The URL can be used to link to this page

PSC 09-12-2024 Searchable PacketCITY OF CUPERTINO PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION AGENDA 10185 North Stelling Road, Quinlan Conference Room Thursday, September 12, 2024 6:00 PM Members of the public wishing to observe the meeting may do so in one of the following ways: 1) Attend in person at Quinlan Community Center, 10185 N. Stelling Road 2) The meeting will also be streamed live on and online at https://youtube.com/@cupertinocitycommission Members of the public wishing to comment on an item on the agenda may do so in the following ways: 1) Appear in person at Quinlan Community Center. 2) E-mail comments by 5:00 p.m. on Thursday, September 12, 2024, to the Commission at publicsafetycommission@cupertino.org. These e-mail comments will also be posted to the City’s website after the meeting. Oral public comments may be made during the public comment period for each agenda item. Members of the audience who address the legislative body must come to the lectern/microphone and are requested to complete a Speaker Card and identify themselves. Completion of Speaker Cards and identifying yourself is voluntary and not required to attend the meeting or provide comments. ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1.Subject: Minutes from May 9, 2024 Recommended Action: Approve minutes from May 9, 2024 A - Draft Minutes POSTPONEMENTS Page 1 1 PSC 09-12-2024 1 of 647 Public Safety Commission Agenda September 12, 2024 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Commission on any matter within the jurisdiction of the Commission and not on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. In most cases, State law will prohibit the Commission from making any decisions with respect to a matter not on the agenda. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS OLD BUSINESS 2.Subject: Public Safety Forum Recommended Action: Receive updated report on Public Safety Forum Presenter: Thomas Chin A - Public Safety Forum - Save the Date - 2024 B - Public Safety Forum Program Overview 3.Subject: City-Owned Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) Program Recommended Action: 1. Recommend the proposed City of Cupertino ALPR Policy for adoption by the City Council, 2. Recommend the City Council consider authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute a memorandum of understanding between the County of Santa Clara and the City of Cupertino regarding the use of ALPRs, 3. Recommend the City Council consider authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and approve an agreement with Flock Safety to lease ALPR cameras not to exceed $185,000 for three years, with the option for two additional years and a maximum total compensation of $300,000 (approximately $60,000 annually). Presenter: Thomas Chin Staff Report A - Draft Resolution Establishing City of Cupertino Automated License Plate Reader Policy B - Memorandum of Understanding on Use of ALPR System C - Flock Safety Quote for Services D - Proposed Camera Locations NEW BUSINESS 4.Subject: 2023 Multi Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Recommended Action: Recommend for adoption the 2023 Santa Clara County Multi Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 1 Base Plan and Volume 2 City of Cupertino Annex Presenter: Thomas Chin Page 2 2 PSC 09-12-2024 2 of 647 Public Safety Commission Agenda September 12, 2024 Staff Report A - Draft Resolution Adopting MJHMP Vol I and II B - Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan - Volume 1 C - Draft Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan - Volume 2: STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS 5.Subject: Report by the Santa Clara County Fire District Recommended Action: Receive Report by the Santa Clara County Fire District Presenter: Deputy Chief Hector Estrada A - Public Safety Report - May 2024 B - Public Safety Fire Report - June 2024 C - Public Safety Fire Report - July 2024 6.Subject: Report by the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office Recommended Action: Receive report by the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office Presenter: Captain Neil Valenzuela A - Public Safety Sheriff's Report - July 2024 7.Subject: Report by the City of Cupertino Office of Emergency Management Recommended Action: Receive report by the City of Cupertino Office of Emergency Management Presenter: Thomas Chin, Emergency Manager, City of Cupertino 8.Subject: Commissioner’s Reports Recommended Action: Receive Commissioners' reports FUTURE AGENDA SETTING ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend this meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for assistance. In addition, upon request in advance by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative format. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the members after publication of the agenda will be made available for public inspection. Please contact the City Clerk’s Office in City Hall located at 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014, during normal business hours. IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please be advised that pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code section Page 3 3 PSC 09-12-2024 3 of 647 Public Safety Commission Agenda September 12, 2024 2.08.100 written communications sent to the City Council, Commissioners or staff concerning a matter on the agenda are included as supplemental material to the agendized item. These written communications are accessible to the public through the City website and kept in packet archives. Do not include any personal or private information in written communications to the City that you do not wish to make public, as written communications are considered public records and will be made publicly available on the City website. Page 4 4 PSC 09-12-2024 4 of 647 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item 24-1338 Agenda Date: 9/12/2024 Agenda #: 1. Subject: Minutes from May 9, 2024 Approve minutes from May 9, 2024 CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 9/9/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™5 PSC 09-12-2024 5 of 647 CUPERTINO PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES Thursday, May 9, 2024 6:00 p.m. City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue CALL TO ORDER Chair Bobby Toda called to order this meeting of the Cupertino Public Safety Commission at 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, May 9, 2024. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Chair Bobby Toda Vice Chair Sidharth Rajaram Neal Evans Nirnalendu Das Commissioners Absent: Staff Present: Captain Neil Valenzuela, Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office Chief Hector Estrada Tom Chin, Emergency Manager, City of Cupertino Meredith Albert, Emergency Management Analyst, City of Cupertino APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Subject: Minutes from March 14, 2024 Recommended Action: Approve minutes from March 14, 2024 Commissioner Commissioner Evans motioned to approve the minutes; Vice Chair Rajaram seconded the motion; Ayes: Toda, Evans, Rajaram, Das. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None. POSTPONEMENTS None ORAL COMMUNICATION None 6 PSC 09-12-2024 6 of 647 WRITTEN COMMUNICATION None OLD BUSINESS 2. Subject: Public Safety Forum Recommended Action: Receive an updated report on the Public Safety Forum Presenter: Thomas Chin, Emergency Manager The 2024 Public Safety Forum was discussed. The event will be held on October 17, 2024. Emergency Manager Chin reviewed the format of the annual Public Safety forum for the benefit of new commissioners. Emergency Manager Chin suggested changing from the presentation-style format to a town hall-style meeting with a panel that includes the elected Sheriff, the appointed County Fire Chief, and the City Manager. It was suggested that the public be asked to submit questions before or during the meeting. Commissioners discussed participation at past forums and talked about ways to encourage participation. Commissioner Das made a motion to receive the report. Commissioner Evans seconded. Roll call vote. Ayes: Das, Evans, Rajaram and Toda. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None. NEW BUSINESS 3. Subject: Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) Update and Exercise Series Recommended Action: Receive report on the Status of the EOP Update and Exercise Series Presenter: Thomas Chin, Emergency Manager, City of Cupertino Thomas Chin described the 2024 Emergency Tabletop series. Emergency Manager Chin described the planning process and execution of two tabletop exercises with response partners. Emergency Manager Chin described the lessons learned as an opportunity to update the 2019 EOP. Commissioners discussed the exercise and commended the City’s efforts to emergency preparedness. Thomas Chin answered questions from the Commission. Vice Chair Rajaram made a motion to receive the report. Commissioner Das seconded. Roll call vote. Ayes: Das, Evans, Rajaram and Toda. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None. STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS 7 PSC 09-12-2024 7 of 647 4. Subject: Report by the Santa Clara County Fire District Recommended Action: Receive a report by the Santa Clara County Fire District Liaison Presenter: Deputy Fire Chief Hector Estrada Deputy Chief Estrada reviewed the March and April 2024 Santa Clara County Fire District reports. Deputy Chief Estrada review incident response data, response times, and property loss. Commissioners discussed the March and April 2024 fire response data. Deputy Chief Estrada answered questions from the Commission. Vice Chair Rajaram made a motion to receive the report. Commissioner Das seconded. Roll call vote. Ayes: Das, Evans, Rajaram and Toda. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None. 5. Subject: Report by the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office Recommended Action: Receive a report by the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office Liaison Presenter: Captain Neil Valenzuela Captain Valenzuela reviewed the March and April crime data. Captain Valenzuela reviewed call volumes and response times. Captain Valenzuela detailed a specific crime stopped and investigated by West Valley deputies in Cupertino. Commissioners discussed the March and April 2024 crime data. Captain Valenzuela answered questions from the Commission. Commissioner Das made a motion to receive the report. Vice Chair Rajaram seconded. Roll call vote. Ayes: Das, Evans, Rajaram and Toda. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None. 6. Subject: Report by the City of Cupertino Office of Emergency Management Recommended Action: Receive a report by the City of Cupertino Office of Emergency Management Presenter: Thomas Chin, Emergency Manager, City of Cupertino Thomas Chin reviewed the Office of Emergency Management's current planning, preparedness, training, and exercise efforts and answered clarifying questions. Thomas Chin discussed programs and resources available to Block Leaders and Citizen Corps volunteers. Additionally, Thomas Chin displayed the City’s new Public Hazard 8 PSC 09-12-2024 8 of 647 Awareness Dashboard. Commissioners discussed the city’s efforts to prepare for emergencies and provide resources for residents and businesses. Thomas Chin answered questions from the Commission. Deputy Fire Chief Estrada commended the City’s technology for emergency preparedness. Vice Chair Rajaram made a motion to receive the report. Commissioner Das seconded. Roll call vote. Ayes: Das, Evans, Rajaram and Toda. Noes: None. Abstain: None. Absent: None. 7. Subject: Commissioner’s Reports Recommended Action: Receive Commissioners' reports Commissioner Evans discussed his ride-along experience with the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office and recommended others to ride-along. Vice Chair Rajaram discussed comments from neighbors regarding security camera footage. Captain Valenzuela reminded Commissioners and the public to call the Sheriff’s Office for any suspicious activity. Chair Toda provided a briefing on the May Mayor’s meeting. FUTURE AGENDA SETTING None ADJOURNMENT Chair Bobby Toda adjourned the Public Safety Commission meeting at 7:54 p.m. SUBMITTED BY: Thomas Chin Staff Liaison to the Public Safety Commission Emergency Services Coordinator City of Cupertino Approval date APPROVED BY: Thomas Chin, Staff Liaison Date 9 PSC 09-12-2024 9 of 647 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item 24-13381 Agenda Date: 9/12/2024 Agenda #: 2. Subject: Public Safety Forum Receive updated report on Public Safety Forum Presenter: Thomas Chin CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 9/9/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™10 PSC 09-12-2024 10 of 647 SAVE THE DATE Public Safety Forum 2024 Thursday, October 17, 6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. Community Hall 10350 Torre Avenue The City of Cupertino and the Cupertino Public Safety Commission Presents 11 PSC 09-12-2024 11 of 647 CUPERTINO PUBLIC SAFETY FORUM PROGRAM PLAN Event Title: Cupertino Public Safety Forum Date: October 17, 2024 Time: 5:00 PM - 8:00 PM Location: Cupertino Community Hall, 10350 Torre Ave, Cupertino, CA 95014 --- Program Overview The Cupertino Public Safety Forum is an event dedicated to fostering community engagement and enhancing public safety awareness in Cupertino. This event will allow residents to hear from key public safety officials, learn more about public safety services and local safety initiatives. Key speakers include the Mayor and the Santa Clara County Fire Chief, who will share priorities for community safety and emergency preparedness. --- Event Agenda 5:00 PM - 6:00 PM: Registration 6:00 PM - 6:10 PM: Welcome and Opening Remarks - Chair Bobby Toda calls the Forum to Order - Introduces the Mayor of Cupertino - Mayor Sheila Mohan 6:10 PM – 6:20 PM: Keynote – Santa Clara County Fire Chief Suwanna Kerdkaew 6:20 PM - 6:30 PM: Presentation by Santa Clara County Fire Chief - Speaker: Deputy Chief Hector Estrada 6:30 PM - 6:40 PM: Presentation by Santa Clara County Sheriff - Speaker: Captain Neil Valenzuela 6:40 PM – 6:50 PM: Break 12 PSC 09-12-2024 12 of 647 - A short intermission for attendees to stretch, grab refreshments, and submit written questions via Card or QR Code for the Q&A session. 6:50 PM - 7:30 PM: Q&A Session - Moderator: TBD – Possible: Tom Chin, City of Cupertino Emergency Manager - An interactive session where previously submitted questions are answered by the Fire Chief and Sheriff Captain. - The moderator may read written questions. - Focus on addressing community concerns, clarifying safety protocols, and discussing future initiatives. 7:30 PM – 7:35 PM: Closing Remarks - Speaker: Chair Bobby Toda, Cupertino Public Safety Commission Chair - Summary of key points discussed during the event. 7:35 PM - 8:00 PM: Networking - Attendees are encouraged to stay and network with speakers, city officials, and each other. Additional Information Parking: Free parking is available at the Cupertino Community Hall parking lot. Additional parking can be found at the nearby Cupertino Library. For more information about the event, please contact: Thomas Chin, Emergency Manager, City of Cupertino tomc@cupertino.gov 408-777-1310 13 PSC 09-12-2024 13 of 647 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item 24-13382 Agenda Date: 9/12/2024 Agenda #: 3. Subject: City-Owned Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) Program 1. Recommend the proposed City of Cupertino ALPR Policy for adoption by the City Council, 2. Recommend the City Council consider authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute a memorandum of understanding between the County of Santa Clara and the City of Cupertino regarding the use of ALPRs, 3. Recommend the City Council consider authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and approve an agreement with Flock Safety to lease ALPR cameras not to exceed $185,000 for three years, with the option for two additional years and a maximum total compensation of $300,000 (approximately $60,000 annually). Presenter: Thomas Chin CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 9/9/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™14 PSC 09-12-2024 14 of 647 PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Meeting: September 12, 2024 Subject City-Owned Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) Program Recommended Action 1. Recommend the proposed City of Cupertino ALPR Policy for adoption by the City Council, 2. Recommend the City Council consider authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and execute a memorandum of understanding between the County of Santa Clara and the City of Cupertino regarding the use of ALPRs, 3. Recommend the City Council consider authorizing the City Manager to negotiate and approve an agreement with Flock Safety to lease ALPR cameras not to exceed $185,000 for three years, with the option for two additional years and a maximum total compensation of $300,000 (approximately $60,000 annually). What is ALPR Technology ALPR technology uses a combination of cameras and computer software to scan the license plates of passing vehicles. The cameras, which can be fixed (e.g., mounted on road signs or traffic lights), capture computer-readable images that allow law enforcement to compare plate numbers against plates of known stolen vehicles or vehicles associated with individuals wanted on criminal charges. When the system matches a license plate, law enforcement receives an alert with the location where the image of the vehicle with the matching plate was captured. As a part of an active investigation, detectives can also use ALPR data after a crime has been committed to identify and locate associated vehicles. Background As part of the FY 2023-2024 and the ongoing FY 2024-2025 Work Programs, Council guided staff to “Deploy city-owned license plate readers and implement policies to allow neighborhood-owned ones.” In response to Council direction, staff conducted an in-depth examination of state legislation, privacy issues, regulatory standards for ALPRs, associated installation costs, and successful practices from comparable municipalities. In March 2023, staff presented a preliminary assessment of the ALPR 15 PSC 09-12-2024 15 of 647 Page 2 of 5 systems and proposed program guidelines to the Public Safety Commission (PSC) and the Technology, Innovation, and Communication Commission (TICC) to garner input from commissioners and community members regarding technology applications, device placement, and potential privacy implications. With the help of this input, staff began drafting an ALPR usage policy and an MOU with Santa Clara County. In January 2024, the County of Santa Clara and the Sheriff's Office adjusted their ALPR Surveillance policy, permitting data exchanges across policing agencies. This change led to the delay of the City being able to enact its own policy as staff needed to review the amendments. At the time staff also assessed the policies and MOUs from jurisdictions like Palo Alto, Los Altos Hills, and Los Gatos to discern best practices. In addition, staff gathered perspectives from county officials, the City Attorney's Office, the City Manager's Office, and Cupertino residents on the preliminarily drafted policy and MOU. Staff incorporated feedback and then returned the revised policy to the PSC in September 2024 for the final recommendation before being presented to the City Council for official adoption. Draft Resolution and Proposed City of Cupertino ALPR Policy (Attachment A) The proposed ALPR policy is a document that sets forth the rules and guidelines for using an automated license plate reader system in the City of Cupertino. The policy aims to introduce clear protocols and protections regarding the collection, storage, and sharing of ALPR data alongside methods for supervision and periodic audits. The policy applies primarily to the ALPR devices owned or leased by the city and installed on city infrastructure; however, the policy allows data sharing from privately owned ALPR devices. The proposed ALPR policy for the City of Cupertino has been developed by leveraging the established policies and experiences of other local jurisdictions, including the City of Saratoga and the Town of Los Altos Hills. To ensure the ALPR system's efficacy and seamless integration, Cupertino will adopt annual reporting and best practices observed in Los Altos Hills, enabling data-driven decision-making and continuous enhancement. The policy covers the following aspects of the ALPR system: • The authorized and prohibited uses of the ALPR system, which are confined to law enforcement and public safety purposes • The data collection process, which entails capturing digital images of vehicle license plates and their associated information, such as date, time, location, and vehicle details • The installation and maintenance of the ALPR devices, which will be leased from a vendor and installed on city infrastructure with appropriate permits and security measures • The data access, storage, and protection procedures, which limit access to authorized personnel of the Sheriff's Office, require login and password authentication and mandate encryption and other data security measures 16 PSC 09-12-2024 16 of 647 Page 3 of 5 • The data retention period, which is 30 days for data stored in the cloud and 12 months for data downloaded or stored locally, unless the data is associated with a criminal investigation or case • The public access limitations, which prohibit selling, sharing, or transferring the data except as required by law or court order • The third-party data sharing conditions, which allow data sharing with the District Attorney's Office, the Public Defender's Office, other law enforcement agencies, and parties to civil litigation in response to a court order • The training requirements, which mandate that all personnel who use and access the ALPR system receive proper training and copies of the policy • The oversight responsibilities, which include logging and auditing all data access, ensuring compliance with the policy and the law, and reporting the audit results to the City Manager California Civil Code section 1798.90.5 requires that public agencies with ALPRs adopt and implement a usage and privacy policy that identifies the individuals who will have access to the ALPR data, describes how the ALPR system will be monitored, lists parameters for sharing of ALPR data, describes measures that will be taken to protect the accuracy of ALPR data, and specifies the retention period for ALPR data. The resolution establishing the City's Automated License Plate Ready Policy must be approved to implement the ALPR program. The recommended action includes adopting a resolution establishing the City of Cupertino Automated License Plate Reader Policy and authorizing the City Manager to establish a memorandum of understanding between the City and the Sheriff's Office governing the use of the ALPR System. Draft MOU with the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office (Attachment B) The draft MOU is an agreement between the City and the Sheriff's Office on the use of the ALPR system within the City which clarifies the duties and expectations of the City and the County concerning the ALPR program, including data handling, security, and maintenance such as: • Use: The Sheriff's Office is authorized to use the ALPR system for legitimate law enforcement purposes within the City in accordance with the applicable policies and laws. The Sheriff's Office is prohibited from using the ALPR system for any discriminatory, harassing, or retaliatory purposes or for any personal or political reasons. • Data: The Sheriff's Office is the custodian of the ALPR data and is responsible for ensuring its security, accuracy, and integrity. The Sheriff's Office is required to comply with the City's and the County's policies on data collection, storage, access, sharing, retention, and ownership. The Sheriff's Office is also required to comply with the California Public Records Act and other laws regarding the disclosure of ALPR data. • Training: The Sheriff's Office is responsible for providing adequate training to its personnel on the proper use of the ALPR system and the applicable policies and 17 PSC 09-12-2024 17 of 647 Page 4 of 5 laws. The Sheriff's Office is also required to maintain training records and provide copies to the City upon request. • Oversight: The Sheriff's Office is required to conduct regular audits and reviews of the ALPR system and data to ensure compliance with the MOU and the policies and laws. The Sheriff's Office is also required to report any violations, breaches, or incidents involving the ALPR system or data to the City and to cooperate with any investigations or inquiries by the City or other authorities. • Monitoring: The Sheriff's Office shall be accountable for monitoring the use and performance of the City ALPR system and ensuring adherence to this policy and applicable laws. The Sheriff's Office will work with the City to evaluate this policy annually and revise it as necessary to reflect changes in technology, laws, or best practices, and inform the City of any suggested changes to the policy. The MOU incorporates the City's ALPR Policy and the County's ALPR Surveillance Use Policy, which set forth the standards and procedures for the lawful and ethical use of the ALPR system and data. The MOU requires both Parties to adhere to these policies and to update them as needed to reflect the current best practices and legal requirements. Recommendation for an Agreement with Flock Safety (Attachment D) Currently, Flock Safety is the only ALPR system approved by the County of Santa Clara and the Sheriff's Office as it conforms to the County Surveillance Use Policy. Several nearby cities have deployed ALPR systems recently in partnership with Flock Safety, including the Town of Los Altos Hills, the City of Saratoga, the Town of Los Gatos, the City of Palo Alto, and the City of San Jose. The Town of Los Altos Hills conducted an informal solicitation in 2021 and selected Flock Safety as the best value to the jurisdiction. Staff consulted with the jurisdictions regarding their experiences with the vendor and recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to negotiate and approve an agreement with Flock Safety to lease ALPR cameras not to exceed $185,000 for three years, with the option for two additional years and a maximum total compensation of $300,000 (approximately $60,000 annually). Utilizing Flock Safety will allow the City to leverage Los Altos Hills' procurement process, streamline implementation, and ensure compatibility across jurisdictions. Proposed Camera Locations (Attachment D) In consultation with the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office, staff proposes 15 camera locations to serve as entry points into the City or on major arterial roads to maximize the effectiveness of the ALPR system. The selected locations provide adequate sun exposure for each ALPR unit. Community Outreach Staff conducted outreach on the proposed ALPR system, including presenting to the Public Safety Commission and the Technology, Information, and Communication Commission (TICC) in March 2023. The presentations covered the purpose, benefits, 18 PSC 09-12-2024 18 of 647 Page 5 of 5 costs, and privacy implications of the ALPR system and solicited feedback from the commissioners and the public. Sustainability Impact No sustainability impact. Fiscal Impact The FY 2023-2024 CWP allocated $60,000.00 for this item. The total cost for the program's first year, including 15 ALPR devices, installation, testing, and maintenance, is estimated at $62,250.00. The annual recurring cost for subsequent years is $59,000.00, which covers the devices' lease, warranty, and software updates. Additional budget may be necessary if the City determines that additional publicly owned ALPR devices are warranted. Cost Breakdown for ALPR Program Description Cost First Year Total $62,250 Annual Recurring Cost $59,000 Cost per Camera per Year $3,000 First Three Years $180,250 Optional Two Years $118,000 Maximum Contract $298,250 California Environmental Quality Act No California Environmental Quality Act impact. _____________________________________ Prepared and Approved by: Thomas Chin, Emergency Manager Attachments: A – Draft Resolution Establishing the City of Cupertino Automated License Plate Reader Policy B –Draft Memorandum of Understanding Between the County of Santa Clara and the City of Cupertino Regarding the Use of ALPRs C – Flock Safety Quote for Services D – Proposed Camera Locations 19 PSC 09-12-2024 19 of 647 RESOLUTION NO. 24- A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READERS WHEREAS, Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) cameras are used by police departments across the United States to instantly capture license plate information and compare it against lists of license plates associated with stolen vehicles, people who have committed a crime, and for other investigative purposes; and WHEREAS, many organizations that have used ALPR technology have found it to be an effective tool in fighting crime; and WHEREAS, California Civil Code section 1798.90.5 requires that public agencies with ALPRs adopt and implement a usage and privacy policy that identifies the individuals who will have access to the ALPR data, describes how the ALPR system will be monitored, lists parameters for sharing of ALPR data, describes measures that will be taken to protect the accuracy of ALPR data, and specifies the retention period for ALPR data. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino hereby adopts the attached Automated License Plate Reader Policy for the use of ALPR cameras in the City of Cupertino. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1st day of October, 2024, by the following vote: Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: ________ Sheila Mohan, Mayor City of Cupertino ________________________ Date 20 PSC 09-12-2024 20 of 647 Resolution No. __________________ Page 2 ATTEST: ________ Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk ________________________ Date 21 PSC 09-12-2024 21 of 647 Resolution No. __________________ Page 3 CITY OF CUPERTINO AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READER POLICY I. Purpose The City of Cupertino ("City") leases an Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) system within the City operated by the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office ("Sheriff's Office") for certain law enforcement and public safety purposes. ALPR systems use high-speed cameras to photograph vehicle license plates. The City intends to contract with vendors to install and maintain the ALPR system. The City ALPR system may also obtain data from ALPR cameras not owned or leased by the City. This policy applies to data held within the City's ALPR system but does not apply to data held independently by the owners or lessors of ALPR cameras not owned or leased by the City. The City ALPR system is intended only for authorized law enforcement and public safety purposes, and its data are only intended to be accessed by authorized users. California Civil Code section 1798.90.5 requires public agencies operating ALPR systems to adopt and implement a usage and privacy policy to ensure that the collection, use, maintenance, sharing, and dissemination of information collected pursuant to such system protects individual privacy and civil liberties. Consistent with the City's commitment to individual privacy and civil liberties and the State law mandate, the City has adopted this policy to regulate the use, management, retention, and other aspects of the City's ALPR system. This policy shall be made available to the public in writing and posted on the City's website. II. Authorized and Prohibited Uses The City ALPR system shall only be utilized for the following purposes: • To locate stolen, wanted, and/or other vehicles that are the subject of an investigation • To locate and/or apprehend individuals subject to arrest warrants or who are otherwise lawfully sought by law enforcement • To locate victims, witnesses, suspects, and others associated with a law enforcement investigation • To locate missing persons, including in response to Amber Alerts and Silver Alerts • To support local, State, Federal, and regional public safety departments in the identification of vehicles associated with targets of criminal investigations, 22 PSC 09-12-2024 22 of 647 Resolution No. __________________ Page 4 including investigations of serial crimes • To analyze traffic patterns using anonymized data • To protect participants at special events; and • To protect critical infrastructure sites. Any data obtained from the City ALPR system shall be used and handled pursuant to this policy and applicable State and Federal law. All other uses not referenced above are prohibited. Under no circumstances shall the ALPR system be used for personal or commercial purposes or other purposes not specifically authorized above. Access to the ALPR system does not negate the need to comply with other laws or regulations, including obtaining a search warrant when legally required. The City shall at no time maintain an account for the ALPR system that allows the City to access the data collected or stored by the ALPR system. III. Data Collection The City ALPR system shall collect digital images of vehicle license plates and their associated license plate numbers. The ALPR system shall collect the date and time the license plate passes a digital-image site where an ALPR is located, a captured vehicle's geographical location, and vehicle details (make, model, type, and color). Live video, vehicle speeds, and audio shall not be provided or recorded. To the extent practicable, the ALPR system shall be designed to blur images of individuals that the system may inadvertently collect. IV. Installation and Maintenance This policy addresses the installation and maintenance of city-owned or leased ALPR devices. An Encroachment Permit will be required for the installation of these devices. While there will be no fee for the permit, an insurance certificate will be necessary. A traffic control plan will also be required if traffic is obstructed during installation. No privately leased or owned ALPR devices will be permitted on City infrastructure. The City will lease the ALPR devices from a vendor responsible for installation and maintenance. The vendor will not be authorized to access data collected by the ALPR system under any circumstances. Their role will be limited to operating, inspecting, troubleshooting, and maintaining the system hardware, software, associated cloud storage mechanisms, and servers, as necessary. To the extent feasible, cameras should be directed toward public property and away 23 PSC 09-12-2024 23 of 647 Resolution No. __________________ Page 5 from private property. V. Data Access, Storage, and Protection The City's ALPR system may only be used by, and data collected thereunder shall be accessible only by, personnel of the Sheriff's Office pursuant to a contract providing law enforcement services to the City. The City's ALPR system shall be accessible only through a login and password-protected system capable of documenting individual user access by name, date, and time. In addition to this policy, Sheriff's Office personnel shall observe and comply with the Sheriff's Office Surveillance Use Policy and any additional guidelines and regulations that are in place governing ALPR use and access. Prior to the City granting use and access, the Sheriff's Office shall execute an agreement with the City and/or the City's contracted ALPR vendor(s), to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, agreeing to comply with this policy. Contracts with vendors for the operation, maintenance, and repair of the ALPR system shall provide that the vendor is not authorized to access data collected by the ALPR system under any circumstances. Such vendors shall only be tasked with operating, inspecting, troubleshooting, and maintaining the system hardware, software, associated cloud storage mechanisms, and servers, as necessary. Data collected by the City ALPR system is automatically uploaded to the ALPR system's associated cloud storage at the time of capture. The City's contracted ALPR vendor shall provide and maintain cloud storage and server capacity as part of the scope of services. The City shall confirm that the contracted vendor installs and implements appropriate security measures for such storage, including encryption, firewalls, authentication, and other reasonable data protection measures. Data stored in the City ALPR system cloud space shall not be downloaded to a local server, stored locally on a hard drive or portable device, or provided in a physical printout, except in the following cases: • Where the ALPR system has identified vehicle license plate images and numbers as a match to a law enforcement registry • Where data retrieval is necessary for conducting or assisting with a criminal investigation or to facilitate an authorized use identified in Section II 24 PSC 09-12-2024 24 of 647 Resolution No. __________________ Page 6 above Only personnel from the Sheriff's Office working in an investigative or enforcement function may download ALPR data for local storage or printout (collectively, "Local Data") for authorized purposes stated herein. Data from the City ALPR system may not otherwise be downloaded for any other purpose, whether by Sheriff's Office authorized personnel, City staff, or other individuals or entities. Local Data shall be maintained in accordance with applicable State and Federal evidentiary laws and in accordance with appropriate chain of custody practices. Additionally, the Sheriff's Office shall implement physical security, encryption, firewalls, authentication, and other reasonable security measures to protect Local Data retrieved from the system. Local Data shall be accessible only through a login and password-protected system capable of documenting individual user access by name, date, and time. VI. Data Retention Data stored in the ALPR cloud system shall be purged after thirty (30) days from the date it was uploaded to the cloud system unless downloaded or stored pursuant to Section IV above. Data that is downloaded or stored pursuant to Section IV above shall be purged no later than tweleve (12) months from the date it was downloaded for local storage unless the data thereafter becomes associated with a criminal investigation or an ongoing case for an authorized purpose identified in Section II above. In the latter case, the data shall be retained for the duration of the criminal investigation and the criminal proceedings through adjudication of the case in the same manner as other evidence in the matter unless otherwise ordered by the court to be retained for a longer period or permanently. VII. Public Access Data from the City ALPR system shall not be sold, shared, or transferred except as explicitly authorized by this policy. Data from the City ALPR system shall not be made public unless specifically required by State or federal law or court order. If a public request for data is received, the Sheriff's Office shall consult with the Santa Clara County Counsel's Office to determine whether the requested data is exempt 25 PSC 09-12-2024 25 of 647 Resolution No. __________________ Page 7 from disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act or other State of Federal law provisions, and whether any additional steps are required in response to such a request for data. VIII. Third-Party Data Sharing Data-sharing from the City's ALPR system shall be limited to only the following: • District Attorney's Office for use as evidence to aid in prosecution, in accordance with laws governing evidence • Public Defender's Office or criminal defense attorney via the District Attorney's Office in accordance with California criminal discovery laws; and • Other law enforcement agencies, as part of a formal criminal or administrative investigation • Parties to civil litigation in response to a court order. IX. Training All personnel authorized to use and access the ALPR system and data pursuant to this policy shall receive all required training from the Sheriff's Office. Said personnel shall also review and receive copies of this policy and the Sheriff's Office Surveillance Use Policy. X. Oversight The Sheriff's Office shall ensure compliance with this policy as the provider of law enforcement services to the City. All-access to ALPR system data shall be logged, and the Sheriff's Office shall maintain an audit trail of requested and accessed information, including the purpose of the search. Periodic, random audits shall be conducted by the Sheriff's Office and on at least an annual basis. Audits shall ensure compliance with this policy and all applicable laws and shall be used to ensure the accuracy of ALPR information and correct data errors. Audit reports shall contain at least the following information: • Name of law enforcement agency that accessed the data • Date and time of access 26 PSC 09-12-2024 26 of 647 Resolution No. __________________ Page 8 • Reason for accessing data • Activity executed, including any license plate numbers searched identified in a separate confidential appendix • Incident number associated with the investigation • The number of arrests resulting from the ALPR system • The number and type of data requests, disclosures, and denials • The number and nature of any violations of this policy or applicable laws • The number and resolution of any complaints received • Any challenges or problems encountered with the ALPR system • Any recommendations for improvement or enhancement of the ALPR system Upon completion of each audit, the Sheriff's Office shall provide a copy of the audit report to the City Manager or the City Manager's designee within five (5) business days of completion. 27 PSC 09-12-2024 27 of 647 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA AND THE CITY OF CUPERTINO REGARDING THE USE OF AUTOMATIC LICENSE PLATE READERS (ALPRs) This Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") is made between the County of Santa Clara ("County") and the City of Cupertino ("City") (collectively referred to as the "Parties" and each one a "Party") regarding the administration of the City's Automatic License Plate Reader system ("ALPRs"). I. PURPOSE In 2014, the County entered into a Law Enforcement Contract with the City pursuant to which the County of Santa Clara Office of the Sheriff ("Sheriffs Office") provides law enforcement services within the corporate limits of the City. In 2024, the Parties entered into a First Amendment to the Law Enforcement Contract. The Law Enforcement Contract and the First Amendment to the Law Enforcement Contract are attached as Exhibit A to this MOU. The City has acquired ALPRs for use within the corporate limits of the City. The City desires that the Sheriff's Office administer the ALPR system pursuant to the Law Enforcement Contract and the First Amendment to the Law Enforcement Contract between the County and the City. The purpose of this MOU is to govern the Parties' obligations with respect to the ALPRs. II. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES A. Acquisition and Maintenance of ALPRs The City will be responsible for the acquisition, installation, and maintenance of the ALPRs, and any associated costs. The City may consult with the Sheriff's Office on the placement of the ALPRs. B. Authorized and Prohibited Uses The ALPRs will only be used for the purposes identified in the City's ALPR Policy (attached as Exhibit B) and the County ALPR Surveillance Use Policy (attached as Exhibit C). Where a conflict exists between the City ALPR Policy and the County ALPR Surveillance Use 28 PSC 09-12-2024 28 of 647 Policy, the more restrictive policy shall govern the conduct of the County and the Sheriff’s Office, and any officers, employees, or agents thereof, with respect to the ALPRs. C. Data Collection, Storage, Access, Sharing, and Retention Data collection, storage, access, sharing, and retention will be in accordance with the City ALPR Policy and the County ALPR Surveillance Use Policy. Where a conflict exists between the City ALPR Policy and the County ALPR Surveillance Use Policy, the County ALPR Surveillance Use Policy shall govern the conduct of the County and the Sheriff’s Office, and any officers, employees, or agents thereof, with respect to the ALPRs. The City further agrees that it will delegate the administrative account with two- actor authentication enabled for the ALPR system to a Sheriff’s Office employee designated by the Sheriff’s Office. The City shall at no time maintain an account for the ALPR system that allows the City access to the data collected or stored by the ALPR system. D. Data Ownership As between the County and the City, the City owns the images captured by the ALPR system. The County owns any data input by the Sheriff’s Office into the ALPR system and any data or records generated by the ALPR system or by the ALPR vendor reflecting a match between an image and a vehicle of interest. E. Training All Sheriff’s Office personnel authorized to use and access the ALPR system and data pursuant to this MOU shall receive all required training from the Sheriff’s Office. Said Personnel shall also review and receive copies of the City ALPR Policy and the County ALPR Surveillance Use Policy. F. Oversight Each Party will ensure that its officers, employees, and agents comply with this MOU, including the City ALPR Policy and County Surveillance Use Policy. All access to ALPR Data shall be logged, and the Sheriff’s Office shall maintain an audit trail of requested and accessed information, including the purpose of the search. The Commented [CJ1]: Or should the more restrictive policy control? Commented [TC2R1]: More restrictive policy should control. Commented [CJ3]: See comment in City policy. Commented [TC4R3]: I neglected to “suggest” deletion in the MOU. My apologies. My reply to your comment in the City policy follows here as well: I suggest removing this specific line while the city “owns” the devices. Access to the data is restricted by the language above. Without any access, the City would not have the ability to ensure functionality and enforce a service agreement with the ALPR vendor. I also suggest adding some language for access to the system for testing may be necessary. Commented [TC5R3]: The restrictive access language will remain. The City will not have an account to access data. 29 PSC 09-12-2024 29 of 647 Sheriff's Office shall conduct an audit on at least an annual basis to determine compliance with this MOU, the incorporated exhibits, and all applicable laws. The Sheriff shall provide copies of the audit report to the City as requested but is entitled to withhold any law enforcement-sensitive portions of the report (e.g., California Department of Justice or other criminal justice data released on a need-to-know/right-to-know basis). G. Compensation The Sheriff’s Office will be compensated for services performed under this MOU in accordance with the Law Enforcement Contract and the First Amendment to the Law Enforcement Contract. III. TERM OF AGREEMENT The term of this MOU shall commence upon the date of execution by all Parties and shall expire on June 30, 2026, unless otherwise terminated by the Parties as provided herein. The Parties may extend the term of the MOU by written amendment to this MOU executed by all Parties. IV. TERMINATION Any Party may terminate this MOU, at any time and without cause, upon 60 days’ written notice given to the other Party pursuant to Section VI, "NOTICES." The County (through the Board of Supervisors) may immediately terminate the MOU for cause if it determines that the City is violating the terms of this MOU, including the attached Exhibits. Prior to terminating for cause, the County must provide the City with notice of the alleged breach and provide the City 5 business days to respond and remedy the breach. The County (through the Board of Supervisors) may immediately terminate the MOU if City fails to timely remedy the breach. Notwithstanding Section III, the MOU shall immediately terminate upon the termination of the Law Enforcement Contract (including any extensions or amendments thereof). Should the City revoke or amend the City ALPR Policy or the County revoke or amend the County ALPR Policy, either Party has the option to either terminate this MOU or to offer 30 PSC 09-12-2024 30 of 647 an amendment to the MOU. V. AMENDMENTS This MOU may only be amended by a written instrument signed by the Parties. VI. NOTICES Any notice required to be given under this MOU shall be in writing and addressed as follows: Notice to County: Robert Jonsen, Sheriff Santa Clara County Office of the Sheriff 55 W. Younger Avenue San Jose, CA 95110 County of Santa Clara Board of Supervisors 70 West Hedding Street East Wing, 10th Floor San Jose, CA 95110 James Williams, County Executive 70 West Hedding Street 11th Floor San Jose, CA 95110 Tony LoPresti, County Counsel 70 West Hedding Street East Wing, 9th Floor San Jose, CA 95110 Notice to City: Pamela Wu, City Manager 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Christopher Jensen, City Attorney 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Thomas Chin, Emergency Manager 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 31 PSC 09-12-2024 31 of 647 The notice required by this MOU shall be effective when, according to timestamps in the sender’s email system or deposited in the United States mail, first-class postage is prepaid. VII. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE Indemnification and insurance for purposes of this MOU will be governed by Sections IV and V of the Law Enforcement Contract. VIII. RECORDS REQUESTS The Parties are public agencies subject to the disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act ("CPRA"). To the extent a Party's proprietary information is contained in documents or information submitted to any other Party, and the Party submitting the document or information ("submitting Party") claims that such information falls within one or more CPRA exemptions, the submitting Party must clearly mark such information "CONFIDENTIAL AND PROPRIETARY" or with similar language, and identify the specific lines containing the information. In the event of a request for such information, the Party in receipt of such information ("receiving Party") will make best efforts to provide notice to the submitting Party prior to such disclosure pursuant to a CPRA request. If the receiving Party receives a CPRA request seeking or partially seeking information clearly marked as confidential or proprietary of the submitting Party, the receiving Party will provide written notice to the submitting Party in a reasonably prompt manner. If the submitting Party contends that any documents are exempt from the CPRA and wishes to prevent disclosure, it is required to obtain a protective order, injunctive relief or other appropriate remedy from a court of law in Santa Clara County before the receiving Party is required to respond to the CPRA request. If the submitting Party fails to obtain such remedy within the time the receiving Party is required to respond to the CPRA request, the receiving Party may disclose the requested information. Data collected by the ALPRs shall not be made public unless required by federal or state law or court order. The Parties agree that they will notify and consult with the other Commented [TC6]: Can this be email? 32 PSC 09-12-2024 32 of 647 with respect to any CPRA request seeking records relating to the ALPR system. The Parties agree that it shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the other against any claim, action or litigation (including but not limited to all judgments, costs, fees, and attorneys’ fees) that may result from denial of a CPRA request for information arising from any representation, or any action (or inaction) of the indemnifying Party. IX. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The Parties shall comply, and shall ensure that their employees, contractors and subcontractors comply, with all applicable (i) requirements governing avoidance of impermissible client conflicts; and (ii) federal, state and local conflict of interest laws and regulations including, without limitation, California Government Code section 1090 et. seq., the California Political Reform Act (California Government Code section 87100 et. seq.) and the regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission concerning disclosure and disqualification (2 California Code of Regulations section 18700 et. seq.). In accepting this MOU, the Parties covenant that they presently have no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of this MOU. Each Party is responsible for assuring compliance of its subcontractors and employees with the requirements of this provision. X. NON-DISCRIMINATION The Parties shall comply with all applicable laws concerning nondiscrimination and equal opportunity in employment and contracting, including but not limited to the following: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended; Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of I 967; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Sections 503 and 504); the Equal Pay Act of 1963; California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code § 12900 et seq.); California Labor Code sections 1101, 1102, and 1197.5; and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008. In addition to the foregoing, the Parties shall not discriminate against any subcontractor, employee, or applicant for employment because of age, race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, sex, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, mental disability, physical disability, medical 33 PSC 09-12-2024 33 of 647 condition, political belief, organizational affiliation, or marital status in the recruitment, selection for training (including but not limited to apprenticeship), hiring, employment, assignment, promotion, layoff, rates of pay or other forms of compensation. Nor shall the Parties discriminate in the provision of services provided under this contract because of age, race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, sex, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, mental disability, physical disability, medical condition, political beliefs, organizational affiliations, or marital status. XI. GOVERNING LAWS AND VENUE This MOU has been executed and delivered in, and shall be construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of California. The proper venue for legal action regarding this MOU shall be in Santa Clara County. XII. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This MOU and its Exhibits and/or Attachments constitute the final, complete, and exclusive statement of the terms of the agreement between the Parties regarding the subject of this MOU. All Exhibits and/or Attachments to this MOU are incorporated herein as one agreement. This MOU incorporates and supersedes all the agreements, covenants and understandings between the Parties concerning the subject matter hereof, and all such agreements, covenants and understandings have been merged into this MOU. In the event that any term, condition, provision, requirement, or specification set forth in the body of this MOU conflicts with or is inconsistent with any term, condition, provision, requirement, or specification in any Exhibit and/or Attachment to this MOU, the provisions of the body of the MOU shall prevail. No prior or contemporaneous agreement or understanding, verbal or otherwise, of the Parties or their agents shall be valid or enforceable unless embodied in this MOU. XIII. THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES This MOU does not, and is not intended to, confer any rights or remedies upon any person or entity other than the Parties. XIV. SIGNATORIES NOT AGENTS/INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR Parties to this MOU shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of any 34 PSC 09-12-2024 34 of 647 signatory in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. The Parties shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this MOU to bind each other to any obligation whatsoever. This MOU is not a contract of employment and does not create an employer-employee relationship between the Parties and neither Party shall be considered the employees of the other and shall not qualify for or become entitled to any claims for employment and retirement benefits from the other. XV. NON-ASSIGNMENT No assignment of this MOU or of the rights and obligations hereunder shall be valid without the prior written consent of all Parties. XVI. WAIVER No delay or failure to require performance of any provision of this MOU shall constitute a waiver of that provision as to that or any other instance. Any waiver granted by a party shall be in writing and shall apply to the specific instance expressly stated. XVII. COUNTERPARTS This MOU may be executed by the Parties in separate counterparts, each of which, when so executed and delivered, shall be an original, but all such counterparts shall together constitute one and the same instrument. XVIII. CONTRACT EXECUTION Unless otherwise prohibited by law or County or City policies, the Parties agree that an electronic copy of a signed contract, or an electronically signed contract, has the same force and legal effect as a contract executed with an original ink signature. The term "electronic copy of a signed contract" refers to transmission by facsimile, electronic mail, or other electronic means of a copy of an original signed contract in a portable document format. The term "electronically signed contract" means a contract executed by applying an electronic signature using technology approved by the County or the City. XIX. COVID-19 REQUIREMENTS (IF APPLICABLE) City shall comply with all County requirements in effect relating to COVID-19 for persons who routinely perform services for County onsite and share airspace with or 35 PSC 09-12-2024 35 of 647 proximity to other people at a County facility as part of their services for County as set forth in a County Health Order (or similar directives) available at https://covid19.sccgov.org/home, and incorporated herein by this reference. City shall comply with all reasonable requests by County for documentation demonstrating City’s compliance with this Section. XX. LEVINE ACT COMPLIANCE City will comply, and will ensure that its agents (as that term is defined under 2 Cal. Code Regs. § 18438.3(a)) and its subcontractors identified in City’s proposal responding to a County solicitation and/or identified in this Agreement (“Subcontractors”) comply, with California Government Code section 84308 (“Levine Act”) and the applicable regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission concerning campaign disclosure (2 California Code of Regulations sections 18438.1 – 18438.8), which (1) require a party to a proceeding involving a contract to disclose on the record of the proceeding any contribution, as defined by Government Code section 84308(a)(6), of more than $250 that the party or their agent has made within the prior 12 months, and (2) prohibit a party to a proceeding involving a contract from making a contribution, as defined by Government Code section 84308(a)(6), of more than $250 to any County officer during the proceeding and for 12 months following the final decision in the proceeding. City agrees to submit any disclosures required to be made under the Levine Act at the Office of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors website at http://www.sccgov.org/levineact, and Contractor shall require Subcontractors to do the same. If this Agreement is to be considered or voted upon by the County’s Board of Supervisors, City shall complete the Levine Act Contractor Form: Identification of Subcontractors and Agents, and if applicable, shall ensure that any Subcontractor completes the Levine Act Subcontractor Form: Identification of Agents, and City must submit all such forms to the County as a prerequisite to execution of the Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused the Agreement to be executed as of the Effective Date written above. 36 PSC 09-12-2024 36 of 647 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA CITY OF CUPERTINO __________ ___ Susan Ellenberg President, Board of Supervisors Pamela Wu City Manager Date: ____________ Signed and certified that a copy of this document has been delivered by electronic or other means to the President, Board of Supervisors. Date: _________ APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: _____ Stephanie M. Jackson Deputy County Counsel Date: ___________________________ APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: ____________ _ Christopher D. Jensen Cupertino City Attorney Date: ___________________________ ATTEST: __ ________ Curtis Boone Acting Clerk of the Board Date: ___________________________ ATTEST: _____ _____ Kirsten Squarcia City Clerk Date: ___________________________ 37 PSC 09-12-2024 37 of 647 Flock Safety + CA - City of Cupertino ______________ Flock Group Inc. 1170 Howell Mill Rd, Suite 210 Atlanta, GA 30318 ______________ MAIN CONTACT: Kyle Egkan kyle.egkan@flocksafety.com 7144690389 Created Date: 06/25/2024 Expiration Date: 08/30/2024 Quote Number: Q-84265 PO Number: 38 PSC 09-12-2024 38 of 647 Budgetary Quote This document is for informational purposes only. Pricing is subject to change. Bill To: 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 Ship To: 10300 Torre Ave Cupertino, California 95014 Billing Company Name: CA - City of Cupertino Subscription Term: 12 Months Billing Contact Name: Payment Terms: Net 30 Billing Email Address: Retention Period: 30 Days Billing Phone: Billing Frequency: Annual Plan - First Year Invoiced at Signing. Hardware and Software Products Annual recurring amounts over subscription term Item Cost Quantity Total Flock Safety Platform $59,000.00 Flock Safety Flock OS FlockOS ™ - Essentials Included 1 Included Flock Safety LPR Products Solar Falcon ® LR Included 7 Included Flock Safety Falcon ® Included 8 Included Professional Services and One Time Purchases Item Cost Quantity Total One Time Fees Flock Safety Professional Services Professional Services - Existing Infrastructure Implementation Fee $150.00 7 $1,050.00 Professional Services - Standard Implementation Fee $650.00 2 $1,300.00 Professional Services - Existing Infrastructure Implementation Fee $150.00 6 $900.00 Subtotal Year 1: $62,250.00 Annual Recurring Subtotal: $59,000.00 Estimated Tax: $0.00 Contract Total: $62,250.00 Taxes shown above are provided as an estimate. Actual taxes are the responsibility of the Customer. This is not an invoice – this document is a non-binding proposal for informational purposes only. Pricing is subject to change. 39 PSC 09-12-2024 39 of 647 Billing Schedule Amount (USD) Year 1 At Contract Signing $62,250.00 Annual Recurring after Year 1 $59,000.00 Contract Total $62,250.00 *Tax not included 40 PSC 09-12-2024 40 of 647 Product and Services Description Flock Safety Platform Items Product Description Flock Safety Falcon ® An infrastructure-free license plate reader camera that utilizes Vehicle Fingerprint® technology to capture vehicular attributes. One-Time Fees Service Description Installation on existing infrastructure One-time Professional Services engagement. Includes site & safety assessment, camera setup & testing, and shipping & handling in accordance with the Flock Safety Advanced Implementation Service Brief. Professional Services - Standard Implementation Fee One-time Professional Services engagement. Includes site and safety assessment, camera setup and testing, and shipping and handling in accordance with the Flock Safety Standard Implementation Service Brief. Professional Services - Advanced Implementation Fee One-time Professional Services engagement. Includes site & safety assessment, camera setup & testing, and shipping & handling in accordance with the Flock Safety Advanced Implementation Service Brief. FlockOS Features & Description FlockOS Features Description Community Network Access The ability to request direct access to feeds from privately owned Flock Safety Falcon® LPR cameras located in neighborhoods, schools, and businesses in your community, significantly increasing actionable evidence that clears cases. Unlimited Users Unlimited users for FlockOS State Network (License Plate Lookup Only) Allows agencies to look up license plates on all cameras opted into the Flock Safety network within your state. Nationwide Network (License Plate Lookup Only) With the vast Flock Safety sharing network, law enforcement agencies no longer have to rely on just their devices alone. Agencies can leverage a nationwide system boasting 10 billion additional plate reads per month to amplify the potential to collect vital evidence in otherwise dead-end investigations. Law Enforcement Network Access The ability to request direct access to evidence detection devices from Law Enforcement agencies outside of your jurisdiction. Time & Location Based Search Search full, partial, and temporary plates by time at particular device locations License Plate Lookup Look up specific license plate location history captured on Flock devices Vehicle Fingerprint Search Search footage using Vehicle Fingerprint™ technology. Access vehicle type, make, color, license plate state, missing / covered plates, and other unique features like bumper stickers, decals, and roof racks. Insights & Analytics Reporting tool to help administrators manage their LPR program with device performance data, user and network audits, plate read reports, hot list alert reports, event logs, and outcome reports. ESRI Based Map Interface Map-based interface that consolidates all data streams and the locations of each connected asset, enabling greater situational awareness and a common operating picture. Real-Time NCIC Alerts on Flock ALPR Cameras Receive automated alerts when vehicles entered into established databases for missing and wanted persons are detected, including the FBI’s National Crime Information Center (NCIC) and National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC) databases. Unlimited Custom Hot Lists Ability to add a suspect’s license plate to a custom list and get alerted when it passes by a Flock camera 41 PSC 09-12-2024 41 of 647 Page 1 of 1 CITY-OWNED AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READER (ALPR) PROGRAM October 1, 2024 PROPOSED CAMERA LOCATIONS (ATTACHMENT D) In consultation with the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office, staff proposes 15 camera locations to serve as entry points into the City or on major arterial roads to maximize the effectiveness of the ALPR system. The selected locations provide adequate sun exposure for each ALPR unit. The list of the proposed approximate locations and a map follow: 1. Foothill Boulevard at Starling Drive 2. North Sterling Road at Homestead Road 3. Stern Avenue at Stevens Creek Boulevard 4. Bollinger Road at Lawrence Expressway 5. Prospect Road at De Anza Boulevard 6. Stevens Creek Boulevard at Peninsula Avenue 7. Bubb Road at Stevens Creek Boulevard 8. Wolfe Road at Vallco Parkway 9. Wolfe Road at Pruneridge Avenue 10. Stevens Creek Boulevard at Campus Drive 11. Wolfe Road at Perimeter Road 12. Stevens Creek Boulevard at City Limit 13. De Anza Boulevard at Eastbound I-280 Off Ramp 14. De Anza Boulevard at Infinite Loop 15. De Anza Boulevard at Rainbow Drive 42 PSC 09-12-2024 42 of 647 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item 24-13385 Agenda Date: 9/12/2024 Agenda #: 4. Subject: 2023 Multi Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Recommend for adoption the 2023 Santa Clara County Multi Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 1 Base Plan and Volume 2 City of Cupertino Annex Presenter: Thomas Chin CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 9/9/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™43 PSC 09-12-2024 43 of 647 PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Meeting: September 12, 2024 Subject 2023 Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Recommended Action: Recommend for adoption the 2023 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 1 Base Plan and Volume 2 City of Cupertino Annex Reasons for Recommendation Background The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, commonly known as the Stafford Act, is a United States federal law designed to provide an orderly and systematic means of providing federal natural disaster assistance for state and local governments in carrying out their responsibilities to aid citizens. Signed into law on November 23, 1988, it amended the Disaster Relief Act of 1974. The Act constitutes the statutory authority for most federal disaster response activities, especially concerning the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and its programs. The Stafford Act allows for a presidential disaster declaration of an emergency, which triggers financial and physical assistance through FEMA. In 2000, the U.S. Congress passed the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, amending the Stafford Act to support pre-disaster mitigation efforts. Recognizing the dangers of natural and human-caused events, Congress emphasized identifying hazards and evaluating community risks. The Act provides policy guidance for State Mitigation Officers and local jurisdictions to develop a Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP). While not legally required, maintaining an MJHMP is necessary for jurisdictions to be eligible for mitigation funds and federal disaster relief under the Stafford Act. In 2016, Santa Clara County, the Santa Clara County Fire Department, and all incorporated cities in Santa Clara County worked together to prepare an updated Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) tailored to the local needs and 44 PSC 09-12-2024 44 of 647 Page 2 of 5 capabilities of the Santa Clara County Operational Area (OA). The City of Cupertino participated in the 2016 MJHMP development process. On June 5, 2018, the City Council adopted a resolution accepting all of Volume 1 and the City of Cupertino's portion of Volume 2 of the Santa Clara County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan to enable the City to qualify for hazard mitigation grants to respond to disasters. The adopted MJHMP was due for revision in 2022, but FEMA granted an extension due to the COVID-19 Pandemic. Planning Process In 2022, the County reconvened the planning team, and a consultant was hired to support the planning process. The consultant support allowed participating jurisdictions to focus on the ongoing response to hazard events, including multiple atmospheric rivers and a winter storm, while ensuring that mitigation planning efforts continued moving forward. The City's local planning process included forming a local planning team led by the Office of Emergency Management. The staff made extra effort to integrate the priorities and projects identified in previously approved plans, such as the Climate Action Plan, to inform the development of the MJHMP. The City's Local Planning Team Leads participated in the MJHMP by attending meetings on the Plan Kick-Off, Risk Assessment, Mitigation Strategy, Wrap-up, and two one-on-one meetings with the planning consultant. In addition, the City filled out the requested forms for each section, which were used to develop this annex. The City also shared information regarding public opportunities to participate in the draft plan update utilizing the digital survey and seven in-person and virtual public outreach meetings. Further, the County coordinated with the City team to review the draft plan before submitting it to Cal OES and FEMA. The 2023 MJHMP planning process differs from previous plans, including: • The risk assessment comprises further considerations of emerging hazards, such as the impact of wildfire smoke. • A concentrated effort to ensure plan integration between the Climate Action Plan, the Capital Improvement Plan, the Community Wildfire Protection Plan, and the Health and Safety Element of the City's General Plan updates, as well as other approved plans. • Incorporating the additional special district planning partners of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Santa Clara County Fire Department, and Santa Clara Valley Water District are involved in hazard mitigation in the City. • The plan was developed following Emergency Management Accreditation Program standards. • The risk assessment provides information on risk and vulnerability that will allow a measurement of cost-effectiveness. 45 PSC 09-12-2024 45 of 647 Page 3 of 5 • Mitigation goals, objectives, and criteria for prioritizing mitigation action items have been updated to include climate change, resiliency, and benefits to underserved and socially vulnerable populations. • The update allowed the planning partners to engage residents, particularly those who are underserved and socially vulnerable, to gauge their perception of risk and support risk reduction through mitigation. • Climate change has been added as a hazard for the planning area. • Expanded information about compliance in the National Flood Insurance Program. The City supported a "whole community" approach to this plan update. Neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved in mitigation activities, as well as businesses, academia, and other private and nonprofit interests, were invited to be involved in the planning process by participating in planning meetings, public meetings, or reviewing the draft plan. In addition to the wide variety of stakeholders identified by the County, other stakeholders the City of Cupertino recommended including the Santa Clara Valley Water District, PG&E, Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office, Santa Clara County Fire Department, San Jose Water, and CalWater. Public Outreach and Engagement In addition to inviting a wide range of stakeholders, the City supported public outreach and engagement by participating in the countywide public outreach and engagement campaign. The City specifically distributed a digital survey utilizing social media, the city website, and GovDelivery email distributions, and publicizing the availability of the survey at an in-person Earth Day event. Additionally, the Office of Emergency Management engaged with the Cupertino Citizen Corps and Block Leader programs to respond to the survey and distribute the survey to their contacts. This survey reached members of underserved populations, including primarily non-English speaking households. The MJHMP was discussed at two virtual and five in-person public meetings across Santa Clara County and coordinated by the County and its consultant. These in-person meetings were targeted toward areas with socially vulnerable populations. These meetings were also designed to be accessible for AFN (access and functional needs) populations. The public was also provided the opportunity to comment on the draft plan via the City website. Comments from the public survey were reviewed, evaluated for alignment with planning priorities, and incorporated as appropriate. Overall, the public expressed concerns regarding hazards like wildfire (including wildfire smoke), extreme heat, and flooding. In particular, evacuation routes and warning systems, including public outreach to help inform people about their options, were areas of concern. This feedback is reflected in the mitigation actions the City of Cupertino selected. 46 PSC 09-12-2024 46 of 647 Page 4 of 5 In addition to directly providing the public the opportunity to comment on the plan, the Santa Clara County Access and Functional Needs and Cultural Competency Working Group, which represents tens of community and faith-based organizations within the SANTA CLARA COUNTY operational area, was consulted. They provided feedback based on the populations they serve, representing approximately 100 nonprofits and Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster members participating in the AFN and Cultural Competency Working Group. SANTA CLARA COUNTY also had representation from community centers and two consulate generals. In addition, some advocates do not have an affiliation but are Santa Clara County residents and provide input on LGBTQ+ and Disability topics. Some organizations include but are not limited to San Andreas Regional Center, Immigrant Info Services, Vista Center for the Blind, American Red Cross, Parents Helping Parents, and Lighthouse. The direct interaction and represented voices generally shared similar concerns for the extreme heat and wildfire hazards, community preparedness, and education and outreach activities. Therefore, prioritization of the wildfire hazard and the corresponding mitigation actions, along with high attention to public outreach and education efforts, informed the plan's many related mitigation actions. Adoption Process and Maintenance The draft MJHMP Base Plan and associated jurisdictional annexes underwent multiple stages of review to ensure compliance and effectiveness. The plan was submitted to the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services (CalOES) for a comprehensive evaluation by the consultant. Following several rounds of feedback and necessary amendments in consultation with the County Office of Emergency Management and their consultant, CalOES granted conditional approval, ensuring that the plan adhered to state standards and effectively addressed critical hazards. After receiving conditional approval at the state level, the MJHMP was submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for further assessment. FEMA's review process involved meticulously examining the plan's adherence to federal guidelines and alignment with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. In June 2024, FEMA granted conditional approval of the Base Plan and associated jurisdictional annexes, including the City of Cupertino, confirming that the plan met the essential criteria for federal compliance. With these conditional approvals from CalOES and FEMA, the MJHMP is presented to the City Council for formal adoption. This formal adoption represents a significant milestone, ensuring that the plan is officially recognized and makes Cupertino eligible for federal grants, such as the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC), Flood Mitigation Assistance (FEMA), and other state and federal mitigation grants. The City's Office of Emergency Management will review the MJHMP annually and work with the County of Santa Clara Office of Emergency Management for a 47 PSC 09-12-2024 47 of 647 Page 5 of 5 comprehensive revision no later than every five years per the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requirements. The City's Office of Emergency Management will maintain a diverse planning team in collaboration with the County Office of Emergency Management, City departments, and community stakeholders. Sustainability Impact In alignment with the City's Climate Action Plan (CAP), the MJHMP will address climate change as a significant hazard, recognizing its potential to exacerbate risks such as flooding, heatwaves, and wildfires. The CAP integration ensures a comprehensive approach to sustainability, where mitigating climate impacts and disaster risks are pursued concurrently. Fiscal Impact By adopting this plan, the City of Cupertino will be eligible to apply for Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) programs, including but not limited to the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC), Flood Mitigation Assistance (FEMA), and other state and federal mitigation grants. California Environmental Quality Act No California Environmental Quality Act impact. _____________________________________ Prepared and Approved by: Thomas Chin, Emergency Manager Attachments: A – Draft resolution adopting the 2023 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 1 Base Plan and Volume 2 City of Cupertino Annex B – Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan - Volume 1: Base Plan C – Draft Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan - Volume 2: City of Cupertino Annex 48 PSC 09-12-2024 48 of 647 RESOLUTION NO. 24- A RESOLUTION OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READERS WHEREAS, all of Santa Clara County has exposure to natural hazards that increase the risk to life, property, environment and the County's economy; WHEREAS, pro-active mitigation of known hazards before a disaster event can reduce or eliminate long-term risk to life and property; WHEREAS, the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-390) established new requirements for pre- and post-disaster hazard mitigation programs; WHEREAS, a coalition of several cities, towns, special districts, and the County of Santa Clara, with similar planning objectives, has been formed to pool resources and create consistent mitigation strategies within the Santa Clara County Operational Area planning area; WHEREAS, this coalition has completed a planning process that engages the public, assesses the risk and vulnerability to the impacts of natural hazards, develops a mitigation strategy consistent with a set of uniform goals and objectives, and creates a plan for implementing, evaluating, and revising this strategy; WHEREAS, the California Office of Emergency Services and Federal Emergency Management Agency officials have reviewed the Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) Volume 1 and 2 and approved it contingent upon this official adoption of the participating governing body; WHEREAS, upon adoption of Volume 1 Base Plan, and Volume 2 City of Cupertino Annex of the Santa Clara County Operational Area MJHMP Update of 2023 and subsequent approval of the said plan by CalOES and FEMA, the City of Cupertino will be eligible to apply for specified Hazard Mitigation Grants. