Glendale (PDF) - Hazard Mitigation Web Portal - State of California

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Natural Hazards Mitigation PlanCity of Glendale, CaliforniaSection 7 – Wildfires• California Fire Plan: The 1996 California Fire Plan is a cooperative effort between theState Board of Forestry and Fire Protection and the CDF (California Board of Forestry,1996). This system ranks the fire hazard of the wildland areas of the State using fourmain criteria: fuels, weather, assets at risk, and level of service (which is a measure ofFire Department’s success in initial-attack fire suppression). The California Fire Planuses GIS data layers to conduct the initial evaluations, and local CDF Ranger Units arethen tasked with field validation of the initial assessment. The final maps use a Fire Plangrid cell with an area of approximately 450 acres, which represents 1/81 of the area of a7.5-minute quadrangle map (called Quad 81). The fire hazard of an individual cell isranked as moderate, high or very high. This system is expected to replace the currentState Responsibility Areas process, but at the time of this writing, the California FirePlan has not been implemented. For additional information regarding this system referto http://www.fire.ca.gov/FireEmergencyResponse/FirePlan/FirePlan.asp.• FireLine System: The Insurance Services Office (ISO) developed a program used bythe insurance industry to identify those areas where the potential loss due to wildfire isgreatest (ISO, 1997). ISO retained Pacific Meridian Resources of Emeryville, Californiato develop the FireLine software, which uses satellite-imagery interpretation to evaluatethe factors of fuel types, slope and roads (access) to develop the risk rating. Mostinsurance companies that provide insurance services to homeowners in California nowuse this system. This software is only available through ISO. Updated versions of thissystem are being developed that include the factors of elevation, aspect, and relativeslope position.• National Fire Plan: Funding for the National Fire Plan was authorized by Congress inOctober 2000 in response to the wildfires of that year. The plan is a cooperative effortof the US Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service, the Department of the Interior,and the National Association of State Foresters. National Fire Plan maps showcommunities that are within the vicinity of federal lands that are at high risk fromwildland fire. The plan uses hazardous fuel reduction treatment techniques (includingprescribed fire alone, mechanical treatment alone, mechanical treatment plus prescribedfire, and other/wildland fire use, such as allowing lightning-caused fires to burn) toreduce the impact of wildland fire on communities within the urban-wildland interface.For additional information refer to http://www.fireplan.gov/.A major component of the National Fire Plan is funding for projects designed to reducefire risks in developed areas and at the urban/wildland interface. A fundamental step inrealizing this goal was the identification of areas that are at high risk of damage fromwildfire. Federal fire managers authorized State Foresters to determine whichcommunities were under significant risk for wildland fire on Federal lands. The CDFundertook the task of generating the state's list of communities at risk. WithCalifornia's extensive Wildland-Urban Interface situation, the list of communitiesextends beyond just those on Federal lands. The CFA has identified 1,264 firethreatenedcommunities in California, one of which is Glendale. For additionalinformation refer to http://www.cafirealliance.org/.• FARSITE, BEHAVEPlus and FlamMap: These are PC-based programs that can beused by local fire managers to calculate potential fire behavior in a given area using GISdata inputs for terrain and fuels. The purpose of these models is to predict fire behavior.Data inputs that can be used in the analyses include elevation, slope, aspect, surface fuel,canopy cover, stand height, crown base height and crown bulk density.2006 PAGE 7 - 9
Natural Hazards Mitigation PlanCity of Glendale, CaliforniaSection 7 – WildfiresThe oldest of these models is the BEHAVE Fire Behavior Prediction and FuelModeling System (Burgan and Rothermel, 1984; Burgan, 1987; Andrews, 1986;Andrews and Chase, 1989; Andrews and Bradshaw, 1991) that has been used since 1984.A newer version of it is referred to as the BehavePlus Fire Modeling System (Andrewsand Bevins, 1999). This software is undergoing additional updates to make it moreuser- friendly and provide additional fire modeling capabilities. FARSITE (Finney,1995, 1998) “simulates the growth and behavior of a fire as it spreads through variablefuel and terrain under changing weather conditions” (http://fire.org/cgibin/nav.cgi?pages=JFSP&mode=9).This software can be used to project the growth ofongoing wildfires and prescribed fires, and can be used as a planning tool for firesuppression and prevention, and fuel assessment. The FlamMap fire behavior mappingand analysis system is still under preparation, although a prototype has been releasedand is being used for the Tahoe Basin project (http://fire.org/cgibin/nav.cgi?pages=JFSP&mode=11).FlamMap combines elements of the two oldermodels. The Glendale Fire Department is considering the use of some of thesecomputer models to simulate fire conditions and predict fire behavior in the fire hazardareas of the city.• Brian Barrette’s Structural Vulnerability System: This system starts with the StateResponsibility Area fire hazard severity rating described above, but also includesstructural elements as rating factors (Barrette, 1999). The structural elementsconsidered include roofing, siding, vegetation clearance, roads and signage, chimneys,structural accessories, water supply, and the location of the structure in relation to thesurrounding conditions (see Table 7.4, below). Under this system, a score of 3 equalsthe most danger, whereas a score of 1 equals the least danger). This system is intendedfor use in assessing individual parcels, and is therefore not likely to be used by agencies,as it is time- and personnel-intensive. However, the system is easy to use and cantherefore be used by individual homeowners or insurance companies to determinewhether or not a specific property has a high fire hazard and is therefore a goodcandidate for specific fire hazard mitigation measures.Table 7.4: Sample Hazard Identification Rating SystemCategoryIndicatorRatingRoads and Signage Steep; narrow; poorly signed 3One or two of the above 2Meets all requirements 1Water Supply None, except domestic 3Hydrant, tank, or pool over 500 feet away 2Location of theStructureHydrant, tank, or pool within 500 feet 1Top of steep slope with brush/grass below 3Mid-slope with clearance 2Level with lawn, or watered groundcover 12006 PAGE 7 - 10
Page 2 and 3:
City CouncilDave Weaver, MayorRafi
Page 4 and 5:
Natural Hazards Mitigation PlanCity
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Table 4-2: STAPLEE Ranking of Actio
Page 58 and 59:
Table 4-4: Description of Ranking C
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89: Natural Hazards Mitigation PlanCity
Page 108 and 109: Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan Sec
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
Page 312 and 313:
Page 314 and 315:
Page 316 and 317:
Page 318 and 319:
NOTES:This map is intended for gene
Page 325:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 332 and 333:
City of GlendaleUpdateHazard Mitiga
Page 334 and 335:
Similar to Safety ElementIncludesEa
Page 336 and 337:
HospitalsPartnershipsWithin City an
Page 338 and 339:
Impact on CityMost significant area
show all

Glendale (PDF) - Hazard Mitigation Web Portal - State of California

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?