City of Winter Garden to also participate in the updating and expansion of the
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead.
ADOPTED this 2LJ-f+f day of ~\)A(2~ 2022, by the City Commission of the City
of Winter Garden, Florida.
CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
WINTER GARDEN, FLORIDA
Resolution No. 22-03
Page 2 of 2
Page 278 of 307
I
U N IVERS I TY OF CENTRAL FLOR IO A
Depa rtm e nt of Emergency Ma nagement
3504 Perseus Loop
Orlando, FL 32816
November 29, 2021
Lauraleigh Avery
Emergency Manager
Office of Emergency Management
Orange County Fire Rescue Department
P.O. Box 5879
Winter Park, Florida 32793-5879
Chief Avery,
This letter serves to acknowle dge adoption of the 2021 Orange County Local Mitigation
Strategy by t h e Uni v ersity of Central Florida (UCF). Adoption of the document is intended
to comply with the state and federal hazard mitigation planning standards contained in
44 CFR 201.6(b)-(d) and Fla. Admin. Coder. 27P-22.003. Moreover, UCF recognizes t h e
importance of establishing mitigation projects and initiatives to r edu ce or eliminale long-
t e rm risk to the community.
The University remains an active contributor in the County's Local Mitigation Strategy,
and will continue to participate in t h e county's ongoing mitigation and resiliency efforts.
Sincerely,
Senior Vice President, Administration a nd Finance
University of Central Florida
CC : Joe Thalheimer, Director, UCF Department of Emergency Management
Kristin Lentz, Mitigation Planner, Florida Division of Em e rgency Management
Phone : 407 .882.7 11 1 • Fax : 407 .882 .7120 • Web: emergency .ucf.edu I a division of Administration and Finance
Page 279 of 307
RESOLUTION
of tlte
Ranger Drainage District
Regarding
LOCAL MITIGATION STRATEGY
Resolution 2022-1
WHEREAS, the areas of Ranger Drainage District are vulnerable to the human and
economic costs of natural, technological and so ci etal disasters; and
WHEREAS, the Ranger Drainage District recognize the impo1iance 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 unde1iake a risk-based approach to r educing ri sks to natural
hazards through mitigation planning; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has implemented various
hazardous mitigation planning provisions through regulation at 44 CPR §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 CPR §201.6(d)(3) requires local jurisdictions to review and revise their
LMS to r e fl ect changes in development, progress in local mitigation efforts, and changes in
priorities, and resubmit it for approval within fiv e (5) years in order to continue to be e ligible for
mitigation project grant funding; and
WHEREAS, the representatives and staff of Ranger Drainage District, Orange County
government and the Local Mitigation Strategy Working Group have identified, justified and
prioritized a number of proposed projects and programs needed to mitigate the vulnerabilities of
a reas of Ranger Drainage District to the impacts of future disasters; and
WHEREAS, these proposed projects and programs have been incorporated into the 202 1
ed ition of the Orange County Lo cal Mitigation Strategy that h as been prepared and issued for
consideration and implementat ion by the commW1itie s of Orange County.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE Ranger Drainage District.
Page 280 of 307
Section 1. Ranger Drainage District hereby accepts and approves its designated portion
of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy.
Section 2. The staff of Orange County and Ranger Drainage District are requested
and instructed to pursue available funding opportunities for implementation of the proposals
designated therein .
Section 3. Ranger Drainage District will, upon receipt of such funding or other
n ecessary resources, seek to implement the proposals contained in its section of th e strategy.
Section 4. Ranger Drainage District will continue to participate in the updating and
expansion of the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead.
Section 5. Ranger Drainage District will further seek to encourage the bus inesse s,
industries and community groups operating within and/or for the benefit of Orange County and
Ranger Drainage Dis tr ict to a lso participate in the updating and expansion of the Orange County
Local Mitigation Strategy in the years ahead.
Section 6. Effective Date. The resolution s hall tak e effect upon the date of its
adoption .
ADOPTED THIS / l ....-.--
DAY OF ':;:,, hil}v4
Orange County, FLORIDA
By: Ranger Drainage District
By v~C,,uf_
Dave Mauck, President
Page 281 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
ANNEX 4 – Orange County LMS Project Priority List Page 172
Annex 4 – Orange County LMS Project Priority List
The following page is the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS) Project Priority
List. This list includes the strategic projects identified by the LMS Working Group to
guide and direct the more specific mitigation and active initiatives that are found in
Annex 5.
The strategic projects found here in Annex 4 are more stable with less frequent
changes than the active initiatives in Annex 5. The strategic projects and sub-projects
are evaluated every five (5) years to coincide with the plan update that is submitted to
the Florida Division of Emergency Management (FDEM) Bureau of Mitigation for
approval.
Annex 4 – Orange County LMS Project Priority List
Page 282 of 307
Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy 2021
ANNEX 5 – Orange County LMS Active Initiatives List Page 173
Annex 5 – Orange County LMS Active Initiatives List
The following pages are the Orange County Local Mitigation Strategy (LMS) Active
Initiatives List. This list includes the most current action items that were submitted to
the LMS Planning Committee for review and ranking. In order to be favorably
considered for inclusion to the list, the initiative should score at least twenty (20) points
out of a forty one (41) total. All of the qualifying initiatives are then presented to the
full Working Group for a motion to include them on the list.
The action items found here in Annex 5 change frequently. The mitigation initiatives
are linked to the strategic projects and sub-projects found in Annex 4. Annex 5 is
updated usually on a quarterly basis, or at the most recent Orange County LMS Working
Group meeting when new projects are added or older projects are revised.
Annex 5 – Orange County LMS Active Initiatives List
Page 283 of 307
RESOLUTION
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.
Page 284 of 307
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 , 2023.
Page 285 of 307
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 , 2023,
LEGALITY THIS DAY OF UNDER AGENDA ITEM NO.
, 2023.
Shuffield, Lowman & Wilson P.A.
By:
Scott Cookson, City Attorney
Page 286 of 307