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Cupertino hereby adopts the 2023 Santa Clara County Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 1 Base Plan and Volume 2 City of Cupertino Annex. 49 PSC 09-12-2024 49 of 647 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City’s Director of Emergency Services is authorized to make minor adjustments to this Plan as necessary and appropriate to satisfy changing conditions and needs without impacting any City Council Policy. PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Cupertino this 1st day of October, 2024, by the following vote: Members of the City Council AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SIGNED: ________ Sheila Mohan, Mayor City of Cupertino ________________________ Date ATTEST: ________ Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk ________________________ Date 50 PSC 09-12-2024 50 of 647 SANTA CLARA COUNTY MULTIJURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN Volume 1: Base Plan 2023 Office of Emergency Management County of Santa Clara 55 W. Younger Ave., San Jose, CA 51 PSC 09-12-2024 51 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan This work was sponsored by the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Management. The research was conducted by IEM, incorporating data provided by Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Management. IEM is a global consulting house for safety, security, strategic performance, and sustainability. We combine objective, scientific analysis with a broad spectrum of experience to provide practical, effective solutions for public and private sectors. IEM ’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. is a registered trademark. © Copyright 2023 IEM IEM documents are protected under copyright law. http://www.iem.com (800) 977-8191 52 PSC 09-12-2024 52 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Acknowledgements i Acknowledgements County of Santa Clara Core Planning Team  Dr. Parastou Najaf, Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Management, Senior Emergency Manager – Mitigation/Recovery  Magdalena Sta Maria, Santa Clara County Office of Sustainability, Sustainability Analyst  Samuel Gutierrez, Santa Clara County Department of Planning and Development, Principal Planner Planning Partners  Michael Alvarez, County of Santa Clara, Principal Development Services Engineer/ Floodplain Administrator  Dan Livingston, City of Campbell, Captain of Support Services Division, Police Department  Ron Taormina, City of Campbell, Acting Superintendent  Bob Lennen, City of Campbell, Building Official  Meredith Albert, City of Cupertino, Emergency Management Analyst  Thomas Chin, City of Cupertino, Emergency Manager  Andre Duurvoort, City of Cupertino, Sustainability Manager  Susan Michael, City of Cupertino, Capital Improvement Program Manager  Jimmy Tan, City of Cupertino, Assistant Director of Public Works  Chad Mosley, City of Cupertino, Acting Director of Public Works  Jennifer Chu, City of Cupertino, Senior Civil Engineer/City of Public Works  Esther Kwon, City of Cupertino, Public Information Officer  Andrew Young, City of Gilroy, Emergency Services and Volunteer Coordinator  Sharon Goei, City of Gilroy, Community Development Director  Daryl Jordan, City of Gilroy, Public Works Director/Floodplain Administrator  Kathryn Krauss, City of Los Altos, Captain of Operations, Police Department  Vency Woo, City of Los Altos, Management Analyst  Irene Silipin, City of Los Altos, HR Manager  Marisa Lee, City of Los Altos, Transportation Services Manager  Veronica Tinoco, City of Los Altos, Building Official  Stephanie Williams, City of Los Altos, Planning Services Manager/ Floodplain Manager  Franklin Wong, City of Los Altos, Public Works. CIP Manager 53 PSC 09-12-2024 53 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Acknowledgements ii  Vivian Chu, City of Los Altos, Finance Manager  Manny Hernandez, City of Los Altos, Parks and Rec Director  Jon Maginot, City of Los Altos, Assistant City Manager  Angela Averiett, City of Los Altos, Police Chief  June DU, City of Los Altos, Finance Director  Sonia Lee, City of Los Altos, Public Information Officer  Nick Zorner, City of Los Altos, Development Services Director  Brian Glass, City of Los Altos, Assistant Fire Chief  Ann Hepenstal, Town of Los Altos Hills, Emergency Management Consultant  Woojae Kim, Town of Los Altos Hills, Public Works Director/ Floodplain Administrator  John Chau, Town of Los Altos Hills, Associate Engineer  Elaine Ling, Town of Los Altos Hills, Senior Planner  Jeremy Loh, Town of Los Altos Hills, Associate Planner  Jonathan Fox, Town of Los Altos Hills, Assistant Planner  Gerry Igtanloc, Town of Los Altos Hills, Building Technician  Cody Einfalt, Town of Los Altos Hills, Management Analyst II/ Interim Assistant to the City Manager  Nicolle Burnham, Town of Los Gatos, Director of Parks and Public Works  Holly Young, Town of Los Gatos, Senior Analyst  Toni-Lynn Charlop, City of Milpitas, Office of Emergency Management Coordinator  Elaine Marshal, City of Milpitas, Deputy Director, Public Works  Jay Lee, City of Milpitas, Principal Planner  Bill Tott, City of Milpitas, Building Official  Arthur Belton, City of Milpitas, Fire Marshal  Michael Silveira, City of Milpitas, CIP Manger  Samantha Vergara, City of Milpitas, Special Projects/Drought & Climate Change  Brian Petrovic, City of Milpitas, Floodplain Administrator  Jennifer Ponce, City of Morgan Hill, Emergency Services Coordinator  Hilary Holeman, City of Morgan Hill, Administrative Analyst  Scott Creer, City of Morgan Hill, Floodplain Administrator  Robert Maitland, City of Mountain View, Fire Department Public Information Officer, Office of Emergency Services Coordinator  Eric Anderson, City of Mountain View, Advanced Planning Manager  Nena Bizjak, City of Mountain View, Chief Building Official  Renee Gunn, City of Mountain View, Associate Civil Engineer/ Floodplain Administrator 54 PSC 09-12-2024 54 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Acknowledgements iii  Ken Dueker, City of Palo Alto, Office of Emergency Services, Chief  Nathan Rainey, City of Palo Alto, Office of Emergency Services Coordinator  Karin North, City of Palo Alto, Assistant Director of Public Works, Environmental Services  Holly Boyd, City of Palo Alto, Assistant Director of Public Works, Engineering  Rajeev Hada, City of Palo Alto, Floodplain Administrator  Chitra Moitra, City of Palo Alto, Planner  Christine Luong Manager, City of Palo Alto, Environmental Control Program – Sustainability  Ray Riordan, City of San Jose, Director of Emergency Management  Jay McAmis, City of San José, Deputy Director of Emergency Management  Mariana Chavez-Vazquez, City of San Jose, Assistant Director of Environmental Services Department  Rajani Nair, City of San Jose, Deputy Director of Environmental Services Department  Jennifer Brown, City of San Jose, Division Manager of Environment Services Department  Jennie Loft, City of San Jose, Public Information Manager of Environmental Services Department  Kat Estrada, City of San Jose, Program Manager of Environmental Services Department  Sean Monlux, City of San Jose, Analyst II  Kendra Yarn, City of San Jose, Program Manager/ Parks Recreation & Neighborhood Services  Torie O’Reilly, City of San Jose, Division Manager/Parks  Olympia Williams, City of San Jose, Division Manager/ Beautify  Sara Sellers, City of San Jose, Acting Deputy Director  Paul Lim, City of San Jose, Emergency Response program Manager  Steve Choy, City of San Jose, Acting Division Manager/ Division Manager Capital Improvement Project Program Manager  Samuel Young, City of San Jose, Division Manager Development Services  Norman Mascarinas, City of San Jose, principal Engineer Transportation and Hydraulics Services  Sanhita Ghosal, City of San Jose, Planner IV/Supervising Planner/ Floodplain Administrator  Jennifer Guzman, City of Santa Clara, Emergency Management Analyst  Gary Welling, City of Santa Clara, Director of Water and Sewer Services  Shilpa Mehta, City of Santa Clara, Assistant Director of Water and Sewer Utilities  Craig Mobeck, City of Santa Clara, Director of Public Works  Michael Liw, City of Santa Clara, Assistant Director of Public Works  Falguni Armin, City of Santa Clara, Principal Engineer  Manuel Pineda, City of Santa Clara, Chief Electric Utility Officer  Kevin Kolnowski, City of Santa Clara, Electric Utility Chief Operating Officer  Andrew Crabtree, City of Santa Clara, Director of Community Development/ Floodplain Manager 55 PSC 09-12-2024 55 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Acknowledgements iv  John Davidson, City of Santa Clara, Principal Planner  Armand Lobao, City of Santa Clara, Building Official  Ruben Torres, City of Santa Clara, Fire Chief  John Madden, City of Santa Clara, Deputy Fire Chief  Jeremy Ray, City of Santa Clara, Deputy Fire Chief  Dennis Yee, City of Santa Clara, Fire Captain  Wahid Kazem, City of Santa Clara, Assistant Police Chief  Cuong Phan, City of Santa Clara, Police Lieutenant  Michelle Templeton, City of Santa Clara, Sustainability Manager  David Knight, City of Santa Clara, Communication Management Analyst  Aaron Yuma, City of Saratoga, Building Official  Neil Valenzuela, City of Saratoga, West Valley Patrol Commander  David Dorcich, City of Saratoga, Associate Civil Engineer. Floodplain Administrator  Jason Falarski, City of Saratoga, Deputy Chief  Thomas Scott, City of Saratoga, Facilities Manager  Crystal Bothelio, City of Saratoga, Assistant City Manager  Trudi Ryan, City of Sunnyvale, Director, Community Development  Ramana Chinnakotla, City of Sunnyvale, Director, Environmental Services  Sean Smith, City of Sunnyvale, Street Operations Manager  Mary Jeyaprakask, City of Sunnyvale, Senior Planner  Suzanne Park, City of Sunnyvale, Chief Building Official  Daniel Moskowitz, City of Sunnyvale, Lieutenant, Office of Emergency Services, Department of Public Safety  Louay Toma, Santa Clara County Fire Department, Senior Program Specialist  Dennis Lollie, Santa Clara County Fire Department, Deputy Chief  Juan Ledesma, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Program Administrator Supervisor, Office of Emergency Services  Andres Acevedo, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Senior Management Analyst  Jack XU, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Senior Engineer/ Hydra, Hydro & Geo  Liang XU, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Hydro, Hydra & Geomorph Manager  Jay Lee, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Watershed Field Ops Manager  Devin Mody, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Ops & Maintenance Engineer Support Manager  Greg Meamber, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Senior Engineer/ Operations & Maintenance  Nina Merrill, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Senior Water Resources Specialist  Steven Wu, Santa Clara Valley Water District, Senior Engineer/ Geotechnical 56 PSC 09-12-2024 56 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Acknowledgements v  Brandon Stewart, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Lands and Facilities Department Manager  Korrine Skinner, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Public Affairs Manager  Matt Anderson, MidPeninsula Regional Open Space District, Chief Ranger and Visitor Services Manager  Hillary Stevenson, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, General Counsel  Jane Mark, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Planning Manager  Jason Lin, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Engineering and Construction Manager  Deborah Hirst, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Grants Program Manager  Brad Bartholomew, IEM, Project Manager  Jessica Mason, IEM, Leader Planner  Kate Smith, IEM, GIS/Hazus Specialist  Carron Day, IEM, Planner  Casey Garnett, IEM, Planner  Krystian Murray, IEM, Planner  Alayna Payne, IEM, Planner  Sabrina Lunsford, IEM, Planner 57 PSC 09-12-2024 57 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Acronyms vi Acronyms AB Assembly Bill ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments ADA Americans with Disabilities Act AELR Annualized Earthquake Loss Ratio AFN Access and Functional Needs APA Approvable-Pending-Adoption APG California Climate Adaptation Planning Guide ARES Amateur Radio Emergency Service BAWSCA Bay Area Water Supply Conservation Agency BRIC Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Cal OES California Office of Emergency Services CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code Caltrans California Department of Transportation CARAS Community Agency for Resources, Advocacy, and Services CCR California Code of Regulations CDBG-DR Urban Development Community Development Block Grant Disaster Recovery CDBG-MIT Community Development Block Grant Mitigation CDC U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CEQ Council on Environmental Quality CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CERCLA California Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act CERT Community Emergency Response Team CFR Code of Federal Regulations CGS California Geological Survey C-MIST Communication, Maintaining Health, Independence, Safety, Support Services, and Self- Determination, and Transportation COOP Continuity of Operations Plan COVID-19 Coronavirus Disease of 2019 CPAD California Protected Area Database CPUC California Public Utilities Commission CRS Community Rating System CSZ Cascadia Subduction Zone CWA Clean Water Act CWPP Community Wildfire Protection Plan CWSRF Clean Water State Revolving Fund CZM Coastal Zone Management DFIRM Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map DHS U.S. Department of Homeland Security DMA Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 DR Disaster Declaration DSOD Division of Dam Safety 58 PSC 09-12-2024 58 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Acronyms vii DSOD Division of Safety of Dams DWR Department of Water Resources DWR Department of Water Resources EAP Emergency Action Plan EBB Earthquake Brace + Bolt Program EIR Environmental Impact Report EM Emergency Declaration EMAP Emergency Management Accreditation Program EOC Emergency Operations Center EPA Environmental Protection Agency ESA Endangered Species Act FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FERC Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FHSZ Fire Hazard Severity Zones FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map FIS Flood Insurance Study FMA Flood Mitigation Assistance FMAG Fire Mitigation Assistance Grants FRMP Flood Risk Management Program GIS Geographic Information Systems HHPD High Hazard Potential Dam HMGP Hazard Mitigation Grant Program HMGP-PF Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Post Fire HMP Hazard Mitigation Plan HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Hwy Highway IBC International Building Code ICARP Integrated Climate Adaptation and Resiliency Program IED Improvised Explosive Device IEM Innovative Emergency Management IID Improved Incendiary Device IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IT Information Technology JTTF Joint Terrorism Task Force LEWS Landslide Early Warning Systems LOMA Letter of Map Amendment LOMR Letters of Map Revision MJHMP Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan MMI Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NBS Nature Based Solutions NCRIC Northern California Regional Intelligence Center NEHRP National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NFIP National Flood Insurance Program NGO Non-Governmental Organization NHD Natural Hazard Disclosure NID National Inventory of Dams 59 PSC 09-12-2024 59 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Acronyms viii NIMS National Incident Management System NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRCS Natural Resources Conversation Services NSI National Structure Inventory NTHMP National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program NWS National Weather Service OA Operational Area OEM Office of Emergency Management PAL Provisionally Accredited Levee PCA Project Cooperation Agreement PDM Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric PGA Peak Ground Acceleration PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration PTSD Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Risk MAP Risk Mapping, Assessment and Planning SAFRR Science Application for Risk Reduction SAR Suspicious Activity Report SCCFD Santa Clara County Fire Department SCCOEM Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Management SCVWD Santa Clara Valley Water District SEMS Standardized Emergency Management System SFHA Special Flood Hazard Area SHMO State Hazard Mitigation Officer SHMP State Hazard Mitigation Plan SR State Route SRA State Responsibility Area STORM Safeguarding Tomorrow through Ongoing Risk Mitigation SVACA Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority TRI Toxic Release Inventory USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture USDM U.S. Drought Monitor USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USGS U.S. Geological Survey VHF Viral Hemorrhagic Fever VTA Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority WHO World Health Organization WNV West Nile Virus WUI Wildland Urban Interface WVFPO Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations Program 60 PSC 09-12-2024 60 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Executive Summary ix Executive Summary Hazard Mitigation Planning Background Hazard mitigation involves the use of long-term and short-term policies, programs, projects, and other activities to alleviate the death, injury, and property damage that can result from a disaster. Santa Clara County and a partnership of local governments and special districts within the county have developed a multijurisdictional hazard mitigation plan to reduce risks from natural disasters in the Santa Clara County Operational Area (OA)—defined as the unincorporated county and incorporated jurisdictions within the geographical boundaries of the county. The plan reaffirms the planning partners commitment to implementing cost-effective, environmentally sound, technically feasible mitigation actions. It also complies with federal and state hazard mitigation planning requirements to establish eligibility for funding under Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) grant programs. The whole community of the Santa Clara County OA—including individual and families, businesses, community and nonprofit organizations, schools and academia, and all levels of government —is the ultimate beneficiary of this MJHMP. Implementing the plan will reduce risk for those who live in, work in, and visit the OA. The plan provides a viable planning framework for natural hazards of concern for the area. Participation in development of the plan by key stakeholders helped ensure outcomes will be mutually beneficial. The resources and background information in the plan are applicable across the OA, and the plan’s goals and recommendations can lay the groundwork for the development and implementation of local mitigation activities and partnerships for years to come. History of Regional Planning Efforts for Hazard Mitigation The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) provides communities in the San Francisco Bay area with planning and research resources related to land use, housing, environmental and water resource protection, disaster resilience, energy efficiency, hazardous waste mitigation, risk management and financial services. In 2004, ABAG led a regional effort to address hazard mitigation planning for Bay Area jurisdictions. ABAG’s regional template was used by numerous counties and cities to meet federal hazard mitigation planning requirements. The ABAG process enabled individual planning processes to meet local government needs, while pooling resources and eliminating redundant planning efforts. In 2010, ABAG conducted its second regional planning effort. Municipalities that used the 2010 updated ABAG tools to meet federal hazard mitigation planning requirements included the County of Santa Clara and the cities of Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San José, Santa Clara, Saratoga, and Sunnyvale. ABAG discontinued its full support of the regional planning concept in 2015, so jurisdictions that were covere d under the regional plan must initiate individual or reformed multijurisdictional planning efforts to continue to comply with federal mitigation planning requirements. In 2016, Santa Clara County, the Santa Clara County Fire Department, and all incorporated cities in Santa Clara County teamed together to prepare an updated Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan tailored to the local needs and capabilities of the Santa Clara County Operational Area. The planning partnership developed a new plan from scratch, using lessons learned from the earlier ABAG planning efforts. Compared to previous planning efforts, the plan focused on more localized concerns, newly available data and tools to enhance the risk assessment, considering FEMA’s Community Rating System (CRS) for flood insurance, and identifying cost-effective actions. 61 PSC 09-12-2024 61 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Executive Summary x The 2023 Santa Clara County Operational Area Planning Effort In 2022, Santa Clara County reconvened the planning team and a consultant was hired to support the planning process. This allowed participants to focus on ongoing hazard events including multiple atmospheric rivers and a winter storm while ensuring that mitigation planning effort continued moving forward. Additional ways the 2023 plan differs from previous plans includes:  The risk assessment includes further considerations of emerging hazards, like the impact of wildfire smoke, which have recently threatened the OA.  A concentrated effort to ensure plan integration between the County Community Wildfire Protection Plan and County Safety Element of the County General Plan updates as well as other approved plans.  The incorporation of the additional special district planning partners of Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Santa Clara County Fire Department, and Santa Clara Valley Water District, which are involved in hazard mitigation in the OA.  The plan was developed in accordance with EMAP standards.  The risk assessment has been formatted to provide information on risk and vulnerability that will allow a measurement of cost-effectiveness.  Mitigation goals and objectives and criteria for mitigation action item prioritization have been updated to include climate change, resiliency, and benefits to populations that are underserved and/or socially vulnerable.  The update gave the planning partners an opportunity to engage residents, particularly those who are underserved and/or socially vulnerable and gauge their perception of risk and support for risk reduction through mitigation.  The update also gave planning partners an opportunity to engage community stakeholders, particularly those that assist underserved and/or socially vulnerable and gauge their perception of risk and support for risk reduction through mitigation.  Climate change has been added as a hazard for the planning area.  Each planning partner has a minimum of one mitigation action per a hazard that can impact them.  Expanded information about planning partner participation and compliance in the National Flood Insurance Program. Plan Development Approach Phase 1: Schedule of Work A Core Planning Team consisting of staff from the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Management, Office of Sustainability, and Department of Planning and Development, and a contract consultant, Innovative Emergency Management (IEM), was assembled to facilitate the update of this plan. This team then formed a planning partnership with local governments, special districts, and other County departments within the OA. Planning partners were also requested to identify additional stakeholders, both internal and external to their community or organization, were invited to participate in the planning process. Some of types of stakeholders identified by partners included representatives from academia, nonprofits, businesses, and other agencies involved in Hazard Mitigation like the California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES). The Core Planning Team oversaw the plan update, compliance with FEMA hazard mitigation planning guidelines, and the plan update schedule. Stakeholders were frequently engaged through meetings, one-on-one calls, and emails including meeting notes to ensure they understood their role in the plan update. 62 PSC 09-12-2024 62 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Executive Summary xi The plan schedule was updated to reflect the needs of the stakeholders and committing priorities as multiple disaster events occurred during the update process. This phase also included a review of the existing MJHMP, the current and draft California statewide hazard mitigation plan, and other existing programs and resources that support hazard mitigation actions in the OA. Phase 2: Determine the Planning Area and Resources The scale of the plan can determine the level of detail that may be included. In this case, the County lead a county-wide planning effort. Planning partners were provided the space to input even more localized data in their sections of the plan as well. New and updated resources and data sources were identified throughout the planning process. FEMA’s Hazus tool for natural hazard analysis was utilized where possible to assess risk and estimated building damage impacts. Phase 3: Build the Planning Team The Core Planning Team invited stakeholders to participate in a series of planning meetings on each of the components of the planning process. After each meeting, planning partners had the opportunity to add their input through forms such as Capability Assessment, Risk Assessment and Mitigation Project Worksheet. The planning team update was additionally supported by input from the public. This input was garnered through several collaborative public meetings, a digital survey, and the utilization of social media and a project website. Phase 4: Create an Outreach Strategy The opportunity for public participation is an important step of the hazard mitigation planning process. For this plan update, the Core Planning Team developed and implemented a whole community, multi-lingual, in-person, and virtual approach to public outreach. Since the County was already working on updating the County’s Safety Element, which includes different but similar hazard risk and disaster response and recovery considerations, the two planning teams collaborated to share information on th is Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP). Two in-person listening sessions were held and one virtual town hall meeting was held to inform the public about the Safety Element and MJHMP update and to garner feedback about hazards of concern and levels of preparedness in the community. The Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) was also being updated simultaneously with the MJHMP, and the two project teams collaborated to share information. Four in- person meetings were held to share information about the CWPP and MJHMP and solicit feedback from the public about the plans. The County and planning partners also requested public participation through a digital survey posted on the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Management’s website available in English, Spanish, Chinese, Vietnamese, and Tagalog. This survey received almost 600 responses. Finally, the public was provided the opportunity to review and provide input on the draft MJHMP. Phase 5: Review Community Capabilities A thorough understanding of community capabilities can help decision makers identify feasible hazard mitigation actions. The planning team evaluated each jurisdiction ’s existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources including staff and funding resources. Applicable opportunities to expand upon on and improve these policies and programs were identified in the Mitigation Strategy. The main point of contact for each planning partner successfully engaged and utilized their planning teams as subject matter experts and planning support throughout the MJHMP process. 63 PSC 09-12-2024 63 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Executive Summary xii Phase 6: Risk Assessment Risk assessment is the process of measuring the potential loss of life resulting from natural hazards, as well as personal injury, economic injury, and property damage, in order to determine the vulnerability of people, buildings, and infrastructure to natural hazards. The risk assessment provides the scientific basis for mitigation actions. It begins with hazard identification and profiling. Each ha zard that may impact the planning area was profiled utilizing the best available data from local, state, and federal resources including other plans, studies, and databases. Each hazard profile includes risk information such as the location, extent, previous occurrences, future probability of each hazard, and estimated cost of potential damage. Furthermore, a vulnerability assessment was incorporated into each profile to show the expected impacts on people, buildings, critical infrastructure, and future development. The role of climate change and potential cascading impacts is also described. As part of a comprehensive risk assessment, planning partners used a hazard risk index to evaluate the probability of occurrence, potential life impact, property impact, percentage of planning area impacted, and extent for each applicable hazard. The overall hazard risk index results based on an average of partner indices is shown in Table 1. These results show which hazards pose the highest overall risk to the Operational Area. Table 1: Average Overall Hazard Risk Index Results Hazard Risk Order Hazard Average Overall Hazard Risk Index Result 1 Earthquake 2.13 2 Wildfire, wildfire smoke, and air quality 1.71 3 Heavy precipitation, heavy winds, extreme temperatures 1.45 4 Drought 1.25 5 Climate change, including sea-level rise 1.19 6 Dam and levee failure .83 7 Flood .79 8 Landslide and mass movement .41 9 Tsunami .03 Based on the average overall hazard risk index results from planning partner risk indices:  The earthquake hazard has the highest risk results, followed by wildfire/smoke/air quality.  The inclement weather, drought, climate change hazards were a moderate risk to the Operational Area.  The dam failure, flood, and landslide/mass movement hazards were a lower risk to the Operational Area.  The tsunami hazard poses the lowest risk to the Operational Area, as not all planning partners can be impacted by this hazard due to geographic location. 64 PSC 09-12-2024 64 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Executive Summary xiii Phase 7: Develop a Mitigation Strategy The Mitigation Strategy is often referred to as the heart of the plan, or the blueprint for breaking the cycle of disaster response and recovery. A risk-based, capabilities-informed mitigation strategy outlines the framework for short-term and long-term community resilience. A guiding principle as well as overarching goals and objectives were established for the Mitigation Strategy. In order to facilitate this important part of the plan update, a Mitigation Projects Working Group was convened. This group wa s responsible for coming up with suggestions for mitigation actions and reviewing and updating the 2017 Goals and Objectives to align with the changed hazard landscape and the new guidelines. Other plans previously approved by the planning partners were also evaluated for potential mitigation actions. Planning partners then assessed their mitigation actions from the past plan and updated them where needed as well as developed new mitigation actions. These actions were then compiled in their annexes in an ac tion plan which included information on the time, cost, funding source, and lead agency. Phase 8: Draft Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan with Public Input and Maintenance Procedures The Core Planning Team and Working Group assembled a document to meet federal hazard mitigation planning requirements for all partners. The updated plan contains two volumes. Volume 1 contains components that apply to all partners and the broader Operational Area and the unincorporated areas of the County. Volume 2 contains all components that are planning partner specific. Each planning partner has a dedicated annex in Volume 2. A plan maintenance strategy which included annual progress reporting, a strategy for continued public involvement, a commitment to plan integration with other relevant plans and programs, and a recommitment from the planning partnership to actively maintain the plan over the five-year performance period. The Planning Team and the pu blic were each provided opportunities to review the draft plan and inputs were incorporated into the final draft. Phase 9: Develop and Adopt Final Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The final draft will be submitted to Cal OES and FEMA for approval. Once pre-adoption approval has been granted by the California Office of Emergency Services and FEMA Region 9, the final adoption phase will begin. Each planning partner will individually adopt the updated plan. Plan implementation will occur over the next five years as the planning partners begins to implement the countywide and jurisdiction-specific actions identified in this plan. Each planning partner main point of contact is responsible for the maintenance of their annex and partner-specific information in this MJHMP. This includes documenting successes and lessons learned, researching new or updated data, laws, policies, regulations, or initiatives t hat can contribute to future iterations of the MJHMP, reviewing potential funding availability, and monitoring and tracking the progress of action items identified in their annex and submitting a status summary to the County ’s project manager annually. Mitigation Goals and Objectives Hazard mitigation plans must identify goals for reducing long-term vulnerabilities to identified hazards (44 CFR Section 201.6(c)(3)(i)). A guiding principle, a set of goals and measurable objectives for this plan were reviewed and approved by the larger Planning Team based on data from the preliminary risk assessment and updates to mitigation priorities since the previous MJHMP. The guiding principle, goals, objectives, and actions in this plan all support each other. Goals were selected to support the gui ding principle. Objectives were selected that met multiple goals. Actions were prioritized based on the action meeting multiple objectives. 65 PSC 09-12-2024 65 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Executive Summary xiv Guiding Principle A guiding principle focuses the range of objectives and actions to be considered. This is not a goal because it does not describe a hazard mitigation outcome, and it is broader than a hazard -specific objective. The guiding principle for this MJHMP is as follows: To equitably reduce risk and increase resilience by establishing and promoting a comprehensive mitigation program and efforts to protect the Whole Community and environment from identified natural and human- induced hazards. Goals The following are the mitigation goals for this plan: 1. Actively develop community awareness, understanding, and interest in hazard mitigation and empower the Operational Area to engage in the shaping of associated mitigation policies and programs. 2. Minimize potential for loss of life, injury, social impacts, and dislocation due to hazards. 3. Minimize potential for damage to property, economic impacts, and unusual public expense due to hazards. 4. Minimize likelihood and impact of hazards causing environmental damage or damaging open space/nature preserves in the County and preserving ecological connectivity in the region and by working with residents to help build community capacity to respond and adapt to hazards and emergencies. 5. Effectively deliver essential information to the whole community that promotes personal preparedness and includes advice to reduce personal vulnerability to hazards. 6. Encourage programs and projects that promote community resiliency by maintaining the functionality of critical Operational Area resources, facilities, and infrastructure. 7. Pursue feasible, cost-effective, grant eligible, and environmentally sound hazard mitigation measures. 8. Increase adaptive capacity to reduce risk from hazard impacts that stem from a changing climate. 9. Remove barriers for local governments to access mitigation funding (broad vs. specific) and reduce the administrative pain points to recipient agencies during the project deployment and auditing phases. The effectiveness of a mitigation strategy is assessed by determining how well these goals are achieved. Objectives Each selected objective meets multiple goals, serving as a stand-alone measurement of the effectiveness of a mitigation action, rather than as a subset of a goal. The objectives also are used to help establish priorities and have been reviewed and approved by the Mitigation Strategy Working Group, and the larger Planning Team. The objectives are as follows: 1. Establish and maintain partnerships in the identification and implementation of mitigation measures in the Operational Area. 2. Implement hazard mitigation programs and projects that protect life, property, and the environment. 66 PSC 09-12-2024 66 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Executive Summary xv 3. Develop and provide updated information about threats, hazards, vulnerabilities, and mitigation strategies to state, regional, and local agencies, as well as private sector groups, community - based organizations, and non-profits. 4. Improve understanding of the locations, potential impacts, and linkages among threats, hazards, vulnerability, and measures needed to protect life, property, and the environment. 5. Encourage the incorporation of mitigation best management measures into plans, codes, and other regulatory standards for public, private, and non-governmental entities within the Operational Area. 6. Inform the public on the risk exposure to natural hazards and ways to increase the public ’s capability to prevent, prepare, respond, recover, and mitigate impacts of these events. 7. Advance community and natural environment sustainability and resilience to future impacts through preparation and implementation of state, regional, and local projects. 8. Reduce repetitive property losses from all hazards. 9. Where feasible and cost-effective, encourage property protection measures for vulnerable structures located in hazard areas. 10. Improve the process on how public agencies select systems that provide warning and emergency communications for a broad array of agencies. This includes improving the selection process and ensuring warning and emergency communications processes are effective and accessible. 11. Partner with educational institutions that provide research, case studies and the like to help bolster agency communication that demonstrates the value of hazard mitigation. Implementation Full implementation of the recommendations of this plan will require time and resources. The measure of the plan’s success will be its ability to adapt to changing conditions. The County of Santa Clara and its planning partners will assume responsibility for adopting the recommendations of this plan and committing resources toward implementation. The framework established by this plan commits all planning partners to pursue actions when the benefits of a project exceed its costs. The planning partnership developed this plan with extensive public input, and public support of the actions identified in this plan will help ensure the plan’s success. 67 PSC 09-12-2024 67 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents xvi Table of Contents 1 Introduction to Hazard Mitigation Planning ....................................................................................... 1 1.1 Why Prepare This Plan? ............................................................................................................. 1 1.1.1 The Big Picture .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1.2 Purposes for Planning ............................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Who Will Benefit from This Plan?.............................................................................................. 3 1.3 Contents of This Plan ................................................................................................................. 3 1.3.1 Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP)........................................................ 3 2 Plan Update: What Has Changed ........................................................................................................ 4 2.1 The Previous Plan ....................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Why Update? ............................................................................................................................... 4 2.2.1 Federal Eligibility ....................................................................................................................... 4 2.2.2 Plan Integration ......................................................................................................................... 5 2.2.3 Changes in Development .......................................................................................................... 5 2.3 Why Update? — What is Different? ........................................................................................... 6 3 Planning for Climate Change and Equitable Outcomes ................................................................. 10 4 Plan Update Approach ....................................................................................................................... 12 4.1 Grant Funding............................................................................................................................ 12 4.2 Formation of the Core Planning Team .................................................................................... 12 4.3 Defining Stakeholders .............................................................................................................. 13 4.4 Establishment of the Planning Partnership ........................................................................... 17 4.5 Defining the Planning Area ...................................................................................................... 21 4.6 Review of Existing Programs................................................................................................... 21 4.7 Public Involvement ................................................................................................................... 22 4.7.1 Strategy ................................................................................................................................... 22 4.7.2 Public Involvement Results ..................................................................................................... 27 4.8 Plan Development Chronology and Milestones ..................................................................... 31 5 Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile .................................................................................. 33 5.1 Geographic Overview ............................................................................................................... 33 5.2 Historical Overview ................................................................................................................... 33 5.3 Major Past Hazard Events ........................................................................................................ 35 5.4 Physical Setting ........................................................................................................................ 36 5.4.1 Geology and Topography ........................................................................................................ 36 5.4.2 Soils ......................................................................................................................................... 36 5.4.3 Climate .................................................................................................................................... 37 5.5 Development Profile ................................................................................................................. 38 68 PSC 09-12-2024 68 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents xvii 5.5.1 Land Use ................................................................................................................................. 38 5.5.2 Critical Facilities, Infrastructure, and Assets ........................................................................... 38 5.5.3 Future Trends in Development ................................................................................................ 41 5.6 Demographics ........................................................................................................................... 42 5.6.1 Population ............................................................................................................................... 42 5.6.2 Age Distribution ....................................................................................................................... 43 5.6.3 Race, Ethnicity, and Language ............................................................................................... 45 5.6.4 Education ................................................................................................................................ 45 5.6.5 Individuals with Disabilities or with Access or Functional Needs ............................................ 46 5.6.6. Social Vulnerability ..................................................................................................................... 46 5.7 Economy .................................................................................................................................... 49 5.7.1 Income ..................................................................................................................................... 49 5.8 Industry, Businesses, and Institutions ................................................................................... 50 5.8.1 Employment Trends and Occupations .................................................................................... 50 5.9 Laws and Ordinances ............................................................................................................... 52 5.9.1 Federal .................................................................................................................................... 52 5.9.2 State ........................................................................................................................................ 60 5.9.3 Local ........................................................................................................................................ 67 6 Identified Hazards of Concern and Risk Assessment .................................................................... 70 6.1 Identified Hazards of Concern ................................................................................................. 70 6.2 Hazard Risk Index ..................................................................................................................... 71 6.2.1 Average Overall Hazard Risk Index Results ........................................................................... 74 6.3 Risk Assessment Tools ............................................................................................................ 74 6.3.1 Mapping ................................................................................................................................... 74 6.3.2 Hazus ...................................................................................................................................... 75 6.4 Risk Assessment Approach ..................................................................................................... 75 6.4.1 Earthquake and Flood ............................................................................................................. 76 6.4.2 Drought .................................................................................................................................... 77 6.4.3 All Other Assessed Hazards ................................................................................................... 77 6.5 EMAP Consequence Analysis ................................................................................................. 77 6.6 Sources of Data Used in Hazus Modeling .............................................................................. 78 6.6.1 Building and Cost Data ........................................................................................................... 78 6.6.2 Hazus Data Inputs ................................................................................................................... 78 6.6.3 Other Local Hazard Data ........................................................................................................ 78 6.6.4 Data Source Summary ............................................................................................................ 79 6.7 Limitations ................................................................................................................................. 80 7 Earthquake .......................................................................................................................................... 82 7.1 General Background ................................................................................................................. 82 7.1.1 Damage from Earthquakes ..................................................................................................... 83 7.1.2 Earthquake Classifications ...................................................................................................... 83 7.1.3 Ground Motion ......................................................................................................................... 85 7.1.4 Effect of Soil Types ................................................................................................................. 87 7.2 Hazard Profile ............................................................................................................................ 88 7.2.1 Past Events ............................................................................................................................. 88 7.2.2 Location ................................................................................................................................... 90 7.2.3 ShakeMaps ............................................................................................................................. 94 7.2.4 Frequency ............................................................................................................................. 100 69 PSC 09-12-2024 69 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents xviii 7.2.5 Severity ................................................................................................................................. 101 7.2.6 Warning Time ........................................................................................................................ 102 7.3 Cascading Impacts ................................................................................................................. 103 7.4 Exposure .................................................................................................................................. 103 7.4.1 Population ............................................................................................................................. 103 7.4.2 Property ................................................................................................................................. 104 7.4.3 Loss Potential ........................................................................................................................ 104 7.4.4 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ....................................................................................... 108 7.4.5 Environment .......................................................................................................................... 109 7.5 Vulnerability ............................................................................................................................. 109 7.5.1 Population ............................................................................................................................. 110 7.5.2 Property ................................................................................................................................. 111 7.5.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ....................................................................................... 112 7.5.4 Environment .......................................................................................................................... 116 7.5.5 Economic Impact ................................................................................................................... 116 7.6 Future Trends in Development .............................................................................................. 117 7.7 Scenario ................................................................................................................................... 118 7.8 Issues ....................................................................................................................................... 119 8 Wildfire ............................................................................................................................................... 122 8.1 General Background ............................................................................................................... 122 8.2 Hazard Profile .......................................................................................................................... 123 8.2.1 Past Events ........................................................................................................................... 123 8.2.2 Location ................................................................................................................................. 126 8.2.3 Frequency ............................................................................................................................. 131 8.2.4 Severity and Impacts ............................................................................................................. 133 8.2.5 Warning Time ........................................................................................................................ 134 8.3 Cascading Impacts ................................................................................................................. 134 8.3.1 Smoke and Air Quality .......................................................................................................... 136 8.4 Exposure .................................................................................................................................. 137 8.4.1 Population ............................................................................................................................. 137 8.4.2 Property ................................................................................................................................. 139 8.4.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ....................................................................................... 140 8.4.4 Environment .......................................................................................................................... 142 8.5 Vulnerability ............................................................................................................................. 143 8.5.1 Population ............................................................................................................................. 143 8.5.2 Property ................................................................................................................................. 144 8.5.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ....................................................................................... 146 8.5.4 Wildlife and Livestock ............................................................................................................ 146 8.6 Future Trends in Development .............................................................................................. 146 8.7 Scenario ................................................................................................................................... 147 8.8 Issues ....................................................................................................................................... 148 9 Inclement Weather ............................................................................................................................ 150 9.1 General Background ............................................................................................................... 150 9.1.1 Heavy Precipitation/Atmospheric River ................................................................................. 150 9.1.2 Extreme Temperatures ......................................................................................................... 154 9.1.3 High Winds ............................................................................................................................ 156 70 PSC 09-12-2024 70 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents xix 9.1.4 Space Weather ...................................................................................................................... 159 9.2 Hazard Profile .......................................................................................................................... 163 9.2.1 Past Events ........................................................................................................................... 163 9.2.2 Location ................................................................................................................................. 169 9.2.3 Frequency ............................................................................................................................. 169 9.2.4 Severity ................................................................................................................................. 169 9.2.5 Warning Time ........................................................................................................................ 170 9.3 Cascading Impacts ................................................................................................................. 170 9.4 Exposure .................................................................................................................................. 170 9.4.1 Population ............................................................................................................................. 170 9.4.2 Property ................................................................................................................................. 171 9.4.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ....................................................................................... 171 9.5 Vulnerability ............................................................................................................................. 171 9.5.1 Population ............................................................................................................................. 172 9.5.2 Property, Critical Facilities, Infrastructure ............................................................................. 172 9.5.3 Environment .......................................................................................................................... 173 9.5.4 Economy ............................................................................................................................... 173 9.6 Future Trends in Development, Scenario, Issues................................................................ 174 9.7 Issues ....................................................................................................................................... 174 9.8 Consequence Analysis ........................................................................................................... 174 10 Drought ........................................................................................................................................ 176 10.1 General Background ........................................................................................................... 176 10.1.1 Monitoring and Categorizing Drought ................................................................................ 176 10.1.2 Normal Precipitation in California ...................................................................................... 178 10.1.3 Water Supply Strategy ...................................................................................................... 179 10.1.4 Water Supply Infrastructure .............................................................................................. 181 10.2 Hazard Profile ...................................................................................................................... 183 10.2.1 Past Events ....................................................................................................................... 183 10.2.2 Location ............................................................................................................................. 187 10.2.3 Frequency ......................................................................................................................... 187 10.2.4 Warning Time .................................................................................................................... 188 10.2.5 Extent ................................................................................................................................ 188 10.2.6 Severity and Impacts ......................................................................................................... 189 10.2.7 Responses to Recent Drought .......................................................................................... 191 10.3 Cascading Hazards ............................................................................................................. 192 10.3.1 Drought and Wildfire ......................................................................................................... 192 10.3.2 Drought and Extreme Heat ............................................................................................... 192 10.3.3 Drought and Flooding ........................................................................................................ 192 10.3.4 Drought and Landslides .................................................................................................... 193 10.4 Vulnerability ......................................................................................................................... 193 10.4.1 Population ......................................................................................................................... 194 10.4.2 Property ............................................................................................................................. 195 10.4.3 Critical Facilities ................................................................................................................ 195 10.4.4 Environmental Impact ....................................................................................................... 195 10.4.5 Economic Impact ............................................................................................................... 198 10.5 Future Trends in Development .......................................................................................... 198 10.6 Scenario ............................................................................................................................... 199 10.7 Issues ................................................................................................................................... 199 71 PSC 09-12-2024 71 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents xx 11 Climate Change ........................................................................................................................... 201 11.1 General Background ........................................................................................................... 201 11.1.1 Climate Change Indicators ................................................................................................ 203 11.1.2 Projected Future Impacts .................................................................................................. 204 11.1.3 How Climate Change Impacts Hazard Mitigation ............................................................. 207 11.2 Responses to Climate Change .......................................................................................... 210 11.3 Vulnerability Assessment – Hazards of Concern ............................................................ 211 11.3.1 Earthquake ........................................................................................................................ 211 11.3.2 Wildfire .............................................................................................................................. 212 11.3.3 Inclement Weather ............................................................................................................ 213 11.3.4 Drought .............................................................................................................................. 214 11.3.5 Dam and Levee Failure ..................................................................................................... 216 11.3.6 Flood ................................................................................................................................. 217 11.3.7 Landslide ........................................................................................................................... 219 11.3.8 Tsunami ............................................................................................................................. 219 11.3.9 Extreme Temperatures ..................................................................................................... 220 11.3.10 Sea Level Rise .................................................................................................................. 222 11.4 Issues ................................................................................................................................... 227 12 Dam and Levee Failure ............................................................................................................... 229 12.1 General Background ........................................................................................................... 229 12.2 Causes of Dam and Levee Failure ..................................................................................... 229 12.2.1 Causes of Dam Failure ..................................................................................................... 229 12.2.2 Causes of Levee Failure ................................................................................................... 230 12.3 Hazard Profiles .................................................................................................................... 230 12.3.1 Past Dam Failure Events .................................................................................................. 230 12.3.2 Dam Location and Extent .................................................................................................. 234 12.3.3 Levee Location .................................................................................................................. 236 12.3.4 Frequency of Dam and Levee Failure ............................................................................... 245 12.3.5 Severity ............................................................................................................................. 245 12.3.6 Warning Time for Dam Failure .......................................................................................... 245 12.3.7 Warning Time for Levee Failure ........................................................................................ 246 12.4 Exposure .............................................................................................................................. 247 12.4.1 Population ......................................................................................................................... 247 12.4.2 Property ............................................................................................................................. 247 12.4.3 Environment ...................................................................................................................... 247 12.5 Vulnerability ......................................................................................................................... 247 12.5.1 Population ......................................................................................................................... 248 12.5.2 Property ............................................................................................................................. 249 12.5.3 Critical Facilities ................................................................................................................ 249 12.5.4 Environment ...................................................................................................................... 249 12.6 Cascading Hazards ............................................................................................................. 251 12.7 Regulatory Oversight for Dams ......................................................................................... 251 12.7.1 National Dam Safety Act ................................................................................................... 251 12.7.2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Dam Safety Program ....................................................... 251 12.7.3 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Dam Safety Program ....................................... 251 12.7.4 State of California .............................................................................................................. 252 12.7.5 Santa Clara Valley Water District ...................................................................................... 253 12.7.6 Regulatory Oversight for Levees ...................................................................................... 254 12.8 Future Trends in Development .......................................................................................... 254 72 PSC 09-12-2024 72 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents xxi 12.9 Scenario ............................................................................................................................... 254 12.10 Issues ................................................................................................................................... 254 12.11 Consequence Analysis ....................................................................................................... 255 13 Flood ............................................................................................................................................. 257 13.1 General Background ........................................................................................................... 257 13.1.1 Measuring Floods and Floodplains ................................................................................... 258 13.1.2 Floodplain Ecosystems ..................................................................................................... 258 13.1.3 Effects of Human Activities ............................................................................................... 259 13.1.4 Federal Flood Programs ................................................................................................... 259 13.2 Hazard Profile ...................................................................................................................... 265 13.2.1 Types of Flood-Related Hazards ...................................................................................... 266 13.2.2 Principal Flooding Sources ............................................................................................... 268 13.2.3 Past Events ....................................................................................................................... 269 13.2.4 Location ............................................................................................................................. 273 13.2.5 Frequency ......................................................................................................................... 274 13.2.6 Severity ............................................................................................................................. 275 13.2.7 Warning Time .................................................................................................................... 288 13.3 Cascading Impacts ............................................................................................................. 288 13.4 Exposure .............................................................................................................................. 289 13.4.1 Population ......................................................................................................................... 289 13.4.2 Property ............................................................................................................................. 290 13.4.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ................................................................................... 292 13.4.4 Environment ...................................................................................................................... 296 13.5 Vulnerability ......................................................................................................................... 297 13.5.1 Population ......................................................................................................................... 298 13.5.2 Property ............................................................................................................................. 300 13.5.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ................................................................................... 307 13.5.4 Environment ...................................................................................................................... 309 13.5.5 Economic Impact ............................................................................................................... 309 13.6 Future Trends in Development .......................................................................................... 310 13.7 Scenario ............................................................................................................................... 310 13.8 Issues ................................................................................................................................... 311 14 Landslide/Mass Movement ......................................................................................................... 313 14.1 General Background ........................................................................................................... 313 14.1.1 Landslide Types ................................................................................................................ 313 14.1.2 Landslide Modeling ........................................................................................................... 315 14.1.3 Landslide Causes .............................................................................................................. 316 14.1.4 Landslide Management ..................................................................................................... 317 14.1.5 Land Subsidence Effects .................................................................................................. 317 14.2 Hazard Profile ...................................................................................................................... 318 14.2.1 Past Events ....................................................................................................................... 318 14.2.2 Location ............................................................................................................................. 327 14.2.3 Frequency ......................................................................................................................... 330 14.2.4 Severity ............................................................................................................................. 330 14.2.5 Warning Time .................................................................................................................... 330 14.3 Cascading Impacts ............................................................................................................. 331 73 PSC 09-12-2024 73 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents xxii 14.4 Exposure .............................................................................................................................. 331 14.4.1 Population ......................................................................................................................... 331 14.4.2 Property ............................................................................................................................. 332 14.4.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ................................................................................... 333 14.4.4 Environment ...................................................................................................................... 336 14.5 Vulnerability ......................................................................................................................... 336 14.5.1 Population ......................................................................................................................... 336 14.5.2 Property ............................................................................................................................. 337 14.5.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure ................................................................................... 337 14.5.4 Environment ...................................................................................................................... 338 14.6 Future Trends in Development .......................................................................................... 338 14.7 Scenario ............................................................................................................................... 338 14.8 Issues ................................................................................................................................... 338 15 Tsunami ........................................................................................................................................ 341 15.1 General Background ........................................................................................................... 341 15.1.1 Tsunami ............................................................................................................................. 341 15.1.2 Seiche ............................................................................................................................... 343 15.2 Hazard Profile ...................................................................................................................... 343 15.2.1 Past Events ....................................................................................................................... 343 15.2.2 Location ............................................................................................................................. 343 15.2.3 Frequency ......................................................................................................................... 344 15.2.4 Severity ............................................................................................................................. 345 15.2.5 Warning Time .................................................................................................................... 345 15.2.6 Extent ................................................................................................................................ 346 15.3 Cascading Impact................................................................................................................ 348 15.4 Exposure and Vulnerability ................................................................................................ 348 15.4.1 Population ......................................................................................................................... 348 15.4.2 Property ............................................................................................................................. 349 15.4.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure .................................................................................... 349 15.4.4 Environment ...................................................................................................................... 349 15.5 Future Trends in Development .......................................................................................... 349 15.6 Scenario ............................................................................................................................... 350 15.7 Issues ................................................................................................................................... 350 16 Other Hazards of Interest ........................................................................................................... 353 16.1 General Background ........................................................................................................... 353 16.1.1 EMAP Consequence Analysis .......................................................................................... 354 16.2 Intentional Hazards ............................................................................................................. 355 16.2.1 Terrorism and Weapons of Mass Destruction ................................................................... 355 16.2.2 Active Threat ..................................................................................................................... 361 16.2.3 Hazard Profile .................................................................................................................... 363 16.2.4 Cyber Threats .................................................................................................................... 366 16.2.5 Hazard Profile .................................................................................................................... 369 16.3 Technological Incidents ..................................................................................................... 370 16.3.2 Hazard Profile .................................................................................................................... 378 16.3.3 Utility Failure, Power Outages, and Public Safety Power Shutoff ..................................... 379 16.3.4 Hazard Profile .................................................................................................................... 382 74 PSC 09-12-2024 74 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents xxiii 16.4 Epidemic and Pandemic ..................................................................................................... 384 16.4.2 Hazard Profile .................................................................................................................... 391 16.5 Fog ........................................................................................................................................ 392 16.5.1 Hazard Profile .................................................................................................................... 393 16.6 Identified Needs................................................................................................................... 394 16.7 Related Plans ....................................................................................................................... 396 17 Mitigation Strategy ...................................................................................................................... 397 17.1 Goals and Objectives .......................................................................................................... 397 17.1.1 Guiding Principle ............................................................................................................... 397 17.1.2 Goals ................................................................................................................................. 397 17.1.3 Objectives .......................................................................................................................... 398 17.2 Mitigation Alternatives ........................................................................................................ 398 17.3 Santa Clara County 2023 Mitigation Action Plan ............................................................. 411 17.4 Financial Capabilities ......................................................................................................... 430 17.4.1 Federal .............................................................................................................................. 430 17.4.2 State .................................................................................................................................. 437 17.4.3 Local .................................................................................................................................. 440 17.5 Action Plan Prioritization ................................................................................................... 440 17.5.1 Benefit-Cost Review .......................................................................................................... 441 17.6 Plan Adoption ...................................................................................................................... 442 17.7 Plan Maintenance Strategy ................................................................................................ 442 17.8 Plan Implementation ........................................................................................................... 443 17.9 Plan Maintenance Element ................................................................................................. 443 17.9.1 Plan Update ....................................................................................................................... 444 17.9.2 Grant Monitoring and Coordination ................................................................................... 445 17.9.3 Continuing Public Involvement .......................................................................................... 445 17.9.4 Incorporation into Other Planning Mechanisms ................................................................ 446 List of Tables Table 1: Average Overall Hazard Risk Index Results .................................................................................. xii Table 2: Summary of Changes in the 2023 MJHMP .................................................................................... 7 Table 3: External Stakeholders Invited to Be Involved in Planning Process .............................................. 13 Table 4: Planning Partner Main Points of Contact ...................................................................................... 17 Table 5: One-on-One Meetings with Planning Partners ............................................................................. 18 Table 6: Summary of Public Outreach ........................................................................................................ 29 Table 7: Plan Development Chronology and Milestones ............................................................................ 31 Table 8: Presidential Disaster Declarations8F ............................................................................................ 35 Table 9: Normal Precipitation and Temperatures in the Operational Area, 1981 –202210F ....................... 37 Table 10: Unincorporated County Land Use............................................................................................... 38 Table 11: Critical Facilities and Infrastructure in the Operational Area ...................................................... 39 Table 12: Recent Population Data13F ......................................................................................................... 42 Table 13: Hourly Living Wage Calculation for Santa Clara County, California (2022)23F .......................... 49 75 PSC 09-12-2024 75 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents xxiv Table 14: Probability of Hazards ................................................................................................................. 72 Table 15: Hazard Risk Ranking by Jurisdiction .......................................................................................... 73 Table 16: Average Overall Hazard Risk Index Results ............................................................................... 74 Table 17: Hazus Model Data Documentation ............................................................................................. 79 Table 18: Mercalli Scale and Peak Ground Acceleration Comparison45F.................................................. 87 Table 19: National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program Soil Classification System46F ....................... 87 Table 20: Recent Earthquakes Magnitude 5.0 or Larger Within a 100-Mile Radius of the Operational Area .................................................................................................................................................................... 89 Table 21: Earthquake Probabilities for the San Francisco Bay Area Region, 2014–204368F .................. 101 Table 22: Earthquake Exposure by Jurisdiction........................................................................................ 104 Table 23: Loss Estimates for 100-Year Probabilistic Earthquake............................................................. 105 Table 24: Loss Estimates for 500-Year Probabilistic Earthquake............................................................. 105 Table 25: Loss Estimates for San Andreas Fault Scenario Earthquake ................................................... 106 Table 26: Loss Estimates for Hayward Fault Scenario Earthquake ......................................................... 106 Table 27: Loss Estimates for Calaveras Fault Scenario Earthquake ....................................................... 107 Table 28: Estimated Earthquake-Caused Debris ..................................................................................... 108 Table 29: Number of Critical Facilities Exposed to Earthquakes .............................................................. 109 Table 30: Estimated Earthquake Impact on Persons ............................................................................... 110 Table 31: Age of Structures in Operational Area ...................................................................................... 111 Table 32: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities from 100-Year Earthquake ......................................... 112 Table 33: Essential Facility Functionality in 100-Year Probabilistic Earthquake ...................................... 113 Table 34: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities from 500-Year Earthquake ......................................... 113 Table 35: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities from Hayward Fault .................................................... 113 Table 36: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities from San Andreas Fault ............................................. 114 Table 37: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities from Calaveras ........................................................... 114 Table 38: Damage to Potable Water Systems by Hazus Scenario .......................................................... 116 Table 39: Damage to Waste Water Systems by Hazus Scenario ............................................................ 116 Table 40: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Earthquake .............................................................................. 120 Table 41: Past Wildfire Events .................................................................................................................. 123 Table 42: Record of Fire Affecting Operational Area ................................................................................ 132 Table 43: Population Within Wildfire Hazard Areas .................................................................................. 138 Table 44: Exposure and Value of Structures in Moderate to High Wildfire Hazard Areas ....................... 139 Table 45: Land Within the Wildfire Hazard Classification Areas ............................................................... 140 Table 46: Critical Facilities within Moderate to High Wildfire Hazard Areas ............................................. 141 Table 47: Critical Facilities Within 100 Meters of Moderate to High Wildfire Hazard Areas ..................... 141 Table 48: Loss Estimates for Wildfire within Moderate to High Wildfire Hazard Class ............................. 145 Table 49: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Wildfire .................................................................................... 148 Table 50: NOAA Geomagnetic Storms Space Weather Scale and Potential Effects123F ........................ 160 Table 51: NOAA Solar Radiation Storms Space Weather Scale and Potential Effects 124F .................... 161 Table 52: NOAA Radio Blackouts Space Weather Scale and Potential Effects 125F ............................... 162 Table 53: 2001–2022 Heavy Rain and Hail Events .................................................................................. 163 Table 54: 2001–2022 Extreme Temperature Events ................................................................................ 166 Table 55:2002-2022 High Wind Events .................................................................................................... 167 Table 56: 1951–2022 Tornado Events ...................................................................................................... 168 Table 57: Population by Jurisdiction ......................................................................................................... 171 Table 58: EMAP Consequence Analysis Inclement Weather ................................................................... 174 Table 59: U.S. Department of Agriculture Disaster Declarations Including Santa Clara County, 2017 – 2022 .......................................................................................................................................................... 187 Table 60: Recent Federal and State Drought Responses ........................................................................ 191 Table 61: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Drought ................................................................................... 199 Table 62: Average Maximum Temperature – Santa Clara County187F.................................................... 205 Table 63: Number of Extreme Heat Days Per Year (Heat Is above 92.7 oF) Santa Clara County188F... 206 Table 64: Average Annual Precipitation – Santa Clara County189F ......................................................... 206 Table 65: Potential Direct and Related Climate Change Impacts in the Operational Area ...................... 208 Table 66: Climate Change Impacts on Natural and Other Hazards ......................................................... 209 76 PSC 09-12-2024 76 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents xxv Table 67: Wildfire – Projected Santa Clara County Acres Burned ........................................................... 212 Table 68: Population and Buildings at Risk – Santa Clara County ........................................................... 213 Table 69: Silicon Valley 2.0 Santa Clara County Sea Level Rise Projections and Inundation Layers ..... 222 Table 70: Estimated Population Residing in Sea Level Rise Inundation Areas ....................................... 223 Table 71: Structure Type in Sea Level Rise Inundation Areas ................................................................. 224 Table 72: Structure and Contents Value in Sea Level Rise Inundation Areas ......................................... 225 Table 73: Structure and Contents Value in Sea Level Rise Inundation Areas, Unincorporated Santa Clara County ....................................................................................................................................................... 225 Table 74: Critical Facilities in Sea Level Rise Inundation Areas ............................................................... 226 Table 75: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Climate Change ...................................................................... 227 Table 76: Dams Classified as a High Hazard or an Extremely High Hazard Risk 217F,218F.................... 231 Table 77: Levees in Santa Clara County 224F .......................................................................................... 238 Table 78: Potential Downstream Hazard from Dams225F ........................................................................ 245 Table 79: Estimated Exposure and Value of Structures in the Dam Failure Inundation Area .................. 247 Table 80: Population in Dam Inundation Area .......................................................................................... 248 Table 81: Value of Exposed Structures in the Dam Inundation Area by Jurisdiction ............................... 250 Table 82: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Dam Failure ............................................................................ 255 Table 83: NFIP Status in the Operational Area ........................................................................................ 261 Table 84: CRS Community Status in the Operational Area246F ............................................................... 264 Table 85: History of Flood Events257F, 258F ............................................................................................. 270 Table 86: Crop Insurance Claims Paid from Excessive Moisture and Flood, 2003 -2022259F ................. 272 Table 87: Summary of Peak Discharges Within the Operational Area260F .............................................. 275 Table 88: Population Within the 10-Percent, 1-Percent, and 0.2-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Areas ......................................................................................................................................................... 289 Table 89: Value of Structures in the 10-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area .............................. 290 Table 90: Value of Structures in the 1-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area ................................ 291 Table 91: Value of Structures in the 0.2-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area ............................. 292 Table 92: Critical Facilities in the 10-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area .................................. 293 Table 93: Critical Facilities in the 1-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area .................................... 293 Table 94: Critical Facilities in the 0.2-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area ................................. 294 Table 95: Habitats Expected to Be Impacted by Riverine Flooding265F .................................................. 296 Table 96: Estimated Flood Impact on Persons ......................................................................................... 298 Table 97: Loss Estimates for 10-Percent-Annual-Chance Flood.............................................................. 300 Table 98: Loss Estimates for 1-Percent-Annual-Chance Flood ................................................................ 301 Table 99: Loss Estimates for 0.2-Percent-Annual-Chance Flood............................................................. 302 Table 100: Estimated Flood-Caused Debris ............................................................................................. 303 Table 101: Flood Insurance Statistics268F ................................................................................................ 304 Table 102: Date of Floodplain Management Regulation Adoption ........................................................... 305 Table 103: Repetitive Loss Properties ...................................................................................................... 306 Table 104: Substantial Damage/Substantial Improvement Implementation ............................................. 307 Table 105: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities and Infrastructure from the 10% Annual Chance Flood .................................................................................................................................................................. 307 Table 106: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities and Infrastructure from the 1% Annual Chance Flood .................................................................................................................................................................. 308 Table 107: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities and Infrastructure from the 0.2% Annual Chance Flood .................................................................................................................................................................. 308 Table 108: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Flood ..................................................................................... 312 Table 109: Landslide Events in Santa Clara County277F, 278F, 279F, 280F, 281F ....................................... 319 Table 110: Population Exposed to Landslide Hazard ............................................................................... 331 Table 111: Exposure and Value of Structures in Moderate to High Landslide Risk Areas ...................... 332 Table 112: Acreage in Moderate to High Landslide Hazard Areas .......................................................... 333 Table 113: Critical Facilities and Infrastructure in Moderate to Very High Landslide Risk Areas ............. 335 Table 114: Loss Potential Based on All Building Stock in Aggregated Landslide Areas .......................... 337 Table 115: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Landslide/Mass Movement ................................................... 339 Table 116: Tsunami Intensity Scale297F ................................................................................................... 346 77 PSC 09-12-2024 77 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents xxvi Table 117: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Tsunami ................................................................................ 351 Table 118: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Other Hazards of Interest ..................................................... 354 Table 119: Event Profiles for Terrorism301F ............................................................................................. 357 Table 120: Santa Clara County Hazardous Materials Spills 2019–2022323F .......................................... 372 Table 121: Corrosion Type........................................................................................................................ 375 Table 122: Leak Classifications ................................................................................................................ 377 Table 123: Electric Providers in Santa Clara County330F ........................................................................ 381 Table 124: Power Shutoffs Statewide331F ................................................................................................ 382 Table 125: COVID-19 Cases Countywide and by City of Residence336F ................................................ 386 Table 126: Disease Outbreaks Identified in Santa Clara County, 2018–2022343F .................................. 387 Table 127: Alternatives to Mitigate the Dam and Levee Failure Hazard .................................................. 399 Table 128: Alternatives to Mitigate the Drought Hazard ........................................................................... 400 Table 129: Alternatives to Mitigate the Earthquake Hazard ..................................................................... 401 Table 130: Alternatives to Mitigate the Flooding Hazard .......................................................................... 403 Table 131: Alternatives to Mitigate the Landslide/Mass Movement Hazard ............................................. 406 Table 132: Alternatives to Mitigate the Inclement Weather Hazard.......................................................... 407 Table 133: Alternatives to Mitigate the Tsunami Hazard .......................................................................... 408 Table 134: Alternatives to Mitigate the Wildfire Hazard ............................................................................ 410 Table 135: County of Santa Clara 2023 Action Items ................................... Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 136: FEMA Mitigation Funding Sources ......................................................................................... 431 Table 137: Additional Federal Funding Sources ....................................................................................... 434 Table 138: State Mitigation Funding Sources ........................................................................................... 437 Table 139: Plan Maintenance Matrix ........................................................................................................ 443 Table 140: Survey Results Level of Hazard Concern ............................................................................... A-2 Table 141: Level of Concern for Climate Change Impacts ....................................................................... A-2 Table 142: Types of Stakeholders Represented ....................................................................................... A-3 Table 143: Public Comments .................................................................................................................... A-3 Table 144: General Feedback Received ................................................................................................ A-16 List of Figures Figure 1: Planning Partners Meeting .......................................................................................................... 20 Figure 2: Planning Partners Mitigation Strategy Meeting ........................................................................... 21 Figure 3: Picture of Public Survey Announcement ..................................................................................... 23 Figure 4: Public Survey Media Announcement ........................................................................................... 24 Figure 5: City of Campbell Social Media Outreach ..................................................................................... 25 Figure 6: Hazard Exposure and Social Vulnerability Map for Santa Clara Valley ...................................... 27 Figure 7: Public and Stakeholder Meeting with 99 Participants .................................................................. 28 Figure 8: Public and Stakeholder Meeting with 104 Participants ................................................................ 29 Figure 9: Samples of Public Comment Period Advertisements .................................................................. 30 Figure 10: Santa Clara County Operational Area (Planning Area) ............................................................. 34 Figure 11: Critical Facilities in the Operational Area ................................................................................... 40 Figure 12: Critical Infrastructure in the Operational Area ........................................................................... 41 Figure 13: Overall Age Distribution in the Operational Area17F ................................................................. 44 Figure 14: Race Distribution in the Operational Area19F ............................................................................ 45 Figure 15: Santa Clara County Social Vulnerability Index .......................................................................... 47 Figure 16: Social Vulnerability Index Themes ............................................................................................. 48 Figure 17: Industry in Santa Clara County .................................................................................................. 50 Figure 18: Occupations in Santa Clara County........................................................................................... 51 Figure 19: California and Santa Clara County Unemployment Rate27F ..................................................... 52 78 PSC 09-12-2024 78 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents xxvii Figure 20: Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale42F .......................................................................................... 85 Figure 21: Peak Acceleration (%g) with 10% Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years 44F .......................... 86 Figure 22: Historic Earthquakes in the Operational Area ........................................................................... 90 Figure 23: Significant Known Faults in the Bay Area 56F ............................................................................ 92 Figure 24: 500-Year Probabilistic Earthquake Scenario Peak Ground Acceleration.................................. 94 Figure 25: Hayward Magnitude 7.0 Fault Scenario Peak Ground Acceleration ......................................... 96 Figure 26: Calaveras Magnitude 7.0 Fault Scenario Peak Ground Acceleration ....................................... 97 Figure 27: San Andreas Magnitude 7.8 Fault Scenario Peak Ground Acceleration ................................... 98 Figure 28: Liquefaction Susceptibility ......................................................................................................... 99 Figure 29: Peak Ground Acceleration with 10-percent Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years ............... 102 Figure 30: Highway Bridge Percentage Damage Exceeds Moderate: Calaveras Scenario ..................... 115 Figure 31: Hayward Fault Earthquake Scenario80F .................................................................................. 119 Figure 32: Air Tanker Dropping Fire Retardant on Lick Fire in Santa Clara County 86F ........................... 126 Figure 33: Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FSHZ) ........................................................................................ 128 Figure 34: Classified Wildfire Hazard ........................................................................................................ 130 Figure 35: Wildfire Risk to Structures ....................................................................................................... 131 Figure 36: Burned Hillslopes above Pulse Canyon near San Antonio Valley, SCU Lightning Complex, Santa Clara County94F ............................................................................................................................. 133 Figure 37: Post Fire Soil Erosion Potential ............................................................................................... 135 Figure 38: NOAA Atlas Intensity - Santa Clara, California ........................................................................ 151 Figure 39: Thunderstorm Life Cycle113F .................................................................................................. 153 Figure 40: National Weather Service Wind Chill Chart ............................................................................. 154 Figure 41: Winter Storm Severity Index .................................................................................................... 155 Figure 42: National Weather Service Heat Index Chart117F .................................................................... 156 Figure 43: National Weather Service Heat Index Classifications and Corresponding Effects on the Body118F ................................................................................................................................................... 156 Figure 44: The Beaufort Wind Scale121F .................................................................................................. 158 Figure 45: Palmer Drought Index from January 1, 2005, to May 20, 2023129F ....................................... 177 Figure 46: Palmer Hydrological Drought Index from January 1, 2005, to May 20, 2023130F .................. 177 Figure 47: Santa Clara Valley Water District System Water Supply 144F ................................................. 182 Figure 48: Hetch Hetchy Water System146F ............................................................................................ 183 Figure 49: U.S. Drought Monitor Time Series California 2000-2023 ........................................................ 188 Figure 50: U.S. Drought Monitory Map of California ................................................................................. 189 Figure 51: Reported Number of Drought Impacts by Category156F ......................................................... 190 Figure 52: CMRA Drought Hazard: Days without Precipitation Indicator for Santa Clara County ........... 194 Figure 53: Tier 1 Tree Mortality High Hazard Zones162F ......................................................................... 197 Figure 54: Tier 2 Tree Mortality High Hazard Zones163F ......................................................................... 197 Figure 55: Global Temperature 1880-2022171F ....................................................................................... 202 Figure 56: Global Carbon Dioxide Concentrations Over Time 174F .......................................................... 203 Figure 57: Impacts of Climate Change on Human Health190F ................................................................. 207 Figure 58: Location of Dams Impacting Santa Clara County221F ............................................................ 235 Figure 59: Dam Inundation Depth Grids ................................................................................................... 236 Figure 60: Levees in Santa Clara County223F .......................................................................................... 237 Figure 61: Risk Rating 2.0: Project Premium Changes for Santa Clara County244F ............................... 263 Figure 62: CRS Communities by Class Nationwide as of October 2022245F .......................................... 264 Figure 63: Watersheds in the Operational Area256F ................................................................................ 269 Figure 64: Mapped Flood Hazard Areas in the Operational Area ............................................................. 274 Figure 65: 100-Year Floodplain Area Land Cover266F ............................................................................. 297 Figure 66: Common Types of Landslides ................................................................................................. 314 Figure 67: Typical Debris Avalanche Scar and Track 272F ....................................................................... 315 Figure 68: A Santa Clara County Debris Flow Triggered by Winter Storms Following the Loma Fire, 2017282F ................................................................................................................................................... 326 Figure 69: SCVWD Historic Groundwater Conditions284F ....................................................................... 327 Figure 70: Deep-Seated Landslide Susceptibility in Santa Clara County ................................................. 329 79 PSC 09-12-2024 79 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Table of Contents xxviii Figure 71: Potential Tsunami Travel Times in the Pacific Ocean, In Hours291F ...................................... 342 Figure 72: Tsunami Hazard Area .............................................................................................................. 344 Figure 73: Weapon Types Used in Terrorist Events in California310F ...................................................... 364 Figure 74: Targets of Terrorist Attacks in California311F .......................................................................... 365 Figure 75: Highly Populated Areas with Hazardous Material Incidents Within Santa Clara County 322F 371 Figure 76: Gas and Hazardous Liquids Pipelines in Santa Clara County 325F ......................................... 374 Figure 77: Santa Clara COVID Cases 2020–2023335F ............................................................................ 385 Figure 78: Weekly Percentage of Emergency Department Visits for Influenza -Like Illness in Santa Clara County, 2019, to February 22, 2023344F .................................................................................................. 388 Figure 79: Sample of Public Survey Advertisement ................................................................................. A-1 Figure 80: Sample Public Feedback on Hazard Impacts - Gilroy Meeting ............................................. A-14 Figure 81: Sample Public Feedback on Hazard Impacts - Campbell Meeting ....................................... A-15 Figure 82: Sample In-Person Feedback Option - Gilroy Meeting ........................................................... A-16 80 PSC 09-12-2024 80 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 1: Introduction to Hazard Mitigation Planning 1 1 Introduction to Hazard Mitigation Planning 1.1 Why Prepare This Plan? 1.1.1 The Big Picture Hazard mitigation is a key component of community resilience. There is no one definition of resilience; however, the Urban Sustainability Directors Network defines resilience as the ability of people and their communities to anticipate, accommodate and positively adapt to or thrive amidst changing climate conditions and hazard events.0F0F 1 The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) defines hazard mitigation as any sustainable action that reduces or eliminates long-term risk to people and property from future disasters.1F1F 2 It involves long- and short-term actions implemented before, during, and after disasters. Hazard mitigation activities include planning and regulations, structure and infrastructure projects, natural system protection, and education and awareness programs as well as other steps to reduce the impact of hazards. For many years, federal disaster funding focused on relief and recovery after disasters occurred, with limited funding for hazard mitigation planning in advance. The Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA; Public Law 106-390), passed in 2000, shifted the federal emphasis toward planning for disasters before they occur.2F2F 3 The DMA requires state and local governments to develop hazard mitigation plans as a condition for federal disaster grant assistance. Regulations developed to fulfill the DMA’s requirements are included in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations (44 CFR). FEMA advocates for a “whole community” approach to hazard mitigation. This approach calls for everyone, from private property owners to commercial interests to nonprofits and local, state, and federal governments to be involved in preparing the nation for the next disaster event. By going through the local planning process outlined in the DMA, communities are able to articulate their needs for mitigation more easily. based on their understanding of their capabilities and risk. This can enhance their ability to develop projects and take mitigation actions, resulting in faster allocation of funding and more cost - effective risk-reduction projects. The DMA also promotes sustainability in hazard mitigation. To be sustainable, hazard mitigation needs to incorporate sound management of natural resources and consider the wider social and economic implications. 1 Urban Sustainability Directors Network. (n.d.). Resilience Hubs. USDN%20Resilience%20Hubs%20Guidance%20Document 2 Federal Emergency Management Agency. (n.d.). Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grants. https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation#:~:text=FEMA%27s%20hazard%20mitigation%20assistance%20provides%2 0funding%20for%20eligible,cycle%20of%20disaster%20damage%2C%20reconstruction%20and%20repeated%20da mage. 3 Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2020, October 19). The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. https://www.fema.gov/blog/disaster-mitigation-act-2000-20-years-mitigation-planning 81 PSC 09-12-2024 81 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 1: Introduction to Hazard Mitigation Planning 2 To further enhance the planning process and the guidelines set by DMA, the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Management follows a specific emergency management planning process. This locally developed process incorporates various nationally recognized best practices and concepts, like the whole community planning approach, with standard program management principles that can be easily integrated into the County’s existing governmental structure. This process brings together stakeholders, builds lasting community relationships, and results in a stronger and more comprehensive mitigation plan. This process is key to building community resilience and was followed in the 2023 MJHMP update. 1.1.2 Purposes for Planning Hazard mitigation planning is the foundation for mitigation investments. Hazard mitigation plans are required to be updated, approved, and adopted every five years in order to maintain eligibility for multiple federal mitigation grant programs. Through the update process, mitigation actions are developed as a part of a community-based, risk-informed decision-making process.3F3F 4 Fourteen jurisdictions and three special districts within the Santa Clara County Operational Area (OA)— defined as the unincorporated county, incorporated jurisdictions, and special districts within the geographical boundaries of Santa Clara County—participated in the Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) prepared in 2023 by the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Management with support from the consulting firm IEM. Participating jurisdictions and districts are referred to in this plan as planning partners. Elements and strategies in the MJHMP were selected because they meet a program requirement and because they meet the needs of the planning partners and their residents. One of the benefits of multijurisdictional planning is the ability to pool resources and support partnerships to reduce redundant activities within the OA that have similar risk exposure and vulnerabilities. FEMA encourages multijurisdictional planning under its guidance for the DMA. This MJHMP will help guide and coordinate mitigation activities throughout the OA. Additionally, it was developed to meet the following objectives:  Meet or exceed requirements of the DMA.  Comply with the requirements outlined in FEMA’s Local Mitigation Policy Planning Guide (April 2022), the requirements of which apply to all plans seeking agency approval on or after April 19, 2023.  Enable all planning partners to continue using federal grant funding to reduce risk through mitigation.  Meet the planning requirements of FEMA’s Community Rating System (CRS), allowing planning partners that participate in the CRS program to maintain or enhance their CRS classifications.  Utilize EMAP standards for strategic planning.  Coordinate existing plans and programs so high priority projects to mitigate possible disaster impacts have an increased opportunity to be funded and implemented. The planning partners discussed using this plan to meet Community Rating System (CRS) requirements as well. Ultimately, it was decided that Santa Clara Valley Water will lead the development of a separate Floodplain Management Plan specifically dedicated towards this goal, allowing planning partners that participate in the CRS program to maintain or enhance their CRS classifications. Relevant information from this MJHMP will be incorporated into the Floodplain Management Plan. 4 Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2022, April 19). Local Mitigation Planning Policy Guide. https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_local-mitigation-planning-policy-guide_042022.pdf 82 PSC 09-12-2024 82 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 1: Introduction to Hazard Mitigation Planning 3 1.2 Who Will Benefit from This Plan? The whole community of the Santa Clara County OA—including individual and families, businesses, community and nonprofit organizations, schools and academia, and all levels of government —is the ultimate beneficiary of this MJHMP. Implementing the plan will reduce risk for those who live in, work in, and visit the OA. The plan provides a viable planning framework for natural hazards of concern for the area. Participation in development of the plan by key stakeholders helped ensure outcomes will be mutually beneficial. The resources and background information in the plan are applicable across the OA, and the plan’s goals and recommendations can lay the groundwork for the development and implementation of local mitigation activities and partnerships for years to come. Mitigation projects, particularly large projects with cascading impacts, will also benefit neighboring jurisdictions. 1.3 Contents of This Plan This plan has been set up in two volumes so that elements that are planning partner-specific can easily be distinguished from those that apply to the overall Santa Clara County OA:  Volume 1: Volume 1 includes all federally required elements of a disaster mitigation plan that apply to the OA and the unincorporated areas of the County. This includes the description of the planning process, public involvement strategy, goals and objectives, hazard risk assessment, mitigation actions, and a plan maintenance strategy.  Volume 2: Volume 2 includes all federally required participant-specific elements, in annexes for each participating entity. It includes a description of the participation requirements established for participants in this plan. Both volumes include elements required under federal guidelines. DMA compliance requirements are cited at the beginning of subsections as appropriate to illustrate compliance. The following appendices provided at the end of Volume 1 include information or explanations to support the main content of the plan:  Appendix A: Public outreach information used in preparation of this update.  Appendix B: Plan adoption resolutions from planning partners. All planning partners will adopt the MJHMP once it has been reviewed by FEMA and reaches Approvable-Pending-Adoption (APA) status. 1.3.1 Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP) This plan incorporates elements of the Emergency Management Standard set by the Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP). A consequence analysis of the potential for detrimental impacts of hazards is included in this 2023 plan update for the EMAP. Each hazard identified in this plan is followed by the Consequence Analysis result. The methodology of this analysis and the results can be found in the Risk Assessment portion in Volume 1 of this plan. 83 PSC 09-12-2024 83 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 2: Plan Update: What Has Changed 4 2 Plan Update: What Has Changed 2.1 The Previous Plan Santa Clara County, 15 jurisdictions, and the Santa Clara County Fire Department were covered under the 2017 Santa Clara County Operational Area (OA)Hazard Mitigation Plan. The planning process used to develop the 2017 plan was as follows:  Definition of the planning area and establishment of a working group of participating stakeholders which oversaw all phases of the plan update.  Promotion of focused outreach to individuals identified for the working group as well as other individuals, agencies, and jurisdictions that had a vested interest in the recommendations in the hazard mitigation plan.  Development of a strategy for public involvement in the plan update which included inviting members of the public to serve on the working group, conducting a public survey, utilizing multiple media avenues, and actively identifying and involving OA stakeho lders.  Assessment of existing programs including plans, studies, reports and technical information and all planning and regulatory, administrative, and technical, public outreach and education, and financial capabilities of planning partners to implement hazard mitigation actions.  Reevaluation of the 2010 plan update to ensure planning partners had the opportunity to provide comment. Santa Clara Valley Water District had a 2017 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan independent of the 2017 Santa Clara County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan. The district joined the OA Mitigation Plan as part of the 2023 Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) update. The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space and Santa Clara County Fire Department also joined the 2023 plan update. 2.2 Why Update? 2.2.1 Federal Eligibility Hazard mitigation plans are updated on a five-year cycle. A jurisdiction or special district covered by a plan that has expired is not able to pursue elements of federal funding under the Robert T. Stafford Act for which a current hazard mitigation plan is a prerequisite. Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations (44 CFR) stipulates that hazard mitigation plans must present a schedule for monitoring, evaluating, and updating the plan. This provides an opportunity to reevaluate recommendations, monitor the impacts of actions that have been completed, and determine if there is a need to change the focus of mitigation strategies. This update meets the requirements for hazard mitigation plans in order to maintain the eligibility for federal grant funding for Planning Participants. Additionally, on April 19, 2022, FEMA updated the Local Mitigation Planning Policy Guide. This means that all plans updated and approved after April 19, 2023, must adhere to the new mitigation planning policy requirements. The 2023 update of the Santa Clara MJHMP has incorporated all changes and is in compliance with all elements of the updated Local Mitigation Planning Policy Guide. The Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan is proud to be one of the only MJHMPs in the state to incorporate the updated guidance. Some of these elements include: 84 PSC 09-12-2024 84 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 2: Plan Update: What Has Changed 5  Incorporating a broad range of representatives in the planning process, including organizations that support underserved communities.  Incorporating the effects of climate change and future conditions in the risk assessment.  Emphasizing the importance of building codes, land use ordinances, and developmental regulations in local capabilities.  Emphasizing the alignment of FEMA related mitigation programs, such as the NFIP. 2.2.2 Plan Integration Since the last plan update, the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Management has worked diligently to incorporate the 2023 MJHMP into other county wide planning initiatives. Santa Clara County Safety Element (the Safety Element): The County is undergoing the 2023 Safety Plan update, which is part of the Santa Clara County General Plan. The purpose of the Santa Clara County Safety Element is to identify and include safety considerations during the decision-making and planning process by establishing goals and policies as they relate to future developments within the County. These goals and policies aim to reduce personal injury and loss of life, prevent property destruction, and reduce environmental damage throughout the community. The Safety Element focuses on addressing potential hazards such as earthquakes, flooding, wildfire, and more. The Safety Element, which will be completed in the Fall of 2023, incorporates risk and hazard data developed during the 2017 MJHMP update. It also strategically aligns with the mitigation goals and actions from the MJHMP. Integration between the Safety Element and the MJHMP+ ensures the County is maximizing their future funding opportunities to reduce risk in the County and comply with Assembly Bill 2140 (2006), which affords the county additional benefits under the California Disaster Assistance Act. Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP): In addition, the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Management collaborated with the Santa Clara Fire Safe Council to integrate the MJHMP and the Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). The CWPP identifies potential priority areas where mitigation measures are needed to protect from wildfire the irreplaceable life, property, and critical infrastructure within the County. The CWPP directly aligns with the MJHMP mitigation strategy and provides an even more in depth look at the County ’s wildfire risk. 2.2.3 Changes in Development Hazard mitigation plan updates must reflect changes in development within the OA since the previous plan (44 CFR Section 201.6(d)(3)). The plan must describe development changes in hazard -prone areas that increased or decreased vulnerability for each planning partner since the last plan was approved. If no changes in development impacted the partner’s overall vulnerability, plan updates may validate the information in the previously approved plan. The intent of this requirement is to ensure the plan ’s mitigation strategy continues to accurately address the risk and vulnerability of existing and potential development and takes into consideration possible future conditions that could impact vulnerability. According to data from the California Department of Finance, the OA decreased in population by .5 percent between 2015 and 2022.4F4F 5 The COVIID-19 pandemic, relocation of remote workers, and rising cost of housing likely contributed to some of this change. Other large urban centers around the nation experienced similar trends during the pandemic. 5 California Department of Finance. (n.d.). Demographic Reports. https://dof.ca.gov/reports/demographic-reports/ 85 PSC 09-12-2024 85 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 2: Plan Update: What Has Changed 6 Participating planning partners have adopted General Plans that govern land-use decisions and policymaking, as well as building codes and specialty ordinances based on state and federal mandates.5F5F 6 Information on planning partner-specific changes in development is included in the participant annexes in Volume 2. 2.3 Why Update? — What is Different? This update seeks to capitalize on some of the successes of the prior plan update, includ ing the good participation rates and format changes. The Santa Clara County OA ’s 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan Update was prepared under the ABAG process however, the County OEM determined that the new format established in the 2017 multijurisdictional hazard mitigation plan update would be best to use moving forward as it better suits the needs and capabilities of the planning partners. The plan update process included a greater focus on public involvement that concentrated on targeted public engagement instead of simply opening technical workshops to the public. A renewed effort was made to establish a plan maintenance and implementation protocol that clearly defines ongoing commitment to the plan’s success. Some of the major differences between the current and previous plans are as follows: • The plan has been totally restructured as an Operational Area plan, focusing only on the geographic area of Santa Clara County. The risk assessment is not a subset of a larger regional effort. Instead, it is isolated to the Santa Clara County OA and focuses on the hazards of concern for the OA. • The risk assessment has been prepared to best support future grant applications by providing information on risk and vulnerability that will directly support the measurement of “cost - effectiveness” required under FEMA mitigation grant programs. • Newly available data and tools provide for a more detailed and accurate risk assessment using means such as FEMA’s Hazards U.S. (Hazus) Multi-Hazard computer model or new data such as FEMA’s countywide Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps. • The planning process creates the opportunity for all municipal planning partners to prepare to meet the requirements of California Senate Bill 379 during the next plan update. That bill will require integration of quantitative climate change risk assessment in the development of climate change related initiatives as part of the safety element of general plans. • The plan is more user-friendly because it is confined to one package. • The update created an opportunity for the County of Santa Clara, local cities and towns, and other planning partners to engage citizens directly in a coordinated approach to gauge their perception of risk and support of the concept of risk reduction throug h mitigation. 6 San José Spotlight. (2022, April 2). Silicon Valley Residents Left in Droves During Pandemic. https://sanjosespotlight.com/silicon-valley-san-jose-santa-clara-sunnyvale-residents-left-in-droves-exodus-during- covid-19-pandemic/ 86 PSC 09-12-2024 86 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 2: Plan Update: What Has Changed 7 • While priorities have remained the same, the plan’s goals objectives and actions are more clearly defined. The plan identifies actions rather than strategies as was the case with the prior plans. Strategies provide direction, but actions are fundable under grant programs. This plan replaces strategies with a guiding principle, goals, and objectives. The actions identified meet multiple objectives that are measurable, so that each planning partner can measure the effectiveness of its mitigation actions, which was difficult prior to this plan update. Below is a table comparing the 2017 MHJMP and 2023 MHJMP. Changes to the plan’s format and contents involved a multistep process that included best practices research and an assessment of jurisdiction and special district planning needs. Table 2: Summary of Changes in the 2023 MJHMP Changes Throughout the Plan • Comprehensive review and update of hazard history, risk and vulnerability data and information • New hazards of climate change, sea-level rise, wildfire smoke, and air quality added • Expanded outreach to vulnerable and historically underserved populations • Lens of planning for climate change and equitable outcomes used to create a comprehensive and inclusive plan • Integrated MJHMP planning process with the planning processes of the Community Wildfire Protection Plan and Safety Element of the General Plan update • It was determined that all CRS requirements will be met in a forthcoming floodplain management plan created by Santa Clara Valley Water District • City of Monte Sereno was not an active participant in this plan update, but is referenced in the plan as applicable • Santa Clara Valley Water District and Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District joined as Planning Partners • Plan was updated to meet 2023 FEMA hazard mitigation plan guidance and requirements Volume I: Base Plan Section Changes Section 1: Introduction to Hazard Mitigation Planning • Updated explanation of importance and purpose of hazard mitigation planning Section 2: Plan Update: What Has Changed • Summary list of plan changes and updates included Section 3: Planning for Climate Change and Equitable Outcomes • Section added to highlight Santa Clara County’s goal of continuing to integrate equity into all aspects of emergency management Section 4: Plan Update Approach • Information added to highlight the concentrated effort to ensure plan integration between the County Community Wildfire Protection Plan and County Safety Element of the County General Plan updates as well as other approved plans • Explanation of the ways planning partners engaged residents, particularly those who are underserved and/or socially vulnerable, 87 PSC 09-12-2024 87 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 2: Plan Update: What Has Changed 8 Volume I: Base Plan Section Changes and gauged their perception of risk and support for risk reduction through mitigation • Explanation of the ways planning partners engaged community stakeholders, particularly those that assist underserved and/or socially vulnerable, and gauged their perception of risk and support for risk reduction through mitigation • Updated plan development chronology and milestones Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile • All information updated using the most recent data available Sections 6-16: Identified Hazards of Concern and Risk Assessment • The risk assessment includes further considerations of emerging hazards, like the impact of climate change, wildfire smoke, and air quality, which have recently impacted the OA with increasing frequency since the 2017 plan • Hazard risk ranking updated and is now hazard risk index criteria • Wildfire, drought, and climate change are now considered to have higher average overall hazard risk by Planning Partners when compared to their hazard risk ranking scores in the 2017 plan • Updated and expanded information on hazard history, location, extent, frequency, and severity; exposure, vulnerability, cascading hazards, and how climate change may impact the frequency, extent, and severity of each hazard • The risk assessment has been formatted to provide information on risk and vulnerability that will allow a measurement of cost- effectiveness • Severe weather terminology updated to inclement weather • Updated maps and graphics • Hazus data and findings updated • The plan was developed in accordance with the most recent EMAP standards • Latest disaster declaration data added • High Hazard Potential Dam Grant Program (HHPD) requirements were considered and referenced Section 17: Mitigation Strategy • Mitigation goals and objectives and criteria for mitigation action item prioritization have been updated to include climate change, resiliency, and benefits to populations that are underserved and/or socially vulnerable. • Expanded detail on plan monitoring, evaluating, and updating to include roles and responsibilities and description of specific methods and schedules 88 PSC 09-12-2024 88 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 2: Plan Update: What Has Changed 9 Volume 2: Planning Partner Annexes • Each Planning Partner has a minimum of one mitigation action per a hazard that can impact them • Actions and project identified in the Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan included in annexes, as applicable • Expanded information about Planning Partner participation and compliance in the National Flood Insurance Program • All data and information updated, including Local Planning Team members, jurisdiction or special district profile, capability assessment, opportunities to integrate the mitigation plan into other local planning initiatives, hazard event history, jurisdiction- or special district-specific vulnerabilities, future development trends, hazard risk index, future needs to better understand risk and vulnerability, status of previous action items, and maps. • Mitigation successes highlighted, as applicable • Risk and vulnerability assessment expanded to include climate change, wildfire smoke, and air quality • Local floodplain managers identified by name in each annex, as applicable • Development trends since the 2017 plan identified • Sea-level rise map added to the City of Palo Alto’s annex Appendices • Appendix B updated from progress report template to adoption resolutions from all participating jurisdictions. 89 PSC 09-12-2024 89 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 3: Planning for Climate Change and Equitable Outcomes 10 3 Planning for Climate Change and Equitable Outcomes Local jurisdictions have a responsibility to ensure that the plan’s mitigation strategy complies with all applicable legal requirements related to civil rights, to ensure nondiscrimination. Such compliance can help achieve equitable outcomes through the mitigation planning process for all communities, including underserved communities and socially vulnerable populations. To ensure that the planning process and outcomes of the local mitigation plan benefit the whole community, equity must be central in its development. Climate change increases the frequency, duration, and intensity of natural hazards, such as wildfires, extreme heat, drought, storms, heavy precipitation, and sea level rise. Communities are feeling the impacts of a changing climate now. Respecting and leveraging the diversity of cultures in Santa Clara County ensures that mitigation planning is fair and equitable by applying a race and social justice framework to analyzing situations, evaluating options, and implementing solutions. The Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Management (SCCOEM) has adopted the FEMA’s equity definition of “the consistent and systematic fair, just and impartial treatment of all individuals.” In addition, SCCOEM acknowledges that historically underserved communities and individuals are often overburdened by systemic injustices/disparities, and these are amplified during the disaster cycle including mitigation. Therefore, the County of Santa Clara’s goal is to continue integrating equity into all aspects of emergency management by:  Leveraging the Access and Functional Needs (AFN) and Cultural Competency Working Group that regularly meets with members of the entire Operational Area, including the community.  Involving members from a variety of groups represent the diverse community living in the County, as well as representatives from historically marginalized groups in the planning process.  Conducting outreach events that focus on the county’s diverse population and most vulnerable community members like people with access and functional needs.  Providing multilingual outreach and communication to residents of the County.  Adopting Communication, Maintaining Health, Independence, Safety, Support Services, and Self - Determination, and Transportation (C-MIST) Framework. C-MIST is a function-based perspective composed of the five (5) functions that delineate areas where preparedness intervention can reduce disaster vulnerability and risk to the whole community.  Building, engaging, and sustaining partnerships with groups that have experienced inequities. For example, individuals experiencing communication, health, independence, safety, support services, self-determination, and transportation barriers during disasters.  Developing assessments and plans that prioritize assistance to those with the greatest needs and include vulnerable populations in the planning process.  Identifying needs and assets, as well as pre-existing vulnerability and resilience.  All community members can exercise their agency through free and informed choice(s). 90 PSC 09-12-2024 90 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 3: Planning for Climate Change and Equitable Outcomes 11 Through these strategies, SCCOEM will continue to lay the foundation for closing gaps identified through lessons learned from previous EOC activations such as COVID -19, Wildfires, and Inclement Weather Episodes, and Active Shooter events that have impacted Santa Clara County. Mitigation decisions and actions strive to provide benefit for all residents equally. SCCOEM Mitigation Program is designed to identify and remove social and institutional barriers that hinder or preclude people with disabilities and all those in the community historically subjected to unequal treatment from full and equal enjoyment of the programs, goods, services, activities, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations provided. Additionally, during mitigation planning and applying for mitigation funding, the County will identify opportunities to increase equity and create new opportunities for the post-disaster state of the County. An equitable community mitigation rests on the foundation of a “complete community” that applies equitable and fair practices in all the County’s planning and implementation. The concept demonstrates local government’s commitment to inclusion and fairness while managing a recovery process that links regional, state, and federal practices. 91 PSC 09-12-2024 91 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 12 4 Plan Update Approach This plan update process had the following primary objectives:  Secure grant funding.  Form a planning group.  Identify stakeholders.  Establish a planning partnership.  Define the Santa Clara County OA.  Identify and coordinate with other agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities.  Review and integrate existing plans, policies, and programs.  Engage the public. These objectives are discussed in the following sections. 4.1 Grant Funding This planning effort was supplemented by a FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) grant under DR-4569 California Wildfires. The County of Santa Clara Office of Emergency Management (OEM) was the sub-applicant for the grant. OEM applied in 2021 and was awarded the grant in 2022. It covered 75 percent of the cost for the development of this plan. 4.2 Formation of the Core Planning Team Santa Clara County OEM hired IEM to assist with the development and implementation of the plan. The lead IEM planner reported directly to the Santa Clara County Operational Area Mitigation Program Manager and the project manager for the plan update. Meetings were held on a weekly and biweekly basis to discuss the plan update status, outreach and engagement strategies, and planning milestones. A Core Planning Team was formed to lead the planning effort, made up of the following members:  Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Management  Santa Clara County Office of Sustainability  Santa Clara County Department of Planning and Development  IEM This planning team—designated the Santa Clara County Operational Area Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) Core Planning Team (or the Core Planning Team)—coordinated regularly over the course of this project to track plan development milestones, brainstorm outreach and engagement strategies, and identify meeting content to help with dev elopment of the update. The Core Planning Team also consisted of members of the County Safety Element update, ensuring visibility between plans. 92 PSC 09-12-2024 92 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 13 4.3 Defining Stakeholders For this planning process, “stakeholder” was defined as: any person or public or private entity that owns or operates facilities that would benefit from the mitigation actions of this plan, and/or has an authority or capability to support mitigation actions identified by this plan. This includes, but is not limited to, local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, agencies that have the authority to regulate development, neighboring communities, representatives of businesses, academi c, and other private organizations such as those that sustain community lifelines, and representatives of nonprofit organizations including community-based organizations that work directly with and/or provide support to underserved communities and socially vulnerable populations. For the sake of clarity, when developing outreach materials, stakeholders were separated into two categories:  Internal Stakeholders: Stakeholders identified and engaged by participants to enhance the planning process and the update of the MJHMP. These stakeholders are subject matter experts within the participating jurisdictions or special districts who impact or may be impacted by a mitigation action or policy. This included people in positions who had the authority to regulate development of the plan. These stakeholders informed the planning teams about specific topics and offered different points of view while providing data, reviewing the MJMP draft, attending planning workshops, and advocating for mitigation measures. Internal stakeholders for each planning partner are identified in the participant annexes in Volume 2.  External Stakeholders: Planning partners identified stakeholders outside their jurisdiction or special district who impact or can be impacted by a mitigation action or policy. These stakeholders were not necessarily involved in all stages of the planning process, but as subject matter experts, they informed the planning teams on specific topics and offered different points of view while providing data, reviewing the MJHMP draft, and advocating for mitigation measures. At the beginning of the planning process, planning partners identified a list of stakeholders to engage during the development of the Santa Clara County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan. The following stakeholders were invited to play a role in the planning process via email: Table 3: External Stakeholders Invited to Be Involved in Planning Process Agency or Organization Point of Contact American Red Cross Ann Herosy, Disaster Services American Red Cross – Silicon Valley Chapter Ginny Ortiz, Disaster Program Manager Amateur Radio Emergency Service (ARES) Barton Smith, Coordinator Avenidas John Sink, Vice President CADRE - Collaborating Agencies’ Disaster Relief Effort Marsha Hovey, Executive Director California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) Victoria LaMar-Haas, Chief, Mitigation Planning Division Cal OES Brian Buckhout, Emergency Services Coordinator California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Edgar Orre, Division Chief California Department of Transportation Shawn Casteel, Acting Senior Environmental Supervisor Campbell Community Emergency Response Team Mark Dunkle, President 93 PSC 09-12-2024 93 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 14 Agency or Organization Point of Contact Campbell Union School District Rosana Palomo, Director, Student Services Cattlemen’s Association Brent Kirk, President City of East Palo Alto Melvin Gaines, City Manager City of Menlo Park Justin Murphy, City Manager Cooper-Garrod Estate Vineyards Bill Cooper, Vintner Cupertino Sanitation District Benjamin Porter, District Manager Department of Homeland Security Staff, Transportation Security Administration Coordination Center Department of Toxic Substances Claude Jemison, Regulator for Los Lagos Golf Course and SAP Center (former landfill and cleanup site) Department of Toxic Substances Sagar Bhatt, Regulator for Watson Park (former landfill) Department of Toxic Substances Jovanne Villamater, Regulator for Vista Montana Parks Department of Toxic Substances Julie Pettijohn, Manager for all regulatory sites except Watson Park Downtown Streets Team Jim Rettew, Interim Executive Director Emergency Medical Services Michael Cubano, Duty Chief Emergency Services Volunteer Representative Annette Glanckopft, Volunteer Emergency Services Volunteer Representative Esther Nigenda, Volunteer Federal Aviation Administration David Zakaski, Airport Tower Manager Fellowship Plaza Shreya Shah, Senior Project Manager Foothill - De Anza Community College District Simon Pennington, Associate Vice President, College and Community Relations, Marketing, and Communications Foothill - De Anza Community College District Joel Cadiz, Executive Director, Facilities Foothill - De Anza Community College District Police Department Daniel Acosta, Police Chief Gavilan College Jaime Mata, Interim Vice President, Administrative Services Gilroy Unified School District Aurelio Rodriguez Coordinator, Safety and Emergency Preparedness Gilroy/Hollister California Highway Patrol Phil Cooper, Captain Google Katherine Williams, Corporate Communications Hidden Villa farm Lukas Wiborg, Assistant Property Manager Intel Corporation Stacy Sher, Crisis Manager Kaiser Permanente—Santa Clara Brendan Gadd, Safety Specialist Kaiser Permanente—Santa Clara Charles L. Smith, Support Services Administrator Life Moves Philip Dah, Opportunity Center Manager Loma Prieta Volunteer Fire Department Alex Leman, Chief Los Altos Hills County Fire District J. Logan, General Manager 94 PSC 09-12-2024 94 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 15 Agency or Organization Point of Contact Los Altos Hills County Fire District Captain (Ret.) Denise Gluhan Los Altos Hills County Fire District Eugenia Woods, Programs, Planning and Grants Manager Los Altos School District Erik Walukiewicz, Assistant Superintendent, Business Services Loma Prieta Resource Conservation District Dina Iden, Executive Director Morgan Hill Unified School District Carmen Garcia, Superintendent Moffett Field Ames Research Center, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Anastasiya Maynich, Emergency Management Specialist National Weather Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Brian Garcia, Meteorologist Pacheco Pass Water District Neelima Palacherla, Executive Officer Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce Charlie Weidanz, Executive Director Palo Alto Medical Foundation Richard Stilleke, Director, Environmental Health and Safety Palo Alto Planning and Transportation Commission Doria Summa, Vice Chair Palo Alto Unified School District Mike Jacobs, Emergency Manager Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) Kevin Conant, Senior Public Safety Specialist Purissima Water District Phil Witt, General Manager Purissima Water District Anthony Stoloski, Operations Manager Ravenswood Family Health Center Daisy Garcia, Associate, Disaster Preparedness and Project Management Regional Water Quality Control Board Ava Castanha, Regulator, Environmental Innovation Center Regional Water Quality Control Board Celina Hernandez, Regulator, Fire Training Regional Water Quality Control Board Alyx Karpowicz, Regulator, Roberts and Story Road Landfills Regional Water Quality Control Board Vic Pal, Regulator, Singleton Landfill Rotating Safe Car Park Norman Puck, Program Director San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority Margaret Bruce, Executive Director San José Water John Tang, Vice President, Regulatory Affairs and Government Relations Santa Clara County CERT President Santa Clara County FireSafe Council Seth Schalet, Chief Executive Officer Santa Clara County FireSafe Council Amanda Brenner, Program Director, Hazardous Fuel Reduction Santa Clara County FireSafe Council Dede Smullen, 2nd Vice President Santa Clara County Local Oversight Program Gerald O’Regan, Regulator for Fire Training Santa Clara County Local Oversight Program Joe Muzzio, Regulator for Fire Station at 1138 Olinder Road Santa Clara County Local Oversight Program Shalom Marquardt, Regulator for Fire Station 8 95 PSC 09-12-2024 95 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 16 Agency or Organization Point of Contact Santa Clara County Parks Don Rocha, Director Santa Clara County Planning & Development Samuel Gutierrez, Principal Planner Santa Clara County Planning & Development Michael Alvarez, Deputy Director Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office Neil Valenzuela, Commander, West Valley Patrol Division Santa Clara University Tyler Masamori, Emergency Planning Manager Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority Derek Newman, Manager, Field Operations Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority Megan Robinson, Supervising Open Space Technician Santa Cruz County David Reid, Director, Office of Emergency Management Saratoga Amateur Radio Association Jack Griswold, President Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council Tylor Taylor, Executive Director Saratoga CERT Charles Rader, Volunteer Lead Saratoga Fire Protection District Commissioner Joseph Long Jr. Saratoga Fire Protection District Commissioner Ernest Kraule Saratoga Fire Protection District Commissioner Eugene Zambetti Saratoga Fire Protection District Trina Whitley, Business Manager Saratoga Retirement Community Sarah Stel, Executive Director Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority (SVACA) Heidi Springer, Executive Assistant Silicon Valley Clean Energy Girish Balachandran, Executive Director San José Fire Department, San José Mineta International Airport Brendan Buller, Battalion Chief San José Police Department, San José Mineta International Airport Jason Pierce, Lieutenant Spring Valley Volunteer Fire Department Mike Hacke, Chief St. Louise Hospital (Santa Clara County Hospital System) Geoff Tull, Emergency Management Coordinator Stanford Healthcare Kathy Harris, Emergency Manager Stanford Healthcare Laura Jackson, Senior Manager, Office of Emergency Management Stanford Healthcare Monica Plumb, Project Coordinator, Office of Emergency Management Stanford Healthcare Taylor Wyatt, Project Coordinator, Office of Emergency Management Stanford University Cody Hill, Associate Director, Stanford Resiliency and Emergency Response Stanford University Board of Trustees Staff, Board of Trustees Office Stanford University Office of Emergency Management Keith Perry, Assistant Director and Emergency Manager Stanford University, IT Facilities, Infrastructure, and Resilience Matthew Ricks, Senior Director 96 PSC 09-12-2024 96 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 17 Agency or Organization Point of Contact Stanford University, Water Resources and Civil Infrastructure Tom Zigterman, Senior Director Stanford University/Real Estate Mark Smith, Manager Stanford University/Real Estate Ramsey Shuayto, Director, Asset Management The Villas Scott Clawson, Manager Valley Water Flood Information Team Greg Meamber, Senior Engineer Vista Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired Karae Lisle, Chief Executive Officer West Valley Clean Water Program Authority Sheila Tucker, Executive Director West Valley College Stephanie Kashima, President West Valley Sanitation District Jon Newby, District Manager Westwind Barn Tori Dye, Barn Manager 4.4 Establishment of the Planning Partnership Santa Clara County OEM opened this planning effort to all eligible local governments and special districts within the OA. Each jurisdiction or special district wishing to join the planning partnership was asked to provide a “letter of intent to participate” that designated a point of contact and confirmed the organization’s commitment to the process and understanding of expectations. All planning partners provided this letter of intent. The planning partners covered under this plan are listed below. Table 4: Planning Partner Main Points of Contact Planning Partner Main Point of Contact County of Santa Clara Dr. Parastou Najaf, Senior Emergency Manager – Mitigation/Recovery, Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Management City of Campbell Dan Livingston, Captain of Support Services Division, Police Department City of Cupertino Meredith Gerhardt, Emergency Management Analyst, Office of Emergency Management City of Gilroy Andrew Young, Emergency Services and Volunteer Coordinator, Office of Emergency Services City of Los Altos Kathryn Krauss, Captain of Operations, Police Department Town of Los Altos Hills Ann Hepenstal, Emergency Preparedness Consultant, Town of Los Altos Hills Town of Los Gatos Nicolle Burnham, Director, Parks and Public Works Department City of Milpitas Toni-Lynn Charlop, Manager, Office of Emergency Services City of Morgan Hill Jennifer Ponce, Coordinator, Office of Emergency Services City of Mountain View Robert Maitland, Emergency Services Coordinator, Office of Emergency Services City of Palo Alto Nathaniel Rainey, Emergency Services Coordinator, Office of Emergency Services 97 PSC 09-12-2024 97 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 18 Planning Partner Main Point of Contact City of San José Jay McAmis, Deputy Director, Office of Emergency Management City of Santa Clara Jennifer Guzman, Emergency Management Analyst, Office of Emergency Services City of Saratoga Crystal Bothelio, Assistant City Manager, City Manager’s Department City of Sunnyvale Daniel Moskowitz, Lieutenant, Office of Emergency Services, Department of Public Safety Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Brandon Stewart, Land and Facilities Department Manager, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District Santa Clara County Fire Department Louay Toma, Senior Emergency Manager, Santa Clara County Fire Department Santa Clara Valley Water District Juan Ledesma, Program Administrator Supervisor, Office of Emergency Services One-on-one planning meetings were held with planning partners throughout the planning process . A total of 43 individual meetings were held with plan participants to gather information and to provide guidance for the jurisdictions and special districts throughout the planning stages. Each meeting is described in Table 5. Table 5: One-on-One Meetings with Planning Partners Planning Partner Date Discussion Topic(s) City of Campbell February 13, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment May 15, 2023  Planning documentation review City of Cupertino February 6, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment April 20, 2023  Mitigation strategy City of Gilroy February 14, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment City of Los Altos February 14, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment April 27, 2023  Capabilities assessment  Mitigation strategy May 9, 2023  Planning documentation review City of Milpitas March 17, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment  Risk assessment May 1, 2023  Risk assessment  Mitigation strategy City of Morgan Hill February 14, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment 98 PSC 09-12-2024 98 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 19 Planning Partner Date Discussion Topic(s) City of Mountain View January 31, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment March 15, 2023  Risk assessment April 13, 2023  Mitigation action items May 1, 2023  Mitigation strategy City of Palo Alto February 7, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment  Planning process timeline City of Santa Clara February 8, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment  Planning process timeline March 16, 2023  Risk assessment with local planning team March 17, 2023  Risk assessment with water and sewer team March 26, 2023  Mitigation strategy May 10, 2023  Planning documentation review City of San José February 13, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment April 27, 2023  Capabilities assessment  Mitigation strategy May 16, 2023  Planning documentation review City of Saratoga February 9, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment March 14, 2023  Risk assessment City of Sunnyvale January 26, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment March 3, 2023  Risk assessment April 7, 2023  Risk assessment  Mitigation strategy Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District March 6, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment  Risk assessment  Planning process timeline Santa Clara County and Santa Clara County Fire Department* February 10, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment March 2, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment March 8, 2023  Capabilities assessment  Risk assessment March 28, 2023  Capabilities assessment  Risk assessment  Mitigation strategy 99 PSC 09-12-2024 99 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 20 Planning Partner Date Discussion Topic(s) Santa Clara Valley Water District January 23, 2023  Annex layout and contents  Community Rating System February 21, 2023  Community Rating System March 13, 2023  Community Rating System April 21, 2023  Mitigation strategy  GIS and mapping Town of Los Altos Hills March 17, 2023  Risk assessment April 25, 2023  Risk assessment  Mitigation strategy June 20, 2023  Annex draft review Town of Los Gatos February 13, 2023  Planning process contacts  Capabilities assessment April 27, 2023  Capabilities assessment  Mitigation strategy *Santa Clara County and Santa Clara County Fire Department held meeting together due to shared staff and resources. Figure 1: Planning Partners Meeting 100 PSC 09-12-2024 100 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 21 Figure 2: Planning Partners Mitigation Strategy Meeting 4.5 Defining the Planning Area The defined planning area for this update has been defined as the Santa Clara County Operational Area (OA). The OA is defined as the unincorporated county and incorporated cities within the geographical boundary of Santa Clara County. Relevant OA characteristics are described in Section 5. The City of Monte Sereno did not actively participate in this MJHMP and does not have a planning partner annex; however, information and data related to the city are included throughout the plan as appropriate and relevant. 4.6 Review of Existing Programs Hazard mitigation planning must include review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information (44 CFR, Section 201.6(b)(3)). Section 5.9 of this plan provides a review of laws and ordinances in effect within the OA that can affect hazard mitigation actions. In addition, the following programs can affect mitigation within the OA:  California Fire Code.  2016 California Building Code.  California State Hazard Mitigation Forum.  Local Capital Improvement Programs.  Local Emergency Operations Plan.  Local General Plans.  Housing Element.  Safety Element (prior and 2023 draft components).  Community Wildfire Protection Plan (2016 version and components of the 2023 draft).  Local Zoning Ordinances. 101 PSC 09-12-2024 101 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 22  Local Coastal Program Policies. An assessment of all planning partners’ regulatory, technical, and financial capabilities to implement hazard mitigation actions is presented in the individual planning partner-specific annexes in Volume 2. Many of these relevant plans, studies and regulations are cited in the capability assessment. 4.7 Public Involvement Broad public participation in the planning process helps ensure that diverse points of view about the OA’s needs are considered and addressed. Additionally, the plan must document how the public had an opportunity to be involved in the planning process, including underserved communities and vulnerable populations within the planning area were provided an opportunity to be involved. The public must have opportunities to comment on disaster mitigation plans during the drafting stages and prior to plan approval (44 CFR, Section 201.6(b)(1)). 4.7.1 Strategy The planning team developed a robust public outreach process within the very short project timeline, attempting to reach as many Santa Clara County community members and stakeholders as possible through the following activities:  Development of a public outreach plan approved by the Core Planning Team .  Partner with planners updating the Safety Element and Community Wildfire Protection Plan planning processes to expand public outreach efforts.  Attendance at advertised public outreach events and virtual meetings with live interaction.  Development and advertisement of a public survey posted on the SCCOEM’s webpage to collect pertinent information from residents and the business community.  Publication of the survey in Santa Clara County’s most spoken languages: English, Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog, and Vietnamese.  Use of social media, such as Nextdoor, Facebook, and Twitter to publicize the survey. Stakeholder Outreach Stakeholders are the individuals, departments, agencies, and jurisdictions that have a vested interest in the recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan. The effort to include stakeholders in this process included stakeholder participation on the Steering Committee. The following federal, state, regional, and local stakeholders also played a role in the planning process:  FEMA Region IX provided planning guidance throughout the planning process.  The California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) provided planning guidance throughout the planning process. Cal OES also reviewed the draft and final version of the MJHMP as part of the hazard mitigation planning process required by DMA.  Many local external stakeholders, including state agencies, local agencies, universities, and non - profit organizations, were given the opportunity to review the draft plan and provide input. A list of these stakeholders is included in Table 3. The strategy to involve the public and external stakeholders in this plan include the following:  Utilize a survey to determine if the public ’s perception of risk and support of hazard mitigation has changed since the initial planning process. 102 PSC 09-12-2024 102 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 23  Utilize social media and local media to share information about the MJHMP process and inform OA citizens about opportunities to participate.  Identify and involve a comprehensive range of OA stakeholders.  Partner with planners updating both the Safety Element and the Community Wildfire Protection Plan to expand public outreach efforts. Public Survey The planning team relied on the community survey (available in English, Spanish, Tagalog, Chinese, and Vietnamese) as the primary method for gathering information and feedback from the public. The secondary method was multiple in-person combined planning meetings which participants were introduced to hazard mitigation and invited to take the survey. The survey was approved by the Core Planning Team and was available to complete via the Santa Clara County Office of Emergency Management’s website. Flyers were also posted around the County and on participating jurisdiction’s official websites and social media pages. Figure 3: Picture of Public Survey Announcement 103 PSC 09-12-2024 103 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 24 Figure 4: Public Survey Media Announcement The survey included 35 questions to:  Gauge the public’s perception of risk and identify what citizens are concerned about;  Identify the best ways to communicate with the public;  Determine the level of public support for the different mitigation strategies; and  Understand the public’s willingness to invest in hazard mitigation. Social Media At the beginning of the plan development process, a website hosted on the Santa Clara County OE M main website was utilized to keep the public posted on plan development milestones and to solicit relevant input. The website was publicized in all press releases and public meetings. Information on the plan development process, the survey, and phased drafts of the plan was made available to the public on the site throughout the process. Santa Clara County OEM intends to keep a website active after the plan’s completion to keep the public informed about successful mitigation projects and future plan updates. The website can be accessed at this link: https://emergencymanagement.sccgov.org/multi- jurisdictional-hazard-mitigation-plan-mjhmp. Many of the participating local jurisdictions also promoted the website on social media and used social media platforms to share public meeting information, notice of the public survey, and notice of the public comment period. Valley Water, for example, posted to Twitter five times and Facebook 4 times as part of a multi-prong strategy. An example of the social media outreach is provided below. 104 PSC 09-12-2024 104 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 25 Figure 5: City of Campbell Social Media Outreach Local Media and Press Releases The Planning Team conducted a wide range of outreach activities in local media. The County developed three key messages to highlight the significance of the Public Survey Period: 1. Announcement of the Public Survey Period: Informing the community about the survey’s availability. 2. Planning for the Future: Emphasizing the importance of proactive hazard mitigation planning. 3. Your Participation Matters: Encouraging community members to participate and contribute to the planning process by taking the survey. During the Public Survey Period for the MJHMP, Santa Clara County disseminated one press release to the various media outlets and utilized a specific media monitoring service to report media coverage for the MJHMP. Unfortunately, despite the County ’s best efforts, no major media outlets covered the event. However, Sing Tao Dailey, a prominent Chinese media outlet, published the information on their website on April 17, 2023. This media outlet boasts a wide-reaching presence across the United States, maintaining offices in major markets which includes New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco. The press release was also published to the Office of Emergency Management’s website as part of the Newsroom page. Valley Water also reached out to communities via local media, including Chinese News, El Observador, Murcury News, Metro, Nextdoor, and Vietnam Daily. 105 PSC 09-12-2024 105 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 26 Information was posted to the County’s social media sites including Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, as well as the Department of Planning and Development’s website and the County’s main website during the public survey period. To amplify public messaging, the County encouraged key stakeholders, including the Operational Area Joint Information System, the Access and Functional Needs & Cultural Competency Work Group, and the Operational Area Emergency Managers to amplify messagin g with their served community members. To simplify access to the survey and increase participation, the County established a user -friendly vanity URL. This URL received significant traction, directing 74% of community members to the Hazard Mitigation Webpage, resulting in 880-page views and 767 visits. Additionally, 81% of users who accessed the Hazard Mitigation Page were successfully redirected to the actual survey page. The Hazard Mitigation page was the second most popular site for the period. The strategic use of local communication channels successfully enhanced community engagement, ensuring a more robust Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Joint MJHMP Outreach Plan integration was considered throughout the development of a public outreach approach for this plan update. As the Safety Element was being updated at the same time as the Santa Clara County Operational Area HMP, the Core Planning Team members coordinated to include hazard mitigation planning components during outreach for the Safety Element. At this meeting, me mbers of the public were presented with interactive boards and polling questions to gauge their hazard concerns, personal preparedness measures, public outreach and education needs, and support for common infrastructure enhancements. The Hazard Mitigation Plan update was discussed, and the public was provided with information on hazard mitigation and hazard mitigation planning including a link to the public survey. This meeting was conducted at the Campbell Community Center, targeting vulnerable populations in the City of San Jose and central Santa Clara valley. The county geographically designed this approach to ensure that those residence who could not travel to the South County community outreach event in Gilroy (mentioned below) still had an opportunity to have their voices heard. Valley Water had staff representation in the audience to respond to and capture inquiries pertaining to Valley Water’s jurisdictions. More than 40 residents from across the county, including vulnerable pockets in the City of San Jose and the Santa Cruz mountain range, interacted and worked with the MJHMP to voice their concerns. In determining which vulnerable communities to target for outreach, planning partners referenced the California Hazard Exposure and Social Vulnerability map, Figure 6 below. Two underserved or socially vulnerable communities were identified according to their estimated hazard exposure and social vulnerability. The largest area in San Jose is east of Highway 87 and a much smaller area is in South Santa Clara County, specifically the City of Gilroy. In addition, by using the CalEMA GIS dashboard, these two areas are also recognized for having a median household income of less than 80% of the statewide average and for having significant earthquake ground shaking potential. 106 PSC 09-12-2024 106 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 27 Figure 6: Hazard Exposure and Social Vulnerability Map for Santa Clara Valley The County also actively facilitated meetings and coordinated outreach between the team working on the HMP and the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). Like the HMP, the CWPP includes recommendations for mitigation measures across the OA. It also includes annexes for the many of the same planning partners which highlight their unique wildfire history and considerations. These similarities presented a valuable opportunity for the two teams to solicit input from the public together. Four joint in- person Public Outreach meetings were conducted in remote, access and functional needs (AFN) areas of the incorporated County as well as an in-person meeting in the Gilroy/South County area where there are pre-identified vulnerable populations. All were welcome to attend. For those that could not make it in person, an additional online outreach meeting was held. Draft Plan Final Public Comment Period A public comment period was conducted to allow the public to provide feedback on the proposed draft of the plan prior to submittal to Cal OES for pre-adoption review and approval. This public comment period ran for 14 days from July 14 to July 28, 2023. The draft plan was shared by participating jurisdictions via their social media sites and emails to external stakeholders. The posted plan was accompanied by a narrative explaining to the public the purpose and content of the plan and was available to view on the County’s website. The Planning Team received 17 comments from the public during the comment period. These comments were reviewed by the Planning Team and incorporated in the plan as appropriate. 4.7.2 Public Involvement Results Survey Results The survey received 588 responses. There were 576 responses to the English survey, 10 responses to the Chinese survey, and 2 responses to the Spanish survey. The use of multi-lingual outreach material proved to be valuable in providing the opportunity for more participation and in receiving a 107 PSC 09-12-2024 107 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 28 broader range of feedback. The results of the survey were presented to the planning partners and will be used in all future decisions making regarding mitigation, risks, and hazards. The survey results regarding respondent’s concern for hazards are summarized in Appendix A of this volume. Public Outreach Events As mentioned, many joint planning efforts occurred between the Santa Clara County MJHMP, Safety Element, and Community Wildfire Protection Plan. This is the first time in Santa Clara County history that this kind of planning effort and coordination has occurred. There were several public meetings for each planning initiative, and each meeting included presentations about the Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. By engaging the public both virtually and in person, the concept of mitigation was widely shared, and the public was provided the opportunity to review the draft plan. Participants at each meeting were encouraged to participate via the public survey. Table 6 summarizes each public outreach meeting that occurred across the OA. Recordings of each meeting can be found at https://sccfiresafe.org/cwpp/ Figure 7: Public and Stakeholder Meeting with 99 Participants 108 PSC 09-12-2024 108 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 29 Figure 8: Public and Stakeholder Meeting with 104 Participants Table 6: Summary of Public Outreach Date Summary of Outreach November 10, 2022 MJHMP presentation and invitation for public comment and feedback at the joint Safety Element Virtual Town Hall (virtual) December 6, 2022 MJHMP presentation and invitation for public comment and feedback at the joint CWPP Community Outreach Meeting Campbell (in-person)  59 fliers distributed, 24 individual risk assessments conducted, 75+ contacts made regarding the plan December 7, 2022 MJHMP presentation and invitation for public comment and feedback at the joint CWPP Community Outreach Meeting San Jose (in-person) December 13, 2022 MJHMP presentation and invitation for public comment and feedback at the joint CWPP Community Outreach Meeting Milpitas (in-person) December 15, 2022 MJHMP presentation and invitation for public comment and feedback at the joint CWPP Community Outreach Meeting Morgan Hill (in-person) December 15, 2022 MJHMP presentation and invitation for public comment and feedback at the joint Safety Element CARAS South County Community Listening Meeting (in-person) March 15, 2023 MJHMP presentation and invitation for public comment and feedback at the joint Safety Element Listening Session June 14-28, 2023 Draft MJHMP published online and a public comment period was in place for two weeks. Comments were considered and implemented where applicable. 109 PSC 09-12-2024 109 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 30 Draft MJHMP Public Comment Period During the development of the MJHMP, the public had the opportunity to review the Draft and make final comments. Every participating jurisdiction advertised this public comment period by using multiple online resources, including official social media accounts, websites, and online newsletters. These comments were taken into consideration and implemented where applicable. Figure 9: Samples of Public Comment Period Advertisements Public Representation In addition to directly providing the public the opportunity to comment on the plan, the Santa Clara County Access and Functional Needs and Cultural Competency Working Group which represents tens of community and faith-based organizations within the SCC operational area were consulted on the plan and were able to provide feedback based on the populations they serve. Approximately 100 non-profits and VOAD members participate in the AFN and Cultural Competency Working Group. SCC also has representation from community centers and two consulate generals. In addition, there are also advocates who do not have an affiliation but are Santa Clara County residents and provide input on LGBTQ+ and Disability topics. Some of the organizations include but are not limited to San Andreas Regional Center, Immigrant Info Services, Vista Center for the Blind, American Red Cross, Parents Helping Parents, Lighthouse. In general, the direct interaction and represented voices shared similar sentiments in concern for specifically the extreme heat and wildfire hazard, community preparedness, and education and outreach activities. Therefore, prioritization of the wildfire hazard, and the corresponding mitigation actions, along with high attention to public outreach and education efforts informed the many such related mitigation actions in the plan. 110 PSC 09-12-2024 110 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 31 4.8 Plan Development Chronology and Milestones Table 7 summarizes important milestones in the plan update process. Table 7: Plan Development Chronology and Milestones Date Event Description December 8, 2022 Initial meeting with Core Planning Team  Planning groups  IEM project staff  Project phases  Proposed workshop schedule  Administration and logistics December 14, 2022 Kick off meeting with planning partners  Introductions  IEM project staff  Planning groups  Mitigation overview  Mitigation planning benefits  Intent of plan update  Plan participants  Hazards covered  Updated FEMA requirements  Planning expectations  Project phases  County planning efforts underway  Plan integration opportunities  Stakeholder identification  Use of SharePoint January 18, 2023 Community Capabilities Review Workshop with planning partners  Planning groups  Planning process contacts ▪ Local planning teams ▪ Internal stakeholders ▪ External stakeholders  Capabilities assessment  National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)  Use of SharePoint February 15, 2023 Risk Assessment Workshop with planning partners  Project phases  Public outreach and documentation  Hazus  GIS  Community Rating System (CRS)  Risk assessment  Planning documents  Risk ranking March 15, 2023 Stakeholder Engagement Workshop #1  Workshop goals  Hazard mitigation planning ▪ Overview 111 PSC 09-12-2024 111 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 4: Plan Update Approach 32 Date Event Description ▪ Planning process  Project phases  Mitigation action items  Feedback on data sources April 3, 2023 Stakeholder Engagement Workshop #2  Workshop goals  Multijurisdictional hazard mitigation plan recap  Mitigation strategy  Mitigation action items  Funding sources  Mitigation integration April 3, 2023 Mitigation Strategy Workshop with planning partners  Mitigation strategy  Mitigation projects working group  2017 mitigation strategy  Review of 2017 actions  New action items  Mitigation incorporation April 4, 2023 Public survey published on County of Santa Clara Office of Emergency Management website Thirty-five question survey published at https://emergencymanagement.sccgov.org/pa rtners/hazard-mitigation-program April 18, 2023 Mitigation Strategy Working Group Meeting  Working group expectations  Review of 2017 MHMP goals and objectives  Review of 2017 MHMP projects  Discussion of the current gaps in identifying projects and accessing funding May 19, 2023 Public survey closed Total of 588 responses received: 576 in English, 10 in Chinese, and 2 in Spanish. June 2, 2023 Planning process wrap up meeting with planning partners  Public survey results summary  Implementation  Monitoring and evaluation  Maintenance  Adoption  Draft review  Draft plan publicity for public and stakeholders July 13, 2023 Draft plan published on County of Santa Clara Office of Emergency Management website for public and stakeholder review Public comment period was open for two weeks to give the public a chance to review the Draft and make comments. September 25, 2023 Plan submittal to Cal OES Final draft plan submitted to Cal OES for review and approval. January 16, 2024 Plan submittal to FEMA Final draft plan submitted to FEMA for review and approval. Plan Approvable Pending Adoption (APA) by FEMA. FEMA to provide APA Letter once they approve the final draft plan. February 8, 2024 First planning partner adopts approved plan. All participants must formally adopt the plan. The five-year lifecycle begins with the first adoption. 112 PSC 09-12-2024 112 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 33 5 Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 5.1 Geographic Overview The Santa Clara County Operational Area is in north-central California in the southern portion of the San Francisco Bay area (see Figure 9). With its numerous natural amenities and one of the highest standards of living in the country, the OA has long been considered one of the best areas in the United States in which to live and work. The county is also referred to as “Silicon Valley.” The Santa Clara County OA has a total area of 1,312 square miles. With a diverse population of more than 1.9 million residents,6F6F 7 it is one of the largest counties in the state and encompasses 15 incorporated cities. San José is the largest city, with just over 1 million people,7F7F 8 followed by Sunnyvale and Santa Clara; the west valley bedroom communities of Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, and Saratoga; the high-tech communities of Campbell, Cupertino, Mountain View, and Palo Alto; industrial Milpitas, and the south county suburban expansion/rural interface areas of Gilroy, Morgan Hill, and their surrounding unincorporated areas. A significant portion of the county ’s land area is unincorporated ranch and farmland. The OA has a rich culture of ethnic diversity, artistic endeavors, sports venues, and academic institutions. Numerous public and private golf courses are located throughout the OA and Santa Clara County operates 28 parks covering more than 50,000 acres, in cluding lakes, streams, and miles of hiking and biking trails. The OA is home to three major universities—Stanford University, Santa Clara University, and San José State University—as well as several community colleges. 5.2 Historical Overview The early inhabitants of the area now known as Santa Clara County were the indigenous Ohlone people, thought to occupy the area at least 1,000 years before Spain began to colonize California in the 18 th century. Spanish settlers established the Santa Clara Valley’s first mission and pueblo in Santa Clara and San José, respectively, and governed “El Llano de Los Robles” (Plain of the Oaks), until the Mexican Revolution led to Mexican control from the 1820s through 1840s. In 1850, California was admitted into the United States, and Santa Clara County was incorporated as one of the state ’s original 27 counties. Deriving its name from Mission Santa Clara, the county originally included much of what was Washington Township (part of Union City and Fremont) in what is now Alameda County. The current county boundaries were set in 1853 when Alameda County was established. From 1850 to 1870, ranchers made a transition from raising cattle and sheep to cultivating hay and grain. French immigrants planted the first vineyards. Mercury mining flourished. California’s first colleges were founded in Santa Clara County and the coming of the railroad produced a small boom in real estate. 7 United States Census Bureau. (2020). Quick Facts: Santa Clara County. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/santaclaracountycalifornia 8 United States Census Bureau. (2020). Quick Facts: San José City. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/sanjosecitycalifornia,santaclaracountycalifornia/PST045222 113 PSC 09-12-2024 113 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 34 Figure 10: Santa Clara County Operational Area (Planning Area) After 1870, orchards began displacing grain fields and vineyards. The Santa Clara Valley became the world’s leading producer of canned fruit and processed dried fruit. By the end of the 19 th century, wealthy San Franciscans, such as Leland Stanford and James Lick, established farms and summer homes in the county. Santa Clara County remained pastoral until World War II, when many people gravitated to California to work in war-related industries. To accommodate the growing population, mass-produced housing spread across the Santa Clara Valley, and agricultural land w as subdivided and developed for housing. Like much of the rest of the United States in the decades immediately following the war, development in the county shifted from largely agricultural to largely suburban. 114 PSC 09-12-2024 114 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 35 At the same time, technology companies began to flourish in Santa Clara County, with significant support and encouragement from Stanford University. The Stanford Industrial Park, established in 1951, later became the Stanford Research Park and provided space for companies such as Hewlett-Packard, Eastman Kodak, General Electric, and Lockheed. Related companies began to form around the region, and by the 1970s Santa Clara County and surrounding areas became known as a center of high- technology development. The term Silicon Valley was coined in 1971, referring to the high concentration of companies in the area that are involved in making silicon semiconductors and the computers that rely on them. Technology industries remain central to the area’s economy to this day. 5.3 Major Past Hazard Events Presidential disaster declarations are typically issued for hazard events that cause more damage than state and local governments can handle without assistance from the federal government. A presidential disaster declaration puts federal recovery programs into motion to help disaster victims, businesses, and public entities. Some of the programs are matched by state programs. Santa Clara County has experienced 20 events (14 major disaster declarations, three emergency declarations, two fire management assistance declarations, and one fire suppression declaration) since 1950 for which presidential disaster declarations were issued. These events are listed in Table 8. Table 8: Presidential Disaster Declarations8F8F 9 Type of Event FEMA Disaster Number* Date Severe Winter Storm DR-3592 03/10/2023 Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, Landslides, and Mudslides DR-4683 January 14, 2023 Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, and Mudslides EM-3591 January 9, 2023 Wildfires DR-4558 August 22, 2020 SCU Lightning Complex Fire DR-5338 August 21, 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic DR-4482 March 22, 2020 COVID-19 EM-3428 March 13, 2020 Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, and Mudslides DR-4308 April 1, 2017 Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, and Mudslides DR-4301 February 14, 2017 Summit Fire DR-2766 May 22, 2008 Wildfires DR-3287 06/28/2008 Croy Fire FS-2465 September 25, 2002 Severe Winter Storms and Flooding DR-1203 February 9, 1998 Severe Storms, Flooding, Mudslides, and Landslides DR-1155 January 4, 1997 Severe Winter Storms, Flooding Landslides, and Mud Flow DR-1046 March 12, 1995 Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, Landslides, and Mud Flows DR-1044 January 10, 1995 Severe Freeze DR-894 February 11, 1991 Loma Prieta Earthquake DR-845 October 18, 1989 Severe Storms and Flooding DR-758 February 21, 1986 Grass, Wildlands, and Forest Fires DR-739 July 18, 1985 9 Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2023). Declared Disasters. https://www.fema.gov/disaster/declarations 115 PSC 09-12-2024 115 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 36 Type of Event FEMA Disaster Number* Date Coastal Storms, Floods, Slides, and Tornadoes DR-677 February 9, 1983 Severe Storms, Flood, Mudslides, and High Tide DR-651 January 7, 1982 Drought EM-3023 January 20, 1977 * DR = Disaster Declaration; EM = Emergency Declaration; FM = Fire Management; FS = Fire Suppression Review of these events helps to identify targets for risk reduction and ways to increase a community ’s capability to avoid large-scale events in the future. Still, many natural hazard events do not trigger federal disaster protocol but have significant impacts on their communities. These events are also important to consider in establishing recurrence intervals for hazards of concern. Additional information about previous hazard events is included in Section 6 of this plan. 5.4 Physical Setting 5.4.1 Geology and Topography The OA’s topography is characterized by its location in the southern San Francisco Bay area. The Santa Clara Valley runs the entire length of the county from north to south, ringed by the rolling hills of the Diablo Range on the east, and the Santa Cruz Mountains on the west. Salt marshes and wetlands lie in the northwestern part of the county, adjacent to the waters of San Francisco Bay. 5.4.2 Soils Prior to 1950 and as far back as the late 1800s, Santa Clara Valley was the scene of a vibrant and productive agriculture industry. Many of the soils of the Santa Clara Valley are alluvial, deposited on fans or floodplains within the valley. The young, deep soils (Elder, Elpaloalto, Still, Stevens Creek, Landelspark, Botella, and Campbell) are naturally very fertile. Field crops were cultivated on the lower parts of the valley, and orchards spanned from the hills east of Milpitas and San José across the val ley to Los Altos and Palo Alto. With the introduction of the electric water pump in the early 20th century, irrigation water from the plentiful ground-water supply became readily available on farms, increasing productivity. The Santa Clara Valley became widely known for the production of high-quality orchard fruits, which were shipped across the United States. Dams were constructed on major streams to store irrigation water and control flooding. As groundwater was rapidly pumped from a depth of several hundred feet, subsurface materials compacted which led to land subsidence. Subsidence damaged pipes and other in-ground structures, and levees were required to block tidewater from entering subsided land. The benefit of this control of streams and pumping of groundwater was a valley relatively free from flooding and high groundwater, an ideal condition for the rapid urban expansion that followed. After World War II, urban growth in the San Francisco Bay area began to expand down to the south end of the bay and into the Santa Clara Valley. After 1950, the pace of development quickened, and subdivisions began to spring up. The first wave of development occurred on the soils along the El Camino Real corridor, where the alluvial fans were relatively level, with slopes of 2 percent or less. Development exploded in the 1960s and topsoil was moved to house lots from the street areas. This type of subdivision construction continued until about 1980, when more shaping of house lots to control drainage began. By 1980, home construction had started to slow because many of the level areas fit for construction were now already developed. 116 PSC 09-12-2024 116 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 37 After 1980, subdivision development moved up areas of alluvial fans and greater slopes, and lot-shaping became more common. After 1990, development moved into steep areas at the edge of the valley and the foothills. Soil disturbance can be severe in these areas, with more than 5 feet of cuts or fills. Fills may consist of materials from several feet below the soil surface, have a high content of clay or fragments, and be low in organic matter and fertility. Cut areas may have subsoil materials at the surface, which also may have a high content of clay or fragments and be low in organic matter and fertility. Many residents have modified the soil surface texture in garden areas with sandy materials and mulches. In areas of the basin soils (Hangerone, Clear Lake, and Embarcadero), clay surface and subsurfac e textures and slow internal drainage due to a high clay content are problems for gardens, ornamental plants, and lawns.9F9F 10 5.4.3 Climate Table 9 summarizes normal climate date from 1981 through 2022 at the National Climatic Data Center weather station at San José. The Mediterranean climate of the OA remains temperate year-round due to the area’s geography and its proximity to the Pacific Ocean. The area is warm and dry much of the year. Rarely is the humidity uncomfortable, and the thermometer seldom drops below freezing. Rain is generally limited to winter and snow to the tops of local mountains. Table 9: Normal Precipitation and Temperatures in the Operational Area, 1981–202210F10F 11 Months Mean Precipitation (inches) Minimum Temperature (°F) Maximum Temperature (°F) January 2.65 32 68 February 2.56 35 74 March 2.28 38 79 April 0.91 41 87 May 0.41 46 91 June 0.10 50 97 July 0.01 53 95 August 0.02 54 96 September 0.16 51 95 October 0.66 45 90 November 1.55 37 77 December 2.35 32 68 Annual 13.39 30 100 10 United States Department of Agriculture. (2015). Supplement to the Soil Survey of Santa Clara. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/conservation-basics/natural-resource-concerns/soil/soil-science 11 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (n.d.). Climate Data Online. https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/cdo-web/ 117 PSC 09-12-2024 117 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 38 5.5 Development Profile 5.5.1 Land Use Table 10 shows current land use for unincorporated Santa Clara County; complete land use data was not available for municipalities in the OA. Land use information is analyzed in this plan for each identified hazard that has a defined spatial extent and location. For hazards that lack this spatial reference, the information in the table serves as a baseline estimate of land use and exposure. The distribution of land uses for the unincorporated county will change over time. Table 10: Unincorporated County Land Use Type of Land Use Area (acres) Percentage of Total Area Agricultural 33,355.5 5.53 General / Institutional 5,381.3 0.89 Open Space 548,603.4 90.88 Low Density Residential 15,988.7 2.65 High Density Residential 68.6 0.01 Commercial 161.8 0.03 Industrial 85.0 0.01 Total 603,644.5 100.00 5.5.2 Critical Facilities, Infrastructure, and Assets Critical facilities and infrastructure are those that are essential to the health and welfare of the population. These features become especially important after a hazard event. Critical facilities typically include public safety stations, schools, department operation centers, and emergency operations centers. Critical infrastructure can include the roads and bridges that provide ingress and egress and allow emergency vehicles access to those in need, and the utilities that provide water, electricity, and communication services to the community. Critical facilities identified in this plan were selected, mapped, and included in geographic information system (GIS) databases based on information provided through the Working Group meetings, stakeholder information requests, and the 2018 State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. Although many facilities and assets of the Santa Clara County OA are important to the quality of life, this plan focuses on those whose loss would result in the greatest impacts on life and safety in the event of a natural hazard. As defined for this hazard mitigation plan update, critical facilities are: Structures or other improvements, public or private, that, because of function, size, service area, or uniqueness, have the potential to cause serious bodily harm, extensive property damage, or disruption of vital socioeconomic activities if it is destroyed or damaged or if its functionality is impaired. Critical facilities may include but are not limited to health and 118 PSC 09-12-2024 118 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 39 safety facilities, utilities, government facilities, hazardous materials facilities, or vital community economic facilities.11F11F 12 All critical facilities and infrastructure were analyzed in Hazus to help rank risk and identify mitigation actions. The risk assessment for each hazard qualitatively discusses critical facilities with regard to that hazard. Table 11 summarizes the general types of critical facilities and infrastructure by local jurisdiction. Figure 10 and Figure 11 show the locations of critical facilities and infrastructure in the OA. Due to the sensitivity of this information, a detailed list of facilities is not provided. The list is on file with Santa Clara County OEM. Table 11: Critical Facilities and Infrastructure in the Operational Area Jurisdiction Essential Facilities Transportation Utilities Hazardous Materials Community Assets Jurisdiction Campbell 21 23 0 6 7 93 Cupertino 26 26 2 5 16 95 Gilroy 25 34 2 7 13 118 Los Altos 22 8 0 0 11 73 Los Altos Hills 6 21 0 0 2 55 Los Gatos 20 35 0 1 6 79 Milpitas 32 66 1 60 19 178 Monte Sereno 1 1 0 0 1 5 Morgan Hill 22 14 1 8 10 69 Mountain View 37 52 1 20 29 174 Palo Alto 49 42 4 26 46 207 San José 370 498 18 135 191 1,479 Santa Clara (city) 53 63 9 103 36 295 Saratoga 18 32 0 0 11 70 Sunnyvale 40 49 3 51 27 232 Unincorporated County 38 187 17 4 48 327 Total 777 1151 58 426 473 3,549 12 Organization of American States. (n.d.). Critical Facilities Mapping. https://www.oas.org/dsd/publications/Unit/oea66e/ch07.htm 119 PSC 09-12-2024 119 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 40 Figure 11: Critical Facilities in the Operational Area 120 PSC 09-12-2024 120 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 41 Figure 12: Critical Infrastructure in the Operational Area 5.5.3 Future Trends in Development An understanding of population and development trends can assist in planning for future development and ensuring that appropriate mitigation, planning, and preparedness measures are in place to protect human health and community infrastructure. The DMA requires that communities consider land use trends, which can alter the need for, and priority of, mitigation options over time. Land use and development trends significantly affect exposure and vulnerability to various hazards. For example, significant development in a hazard area increases the building stock and population exposed to that hazard. New development that has occurred in the last five years within the OA and potential future development in the next five years, as identified by each jurisdiction, is addressed in the planning partner annexes located in Volume 2 of this plan. 121 PSC 09-12-2024 121 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 42 The municipal planning partners have adopted general plans that govern land use decision and policy making for their jurisdictions. Decisions on land use will be governed by these programs. This plan will work together with these programs to support wise land use in the future by providing vital information on the risk associated with natural hazards in the OA. Incorporating information from the hazard mitigation into the general plan as the plans are updated will ensure that future development will be esta blished with the benefits of the information on risk and vulnerability to natural hazards identified in this plan. 5.6 Demographics Some populations are at greater risk from hazard events because of decreased resources or physical abilities. Those who are older, for example, may be more likely to require additional assistance. Research has shown that people living near or below the poverty line, those who are older, women, children, those who are racial and/or ethnic minorities, renters, individuals with disabilities, and others with access and functional needs, may all experience more severe impacts from disasters than the general popu lation. These more vulnerable populations may vary from the general population in risk perception, living conditions, access to information before, during, and after a hazard event, capabilities during an event, and access to resources for post-disaster recovery. Indicators of vulnerability—such as disability, age, poverty, and minority race and ethnicity—often overlap spatially and often in the geographically most vulnerable locations. Detailed spatial analysis to locate areas where there are higher concentrations of more vulnerable community members helps to extend focused public outreach and education and resources to these most vulnerable residents. 5.6.1 Population Resident Population Information about population is a critical part of planning because it directly relates to land needs such as housing, industry, stores, public facilities and services, and transportation. The 2020 U.S. Census estimated the OA’s population at 1,936,259.12F12F 13 Population changes are useful socio-economic indicators. A growing population generally indicates a growing economy, while a decreasing population signifies economic decline. In this case, population estimates are assumed to be influenced by the COVID-19 pandemic, rising cost of living including housing, and decline in foreign immigration due to change in federal policy. Since 2011, California has experienced an increased number of people moving out of the State in a year than into it. The OA is no exception. Table 12 shows the population in the OA from 2000 to 2022 according to the California Finance Department. Table 12: Recent Population Data13F13F 14 Jurisdiction Population 2000 2005 2010 2015 2022 City of Campbell 38,138 37,406 39,349 41,986 42,833 13 United States Census Bureau. (2020). Quick Facts: Santa Clara County. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/santaclaracountycalifornia 14 State of California Department of Finance. (2021, December). E-2 California County Population Estimates and Components of Change by Year. https://dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/e-2-california-county-population- estimates-and-components-of-change-by- year/#:~:text=California%E2%80%99s%20population%20declined%20by%20173%2C000%20persons%20between %20July,estimates%20released%20today%20by%20the%20Department%20of%20Finance. 122 PSC 09-12-2024 122 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 43 Jurisdiction Population 2000 2005 2010 2015 2022 City of Cupertino 50,546 53,632 58,302 58,038 59,610 City of Gilroy 41,464 45,782 48,821 54,324 59,269 City of Los Altos 27,693 27,381 28,976 30,513 31,526 Town of Los Altos Hills 7,902 7,852 7,922 8,595 8,400 Town of Los Gatos 28,592 28,070 29,413 31,157 33,062 City of Milpitas 62,698 62,177 66,790 74,140 80,839 City of Monte Sereno 3,483 3,324 3,341 3,445 3,488 City of Morgan Hill 33,556 35,011 37,822 42,382 46,451 City of Mountain View 70,708 70,629 74,066 76,712 83,864 City of Palo Alto 58,598 60,723 64,403 67,331 67,473 City of San José 894,943 901,159 945,942 1,030,053 976,482 City of Santa Clara 102,361 107,058 116,468 121,580 130,127 City of Saratoga 29,843 29,630 29,926 30,060 30,667 City of Sunnyvale 131,760 131,853 140,081 146,629 156,234 Unincorporated County 100,300 96,547 90,020 87,029 84,458 Total 1,682,585 1,698,234 1,781,642 1,903,974 1,894,783 Daily Commuting Population According to the California Employment Development Department, Santa Clara County is the single largest commuter destination in Submarket C of the San Francisco Bay Area Economic Market, holding and/or importing 1,009,391 commuters daily.14F14F 15 This large commuter contingent has impacts on planning for the OA’s infrastructure and service needs, as well as on planning for hazard mitigation and emergency management. Commuters may be familiar with the area immediately surrounding their place of business or regular route to work but may be less familiar with the services and resources provided to the population during a disaster event. The U.S. Census estimates that over 66.8 percent of workers in the OA commute alone (by car, truck, or van) to work, and mean travel time to work is 24 minutes. The state average is 28 minutes.15F15F 16 5.6.2 Age Distribution As a group, the adults who are older are more apt to lack the physical and economic resources necessary for response and resiliency for hazard events and are more likely to suffer health -related consequences making recovery slower. They are more likely to be vision, hearing, and/or mobility impaired, and more likely to experience mental impairment or dementia. Additionally, adults who are older are more likely to live in assisted- living facilities where emergency preparedness occurs at the discretion of facility operators. These facilities are typically identified as “critical facilities” by emergency managers because 15 California Employment Development Department. (2020, August 28). WIOA Regional Planning Units. https://edd.ca.gov/siteassets/files/Jobs_and_Training/pubs/wsd20 -01.pdf 16 United States Census Bureau. (2020). Quick Facts: Santa Clara County; California. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/santaclaracountycalifornia,CA/LFE305221 123 PSC 09-12-2024 123 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 44 they require extra notice to implement evacuation. Residents who are older and living in their own homes may have more difficulty evacuating and could be stranded in dangerous situations. This population group is more likely to need special medical attention, which may not be readily available during natural disasters due to isolation caused by the event. Specific planning attention for the those who are older is an important consideration given the current trend of aging of the American population. Children under 18 are particularly vulnerable to disaster events as well because of their young age and dependence on others for basic necessities. Children often experience increased physical and health challenges as well as issues learning after a disaster event. Additionally, very young children may be vulnerable to injury or sickness; this added vulnerability can be worsened during a natural disaster because they may not understand the measures that need to be taken to protect themselves from hazards. The unique needs of children are important to factor into disaster response and recovery efforts as well as when calculating the benefit and costs of mitigation alternatives. 16F16F 17 The overall age distribution for the OA is illustrated in Figure 13. Based on U.S. Census 2021 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimate, the mean age in the OA is 48.2 compared to California ’s mean age of 37.6 years. Additionally, 14.5 percent of the OA’s population is 65 or older, compared to the state estimate of 15.2 percent. An estimated 21.2 percent of the OA population is 18 or younger, compared to the state estimate of 22.4 percent. Figure 13: Overall Age Distribution in the Operational Area17F17F 18 17 Society for Research in Child Development. (2020, August 13). Understanding the Impacts of Natural Disasters on Children. https://www.srcd.org/research/understanding-impacts-natural-disasters- children#:~:text=Every%20year%2C%20175%20million%20children%20globally%20are%20expected,communities% 20better%20prepare%20for%20and%20respond%20to%20disasters. 18 United States Census Bureau. (2021). American Community Survey, Age and Sex Santa Clara County, California. https://data.census.gov/table?q=Age+in+Santa+Clara+County+2021&tid=ACSST1Y2021.S0101 124 PSC 09-12-2024 124 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 45 5.6.3 Race, Ethnicity, and Language Research shows that racial and ethnic minorities are less likely to be involved in pre -disaster planning and experience higher mortality rates during a disaster event. Post -disaster recovery can be ineffective and is often characterized by cultural insensitivity. Since higher proportions of ethnic minorities live below the poverty line than the majority white population, poverty can compound vulnerability. According to the 2020 U.S. Census, the racial composition of the OA is predominantly Asian, at about 39 percent. The next most common race is White, at 32 percent. The racial distribution in the OA is shown below. The OA has a 40.3 percent foreign-born population. Other than English, the most commonly spoken languages in the OA are Chinese, Vietnamese, and Tagalog, followed by Spanish.18F18F 19 Figure 14: Race Distribution in the Operational Area19F19F 20 5.6.4 Education Understanding educational attainment of the population is important when developing appropriate outreach and educational materials. The U.S. Census estimates that 28 percent of the population OA 25 years and older has attained a bachelor’s degree, and 27 percent a graduate or professional degree. Seventy-six percent of the population has attended college for some period, and 10 percent have not achieved a high school or equivalent degree.20F20F 21 19 United States Census Bureau. (2020). Santa Clara County, California. https://data.census.gov/profile?g=050XX00US06085 20 United States Census Bureau. (2020). Santa Clara County, California. https://data.census.gov/profile?g=050XX00US06085 21 United States Census Bureau. (2020). Santa Clara County, California. https://data.census.gov/profile?g=050XX00US06085 125 PSC 09-12-2024 125 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 46 5.6.5 Individuals with Disabilities or with Access or Functional Needs The U.S. Census estimates that over 42 million non-institutionalized people with disabilities live in the U.S. Individuals with disabilities are more likely to have difficulty with resilience and responding to a hazard event than the general population.21F21F 22 Local government may be the first level of response to assist these individuals, and coordination of efforts to meet their access and functional needs is paramount to life safety efforts. It is important for emergency and incident managers to distinguish between functional and medical needs in order to plan for incidents that require evacuation and sheltering. Knowing the percentage of population with a disability will allow emergency management personnel and first responders to have personnel available who can provide services needed by those with access and functional needs. According to the U.S. Census 2021 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, 169,467, or 9 percent, of individuals have some form of disability in the OA.22F22F 23 5.6.6. Social Vulnerability The Social Vulnerability Index provides a visual representation of the potential negative effects on communities that natural hazards or other external stresses on human health. The index is based on 16 variables from the U.S. Census to indicate areas that may need additional support before, during or after disasters. These indices include measures of socioeconomic status, household characteristics, racial and ethnic minority status, and housing type and transportation. The overall social vulnerability for Santa Clara County is shown in Figure 14. A summary of the four categories of indices that contribute to the overall index is shown in Figure 15. The darker toned colors indicate areas with potentially higher vulnerability. 22 United States Census Bureau. (2020). United States. https://data.census.gov/profile/United_States?g=010XX00US 23 United States Census Bureau. (2020). Santa Clara County, California. https://data.census.gov/profile?g=050XX00US06085 126 PSC 09-12-2024 126 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 47 Figure 15: Santa Clara County Social Vulnerability Index 127 PSC 09-12-2024 127 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 48 Figure 16: Social Vulnerability Index Themes 128 PSC 09-12-2024 128 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 49 5.7 Economy 5.7.1 Income In the United States, individual households are expected to use private resources to prepare for, respond to and recover from disasters to some extent. This means economically disadvantaged households are automatically disadvantaged when confronting hazards. Additionally, those who are economically disadvantaged typically occupy more poorly built and inadequately maintained housing. Mobile or modular homes, for example, are more susceptible to damage in earthquakes and floods than other types of housing. In urban areas, those who are economically disadvantaged often live in older houses and apartment complexes, which are more likely to be made of un-reinforced masonry, a building type that is particularly susceptible to damage during earthquakes. Furthermore, those who are economically disadvantaged are less likely to have insurance to compensate for losses incurred from natural disasters. This means they may have a great deal to lose during an event and may be the least prepared to deal with potential losses. The events following Hurricane Katrina in 2005 illustrated that personal household economics significantly impact people’s decisions on evacuation. Individuals who cannot afford gas for their cars will likely decide not to evacuate. A living wage calculator developed at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology estimates the hourly living wage needed to support different types of families. The calculator takes into consideration basic needs such as health, housing, transportation, and other necessities and interprets the living wage as a geographically specific hourly rate required to acquire basic minimum necessities cost. Table 13 presents summary information from the living wage calculator for 2022. Each hourly rate is adjusted per each working adult. Table 13: Hourly Living Wage Calculation for Santa Clara County, California (2022)23F23F 24 Wage Level One Adult One Adult + Two Children Two Adults Two Adults + One Child Living Wage $26.86 $68.69 $38.42 $46.79 Poverty Wage $6.53 $11.07 $8.80 $11.07 Minimum Wage $15.50 $15.50 $15.50 $15.50 Based on 2022 U.S. Census Bureau estimates, the median household income in Santa Clara County was $141,562. It is estimated that about 16 percent of households receive an income between $100,000 and $149,999 per year and over 47 percent of household incomes are above $150,000 annually. About 9 percent of the households in the OA make less than $25,000 per year. The poverty threshold for a family of four in 2022 was $30,186; for a family of three, $22,892; for a family of two under 65 years, $19,597 and for unrelated individuals under 65 years, $15,225.24F24F 25 The 2015 living wage calculations cited in the 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan were notably different than the current estimates. For example, the living wage for one adult was $14.52 and $11.30 for two adults. When incomes do not match the cost-of-living increase, households may be forced to reduce household on nonessential items. Hazard mitigation measures, such as flood insurance and voluntary structural retrofitting, are not usually considered essential despite their demonstrated long-term cost effectiveness. 24 Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (2023). Living Wage Calculator, Santa Clara County. https://livingwage.mit.edu/counties/06085 25 United States Census Bureau. (2020). Santa Clara County, California. https://data.census.gov/profile?g=050XX00US06085 129 PSC 09-12-2024 129 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 50 5.8 Industry, Businesses, and Institutions The county’s economy is strongly based in the professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and waste management services industry, followed by educational services and health care and social assistance, manufacturing, and retail trade. Figure 16 shows the breakdown of industry types in the OA. Santa Clara County is part of one of the state’s busiest urbans areas. The OA benefits from a variety of business activity. Major businesses include Apple, Inc, Alphabet Inc. (Google), Netflix, Roku, Inc. Shockley Semiconductor Laboratory, eBay Inc., Cisco Systems Inc., Applied Materials Inc., Flextronics International, Intel Corp, Kaiser Permanente Medical Center, Liberty Tax Service, Lockheed Martin Space Systems, NASA, Phillips Lumileds Lighting Company, Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, and many others. Major educational and research institutions in the OA include Stanford University, San José State University, Santa Clara University, Mission College, De Anza College, Foothill College, West Valley College, Mission College, Evergreen Valley College, San José City College, and Gavilan College. Figure 17: Industry in Santa Clara County 5.8.1 Employment Trends and Occupations According to the Census Bureau, 66.6 percent of the Santa Clara County population 16 years and over is in the labor force. Management, business, science, and arts occupations make up 59 percent of jobs in the County. Other major occupations include sales and office (15 percent) and service (13 percent). Multiple major employers in California are located in Santa Clara County, including Apple, Cisco Systems, Advanced Micro Devices Inc, Amazon, Apple, Applied Materials Inc, California’s Great America, Cisco 130 PSC 09-12-2024 130 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 51 Systems, Intel Corp, Intuit, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Alphabet Inc. (Google), and Nvidia Corp., and Yahoo. The largest of these are Applied Materials Inc, Apple, Cisco Systems, Intel Inc, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Google, and Yahoo each with 10,000 or more employees. The others employ between 1,000- 4,999 employees.25F25F 26 Figure 18: Occupations in Santa Clara County The figure below compares the California and the Santa Clara County unemployment trends from 2017 to 2021. According to the State of California’s Employment Development Department, the Santa Clara County unemployment rate was trending downward prior to 2020 when it spiked upward, likely in part due to the COVID-19 pandemic. By 2021, the unemployment rates started to fall again. They continued to fal l below pre-pandemic estimates in 2022. Overall, Santa Clara County experienced less unemployment than the rest of the State throughout this time period.26F26F 27 26 United States Census Bureau. (2021). American Community Survey, Selected Economic Characteristics Santa Clara County, California. https://data.census.gov/table?q=employment+in+Santa+Clara+County,+California&tid=ACSDP1Y2021.DP03 27 State of California Employment Development Department. (2023). Economic Development Data Library. https://data.edd.ca.gov/ 131 PSC 09-12-2024 131 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 52 Figure 19: California and Santa Clara County Unemployment Rate27F27F 28 5.9 Laws and Ordinances Existing laws, ordinances, and plans at the federal, state, and local level can support or impact hazard mitigation actions identified in this plan. Hazard mitigation plans are required to include a review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information as part of the planning process (44 CFR, Section 201.6(b)(3)). The following federal and state programs have been identified as programs that may interface with the actions identified in this plan. Each progr am enhances capabilities to implement mitigation actions or has a nexus with a mitigation action in this plan. Information presented in this section can be used in addition to local capabilities to implement the actions found in the jurisdictional and special district annexes of Volume 2 of this plan. Each planning partner has individually reviewed existing local plans, studies, reports, and technical information in its jurisdictional or special district annexes, presented in Volume 2 of this plan. 5.9.1 Federal Stafford Act The Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (“Stafford Act”) is the statutory authority for most Federal disaster response activities for FEMA and FEMA programs. The Stafford Act initially provided limited resources mitigation and pre-disaster community resilience. It did include the Pres- Disaster Hazard Mitigation (PDM) program however, funding was often ad hoc and historically much less than traditional disaster spending. Subsequent legislation has since amended the Stafford Act, opening the doors to additional mitigation opportunity. 28 State of California Employment Development Department. (2023). Economic Development Data Library. https://data.edd.ca.gov/ 132 PSC 09-12-2024 132 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 53 Disaster Mitigation Act The DMA is the current federal legislation addressing hazard mitigation planning. It emphasizes planning for disasters before they occur. It specifically addresses planning at the local level, requiring plans to be in place before certain hazard mitigation funds are available to communities. This plan is designed to meet the requirements of DMA, improving eligibility for future hazard mitigation funds. Disaster Recovery Reform Act The Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 amended the Stafford Act and provided 56 provisions for FEMA policy or regulation changes. Crucially, the Act set aside 6 percent of the total aid amount awarded in the previous year for pre-disaster mitigation. FEMA estimates this mean $300-500 million dollars will be available for mitigation annually.28F28F 29 This creates a much more consistent, reliable stream of pre-disaster mitigation dollars than ever seen before. Additionally, the Act expanded language for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) to include an increased focused on resilience and reducin g future damage in the post-disaster environment which may encourage proactive mitigation measures. It also provided states, tribes, and local jurisdictions with additional authority to use FEMA funding to rebuild to the latest building codes to reduce future risk to the Nation. National Environmental Policy Act The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to consider the environmental impacts of proposal actions and reasonable alternatives to those actions, alongside technical and economic considerations. NEPA established the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), whose regulations (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508) set standards for NEPA compliance. Consideration and decision- making regarding environmental impacts must be documented in an environmental impact statement or environmental assessment. Environmental impact assessment requires the evaluation of reasonable alternatives to a proposed action, solicitation of input from organizations and individuals that could be affected, and an unbiased presentation of direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts. FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable federal acts. Any action identified in this plan that falls within the scope of this act will need to meet its requirements. Endangered Species Act The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) was enacted in 1973 to conserve species facing depletion or extinction and the ecosystems that support them. The act sets forth a process for determining which species are threatened and endangered and requires the conservation of the critical habitat in which those species live. The ESA provides broad protection for species of fish, wildlife and plants that are listed as threatened or endangered. Provisions are made for listing species, as well as for recovery plans and the designation of critical habitat for listed species. The ESA outlines procedures for federal agencies to follow when taking actions that may jeopardize listed species and contains exceptions and exemptions. It is the enabling legislation for the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. Criminal and civil penalties are provided for violations of the ESA and the Convention. 29 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). (2020). Hazard Mitigation Assistance. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/homesec/IN11187.pdf 133 PSC 09-12-2024 133 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 54 Federal agencies must seek to conserve endangered and threatened species and use their authorities in furtherance of the ESA’s purposes. The ESA defines three fundamental terms:29F29F 30  Endangered means that a species of fish, animal or plant is “in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” (For salmon and other vertebrate species, this may include subspecies and distinct population segments.)  Threatened means that a species “is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future.” Regulations may be less restrictive for threatened species than for endangered species.  Critical habitat means “specific geographical areas that are…essential for the conservation and management of a listed species, whether occupied by the species or not.” Five sections of the ESA are of critical importance to understanding it:  Section 4: Listing of a Species—The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries Service is responsible for listing marine species; the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is responsible for listing terrestrial and freshwater aquatic species. The agencies may initiate reviews for listings, or citizens may petition for them. A listing must be made “solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.” After a listing has been proposed, agencies receive comment and conduct further scientific reviews for 12 to 18 months, after which they must decide if the listing is warranted. Economic impacts cannot be considered in this decision, but it may include an evaluation of the adequacy of local and state protections. Critical habitat for the species may be designated at the time of listing.  Section 7: Consultation—Federal agencies must ensure that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed or proposed species or adversely modify its critical habitat. This includes private and public actions that require a federal permit. Once a final listing is made, non-federal actions are subject to the same review, termed a “consultation.” If the listing agency finds that an action will “take” a species, it must propose mitigations or “reasonable and prudent” alternatives to the action; if the proponent rejects these, the action cannot proceed.  Section 9: Prohibition of Take—It is unlawful to “take” an endangered species, including killing or injuring it or modifying its habitat in a way that interferes with essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering.  Section 10: Permitted Take—Through voluntary agreements with the federal government that provide protections to an endangered species, a non-federal applicant may commit a take that would otherwise be prohibited as long as it is incidental to an otherwise lawful activity (such as developing land or building a road). These agreements often take the form of a “Habitat Conservation Plan.”  Section 11: Citizen Lawsuits—Civil actions initiated by any citizen can require the listing agency to enforce the ESA’s prohibition of taking or to meet the requirements of the consultation process. FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable federal acts. Any action identified in this plan that falls within the scope of this act will need to meet its requirements. 30 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (n.d.). Glossary: Endangered Species Act. https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/laws-and-policies/glossary-endangered-species- act#:~:text=A%20threatened%20species%20is%20defined%20under%20the%20ESA,threatened%20or%20endange red%20are%20called%20%E2%80%9C%20listed%20species.%E2%80%9D 134 PSC 09-12-2024 134 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 55 The Clean Water Act The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) employs regulatory and non-regulatory tools to reduce direct pollutant discharges into waterways, finance municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and manage polluted runoff. These tools are employed to achieve the broader goal of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s surface waters so that they can support “the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and recreation in and on the water.” Evolution of CWA programs over the last decade has included a shift from a program-by-program, source-by-source, and pollutant-by-pollutant approach to more holistic watershed-based strategies. Under the watershed approach, equal emphasis is placed on protecting healthy waters and restoring impaired ones. A full array of issues is addressed, not just those subject to CWA regulatory authority. Involvement of stakeholder groups in the development and implementation of strategies for achieving and maintaining water quality and other environmental goals is a hallmark of this approach. FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable federal acts. Any action identified in this plan that falls within the scope of this act will need to meet its requirements. National Flood Insurance Program The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) provides federally backed flood insurance in exchange for communities enacting floodplain regulations. Participation and good standing under NFIP are prerequisites to grant funding eligibility under the Robert T. Stafford Act. Santa Clara County and all of the partner cities for this plan participate in the NFIP and have adopted regulations that meet the NFIP requirements. At the time of the preparation of this plan, all participating jurisdictions in the partners hip were in good standing and in full compliance with the minimum requirements of the NFIP. Community Rating System The Community Rating System (CRS) is a voluntary incentive program for communities that participate in the NFIP and adopt and enforce floodplain management practices that exceed minimum requirements. Flood insurance premium discounts reflect the ways in which the community meets the following goals of the program:  Reduce and avoid flood damage to insurable property.  Strengthen and support the insurance aspects of the National Flood Insurance Program.  Foster comprehensive floodplain management. Participating in the CRS program not only encourages communities to reduce the risk to life and property from flooding through a proactive floodplain management program, but provides a clear, monetary incentive for residents for supporting mitigation activities. Many planning partners participate in the CRS. Many planning partners participate in the CRS. The planning partners discussed using this plan to meet CRS requirements as well. Ultimately, it was decided that Santa Clara Valley Water will lead the development of a separate Floodplain Management Plan specifically dedicated towards this goal, allowing planning partners that participate in the CRS program to maintain or enhance their CRS classifications. Relevant information from this Hazard Mitigation Plan will be incorporated into the Floodplain Management Plan. Coastal Zone Management Act The national Coastal Zone Management Act requires federal agencies to conduct their planning, management, development, and regulatory activities in a manner consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the policies of state Coastal Zone Management (CZ M) programs. State CZM lead agencies have the authority to review federal actions for consistency with their federally approved CZM programs. 135 PSC 09-12-2024 135 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 56 In California, the California Coastal Commission, the Bay Conservation and Development Commission, and the California Coastal Conservancy are the three CZM agencies empowered to conduct federal consistency reviews. The informational and procedural requirements for CZM federal consistency reviews are prescribed by federal regulations (15 CFR 930). Any action identified in this plan that falls within the scope of this act will need to meet its requirements. National Incident Management System The National Incident Management System is a systematic approach for government, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector to work together to manage incidents involving hazards. The system provides a flexible but standardized set of incident management practices. Incidents typically begin and end locally, and they are managed at the lowest possible geographical, organizational, and jurisdictional level. In other instances, success depends on the involvement of multiple jurisdictions, levels of government, functional agencies, and emergency-responder disciplines. These instances necessitate coordination across this spectrum of organizations. Communities using the National Incident Management System follow a comprehensive national approach that im proves the effectiveness of emergency management and response personnel across the full spectrum of potential hazards (including natural hazards, terrorist activities, and other human-caused disasters) regardless of size or complexity. Although participation is voluntary, federal departments and agencies are required to make adoption of NIMS by local and state jurisdictions a condition to receive federal preparedness grants and awards. The content of this plan is considered to be a viable support tool for any phase of emergency management. The NIMS program is considered as a response function, and information in this hazard mitigation plan can support the implementation and update of all NIMS-compliant plans within the planning area. Americans with Disabilities Act and Amendments The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) seeks to prevent discrimination against people with disabilities in employment, transportation, public accommodation, communications, and government activities. The most recent amendments became effective in January 2009 (P.L. 110-325). Title II of the ADA deals with compliance with the act in emergency management and disaster-related programs, services, and activities. It applies to state and local governments as well as third parties, including religious entities and private nonprofit organizations. The ADA has implications for sheltering requirements and public notifications. During an emergency alert, officials must use a combination of warning methods to ensure that all residents have any necessary information. Those with hearing impairments may not hear radio, television, sirens, or other audible alerts, while those with visual impairments may not see flashing lights or visual alerts. Two stand-alone technical documents have been issued for shelter operators to meet the needs of people with disabilities. These documents address physical accessibility as well as medical needs and service animals. The ADA also intersects with disaster preparedness programs in regard to transportation, social services, temporary housing, and rebuilding. Persons with disabilities may require additional assistance in evacuation and transit (such as vehicles with wheelchair lifts or paratransit buses). Evacuation and other response plans should address the unique needs of residents. Local governments may be interested in implementing a special-needs registry to identify the home addresses, contact information, and needs for residents who may require more assistance. FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable federal acts. Any action identified in this plan that falls within the scope of this act will need to meet its requirements. Civil Rights Act of 1964 The Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin and requires equal access to public places and employment. The act is relevant to emergency management and hazard mitigation in that it prohibits local governments from favoring the needs of one population group over another. 136 PSC 09-12-2024 136 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 57 Local government and emergency response must ensure the continued safety and well -being of all residents equally, to the extent possible. FEMA hazard mitigation project grant applications require full compliance with applicable federal acts. Any action ide ntified in this plan that falls within the scope of this act will need to meet its requirements. Rural Development Program The mission of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Rural Development Program is to help improve the economy and quality of life in rural America. The program provides project financing and technical assistance to help rural communities provide the infrastructure needed by rural businesses, community facilities, and households. The program addresses rural America ’s need for basic services, such as clean running water, sewage and waste disposal, electricity, and modern telecommunications and broadband. Loans and competitive grants are offered for various community and economic development projects and programs, such as the development of essential community facilities including fire stations. Some of the actions identified in this plan may be eligible fo r funding available under this program. Community Development Block Grant Disaster Resilience Program In response to disasters, Congress may appropriate additional funding for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Community Development Block Grant programs to be distributed as Disaster Recovery grants (CDBG-DR). These grants can be used to rebuild affected areas and provide seed money to start the recovery process. CDBG-DR assistance may fund a broad range of recovery activities, helping communities and neighborhoods that otherwise might not recover due to limited resources. CDBG-DR grants often supplement disaster programs of FEMA, the Small Business Administration, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Housing and Urban Development generally awards noncompetitive, nonrecurring CDBG-DR grants by a formula that considers disaster recovery needs unmet by other federal disaster assistance programs. To be eligible for CDBG-DR funds, projects must meet the following criteria:  Address a disaster-related impact (direct or indirect) in a presidentially declared county for the covered disaster.  Be a CDBG-eligible activity (according to regulations and waivers).  Meet a national objective. Incorporating preparedness and mitigation into these actions is encouraged, as the goal is to rebuild in ways that are safer and stronger. CDGB-DR funding is a potential alternative source of funding for actions identified in this plan. Community Development Block Grant Mitigation The Community Development Block Grant Mitigation (CDBG -MIT) program was developed to support communities impacted by recent disasters in carrying out strategic and high -impact mitigation actions to reduce losses from future events. Congress may appropriate additional CDBG-MIT funding for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development following a disaster event. The goals of CDBG -MIT funding are:  Support data-informed investments, focusing on repetitive loss of property and critical infrastructure;  Build capacity to comprehensively analyze disaster risks and update hazard mitigation plans;  Support the adoption of policies that reflect local and regional priorities that will have long -lasting effects on community risk reduction, including risk reduction to community lifelines and decreasing future disaster costs; and 137 PSC 09-12-2024 137 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 58  Maximize the impact of funds of encouraging leverage, private/public partnerships, and coordination with other federal dollars. This would be a potential post-disaster financial capability of jurisdictions covered in this plan which could be put towards implementing the identified mitigation actions. Emergency Watershed Program The USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service administers the Emergency Watershed Protection Program, which responds to emergencies created by natural disasters. Eligibility for assistance is not dependent on a national emergency declaration. The program is designed to help people and conserve natural resources by relieving imminent hazards to life and property caused by floods, fires, windstorms, and other natural occurrences. The Emergency Watershed Protection is an emergency recovery program. Financial and technical assistance are available for the following activities:30F30F 31  Remove debris from stream channels, road culverts, and bridges.  Reshape and protect eroded banks.  Correct damaged drainage facilities.  Establish cover on critically eroding lands.  Repair levees and structures.  Repair conservation practices. This federal program could be a possible funding source for actions identified in this plan. Presidential Executive Orders 11988 and 13690 Executive Order 11988 requires federal agencies to avoid to the extent possible the long and short -term adverse impacts associated with the occupancy and modification of floodplains and to avoid direct and indirect support of floodplain development wherever there is a practicable alternative. It requires federal agencies to provide leadership and take action to reduce the risk of flood loss, minimize the impact of floods on human safety, health, and welfare, and restore and preserve the natural and beneficial values of floodplains. The requirements apply to the following activities 31F31F 32:  Acquiring, managing, and disposing of federal lands and facilities.  Providing federally undertaken, financed, or assisted construction and improvements.  Conducting federal activities and programs affecting land use, including but not limited to water and related land resources planning, regulation, and licensing. Executive Order 13690 expands Executive Order 11988 and acknowledges that the impacts of flooding are anticipated to increase over time due to the effects of climate change and other threats. It mandates a federal flood risk management standard to increase resilience against flooding and help preserve the natural values of floodplains. This standard expands management of flood issues from the current base flood level to a higher vertical elevation and corresponding horizontal floodplain when federal dollars are involved in a project. 31 National Resources Conservation Service. (n.d.). Emergency Watershed Protection. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs-initiatives/ewp-emergency-watershed-protection/kentucky/emergency- watershed-protection 32 Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2015, October 8). Guidelines for Implementing Executive Order 11988. https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_implementing -guidelines-EO11988-13690_10082015.pdf 138 PSC 09-12-2024 138 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 59 The goal is to address current and future flood risk and ensure that projects funded with taxpayer dollars last as long as intended.32F32F 33 All actions identified in this plan will seek full compliance with all applicable presidential executive orders. Presidential Executive Order 11990 Executive Order 11990 requires federal agencies to provide leadership and take action to minimize the destruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands, and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values of wetlands. The requirements apply to the following activities:33F33F 34  Acquiring, managing, and disposing of federal lands and facilities.  Providing federally undertaken, financed, or assisted construction and improvements.  Conducting federal activities and programs affecting land use, including but not limited to water and related land resources planning, regulation, and licensing. All actions identified in this plan will seek full compliance with all applicable presidential executive orders. Emergency Relief for Federally Owned Roads Program The U.S. Forest Service’s Emergency Relief for Federally Owned Roads Program was established to assist federal agencies with repair or reconstruction of tribal transportation facilities, federal lands transportation facilities, and other federally owned roads that are open to public travel and have suffered serious damage by a natural disaster over a wide area or by a catastrophic failure. The program funds both emergency and permanent repairs.34F34F 35 Eligible activities under this program meet some of the goals and objectives for this plan and the program is a possible funding source for actions identified in this plan. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Programs The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has several civil works authorities and programs related to flood risk and flood hazard management:  Floodplain Management Services are 100-percent federally funded technical services such as development and interpretation of site-specific data related to the extent, duration, and frequency of flooding. Special studies may be conducted to help a community understand and respond to flood risk. These may include flood hazard evaluation, flood warning and preparedness, or flood modeling.  For more extensive studies, the Corps of Engineers offers a cost-shared program called Planning Assistance to States and Tribes. Studies under this program generally range from $25,000 to $100,000, with the local jurisdiction providing 50 percent of the cost.  The Corps of Engineers has several cost-shared programs (typically 65 percent federal and 35 percent non-federal) aimed at developing, evaluating, and implementing structural and non- structural capital projects to address flood risks at specific locations or within a specific watershed: 33 Obama White House. (2015, January 30). Executive Order – Establishing a Federal Flood Risk Management Standard and a Process for Further Soliciting and Considering Stakeholder Input. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/01/30/executive-order-establishing-federal-flood-risk- management-standard-and- 34 National Archives. (n.d.). § 9.4 Definitions. https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-44/chapter-I/subchapter-A/part- 9/section-9.4 35 Federal Highway Administration. (n.d.). Fact Sheets, Emergency Relief Program. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure- law/er_fact_sheet.cfm#:~:text=The%20BIL%20continues%20the%20Emergency%20Relief%20program%2C%20whi ch,disasters%20or%20catastrophic%20failure%20from%20an%20external%20cause. 139 PSC 09-12-2024 139 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 60 ▪ The Continuing Authorities Program for smaller-scale projects includes Section 205 for Flood Control, with a $7 million federal limit and Section 14 for Emergency Streambank Protection with a $1.5 million federal limit. These can be implemented without specific authorization from Congress. ▪ Larger scale studies, referred to as General Investigations, and projects for flood risk management, for ecosystem restoration or to address other water resource issues, can be pursued through a specific authorization from Congress and are cost-shared, typically at 65 percent federal and 35 percent non-federal. ▪ Watershed Management planning studies can be specifically authorized and are cost-shared at 50 percent federal and 50 percent non-federal.  The Corps of Engineers provides emergency response assistance during and following natural disasters. Public Law 84-99 enables the Corps to assist state and local authorities in flood fight activities and cost share in the repair of flood protective structures. Assistance afforded under PL 84-99 is broken down into the following categories: ▪ Preparedness: The Flood Control and Coastal Emergency Act establishes an emergency fund for preparedness for emergency response to natural disasters; for flood fighting and rescue operations; for rehabilitation of flood control and hurricane protection structures. Funding for Corps of Engineers emergency response under this authority is provided by Congress through the annual Energy and Water Development Appropriation Act. Disaster preparedness activities include coordination, planning, training and conduct of response exercises with local, state, and federal agencies. ▪ Response Activities: PL 84-99 allows the Corps of Engineers to supplement state and local entities in flood-fighting for urban and other non-agricultural areas under certain conditions (Engineering Regulation 500-1-1 provides specific details). All flood-fight efforts require a Project Cooperation Agreement (PCA) signed by the public sponsor and a requirement for the sponsor to remove all flood-fight material after the flood has receded. PL 84-99 also authorizes emergency water support and drought assistance in certain situations and allows for “advance measures” assistance to prevent or reduce flood damage conditions of imminent threat of unusual flooding. ▪ Rehabilitation: Under PL 84-99, an eligible flood protection system can be rehabilitated if damaged by a flood event. The flood system would be restored to its pre -disaster status at no cost to the federal system owner, and at 20-percent cost to the eligible non-federal system owner. All systems eligible for PL 84-99 rehabilitation assistance have to be in the Rehabilitation and Inspection Program prior to the flood event. Acceptable operation and maintenance by the public levee sponsor are verified by levee inspections conducted by the Corps on a regular basis. The Corps has the responsibility to coordinate levee repair issues with interested federal, state, and local agencies following natural disaster events where flood control works are damaged. All of these authorities and programs are available to the planning partners to support any intersecting mitigation actions. 5.9.2 State Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act was enacted in 1972 to mitigate the hazard of surface faulting to structures for human occupancy. The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act’s main purpose is to prevent construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. Before a new project is permitted, cities and counties require a geologic investigation to demonstrate that proposed buildings will not be constructed on active faults. 140 PSC 09-12-2024 140 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 61 The act addresses only the hazard of surface fault rupture and is not directed toward other earthquake hazards, such as liquefaction or seismically induced landslides. The law requires geologists from the State of California to establish regulatory zones around the surface traces of active faults and to issue appropriate maps. The maps are distributed to all affected cities, counties, and state agencies for their use in planning and controlling new or renewed construction. Local agencies must regulate most development projects within the zones. Projects include all land divisions and most structures for human occupancy. All seismic hazard mitigation actions identified in this plan will seek full compliance with the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. California General Planning Law California state law requires that every county and city prepare and adopt a comprehensive long-range plan to serve as a guide for community development. The general plan expresses the community ’s goals, visions, and policies relative to future land uses, both public and private. The general plan is mandated and prescribed by state law (Cal. Gov. Code §65300 et seq.) and forms the basis for most local government land use decision-making. The plan must consist of an integrated and internally consistent set of goals, policies, and implementation measures. In addition, the plan must focus on issues of the greatest concern to the community and be written in a clear and concise manner. City and county actions, such as those relating to land use allocations, annexations, zoning, subdivision and design review, redevelopment, and capital improvements, must be consistent with the plan. All municipal planning partners to this plan have general plans that are currently compliant with this law and have committed to integrating this mitigation plan with their general plans through provisions referenced below (AB-2140 and SB-379). California Environmental Quality Act The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was passed in 1970, shortly after the federal government enacted the National Environmental Policy Act, to institute a statewide policy of environmental protection. CEQA requires state and local agencies in California to follow a protocol of analysis and public disclosure of the potential environmental impacts of development projects. CEQA makes environmental protection a mandatory part of every California state and local agency ’s decision- making process. CEQA establishes a statewide environmental policy and mandates actions all state and local agencies must take to advance the policy. Jurisdictions conduct analysis of the project to determine if there are potentially significant environmental impacts, identify mitigation measures, and possible project alternatives by preparing environmental reports for projects that requires CEQA review. This environmental review is required before an agency takes action on any policy, program, or project. Santa Clara County has sought exemption from CEQA for the Hazard Mitigation Plan based on four different sections of the CEQA Guidelines:  Section 15183(d): “The project is consistent with…a general plan of a local agency, and an EIR was certified by the lead agency for the...general plan.”  Section 15262: “A project involving only feasibility or planning studies for possible future actions which the agency, board or commission has not approved, adopted, or funded does not require the preparation of an EIR or negative declaration but does requ ire consideration of environmental factors. This section does not apply to the adoption of a plan that will have a legally binding effect on later activities.”  Section 15306: “(Categorical Exemption) Class 6 consists of basic data collection, research, experimental management, and resource evaluation activities which do not result in a serious or major disturbance to an environmental resource. These may be strict ly for information gathering 141 PSC 09-12-2024 141 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 62 purposes, or as part of a study leading to an action which a public agency has not yet approved, adopted, or funded.”  Section 15601(b)(3): “...CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effec t on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA.” Planning partners may seek exemption at their discretion. California Coastal Management Program The California Coastal Management Program under the California Coastal Act requires each city or county lying wholly or partly within the coastal zone to prepare a local coastal plan. The specific contents of such plans are not specified by state law, but they must be certified by the Coastal Commission as consistent with policies of the Coastal Act (Public Resources Code, Division 20). The Coastal Act has provisions relating to geologic hazards but does not mention tsunamis specifically. Section 30253(1) of the Coastal Act states that new development shall minimize risks to life and property in areas of high geologic, flood, and fire hazard. Development should be prevented or limited in high hazard areas whenever possible. However, where development cannot be prevented or limited, land use density, building value, and occupancy should be kept at a minimum. There are identified coastal zones in the Santa Clara County Operational Area and affected planning partners have developed local coastal plans to address them. Any mitigation project identified in this plan that intersects the mapped coastal zone will be consistent with the recommendations of the local coastal plan. California State Assembly Bills Assembly Bill 162: Flood Planning, Chapter 369, Statutes of 2007 This California State Assembly Bill (AB) passed in 2007 requires cities and counties to address flood - related matters in the land use, conservation, and safety and housing elements of their general plans. The land use element must identify and annually review the areas covered by the general plan that are subject to flooding as identified in floodplain mapping by either FEMA or the Department of Water Resources (DWR). During the next revision of the housing element on or after January 1, 2009, the conservation element of the general plan must identify rivers, creeks, streams, flood corridors, riparian habitat, and land that may accommodate floodwater for groundwater recharge and stormwater management. The safety element must identify information regarding flood hazards, including:  Flood hazard zones;  Maps published by FEMA, DWR, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Central Valley Flood. Protection Board, and CalOES;  Historical data on flooding; and  Existing and planned development in flood hazard zones. The general plan must establish goals, policies, and objectives to protect from unreasonable flooding risks, including:  Avoiding or minimizing the risks of flooding new development;  Evaluating whether new development should be located in flood hazard zones; and  Identifying construction methods to minimize damage. 142 PSC 09-12-2024 142 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 63 Assembly Bill 2140: General Plans—Safety Element, Chapter 739, Statutes of 2006 This bill allows jurisdictions to be eligible for state funding to cover the local match of public assistance costs for recovery activities after hazard events if the local jurisdiction incorporates their Local Hazard Mitigation Plan into the safety element of their general plan. In addition, this bill requires Cal OES to give preference for federal mitigation funding to cities and counties that have adopted local hazard mitigation plans. The intent of the bill is to encourage cities and counties to create and adopt hazard mitigation plans. The County OEM has worked with the safety element team throughout 2022 and 2023 in updating the Safety Element, to ensure the County is maximizing their future funding opportunities to reduce risk in the County and comply with Assembly Bill 2140 (2006), which affords the county additional benefits under the California Disaster Assistance Act. The Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan will be incorporated into the Safety Element as the Safety Element update comes to a completion and is presented to the Board of Supervisors for Adoption. Assembly Bill 70: Flood Liability, Chapter Number 367, Statutes of 2007 This bill provides that a city or county may be required to contribute a fair and reasonable share to compensate for property damage caused by a flood to the extent that it has increased the state ’s exposure to liability for property damage by unreasonably approving new development in a previously undeveloped area that is protected by a state flood control project, unless the city or county meets specified requirements. Assembly Bill 32: The California Global Warming Solutions Act This bill addresses greenhouse gas emissions. It identifies the following potential adverse impacts of global warming: the exacerbation of air quality problems, a reduction in the quality and supply of water to the state from the Sierra snowpack, a rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of thousands of coastal businesses and residences, damage to marine ecosystems and the natural environment, and an increase in the incidences of infectious diseases, asthma, and other human health-related problems. AB 32 establishes a state goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 (a reduction of approximately 25 percent from forecast emission levels), with further reductions to follow. The law requires the state Air Resources Board to do the following:35F35F 36  Establish a program to track and report greenhouse gas emissions.  Approve a scoping plan for achieving the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective reductions from sources of greenhouse gas emissions.  Adopt early reduction measures to begin moving forward.  Adopt, implement, and enforce regulations—including market mechanisms such as “cap and- trade” programs—to ensure that the required reductions occur. The Air Resources Board recently adopted a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit and an emissions inventory, along with requirements to measure, track, and report greenhouse gas emissions by the industries it determined to be significant sources of greenhouse gas emissions. 36 California Air Resources Board. (2018, September 28). AB 32 Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/ab-32-global-warming-solutions-act-2006 143 PSC 09-12-2024 143 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 64 Assembly Bill 2800: Climate Change: Infrastructure Planning This California State Assembly bill, in effect through July 1, 2020, requires state agencies to consider the current and future impacts of climate change when planning, designing, building, operating, maintaining, and investing in state infrastructure. The bill requires the agency to establish a climate -safe infrastructure working group by July 1, 2017, to examine how to integrate scientific data concerning projected climate change impacts into state infrastructure engineering. Assembly Bill 38: Fire Safety: Low-Cost Retrofits: Regional Capacity Review: Wildfire Mitigation The Governor approved assembly bill 38 in October 2019 expanding pre-existing obligations to review regional capacity to improve forest health, fire resilience, and safety as well as provide a prescribed disclosure notice to buyers of property informing them of their fire home hardening options. In addition, it authorized Cal OES and CALFIRE to jointly develop a wildfire mitigation program now known as the “Home Hardening Program.” This effort is intended to encourage cost-effective wildfire resilience measures by providing financial assistance for retrofits, hardening, and the creation of defensible space. 1998 Natural Hazard Disclosure Act The Natural Hazard Disclosure Act, which became effective in June 1998, requires sellers to provide home buyers with a natural hazard disclosure report (NHD) in order to sell a home in a natural hazard zone. Failure to comply with this act may result in the buyer or agent being liable for any damage experienced by the buyer. There are six main hazards required to be disclosed in an NHD:36F36F 37  A special flood hazard area  An area of potential flooding on a dam failure inundation map  A very high fire severity zone  A wildland area that may contain substantial forest fire risks and hazards  An earthquake fault zone  A seismic hazard zone California State Senate Bills Senate Bill 97 Senate Bill 97, enacted in 2007, amends CEQA to clearly establish that greenhouse gas emissions and the effects of greenhouse gas emissions are appropriate subjects for CEQA analysis. It directs the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research to develop draft CEQA guidelines for the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions or their effects by July 1, 2009, and directs the California Natural Resources Agency to certify and adopt the CEQA Guidelines by January 1, 2010. Senate Bill 1000 General Plan Amendments: Safety and Environmental Justice Elements Senate Bill 1000 amends California’s Planning and Zoning Law in two ways:  The original law established requirements for initial revisions of general plan safety elements to address flooding, fire, and climate adaptation and resilience. It also required subsequent review and revision as necessary based on new information. Senate Bill 1000 specifies that the 37 California Association of Realtors. (n.d.). Natural Hazard Disclosure Statement. https://www.car.org/- /media/CAR/Documents/Transaction-Center/PDF/QUICK-GUIDES/Quick-Guide--Natural-Hazard-Disclsoure-NHD- Statement-REVISED-52022.pdf 144 PSC 09-12-2024 144 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 65 subsequent reviews and revision based on new information are required to address only flooding and fires (not climate adaptation and resilience).  Senate Bill 1000 adds a requirement that, upon adoption or revision of any two other general plan elements on or after January 1, 2018, an environmental justice element be adopted for the general plan or environmental justice goals, policies and objectives be incorporated into other elements of the plan. Senate Bill 1241: General Plans: Safety Element—Fire Hazard Impacts In 2012, Senate Bill 1241 was enacted, requiring that all future General Plans address fire risk in state responsibility areas and very high fire hazard severity zones in their safety element. In addition, the bill requires cities and counties to make certain findings regarding available fire protection and suppression services before approving a tentative map or parcel map. Senate Bill 379: General Plans: Safety Element—Climate Adaptation Senate Bill 379 builds on the flood planning inclusions into the safety and housing elements and the hazard mitigation planning safety element inclusions in General Plans outlined in AB 162 and AB 2140. Senate Bill 379 specifically focuses on a new requirement that cities and counties include climate adaptation and resiliency strategies in the safety element of their General Plans beginning January 1, 2017. In addition, this bill requires general plans to include a set of goals, policies, and objectives, an d specified implementation measures based on the conclusions drawn from climate adaptation research and recommendations. This update process for this hazard mitigation plan was conducted with the intention of full compliance with this bill. However, at the time of the update, there was no clear guidance from the state on what constitutes full compliance or what protocol is to be used to determine compliance. When such guidance has been established, the planning partners will submit this plan or its subsequent updates to the state for review and approval. Senate Bill 190: Fire Safety: Building Standards: Defensible Space Program In October 2019, Senate Bill 190 amended the Government Code and Health and Safety Code to build a common understanding of site and structure fire risk reduction measures. Among other things, the bill authorized the Office of the State Fire Marshall to develop a model defensible space program which would be available for city and county code enforcement officials to utilize. Additionally, it directed the Office of the State Fire Marshall to develop and make publicly available a Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Safety Building Standards compliance training intended for local building officials, builders, and fire service personnel.37F37F 38 California State Building Code California Code of Regulations Title 24 (CCR Title 24), also known as the California Building Standards Code, is a compilation of building standards from three sources:  Building standards that have been adopted by state agencies without change from building standards contained in national model codes.  Building standards that have been adopted and adapted from the national model code standards to meet California conditions.  Building standards authorized by the California legislature that constitute extensive additions not covered by the model codes adopted to address particular California concerns. 38 California Legislative Information. (2019, October 2). SB-190 Fire Safety: Building Standards: Defensible Space Program. Bill Text - SB-190 Fire safety: building standards: defensible space program. (ca.gov) 145 PSC 09-12-2024 145 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 66 The state Building Standards Commission is authorized by California Building Standards Law (Health and Safety Code Sections 18901 through 18949.6) to administer the processes related to the adoption, approval, publication, and implementation of California’s building codes. These building codes serve as the basis for the design and construction of buildings in California. The national model code standards adopted into Title 24 apply to all occupancies in California, except for modifications adopted by state agencies and local governing bodies. Since 1989, the Building Standards Commission has published new editions of Title 24 every 3 years. All municipal planning partners to this plan have adopted building codes that are in full compliance with the California State Building Code. California has also passed the first green building code in the Nation, known as the California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen). CALGreen establishes new green building standards in order to promote sustainable development. The goals of the program include:  Reduce greenhouse gas emissions from buildings.  Promote environmentally responsible, cost-effective, healthier places to live and work.  Reduce energy and water consumption.  Respond to the environmental directives of the administration. Standardized Emergency Management System CCR Title 19 establishes the Standardized Emergency Management System to standardize the response to emergencies involving multiple jurisdictions. The system is intended to be flexible and adaptable to the needs of all emergency responders in California. It requires emergency response agencies to use basic principles and components of emergency management. Local governments must use the Standardized Emergency Management System by December 1, 1996, to be eligible for state funding of response - related personnel costs under CCR Title 19 (Sections 2920, 2925 and 2930). The roles and responsibilities of individual agencies contained in existing laws or the state emergency plan are not superseded by these regulations. This hazard mitigation plan is considered to b e a support document for all phases of emergency management, including those associated with SEMS. California State Hazard Mitigation Plan Under the DMA, California must adopt a federally approved state multi-hazard mitigation plan to be eligible for certain disaster assistance and mitigation funding. California has elected to develop an enhanced plan, which makes it eligible for additional mitigation funding. The State Hazard Mitigation Plan (SHMP) is the State’s primary hazard mitigation guidance. It incorporates:  An updated analysis of the state’s historical and current hazards.  Hazard mitigation goals and objectives.  Hazard Mitigation strategies and actions. The California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) is responsible for leading the plan update in coordination with key planning stakeholders and sources of information. The 2018 SHMP is being updated at the time of this plan’s update to reflect changing conditions and add new information as well as incorporate the new FEMA planning policy guidance. Under 44 CFR Section 201.6, local hazard mitigation plans must be consistent with their state ’s hazard mitigation plan. In updating this plan, the Steering Committee reviewed the California State Hazard Mitigation Plan to identify key relevant state plan elements. 146 PSC 09-12-2024 146 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 67 Governor’s Executive Order S-13-08 Governor’s Executive Order S-13-08 enhances the state’s management of climate impacts from sea level rise, increased temperatures, shifting precipitation and extreme weather events. There are four key actions in the executive order:  Initiate California’s first statewide climate change adaptation strategy to assess expected climate change impacts, identify where California is most vulnerable, and recommend adaptation policies by early 2009. This effort will improve coordination within state government so that better planning can more effectively address climate impacts on human health, the environment, the state’s water supply and the economy.  Request that the National Academy of Science establish an expert panel to report on sea level rise impacts in California, to inform state planning and development efforts.  Issue interim guidance to state agencies for how to plan for sea level rise in designated coastal and floodplain areas for new projects.  Initiate a report on critical infrastructure projects vulnerable to sea level rise. 5.9.3 Local Plans, Reports, and Codes Plans, reports, and other technical information were identified and provided directly by participating jurisdictions and stakeholders or were identified through independent research by the planning consultant. These documents were reviewed to identify the following:  Existing jurisdictional and special district capabilities.  Needs and opportunities to develop or enhance capabilities, which may be identified within the local mitigation strategies.  Mitigation-related goals or objectives considered during the development of the overall goals and objectives.  Proposed, in-progress, or potential mitigation projects, actions, and initiatives to be incorporated into the updated mitigation strategies.  The following local regulations, codes, ordinances, and plans were reviewed in order to develop complementary and mutually supportive goals, objectives, and mitigation strategies that are consistent across local and regional planning and regulatory mechanisms: ▪ General Plans (Housing Elements, Safety Elements). ▪ Building Codes. ▪ Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. ▪ NFIP Flood Damage Prevention Ordinances. ▪ Stormwater Management Plans. ▪ Emergency Management and Response Plans. ▪ Land Use and Open Space Plans. ▪ Climate Action Plans. ▪ Capability Assessment. 147 PSC 09-12-2024 147 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 68 All participating jurisdictions and special districts compiled an inventory and analysis of existing authorities and capabilities called a “capability assessment.” A capability assessment creates an inventory of a jurisdiction’s mission, programs, and policies, and evaluates its capacity to carry them out. This assessment identifies potential gaps in the jurisdiction’s capabilities and opportunities to expand and improve upon existing capabilities. The planning partners views all core jurisdictional and special district capabilities as fully adaptable to meet an organization’s needs. Every code can be amended, and every plan can be updated. Such adaptability is itself considered to be an overarching capability. If the capability assessment identified an opportunity to add a missing core capability or expand an existing one, th en doing so has been selected as an action in the jurisdiction’s action plan, which is included in the individual annexes presented in Volume 2 of this plan. Capability assessments for each planning partner are presented in the jurisdictional and special district annexes in Volume 2 of this plan. The sections below describe the specific capabilities evaluated under the assessment. Legal and Regulatory Capabilities Jurisdictions have the ability to develop policies and programs and to implement rules and regulations to protect and serve residents. Local policies are typically identified in a variety of community plans, implemented via a local ordinance, and enforced through a governmental body. Jurisdictions regulate land use through the adoption and enforcement of zoning, subdivision, and land development ordinances, building codes, building permit ordinances, floodplain, and stormwater management ordinances. When effectively prepared and administered, these regulations can lead to hazard mitigation. Fiscal Capabilities Assessing a jurisdiction’s or special district’s fiscal capability provides an understanding of the ability to fulfill the financial needs associated with hazard mitigation projects. This assessment identifies both outside resources, such as grant-funding eligibility, and local authority to generate internal financial capability, such as through impact fees. Administrative and Technical Capabilities Legal, regulatory, and fiscal capabilities provide the backbone for successfully developing a mitigation strategy; however, without appropriate personnel, the strategy may not be implemented. Administrative and technical capabilities focus on the availability of personnel resources responsible for implementing all the facets of hazard mitigation. These resources include technical experts, such as engineers and scientists, as well as personnel with capabilities that may be found in multiple departments, such as grant writers. NFIP Compliance Flooding is the costliest natural hazard in the United States and, with the promulgation of recent federal regulation, homeowners throughout the country are experiencing increasingly high flood insurance premiums. Community participation in the NFIP opens up opportunity for additional grant funding associated specifically with flooding issues. Assessment of the jurisdiction ’s current NFIP status and compliance provides planners with a greater understanding of the local flood management program, opportunities for improvement, and available grant funding opportunities. Public Outreach Capability Regular engagement with the public on issues regarding hazard mitigation provides an opportunity to directly interface with community members. Assessing this outreach and education capability illustrates 148 PSC 09-12-2024 148 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 5: Santa Clara County Operational Area Profile 69 the connection between the government and community members, which opens a two -way dialogue that can result in a more resilient community based on education and public engagement. Participation in Other Programs Other programs, such as the Community Rating System, StormReady, and Firewise, enhance a jurisdiction’s ability to mitigate, prepare for, and respond to natural hazards. These programs indicate a jurisdiction’s desire to go beyond minimum requirements set forth by local, state, and federal regulations in order to create a more resilient community. These programs complement each other by focusing on communication, mitigation, and community preparedness to save lives and minimize the impact of natural hazards on a community. Development and Permitting Capability Identifying previous and future development trends is achieved through a comprehensive review of permitting since completion of the previous plan and in anticipation of future development. Tracking previous and future growth in potential hazard areas provides an overview of increased exposure to a hazard within a community. Adaptive Capacity An adaptive capacity assessment evaluates a jurisdiction’s ability to anticipate impacts from future conditions. By looking at public support, technical adaptive capacity, and other factors, jurisdictions identify their core capability for resilience against issues such as sea level rise. The adaptive capacity assessment provides jurisdictions with an opportunity to identify areas for improvement by ranking their capacity high, medium, or low. Expanding and Improving Mitigation Capabilities Both pre- and post-disaster mitigation capabilities change over time. The intent of this mitigation plan is to evaluate current mitigation capabilities and identify if there are any gaps which could be further addressed. In Volume 2 of this plan, in addition to an individual capability assessment, there is a discussion of the capabilities which could be expanded upon for each participant. County items, such as increasing funding for community education and outreach including translated materials as well as funding regional planning and coordination, serve as examples of what this looks like. If there are any challenges or limitations for each participant, they have stated so in the in their respective annex. Integration Opportunity The assessment looked for opportunities to integrate this mitigation plan with the legal/regulatory capabilities identified. Capabilities were identified as integration opportunities if they can support or enhance the actions identified in this plan or be supported or enhanced by components of this plan. Planning partners considered actions to implement this integration as described in the jurisdictional and special district annexes in Volume 2 of this plan. 149 PSC 09-12-2024 149 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 6: Identified Hazards of Concern and Risk Assessment 70 6 Identified Hazards of Concern and Risk Assessment Risk assessment is the process of measuring the potential loss of life, personal injury, economic injury, and property damage resulting from identified hazards. It allows emergency management personnel to establish early response priorities by identifying potential hazards and vulnerable assets. The process focuses on the following elements:  Hazard identification: Use all available information to determine what types of hazards may affect a jurisdiction, how often they can occur, and their potential severity.  Exposure identification: Estimate the total number of people and properties in the jurisdiction that are likely to experience a hazard event if it occurs.  Vulnerability identification and loss estimation: Assess the impact of hazard events on the people, property, environment, economy, and lands of the region, including estimates of the cost of potential damage or cost that can be avoided by mitigation.  The risk assessment for this hazard mitigation plan update evaluates the risk of natural hazards prevalent in the OA and meets requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act (44 CFR, Section 201.6(c)(2)). To protect individual privacy and the security of critical facilities, information on properties assessed is presented in aggregate, without details about specific individual personal or public properties. 6.1 Identified Hazards of Concern The Core Planning Group considered the full range of natural hazards that could affect the OA and then listed hazards that present the greatest concern. The process incorporated a review of state and local hazard planning documents as well as information on the frequency of, magnitude of, and costs associated with hazards that have struck the OA or could do so. Anecdotal information regarding natural hazards and the perceived vulnerability of the OA ’s assets to them was also used. Based on the review, this plan addresses the following hazards of concern (presented in order of the hazard risk index results; the order of listing does not indicate the hazards ’ relative severity):  Earthquake  Wildfire  Inclement Weather  Drought  Climate Change  Dam and Levee Failure  Flood  Landslide  Tsunami 150 PSC 09-12-2024 150 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 6: Identified Hazards of Concern and Risk Assessment 71 In addition to the hazards of concern for which full risk assessments were performed, other hazards of interest were identified for inclusion in this plan: intentional hazards, technological hazards, and epidemic and pandemic. These hazards are of interest because they present risk to the OA. However, no methodologies are currently available to perform risk assessments on them that are equivalent to those used for the natural hazards of concern addressed in detail in this plan. 6.2 Hazard Risk Index FEMA requires all hazard mitigation planning partners to have jurisdiction-specific mitigation actions based on local risk, vulnerability, and community priorities (FEMA, 2011). This plan included a risk index procedure for each planning partner, in which the degree of risk posed by each hazard was calculated based on a set of factors. Risk index factors were assigned a numerical degree of risk level based on information presented in the hazard profiles and planning partner annexes. This number was then weighted, and a formula was used to aggregate the values into an overall hazard risk index number. The weight given to each factor was based on a review of best practices and agreed upon by the Core Planning Team. All planning partners calculated risk for their own jurisdiction or special district following the same methodology. The higher the overall risk index number, the greater the hazard risk . This methodology does not compare hazards to each other or rank hazards against one another. Instead, this process provides a sense of hazard priorities or relative risk and allows comparison of the same hazard across participants. It provides planning participants with a sense of hazard priorities, or relative risk. By doing this analysis, mitigation planning and initiatives can focus on the greatest risk. While hazards occur together or as a consequence of others (e.g., dam failure may cause flooding and earthquakes may cause landslides), participants considered hazards as a singular event for the purposes of rating. This approach is part of a holistic hazard risk analysis that includes complementary qualitative and quantitative elements and provides a consistent metric across different hazards. This hazard analysis methodology can:  Help establish priorities for planning, capability development, and hazard mitigation;  Serve as a tool in the identification of hazard mitigation measures;  Be one tool in conducting a hazard-based needs analysis;  Serve to educate the public and public officials about hazards and vulnerabilities; and  Help communities make objective judgments about acceptable risk . The factors and their corresponding numeric indices and weight factors are detailed in Table 14. Individual and OA-level hazard risk indices were used to inform the action plan development process and mitigation priorities for each planning partner. Each annex presents the risk indices for each planning partner. 151 PSC 09-12-2024 151 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 6: Identified Hazards of Concern and Risk Assessment 72 Table 14: Probability of Hazards Risk Index Factor Degree of Risk Level Criteria Factor Weight for Degree of Risk Level Probability of Future Events 0 Unlikely Less than 1 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. 30% 1 Occasional 1 to 10 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. 2 Likely 11 to 90 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 1 to 10 years. 3 Highly Likely 91 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of less than 1 year. Life Impact 0 Minor Very few injuries, if any at all. 35% 1 Limited Minor injuries. 2 Critical Multiple deaths and/or injuries. 3 Catastrophic High number of deaths and/or injuries. Property Impact 0 Minor Only minor property damage and minimal disruption of life. Temporary shutdown of critical facilities. 25% 1 Limited More than 10 percent of property in affected area damaged/destroyed. Complete shutdown of critical facilities for more than one day. 2 Critical More than 25 percent of property in affected area damaged/destroyed. Complete shutdown of critical facilities for more than one week. 3 Catastrophic More than 50 percent of property in affected area damaged/destroyed. Complete shutdown of critical facilities for 30 days or more. Percentage of Area Impacted 0 Negligible Less than 10 percent of planning area or isolated single-point occurrences. 10% 1 Minimal 10 to 25 percent of the planning area or limited single-point occurrences. 2 Significant 26 to 74 percent of planning area or frequent single-point occurrences. 3 Extensive 75 to 100 percent of planning area or consistent single-point occurrences. 152 PSC 09-12-2024 152 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 6: Identified Hazards of Concern and Risk Assessment 73 Table 15: Hazard Risk Ranking by Jurisdiction Earthquake Wildfire Inclement Weather Drought Climate Change Dam and Levee Failure Flood Landslide Tsunami Campbell 2 0.9 1.7 0.7 0 1.75 0.55 0 0 Cupertino 2.7 1.9 1.1 1.45 1.55 0.45 0.5 0.4 0 Gilroy 2.9 1.05 1.25 0.9 0.3 2 0.4 0 0 Los Altos 2 1.95 2.05 1.8 1.6 0.95 0.65 0 0 Los Altos Hills 2 2.1 1.4 1.95 1.3 0 0.65 1.3 0 Los Gatos 1.45 2.55 1.15 0.6 1.2 0.35 0.35 0.65 0 Milpitas 2.3 2.05 0.9 1.2 2.3 1.85 1.8 0.6 0 Monte Sereno - - - - - - - - - Morgan Hill 2.9 1.05 1.25 0.9 0.3 2 1.25 0 0 Mountain View 2 0.65 1.4 2 1.3 0 2 0 0 Palo Alto 2 1.95 2.05 2.05 1.85 0.95 0.65 0 0 San Jose 1.25 1.6 1.8 1.45 0 1.9 1.9 0 0 Santa Clara City 3 1.3 1.7 1.45 1.4 1.8 2 0 0.35 Saratoga 2.7 2 0.95 0.8 0.4 0 0 0.85 0 Sunnyvale 2.9 1.05 1.25 0.9 0.3 2 0.3 0 0 Santa Clara County 2.1 1.7 1.55 0.8 1.6 1.75 0.65 0.4 0 SCC 2.1 1.7 1.55 0.8 1.6 1.75 0.65 0.4 0 MidPen 1.35 3 1.3 1.2 1.8 0.25 1.2 1.55 0 SCCFD 2.7 1.7 1.55 0.8 1.6 1.75 0.65 0.4 0 SCVWD - - - - - - - - - Average 2.24 1.68 1.44 1.21 1.13 1.19 0.90 0.36 0.02 153 PSC 09-12-2024 153 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 6: Identified Hazards of Concern and Risk Assessment 74 6.2.1 Average Overall Hazard Risk Index Results The overall hazard risk index results based on an average of partner indices is shown in Table 16. These results show which hazards pose the highest overall risk to the Operational Area. Table 16: Average Overall Hazard Risk Index Results Hazard Risk Order Hazard Average Overall Hazard Risk Index Result 1 Earthquake 2.24 2 Wildfire, smoke, and air quality 1.68 3 Inclement weather* 1.44 4 Drought 1.21 5 Climate change, including sea-level rise 1.13 6 Dam and levee failure 1.19 7 Flood .90 8 Landslide and mass movement .36 9 Tsunami .02 *Listed as separate hazards in the hazard profile and annexes: heavy precipitation, high wind, extreme heat, extreme cold, and space weather. Based on the average overall hazard risk index results from planning partner risk indices: • The earthquake hazard has the highest risk results, followed by wildfire/smoke/air quality.  The inclement weather, drought, climate change hazards were a moderate risk to the Operational Area.  The dam failure, flood, and landslide/mass movement hazards were a lower risk to the Operational Area.  The tsunami hazard poses the lowest risk to the Operational Area, as not all planning partners can be impacted by this hazard due to geographic location. 6.3 Risk Assessment Tools 6.3.1 Mapping National, state, and county databases were reviewed to locate available spatially based data relevant to this planning effort. Maps were produced using geographic information system (GIS) software to show the spatial extent and location of hazards when such datasets were available. These maps are included in the hazard profile sections and planning partner annexes of this MJHMP. 154 PSC 09-12-2024 154 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 6: Identified Hazards of Concern and Risk Assessment 75 6.3.2 Hazus Overview In 1997, FEMA developed the standardized Hazards U.S. (Hazus) model to estimate losses caused by earthquakes and identify areas that face the highest risk and potential for loss. Hazus was later expanded into a multi-hazard methodology with new models for estimating potential losses from hurricanes and floods. Hazus is a GIS-based software program used to support risk assessments, mitigation planning, and emergency planning and response. It provides a wide range of inventory data, such as demographics, building stock, critical facility, transportation and utility lifeline, and multiple models to estimate potential losses from natural disasters. The program maps and displays hazard data and the results of damage and economic loss estimates for buildings and infrastructure. Its advantages include the following:  Provides a consistent methodology for assessing risk across geographic and political entities.  Provides a way to save datasets so that they can readily be updated as population, inventory, and other factors change and as mitigation planning efforts evolve.  Facilitates review of mitigation plans because it helps to ensure that FEMA methodologies are incorporated.  Supports grant applications by calculating benefits using FEMA definitions and terminology.  Produces hazard data and loss estimates that can be used in communication with local stakeholders.  Is administered by the local government and can be used to manage and update a hazard mitigation plan throughout its implementation. Levels of Detail for Evaluation Hazus provides default data for inventory, vulnerability, and hazards; the default data can be supplemented with local data to provide a more refined analysis. The model can carry out three levels of analysis, depending on the format and level of detail of information about the OA:  Level 1: All of the information needed to produce an estimate of losses is included in the software’s default data. These data are derived from national databases and describe in general terms the characteristic parameters of the OA.  Level 2: More accurate estimates of losses require more detailed information about the OA. To produce Level 2 estimates of losses, detailed information is required about local geology, hydrology, hydraulics, and building inventory, as well as data about utilities and critical facilities. This information is needed in a GIS format.  Level 3: This level of analysis generates the most accurate estimate of losses. It requires detailed engineering and geotechnical information to customize it for the OA. 6.4 Risk Assessment Approach The risk assessments in this plan describe the risks associated with each identified hazard of concern. The following steps were used to define the risk of each hazard:  Identify and profile each hazard: The following information is given for each hazard: ▪ Geographic areas most affected by the hazard. ▪ Event frequency estimates. 155 PSC 09-12-2024 155 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 6: Identified Hazards of Concern and Risk Assessment 76 ▪ Severity estimates. ▪ Warning time likely to be available for response.  Define probability: probability of future events was identified utilizing the following terms: ▪ Unlikely – less than 1 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. ▪ Occasional – 1 to 10 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 11 to 100 years. ▪ Likely – 11 to 90 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 1 to 10 years. ▪ Highly Likely – 91 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of less than 1 year.  Determine exposure to each hazard: Exposure was assessed by overlaying hazard maps with an inventory of structures, facilities, and systems to decide which of them would be exposed to each hazard.  Assess the vulnerability of exposed facilities: Vulnerability of exposed structures and infrastructure was evaluated by interpreting the probability of occurrence of each event and assessing structures, facilities, and systems that are exposed to each hazard. Tools such as GIS and Hazus were used for this assessment for the flood and earthquake hazards. Outputs similar to those from Hazus were generated for other hazards, using data generated through GIS. 6.4.1 Earthquake and Flood The following hazards were evaluated using Hazus:  Flood: A Level 1 user-defined analysis was performed for general building stock in flood zones and for critical facilities and infrastructure. Digital Elevation Models (DEM) for the OA was used to delineate flood hazard areas and estimate potential losses from the 10-percent-annual-chance, 1- percent-annual-chance, and 0.2-percent-annual-chance flood events. To estimate damage that would result from a flood, Hazus uses pre-defined relationships between flood depth at a structure and resulting damage, with damage given as a percent of total replacement value. Curves defining these relationships have been developed for damage to structures and for damage to typical contents within a structure. By inputting flood depth data and known property replacement cost values, dollar-value estimates of damage were generated.  Earthquake: A Level 2 analysis was performed to assess earthquake exposure and vulnerability for three scenario events and two probabilistic events: ▪ A Magnitude-7.0 event on the Hayward Fault with an epicenter approximately 25 miles north of the City of Palo Alto. ▪ A Magnitude-7.0 event on the Calaveras Fault with an epicenter approximately 25 miles north of the City of Milpitas. ▪ A Magnitude-7.8 event on the San Andreas Fault with an epicenter approximately 148 miles northwest of the City of Palo Alto. ▪ The standard Hazus 100- and 500-year probabilistic events. 156 PSC 09-12-2024 156 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 6: Identified Hazards of Concern and Risk Assessment 77 6.4.2 Drought The risk assessment methodologies used for this plan focus on damage to structures. The risk assessment for drought was more limited and qualitative than the assessment for the other hazards of concern because drought does not affect structures. 6.4.3 All Other Assessed Hazards Historical datasets were not adequate to model future losses for most of the hazards of concern. However, areas and inventory susceptible to some of the hazards of concern were mapped by other means and exposure was evaluated. A qualitative analysis was conducted for other hazards using the best available data and professional judgment. 6.5 EMAP Consequence Analysis A consequence analysis of the potential for detrimental impacts of hazards is included in this 2023 plan update for the Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP). Each hazard identified in this plan is followed by the Consequence Analysis result. In this analysis all nine natural hazards profiled for Santa Clara County have been addressed, with the impacts that each will have on the following:  Impact on the Public: What is the scope of impact on the health and safety of people in the area of the incident?  Impact on Responders: What is the scope of impact on health and safety of responders (i.e., firefighters, law enforcement, emergency management personnel, etc.) in the area responding to the incident?  Continuity of Operations: Will the organization need to relocate in order to fulfill duties? Will any other continuity measures be implemented?  Impact on Property, Facilities, and Infrastructure: What are potential damages to structures (private and public), utilities, treatment plants, electric grid, roads, and bridges?  Delivery of Services: What impacts occur to the delivery of services such as food, medical, or any other life sustaining entities?  Impact on the Environment: How has the incident affected the surrounding environment, i.e., contamination (water, soil, or air), erosion, crop damage, etc.?  Impact on the Economy: Are there any affects to the economy due to loss of revenue, cleanup efforts, and reconstruction?  Impact of the Public Confidence in the Jurisdiction’s Governance: How has the hazard affected public confidence? The Consequence Analysis includes ranking determinations for each of the above elements. The ranking elements are categorized as Minimal, Moderate, or Severe. The Risk Assessment portion of the MJHMP was used to ascertain prior damages in an effort to estimate ratings on future impacts. The ratings are meant to be a guide, and not all inclusive, due to the variances that could apply such as population, location, time, hazard type, and the number of jurisdictions within the hazard area. 157 PSC 09-12-2024 157 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 6: Identified Hazards of Concern and Risk Assessment 78 6.6 Sources of Data Used in Hazus Modeling 6.6.1 Building and Cost Data Replacement cost values and detailed structure information and census data are included within Hazus 6.0. This recently updated version of Hazus uses 2020 census data and dasymetric census blocks for improved floodplain model accuracy. The stock building inventory data is from the National Structure Inventory (NSI), a point-based dataset developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). When available, updated data provided by Santa Clara County was used in place of the Hazus defaults for critical facilities and infrastructure. Replacement cost is the cost to replace the entire structure with one of equal quality and utility. Replacement cost is based on industry-standard cost-estimation models published in RSMeans Square Foot Costs.38F38F 39 It is calculated using the RSMeans square foot cost for a structure, which is based on the Hazus occupancy class (i.e., multi-family residential or commercial retail trade), multiplied by the square footage of the structure from the tax assessor data. The construction class and number of stories for single-family residential structures also factor into determining the square foot costs. 6.6.2 Hazus Data Inputs The following hazard datasets were used for the Hazus Level 2 analysis conducted for the risk assessment:  Flood: A USGS 10-meter Digital Elevation Model for the OA was used to delineate flood hazard areas and generate flood depth grids that are integrated into the Hazus model. These depth grids are used to estimate potential losses from the 10-percent-annual-chance, 1-percent-annual- chance, and 0.2-percent-annual-chance flood events.  Earthquake: Earthquake ShakeMaps and probabilistic data prepared by the USGS were used for the analysis of this hazard. A National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program soils map from the California Department of Conservation, USGS liquefaction susceptibility data and susceptibility to deep-seated landslide from the California Geological Survey were also integrated into the Hazus model. Hazus uses classifications within these datasets to derive probabilities that ground deformation can occur in areas of higher liquefaction or landslide susceptibility. It should be noted that deep-seated landslides are generally large landslides that are slow moving during rainfall induced movement, but some can be fast moving and may occur during earthquakes. However, this dataset does not specifically measure earthquake induced landslides. Inclusion of liquefaction and landslide data in Hazus represent ground deformation that may occur during an earthquake that can contribute to structural damage. As such, inclusion of these datasets tends to increase the amount and cost of damage modeled by Hazus. 6.6.3 Other Local Hazard Data Locally relevant information on hazards was gathered from a variety of sources. Frequency and severity indicators include past events and the expert opinions of geologists, emergency management specialists, and others. Data sources for specific hazards were as follows:  Landslide: Susceptibility to deep-seated landslide data were provided by the California Geological Survey. 39 RSMeans data from Gordian. (2023). Estimating Square Foot Cost. https://www.rsmeans.com/estimating-square- foot-cost 158 PSC 09-12-2024 158 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 6: Identified Hazards of Concern and Risk Assessment 79  Sea Level Rise: Sea level rise data were provided by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. A sea level rise of 6 feet above current mean higher high water was used for the exposure analysis.  Dam Inundation: Dam inundation exposure areas were acquired from the California Department of Water Resources Division of Safety of Dams. Many of these are owned by the Santa Clara Valley Water District.  Levee Inundation: Levee inundation exposure areas were defined with boundaries provided by Santa Clara County.  Severe Storm: No GIS format severe storm area datasets were identified for the OA.  Tsunami: Tsunami inundation map was prepared by California Department of Conservation in cooperation with the University of Southern California, California Geological Survey, and California Emergency Management Agency.  Wildfire: Wildfire Hazard Classification and Structures at Risk data were provided by Tukman Geospatial. Additional fire severity data was acquired from California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 6.6.4 Data Source Summary Table 17 summarizes the data sources used for the risk assessment for this plan. Table 17: Hazus Model Data Documentation Data Source Date Format Building information such as area, occupancy, date of construction, and stories FEMA Hazus version 6.0, National Structure Inventory (NSI), Santa Clara County 2023 Digital (tabular) format Building replacement cost FEMA Hazus version 6.0 2023 Digital (GIS and tabular) format Population data FEMA Hazus version 6.0, US Census Bureau 2020 Digital (GIS and tabular) format Flood hazard data FEMA 2016 Digital (GIS) format Tsunami CGS (State of California) 2021 Digital (GIS) format Earthquake ShakeMaps USGS, provided via Hazus version 6.0 Downloaded 2023 Digital (GIS) format Liquefaction susceptibility USGS (via ABAG) 2006 Digital (GIS) format National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey Downloaded 2023 Digital (GIS) format Dam Inundation Areas California Department of Water Resources, Division of Safety of Dams Varies 2019-2021 Digital (GIS) format Landslide California Geological Survey 2011 Digital (GIS) format 159 PSC 09-12-2024 159 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 6: Identified Hazards of Concern and Risk Assessment 80 Data Source Date Format Sea Level Rise Adapting to Rising Tides - San Francisco Conservation and Development Commission 2018 Digital (GIS) format Wildfire Tukman Geospatial, CAL FIRE 2022, 2007 Digital (GIS) format Digital Elevation Model USGS Downloaded 2023 Digital (GIS) format Critical Facilities and Assets Hazus version 6.0, Santa Clara County 2023 Digital (GIS) format Emergency operation centers, airport facilities, bus facilities, light rail facilities, rail facilities, communication facilities, electric power facilities, potable water facilities, wastewater facilities FEMA Hazus version 6.0 Default Critical Facilities Data 2023 Digital (GIS) format Points of interest (city halls, community centers, other county facilities, child day care facilities) Santa Clara County 2023 Digital (GIS) format Santa Clara County critical facilities (fire stations, hospitals, skilled nursing facilities and clinics, police stations, public / private schools, universities, and colleges) FEMA Hazus version 6.0, Santa Clara County 2023 Digital (spreadsheet) format Superfund sites (hazardous material sites) EPA 2022 Digital (GIS) format Toxic release inventory facilities (hazardous material facilities, designated communications centers, electric power, and petroleum facilities) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Downloaded 2023 Digital (GIS) format State and local bridges (highway bridges, light rail bridges, rail bridges, includes pedestrian bridges) Hazus 6.0 Inventory, Santa Clara County 2023 Digital (GIS) format 6.7 Limitations Loss estimates, exposure assessments, and hazard-specific vulnerability evaluations rely on the best available data and methodologies. Uncertainties are inherent in any loss estimation methodology and arise in part from incomplete scientific knowledge concerning natural hazards and their effects on the built environment. Uncertainties also result from the following:  Approximations and simplifications necessary to conduct a study.  Incomplete or outdated inventory, demographic or economic parameter data.  The unique nature, geographic extent, and severity of each hazard.  Mitigation measures already employed. 160 PSC 09-12-2024 160 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 6: Identified Hazards of Concern and Risk Assessment 81  The amount of advance notice residents have to prepare for a specific hazard event.  Lack of a standardized model for assessing sea level rise impacts. Multiple models provide multiple results. Not all models were run in the development of the sea level rise analysis. These factors can affect loss estimates by a factor of two or more. Therefore, potential exposure and loss estimates are approximate and should be used only to understand relative risk. Over the long term, Santa Clara County will collect additional data to assist in estimating potential losses associated with other hazards. 161 PSC 09-12-2024 161 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 82 7 Earthquake Definitions  Earthquake: The shaking of the ground caused by an abrupt shift of rock along a fracture in the earth or a contact zone between tectonic plates.  Epicenter: The point on the earth’s surface directly above the hypocenter of an earthquake. The location of an earthquake is commonly described by the geographic position of its epicenter and by its focal depth.  Fault: A fracture in the earth’s crust along which two blocks of the crust have slipped with respect to each other.  Hypocenter: The region underground where an earthquake ’s energy originates.  Liquefaction: Loosely packed, water-logged sediments losing their strength in response to strong shaking, causing major damage during earthquakes. 7.1 General Background An earthquake is the vibration of the earth’s surface following a release of energy in the earth ’s crust. This energy can be generated by a sudden dislocation of the crust or by a volcanic eruption. Most destructive quakes are caused by dislocations of the crust. The crust may first bend and then, when the stress exceeds the strength of the rocks, break and snap to a new position. In the process of breaking, vibrations called “seismic waves” are generated. These waves travel outward from the source of the earthquake at varying speeds. Geologists have found that earthquakes tend to reoccur along faults, which are zones of weakness in the earth’s crust. Even if a fault zone has recently experienced an earthquake, there is no guarantee that all the stress has been relieved. Another earthquake could still occur. In fact, relieving stress can increase stress in other parts of the affected fault and other faults. Additional earthquakes, called aftershocks, are common after a large earthquake. California is seismically active because of movement of the North American Plate, east of the San Andreas Fault, and the Pacific Plate to the west, which includes the state ’s coastal communities. Movement of the tectonic plates against one another creates stress, which is released as energy that moves through the earth as seismic waves. Faults are classified in terms of their activity level; “active,” “potentially active,” or “inactive.” Most seismic activity occurs along faults that are known to have geologic evidence of activity. However, inactive faults, where no such displacements have been recorded, also have the potential to reactivate or experience displacement along a branch sometime in the future. An example of a fault zone that has been reactivated is the Foothills Fault Zone. The zone was considered inactive until evidence of an earthquake (approximately 1.6 million years ago) was found near Spenceville, California. Then, in 1975, an earthquake occurred on another branch of the zone near Oroville, California (now known as the Cleveland Hills Fault). The State Division of Mines and Geology indicates that increased earthquake activity throughout California may cause tectonic movement along currently inactive fault systems. 162 PSC 09-12-2024 162 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 83 7.1.1 Damage from Earthquakes A direct relationship exists between a fault’s length and location and its ability to generate damaging ground motion at a given site. Small, local faults produce lower magnitude quakes, but ground shaking can still be strong, and damage can be significant in areas close to the fault. In contrast, la rge regional faults can generate earthquakes of great magnitudes but, because of their distance and depth, they may result in only moderate shaking in an area. Earthquakes can last from a few seconds to over five minutes; they may also occur as a series of tremors over a period of several days. Aftershocks may be felt for months or years after the mainshock. The actual movement of the ground in an earthquake is seldom the direct cause of injury or death. People that fall over during the quake may experience more mild injuries like broken bones. Casualties generally result from falling objects and debris, because earthquakes shake, damage, or demolish furnishings a nd buildings and other structures. Disruption of communications and internet, electrical power, gas, sewer, and water services should be expected in the affected area. Earthquakes may trigger dam failures and landslides. Their damage may cause fires and releases of hazardous material, compounding the disastrous effects. 7.1.2 Earthquake Classifications Earthquakes are typically classified in one of two ways: by the amount of energy released, measured as magnitude; or by the impact on people and structures, measured as intensity. Magnitude An earthquake’s magnitude is a measure of the energy released at the source of the earthquake. It is commonly expressed by ratings on either of two scales (Michigan Tech University)39F39F 40:  The Richter scale measures magnitude of earthquakes based on the amplitude of the largest energy wave released by the earthquake. Richter scale readings are suitable for smaller earthquakes; however, because it is a logarithmic scale, the scale does not distinguish clearly the magnitude of large earthquakes above a certain level. Richter scale magnitudes and corresponding earthquake effects are as follows: ▪ 2.5 or less: Usually not felt, but can be recorded by seismograph. ▪ 2.5 to 5.4: Often felt, but causes only minor damage. ▪ 5.5 to 6.0: Slight damage to buildings and other structures. ▪ 6.1 to 6.9: May cause a lot of damage in very populated areas. ▪ 7.0 to 7.9: Major earthquake; serious damage. ▪ 8.0 or greater: Great earthquake; can totally destroy communities near the epicenter. 40 Michigan Tech University. (n.d.) How do we measure Earthquake Magnitude? https://www.mtu.edu/geo/community/seismology/learn/earthquake-measure/ 163 PSC 09-12-2024 163 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 84  While the Richter scale may be well known, the most commonly used scale today is the moment magnitude (Mw) scale. The moment magnitude scale is based on the total moment release of the earthquake (the product of the distance a fault moved, and the force required to move it). Moment magnitude roughly matches the Richter scale but provides more accuracy for larger magnitude earthquakes. The scale is as follows: ▪ Great: Mw > 8. ▪ Major: Mw = 7.0 - 7.9. ▪ Strong: Mw = 6.0 - 6.9. ▪ Moderate: Mw = 5.0 - 5.9. ▪ Light: Mw = 4.0 - 4.9. ▪ Minor: Mw = 3.0 - 3.9. ▪ Micro: Mw < 3. Intensity For an earthquake, intensity varies across the area. Intensity will be larger near the fault rupture, in the direction of the rupture, and in sedimentary basins. Sedimentary basins are depressions in the earth ’s surface that consist of alluvial deposit and sedimentary rocks, which are geologically younger and have slower seismic wave velocities.40F40F 41 Sedimentary basins like the Evergreen basin, which lies beneath the northeastern margin of the Santa Clara Valley near the south end of the San Francisco Bay, amplify the ground shaking during an earthquake, increasing the intensity of the quake. Currentl y the most commonly used intensity scale is the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) Scale, with ratings defined in Figure 19.41F41F 42 41 U.S. Geological Survey. (2020). Earthquake Science Center Seminars, Sedimentary basin effects in ground motions from empirical models and simulation platforms. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/contactus/menlo/seminars/1297#:~:text=Sedimentary%20basins%20are%20depressions %20in,in%20thickness%20towards%20their%20margins. 42 U.S. Geological Survey. (n.d.). The Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) Scale assigns intensities as…. https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/modified-mercalli-intensity-mmi-scale-assigns-intensities 164 PSC 09-12-2024 164 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 85 Figure 20: Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale42F42F 43 7.1.3 Ground Motion Earthquake hazard assessment is also based on expected ground motions. During an earthquake when the ground is shaking, it experiences acceleration. The peak ground acceleration (PGA) is the largest increase in velocity recorded by a particular station during an earthquake. PGA indicates the severity of an earthquake and is a measure of how hard the earth shakes, or accelerates, in a given geographic area. It is measured in g (the acceleration due to gravity), expressed as a percentage of that acceleration (%g). Horizontal and vertical PGA varies with soil or rock type. Instruments called accelerographs record levels of ground motion due to earthquakes at stations throughout a region. These readings are recorded by state and federal agencies that monitor and predict seismic activity. Earthquake hazard assessment involves estimating the annual probability that certain ground motion accelerations will be exceeded, and then summing the annual probabilities over the time period of interest. National maps of earthquake shaking hazards, which have been produced since 1948, provide information for creating and updating seismic design requirements for building codes, insurance rate structures, earthquake loss studies, retrofit priorities and land use planning. After thorough review of the studies, professional organizations of engineers update the seismic-risk maps and seismic design requirements contained in building codes, the USGS updated the National Seismic Hazard Maps in 2018. 43 U.S. Geological Survey. (n.d.). The Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) Scale Assigns Intensities as... https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/modified-mercalli-intensity-mmi-scale-assigns-intensities 165 PSC 09-12-2024 165 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 86 New seismic, geologic, and geodetic information on earthquake motion, soil amplification factors, and local seismic velocity models was incorporated into the revised maps, allowing the USGS, for the first time, to calculate probabilistic seismic hazard curves for an expanded time period and site classes as well as account for long-period ground motions in deep sedimentary basins like the San Francisco Bay region.43F43F 44 The USGS is currently working on updating this model with a targeted release later in 2023. These maps influence earthquake insurance rates and support government official, emergency managers, community planners, and the public in understanding the potent ial risks to their community. Building codes that include seismic provisions specify the horizontal force due to lateral acceleration that a building should be able to withstand during an earthquake. Buildings, bridges, highways, and utilities built to meet modern seismic design requirements are typically able to withstand earthquakes better, with less damage and disruption. PGA values are directly related to these lateral forces that could damage “short period structures” (e.g., single-family dwellings). Longer-period response components determine the lateral forces that damage taller structures with longer natural periods (apartment buildings, factories, high-rises, bridges). Figure 20 lists damage potential and perceived shaking by PGA factors, compared to the Mercalli scale. Figure 21: Peak Acceleration (%g) with 10% Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years 44F44F 45 44 U.S. Geological Survey. (2021, September 23). Data Release for Additional Period and Site Class Data for the 2018 National Seismic Hazard Model for the Conterminous United States. https://www.usgs.gov/data/data-release- additional-period-and-site-class-data-2018-national-seismic-hazard-model 45 U.S. Geological Survey. (2018). 2018 Long-term National Seismic Hazard Map. https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/2018-long-term-national-seismic-hazard-map 166 PSC 09-12-2024 166 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 87 Table 18: Mercalli Scale and Peak Ground Acceleration Comparison45F45F 46 Modified Mercalli Scale Perceived Shaking Potential Structure Damage Estimated PGAa (%g) Resistant Buildings Vulnerable Buildings I Not Felt None None <0.17% II-III Weak None None 0.17% - 1.4% IV Light None None 1.4% - 3.9% V Moderate Very Light Light 3.9% - 9.2% VI Strong Light Moderate 9.2% - 18% VII Very Strong Moderate Moderate/Heavy 18% - 34% VIII Severe Moderate/Heavy Heavy 34% - 65% IX Violent Heavy Very Heavy 65% - 124% X - XII Extreme Very Heavy Very Heavy >124% a PGA measured in percent of g, where g is the acceleration of gravity. 7.1.4 Effect of Soil Types The impact of an earthquake on structures and infrastructure is largely a function of ground shaking, distance from the source of the quake, and liquefaction, a secondary effect of an earthquake in which soils lose their shear strength and flow or behave as liquid, thereby damaging structures that derive their support from the soil. Liquefaction generally occurs in soft, unconsolidated sedimentary soils and shallow water table. A program called the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) creates maps based on soil characteristics to help identify locations subject to liquefaction. Table 19 summarizes NEHRP soil classifications. NEHRP Soils B and C typically can sustain ground shaking without much effect, dependent on the earthquake magnitude. The areas that are commonly most affected by ground shaking have NEHRP Soils D, E, and F. In general, these areas are also most susceptible to liquefaction. Table 19: National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program Soil Classification System46F46F 47 NEHRP Soil Type Description Mean Shear Velocity to 30 m (m/s) A Hard Rock 1,500 B Firm to Hard Rock 760–1,500 C Dense Soil/Soft Rock 360–760 D Stiff Soil 180–360 E Soft Clays < 180 46 SanAndreasFault.org. (2010). Did you feel it? http://www.sanandreasfault.org/feelit.html 47 National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program. (n.d.). Seismic Site Classification. https://www.masw.com/files/NEHRP.pdf 167 PSC 09-12-2024 167 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 88 NEHRP Soil Type Description Mean Shear Velocity to 30 m (m/s) F Special Study Soils (liquefiable soils, sensitive clays, organic soils, soft clays >36 m thick) The USGS has created a soil type map for the San Francisco Bay area that provides rough estimates of site effects based on surface geology. NEHRP soil types were assigned to a geologic unit based on the average velocity of that unit, and the USGS notes that this approach can lead to some inaccuracy. For instance, a widespread unit consisting of Quaternary sand, gravel, silt, and mud has been assigned as Class C soil types; however, some of the slower soil types in this unit fall under Class D. USGS does not have any way of differentiating units for slower-velocity soils in its digital geologic dataset.47F47F 48 7.2 Hazard Profile The Bay region is located within the active boundary between the Pacific and the North American tectonic plates. The western edge of the Santa Clara County OA is on the Pacific Plate, which is constantly moving northwest past the North American Plate at a rate of about 2 inches per year.48F48F 49 Earthquakes in the San Francisco Bay region result from strain energy constantly accumulating across the region because of the motion of the Pacific Plate relative to the North American Plate. The San Andreas Fault, on which earthquakes of magnitude 7.8 and 7.9 have occurred in historical time, including the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, is the fastest slipping fault along the plate boundary. 7.2.1 Past Events The last major earthquake with an epicenter in the Santa Clara County OA was the 1984 Morgan Hill Earthquake (Magnitude 6.2). The epicenter of the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake (Magnitude 7.1) was just a few miles outside the OA. Since then, there have been no significant seismic events in Santa Clara County.49F49F 50 Other significant earthquakes in California include the 1906 earthquake in San Francisco, the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake, the 1994 Northridge earthquake, the 2014 Napa earthquake, and the 2019 Ridgecrest earthquake. The Morgan Hill Earthquake of April 24, 1984, was a moderate size earthquake on the Calaveras Fault. It caused moderate damage that extended southward from the epicenter. In the Santa Clara County OA, where most of the damage occurred, more than 550 structures experienced minor damage. Major structural damage was mostly confined to a small area on two streets in the Jackson Oaks subdivision east of Morgan Hill. There were numerous reports of fires resulting from the earthquake. Minor damage was also reported in San Martin and Coyote. Twenty-seven people were injured.50F50F 51 This event led to a FEMA major disaster declaration (DR-845). 48 U.S. Geological Survey. (2006). Geologic Map of the San Francisco Bay Region. https://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/2006/2918/sim2918_geolposter-stdres.pdf 49 U.S. Geological Survey. (n.d.). Earthquake Facts & Earthquake Fantasy. https://www.usgs.gov/programs/earthquake-hazards/earthquake-facts-earthquake- fantasy#:~:text=The%20Pacific%20Plate%20moves%20northwestward%20past%20the%20North,tiny%20shocks%2 0and%20a%20few%20moderate%20earth%20tremors. 50 Association of Bay Area Governments. (n.d.). Resilience. https://abag.ca.gov/our-work/resilience 51 Association of Bay Area Governments. (2011). Bay Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Taming Natural Hazards. https://abag.ca.gov/2011-bay-area-hazard-mitigation-plan 168 PSC 09-12-2024 168 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 89 The Loma Prieta Earthquake on October 17, 1989, occurred near Loma Prieta in the Santa Cruz Mountains along the San Andreas Fault. Thousands of landslides across the area blocked roads and highways, impacting rescue efforts and damaging structures. In Santa Clara County, collapsed and damaged buildings were reported in Gilroy, Los Gatos, and San José.51F51F 52 California has been included in 13 FEMA major disaster (DR) or emergency (EM) declarations for earthquakes. Santa Clara County was included in only one declaration: DR-845 for the Loma Prieta Earthquake, which occurred in 1989. The declaration for this event covered Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Monterey, Sacramento. Table 20 and Figure 21 summarize recent earthquakes of magnitude of 5.0 or greater within a 100-mile radius of the OA. Table 20: Recent Earthquakes Magnitude 5.0 or Larger Within a 100-Mile Radius of the Operational Area Date Magnitude Epicenter Location 10/25/2022 5.1 9 miles east-southeast of Alum Rock, California 4/5/2018 5.3 19 miles southwest of Santa Cruz, California 8/24/2014 6.0 South Napa, California 10/21/2012 5.3 15 miles east-northeast of King City, California 10/31/2007 5.5 San José, California 5/14/2002 5.0 Northern California 9/3/2000 5.0 Northern California 8/12/1998 5.2 Central California 4/18/1990 5.4 Northern California 10/17/1989 6.9 Loma Prieta, California Earthquake 10/18/1989 5.1 4 miles southwest of Monte Sereno, California 8/8/1989 5.4 Northern California 6/27/1989 5.3 Northern California 6/13/1988 5.3 San Francisco Bay Area, California 2/20/1988 5.1 Central California 3/31/1986 5.7 Northern California 1/26/1986 5.4 Central California 52 Association of Bay Area Governments. (2011). Bay Area Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Taming Natural Hazards. https://abag.ca.gov/2011-bay-area-hazard-mitigation-plan 169 PSC 09-12-2024 169 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 90 Figure 22: Historic Earthquakes in the Operational Area 7.2.2 Location Santa Clara County is exposed to three major regional faults: Hayward, Calaveras, and San Andreas. The Hayward and Calaveras faults are in the central portion of Santa Clara County and present the greatest earthquake threat to the OA. The San Andreas Fault is on the northwestern boundary of the OA and runs through hills separating Santa Clara County from Santa Cruz County. The primary seismic hazard for the OA is potential ground shaking from these three large faults.52F52F 53 The Greenville fault in the northeastern portion of the county presents less risk than these three major faults. Figure 22 provides 53 Association of Bay Area Governments. (n.d.). Earthquake. https://abag.ca.gov/our-work/resilience/data- research/earthquake 170 PSC 09-12-2024 170 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 91 location and probability of area fault lines. The three major faults are described further in the following sections. Hayward Fault The Hayward Fault runs parallel to and east of the San Andreas Fault. It extends from San José about 74 miles northward along the base of the East Bay Hills to San Pablo Bay. The fault is a right -lateral slip fault. The Hayward Fault extends through some of the Bay Area’s most populated areas. Communities on or near the fault include San José, Oakland, Fremont, Richmond, Berkeley, Hayward, San Leandro, San Lorenzo, El Cerrito, Emeryville, Kensington, and Milpitas. Among other sites, the fault runs directly under the now-abandoned old city hall in downtown Hayward, the University of California-Berkeley football stadium, the Mira Vista Golf Course near Berkeley, Lake Temescal, Contra Costa College, and Port Pinole Shoreline Regional Park. It is the single most urbanized earthquake fault in the United States.53F53F 54 The Hayward Fault is becoming a hazard priority throughout the Bay Area because of its increased chance for activity and its intersection with multiple highly populated areas and critical infrastructure. According to the Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, Volume 3, released in March 2015, the probability of experiencing a Magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquake along the Hayward Fault in the next 30 years (starting from 2014) is 14.3 percent.54F54F 55 An earthquake of this magnitude has regional implications for the entire Bay Area, as the Hayward Fault crosses transportation and resource infrastructure, including multiple highways, regional gas and water pipelines, electrical transmission lines, and the Hetch-Hetchy Aqueduct. Disruption of the Hetch-Hetchy system has the potential to severely impair water service to the Santa Clara County OA. An important difference between the Hayward and San Andreas faults is “aseismic creep.” The San Andreas Fault is locked in many places; much of its energy is released in the form of earthquakes. However, creep occurs in spots along the Hayward Fault. The ground moves a few millimeters each year, pulling apart sidewalks, pipelines and other structures that sit astride the fault. At Memorial Stadium at the University of California Berkeley, which was built in 1923, creep has caused the two sides of the stadiu m to be offset more than a foot, requiring retrofitting with expansion joints. Creep accounts for a small part of the total motion that takes place on a fault over geologic time; earthquakes account for the rest.55F55F 56 54 California Office of Emergency Services. (2016, July 6). Bay Area Earthquake Plan. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/Preparedness/Documents/BayAreaEQConopsPub_Version_2016.pdf . 55 U.S. Geological Survey. (2015, March). UCEFR3: A New Earthquake Forecast for California’s Complex Fault System. https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2015/3009/pdf/fs2015-3009.pdf 56 California Department of Conservation. (2008, October 7). Hayward Fault Fact Sheet. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/index/Pages/HaywardFaultFactSheet.aspx 171 PSC 09-12-2024 171 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 92 Figure 23: Significant Known Faults in the Bay Area56F 57 57 U.S. Geological Survey. (2016, August). Earthquake Outlook for the San Francisco Bay Region 2014 -2043. https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2016/3020/fs20163020.pdf 172 PSC 09-12-2024 172 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 93 Calaveras Fault The Calaveras Fault is a major branch of the San Andreas Fault, located to the east of the Hayward Fault. It extends 76 miles from the San Andreas Fault near Hollister to Danville at its northern end. The Calaveras Fault is one of the most geologically active and complex faults in the Bay Area. Recent research from the University of Berkeley suggests that the Hayward fault is essentially an offshoot of the Calaveras Fault.57F 58 This means that they could go off together, potentially creating a larger event as an earthquake’s magnitude is relative to its length. In a worst case scenario, a rupture along the Hayward fault could extend to the Calaveras Fault and south to where the Calaveras Fault meets the San Andreas Fault. The probability of experiencing a Magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquake along the Calaveras Fault in the next 30 years is 7.4% percent. San Andreas Fault The San Andreas Fault extends 810 miles from the East Pacific rise in the Gulf of California through the Mendocino fracture zone off the shore of northern California. The fault is estimated to be 28 million years old. The San Andreas Fault is an example of a transform boundary exposed on a continent. It forms the tectonic boundary between the Pacific Plate and the North American Plate, and its motion is right -lateral strike-slip. The San Andreas Fault is typically referenced in three segments. The southern segment extends from its origin at the East Pacific Rise to Parkfield, California, in Monterey County. The central segment extends from Parkfield to Hollister, California. The northern segment extends northwest from Hollister, through Santa Clara County, to its ultimate junction with the Mendocino fracture zone and the Cascadia subduction zone in the Pacific Ocean. The probability of experiencing a Magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquake along the San Andreas Fault within the next 30 years is 6.4 percent. Maps of Earthquake Impact on the OA The impact of an earthquake is largely a function of the following components:  Surface fault rupture  Ground shaking (ground motion accelerations)  Liquefaction (soil instability) Impacts vary with distance from the source (both horizontally and vertically). Mapping that shows the impacts of these components was used to assess the risk of earthquakes within the OA, as described in the sections below. Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Map A probabilistic seismic hazard map shows the hazard from earthquakes that geologists and seismologists agree could occur. The maps are expressed in terms of probability of exceeding a certain ground motion, such as the 10-percent probability of exceedance in 50 years. This level of ground shaking has been used for designing buildings in high seismic areas.58F 59 58 University of California Berkley. (2015, April 2). https://news.berkeley.edu/2015/04/02/calaveras-hayward-fault-link- means-potentially-larger-quakes/ 59 Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment, Association of Bay Area Government Resilience Program (2018, February 22) https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=c3a21989363b484ca6f9c0730e14d9f6 . 173 PSC 09-12-2024 173 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 94 Figure 24: 500-Year Probabilistic Earthquake Scenario Peak Ground Acceleration 7.2.3 ShakeMaps A ShakeMap is a representation of ground shaking produced by an earthquake. The information it presents is different from the earthquake magnitude and epicenter that are released after an earthquake because ShakeMaps focus on the ground shaking resulting from the earthquake, rather than the parameters describing the earthquake source. An earthquake has only one magnitude and one epicenter, but it produces a range of ground shaking at sites throughout the region, depe nding on the distance from the earthquake, the rock and soil conditions at sites, and variations in the propagation of seismic waves from the earthquake due to complexities in the structure of the earth ’s crust. A ShakeMap shows the extent and variation of ground shaking in a region immediately following significant earthquakes. 174 PSC 09-12-2024 174 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 95 Ground motion and intensity maps are derived from peak ground motion amplitudes recorded on seismic sensors (accelerometers), with interpolation based on estimated amplitudes where data are lacking, and site amplification corrections. Color-coded instrumental intensity maps are derived from empirical relations between peak ground motions and Modified Mercalli intensity. There are two types of scenario ground motion maps: a ShakeMap of median shaking for a fault rupture; and a map of simulated ground motions for a specified earthquake hypocenter and fault rupture. The latter is more like an earthquake event and presents more variability in ground motions than a scenario ShakeMap. Earthquake scenario maps describe the expected ground motions and effects of hypothetical large earthquakes for a region. The following scenarios were chosen for this plan: • A Magnitude 7.0 on the Hayward Fault with an epicenter approximately 25 miles north of the City of Palo Alto. 59F 60 • A Magnitude 7.0 on the Calaveras Fault with an epicenter approximately 25 miles north of the City of Milpitas. 60F 61 • A Magnitude 7.8 on the San Andreas Fault with an epicenter approximately 148 miles northwest of the City of Palo Alto. 61F 62 60 U.S. Geological Survey Shakemap Scenario. (n.d.) M 7.0 Scenario Earthquake – Hayward – Rodgers Creek. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/scenarios/eventpage/nclegacyhaywardrodgerscreekhnhsm7p0_se/executive. 61 U.S. Geological Survey Shakemap Scenario (n.d.) M 7.0 Scenario Earthquake – Calaveras North + Central+ South. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/scenarios/eventpage/nclegacycalaverascncccsm7p0_se/executive . 62 USGS Shakemap Scenario (n.d.) M 7.8 Scenario Earthquake – N. San Andreas; North Coast + Peninsula + Santa Cruz Mountain. https://earthquake.usgs.gov/scenarios/eventpage/nclegacynpsanandreassansapsasm7p8_se/executive . 175 PSC 09-12-2024 175 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 96  Figure 25: Hayward Magnitude 7.0 Fault Scenario Peak Ground Acceleration 176 PSC 09-12-2024 176 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 97 Figure 26: Calaveras Magnitude 7.0 Fault Scenario Peak Ground Acceleration 177 PSC 09-12-2024 177 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 98 Figure 27: San Andreas Magnitude 7.8 Fault Scenario Peak Ground Acceleration Liquefaction Maps Soil liquefaction maps are useful tools to assess potential damage from earthquakes. When the ground liquefies, sandy or silty materials saturated with water behave like a liquid, causing pipes to leak, roads and airport runways to buckle, and building foundations to be damaged. In general, areas with NEHRP Soils D, E, and F are also susceptible to liquefaction. If there is a dry soil crust, excess water will sometimes come to the surface through cracks in the confining layer, bringing liquefied sand with it, creating sand boils. Figure 27 shows the liquefaction susceptibility in the Santa Clara County OA. 178 PSC 09-12-2024 178 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 99 Figure 28: Liquefaction Susceptibility Alquist-Priolo Zone Maps The sliding movement of earth on either side of a fault is called fault rupture. Fault rupture begins below the ground surface at the earthquake hypocenter, typically between 3 and 12 miles below the ground surface in California. If an earthquake is large enough, the fault rupture will travel to the ground surface, potentially destroying structures built across its path. California’s Alquist-Priolo Zone maps define regulatory zones for potential surface fault rupture where fault lines intersect with future development and populated areas. The purpose of these maps is to assist in the geologic investigation before construction begins to ensure that structures will not be located on an active fault. 179 PSC 09-12-2024 179 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 100 Cities and counties affected by the zones must regulate certain development projects while sellers of real estate must disclose at the time of sale that the property lies within such a zone. The Santa Clara County OA is located in a designated Alquist-Priolo Zone for the Hayward Fault.62F 63 Alquist-Priolo maps were referenced, but not specifically used, in the assessment of risk for this plan. This plan assumes that the studies conducted and information provided by the State of California are the best available data for surface rupture risk and could not be improved through a separate assessment for this plan. Alquist-Priolo maps are available to the public on the California Department of Conservation website.63F 64 7.2.4 Frequency California experiences hundreds of earthquakes each year, most with minimal damage and magnitudes below 3.0 on the Richter Scale. Earthquakes that cause moderate damage to structures occur several times a year. According to the USGS, a strong earthquake measuring greater than 5.0 on the Richter Scale occurs every 2 to 3 years and major earthquakes of more than 7.0 on the Richter Scale occur once a decade. The USGS estimated in 2016 that there is a 72-percent probability of at least one earthquake before 2043 with a magnitude of 6.7 or greater that could cause widespread damage in the San Francisco Bay area.64F 65 According to the Third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast, the probability of moderate -sized earthquakes (magnitude 6.5 to 7.5) is lower than previously forecasted, whereas that of larger events is higher.65F 66 This is because the new study took into account the possibility of ruptures along multiple faults simultaneously. Probabilities for earthquakes on major fault lines in the San Francisco Bay Area have been estimated by the USGS in its 2016 report, as summarized in Table 21. A major earthquake could happen at any time. Both the San Andreas and the Hayward Faults have the potential for experiencing major to great events. Large earthquakes along the Hayward Fault have occurred on average every 150 years – the last being in 1868.66F 67 USGS describe the fault as a “tectonic time bomb.”.67F 68 Any seismic activity of 6.0 or greater on faults within the OA would have significant impacts throughout the OA. Bay Area communities can use the likelihood of a 6.8 -7.0 earthquake near San Francisco as a predictive model of what to prepare for. Further information on the impact of climate change on the probability of earthquakes is included in Section 11. Probability in OA: Likely 63 California Department of Conservation. (2008). Hayward Fault Fact Sheet. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/index/Pages/HaywardFaultFactSheet.aspx 64 California Department of Conservation. (2023). The California Seismic Hazards Program. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/sh 65 U.S. Geological Survey. (2016, August). Earthquake Outlook for the San Francisco Bay Region 2014-2043. https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2016/3020/fs20163020.pdf 66 Southern California Earthquake Center. (2017). Third Uniform California Earthquake Rupture Forecast. https://www.scec.org/ucerf#:~:text=UCERF3%20shows%20the%20likelihood%20of%20moderate - sized%20earthquakes%20%28magnitude,may%20occasional%20rupture%20together%20to%20cause%20larger%2 0earthquakes. 67 California Earthquake Authority. (2020, July 8). What to Expect from an Earthquake along the Hayward Fault. https://www.earthquakeauthority.com/Blog/2019/hayward-fault-earthquake-prediction 68 U.S. Geological Survey. (2008). The Hayward Fault – Is it Due for a Repeat of the Powerful 1868 Earthquake? https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2008/3019/ 180 PSC 09-12-2024 180 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 101 Table 21: Earthquake Probabilities for the San Francisco Bay Area Region, 2014 –204368F 69 Fault Probability of One or More M ≥ 6.7 Quake 2014–2043 Hunting Creek 16% Green Valley 16% Concord 16% Greenville 16% Berryessa 16% Calaveras 26% Maacama 8% Rodgers Creek Fault 33% Hayward 33% San Andreas 22% San Gregorio 6% 7.2.5 Severity The severity of an earthquake can be expressed in terms of intensity or magnitude:  Intensity represents the observed effects of ground shaking at any specified location. The intensity of earthquake shaking lessens with distance from the earthquake epicenter. Tabulated peak ground accelerations for listed “maximum credible earthquakes” ar e a measure of how a site will be affected by seismic events on distant faults.  Magnitude represents the amount of seismic energy released at the hypocenter of the earthquake. It is based on the amplitude of the earthquake waves recorded on instruments. Magnitude is thus represented by a single, instrumentally determined value. 69 U.S. Geological Survey. (2017). Map of Known Active Faults and Earthquake Probabilities. https://www.usgs.gov/media/images/map-known-active-faults-and-earthquake-probabilities 181 PSC 09-12-2024 181 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 102 Figure 29: Peak Ground Acceleration with 10-percent Probability of Exceedance in 50 Years ABAG estimates a potential loss of 159,000 housing units in Bay Area communities after a large earthquake. This loss would have disastrous effects on local and regional economies. Recovery, repair, and rebuilding time for each household would be lengthy because of the number of homes that would need repair or replacement. Annual losses also represent a sizable economic burden on the OA. According to FEMA 2023 report Hazus Estimated Annualized Earthquake Losses for the United States , the annualized earthquake loss ratio (AELR)—or the estimated building loss value as a fraction of the building inventory replacement value—for the San José metro area is the second highest in California69F 70. The metro areas include San José, Sunnyvale, and Santa Clara. This finding emphasizes the fact that the severity of more frequent, non-catastrophic earthquakes is still significant enough to warrant further seismic risk reduction actions. 7.2.6 Warning Time There is no current reliable way to predict when an earthquake will occur at any given location. Research and beta testing are being done with warning systems that use telecommunications that can travel faster than an earthquake’s high energy waves, called S waves. 70 FEMA. (April 2023). Hazus Estimated Annualized Earthquake Losses for the United States. Hazus Estimated Annualized earthquake losses for the United States, FEMA P-366 182 PSC 09-12-2024 182 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 103 The warning is generated by a rupture at an earthquake’s hypocenter and telecommunicated to provide a warning for shaking before the S waves arrive. These potential earthquake early warning systems could give up to approximately 40 seconds’ notice of peak earthquake shaking. In 2019, California became the nation’s first state to have a statewide earthquake early warning system. Early Warning California is able to provide alerts to the public seconds before an earthquake is felt. The warning time is very short, but it could allow for someone to get under a desk, step away from a hazardous material, or shut down a computer system. 7.3 Cascading Impacts Earthquakes can cause a variety of cascading hazards including landslides, tsunamis, fires, dam failures, and hazardous material releases. Earthquakes cause large and sometimes disastrous landslides and mudslides. River valleys are vulnerable to slope failure, often as a result of loss of cohesion in clay-rich soils. Soil liquefaction occurs when water-saturated sands, silts, or gravelly soils are shaken so violently that the individual grains lose contact with one another and “float” freely in the water, t urning the ground into a pudding-like liquid. Building and road foundations lose load-bearing strength and may sink quicksand-like into what was previously solid ground. Unless properly secured, hazardous materials can be released, causing considerable dam age to the environment and people. Depending on the location, earthquakes can also trigger tsunamis. Most tsunamis are caused by underwater earthquakes. The tsunami hazard is furthered described in Section 13. Earthen dams and levees are highly susceptible to seismic events, and the impacts of their eventual failures can be considered secondary risk exposure to earthquakes. Dams do not have to be destroyed in an earthquake for there to be devastating consequences. Dams can be cracked due to embankment deformation induced by ground shaking, experience foundation damage, or be impacted by an earthquake-cased landslide. Dam failures can result in significant downstream flooding. This hazard is further described in Section 12. Additionally, fires can result from gas lines or power lines that are broken or downed during the earthquake. It may be difficult to control a fire, particularly if the water lines feeding fire hydrants are also broken. After the 1906 earthquake in San Francisco, for example, a fire burned for three days, destroying much of the city and leaving 200,000 people houseless.70F 71 Fires in urban areas present unique firefighting and public health challenges. They would be a considerable concern after a major earthquake event. 7.4 Exposure 7.4.1 Population The entire population of the OA is potentially exposed to direct and indirect impacts from earthquakes. The degree of exposure is dependent on many factors, including the age and construction type of the structures people live in, the soil their homes are constructed on, their proximity to fault location, etc. Whether directly impacted or indirectly impact, the entire population will have to deal with the consequences of earthquakes to some degree. Business interruption could keep people from working, road closures could isolate populations, and loss of functions of utilities could impact populations that suffered no direct damage from an event itself. 71 The U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. (n.d.). San Francisco Earthquake, 1906. https://www.archives.gov/legislative/features/sf#:~:text=On%20the%20morning%20of%20April%2018%2C%201906 %2C%20a,three%20days%20and%20destroyed%20nearly%20500%20city%20blocks.. 183 PSC 09-12-2024 183 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 104 7.4.2 Property According to Santa Clara County Tax Assessor records, there are 535,391 buildings in the OA, with a total replacement value of $381 billion. Since all structures in the OA are susceptible to earthquake impacts to varying degrees, this total represents the property exposure to seismic events. Table 22 shows the exposure value breakdown by jurisdiction with the OA. Table 22: Earthquake Exposure by Jurisdiction Jurisdiction Number of Buildings Total Building Value: Structure and Contents Campbell 14,494 $9,337,059,000 Cupertino 17,460 $14,466,910,000 Gilroy 11,597 $7,140,035,000 Los Altos 13,433 $9,697,438,000 Los Altos Hills 3,342 $4,077,127,000 Los Gatos 10,467 $7,634,327,000 Milpitas 20,912 $13,830,811,000 Monte Sereno 1,078 $986,431,000 Morgan Hill 21,044 $5,547,035,000 Mountain View 6,545 $14,501,750,000 Palo Alto 19,914 $16,233,190,000 San José 25,5703 $168,553,959,000 Santa Clara (city) 32,978 $26,584,014,000 Saratoga 10,214 $8,348,159,000 Sunnyvale 41,941 $28,567,428,000 Unincorporated County 54,269 $46,077,151,000 Total 535,391 $381,582,824,000 7.4.3 Loss Potential Property losses were estimated through the Level 2 Hazus analysis for the 100-year and 500-year earthquakes and the three scenario events. Table 23 through Table 27 show the results for two types of property loss:  Structural loss, representing damage to building structures.  Contents loss, representing the value of lost contents and inventory.  Total loss, representing a combination of direct (structural and content) and indirect costs such as relocation, income loss, rental loss, and wage loss. 184 PSC 09-12-2024 184 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 105 Table 23: Loss Estimates for 100-Year Probabilistic Earthquake Jurisdiction Estimated Loss Associated with Earthquake % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Total Campbell $83,411,720 $147,383,480 $714,842,110 6.42 Cupertino $110,113,070 $202,728,570 $944,296,790 5.58 Gilroy $111,762,750 $186,420,740 $919,308,810 10.87 Los Altos $60,407,350 $105,705,000 $516,809,420 4.75 Los Altos Hills $15,337,870 $32,413,630 $143,905,510 3.27 Los Gatos $52,214,200 $97,964,100 $469,109,470 5.21 Milpitas $229,633,340 $366,547,460 $1,792,104,770 10.79 Monte Sereno $5,582,230 $9,912,830 $48,082,010 4.59 Morgan Hill $85,693,050 $144,753,610 $647,026,030 9.86 Mountain View $138,215,630 $228,950,290 $1,135,921,470 6.55 Palo Alto $123,276,450 $234,519,070 $1,143,458,680 5.89 San José $2,271,729,230 $3,804,754,590 $18,548,766,290 9.19 Santa Clara (city) $371,540,110 $623,137,970 $2,922,510,780 9.07 Saratoga $46,922,910 $87,663,150 $411,758,710 4.52 Sunnyvale $277,402,330 $471,198,590 $2,271,326,290 6.81 Unincorporated County $491,709,760 $847,476,000 $4,002,857,370 7.40 Total $4,474,952,000 $7,597,529,080 $36,632,084,510 8.07 Table 24: Loss Estimates for 500-Year Probabilistic Earthquake Jurisdiction Estimated Loss Associated with Earthquake % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Total Campbell $332,939,800 $514,222,930 $2,637,075,050 23.67 Cupertino $483,321,680 $773,618,650 $3,846,779,640 22.62 Gilroy $325,070,990 $496,300,090 $2,565,057,320 30.59 Los Altos $253,325,050 $368,045,620 $1,957,493,570 17.73 Los Altos Hills $79,356,360 $139,360,770 $675,309,730 14.98 Los Gatos $237,262,800 $375,686,540 $1,937,596,360 21.33 Milpitas $868,837,200 $1,284,918,220 $6,491,226,210 39.92 Monte Sereno $24,465,000 $32,498,890 $181,964,270 17.12 Morgan Hill $278,620,680 $446,000,140 $2,045,968,380 31.44 Mountain View $554,403,710 $860,895,660 $4,359,290,900 25.19 185 PSC 09-12-2024 185 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 106 Jurisdiction Estimated Loss Associated with Earthquake % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Total Palo Alto $508,699,590 $904,493,750 $4,518,057,520 23.11 San José $7,547,645,640 $12,175,341,680 $60,078,192,300 30.15 Santa Clara (city) $1,281,702,680 $2,143,040,010 $10,023,437,510 31.60 Saratoga $215,118,140 $317,501,240 $1,672,277,590 18.05 Sunnyvale $1,022,240,280 $1,620,535,330 $8,017,810,470 24.07 Unincorporated County $1,834,740,210 $2,763,641,700 $13,914,201,350 25.85 Total $15,847,749,810 $25,216,101,220 $142,921,738,170 27.77 Table 25: Loss Estimates for San Andreas Fault Scenario Earthquake Jurisdiction Estimated Loss Associated with Earthquake % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Total Campbell $49,214,560 $92,236,240 $432,374,280 3.91 Cupertino $81,301,810 $153,677,230 $710,419,020 4.24 Gilroy $33,481,560 $61,301,010 $280,483,670 3.24 Los Altos $55,804,220 $90,175,700 $462,202,090 4.27 Los Altos Hills $10,926,300 $20,917,530 $97,960,120 2.25 Los Gatos $27,424,860 $45,440,870 $234,302,660 2.58 Milpitas $296,969,340 $464,378,390 $2,282,091,580 13.76 Monte Sereno $2,727,410 $4,081,180 $21,982,080 2.10 Morgan Hill $24,995,170 $42,475,860 $184,472,540 2.78 Mountain View $132,855,600 $217,121,870 $1,083,896,690 6.22 Palo Alto $97,695,850 $200,178,300 $936,127,860 4.90 San José $1,868,771,120 $3,118,303,370 $14,933,844,800 7.34 Santa Clara (city) $325,662,720 $591,625,640 $2,655,220,690 8.28 Saratoga $27,814,510 $48,360,240 $237,674,840 2.62 Sunnyvale $260,122,500 $429,175,020 $2,076,576,830 6.17 Unincorporated County $288,238,330 $481,595,870 $2,294,416,020 4.20 Total $3,584,005,860 $6,061,044,320 $28,924,045,770 6.34 Table 26: Loss Estimates for Hayward Fault Scenario Earthquake Jurisdiction Estimated Loss Associated with Earthquake % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Total Campbell $40,301,090 $98,620,250 $409,079,960 3.76 186 PSC 09-12-2024 186 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 107 Jurisdiction Estimated Loss Associated with Earthquake % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Total Cupertino $76,928,120 $182,120,770 $752,020,960 4.56 Gilroy $30,147,280 $73,497,000 $305,747,590 3.72 Los Altos $45,091,440 $101,276,690 $433,600,270 4.03 Los Altos Hills $25,102,370 $58,726,440 $246,663,700 5.56 Los Gatos $49,681,050 $105,154,360 $470,871,870 5.23 Milpitas $22,068,720 $68,614,250 $254,995,140 1.61 Monte Sereno $4,912,510 $10,456,710 $45,981,960 4.41 Morgan Hill $17,740,240 $47,816,600 $177,511,110 2.78 Mountain View $65,744,520 $161,424,770 $669,374,410 3.94 Palo Alto $74,475,780 $202,860,830 $827,014,160 4.32 San José $412,039,580 $1,243,445,510 $4,732,726,140 2.46 Santa Clara (city) $78,077,550 $242,884,660 $886,193,970 2.89 Saratoga $48,918,390 $105,223,740 $456,057,380 5.04 Sunnyvale $97,943,980 $261,626,210 $1,041,138,290 3.22 Unincorporated County $206,686,640 $460,193,440 $1,944,849,460 3.66 Total $1,295,859,260 $3,423,942,230 $13,653,826,370 3.13 Table 27: Loss Estimates for Calaveras Fault Scenario Earthquake Jurisdiction Estimated Loss Associated with Earthquake % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Total Campbell $40,939,680 $86,487,180 $386,261,760 3.56 Cupertino $71,012,520 $146,392,880 $651,211,640 3.95 Gilroy $19,238,740 $45,359,670 $188,770,670 2.26 Los Altos $50,620,630 $86,562,830 $431,369,830 4.03 Los Altos Hills $10,762,060 $20,780,700 $96,841,280 2.23 Los Gatos $23,993,340 $43,003,930 $213,109,080 2.40 Milpitas $209,898,010 $374,708,150 $1,728,857,450 10.54 Monte Sereno $2,665,370 $4,043,610 $21,636,660 2.08 Morgan Hill $15,897,370 $34,459,240 $137,948,090 2.14 Mountain View $105,347,590 $194,639,980 $921,924,650 5.39 Palo Alto $84,410,530 $188,043,650 $842,872,700 4.49 San José $1,354,935,210 $2,533,808,530 $11,560,267,970 5.78 Santa Clara (city) $250,185,320 $521,829,550 $2,208,182,000 6.99 Saratoga $26,733,350 $47,643,880 $231,358,470 2.57 187 PSC 09-12-2024 187 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 108 Jurisdiction Estimated Loss Associated with Earthquake % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Total Sunnyvale $198,860,640 $368,380,050 $1,711,126,870 5.17 Unincorporated County $211,495,100 $406,336,080 $1,828,500,120 3.42 Total $2,676,995,460 $5,102,479,910 $23,160,239,240 5.16 A summary of the property-related loss results is as follows:  For a 100-year probabilistic earthquake shaking, the estimated damage potential is $36.6 billion, or 8 percent of the total replacement value for the OA.  For a 500-year probabilistic earthquake shaking, the estimated damage potential is $142.9 billion, or 27.8 percent of the total replacement value for the OA.  For a 7.8-magnitude event on the San Andreas Fault, the estimated damage potential is $28.9 billion, or 6.3 percent of the total replacement value for the OA.  For a 7.0-magnitude event on the Hayward Fault, the estimated damage potential is $13.7 billion or 5 percent of the total replacement value for the OA.  For a 7.0-magnitude event on the Calaveras Fault, the estimated damage potential is $23.2 billion, or 5.6 percent of the total replacement value for the OA. The Hazus analysis also estimated the amount of earthquake-caused debris in the OA for the 100-year and 500-year earthquakes and the three scenario events, as summarized in Table 28: . Table 28: Estimated Earthquake-Caused Debris Scenario Debris to Be Removed (Thousands of Tons) 100-Year Earthquake 4,589 500-Year Earthquake 17,862 San Andreas Fault Scenario 3,902 Hayward Fault Scenario 1,106 Calaveras Fault Scenario 2,638 7.4.4 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure All critical facilities in the OA are exposed to the earthquake hazard. Table 29: Number of Critical Facilities Exposed to Earthquakes lists the number of each type of facility by jurisdiction. Additionally, communities in the Bay Area are serviced by infrastructure that is susceptible to damage from earthquakes, as nearly all the infrastructure connection that the area depends on for water, electric power, fuel, and transportation services cross a fault.71F 72 Hazardous materials releases can occur during an earthquake from fixed facilities or transportation-related incidents. Transportation corridors can be disrupted during an earthquake, leading to the release of materials to the surrounding environment. 72 California Office of Emergency Services. (2016, July 6). Bay Area Earthquake Plan. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/Preparedness/Documents/BayAreaEQConopsPub_Version_2016.pdf 188 PSC 09-12-2024 188 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 109 Facilities holding hazardous materials are of particular concern because of possible isolation of neighborhoods surrounding them. During an earthquake, structures storing these materials could rupture and leak into the surrounding area or an adjacent waterway, having a disastrous effect on the environment, or emit chemicals in a toxic plume. Table 29: Number of Critical Facilities Exposed to Earthquakes Jurisdiction Number of Facilities by Jurisdiction Critical Facilities Transportation Utilities Community Assets Hazardous Materials Total Campbell 21 23 0 7 6 57 Cupertino 26 26 2 16 5 75 Gilroy 25 34 2 13 7 81 Los Altos 22 8 0 11 0 41 Los Altos Hills 6 21 0 2 0 29 Los Gatos 20 35 0 6 1 62 Milpitas 32 66 1 19 60 178 Monte Sereno 1 1 0 1 0 3 Morgan Hill 22 14 1 10 8 55 Mountain View 37 52 1 29 20 139 Palo Alto 49 42 4 46 26 167 San José 370 498 18 191 135 1,212 Santa Clara (city) 53 63 9 36 103 264 Saratoga 18 32 0 11 0 61 Sunnyvale 40 49 3 27 51 170 Unincorporated County 35 187 17 48 4 291 Total 777 1151 58 473 426 2885 7.4.5 Environment The entire OA is a seismically active area and could be exposed to ground shaking from several different faults. According to the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones map for the San Francisco Bay Region, all of the OA is likely to experience very strong, severe, or violent shaking. Environmental problems as a result of an earthquake could occur anywhere in the OA. Cascading hazards will likely have some of the most damaging effects on the environment. 7.5 Vulnerability Earthquake vulnerability data was generated using a Level 2 Hazus analysis. Once the location and size of a hypothetical earthquake are identified, Hazus estimates the intensity of the ground shaking, the number of buildings damaged, the number of casualties, the damage to transportation systems and utilities, the number of people displaced from their homes, and the estimated cost of repair and cleanup. Changes in conditions: No change in vulnerability 189 PSC 09-12-2024 189 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 110 • Overall, the OA is in a seismically active area with multiple fault sources . • The OA has a significant population and number of assets exposed to damage from earthquake which constitutes a high risk. • Population and building development has grown but at a very slow rate and new buildings are built in accordance with seismic codes. 7.5.1 Population Impacts on persons and households in the OA were estimated for the 100-year and 500-year shaking from earthquakes and the three scenario events through the Level 2 Hazus analysis. One of the primary impacts on population is being displaced from their homes and seeking alternative shelter. Table 30: Estimated Earthquake Impact on Persons summarizes the results. People can also experience physical injury or death, be impacted by disruptions to transportation and utility systems, loss or wages or other loss of services from business interruptions. There are estimated to be 29,329 people in 10,010 households living on soils with high to very high liquefaction potential in the OA, or about 1.52 percent of the total population. Higher liquefaction potential contributes to structural damage and subsequent displacement of people from their residences. A summary analysis of demographics using the Hazus data identified populations with additional factors that add to their vulnerability to earthquake hazard. The Hazus model does not provide results for how specific demographic categories will be impacted by the different earthquake scenarios . This only provides a general indication of the number of people who may have a more difficult time recovering from the impacts of an earthquake.  Economically Disadvantaged Populations: It is estimated that 2.45 percent of the people within the OA are economically disadvantaged, defined as having household incomes of $20,000 or less.  Population over 64 Years Old: It is estimated that 260,705 persons or 13.5 percent of the population in the OA are over 64 years old.  Population under 16 Years Old: It is estimated that 422,719 persons or 21.8 percent of the population within the OA under 18 years of age.  Racial and ethnic minorities comprise a significant proportion of the population: 39% are Asian and 25% are Hispanic. Table 30: Estimated Earthquake Impact on Persons Scenario Number of Displaced Households Number of Persons Requiring Short-Term Shelter 100-Year Shaking from Earthquakes 16,071 8,076 500-Year Shaking from Earthquakes 77,037 38,242 San Andreas ShakeMap Scenario 4,364 2,047 Calaveras ShakeMap Scenario 8,199 4,047 Hayward ShakeMap Scenario 2,708 1,282 The 100-year shaking results are less than the 500-year shaking results because stronger shaking occurs less often and is more likely to occur in a 500-year period than a 100-year period. 190 PSC 09-12-2024 190 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 111 7.5.2 Property Building Age Table 31 identifies significant milestones in building and seismic code requirements that directly affect the structural integrity of development. Using these time periods, the Core Planning Group used the National Structure Inventory to identify the number of structures in the OA by date of construction. The NSI provided limited data on the number of structures built between 2005 and 2016. Table 31: Age of Structures in Operational Area Time Period Number of Current OA Structures Built in Period Significance of Time Frame 1939-1940 7,853 In 1940, the first strong motion recording was made. 1941-1960 96,753 In 1960, the Structural Engineers Association of California published guidelines on recommended earthquake provisions. 1961-1975 224,356 In 1975, significant improvements were made to lateral force requirements. 1976–1993 141,510 In 1994, the Uniform Building Code was amended to include provisions for seismic safety. 1994–present 65,144 Seismic code is currently enforced. Please note that data on more recent structures are limited. Total 535,616 The number of structures does not reflect the number of total housing units, as many multi-family units and attached housing units are reported as one structure. Approximately 38.5 percent of the OA’s structures were constructed after the Uniform Building Code was amended in 1994 to include seismic safety provisions. Soft-Story Buildings A soft-story building is a multi-story building with one or more floors that are “soft” because of structural design. If a building has a floor that is 70-percent less stiff than the floor above it, it is considered a soft- story building. This soft story creates a major weak point in an earthquake. Since soft stories are typically associated with retail spaces and parking garages, they are often on the lower stories of a building. When they collapse, they can take the whole building down with them, causing serious structural damage that may render the structure totally unusable. These floors can be especially dangerous in earthquakes because they cannot cope with the lateral forces caused by the swaying of the building during a quake. As a result, the soft story may fail, causing what is known as a soft-story collapse. Soft-story collapse is one of the leading causes of earthquake damage to private residences. Loss estimation and vulnerability analyses based on models with specified fragility curves for soft -story construction in the OA are not currently available to support quantitative analyses of risk. There are qualitative reports on risk available within the OA. These reports were not used for this analysis due to their lack of quantitative data. ABAG and other agencies in the Bay Area have programs generating this type of data, but it is not known when such data will be available for the Santa Clara County OA. This type of data will need to be generated to support future risk assessments of the earthquake hazard. 191 PSC 09-12-2024 191 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 112 Unreinforced Masonry Buildings Unreinforced masonry buildings are constructed from materials such as adobe, brick, hollow clay tiles, or other masonry materials and do not contain an internal reinforcing structure, such as rebar in concrete or steel bracing for brick. Unreinforced masonry poses a significant danger during an earthquake because the mortar holding masonry together is typically not strong enough to withstand significant earthquakes. Additionally, the brittle composition of these houses can break apart and fall away or buckle, potentially causing a complete collapse of the building. In the Santa Clara County OA, unreinforced masonry buildings are generally brick buildings that were constructed before modern earthquake building codes and designs were enacted. The State of California enacted a law in 1986 that required all local governm ents in Seismic Zone 4 (nearest to active earthquake faults) to inventory unreinforced masonry buildings. The law encourages local governments to adopt local mandatory strengthening programs, delineate seismic retrofit standards, and put into place measures to reduce the number of people in unreinforced masonry buildings. According to ABAG, housing units in unreinforced masonry buildings account for only 1-percent of the total Bay Area housing stock.72F 73 7.5.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure Level of Damage Hazus classifies the vulnerability of critical facilities to earthquake damage in five categories: no damage, slight damage, moderate damage, extensive damage, or complete damage. Hazus also classifies facilities in terms of loss-of-function and possible restoration times. The model was used to assign a vulnerability category to each critical facility category in the OA. The analysis was performed for the 100-year and 500-year events and for all three fault scenarios. Selected results are summarized in Table 32 through Table 37. Table 32: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities from 100-Year Earthquake Type of Critical Facility Total With Moderate Damage With Complete Damage With Functionality >50% on Day 1 With Functionality >50% on Day 7 Essential Facilities 777 151 0 257 N/A Transportation 1154 12 0 1146 1154 Utilities 58 49 0 30 57 Community Assets 515 N/A N/A N/A N/A Hazardous Materials 426 N/A N/A N/A N/A Overall 2927 212 0 1433 1211 Notes: Damage level represents the highest-probability damage state for each facility. Values shown are accurate for comparison of results in this plan. See Section 6.7 for discussion of data limitations. This scenario modeled significant impacts to essential facilities. Loss of functionality of these services will result in difficult response in the immediate aftermath of an earthquake. Furthermore, of the 656,063 73 Association of Bay Area Governments. (2016, March). Resilience Policy Guidance Document Soft Story Retrofit Program Development. https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/soft_story_report_web_version_v2.pdf 192 PSC 09-12-2024 192 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 113 households, 203,485 are expected to be without potable water, and 358,285 without electric power on day one. Transportation systems will mostly remain functional. Table 33: Essential Facility Functionality in 100-Year Probabilistic Earthquake Facility Total With >50% Functionality on Day 1 Hospital 20 7 Schools 617 195 EOCs 7 4 Police Stations 35 12 Fire Stations 98 39 Table 34: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities from 500-Year Earthquake Type of Critical Facility Total With Moderate Damage With Complete Damage With Functionality >50% on Day 1 With Functionality >50% on Day 7 Essential Facilities 777 654 62 0 N/A Transportation 1154 599 23 607 942 Utilities 58 58 14 0 31 Community Assets 515 N/A N/A N/A N/A Hazardous Materials 426 N/A N/A N/A N/A Overall 2957 1311 99 607 973 Notes: Damage level represents the highest-probability damage state for each facility. Values shown are accurate for comparison of results in this plan. See Section 6.7 for discussion of data limitations. Table 35: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities from Hayward Fault Type of Critical Facility Total With Moderate Damage With Complete Damage With Functionality >50% on Day 1 With Functionality >50% on Day 7 Essential Facilities 777 25 0 704 N/A Transportation 1154 0 0 1153 1154 Utilities 58 32 0 33 58 Community Assets 515 N/A N/A N/A N/A 193 PSC 09-12-2024 193 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 114 Type of Critical Facility Total With Moderate Damage With Complete Damage With Functionality >50% on Day 1 With Functionality >50% on Day 7 Hazardous Materials 426 N/A N/A N/A N/A Overall 2927 57 0 1890 1212 Notes: Damage level represents the highest-probability damage state for each facility. Values shown are accurate for comparison of results in this plan. See Section 6.7 for discussion of data limitations. Table 36: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities from San Andreas Fault Type of Critical Facility Total With Moderate Damage With Complete Damage With Functionality >50% on Day 1 With Functionality >50% on Day 7 Essential Facilities 777 124 0 531 N/A Transportation 1154 10 0 1151 1154 Utilities 58 29 0 33 58 Community Assets 515 N/A N/A N/A N/A Hazardous Materials 426 N/A N/A N/A N/A Overall 2927 163 0 1715 1212 Notes: Damage level represents the highest-probability damage state for each facility. Values shown are accurate for comparison of results in this plan. See Section 6.7 for discussion of data limitations. Table 37: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities from Calaveras Type of Critical Facility Total With Moderate Damage With Complete Damage With Functionality >50% on Day 1 With Functionality >50% on Day 7 Essential Facilities 777 45 0 579 N/A Transportation 1154 10 0 1150 1154 Utilities 58 29 0 33 53 Community Assets 515 N/A N/A N/A N/A Hazardous Materials 426 N/A N/A N/A N/A Overall 2927 84 0 1762 1207 Notes: Damage level represents the highest-probability damage state for each facility. Values shown are accurate for comparison of results in this plan. See Section 6.7 for discussion of data limitations. Hazardous Materials An earthquake can cause hazardous material releases from fixed facilities and transportation -related releases. The Bay Area includes numerous oil refineries, chemical plants, tank farms, pipelines, high tech and biotechnology laboratories and production facilities and other industrial facilities.73F 74 74 California Office of Emergency Services. (2016, July 6). Bay Area Earthquake Plan. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/Preparedness/Documents/BayAreaEQConopsPub_Version_2016.pdf 194 PSC 09-12-2024 194 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 115 Additionally, there are there are multiple highways and railroads which transport HAZMAT, oil, and natural gas products in the OA. Although the Hazus scenarios did not include specific damage estimates for hazardous materials facilities, any facility could experience damage from severe ground shaking that could result in a HAZMAT incident. Transportation Liquefaction, landslides, and fault surface rupture during an earthquake can significantly damage roads. Access to major roads is crucial to life and safety after a disaster event as well as to response and recovery operations. Disruptions in transportation systems are of particular concern in areas with limited access via transportation corridors, as a major event has the potential to isolate these communities from critical assistance and aid. Several communities in the OA extend into the foothills, where narrow and dead-end spur roads are common. Landslide susceptibility is also higher in these areas. Although the Hazus models did not indicate significant functional disruption to transportation network, past events indicate transportation damage should be expected that will disrupt response and recovery, and also require costly repairs. Bridges Earthquake shaking, liquefaction and landslides can significantly damage bridges, which often provide the only access to some neighborhoods. Since soft soil regions generally follow floodplain boundaries, those bridges that cross water courses are considered vulnerable. Key factors in the degree of vulnerability are the facility’s age and type of construction and soil classification at the bridge support structure, which indicate the standards to which the bridge was built. An example of the location of bridges in the OA with potential damage in the Calaveras Hazus Scenario is shown in Figure 29. Figure 30: Highway Bridge Percentage Damage Exceeds Moderate: Calaveras Scenario Water and Sewer Infrastructure Water and sewer infrastructure would likely suffer considerable damage in the event of an earthquake. If water and wastewater treatment plants were damaged, there could be a lack of potable water and spilling of raw sewage into bays or rivers.74F 75 Distribution systems with older brittle pipes are vulnerable to shaking 75 California Seismic Safety Commission. (1999). Earthquake Risk Management: A Toolkit for Decision -Makers. https://ssc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2020/08/ssc_1999-04_risk_toolkit.pdf 195 PSC 09-12-2024 195 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 116 and liquefaction in particular. Water and sewer restoration generally takes longer than other critical infrastructure. There would be significant regional needs for water after a Bay Area earthquake. Table 38 and Table 39 give more details on potential damage to these systems based on Hazus models. These indicate a significant number of residents across the OA without essential services for an extended time. Table 38: Damage to Potable Water Systems by Hazus Scenario Potable Water Total Pipelines Length Number of leaks Number of Breaks Households without service at Day 7 100 Year 7,119 2,050 777 147,285 500 Year 7,119 13,762 4,974 625,830 San Andreas 7119 4,717 1,457 362,907 Calaveras 7119 4,696 1,375 342,397 Hayward 7,119 2,947 839 170,876 Table 39: Damage to Waste Water Systems by Hazus Scenario Waste Water Total Pipelines Length Number of leaks Number of Breaks 100 Year 4,272 1,030 390 500 Year 4,272 6,913 2,498 San Andreas 4,272 2,369 733 Calaveras 4,272 2,359 691 Hayward 4,272 1,480 421 7.5.4 Environment Environmental problems as a result of an earthquake can be numerous. Earthquakes can cause ground shaking, soil liquefaction, landslides, fissures, fires, dam failures, and tsunamis. Cascading hazards will likely have some of the most damaging effects on the environment. Earthquake-induced landslides in landslide-prone areas can significantly damage surrounding habitat. It is also possible for streams to be rerouted after an earthquake. Rerouting can change the water quality, possibly damaging habitat and feeding areas. There is a possibility that streams fed by groundwater wells will dry up because of changes in underlying geology. Hazardous material releases, including through transportation incidents, damage to sewers, and natural gas lines, as well as other infrastructure could seriously impact the environment. 7.5.5 Economic Impact Earthquake events can severely disrupt the economy of the affected area. Economic impact will be largely associated with the disruption of power, gas, telecommunication, water, and wastewater services caused by an earthquake event. In general, major events may cause damage to land, buildings, transportation infrastructure, and businesses. With an event of such significance, economic recovery could take years, depending on available recovery funds. 196 PSC 09-12-2024 196 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 117 The total economic impact of a major earthquake is likely to spread well beyond the impacted area, especially in a population center like the Santa Clara County OA. This is often referred to the “ripple effect.”75F 76 The United States has a highly developed, specialized, interdependent, money economy. While those features make the economy productive and resilient, they also mean that a large magnitude earthquake will not be just a regional event. It has the potential to impact the national economy. An earthquake can result in impacts to the national economy including through disruptions to supply chains, shocks to financial markets, and drain on the insurance system. Various sectors of the OA economy would be impacted differently. For example, tourism would likely be impacted over a long term while the impacted area recovers. The retail sector would likely recover quickly to support recovery, and the construction sector would eventually experience growth. Businesses would experience different levels of damage to property, loss of revenues, loss of market share and/or reputation. Business interruptions in recent California earthquakes have caused the failure of a number of small and medium-sized businesses.76F 77 Failed businesses impact the sales, property, and other tax revenue for local governments. Recovery of the economy is a key sign of a community ’s resilience. 7.6 Future Trends in Development Since all of the Santa Clara County Operational Area is located within an earthquake hazard zone, all future development will, to some extent, be exposed to the earthquake hazard. In the 30 years since the Loma Prieta earthquake, the bay region has investe d about $80 billion (in 2016 U.S. dollars) in seismic strengthening of transportation, water, and other critical infrastructure; hospitals, schools, and governments facilities; and unreinforced masonry, soft story, and other types of buildings.77F 78 More work needs to be done to prepare the region for the next major event. A key part of that is adopting and enforcing land use practices and building codes that consider seismic hazards. Land use planning is directed by general plans adopted under California’s General Planning Law. Municipal planning partners are encouraged to establish General Plans with policies directing land use and dealing with issues of geologic and seismic safety. These plans provide the capability at the local municipal level to protect future development from the impacts of earthquakes. All planning partners reviewed their general plans under the capability assessments performed for this effort. Deficiencies identified by these reviews can be identified as mitigation actions to increase the capability to deal with future trends in development. Unincorporated Santa Clara County and the development departments in participating jurisdictions will strictly enforce all seismic building codes and design standards to prevent loss of life and property caused by earthquake. Public education, cooperation with the development community, and individual preparedness are essential as the OA welcomes thousands of new residents and hundreds of new businesses to each year. It will take a whole community approach to prepare for the next seismic event. Kaiser Permanente, a health care organization, was highlighted by FEMA as a mitigation best practice for its work to seismically retrofit or replace its existing hospitals and buildings, including the Santa Clara Medical Center, in accordance with California Senate Bill 1953. ABAG’s Resilience Program assists Bay Area local governments and residents in planning and preparing for earthquakes through data, planning, policy, and implementation tools. Plan Bay Area 2050 proposes long-term strategies for minimizing damage from a major earthquake. 76 National Academies of Since, Engineering and Medicine. (1992). The Economic Consequences of a Catastrophic Earthquake. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/2027/the-economic-consequences-of-a-catastrophic- earthquake-proceedings-of-a 77 California Seismic Safety Commission. (1999). Earthquake Risk Management: A Toolkit for Decision -Makers. https://ssc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2020/08/ssc_1999-04_risk_toolkit.pdf 78 U.S. Geological Survey. (2021, October). They HayWired Earthquake Scenario. https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2021/3054/fs20213054.pdf 197 PSC 09-12-2024 197 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 118 It aims to provide means-based financial support for the retrofit of existing residential buildings. These investments would ensure higher seismic standards to protect residents, especially those with low - income, from earthquakes. 7.7 Scenario With the abundance of fault exposure in the Bay Area, the potential scenarios for earthquake activity are many. An earthquake does not have to occur within the OA to have a significant impact on the people, property, and economy of the OA. In 2018, the USGS in partnership with the Southern California Earthquake Center shared hypothetical earthquake scenario known as the HayWired Earthquake Scenario which imagined a M7.0 earthquake centered in Oakland, California rupturing the Hayward fault along its length for about 52 miles. In this scenario, the entire OA would experience ground shaking and severe impacts. A screenshot from the computer simulation of the earthquake shows the region that would be impacted in Figure 30. If this type of event were to occur, there would be significant impacts through the OA, region, and nation. More than a million Bay Area homes would be impacted.78F 79 Potential warning systems would be able to provide mere seconds or tens of seconds of warning time. This would not provide adequate time for preparation. There would be immediate need for first responder assistance. Many thousands of people could be stranded in elevators or under debris. Models predict hundreds of deaths and thousands of injuries. There would be massive structural failure of property on NEHRP C, D, E, and F soils. Levees and revetments built on these poor soils would likely fail, representing a loss of critical infrastructure. Fires could be started and, in worse case scenarios, turn into to firestorms, devastating urban areas. Electricity may not return for days. Water restoration may take up to a month. Many homes, particularly those built to older building code standards, would be considered unsafe to return to . Tens of thousands of households could be displaced. Aftershocks would continue to rock the area, causing more damage than the main shock in communities like Palo Alto.79F 80 Aftershocks would be felt for months to years after the earthquake event. Cascading impacts, like landslides and mudslides, could further damage structures. River valley hydraulic-fill sediment areas are also vulnerable to slope failure, often as a result of loss of cohesion in clay-rich soils. Soil liquefaction would occur in water-saturated sands, silts, or gravelly soils. The long-term impacts of an earthquake like this would be enormous. The estimated financial loss to residential, commercial, and infrastructure would be over $100 billion around the Bay Area. 79 California Earthquake Authority. (2020, July 8). What to Expect from an Earthquake along the Hayward Fault. https://www.earthquakeauthority.com/Blog/2019/hayward-fault-earthquake-prediction 80 U.S. Geological Survey. (2018). The HayWired Scenario: An Urban Earthquake in a Connected World. https://geonarrative.usgs.gov/haywired_vol1/#:~:text=The%20U.S.%20Geological%20Survey%20%28USGS%29%2 0HayWired%20scenario%20considers,fact%2C%20the%20HayWired%20earthquake%20will%20probably%20never %20occur. 198 PSC 09-12-2024 198 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 119 Figure 31: Hayward Fault Earthquake Scenario80F 81 7.8 Issues Important issues associated with an earthquake include the following:  More quantitative information is needed on the exposure and performance of soft -story construction within the OA.  Approximately 29 percent of the OA’s building stock was built prior to 1975, when seismic provisions became uniformly applied through building code applications.  Based on the modeling of critical facility performance performed for this plan, a portion of facilities in the OA is expected to have complete or extensive damage from scenario events. These facilities are prime targets for structural retrofits.  Critical facility owners should be encouraged to create or enhance continuity of operations plans using the information on risk and vulnerability contained in this plan.  Geotechnical standards should be established that consider the probable impacts from earthquakes in the design and construction of new or enhanced facilities.  There are a large number of high risk dams within the OA. Dam failure warning and evacuation plans and procedures should be reviewed and updated to reflect the dams ’ risk potential associated with earthquake activity in the region. 81 U.S. Geological Survey. (2018, January 18). HayWired Scenario. https://www.usgs.gov/programs/science- application-for-risk-reduction/science/haywired- scenario#:~:text=The%20HayWired%20earthquake%20scenario%20is%20a%20magnitude%207.0,Ma%20By%20Ea rthquake%20Hazards%20Program%20June%2016%2C%202020 199 PSC 09-12-2024 199 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 120  Earthquakes could trigger other natural hazard events such as liquefaction, dam failures and landslides, and fire which could severely impact the OA.  A worst-case scenario would be the occurrence of a large seismic event during a flood or high- water event. Levee failures would happen at multiple locations, increasing the impacts of the individual events.  Citizens are expected to be self-sufficient up to 3 days after a major earthquake without government response agencies, utilities, private-sector services, and infrastructure components. Education programs are currently in place to facilitate development o f individual, family, neighborhood, and business earthquake preparedness. Government alone can never make this region fully prepared. It takes individuals, families, and communities working in concert with one another to truly be prepared for disaster.  After a major seismic event, the Santa Clara County Operational Area is likely to experience disruptions in the flow of goods and services resulting from the destruction of major transportation infrastructure across the broader region.  The Santa Clara County OA is home to multiple tech centers that provide goods and services to the nation and world. A major earthquake in the region would disrupt these service providers and severely impact the economic and functional stability of the region and potentially the country. Table 40: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Earthquake Subject  Ranking  Impacts/Earthquake Public  Minimal to severe Depending on the size and location of the earthquake, the public may be at significant risk from an earthquake event. They could sustain injuries from falls, collapsing building, fall items, and damaged utilities, as well as any number of cascading impacts. Loss of life is possible. There could be significant disruption to normal life following an event. People with disabilities and access/functional needs, as well as other diverse characteristics that may impact their ability to respond and recover from an event, will need additional assistance. Responders  Minimal to severe First responders would be relied upon during the aftermath of an earthquake and potentially exposed to increased risk of injury and loss of life, particularly from aftershocks. Continuity of Operations (including continue delivery of services) Minimal to severe Earthquakes can damage buildings, roads, utilities, and other critical infrastructure necessary for normal operations. Government facilities may be impacted. Records and systems may be damaged or destroyed. Damages may take a long time to repair. Delivery of services may be disrupted. 200 PSC 09-12-2024 200 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 7: Earthquakes 121 Subject  Ranking  Impacts/Earthquake Property, Facilities, and Infrastructure  Minimal to severe Depending on the location and magnitude of the earthquake, buildings be damaged or destroyed; bridges, highways, dams, and other public infrastructure may fail; utilities would be interrupted; and community lifelines would be impacted. There would be debris to clean-up. There may be additional cascading impacts, like landslides, tsunamis, fires, or dam failures which compound the event. Medical facilities, mass-care shelters, and essential food and water supply chains would be critical to quickly restore post-event. Environment  Minimal to severe Earthquake-caused cascading impacts could negatively impact the environment. Landslides, tsunamis, fires, and dam failures can occur after an earthquake. Disruption to waterways, such as through rerouting streams and debris, could possibly damage habitat and feeding areas. Hazardous materials release would be a serious concern. Economic Conditions  Minimal to severe  Impacts to the economy will largely depend on the amount of damage and destruction to facilities, infrastructure, and transportation lifelines. Major damage or significant delays in recovery could severely impact the local, state, national, and even global economy. Public Confidence in the Government  Minimal to severe  The public’s confidence in the government will depend on how it handles response and recovery efforts to the event. 201 PSC 09-12-2024 201 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 122 8 Wildfire Definitions  Interface Area: An area susceptible to wildfires and where wildland vegetation and urban or suburban development occur together. An example would be smaller urban areas and dispersed rural housing in forested areas.  Wildfire: Fires that result in uncontrolled destruction of forests, brush, field crops, grasslands, and real and personal property in non-urban areas. Because of their distance from firefighting resources, they can be difficult to contain and can cause a great deal of destruction. 8.1 General Background A wildfire is any uncontrolled fire occurring on undeveloped land that requires fire suppression. Wildfires can be ignited by lightning or by human activity such as smoking, campfires, equipment use, sparks from power lines, and arson. Fire hazards present a considerable risk to vegetation and wildlife habitats. Short -term loss caused by a wildfire can include the destruction of timber, wildlife habitat, scenic vistas, and watersheds. Long -term effects include smaller timber harvests, reduced access to affected recreational areas, and destruction of cultural and economic resources and community infrastructure. The potential for significant damage to life and property exists in areas designated as “wildland urban interface areas,” where de velopment is adjacent to densely vegetated areas. There are a few different types of wildfires:  Ground Fires: Fires that burn when surface fuels, such as organic soils, duff, decomposing litter, buried logs, roots, and the below-surface portion of stumps ignite and burn under the ground. Ground fires may eventually burn through the ground surface and become surface fires.  Surface Fires: Fires that burn on the surface of the ground and are primarily fueled by low-lying vegetation such as leaf and needle litter, dead branch material, downed logs, bark, trees bones, and low statute living plants.  Ladder Fuels: Dead or live vegetation such as low-lying tree branches, shrubs, and trees under the tree canopy that allows an active fire to spread from the forest floor into the tree canopy to become crown fires.  Crown Fires: Fires that spread from treetop to treetop, typically at a rapid pace. They are often pushed by wind and can become extremely intense and difficult to put out.  Spotting Fires: Fires that involve burning embers which are thrown ahead of the main fire. This type of fire can be produced by crown fires depending on wind and topography. Once they begin, spotting fires are difficult to control.  The Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan was used to inform parts of this risk assessment and can be accessed for an in-depth look at the County’s wildfire risk and other supporting data. The plan can be found online with the following link: https://www.sccfd.org/santa-clara-county-community-wildfire-protection-plan/ 202 PSC 09-12-2024 202 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 123 8.2 Hazard Profile 8.2.1 Past Events Wildfire poses a significant risk to public health and safety, economies, infrastructure, and irreplaceable cultural and natural resources within the OA.81F 82 Wildfire is an annual risk in Santa Clara County.82F 83 The following are wildfires of over 10 acres that have been recorded in or near the OA before February 2023.83F 84 Table 41: Past Wildfire Events Event Name Event Period Additional Information From To Lexington Fire 6/26/1985 7/19/1985 FEMA-739-DR-CA. This federal wildfire disaster included six counties. In Santa Clara County, the worst of the fires affected the Santa Cruz Mountains south of the City of San José, threatening at least 2,000 homes and forcing the evacuation of more than 4,500 people.84F 85 Felter Fire 10/25/2006 10/26/2006 Burned 200 acres. Stevens Fire 8/30/2007 9/2/2007 Burned 151 acres near Stevens Canyon Reservoir. Lick Fire 9/3/2011 9/11/2007 Burned 47,760 acres at Henry Coe State Park, with four residences and 20 outbuildings destroyed. Summit Fire 5/22/2008 5/30/2008 FEMA-2766-FM-CA. Burned 4,270 acres along with 35 residences, 64 outbuildings at Summit Road and Maymen Flats, south of the Town of Loma Prieta. Whitehurst/ Hummingbird Fires 6/21/2008 6/26/2008 Burned 794 acres at Hummingbird and 200 acres at Whitehurst. Pacheco Fire 8/29/2009 8/30/2009 Burned 1,650 acres. Croy Fire 9/23/2002 10/5/2002 FM-2465. Burned 13,128 acres. McDonald Fire 7/21/2011 7/21/2011 Burned 27 acres east of the City of Morgan Hill below Anderson Lake. Uvas Fire 7/12/2013 7/12/2013 Burned 50 acres along Uvas Road and Casa Loma Road, near Calero County Park and west of the City of Morgan Hill. Grant Fire 12/31/2013 12/31/2013 Burned 40 acres off Mount Hamilton Road near Grant Ranch County Park. 82 Santa Clara County Fire Department. (2016, August). Santa Clara Community Wildfire Protection Plan. https://www.sccfd.org/santa-clara-county-community-wildfire-protection-plan/ 83 County of Santa Clara. (2012). Silicon Valley 2.0. https://sustainability.sccgov.org/silicon-valley-20 84 State of California. (2023). California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. https://www.fire.ca.gov/ 85 Los Angeles Times. (1985, July 10). Fire Imperils 2,000 Homes Near San José. https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1985-07-10-mn-7612-story.html 203 PSC 09-12-2024 203 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 124 Event Name Event Period Additional Information From To Curie Fire 6/30/2014 7/1/2014 Burned 125 acres off Curie Drive south of the City of San José. Casa Fire 8/28/2014 8/31/2014 Burned 80 acres along Highway 152 at Casa De Fruta. Highway Fire 6/30/2015 7/3/2015 Burned 42 acres off Highway 101 near Monterey Frontage Road, south of the City of Gilroy. Pacheco Fire 9/9/2015 9/10/2015 Burned 215 acres off Highway 152 at Dinosaur Point, three miles west of San Luis Reservoir. Sierra Fire 7/30/2016 7/31/2016 Burned 114 acres off Sierra Road and Calaveras Road. Bailey Fire 8/17/2016 8/18/2016 Burned 100 acres off Highway 101 and Bailey Road. Oak Fire 9/1/2016 9/2/2016 Burned 25 acres off Oak Glen Avenue, two miles west of the City of Morgan Hill. Loma Fire 9/26/2016 10/12/2016 Burned 4,474 acres and destroyed 12 residences and 16 outbuildings off Loma Prieta Road and Loma Chiquita Road, 10 miles northwest of the City of Morgan Hill. Quimby Fire 6/21/2017 6/21/2017 Burned 54 acres off Quimby Road, west of Great Ranch Park, East San José. Ranch Fire 6/29/2017 6/29/2017 Burned 85 acres off Grant Road, Mt. Hamilton, east of the City of San José. Felipe Fire 7/10/2017 7/10/2017 Burned 70 acres by San Felipe Road and Metcalf Road, 8 miles northeast of City of Morgan Hill. Lariat Fire 7/11/2017 7/11/2017 Burned 101 acres along Lariat Lane and Claitor Way, six miles northeast of the City of San José. Castro Fire 7/23/2017 7/23/2017 Burned 78 acres off Castro Valley Road & Highway 101, southwest of the City of Gilroy. Weller Fire 7/26/2017 7/26/2017 Burned 51 acres along Weller Road and Calaveras Road, three miles east of the City of Milpitas. Tilton Fire 8/11/2017 8/11/2017 Burned 100 acres by Hale Avenue and Tilton Avenue in the City of Morgan Hill. Bally Fire 9/3/2017 9/3/2017 Burned 100 acres by Ballybunion Court in the City of Gilroy. Keeler Fire 5/27/2018 5/27/2018 Burned 16 acres by Keeler Court and Santa Teresa Boulevard, south of the City of San José. Tesla Fire 6/29/2018 6/29/2018 Burned 70 acres across Tesla Road and Reuss Road, east of the City of Livermore. Bridle Fire 7/6/2018 7/6/2018 Burned 116 acres off Bridal Path Drive and Butch Drive, east of the City of Gilroy. Curie Fire 7/10/2018 7/10/2018 Burned 70 acres by Curie Drive and San Ignacio Avenue, southwest of San José. Hale Fire 7/10/2019 7/10/2019 Burned 51 acres at Hale Avenue and Monterey Street in the City of Morgan Hill. 204 PSC 09-12-2024 204 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 125 Event Name Event Period Additional Information From To Country Fire 7/22/2018 7/22/2018 Burned 320 acres along Country Club Road and North Park Victoria Road in the City of Milpitas. Quimby Fire 9/23/2018 9/23/2018 Burned 30 acres by Quimby Road and Borden Drive, East San José. Park Fire 10/7/2018 10/7/2018 Burned 62 acres along Monterey Road and Coyote Creek Golf Drive, north of the City of Morgan Hill. Canyon Fire 5/30/2019 6/11/2019 Burned 144 acres off Del Puerto Canyon Road and Diablo Grande Parkway, west of the City of Patterson. Malech Fire 6/9/2019 6/11/2019 Burned 210 acres by Malech Road & Bailey Road, South San José. Calaveras Fire 6/10/2019 6/17/2019 Burned 35 acres by Calaveras Road and Weller Road east of the City of Milpitas. Mines Fire 6/26/2019 6/27/2019 Burned 17 acres by Mines Road and Turner Gulch in the San Antonio Valley. Coyote Fire 7/2/2019 7/2/2019 Burned 74 acres by Northbound US 101 at Coyote Creek Golf Drive in the City of San José. Aborn Fire 7/15/2019 7/15/2019 Burned 47 acres off Aborn Road and Murillo Avenue, East San José. Sweigert Fire 7/24/2019 7/24/2019 Burned 80 acres off Kahler Court and Felter Road, East of the City of Milpitas. Bayliss Fire 8/15/2019 8/15/2019 Burned 60 acres by Santa Teresa Boulevard and Bayless Drive, South San José. Jamieson Fire 8/25/2019 8/25/2019 Burned 35 acres at Jamieson Road and Cañada Road near the City of Gilroy. Reservoir Fire 9/21/2019 9/24/2019 Burned 128 acres near Calaveras Road and Felter Road, 5 miles northeast of the City of Milpitas. Point Fire 10/7/2019 10/7/2019 Burned 29 acres between Highway 152 and Dinosaur Point Road. Santa Clara Unit (SCU) Lightning Complex Fire 8/16/2020 10/1/2020 Burned 396,624 acres between Santa Clara County, Alameda County, Contra Costa County, San Joaquin County, Merced County, and Stanislaus County. Silver Fire 6/4/2020 6/4/2020 Burned 19 acres by Dutch Flat Trail, East of the City of San José. Colleen Fire 6/4/2020 6/7/2020 Burned 126 acres around Colleen Drive, South San José. Park Fire 7/4/2020 7/6/2020 Burned 353 acres by East Dunne Avenue and Finley Ridge Road, east of the City of Morgan Hill. Crews Fire 7/5/2020 7/13/2020 Burned 5,513 acres by Crews Road and Oak Spring Circle, north of the City of Gilroy. Alum Fire 7/11/2020 7/11/2020 Burned 31 acres by Mt. Hamilton and Crothers Road, northeast of the City of San José. Coyote Fire 8/21/2020 8/26/2020 Burned 143 acres by Monterey Road and Coyote Creek Golf Drive. 205 PSC 09-12-2024 205 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 126 Event Name Event Period Additional Information From To Silicon Valley Fire 6/14/2021 6/14/2021 Burned 35 acres by off Silicon Valley Road and Basking Ridge, East San José. Paseo Fire 6/25/2021 6/25/2021 Burned 37 acres by Paseo Robles Avenue and Paseo Vista Avenue, east of the City of Morgan Hill. The 2020 fire season was the largest wildfire season recorded in California ’s modern history. It was also the most devastating in recent Santa Clara County history. One fire significantly outpaced the rest. The SCU Lightning Complex fire started as a series of almost twenty fires on August 16, 2020, and burned until October 1, 2020, engulfing 396,624 acres five counties. At least 26 structures were damaged and 225 destroyed. There were 6 confirmed injuries to fire personnel and civilians and no deaths. As of this writing, it was the fourth largest fire in California’s recorded history. 8.2.2 Location Wildfires occur in two distinct spaces: wildlands, and the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI). Wildland fires that burn in natural, undeveloped settings actually benefit the landscape through cleaning the forest floor from heavy brush, killing disease, providing food and habitat to forest animals and birds in the new vegetation that grows, and supporting new generations of plants that require intense heat for seed germination. According to the U.S. Fire Administration,85F 86 the WUI is the zone of transition between occupied land and human development. It is the line, area, or zone where structures and other human development meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland or vegetative fuels. The WUI possess unique wildfire ri sks as fire can easily move between structural and vegetative fuels. The WUI has seen exponential growth in recent years. It is vital that WUI communities continue to work to address the WUI wildfire issue. Figure 32: Air Tanker Dropping Fire Retardant on Lick Fire in Santa Clara County86F 87 Fire-prone areas in California are divided into three categories: federal responsibility areas, state responsibility areas, and local responsibility areas. The California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) has responsibly for fire prevention and firefighting services within the state 86 U.S. Fire Administration. (2022). What is the WUI? https://www.usfa.fema.gov/wui/what-is-the-wui.html 87 Schulz, W. (n.d.). Air tanker dropping fire retardant on Lick Fire in Santa Clara County [Photograph]. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, California. 206 PSC 09-12-2024 206 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 127 responsibility areas, while local agencies have local responsibility areas, and the U.S. Forest Service has fire-related responsibilities in the federal responsibility areas. CAL FIRE’s Fire and Resource Assessment Program has modeled and mapped fire hazard risk using a science-based and field-tested model that assigns a hazard score based on factors that influence fire likelihood and fire behavior such as fire history, existing and potential fuel (natural vegetation), predicted flame length, blowing embers, terrain, and typical fire weather for an area. These factors include the following:  Fuel: Fuel may include living and dead vegetation on the ground, along the surface as brush and small trees, and above the ground in tree canopies. Lighter fuels such as grasses, leaves and needles quickly expel moisture and burn rapidly, while heavier fuels su ch as tree branches, logs and trunks take longer to warm and ignite. Trees killed or defoliated by forest insects and diseases are more susceptible to wildfire.  Weather: Relevant weather conditions include temperature, relative humidity, wind speed and direction, cloud cover, precipitation amount and duration, and the stability of the atmosphere. Of particular importance for wildfire activity are wind and thunderstorms: ▪ Strong, dry winds produce extreme fire conditions. Such winds generally reach peak velocities during the night and early morning hours. It accounts for flying ember production, which is the principal driver of the wildfire hazard in densely developed areas. ▪ The thunderstorm season typically begins in June with wet storms and turns dry with little or no precipitation reaching the ground as the season progresses into July and August. Traditionally, this “fire season” between July and November would be when the State sees the most wildfires. However, according to the 2018 Strategic Fire Plan, climate change has rendered that term obsolete, as fires now burn year-round.  Terrain: Topography includes slope and elevation. The topography of a region influences the amount and moisture of fuel; the impact of weather conditions such as temperature and wind; potential barriers to fire spread, such as highways and lakes; and elevation and slope of landforms (fire spreads more easily uphill than downhill).  Probability of Future Occurrence: The likelihood of an area burning over a 30- to 50-year time period, based on history and other factors. Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) are ranked into the following risk classifications: moderate, high, or very high. The model covers the State Responsibility Area (SRA), which is the land where the State of California is financially responsible for the prevention and suppression of wildfires. It does not include lands within incorporated city boundaries or in federal ownership. Significant land-use changes need to be accounted for through periodic model updates. The Wildfire Hazard Severity Zone Map87F 88 was updated in 2007, and since updated in 2023 to reflect all that has happened in terms of scientific data, a changing climate, and other factors. The new model incorporates local climate data and changes in burn probability based on recent trends in fire occurrence. Overall, the map shows increase fire hazard, reflecting the State’s increase in wildfire occurrence and severity. It is important CAL FIRE continues to maintain these maps in order to build more resilient, fire -adapted communities. GIS data of the 2023 update was not yet released to include in the maps for this plan. The FHSZs shown throughout use the 2007 data. Figure 32 shows the FHSZ mapping for the Santa Clara County OA. 88 State of California. (2023). Fire Hazard Severity Zones Map. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/community-wildfire- preparedness-and-mitigation/wildfire-preparedness/fire-hazard-severity-zones/fire-hazard-severity-zones-map/ 207 PSC 09-12-2024 207 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 128 Figure 33: Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FSHZ) Typically, wildfires will occur anywhere in the County outside of the urbanized Highway 101 corridor and Santa Clara Valley. In general, the areas with the highest fire risk hazard are found in the parts of the OA farthest from urbanized areas, including along the border with Stanislaus and Santa Cruz Counties. However, there are also Very High FHSZs near urban areas, including south of Los Gatos, west of Saratoga, west of Morgan Hill, and west of Gilroy. 208 PSC 09-12-2024 208 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 129 Wildfires are not also limited to Very High risk areas and can occur in Moderate or High FHSZs. The Santa Clara County General Plan88F 89 suggests much of Santa Clara County is at high risk to wildfires due to:  Climatic factors, such as rainfall, humidity, and wind patterns;  Volume of naturally occurring fuel, such as brush, dead trees, and grasses that ignite easily and burn hotly;  Steepness of slopes; and  Inaccessibility and lack of available water supplies for fire suppression. Additional information on wildfire hazard and risk to structures are available in the 2020 Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Mateo County Wildfire Risk to Structures and Classified Wildfire Hazard Maps .89F 90 The classified wildfire hazard was calculated by 9 weighted input data sets that contribute to the potential for wildfire. These include fire environment factors such as fuel, weather, topography and ignition sources, the probability of a fire occurring at a specific point during a specific time period, and the expected distribution of intensity. This wildfire hazard model resulted in a 20-meter raster with 6 classes of relative wildfire hazards. Because this classified hazard data was of finer resolution and completed more recently, it was the primary source used to evaluate potential exposure and risk in the OA. 89 County of Santa Clara. (1994, December 20). General Plan. https://plandev.sccgov.org/ordinances-codes/general- plan 90 Santa Cruz Mountains Stewardship Network. (2020) Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Mateo County Wildfire Risk to Structures and Classified Wildfire Hazard Maps for Fire Prevention Planning. 209 PSC 09-12-2024 209 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 130 Figure 34: Classified Wildfire Hazard  This hazard classification does not account for resources or assets exposed to the hazard. Wildfire risk is the potential for adverse consequences to valued resources or assets. The Wildfire Risk to Structures map models risk by one value: structures. This map displays 10-acre hexagons ranked for wildfire hazard and structure density. Hexagons with high structure density and high wildfire hazard indicate areas of greatest concern. 210 PSC 09-12-2024 210 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 131 Figure 35: Wildfire Risk to Structures 8.2.3 Frequency Wildfire frequency can be assessed through review of the portion of an area burned in previous wildfire events. Table 42 includes a summary of CAL FIRE records of fires from 1950 to 2021. About 39 percent of the mapped wildfire risk zones in the Santa Clara County OA have burned in that period. 211 PSC 09-12-2024 211 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 132 Table 42: Record of Fire Affecting Operational Area Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) Total Area in Wildfire Severity Zone (acres) Area Burned, 1950-2021 Acres Percent of Total Moderate FHSZ 33,549 2,377 7.1 High FHSZ 372,517 119,693 32.1 Very High FHSZ 148,389 93,224 62.8 Total 554,455 215,295 38.8 The National Fire Plan directs funding to be provided for projects intended to reduce fire risks to a community. To meet this object, high risk communities within the wildland-urban interface were identified and publicized in the Federal Register in 2001. Since then, states have been responsible for updating this list. According to CAL FIRE’s list of Communities at Risk,90F 91 14 out of 15 local jurisdictions within Santa Clara County are at high risk of damage from wildfire. The City of Mountain View is not included on this list. It is surrounded by urban development and the San Francisco Bay. It is important to consider changing conditions when assessing the future probability of wildfires in the OA. According to CAL FIRE,91F 92 over the last 5 years, 13 out the 20 most destructive wildfires in California ’s history have occurred. Thousands of homes, business, and pieces of infrastructure were damaged or destroyed. This isn’t a new trend. Since the 1970s, the number of statewide fires has steadily been increasing. NASA’s Earth Observatory92F 93 summarized the causes of this surge of large, destructive of fires as; heat waves and droughts influenced by climate changed, a century of fire suppression, and fast - growing populations expanding the WUI. Despite recent storm and flooding events, the U.S. Drought Monitor indicates that most of California is still experiencing moderate to severe drought conditions. Santa Clara County is in a moderate drought and experienced the 35th driest year to date over the past 128 years in 2022. Drought leads to more severe, costly fires as it contributes to high burn intensity, the rate at which fire spreads, availability of dry fuels, and fires in typically wet parts of the state. When fuel is dry, sparks from both na tural sources such as lightning and human sources like power lines, are more likely to ignite. Droughts can hamper first responder’s firefighting capabilities by reducing water reserves necessary to combat the blazes, resulting in longer lasting, wider spreading events. According to California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment,93F 94 the frequency of extreme wildfires may increase, and the average area burned statewide may increase by 77% if greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise. Water resources, both in terms of rainfall and the availability of fuel for fires and water for fire suppression, also may be impacted by shifting water patterns due to climate change. 91 State of California. (n.d.). Communities at Risk. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/divisions/community-wildfire-preparedness-and-mitigation/fire-plan/communities-at-risk/#c 92 State of California. (2023). California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. https://www.fire.ca.gov/ 93 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Earth Observatory. (2021). What’s Behind California’s Surge of Large Fires? https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/148908/whats-behind-californias-surge-of-large-fires 94 State of California. (2018). California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. https://climateassessment.ca.gov/ 212 PSC 09-12-2024 212 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 133 Figure 36: Burned Hillslopes above Pulse Canyon near San Antonio Valley, SCU Lightning Complex, Santa Clara County94F 95 Changing fire management practices also impact fire risk. Early in the 20th century, fire fighters adopted practices of fire suppression, with few prescribed burns. That meant that vegetation which would have been thinned due to naturally occurring fires was allowed to become overgrown and dense. Now, decades later, the impacts of those practices are being felt. A new consensus is developing that proactive fuel treatment is critical to wildfire management. Human behavior will also play a large role in predicting the future probability of wildfire. Human -caused fires, both accidental and arson, are the leading cause of wildfires in California. Education and outreach campaigns are important tools for reducing the risk of human-caused fires. Further information on the impact of climate change on the probability of wildfire is included in Section 15, Tsunami. Probability in OA: Highly Likely 8.2.4 Severity and Impacts Potential losses from wildfire include human life, structures and other improvements, and natural resources. There are no recorded incidents of loss of life from wildfires in the OA. There have been multiple destructive wildfires in the OA destroying residences, burning thousands of acres, and forcing people to evacuate. Given the immediate response times to reported fires, the likelihood of injuries and casualties is minimal. Economic losses may also occur given the size and location of the fire event. The 95 Spangler, E. (2020). Burned hillslopes above Pulse Canyon [Photograph]. California Department of Conservation. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/landslides/recent 213 PSC 09-12-2024 213 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 134 extent of a wildfire can be moderate to severe and depends on the size, rate of spread, fuel type, cause, and impact on communities. The greater the extent, the more severe the wildfire will be. The Santa Clara County CWPP states that high fire danger conditions that can support very active fire behavior may be uncommon, but when it does occur, it can have very severe and destructive potential. Instances such as the 1985 Lexington fire burned 37 homes, 4,200 acres, and caused $7 million in damage. The 2009 Loma Pieta fire burned 669 acres, cost $2.7 million to suppress, involved 1,742 fire fighters, destroyed 1 residence, and caused 4 injuries. It is important to know while these cases are rare, the severity can be detrimental. 8.2.5 Warning Time Wildfires are often caused by humans, intentionally or accidentally. Approximately 94% of wildfires in California are human caused.95F 96 There is no way to predict when one of these human-caused wildfires might break out. Dry seasons and droughts are factors that greatly increase fire likelihood. Dry lightning may trigger wildfires. Inclement weather can be predicted, so special attention can be paid during weather events that may include lightning. Reliable National Weather Service lightning warnings are available on average 24 to 48 hours prior to a significant electrical storm. The National Weather Service alerts fire departments through Red Flag Warnings & Fire Weather Watches when there is critical weather and dry conditions that could lead to the development or rapid increase of wildfire activity. A Fire Weather Watch is issued when weather conditions could exist in the next 12–72 hours. A Red Flag Warning is the highest alert. It is important that all residents and visitors take step to prevent wildfires, particularly when either of these alerts are issued. If a fire does break out and spread rapidly, residents may need to evacuate within hours or days. Once a fire has started, fire alerting is reasonably rapid in most cases. The rapid spread of cellular phone and two-way radio communications in recent years has further contributed to a significant improvement in warning time. Recent wildfires have put these warning systems to the test. Rapidly spreading severe California wildfires has left residents with only minutes to evacuate in some cases. 8.3 Cascading Impacts Wildfires can have a range of cascading impacts, which in some cases may cause more widespread and prolonged damage than the fire itself. They strip slopes of vegetation, exposing them to greater amounts of runoff. This in turn can weaken soils and cause failures on slopes. Major landslides can occur several years after a wildfire. The following figure depicts the areas of the OA most at risk for landslides post wildfire: 96 State of California. (2023). California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. https://www.fire.ca.gov/. 214 PSC 09-12-2024 214 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 135 Figure 37: Post Fire Soil Erosion Potential Wildfires cause the contamination of reservoirs, destroy transmission lines, and contribute to flooding. Most wildfires burn hot and for long durations which can bake soils, especially those high in clay content, thus increasing the imperviousness of the ground. This increases the runoff generated by storm events, thereby increasing the chance of flooding. Flash floods are particularly common after a wildfire. Even areas that are not traditional at high-risk to flooding can flood due to changes in the landscape post-fire.96F 97 Flooding and flood damage after fire is often more severe, as debris and ash left from the fire can form mudflows. As rainwater moves across charred and barren ground, it can also pick up soil and sediment and carry it in a stream of floodwaters. Impacts to the watershed can be felt for years after a wildfire. 97 Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2020, November). FEMA Fact Sheet Flood after Fire: Flood Risks Increase after Fires. https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_flood-after-fire_factsheet_nov20.pdf 215 PSC 09-12-2024 215 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 136 Fires can cause direct economic losses in the reduction of harvestable timber and indirect economic losses in reduced tourism. Cultural and historic resources, scenic vista, and recreational areas may burn. Fire and smoke can reduce employee’s ability to go to work, decrease productivity, and delay outdoor projects. Adapting to these conditions will cost businesses, consumers, and governments.97F 98 Wildfires can also affect personal and household economics through loss of income, increased medical costs, and property damage that may not be covered by insurance. Wildlife can also be impacted by wildfires. After the historic wildfire seasons California has seen recently, there were increased sighting of animals such as mountain lions, raccoons, and coyotes in urban neighborhoods. Wildfires may be one reason why they are encroaching on urban areas, both putting urban populations at risk from these animals and exposing these animals to the risk humans present to them. 8.3.1 Smoke and Air Quality Smoke exposure is one of the most concerning secondary impacts of wildfires. Smoke generated by wildfire consists of visible and invisible emissions that contain particulate matter (soot, tar, water vapor, and minerals), gases (carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides), and toxics (formaldehyde, benzene). Emissions from wildfires depend on the type of fuel, the moisture content of the fuel, the efficiency (or temperature) of combustion, and the weather. The biggest threat from smoke is fine particles. Fine particles in smoke can get into eyes and respiratory systems, cause burning eyes, runny noses, and illness like bronchitis, as well as aggravate chronic heart and lung disease potentially resulting in premature death for people with these conditions.98F 99 The inhalation of wildfire smoke can harm many and become fatal. Wildfire smoke is known to be even more dangerous than wildfire flames and burns. Wildfire smoke is rolling back decades of investments in improving air quality in the U.S. Over the last decade, the estimated amount of each individual’s exposure to light, medium, and heavy wildfire smoke has gone up.99F 100 The rapid acceleration of poor air quality days and number of people exposed is particularly concerning. One study found a 27% increase in people annually exposed to a particle pollution known as PM2.5 – an increase from less than half a million people only a decade ago to over eight million exposed on at least one day a year ago now100F 101. Smoke does not recognize jurisdictional boundaries. The impact of this hazard can be felt far from its source. Wildfires started outside of the OA, from northern California to Oregon, have brought smoke to the Bay Area in recent years. Severe smoke events are expected to only get worse as climate change increases the frequency and severity of wildfires. This poses a chance to exasperate already challenging air quality issues. According to the American Lung Association’s 2023 State of the Air report, Santa Clara County received a grade of “F”. An estimated almost 1.9 million people within the OA are considered to be at risk from poor air quality. While wildfires are certainly not the only source of air pollution, the inc rease in wildfire smoke in recent years has still demonstrated the serious impact of poor air quality across sectors. 98 Lappe, B. & Vargo, J. (2022, November). Disruptions from Wildfire Smoke: Vulnerabilities in Local Economies and Disadvantaged Communities in the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. https://www.frbsf.org/community- development/publications/community-development-research-briefs/2022/november/disruptions-from-wildfire-smoke/ 99 Environmental Protection Agency. (2021, June 16). Wildfires and Indoor Air Quality (IAQ). https://www.epa.gov/indoor-air-quality-iaq/wildfires-and-indoor-air-quality-iaq 100 Lappe, B. & Vargo, J. (2022, November). Disruptions from Wildfire Smoke: Vulnerabilities in Local Economies and Disadvantaged Communities in the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco. https://www.frbsf.org/community- development/publications/community-development-research-briefs/2022/november/disruptions-from-wildfire-smoke/ 101 Garthwaite, J. (2022, September). Stanford researchers find wildfire smoke is unraveling decades of air quality gains, exposing millions of Americans to extreme pollution levels. Wildfire smoke is unraveling decades of air quality gains | Stanford News 216 PSC 09-12-2024 216 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 137 Smoke and poor air quality disproportionately impacts vulnerable populations and frontline workers (those in outdoor occupations typically without air filtration). The most vulnerable to smoke ’s impacts include the elderly, children, people with pre-existing conditions including respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, communities of color, and low-income populations. One of the most common pieces of advice to people during a severe smoke event is to stay indoors. However, particularly in inadequate housing situations or when people do not have the means to evacuate, simply staying indoors is not sufficient considering how smoke can infiltrates buildings through windows and doors, vents, air conditioning, and small cracks or other openings. Additional measures such as clean air centers, masks, and air purifiers may be required. Smoke is as disruptive as it is deadly. Exposure to air pollution by children can reduce lung growth, inhibit brain development, and increase the risk of health conditions like asthma.101F 102 Children’s education can also be disrupted, resulting in decreased test scores and educational attainment. Although these impacts may be hard to quantify now, it is likely those exposed will be experiencing them for years to come. The economy is also impacted through decrease labor income, employment, and labor force participation. Wildfire smoke reduced earnings across the country by an estimated $125 billion a year between 2007 and 2019.102F 103 8.4 Exposure 8.4.1 Population Population could not be examined by wildfire hazard classification because the boundaries of census block groups do not coincide with the zone boundaries. However, population was estimated using the residential building count in the areas of moderate to high hazard and multiplying by the 2017-2021 US Census Bureau average population per household for Santa Clara County. Table 43 presents the results. Hazus 6.0 demographic data indicates that 260,705 persons or 13.5 percent of the population in the OA are over 64 years old, and 422,719 persons or 21.8 percent of the population within the OA under 18 years of age. These ages groups may experience worse affects from poor air quality resulting from a wildfire. They may also have a greater dependency on assistance from others in the event of an evacuation. 102 United Nations Environment Programme. (October 2018). Young and old, air pollution affects the most vulnerable. Young and old, air pollution affects the most vulnerable (unep.org) 103 Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research. (December 2022). Wildfires reveal the large toll of air pollution on labor market outcomes. Wildfires reveal the large toll of air pollution on labor market outcomes | Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research (SIEPR) 217 PSC 09-12-2024 217 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 138 Table 43: Population Within Wildfire Hazard Areas Jurisdiction Number of Buildings in Wildfire Hazard Area Population in Wildfire Hazard Area Residential Public Industrial Commercial Total Number of Buildings Population % of Total Population Campbell 83 1 1 0 85 247 0.57 Cupertino 2,116 4 5 42 2,167 6,306 10.40 Gilroy 4,426 7 40 109 4,582 13,189 22.18 Los Altos 1,019 7 10 31 1,067 3,037 9.55 Los Altos Hills 2,305 5 20 65 2,395 6,869 81.27 Los Gatos 2,789 9 23 87 2,908 8,311 24.79 Milpitas 1,401 2 17 36 1,456 4,175 5.20 Monte Sereno 535 0 2 13 550 1,594 46.21 Morgan Hill 5,237 17 56 167 5,477 15,606 34.65 Mountain View 318 1 1 30 350 948 1.15 Palo Alto 574 3 4 23 604 1,711 2.50 San José 15,507 44 118 453 16,122 46,211 4.56 Santa Clara (city) 109 0 0 4 113 325 0.25 Saratoga 2,823 7 33 96 2,959 8,413 27.10 Sunnyvale 348 2 6 10 366 1,037 0.67 Unincorporated County 10,913 66 242 664 11,885 32,521 36.03 Total 50,503 175 578 1830 53,086 150,499 7.78 218 PSC 09-12-2024 218 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 139 8.4.2 Property Property damage from wildfires can significantly alter entire communities. The number of structures in each FHSZ within the OA and their values are summarized in Table 44. Table 45 shows the general land use of parcels exposed to the wildfire hazard in unincorporated areas of the OA. According to the Santa Clara County CWPP, there are 107 properties and districts listed on the National Register of Historic Places in Santa Clara County. Many of these sites are urban, but some are within the WUI. The Lick Observatory is one such place of historic and cultural significant which w as almost burned due to a recent wildfire. Table 44: Exposure and Value of Structures in Moderate to High Wildfire Hazard Areas Jurisdiction Buildings Exposed Value Exposed % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Vehicle Campbell 85 $26,018,757.17 $13,518,215 $2,718,000 0.37 Cupertino 2,167 $851,005,863 $433,722,243 $66,474,000 8.17 Gilroy 4,582 $1,915,907,959 $1,063,212,359 $137,916,000 22.02 Los Altos 1,067 $443,693,069 $241,831,582 $30,906,000 8.56 Los Altos Hills 2,395 $1,234,211,033 $654,595,360 $67,059,000 71.11 Los Gatos 2,908 $1,310,513,983 $712,187,966 $93,780,000 19.75 Milpitas 1,456 $513,489,424 $279,091,477 $44,361,000 4.02 Monte Sereno 550 $269,260,704 $137,202,957 $15,273,000 43.58 Morgan Hill 5,477 $2,273,625,913 $1,266,973,143 $179,847,000 29.65 Mountain View 350 $114,334,578 $63,331,824 $14,103,000 0.88 Palo Alto 604 $319,419,553 $166,253,134 $25,092,000 2.26 San José 16,122 $6,080,110,863 $3,333,308,139 $487,431,000 4.77 Santa Clara (city) 113 $34,986,342 $17,821,587 $3,978,000 0.16 Saratoga 2,959 $1,347,146,278 $736,302,667 $86,508,000 26.01 Sunnyvale 366 $116,046,797 $65,337,581 $15,030,000 0.53 Unincorporated County 11,885 $5,720,386,230 $3,403,867,991 $444,906,000 44.35 Total 53,086 $22,570,157,353 $12,588,558,231 $1,715,382,000 8.14 219 PSC 09-12-2024 219 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 140 Table 45: Land Within the Wildfire Hazard Classification Areas Type of Land Use Moderate Hazard Zone High Hazard Zone Very High Hazard Zone Area (acres) % of total Area (acres) % of total Area (acres) % of total Campbell 7.8 0.2% 5.33 0.1% 0.69 0.0% Cupertino 415.13 5.8% 262.34 3.6% 62.11 0.9% Gilroy 1249.51 11.8% 1080.12 10.2% 117.51 1.1% Los Altos 115.63 2.8% 44.83 1.1% 2.2 0.1% Los Altos Hills 1491.83 25.7% 697.59 12.0% 38.52 0.7% Los Gatos 929.39 12.5% 667.03 8.9% 139.32 1.9% Milpitas 322.51 3.7% 303.12 3.5% 127.1 1.5% Monte Sereno 142.96 13.8% 66.92 6.4% 3.56 0.3% Morgan Hill 1131.79 13.7% 876.38 10.6% 249.36 3.0% Mountain View 65.66 0.8% 49.97 0.6% 13.29 0.2% Palo Alto 1246.27 7.5% 1180.12 7.1% 735.18 4.4% San Jose 6722.21 5.8% 5036.3 4.4% 1951.14 1.7% Santa Clara 40.39 0.3% 5.15 0.0% 0 0.0% Saratoga 1269.79 15.5% 723.72 8.8% 71.02 0.9% Sunnyvale 44.85 0.3% 30.79 0.2% 2.48 0.0% Unincorporated 111,878.48 18.5% 144,629.2 24.0% 129,146.5 21.4% Total 127,074.2 15.2% 155,658.9 18.6% 132,660 15.9% 8.4.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure Table 46 and Table 47 identify critical facilities exposed to the wildfire hazard in the OA. In the event of wildfire, there would likely be little damage to the majority of infrastructure. Most road and railroads would be without damage except in the worst scenarios. Power lines are the most at risk to wildfire because most are made of wood and susceptible to burning. In the event of a wildfire, pipelines could provide a source of fuel and lead to a catastrophic explosion. The Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan notes that there are many arterial roads and highways that are critical to transportation in the WUI. The transportation networks exposed to the WUI include Skyline/Highway 35, Summit Road, Junipero Serra Blvd/Foothill Expressway, Blossom Hill Road, Almaden Road, Old Monterey Highway, Page Mill Road, Stevens Canyon Road, Highway 9, Highway 17, Old Santa Cruz Highway, Watsonville Road, Hecker Pass/Highway 152 West, Pacheco Pass/Highway 152 East, and Mt. Hamilton Road/Highway 130. 220 PSC 09-12-2024 220 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 141 Table 46: Critical Facilities within Moderate to High Wildfire Hazard Areas Jurisdiction Essential Facilities Transportation Utilities Hazardous Materials Community Assets Campbell 0 0 0 0 0 Cupertino 0 7 0 0 1 Gilroy 1 7 0 0 4 Los Altos 0 0 0 0 0 Los Altos Hills 0 8 0 0 1 Los Gatos 0 1 0 0 3 Milpitas 0 2 0 0 0 Monte Sereno 0 0 0 0 1 Morgan Hill 0 5 0 3 6 Mountain View 0 3 0 0 1 Palo Alto 0 1 0 0 6 San Jose 2 26 2 2 19 Santa Clara 0 1 0 0 2 Saratoga 1 9 0 0 2 Sunnyvale 0 0 0 0 0 Unincorporated 3 100 14 1 29 Total 7 170 16 6 75 Table 47: Critical Facilities Within 100 Meters of Moderate to High Wildfire Hazard Areas Jurisdiction Essential Facilities Transportation Utilities Hazardous Materials Community Assets Campbell 1 7 0 0 2 Cupertino 2 11 0 0 8 Gilroy 12 29 2 2 7 Los Altos 7 6 0 0 6 Los Altos Hills 6 21 0 0 2 Los Gatos 11 25 0 0 7 Milpitas 4 24 0 0 13 Monte Sereno 0 1 0 0 1 Morgan Hill 16 14 1 5 10 Mountain View 2 26 0 2 7 Palo Alto 4 4 1 3 16 San Jose 62 207 8 19 91 Santa Clara 7 13 1 2 5 Saratoga 9 31 0 0 10 Sunnyvale 3 17 2 2 8 221 PSC 09-12-2024 221 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 142 Jurisdiction Essential Facilities Transportation Utilities Hazardous Materials Community Assets Unincorporated 28 177 16 2 37 Total 174 610 31 37 230 There are registered hazardous material containment sites in wildfire risk zones in the OA. During a wildfire, containers for these materials could rupture due to excessive heat and act as fuel for the fire, causing rapid spreading and escalating the fire to unmanageable levels. In addition, they could leak into surrounding areas, saturating soils and seeping into surface waters, and have a disastrous effect on the environment. Although the risk assessment did not include any modeling to determine specific damage estimates for these facilities, it does indicate a large number of assets are exposed to wildfire hazard. There are a large number of essential facilities, transportation features, and other community assets within close proximity to high wildfire hazard classification areas. Structures may be exposed to damage directly from fire. Additionally, utility services may be disrupted, particularly areas with above ground utility systems, some of which have been identified in the 2023 CWPP. Further evaluation may be needed to consider building construction materials, landscape conditions, road access, and defensible space to further determine their susceptibility to wildfire and where specific priority mitigation actions are needed. 8.4.4 Environment Fire is a natural and critical ecosystem process in most terrestrial ecosystems, dictating in part the types, structure, and spatial extent of native vegetation. However, wildfires can cause severe environmental impacts:  Soil Erosion: The protective covering provided by foliage and dead organic matter is removed, leaving the soil fully exposed to wind and water erosion. Accelerated soil erosion occurs, causing landslides and threatening aquatic habitats.  Spread of Invasive Plant Species: Non-native woody plant species frequently invade burned areas. When weeds become established, they can dominate the plant cover over broad landscapes, and become difficult and costly to control.  Disease and Insect Infestations: Unless diseased or insect-infested trees are swiftly removed, infestations and disease can spread to healthy forests and private lands. Timely active management actions are needed to remove diseased or infested trees.  Destroyed Endangered Species Habitat: Catastrophic fires can have devastating consequences for endangered species.  Soil Sterilization: Topsoil exposed to extreme heat can become water repellant, and soil nutrients may be lost. It can take decades or even centuries for ecosystems to recover from a fire. Some fires burn so hot that they can sterilize the soil.  Damaged Fisheries: Critical fisheries can suffer from increased water temperatures, sedimentation, and changes in water quality. Many ecosystems are adapted to historical patterns of fire occurrence. These patterns, called “fire regimes,” include temporal attributes (e.g., frequency and seasonality), spatial attributes (e.g., size and spatial complexity), and magnitude attributes (e.g., intensity and severity), e ach of which have ranges of natural variability. Ecosystem stability is threatened when any of the attributes for a given fire regime diverge from its range of natural variability. 222 PSC 09-12-2024 222 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 143 8.5 Vulnerability There are significant assets, including structures, systems, populations, and community lifelines, vulnerable to wildfire in the OA. In particular, the communities of Gilroy, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Saratoga, and the unincorporated county have substantial percentages of their area, population, and structural value within high risk areas. Changes in conditions: Increase in Vulnerability • Recent drought has impacted vegetation, tree mortality and other • CMRA data indicates an increase in the annual number of days without precipitation, an increase in the number of consecutive days without precipitation, and the number of days with high temperatures. These conditions can all contribute to greater wildfire risk. • Large wildfires occur throughout California, and poor air quality from smoke from wildfire in other portions of the state contribute to poor air quality in the OA. • These climate trends are ongoing and projected to continue. • Management of fire risk requires repetitive action to manage fuels and maintain defensible space. Vulnerability will increase without ongoing management. • Many areas throughout the OA reside in foothill areas where roads may be narrow, be located on dead end spurs, or have long drive-times to fire response facilities, which may increase the difficulty of fire suppression near these structures. Residents bear some of the burden in maintaining vegetation near their homes to try and reduce the risk of fire. • Wildfire leads to an increased risk of debris flow in burned areas, with increases vulnerability to homes and roadways in foothills following a wildfire. 8.5.1 Population There are no recorded incidents of loss of life from wildfires within the OA. Given the immediate response times to reported fires, the likelihood of injuries and casualties is minimal; therefore, injuries and casualties were not estimated for the wildfire hazard. That is not to say that wildfires would not impact the OA population. If any OA residents were to be injured or killed by a wildfire, besides fire responders, it would most likely be a member of a vulnerable population. This includes people with limited mobility that required assistive devices like wheelchairs or medical oxygen, people with respiratory or other illnesses, people over 60, people with a communication barrier, migrant populations, people from low-income communities, and people without regular access to a vehicle they could use to evacuate. Wildfire may threaten the health and safety of those fighting the fires too. First responders are exposed to the dangers from the initial incident and after -effects from smoke inhalation and heat stroke. Gilroy, Los Altos hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Saratoga all have a significant percentage of their population within or close to high wildfire risk areas. People residing in these areas are at higher risk to possible injury and also from being displaced from their homes if an evacuation is required. The public is also exposed to the negative impacts of smoke. Public health impacts associated with wildfire include difficulty in breathing, odor, and reduction in visibility. Smoke and air pollution from wildfires can be a severe health hazard, especially for vulnerable populations, including children, the elderly, outdoor workers, and those with respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. The 2018 wildfires alone were estimated to have health costs in Santa Clara County over $1.5 billion.103F 104 104 Bay Area Council Economic institute. (November 2021). The True Cost of Wildfires Analyzing the Impact of Wildfires on the California Economy. BACEI_WildfireImpacts_Nov2021.pdf (bayareaeconomy.org) 223 PSC 09-12-2024 223 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 144 Commuters may also be impacted. Wildfires around the Bay Area may cause route/commuter delays or disruption due to closed roadways. Some drivers may have to stay home during poor air quality days, particularly if they are part of vulnerable population including people with lung diseases such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, adults over 65, people with cardiovascular disaster, people who smoke, and people in poverty who lack access to healthcare. Additionally, the California Department of Public Health104F 105 recognizes the potential negative impact of wildfires on mental health. The stress of coping with the loss of a home, personal items, pets, livestock, and other traumatic events can trigger mood swings, sleep disruption, and cause extreme nervous tension and/or depression. Children may find it particularly challenging to cope with losses caused by wildfire and present symptoms adults may not initially recognize as a sign of this stress. A comprehensive review of mental health and fire literature found that there was increased cases of PTSD, depression, anxiety, and substance use post-fire both in short-term and long-term studies. The impacts to the populations’ mental health should be considered when evaluating the benefits and costs of alternative mitigation actions. 8.5.2 Property Loss estimations for the wildfire hazard are not based on damage functions, because no such damage functions are currently available. Instead, loss estimates were developed representing 10 percent, 30 percent, and 50 percent of the replacement value of exposed structures. This allows emergency managers to select a range of economic impact based on an estimate of the percent of damage t o the general building stock. Damage in excess of 50 percent is considered to be substantial by most building codes and typically requires total reconstruction of the structure. Table 48 lists the loss estimates for the general building stock for jurisdictions that have an exposure to a fire hazard severity zone (the aggregate of the 3 zones assessed). 105 California Department of Public Health. (2022, December 29). Wildfires & Mental Health. https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/EPO/Pages/Wildfire%20Pages/Wildfires --Mental-Health.aspx 224 PSC 09-12-2024 224 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 145 Table 48: Loss Estimates for Wildfire within Moderate to High Wildfire Hazard Class Jurisdiction Exposed Value Estimated Loss Potential from Wildfire 10% Damage 30% Damage 50% Damage Campbell $42,254,972.95 $4,225,497.30 $12,676,491.89 $21,127,486.48 Cupertino $1,351,202,106.61 $135,120,210.66 $405,360,631.98 $ 675,601,053.31 Gilroy $3,117,036,318.53 $311,703,631.85 $935,110,895.56 $1,558,518,159.27 Los Altos $716,430,652.27 $71,643,065.23 $214,929,195.68 $358,215,326.14 Los Altos Hills $1,955,865,393.65 $195,586,539.37 $586,759,618.10 $977,932,696.83 Los Gatos $2,116,481,950.18 $211,648,195.02 $634,944,585.05 $1,058,240,975.09 Milpitas $836,941,901.80 $83,694,190.18 $251,082,570.54 $418,470,950.90 Monte Sereno $421,736,661.94 $42,173,666.19 $126,520,998.58 $210,868,330.97 Morgan Hill $3,720,446,057.04 $372,044,605.70 $1,116,133,817.11 $1,860,223,028.52 Mountain View $191,769,402.82 $19,176,940.28 $57,530,820.85 $95,884,701.41 Palo Alto $510,764,687.23 $51,076,468.72 $153,229,406.17 $255,382,343.62 San José $9,900,850,002.92 $990,085,000.29 $2,970,255,000.88 $4,950,425,001.46 Santa Clara (city) $56,785,930.11 $5,678,593.01 $17,035,779.03 $28,392,965.06 Saratoga $2,169,956,945.61 $216,995,694.56 $650,987,083.68 $1,084,978,472.81 Sunnyvale $196,414,379.07 $19,641,437.91 $58,924,313.72 $98,207,189.54 Unincorporated County $9,569,160,222.23 $956,916,022.22 $2,870,748,066.67 $4,784,580,111.12 Total $36,874,097,584.96 $3,687,409,758.50 $11,062,229,275.49 $18,437,048,792.48 It should be noted that of the 53,086 structures in the OA determined to be at risk to wildfire, 50,503 are residences. This places a high burden of loss directly on individual homeowners. It may also coincide with a large number of people displaced, both for short -term evacuations, or possibly long-term if homes are lost to wildfire. 225 PSC 09-12-2024 225 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 146 8.5.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure As shown in Table 47, many essential facilities and infrastructure are in close proximity to areas at high risk to wildfire. Individual facility and structure types within the hazard areas were not counted. Essential facilities at risk could include schools, fire or police stations, or hospitals that are near the high wildfire risk classification zones. It is expected that most of the transportation facilities potentially include railway, light rail, or highway bridges. Air and rail facilities are predominantly in more developed urban areas with less direct risk to wildfire. Several electric power facilities are located near high hazard areas. Critical facilities of wood frame construction are especially vulnerable during wildfire events. Roads and railroads could be damaged by fallen trees, slides, debris flows, cracking, heavy fire fighting vehicles, and loss of signs and road delineators. Narrow one-lands roads are common in communities throughout the county. Fires can create conditions that block or prevent access and can iso late residents and emergency service providers. Wildfire typically does not have a major direct impact on bridges, but it can create conditions in which bridges are obstructed. Many bridges in areas of high to moderate fire risk are important because they provide the only ingress and egress to large areas and in some cases to isolated neighborhoods. Communications and power and gas distribution infrastructure may also be threatened. Power lines are the most at risk from wildfire because most poles are made of wood and susceptible to burning. In 2018, Pacific Gas & Electric, the primary gas and electricity supplier to the northern half of California, declared bankruptcy following the 2017 and 2018 northern California wildfire. This bankruptcy has been called the first climate change bankruptcy (Center on Global Energy Policy).105F 106 It serves as an important case study for how to understand risk to critical infrastructure and the many stakeholders impacted. The function of critical facilities and infrastructure may also be impacted by fire mitigation measures, such as public safety power shutoffs. Electrical transmission and distribution lines may ignite fires if they are downed by winds and/or trees. To reduce this risk, electrical grids or blocks of an area may be deenergized during heightened risk conditions. This is important for critical facilities to be aware of and prepare for in order to reduce disruptions. 8.5.4 Wildlife and Livestock The Santa Clara County CWPP Plan notes that horses, livestock, and animals may be especially vulnerable if a wildfire occurs. Many rural homes in the OA have horses, other large animals, and livestock. Farm animals and pets are common in homes of the OA. It can be difficult to evacuate large animals during a wildfire, and they can be harmed by smoke and other wildfire impacts. The loading of horses during a fire, and transportation of stock vehicles down narrow roads under stressful situations can be difficult. Other wildlife, like birds, are highly vulnerable during wildfires due to habitat destruction, smoke inhalation, loss of food sources, and even adverse effects on rare and specialized species. 8.6 Future Trends in Development The population of Santa Clara County increase 8.7% between 2010 and 2020. However, the population has begun to decline in recent years any future growth is expected at a slow rate. The highly urbanized portions of the OA have little or no wildfire risk exposure. Development in the wildland urban interface can be managed with strong fire-resilient land use and building codes. Santa Clara County has been a leader 106 Center on Global Energy Policy. (2020, January 28). Out of Control: The Impact of Wildfires on our Power Sector and the Environment. https://www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/publications/out-control-impact-wildfires-our-power- sector-and-environment 226 PSC 09-12-2024 226 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 147 in urban planning for decades. Planning partners have taken steps to reduce geographic spread into wildland areas and promote “smart growth,” which includes focusing on moderate to higher density development near existing infrastructure.106F 107 These efforts have been fairly effective in accommodating residential growth without significant urban encroachment. However, despite these efforts, as population grows, it is likely the development of wildland will continue, and the WUI will grow. In som e cases, parcels may be developed without a planning permit. New development is also occurring in areas that have limited water supply, putting residents at risk. The technology industry is a major employer in the county. Many employees of tech-based industries are choosing to build property in the Santa Clara foothills, creating additional concerns around the value of property in the WUI, proper fire-resident landscaping, and gated communities. Overall though, this plan has assessed capabilities with regards to the tools necessary to encourage fire - resilient future development and found the OA was equipped with sufficient resources. In fact, the OA was actively involved in expanding planning capabilities at the time of this plan update. The Santa Clara County General Plan and individual city General Plans also address wildfire and can reduce risk through developing land use policies for hazard prone areas (e.g., proper community design, open space land use, and reducing population in areas prone to wildfire). The Safety Element of the Santa Clara County General Plan is currently being updated. Updating the Safety Element will ensure safety considerations are identified and included during the decision-making and planning processes as they relate to future developments within the county. The Safety Element addresses Wildland/Urban Fire risk. The Santa Clara County Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP)107F 108 is also currently being updated and will outline a mitigation and preparedness plan to reduce wildfire risk. The CWPP advocates for wildfire risk reduction measures including updating applicable policies, codes, and ordinances, prioritizing fuel reduction, improving available water supply networks, and engaging in outreach and education. It emphasizes property’s owners’ responsibility to reduce structure ignitability and mitigate risk. 8.7 Scenario A major wildfire in the OA might begin with a water shortage causing tinder-like wildlands and “Red Flag” conditions occurring, indicating a combination of higher-than-normal temperatures, low humidity and winds blowing from the east across California to the ocean. Lightning strikes or human carelessness with combustible materials could trigger a multitude of small, isolated fires. The embers from these smaller fires could be carried miles by hot, dry winds. Fires that start in flat areas move slower, but wind still pushes them. It is not unusual for a wildfire pushed by wind to burn the ground fuel and later climb into the crown and reverse its track. This is one of many ways that fires can escape containment, typically during periods when response capabilities are overwhelmed. These small new fires would most likely merge. Suppression resources would be redirected from protecting the natural resources to saving more remote subdivisions. The worst-case scenario would include an active fire season throughout the American west, spreading resources thin. Firefighting teams would be exhausted or unavailable. Many federal assets would be responding to other fires that started earlier in the sea son. Multiple fires burn in the State or OA at one time would limit State and local capabilities to respond. If fire management capabilities are stretched too thin, and weather conditions remained favorable for wildfires, the fire could encroach upon the WUI. Losses in the WUI could be devastating. Residents would need to evacuate, residential and commercial properties would be damaged or destroyed, lives could be 107 Santa Clara County Fire Department. (2016, August). Santa Clara Community Wildfire Protection Plan. https://www.sccfd.org/santa-clara-county-community-wildfire-protection-plan/ 108 Santa Clara County FireSafe Council (2019). https://sccfiresafe.org/cwpp/ 227 PSC 09-12-2024 227 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 148 lost, and infrastructure and utilities including communication towers, power grids, water utilities, transportation corridors and community watersheds could be impacted. To further complicate the problem after the fire has been contained, heavy rains could follow, causing flooding and landslides and releasing tons of sediment into rivers, and damaging sensitive habitat and riparian areas. Such a fire followed by rain could release millions of cubic yards of sediment into streams, creating new floodplains and changing existing ones. With the vegetation removed from the watershed, stream flows could easily double. Floods that could be expected every 50 years may occur every c ouple of years. With the streambeds unable to carry the increased discharge because of increased sediment, the floodplains and floodplain elevations would increase. Floodplain management capabilities would find it challenging to adapt to changed conditions and new flood map studies would be warranted. 8.8 Issues Important issues associated with wildfires in the OA include the following:  Public education and outreach to people living in or near the fire hazard zones should include information about and assistance with mitigation activities such as defensible space, and advance identification of evacuation routes and safe zones.  Wildfires could cause landslides as a secondary natural hazard.  Climate change could affect the wildfire hazard.  Future growth into interface areas should continue to be managed.  Area fire districts need to continue to train on wildland-urban interface events.  Vegetation management activities. This would include enhancement through expansion of the target areas as well as additional resources.  Regional consistency of higher building code standards such as residential sprinkler requirements and prohibitive combustible roof standards.  Fire department water supply in high-risk wildfire areas.  Expand certifications and qualifications for fire department personnel. Ensure that all firefighters are trained in basic wildfire behavior, basic fire weather, and that all company officers and chief level officers are trained in the wildland command and strike team leader level. Table 49: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Wildfire Subject Ranking Impacts/Wildfire Public Minimal to Severe Residents in the high wildfire risk zones are most likely to be impacted. Impacts include injuries related to burns, smoke inhalation, and loss of property and homes. Residents outside of the immediate wildfire area may still be impacted by a wildfire event due to smoke, disruption of services, or inaccessible roads. 228 PSC 09-12-2024 228 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 8: Wildfire 149 Subject Ranking Impacts/Wildfire Responders Minimal Responders will be called upon to manage the overall incident including potentially supporting evacuations, closing roads, assisting injured members of the public, and more. Climate conditions also need to be considered. Fire management agencies face more uncertainty in planning, change in suppression and fire management techniques, and the need for more agency coordination considering compounding hazards like drought. With proper training, data, equipment, and time for responders with pre-existing conditions to take precautionary steps to protect themselves prior to exposure, it is anticipated the impact to responders will be minimal. Continuity of Operations (including continued delivery of services) Minimal to Moderate The impacts on continuity of operations depends largely on the location of the fire and whether any facility or critical infrastructure component would be impacted. Each fire will present unique risks. Communication systems could be damaged or destroyed. Power connectivity could be disrupted. Other community lifelines could be disrupted or destroyed. Delivery of services may be slowed or stopped in impacted areas. Property, Facilities, and Infrastructure Minimal to severe The localized impact to properties, facilities, and infrastructure could be severe. The impact to critical infrastructure depends in part on the preparation taken prior to a fire during high-risk warning levels (e.g., raising water levels and fueling gener ators). Fire conditions and the ability of responder’s to quickly suppress the fire will also play a large role in determining the impact. Environment Minimal to severe Fire plays an important role in California’s ecosystem. A wildfire does not necessarily have a negative impact on the environment. However, fires can also have severe negative impact in terms of habitat destruction, soil erosion, soil sterilization, spread of invasive species, and disease and insect infestation. Economic Conditions Minimal to severe Impacts on the economy will depend greatly on the size and location of the wildfire event. A major wildfire event could impact the local economy through the destruction of property, businesses, and infrastructure; delays or halts in supply chains; and impacts to health and air quality, which may decrease worker productivity or prevent workers from going to work. Public Confidence in the Government Minimal to severe The public’s confidence will vary, depending on the perception of how well the event was managed, the warning time, and the time it takes for response and recovery. Timely and accurate public information and notification during these events will impact public trust. 229 PSC 09-12-2024 229 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 150 9 Inclement Weather Definitions • Atmospheric River: A long, narrow region in the atmosphere that transports most of the water vapor outside of the tropics. These columns of vapor move with the weather, carrying large amounts of water vapor and strong winds. When atmospheric rivers make landfall, they release this vapor in the form of rain or snow, causing flooding and mudslide events. • Damaging Winds: Winds exceeding 50–60 mph. NOAA identifies eight types of damaging winds. • Extreme Heat: A period of high heat and humidity with temperatures above 90 degrees for at least two to three days. • Extreme Temperatures: Unexpected, unusual, or unseasonal temperatures—cold or hot—that can create dangerous situations. • Heat Index: The temperature the body feels when heat and humidity are combined. • Heavy Precipitation: Also known as heavy rain, refers to instances where the amount of rain or snow experienced in one area exceeds what is normal. • Space Weather: Variations in the space environment between the sun and earth. It can influence the performance of technology used on Earth. • Thunderstorm: A rain event that includes thunder, lightning and occasionally strong gusty winds and hail. 9.1 General Background Inclement weather refers to any dangerous meteorological phenomena with the potential to cause damage, serious social disruption, or loss of human life. Inclement weather can be categorized into two groups: systems that form over wide geographic areas are classified as general severe weather; those with a more limited geographic area are classified as localized severe weather. In this plan, we refer to this hazard by the broad “inclement weather” term. Inclement weather, technically, is not the same as extreme weather, which refers to unusual weather events at the extremes of the historical distribution for a given area. The most common inclement weather events that impact the Santa Clara County OA are heavy rains/atmospheric rivers/, extreme weather (hot and cold), high wind, and space weather. These types of inclement weather are described in the following sections. Flooding issues associated with inclement weather are discussed in Section 13. Inclement weather episodes account for the majority of OEM EOC activations since 2017. Each year since the last plan update, Santa Clara County has experienced an average of 10 inclement weather episodes (cold and hot). The Office of Emergency Management has a robust system for coordinating response across multiple jurisdictions during inclement weather episodes. The process is described in the Inclement Weather Annex to the Emergency Operations Plan. This annex was developed in cooperation with over 40 area stakeholders representing more than 20 different agencies. 9.1.1 Heavy Precipitation/Atmospheric River Most severe storms in the Santa Clara County OA consist of atmospheric rivers, heavy rains, hail, and thunderstorms. 230 PSC 09-12-2024 230 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 151 Heavy precipitation, or heavy rain, refers to instances where the amount of rain or snow experienced in one area exceeds what is normal.108F 109 The amount of precipitation needed to qualify as heavy rain varies with each location and season. Heavy rain is distinct from climate change analyses on increasing precipitation. It does not mean that the total amount of precipitation at a location has in creased, just that the rain is occurring in a more intense event. More frequent heavy rain events, however, can serve as indicators of changing precipitation levels. Heavy precipitation is measured by tracking the event frequency, analyzing the mean return period, and by measuring the amount of precipitation within a specific timeframe, such as the inches of rain within a 24-hour period. Rainfall intensity is based on the amount of rainfall per unit of time. Light rain is typically less than 0.1 inch per hour, moderate rain is .1 to .3 inches of rain per hour, heavy rain is .3 to 2 inches per hour, and violent rain can be used to characterize rates greater than 2 inches per hour.109F 110 Figure 38: NOAA Atlas Intensity - Santa Clara, California According to the NOAA, about 30 to 50 percent of annual precipitation in the west coast states, such as California, are due to atmospheric river events. Atmospheric Rivers are long, concentrated regions in the atmosphere that transport moist air away from the tropics and into higher latitudes. When combined with high wind, they produce large amounts of heavy rain and snow which can lead to flash floods, mudslides and significant damage to life and property.110F 111 109 United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2021 April). Climate Change Indicators: Heavy Participation. https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-heavy- precipitation#:~:text=%22Heavy%20precipitation%22%20refers%20to%20instances%20during%20which%20the,can %20affect%20the%20intensity%20and%20frequency%20of%20precipitation. 110 Rain rate intensity classification. Manual of Surface Weather Observations. https://www.baranidesign.com/faq- articles/2020/1/19/rain-rate-intensity-classification 111 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Research News. (2023, January 11). Atmospheric Rivers: What are they and how does NOAA study them? https://research.noaa.gov/article/ArtMID/587/ArticleID/2926/Atmospheric- Rivers-What-are-they-and-how-does-NOAA-study- them#:~:text=Infographic%3A%20The%20science%20behind%20atmospheric%20rivers%20%28NOAA%29%20Atm ospheric,and%20snow%20upon%20landfall%2C%20es pecially%20over%20mountainous%20terrain. 231 PSC 09-12-2024 231 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 152 A thunderstorm is a rain event that includes thunder, lightning and occasionally strong gusty winds and hail.111F 112 A thunderstorm is classified as “severe” when it contains one or more of the following: hail one inch or greater, winds gusting in excess of 50 knots (57.5 mph), or tornado. Thunderstorms are usually short in duration (seldom more than two hours). Heavy rains associated with thunderstorms can lead to flash flooding during the wet or dry season. According to the American Meteorological Society Glossary of Meteorology, thunderstorms are reported as light, medium, or heavy according to the following characteristics:112F 113  Nature of the lightning and thunder  Type and intensity of the precipitation, if any  Speed and gustiness of the wind  Appearance of the clouds  Effect on surface temperature Three factors cause thunderstorms to form: moisture, rising unstable air (air that keeps rising when disturbed), and a lifting mechanism to provide the disturbance. The sun heats the surface of the earth, which warms the air above it. If this warm surface air is forced to rise (hills or mountains can cause rising motion, as can the interaction of warm air and cold air or wet air and dry air) it will continue to rise as long as it weighs less and stays warmer than the air around it. As the air rises, it transfers heat from the surface of the earth to the upper levels of the atmosphere (the process of convection). The water vapor it contains begins to cool and it condenses into a cloud. The cloud eventually grows upward into areas where the temperature is below freezing. Some of the water vapor turns to ice and some of it turns into water droplets. Both have electrical charges. Ice particles usually have positive charges, and rain droplets usually have negative charges. When the charges build up enough, they are discharged in a bolt of lightning, which causes the sound waves we hear as thunder. Thunderstorms have three stages (see Figure 38):  Developing Stage: The developing stage of a thunderstorm is marked by a cumulus cloud that is being pushed upward by a rising column of air (updraft). The cumulus cloud soon looks like a tower (called towering cumulus) as the updraft continues to develop. There is little to no rain during this stage but occasional lightning. The developing stage lasts about 10 minutes.  Mature Stage: The thunderstorm enters the mature stage when the updraft continues to feed the storm, but precipitation begins to fall out of the storm, and a downdraft begins (a column of air pushing downward). When the downdraft and rain-cooled air spread out along the ground, they form a gust front, or a line of gusty winds. The mature stage is the most likely time for hail, heavy rain, frequent lightning, strong winds, and tornadoes. The storm occasionally has a black or dark green appearance.  Dissipating Stage: Eventually, a large amount of precipitation is produced, and the updraft is overcome by the downdraft beginning the dissipating stage. At the ground, the gust front moves out a long distance from the storm and cuts off the warm moist air that was feeding the thunderstorm. Rainfall decreases in intensity, but lightning remains a danger. 112 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Severe Storms Laboratory. (n.d.). Severe Weather 101-Thunderstorm Basics. https://www.nssl.noaa.gov/education/svrwx101/thunderstorms/ 113 American Meteorological Society Glossary of Meteorology. (2022). Thunderstorm. https://glossary.ametsoc.org/wiki/Thunderstorm#:~:text=(Sometimes%20called%20electrical%20storm.),rain%2C%20 and%20sometimes%20with%20hail. 232 PSC 09-12-2024 232 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 153 Figure 39: Thunderstorm Life Cycle113F 114 There are different types of thunderstorms identified by the NOAA and some are listed below114F 115:  Single-Cell Thunderstorms: Single-cell thunderstorms are small and brief. They usually grow and die within an hour and may produce brief heavy rain and lightning.  Multi-Cell Storm: A multi-cell storm is the most common type of thunderstorm in which new updrafts form along the leading edge of cool air. Single cells usually last 30 to 60 minutes while multi-cell storm systems may last for many hours. They may produce hail, strong winds, brief tornadoes, and flooding.  Squall Line: A squall line is a group of storms arranged into a line, often accompanied by squalls or gusty winds and heavy rains. They tend to pass quickly and are less likely to produce tornadoes. They are usually 10 or 20 miles wide but can be up to hundreds of mil es long.  Supercell: A supercell is a long-lived (usually greater than 1 hour) and highly organized storm that feeds off an updraft (a rise of current air) that is tilted and rotating. This rotating updraft can be as large as 10 miles in diameter and up to 50,000 feet tall and can be present as much as 20 to 60 minutes before a tornado forms. This rotation is called a mesocyclone when it is detected by a Doppler radar. The tornado is a small extension of this larger rotation. Most large and violent tornadoes come from supercells. A thunderstorm is a storm with lightning and thunder produced by cumulonimbus clouds, usually producing gusty winds, heavy rain, and sometimes hail. Thunderstorms are usually short in duration (seldom more than two hours). Heavy rains associated with thunderstorms can lead to flash flooding during the wet or dry season. According to the American Meteorological Society Glossary of Meteorology, thunderstorms are reported as light, medium, or heavy according to the following characteristics: • Nature of the lightning and thunder • Type and intensity of the precipitation, if any • Speed and gustiness of the wind 114 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Severe Storms Laboratory. (n.d.). Severe Weather 101-Thunderstorms. https://www.nssl.noaa.gov/education/svrwx101/thunderstorms/ 115 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Severe Storms Laboratory. (n.d.). Severe Weather 101-Thunderstorm Types. https://www.nssl.noaa.gov/education/svrwx101/thunderstorms/types/ 233 PSC 09-12-2024 233 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 154 • Appearance of the clouds • Effect on surface temperature 9.1.2 Extreme Temperatures Extreme temperatures are unexpected, unusual, or unseasonal temperatures—cold or hot—that can create dangerous situations. Extreme cold temperatures are below normal temperatures that may lead to serious health problems. Exposure to the extreme cold can lead to hypothermia and frostbite in people exposed to the weather without adequate clothing protection. It may result in death if it exacerbates preexisting chronic conditions. The NWS provides a Wind Chill Chart to calculate the dangers from winter winds and freezing temperatures. Wind chill is represented by the actual air temperature factored in by wind speed. Figure 39 displays the extent and intensity by the time it takes to develop frostbite. Figure 40: National Weather Service Wind Chill Chart The NOAA Weather Prediction Center also has a Winter Storm Severity Index (WSSI) tool. This tool communicates the general level of severe winter weather and can be viewed in the figure below. The levels range from “minor” to “extreme.” 234 PSC 09-12-2024 234 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 155 Figure 41: Winter Storm Severity Index According to FEMA, extreme heat is defined as a period of high heat and humidity with temperatures above 90 degrees for at least two to three days.115F 116 Heat is the primary cause of weather-related death in the United States and can be very taxing on the human body. Vulnerable populations such as young children, infants, people with chronic medical conditions, and pregnant women are at higher risk of heat related illness. The heat index is the temperature the body feels when heat and humidity are combined.116F 117 The direct relationship between humidity and heat can affect the severity of extreme heat events. The graphic from the NWS below classifies the level of severity in relation to the heat index. 116 U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2022, August 1). Extreme Heat. https://www.ready.gov/heat 117 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Weather Service. (n.d.). Heat Forecast Tools. https://www.weather.gov/safety/heat-index 235 PSC 09-12-2024 235 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 156 Figure 42: National Weather Service Heat Index Chart117F 118 Figure 43: National Weather Service Heat Index Classifications and Corresponding Effects on the Body118F 119 9.1.3 High Winds High Winds can occur during severe thunderstorms, with strong weather systems, or can flow down a mountain. High winds are defined as winds of 40 mph or greater lasting for an hour or more, and gusts to 58 mph or greater (NOAA). Windstorms are especially dangerous in areas with significant tree stands and areas with exposed property, poorly constructed buildings, mobile homes (manufactured housing units), major infrastructure, and above-ground utility lines. A windstorm can topple trees and power lines, cause damage to residential, commercial, and critical facilities, and leave tons of debris in its wake. 118 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Weather Service. (n.d.). What is the heat index? https://www.weather.gov/ama/heatindex 119 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Weather Service. (n.d.). What is the heat index? https://www.weather.gov/ama/heatindex 236 PSC 09-12-2024 236 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 157 Damaging winds are classified as those exceeding 50–60 mph.119F 120 Damage from such winds accounts for half of all severe weather reports in the lower 48 states and is more common than damage from tornadoes. Wind speeds can reach up to 100 mph and can produce a damage path extending for hundreds of miles. NOAA identifies eight types of damaging winds120F 121:  Straight-line Wind: Any thunderstorm wind that is not associated with rotation; this term is used mainly to differentiate from tornado winds.  Downdraft: A small-scale column of air that rapidly sinks toward the ground.  Downburst: Downburst is the general term for all localized strong wind events that are caused by a strong downdraft within a thunderstorm.  Macroburst: An outward burst of strong winds near the surface with horizontal dimensions larger than 4 km (2.5 mi) and occurs when a strong downdraft reaches the surface. Macroburst winds may begin over a smaller area and then spread out over a wider area, sometimes producing damage similar to a tornado. Although usually associated with thunderstorms, macrobursts can occur with weak showers.  Microburst: A small, concentrated downburst that produces an outward burst of damaging winds at the surface. Microbursts are small, usually less than 4 km across, and short-lived, lasting only 5 to 10 minutes, with maximum wind speeds sometimes exceeding 100 mph. There are two kinds of microbursts: wet and dry. A wet microburst is accompanied by heavy precipitation at the surface. Dry microbursts, common in places like the high plains and the intermountain west, occur with little or no precipitation reaching the ground.  Gust Front: A gust front is the leading edge of rain-cooled air that clashes with warmer thunderstorm inflow. Gust fronts are characterized by a wind shift, temperature drop, and gusty winds out ahead of a thunderstorm. Sometimes the winds push up air above them, for ming a shelf cloud or detached roll cloud.  Derecho: A widespread, long-lived windstorm that is associated with a band of rapidly moving showers or thunderstorms. It consists of numerous microbursts, downbursts, and downburst clusters. By definition, if the wind damage swath extends more than 240 miles (about 400 kilometers) and includes wind gusts of at least 58 mph (93 km/h) or greater along most of its length, then the event may be classified as a derecho.  Haboob: A wall of dust that is pushed out along the ground from a thunderstorm downdraft at high speeds.  The Beaufort Scale is a classification system that relates wind speed to observed conditions. As shown in Figure 9-6, this scale indicates likely conditions that can be observed at increasing wind speed levels. 120 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Severe Storms Laboratory. (n.d.). Severe Weather 101-Damaging Winds Basics. https://www.nssl.noaa.gov/education/svrwx101/wind/ 121 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Severe Storms Laboratory. (n.d.). Severe Weather 101-Types of Damaging Winds. https://www.nssl.noaa.gov/education/svrwx101/wind/types/ 237 PSC 09-12-2024 237 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 158 Figure 44: The Beaufort Wind Scale121F 122 122 National Weather Service. Beaufort Scale. Estimating Wind Speed and Sea State. https://www.weather.gov/pqr/beaufort 238 PSC 09-12-2024 238 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 159 9.1.4 Space Weather Space weather refers to conditions resulting from solar activity that can potentially affect Earth, our atmosphere, and the near-Earth environment.122F 123 Our planet’s atmosphere helps protect us from solar radiation, but occasional eruptions of radiation and matter can disrupt our power grids and communications systems, as well as impact satellite operations and GPS navigation capabilities. In severe cases, it produces solar energetic particles, which can damage satellites used for commercial communications, global positioning, intelligence gathering, and weather forecasting. NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center has developed space weather scales. The scales describe the environmental disturbances for three event types: geomagnetic storms, solar radiation storms, and radio blackouts. The scales have numbered levels to convey severity, similar to hurricanes, tornadoes, and earthquakes. They list possible effects at each level, show the frequency of such events, and help measure of the possible intensity of the physical causes. The NOAA space weather scales are included in Table 50, Table 51, and Table 52. NOAA studies have determined that different types of space weather may occur separately. 123 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service. (n.d.). Space Weather. https://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/next-generation/space-weather 239 PSC 09-12-2024 239 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 160 Table 50: NOAA Geomagnetic Storms Space Weather Scale and Potential Effects 123F 124 124 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2011, April 7). Space Weather Scales. https://swpc-drupal.woc.noaa.gov/noaa-scales- explanation#:~:text=The%20NOAA%20Space%20Weather%20Scales%20were%20introduced%20as,and%20their%20possible%20effects%20on%20pe ople%20 and%20systems. 240 PSC 09-12-2024 240 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 161 Table 51: NOAA Solar Radiation Storms Space Weather Scale and Potential Effects124F 125 125 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2011, April 7). Space Weather Scales. https://swpc-drupal.woc.noaa.gov/noaa-scales- explanation#:~:text=The%20NOAA%20Space%20Weather%20Scales%20were%20introduced%20as,and%20their%20possible%20effects%20on%20pe ople%20 and%20systems. 241 PSC 09-12-2024 241 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 162 Table 52: NOAA Radio Blackouts Space Weather Scale and Potential Effects125F 126 126 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2011, April 7). Space Weather Scales. https://swpc-drupal.woc.noaa.gov/noaa-scales- explanation#:~:text=The%20NOAA%20Space%20Weather%20Scales%20were%20introduced%20as,and%20their%20possible%20effects%20on%20pe ople%20 and%20systems. 242 PSC 09-12-2024 242 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 163 9.2 Hazard Profile 9.2.1 Past Events The National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) receives storm data from the National Weather Service (NWS) that is then compiled into a Storm Events Database. NWS receives their information from a variety of sources, which include but are not limited to, county, City, and federal emergency management officials; local law enforcement officials; SkyWarn spotters; NWS damage surveys; newspaper clipping services; the insurance industry; and the general public, among others. Please note that the NWS does not guarantee the accuracy, validity, or completeness of the event data in the Storm Events Database. The Storm Events Database has a record of inclement weather events that occurred in the OA during the last twenty-one years (see Table 53). These events include heavy rain/precipitation, excessive heat or cold, and high winds. In total, inclement weather has caused an estimated $24,152,120 in property damage in the OA. $10,025,020 was from Heavy Precipitation Events Heavy Precipitation 11/30/2012 A series of storms brough strong winds, heavy rainfall and flooding to the region and reported of 13,800 power outages in the Bay Area. 12/3/2014 Rain, wind, some flooding issues and downed trees and power lines were reported. 12/11/2014 An atmospheric river brought heavy rain and gusty winds . Rainfall rates of 1.5 – 2 inches/hour were reported. Many locations around the Bay Area had urban flooding of streets and highways and flooding of creeks. 2/9/2015 Heavy rain, gusty winds, and damage to trees and power lines along with some minor flooding of urban areas occurred. 1/8/2017 Potent atmospheric river brought heavy rain, strong southerly winds, and storm surge issues. Dec 27, 2022 – Jan. 31, 2023. A series of heavy rainstorms affected multiple counties, prompting emergency declarations. Road closures occurred in Gilroy, including closer of southbound Hwy 101. Other road closures occurred in San Jose and other parts of the valley due to flooding. Heavy rain contributed to a landslide that temporarily blocked Hwy 17 at Glenwood Drive in Los Gatos. On January 13, 2023, Santa Clara County issued evacuation warnings for watershed areas of the Uvas Reservoir, Pacheo Pass River bases, and Highway 101 and Bolsa Road due to continued weather and flooding concerns. Additional examples of heavy rain contributing to landslides can be found in Section 14.2.1. Table 53: 2001–2022 Heavy Rain and Hail Events Dates of Event Event Type Location 12/15/2002 Heavy Rain Santa Clara County/Los Gatos 12/15/2002 Heavy Rain Santa Clara County/Saratoga 243 PSC 09-12-2024 243 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 164 Dates of Event Event Type Location 11/30/2012 Heavy Rain Santa Clara County 11/30/2012 Heavy Rain Santa Clara County 10/10/2012 Hail Santa Clara County/Gilroy 10/10/2012 Hail Santa Clara County/Gilroy 2/9/2014 Heavy Rain Santa Clara County 12/3/2014 Heavy Rain Santa Clara County/Saratoga 12/11/2014 Heavy Rain Santa Clara County 2/9/2015 Heavy Rain Santa Clara County 2/9/2015 Heavy Rain Santa Clara County 1/8/2017 Heavy Rain Santa Clara County/Morgan Hill 1/19/2017 Hail Santa Clara County/Los Gatos 1/19/2017 Hail Santa Clara County 1/20/2017 Hail Santa Clara County/Los Gatos 2/17/2017 Heavy Rain Santa Clara County 3/5/2017 Hail Santa Clara County/Los Gatos 1/19/2018 Hail Santa Clara County 1/25/2018 Hail Santa Clara County/San Jose 1/25/2018 Hail Santa Clara County/Gilroy 1/25/2018 Hail Santa Clara County/Gilroy 1/25/2018 Hail Santa Clara County/Morgan Hill 2/26/2018 Hail Santa Clara County/Gilroy 3/2/2018 Hail Santa Clara County/San Jose 3/17/2018 Hail Santa Clara County/Sunnyvale 4/16/2018 Hail Santa Clara County/San Jose 4/16/2018 Hail Santa Clara County 2/15/2019 Hail Santa Clara County 3/10/2019 Hail Santa Clara County/San Jose 244 PSC 09-12-2024 244 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 165 Dates of Event Event Type Location 3/10/2019 Hail Santa Clara County/San Jose 3/10/2019 Hail Santa Clara County 1/16/2020 Hail Santa Clara County 1/16/2020 Hail Santa Clara County 3/17/2020 Hail Santa Clara County 3/25/2020 Hail Santa Clara County/Los Gatos 3/25/2020 Hail Santa Clara County/Palo Alto 3/25/2020 Hail Santa Clara County/Mountain View 3/25/2020 Hail Santa Clara County/Mountain View 3/25/2020 Hail Santa Clara County/Gilroy 3/25/2020 Hail Santa Clara County/Sunnyvale 3/25/2020 Hail Santa Clara County/Gilroy 3/25/2020 Hail Santa Clara County/Santa Clara 4/6/2020 Hail Santa Clara County 3/10/2021 Hail Santa Clara County/San Jose Extreme Heat or Cold The NCEI reports 14 deaths in Santa Clara County since 2002 as a direct result of cold and wind chill. Seven deaths and 61 injuries have been directly attributed to heat. • NCEI reports that excessive heat led to rolling blackouts in the Bay Area on 8/14/2020 • On 8/16/2020, extreme heat contributed to 464 EMS calls across Santa Clara County. • NCEI documents the use of cooling centers to counter the effects of extreme heat in Santa Clara on 5/17/2009 and 9/4/2022. • On 1/6/2007, the NCEI records that freezing temperatures in Santa Clara Valley fell into the lower 20s, causing $50,000 in crop damage. • On 12/8/2009, Light rail trains were delayed and Highway 101 to Interstate 280 in San Jose were closed due to severe ice on the roadway. Flights from San Jose International Airport were delayed because some airlines do not have de-icing equipment. Ice also contributed to a vehicle accident. 245 PSC 09-12-2024 245 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 166 Table 54: 2001–2022 Extreme Temperature Events Dates of Event Event Type Location 7/20/2006 Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose 7/21/2006 Heat East Bay Hills and the Diablo Range (Zone) 7/22/2006 Heat San Francisco Bay Shoreline (Zone) 7/22/2006 Heat Santa Cruz Mountains (Zone) 5/17/2009 Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose 5/17/2009 Heat San Francisco Bay Shoreline (Zone) 5/17/2009 Heat East Bay Hills and the Diablo Range (Zone) 5/17/2009 Heat Santa Cruz Mountains (Zone) 6/19/2017 Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose 12/25/2018 Cold/Wind Chill Santa Clara Valley including San Jose 1/1/2019 Cold/Wind Chill Santa Clara Valley including San Jose 11/27/2019 Cold/Wind Chill Santa Clara Valley including San Jose 11/28/2019 Cold/Wind Chill Santa Clara Valley including San Jose 11/29/2019 Cold/Wind Chill Santa Clara Valley including San Jose 6/10/2019 Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose 6/10/2019 Excessive Heat San Francisco Bay Shoreline (Zone) 8/14/2020 Excessive Heat San Francisco Bay Shoreline (Zone) 8/16/2020 Excessive Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose 9/6/2020 Excessive Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose 9/7/2020 Excessive Heat San Francisco Bay Shoreline (Zone) 6/17/2021 Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose 6/17/2021 Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose 246 PSC 09-12-2024 246 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 167 Dates of Event Event Type Location 7/11/2021 Excessive Heat East Bay Hills and the Diablo Range (Zone) 6/10/2022 Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose 6/21/2022 Heat San Francisco Bay Shoreline (Zone) 6/21/2022 Heat San Francisco Bay Shoreline (Zone) 6/21/2022 Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose 9/4/2022 Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose 9/4/2022 Heat San Francisco Bay Shoreline (Zone) 9/4/2022 Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose 9/4/2022 Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose 9/5/2022 Heat San Francisco Bay Shoreline (Zone) 9/5/2022 Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose 9/6/2022 Heat San Francisco Bay Shoreline (Zone) 9/6/2022 Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose 9/8/2022 Heat Santa Clara Valley Including San Jose High Wind • In addition, the NOAA/NCEI database reports 494 high wind events that have occurred in the OA since 2005. This is the most common inclement weather hazard type to affect the OA, and these events have caused an estimated $7,406,100 in property damage since the first recorded incident in 2005. • On 1/19/2010-1/22/2000, the NCEI records strong winds that affected the Bay Area. Winds knocked two trees down along East Santa Clara Street in San Jose and around 10,000 customers lost power in the San Jose area. Additional incidents of trees and limbs fa lling and causing damage were reported. These reports include damage to utilities such as telephone poles and power transformers, damage caused to vehicles, partially blocked roadways, or injured people. Specific impacts were recorded in San Jose, Los Gatos, and Milpitas. Table 55:2002-2022 High Wind Events 247 PSC 09-12-2024 247 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 168 Years Number of Wind Events 2005 6 2006 11 2008 16 2009 18 2010 21 2011 15 2012 14 2013 23 2014 32 2015 15 2016 3 2017 51 2018 26 2019 92 2020 52 2021 61 2022 9 Although rare, Santa Clara County has also experienced tornados, which have caused a total of $6,721,000 in damage. Table 56: 1951–2022 Tornado Events Date Event Type Location 1/11/1951 F2 Tornado Santa Clara County 12/8/1997 F0 Tornado San Jose 2/6/1998 F0 Tornado Sunnyvale 5/5/1998 F1 Tornado Los Altos 5/5/1998 F2 Tornado Sunnyvale 4/14/2007 EF0 Tornado Gilroy 248 PSC 09-12-2024 248 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 169 Space Weather Space weather monitoring is relatively new, and there is limited data available regarding historical occurrences. However, we know that space weather has impacted the OA and is likely to impact the OA in the future. 9.2.2 Location Heavy precipitation/Rain, extreme heat or extreme cold, high winds, and even space weather can occur anywhere within the OA. The extent is highly variable. Given their widespread nature, these events have the potential to impact large areas simultaneously. Historical records show that these events can happen in one isolated part of the OA, or in the entirety of the planning area. Therefore, inclement weather events are not confined to any geographical barrier and may impact all parts of the OA. 9.2.3 Frequency Several types of inclement weather have shown an increasing number of events in recent years. This represents a trend that due to factors such as climate change it is likely that inclement weather events will become more frequent over time. Based on the frequency of historic events, inclement weather events can be expected to occur multiple times annually. Heavy Precipitation: According to the historical events reported by the NCEI database, 44 heavy precipitation events have occurred in the last twenty-one years. Of these 44 events, 33 incidents have occurred in the last five years alone. Probability in OA: Highly Likely Extreme Temperature: 33 extreme temperature events were recorded in the NCEI database since 2002. 24 of those have occurred since 2017. Probability in OA: Highly Likely High Wind: 470 high wind events have occurred in the OA since 2005. Wind speeds in these events have ranged from 9 to 96 knots. Probability in OA: Highly Likely Space Weather: Data was not available to estimate the frequency of space weather events. Probability in OA: Likely 9.2.4 Severity Severity will depend on the extent of each event and can range from mild to severe. Inclement weather can cause disruption to critical facilities and extensive damage to property and infrastructure. The NCEI database reports a total of $24,152,120 in property damage from these events in some of the most severe cases, not including space weather. The levels of severity related to space weather are best described in Table 50, Table 51, and Table 52. The level of severity can range from minor to extreme and will mostly impact the OA’s technological, communication, and power grid systems. 249 PSC 09-12-2024 249 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 170 9.2.5 Warning Time The National Weather Service provides forecasting and prediction services for a variety of inclement weather events and maintains an established process for issuing advisories, watches and warnings for each. The amount of warning time varies on the type of weather event. 126F 127 Heavy Precipitation: warning times for significant weather events may vary widely. Initial storm advisories can have a lead time of 36-48 hours. More extreme events like thunderstorms, hail, or other severe weather may have warning of an hour or less. Extreme Temperature: Advisories regarding extremes in heat or cold can be issued with 0-36 hours of lead time. High Wind: Wind advisories can have a lead time of 12 to 36 hours. Space Weather: Space weather prediction services are provided by NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center. The SWPC draws on various data sources to provide forecasts, watches, warning and alerts with a possible lead time of hours to days of possible space weather activity.127F 128 Lead time varies from hours to days. 9.3 Cascading Impacts While inclement weather is the most common hazard to occur in the OA, it is important to note the potential cascading impacts of these events. Heavy precipitation can lead to significant flooding, also contributing to landslides and mudslides, posing serious threats to human lives, property, infrastructure and ecosystems. Flooding and other cascading impacts of heavy rain can interrupt transportation, utility services, or other emergency services. Extreme temperatures, whether excessively hot or cold, will have impacts on human health, potentially leading to heatstroke, dehydration, and cold-related illnesses. Additionally, extreme temperatures can strain energy resources and infrastructure, increasing the risk of blac kouts and disruption of critical services and infrastructure. High winds have historically caused damage across the OA. They can damage or disrupt essential functions and interrupt service from energy and communication systems. Space weather events, such as solar flares and geomagnetic storms can be significant and pose substantial risks to modern technological systems and critical infrastructure. Space weather can disrupt satellite communications, GPS, and aviation systems, affecting various sectors, including telecommunications, transportation, and emergency services. 9.4 Exposure 9.4.1 Population Because of the unconfined and variable nature of inclement weather, the entire population is considered to be exposed. Heavy rain, hail, lightning, high winds, and extreme temperatures all have the potential to harm the health of or injure people within the OA. 127 https://www.weather.gov/safety/ 128 Space Weather Watc https://www.weather.gov/safety/space-wwhes, Warnings and Alerts 250 PSC 09-12-2024 250 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 171 Table 57: Population by Jurisdiction Jurisdiction 2022 City of Campbell 42,833 City of Cupertino 59,610 City of Gilroy 59,269 City of Los Altos 31,526 Town of Los Altos Hills 8,400 Town of Los Gatos 33,062 City of Milpitas 80,839 City of Monte Sereno 3,488 City of Morgan Hill 46,451 City of Mountain View 83,864 City of Palo Alto 67,473 City of San José 976,482 City of Santa Clara 130,127 City of Saratoga 30,667 City of Sunnyvale 156,234 Unincorporated County 84,458 Total 1,894,783 9.4.2 Property There are 535,391 buildings in the OA, with a total replacement value of $381 billion. All of these buildings exist in an area susceptible to inclement weather; however, dollar loss estimates for specific building occupancy types or geographic areas are not available. Although inclement weather events are the most frequent hazard in the OA, historic dollar losses have been comparatively moderate. 9.4.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure All critical facilities in the OA are potential exposed to inclement weather. Facilities may be damaged directly by high winds, hail, or by flooding that results from heavy rain. Water, electric, fuel, transportation, and communication services could be disrupted by damage caused by heavy precipitation, high winds, or space weather. Extreme temperature may also disrupt services or strain energy systems. 9.5 Vulnerability Changes in conditions: Increase in vulnerability  A review of past events indicates that an increasing number of inclement weather events per year for heavy rain, extreme heat, and high winds. 251 PSC 09-12-2024 251 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 172  CMRA indicates a trend in increasing number of extreme heat days each year and the number of consecutive hot days. Climate change will continue to increase the amount of very hot days and impacts to residents will increase as a result.  Climate change affects the frequency and intensity of storms, which contributes to the potential of damaging inclement weather events such as heavy rain, hail, and high wind across the OA.  Overall population and building growth are slow in the OA, and are not expected to be a significant factor in increased vulnerability. Currently the increase in vulnerability appears to be driven more by an increased number of events than changes in development. However, continued monitoring of demographic shifts, new insights regarding the effects of climate change, economic changes that may impact building and other development, and aging of building stock and infrastructure should continue to receive consideration on potential weather impacts. Individual jurisdictional annexes may note localized growth at a smaller scale. 9.5.1 Population Because of the unpredictable nature of when and where significant weather events can occur, and variable intensity of these events, all of the OAs population of 1,894,783 residents are potentially vulnerable to impacts of inclement weather. The OA has a population of nearly 10,000 people that are homeless, according to the 2023 Santa Clara Point-In-Time report. This population is especially vulnerable to the impacts of inclement weather, especially with extreme heat and cold events, which can be detrimental to human health. Only 25% of individuals experiencing homelessness are sheltered, and the other 75% may be exposed to the elements and inclement weather events. NCEI has documented cases of illness or death in Santa Clara County related to extreme heat or cold. All other vulnerable populations such as those in poverty, the elderly, and children can be negatively impacted by inclement weather events. Hazus 6.0 demographic data indicates that 260,705 persons or 13.5 percent of the population in the OA are over 64 years old. Older persons are particularly at risk to health problems caused by extreme heat. 422,719 persons or 21.8 percent of the population within the OA under 18 years of age. It is estimated that 2.45 percent of the people within the OA are economically disadvantaged, defined as having household incomes of $20,000 or less. People with disabilities, communities of color, persons with limited English proficiency, housing condition, health care access and education are additional factors that affect vulnerability to severe weather hazards identified in the Silicon Valley 2.0 hazard fact sheet for extreme heat. Outdoor workers and unhoused residents are among the population most at risk. According to the Silicon Valley 2.0 report, 62% of the total County population is currently exposed to extreme heat conditions and 42% of those exposed have moderate to high social vulnerability. Approximately 60,000 people within moderate socially vulnerable communities in South County jurisdictions, such as Morgan Hill and Gilroy, could be exposed to frequent extreme heat events. All business, schools, and government systems reliant on technology are vulnerable to the impacts of space weather. As space weather has the potential to disrupt the OA’s power and communication systems, any entity reliant on technology may experience more severe impacts. 9.5.2 Property, Critical Facilities, Infrastructure Hazus modeling is not available to quantify potential damage to property, critical facilities, or infrastructure in the OA. Physical damage and service disruption are variable depending on the size and severity of the weather event. Although the exact location and intensity of weather events makes it difficult to project exactly what physical assets may be at risk, possible impacts might include: 252 PSC 09-12-2024 252 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 173 Heavy Rain • Localized pooling of water on roadways has occurred during or following past heavy rain events . Flooding in early 2023 lead to closures of major transportation routes, including Hwy 101 in Gilroy. Vehicles may lose traction or may be unable to safely traverse some roadways. Impacts to roadways may cause delays to emergency responders. • Heavy rain has contributed to landslides and other slope failures that have blocked or damaged roadways. • Pedestrian travel is particularly difficult during a severe weather event. Those who rely on public transportation may have difficulty reaching transit points or difficulty finding shelter if service is interrupted • Heavy rain has caused localized flooding and subsequent water damage to nearby structures. Flooding from heavy rain can damage residences, commercial, industrial, or other building types. High Wind • Above ground utilities such as communication towers, telephone lines and power lines are vulnerable to damage from high winds. High winds have caused trees to fall which have damaged power lines and transformers, disrupting power service to large areas. • Critical facilities may also lose power if high winds damage power distribution systems and may need to rely on back-up power systems. • High winds can damage roofs or windows to homes and businesses or other critical facilities. Winds can also lead to fallen trees which may damage nearby buildings or sidewalks. • Outdoor events such as sporting activities, farmers markets, and community festivals can be disrupted, and participants may have difficulty seeking shelter from a fast-moving storm. Extreme Heat • Extreme heat may lead to increased demand on energy systems which may strain their ability provide adequate cooling to facilities and increases potential for power outages. Rolling brownouts have occurred in the Bay Area during past extreme heat events. • High temperatures can cause pavement to soften and expand which can cause rutting, potholes, or other damage to streets. • Extreme heat has had serious health consequences for people who are unhoused or for outdoor workers. Extreme Cold • Extreme cold is less common in the OA, but results in difficult travel if combined with precipitation that may lead to icy roadways, airport runways, and other transportation systems. • NCEI records have documented impacts to highways, airports, and mass transit systems due to icy conditions during period of extreme cold. • Dangerous travel conditions can lead to damage from collisions, personal injury, or economic disruption. 9.5.3 Environment Cascading effects of heavy rain could be damaging to the environment, such as erosion caused by increased runoff or flooding, or to systems damage from landslides. Hail can cause extensive damage to plants. High winds can break tree branches or cause other damage to plant life or animal habitat. 9.5.4 Economy Inclement weather events can disrupt the economy of the OA. Economic impact will largely be associated with the disruption of transportation, power, gas, and telecommunication services caused by high winds, or associated with flooding caused by heavy precipitation. Events severe enough to cause structural damage can also cause business interruptions. The economic sectors affected may vary significantly depending on the extent and severity of the event. 253 PSC 09-12-2024 253 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 174 9.6 Future Trends in Development, Scenario, Issues Impacts from inclement weather pose a real threat to physical, social and economic well-being in the OA. Multiple events can be expected to affect the OA every year, with variable severity. OA residents can use weather advisories to prepare themselves for inclement weather events, but sometimes severe events have limited warning time. Inclement weather has the potential to cause cascading impacts and can damage multiple systems in both limited and widespread areas. Although there have been small decreases in population in recent years, Santa Clara County has experienced significant growth in the past. New development may affect drainage patterns and change impacts from heavy rain. An increase in population coincides with an increased number of people at risk to weather events. As discussed further in Section 11: Climate Change, impacts of severe weather are projected to intensify due to climate change. 9.7 Issues  Inclement weather is inherently uncertain. Conditions can change rapidly, and the severity and exact locations of an event are highly variable.  The variable nature of inclement weather makes it difficult to identify specific locations, structures, or systems that might be more likely to be damaged in an event. This makes it difficult to identify priorities or areas for risk reduction projects.  People may not heed weather warnings.  Heavy rain events may result in ponding or localized flooding in low-lying areas.  Heavy rain may result in inland stormwater flooding after stormwater management systems are overwhelmed.  Inclement weather can cause secondary hazards such as flooding, landslides, mudslides, and disruption of systems or infrastructure.  Inclement weather events are directly related to climate change; however, climate change impacts still are poorly understood. Average temperatures are expected to increase and changes in precipitation patterns are anticipated, but it is not yet known how that will impact local weather patterns. Impacts of inclement weather events are anticipated to become more severe. 9.8 Consequence Analysis Inclement weather events occur frequently, and these events are likely to increase in frequency over time. They may cause a wide range of impacts, which vary greatly depending on the level of severity and extent for each event. The information in Table 58 provides the consequence analysis of the potential for detrimental impacts of inclement weather done for accreditation with the Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP). Table 58: EMAP Consequence Analysis Inclement Weather Subject Ranking Impacts/Inclement Weather Health and Safety of Public in the Area of the Incident Severe Impact of the immediate area could be severe for affected areas and moderate to light for other less affected areas. Responders Moderate Impact to responders could be severe for unprotected personnel and moderate to light for prepared personnel. 254 PSC 09-12-2024 254 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 9: Inclement Weather 175 Subject Ranking Impacts/Inclement Weather Continuity of Operations (including continued delivery of services) Moderate There is a moderate expectation to execute the COOP, though a severe level of impact can be expected for the full extent of an inclement weather event. Property, Facilities, and Infrastructure Minimal to Severe There is potential for localized impact to facilities and infrastructure in the incident area, which can range from minimal to severe depending on the extent of the incident. Delivery of Services Minimal to Severe Delivery of services could be affected if there is any disruption to the roads and/or utilities due to damages sustained. Environment Moderate to Severe Greatest impact will be to trees, bushes, foliage, crops, and wildlife, which could be severe. Economic Conditions Minimal to Severe Impacts to the economy will greatly depend on the severity of the inclement weather event, longevity of the storm, and any damages sustained such as utilities and roads. Public Confidence in the Government Minimal to Severe Response and recovery will be in question if not timely and effective. 255 PSC 09-12-2024 255 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 176 10 Drought Definitions  Meteorological Drought: Occurs when rainfall has been deficient for an extended period.  Hydrological Drought: Occurs when rainfall deficits impact the water supply available from streams, reservoirs, lakes, and groundwater.  Agricultural Drought: Occurs when factors such as rainfall deficits, soil water deficits, reduced groundwater, or low reservoir levels for irrigation result in impacts on agriculture.  Socioeconomic Drought: Occurs when diminished water supply reduces the supply of economic goods such as fruits, vegetables, grains, or meat.  Ecological Drought: Occurs when a prolonged and widespread deficit in naturally available water supplies—including changes in natural and managed hydrology —creates multiple stresses across ecosystems. 10.1 General Background Drought is a significant decrease in water supply relative to what is “normal” in a given location. A normal phase in the climate cycle of most geographical regions, drought originates from a deficiency of precipitation over an extended period, usually a season or more. This leads to a water shortage for some activity, group, or environmental sector. Determination of when drought begins is based on impacts on water users and assessments of the available water supply, including water stored in surface reservoirs or groundwater basins. Different water agencies have different criteria for defining drought. Some issue drought watch or drought warning announcements. The California Water Code does not include a statutory definition of drought; however, analysis of the code indicates that legal matters most frequently focus on drought conditions during times of water shortages. 10.1.1 Monitoring and Categorizing Drought Drought monitoring at the national, regional, and local levels is an integral part of drought early warning, planning, and mitigation.128F 129 Nationally, agencies involved in this effort include the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Integrated Drought Information System which produces the U.S. Drought Monitor, and the National Drought Mitigation Center at the University of Nebraska -Lincoln. In California, drought is addressed by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR). The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has developed several indices to measure drought impacts and severity and to map their extent and locations:  The Palmer Crop Moisture Index measures short-term drought weekly to quantify drought’s impacts on agriculture during the growing season. 129 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (n.d.). Monitoring Drought. https://www.drought.gov/what-is- drought/monitoring-drought 256 PSC 09-12-2024 256 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 177  The Palmer Drought Severity Index is based on long-term weather patterns. Long-term drought is cumulative, so the intensity of drought during a given month depends on current weather plus the cumulative weather of previous months. The Palmer Drought Index responds rapidly as weather patterns change quickly.  The Palmer Z Index measures short-term drought on a monthly scale.  The hydrological impacts of drought (e.g., reservoir levels, groundwater levels, etc.) take longer to develop and it takes longer to recover from them. The Palmer Hydrological Drought Index is a long-term index to quantify hydrology effects. The Palmer Hydrological Drought Index responds more slowly to changing conditions than the Palmer Drought Index.  The Standardized Precipitation Index considers only precipitation. In the Standardized Precipitation Index, an index of zero indicates the median precipitation amount; the index is negative for drought and positive for wet conditions. The Standardized Prec ipitation Index is computed for time scales ranging from one month to 24 months. The following graphics show the Palmer Drought Index and Palmer Hydrological Drought Index for California Climate Division 4, of which Santa Clara County is a part, from January 1, 2005, to May 20, 2023. Near normal conditions are indicated by -1.9 to +1.9. Drought conditions are indicated by -2.0 to - 4.0 or less and wet conditions are indicated by +2.0 to +4.0 or above. Figure 45: Palmer Drought Index from January 1, 2005, to May 20, 2023129F 130 Figure 46: Palmer Hydrological Drought Index from January 1, 2005, to May 20, 2023130F 131 130 National Centers for Environmental Information. (2023, May). Weekly Palmer Drought Indices Divisional Time Series. https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/weekly-palmers/time-series/0404 131 National Centers for Environmental Information. (2023, February). North American Drought Monitor. https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/nadm/indices/spi/div 257 PSC 09-12-2024 257 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 178 U.S. Drought Monitor The U.S. Drought Monitor (USDM) is a map that is updated weekly to show the location and intensity of drought across the country. The USDM uses a five-category system.131F 132  D0: Abnormally Dry ▪ Short-term dryness slowing planting and growth of crops ▪ Some lingering water deficits ▪ Pastures or crops not fully recovered  D1: Moderate Drought ▪ Some damage to crops and pastures ▪ Some water shortages are developing ▪ Voluntary water-use restrictions requested  D2: Severe Drought ▪ Crop or pasture loss likely ▪ Water shortages are common ▪ Water restrictions imposed  D3: Extreme Drought ▪ Major crop/pasture losses ▪ Widespread water shortages or restrictions  D4: Exceptional Drought ▪ Exceptional and widespread crop/pasture losses ▪ Shortages of water creating water emergencies 10.1.2 Normal Precipitation in California Most of California’s precipitation comes from storms moving across the Pacific Ocean. Extremely dry and extremely wet years have become more common in California.132F 133 On average, 75 percent of California’s annual precipitation occurs between November and March, with 50 percent occurring between December and February. A persistent Pacific high-pressure zone over California in mid-winter signals a tendency for a dry water year. A typical water year produces about 100 inches of rainfall over the North Coast, 50 inches of precipitation (combination of rain and snow) over the Northern Sierra, and 15 inches in Santa Clara County. In extremely dry years, these annual totals can fall to as little as one half, or even one third of these amounts. 132 National Integrated Drought Information System. (n.d.). U.S. Drought Monitor (USDM). https://www.drought.gov/data-maps-tools/us-drought- monitor#:~:text=Thepercent20U.S.percent20Droughtpercent20Monitorpercent20percent28USDMpercent29percent20 ispercent20apercent20map,Severepercent20percent28D2percent29percent2Cpercent20Extremepercent20percent28 D3percent29percent20andpercent20Exceptionalpercent20percent28D4percent29percent20Drought. 133 Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. (2018). Precipitation. https://oehha.ca.gov/media/epic/downloads/09precipitation_19dec2018.pdf#:~:text=Extremelypercent20drypercent20 andpercent20extremelypercent20wetpercent20yearspercent20havepercent20become,thatpercent20providepercent2 0mostpercent20ofpercent20thepercent20statepercentE2percent80percent99spercent20waterpercent20supplies. 258 PSC 09-12-2024 258 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 179 As the winter months have become warmer in recent years, more precipitation has been falling as rain instead of snow over the watersheds that provide most of the state’s water supplies. With climate change, more intense dry periods under warmer conditions are anticipated, leading to extended, more frequent drought in California. A higher proportion of precipitation falling as rain instead of snow and an increase in the duration, frequency, and intensity of warm, wet storms are also projected. This can result in greater flooding, and force reservoirs to release more water early in the spring, which means less water will be available for agriculture and municipal uses in the summer and fall.133F 134 The Sierra Nevada snowpack serves as the primary agent for replenishing water in the San Francisco Bay area, including Santa Clara County, and for much of the State of California. A reduction in spring snowpack runoff, whether due to drier winters or to increasing temperatures leading to more rain than snow, can increase the risk of summer or fall water shortages throughout the region. Increases in temperature are already causing decreases in snowpack. The mountain snowpack provides as much as a third of California’s water supply by accumulating snow during our wet winters and releasing it slowly during our dry springs and summers. Warmer temperatures will melt the snow faster and earlier, making it more difficult to store and use throughout the dry season. The DWR Climate Change Team expects that by the end of this century, California ’s Sierra Nevada snowpack is projected to experience a 48–65 percent loss from the historical April 1 average of 66.5 inches.134F 135 10.1.3 Water Supply Strategy The Bay Area Water Supply Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) is the main water provider for much of the Bay Area, allowing Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) to manage the continual water supply necessary to maintain health, safety, and economic wellbeing of residents, businesses, and community organizations. BAWSCA developed a two-phase, long-term water supply strategy for customers throughout the Bay Area, as outlined in the 2015 Long-Term Reliable Water Supply Strategy Phase II Final Report.135F 136 Purposes of its strategy are as follows:  Quantifying water supply reliability needs of BAWSCA member agencies through 2040.  Identifying water supply management programs or programs that can be developed to meet those regional water reliability needs.  Developing an implementation plan for the water supply strategy. This strategy recognized that drought-year shortfalls could be significant but determined that normal- year water supply would be adequate through at least 2040. Dry years could result in system-wide cutbacks of up to 20 percent, but 10 to 15 percent is the more consistent standard. BAWSCA noted that the impacts of water shortages would be regional and could lead to secondary detrimental economic effects. To address this concern, the strategy focused on identifying options for filling all or part of the drought-year supply shortfall and investigating and potentially implementing actions that seem most beneficial.136F 137 134 Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. (2018). Precipitation. https://oehha.ca.gov/media/epic/downloads/09precipitation_19dec2018.pdf#:~:text=Extremelypercent20drypercent20 andpercent20extremelypercent20wetpercent20yearspercent20havepercent20become,thatpercent20providepercent2 0mostpercent20ofpercent20thepercent20statepercentE2percent80percent99spercent20waterpercent20supplies. 135 California Department of Water Resources. (n.d.). Climate Change and Water. https://water.ca.gov/Programs/All- Programs/Climate-Change-Program/Climate-Change-and-Water 136 Bay Area Water Supply Conservation Agency. (2015 February). Long-Term Reliable Water Supply Strategy. https://bawsca.org/water/reliability/strategy 137 Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency. (n.d.). Water Supply & System. https://bawsca.org/water/supply 259 PSC 09-12-2024 259 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 180 BAWSCA also developed a Water Conservation Implementation Plan,137F 138 focusing on the following objectives:  Help BAWSCA member agencies evaluate potential water savings and cost -effectiveness associated with implementing additional water conservation measures beyond their commitments of 2004.  Determine potential water savings in 2018 and 2030 based on a selected range of new conservation measures and the 2004 water conservation commitments.  Determine BAWSCA’s role in helping member agencies achieve individual water conservation goals.  Develop a coordinated regional plan for water conservation implementation measures to serve as a guideline for member agencies. In the Santa Clara County OA, the following districts and cities are members of BAWSCA: SCVWD, Milpitas, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San José, City of Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, Purissma Hills Water District, and Stanford University.138F 139 The SCVWD is the wholesale water and groundwater management agency throughout Santa Clara County, relying on local retailers (municipalities and private companies) to deliver water throughout the County.139F 140 The following are the retailer water providers for each municipal planning partner:  Campbell: San José Water Company  Cupertino: San José Water Company and California Water Service Company  Gilroy: Gilroy Public Works Department  Los Altos: California Water Service Company  Los Altos Hills: Purissima Hills Water District and California Water Service Company  Los Gatos: San José Water Company  Milpitas: City of Milpitas Community Services  Monte Sereno: San José Water Company  Morgan Hill: City of Morgan Hill  Mountain View: City of Mountain View Public Works  Palo Alto: City of Palo Alto Utilities Department  San José: San José Water Company, Great Oaks Water Company, and San José Municipal Water System  Santa Clara City: City of Santa Clara Water Department  Saratoga: San José Water Company 138 Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency. (n.d.). Conservation Implementation Plan. https://bawsca.org/conserve/reports/plan#:~:text=Thepercent20specificpercent20objectivespercent20ofpercent20thep ercent20WCIPpercent20arepercent20as,beyondpercent20whatpercent20theypercent20hadpercent20committedperc ent20topercent20inpercent202004. 139 Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency. (2020). Member Agency Map. https://bawsca.org/members/map 140 Santa Clara Valley Water District. (2021). Groundwater Management Plan. https://s3.us-west- 2.amazonaws.com/assets.valleywater.org/2021_GWMP_web_version.pdf 260 PSC 09-12-2024 260 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 181  Sunnyvale: City of Sunnyvale Public Works Department and California Water Service Company The SCVWD has its own water supply strategy outlined in the SCVWD Water Supply Master Plan 2040.140F 141 The Water Master Plan 2040 outlines a water supply strategy with three key elements:  Secure existing supplies and facilities.  Optimize the use of existing supplies and facilities.  Expand water use efficiency efforts. Some County residents have domestic wells on their property. The North Central Regional Office of California DWR monitors wells for Santa Clara County to help protect groundwater quality.141F 142 Under Ordinance 90-1, as of July 1, 2013, a person must obtain a permit from SCVWD to perform any well activities. In response to extreme and expanding drought conditions, as those existing on March 28, 2022, the state can prohibit Valley Water and other well permitting agencies from issuing a construction permit for a new groundwater well.142F 143 10.1.4 Water Supply Infrastructure Figure 46 shows the SCVWD water supply system. Santa Clara County receives 50 percent of its water supply from the San Francisco Bay-Delta watershed. Of this water, 40 percent comes directly through the Delta watershed or water conveyance systems and 10 percent is from the Hetch-Hetchy System. Another 30 percent of the County’s supply is local, from natural groundwater, reservoirs to groundwater, and reservoirs to drinking water treatment plans. Five percent is recycled water, primarily used for irrigation, industry, and agriculture. A 15 percent water-use reduction by the community is required to reach the needed water supply total.143F 144 141 Santa Clara Valley Water District. (2019, November). Water Supply Master Plan 2040. https://www.valleywater.org/sites/default/files/Waterpercent20Supplypercent20Masterpercent20Planpercent202040_ 11.01.2019_v2.pdf 142 California Department of Water Resources. (n.d.). Technical Assistance. https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Integrated-Regional-Water-Management/Technical-Assistance 143 Santa Clara Valley Water District. (n.d.). Well Permits and Inspections. https://www.valleywater.org/contractors/doing-businesses-with-the-district/wells-well-owners/well-permits-and- inspections 144 Santa Clara Valley Water District. (n.d.). Where Your Water Comes From. https://www.valleywater.org/your- water/where-your-water-comes 261 PSC 09-12-2024 261 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 182 Figure 47: Santa Clara Valley Water District System Water Supply144F 145 The Hetch-Hetchy Water System was approved in 1913 under the Raker Act, which allowed use of federal lands to build that water system. The water system was constructed by San Francisco over the next 20 years, with first delivery of water in 1934. Although the system is owned by San Francisco, it was designed from the beginning to serve as a regional water supply system.145F 146 Figure 47 shows the Hetch- Hetchy Water System. 145 Santa Clara Valley Water District. (n.d.). Where Your Water Comes From. https://www.valleywater.org/your- water/where-your-water-comes 146 Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency. (n.d.). Hetch Hetchy System. https://bawsca.org/water/supply/hetchhetchy 262 PSC 09-12-2024 262 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 183 Figure 48: Hetch Hetchy Water System146F 147 10.2 Hazard Profile Droughts originate from a deficiency of precipitation resulting from an unusual weather pattern. Such patterns can be short-term, lasting for a few weeks or months, or long-term, lasting for many months or for years. It is possible for a region to experience a long-term circulation pattern that produces drought, and to have short-term changes in this long-term pattern that result in short-term wet spells. Likewise, it is possible for a long-term wet circulation pattern to be interrupted by short-term weather spells that result in short-term drought. Droughts typically occur after 2 or 3 years of below-average rainfall during the period from November to March, when about 75 percent of California’s average annual precipitation falls. 10.2.1 Past Events California is no stranger to drought; it is a recurring feature of our climate.147F 148 The DWR has state hydrologic data from as far back as the early 1900s which indicate occurrences of multi-year droughts from 1912 to 1913, 1918 to 1920, and 1922 to 1924. Between 1954 and 2016, California experienced one FEMA-declared emergency (EM) classified as a drought: FEMA Declaration EM-3023 in 1977, which applied to 58 California counties, including Santa Clara County.148F 149 Santa Clara’s drought history includes years of drought followed by years with little drought.  1976 to 1977: California had one of its most severe droughts during the winters of 1976 and 1977. 1977 was the driest period on record in California, with the previous winter recorded as the fourth driest in California’s hydrological history. The cumulative impact led to widespread water shortages and severe water conservation measures across the state. Only 37 percent of normal Sacramento Valley runoff was received. 147 Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency. (n.d.). Hetch Hetchy System. https://bawsca.org/water/supply/hetchhetchy 148 California Department of Water Resources. (n.d.). Drought. https://water.ca.gov/drought/ 149 Federal Emergency Management Agency. (n.d.). California Drought EM -3023-CA. https://www.fema.gov/disaster/3023 263 PSC 09-12-2024 263 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 184  Over $2.6 billion in crop damage was recorded in 31 counties. Santa Clara County was included in FEMA-3023-EM-CA declaration on January 20, 1977.  1987 to 1992: California’s received precipitation was well below average levels for four consecutive years. While the Central Coast was most affected, the Sierra Nevada mountains in Northern California and the San Joaquin Valley (Central Valley) were also affected. Water suppliers did not experience shortages until the third or fourth year of the drought. Reservoir storage provided a buffer against drought impacts during the initial years of the drought. In 1991, the State Water Project sharply decreased deliveries to water suppliers, including the San Francisco Bay Area. The SCVWD implemented drought contingency measures such as rationing and mandatory conservation to reach its 25 percent reduction goal. By February 1991, all 58 counties in California were suffering under drought conditions that affected urban, rural, and agricultural areas. Some counties had declared a local drought emergency, but Santa Clara County was not included.  1993 to 2006: Rainfall in this period reached previous highs, but severe drought conditions returned in 2007.  2007 to 2009: A governor’s executive order proclaimed a statewide drought emergency on June 4, 2008, after spring 2008 was the driest spring on record, with low snowmelt runoff. On February 27, 2009, after the largest court-ordered water restriction in state history up to that time, a state of emergency was proclaimed for the entire state as the severe drought conditions continued. Santa Clara County received about half of its water through the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, which was already significantly limited that year because of pumping restrictions mandated under the Endangered Species Act.149F 150 Water deliveries through the Delta were cut by about 20 to 30 percent. The SCVWD had mandatory water conservation and rationing measures in effect to reduce usage by 15 percent.  2012 to 2017: California’s drought has set several records. From 2012 to 2014, it ranked as the driest three consecutive years for statewide precipitation. New climate records were set in 2014 for statewide average temperatures and for record-low water allocations from State Water Project and Central Valley Project contractors. A statewide drought emergency was declared in January 2014. Minimum annual precipitation records were set for many communities in 2013. Executive orders and regulations called for water conservation and management. A new law requires retail urban water suppliers with more than 3,000 customers to establish rules defining “excessive water use” and impose those rules during drought emergencies. On its website, DWR refers to “the five-year drought that ended in 2016.150F 151 On April 2, 2017, Governor Brown lifted the drought emergency imposed in 2014 but declared that California must continue water conservation efforts USGS).151F 152  2017 to Present: The National Drought Mitigation Center developed the Drought Impact Reporter152F 153 as a national drought impact database for the United States. Information comes from a variety of sources: on-line, drought- related news stories and scientific publications, members of the public who visit the website and submit a drought-related impact for their region, members of the media, and members of relevant government agencies. The database is being populated beginning with the most recent impacts and working backward in time. 150 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (n.d.). Endangered Species Act. https://www.fws.gov/media/endangered-species- act 151 California Department of Water Resources. (n.d.). Countywide Drought and Water Shortage Contingency Plans. https://water.ca.gov/Programs/Water-Use-And-Efficiency/2018-Water-Conservation-Legislation/County-Drought- Planning 152 USGS. (n.d.). 2012-2016 California Drought: Historical Perspective. (https://ca.water.usgs.gov/california- drought/california-drought-comparisons.html 153 National Drought Mitigation Center. (n.d.). Drought Impact Reporter. https://www.drought.gov/data-maps- tools/drought-impact-reporter-dir 264 PSC 09-12-2024 264 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 185 Between January 2017 and January 2023, the Drought Impact Reporter153F 154 described more than fifty incidents of drought-related events in the Santa Clara OA. Highlights of that list are presented below. ▪ Feb. 8, 2017: The State Water Resources Control Board opted to keep the water restrictions until spring to see how the rest of winter plays out, in terms of precipitation, before making any changes to the restrictions. ▪ March 22, 2017: Farmers south of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta learned that they would receive 65 percent of full allocations from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, despite the heavy rainfall the state has received, leading to flooding, full reservoirs, a nd deep snowpack. ▪ April 11, 2017: The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation announced that South of Delta water contractors would receive a 100 percent allocation from the Central Valley Project. ▪ Jan. 30, 2018: The California Department of Water Resources announced that customers of the State Water Project would receive 20 percent of their requests. ▪ Feb. 22, 2018: Eastside water service contractors will receive 100 percent of their contracts. ▪ 2019: No relevant reports on drought. ▪ Feb. 25, 2020: North-of-Delta agriculture contractors will receive 50 percent of their contracted supply, while South-of-Delta agriculture contractors will receive 15 percent. ▪ Feb. 27, 2020: Northern California ranchers with unirrigated pastures were already giving their cattle supplemental feed as grasses have dried out months earlier than usual. ▪ May 26, 2020: After a dry winter, the State Water Project increased its allocation to 20 percent following above normal precipitation in May. ▪ Feb. 23, 2021: The upcoming March snowpack survey and a planned airborne snow survey will provide more information on the amount of water available for growers. The Tuolumne snowpack measured just 55.6 percent of the historical average for the date. ▪ March 17, 2021: Customers of the Santa Clara Valley Water District were urged to increase their conservation efforts, but no water restrictions were mandated just yet. ▪ March 23, 2021: The California Department of Water Resources updated its initial water allocation for the 2021 water year to 5 percent of requested supplies, down from 10 percent as announced in December 2020. ▪ March 23, 2021: The State Water Board sent notices to California’s 40,000 water users, including small farms and big cities, to alert them to prepare for cuts in water deliveries. ▪ April 28, 2021: The board also voted unanimously to double the price it pays homeowners to use drought-tolerant landscaping from $1 per square foot to $2. The district serves nearly two million people in Santa Clara County. ▪ May 5, 2021: Farmers north of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta learned that they will not receive even 5 percent of contracted water from the Central Valley Project. Water deliveries were suspended, due to limited supply, according to the Bureau of Reclama tion. ▪ May 26, 2021: The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation announced that municipal water agencies that get water from the Central Valley Project would receive just 25 percent of their allocation. 154 National Integrated Drought Information System. (n.d.). Drought Impact Reporter Dashboard. https://unldroughtcenter.maps.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/46afe627bb60422f85944d70069c09cf 265 PSC 09-12-2024 265 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 186 ▪ May 27, 2021: The federal government announced water cuts to urban areas of more than half, which will lead the Santa Clara Valley Water District. ▪ June 10, 2021: Mandatory water restrictions were issued for Santa Clara County, due to the low water supply. ▪ June 25, 2021: A local emergency was declared in Santa Clara County, due to extreme drought. ▪ July 4, 2021: Farmers were not getting any water from the state or federal projects. ▪ July 8, 2021: California Gov. Gavin Newsom requested that people and businesses curb their water use by 15 percent as intense drought persisted. ▪ Aug 2, 2021: Santa Clara Valley Water District does not have enough water to release to support the fish. ▪ Nov 23, 2021: The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission urged almost 3 million water customers in the Bay Area to curb water use by 10 percent and declared a water shortage emergency. ▪ Dec 2, 2021: The State Water Resources Control Board proposed new emergency drought regulations to discourage water waste as water supplies were low after continued drought. ▪ March 15, 2022: Despite the record dry January and February, Californians are falling short on voluntary water conservation. ▪ May 23, 2022: Urban water use increased 18.9 percent in March. ▪ May 25, 2022: Water users in Santa Clara County could be fined $500, or even up to $10,000, as the Santa Clara Valley Water District enacted new drought rules. ▪ June 7, 2022: Public systems, like the City of San Francisco, will have to have to turn to groundwater or other sources. ▪ Oct 19, 2022: Many trees in California’s forests were turning rust colored as another year of drought and bark beetles or other insects. ▪ Nov 28, 2022: Water storage was near historic lows, with Shasta Reservoir, the largest reservoir in the Central Valley Project, at 31 percent of capacity. ▪ Nov 30, 2022: A survey of California urban water agencies representing about 90 percent of the state’s population showed that about 18 percent, or 73 of the 414 water suppliers, indicated that they will soon face potential shortages. ▪ Dec 1, 2022: The Department of Water Resources announced an initial State Water Project allocation of 5 percent of requested supplies for 2023. ▪ Jan 26, 2023: The series of storms that brought heavy rain and snow to California have partially filled reservoirs, allowing the State Water Project to offer 30 percent of requested water supplies to 29 public water agencies that serve 27 million Californians. The initial allocation in December was just 5 percent. U.S. Department of Agriculture Disaster Declarations The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Farm Service Agency provides assistance for natural disaster losses resulting from drought, flood, fire, freeze, tornadoes, pest infestation, and other natural disasters. The USDA Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to designate counties as disaster areas to make emergency loans to producers suffering losses in those counties and in contiguous counties. For drought-related data between 2017 and 2022, the period for which data was available, California has been included in 55 State and County Level Records of Disaster Designation Information made by the US 266 PSC 09-12-2024 266 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 187 Secretary of Agriculture. Santa Clara County was included in seven of these declarations in relation to drought. 154F 155 Table 59: U.S. Department of Agriculture Disaster Declarations Including Santa Clara County, 2017–2022 Year Declaration Number(s) 2017 S4144 and S4163 2018 None 2019 None 2020 S4697 2021 S4916, S4969, and S4958 2022 S5146 10.2.2 Location Drought is a regional phenomenon. A drought that affects the Santa Clara County OA would affect all aspects of the environment and the community simultaneously and has the potential to impact every person directly or indirectly in the county as well as adversely affect the local economy. “The norm for California’s climate is to move back and forth frequently between wet and dry conditions, and water conservation must be a way of life for all who enjoy living in or visiting our state.” Karla Nemeth, Director of California Department of Water Resources March 12, 2018 10.2.3 Frequency Historical drought data regarding Santa Clara County indicate four significant droughts over the last 40 years, with drought occurring in 12 of those 40 years.155F 156 Based on risk factors and this history, droughts likely will continue to occur cyclically in the Santa Clara County OA. Further information on the impact of climate change on the probability of drought is included in Section 11. Probability in OA: Likely 155 U.S. Department of Agriculture. (n.d.). Disaster Designation Information. https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and- services/disaster-assistance-program/disaster-designation-information/index 156 National Integrated Drought Information System. (n.d.). Drought Conditions for Santa Clara County. https://www.drought.gov/states/california/county/santapercent20clara 267 PSC 09-12-2024 267 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 188 10.2.4 Warning Time Empirical studies conducted over the past century have shown that meteorological drought is never the result of a single cause. It is the result of many causes, often synergistic in nature; these include global weather patterns that produce persistent, upper-level high-pressure systems along the West Coast with warm, dry air resulting in less precipitation. Scientists at this time do not know how to predict drought more than a month in advance for most locations. Predicting drought depends on the ability to forecast precipitation and temperature. Anomalies of precipitation and temperature may last from several months to several decades; California is currently finishing a several-year-long drought, while other areas in the United States may undergo droughts as short as 1 or 2 months. How long droughts last depends on interactions between the atmosphere and the oceans, soil moisture and land surface processes, topography, internal dynamics, and the accumulated influence of weather systems on the global scale. 10.2.5 Extent Figure 48 displays data from the U.S. Drought Monitor for the State of California from 2000 through 2023. Several periods of moderate to extreme drought have occurred during this time. D0 Abnormally Dry represents the least severe drought conditions and D4 Exceptional Drought represents the most severe. As noted in 10.2.1 Past Events, significant droughts have occurred from 2007-2009, 2012-2017 and 2000-2023. During these events, significant portions of the entire state were impacted. The OA has experienced conditions from D0 to D4 at different times within this time frame. Figure 49 displays a snapshot of conditions during the most recent drought. During the fall of 2022, the entire OA was experiencing Severe Drought conditions, with the easternmost part of the county experiencing Extreme Drought. As noted in 10.1.4, a significant portion of the OA water supply originates outside of the area which may experience different drought severity. Figure 49: U.S. Drought Monitor Time Series California 2000-2023 268 PSC 09-12-2024 268 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 189 Figure 50: U.S. Drought Monitory Map of California 10.2.6 Severity and Impacts The severity of a drought depends on the degree of moisture deficiency, the duration, and the size and location of the affected area. The longer the duration of the drought and the larger the area impacted, the more severe the potential impacts. Drought can have a widespread impact on the environment and the economy, although it typically does not result in loss of life or damage to property, as do other natural disasters. Drought affects agriculture, business and industry, energy, fire, plants, tourism and recreation, and water supply and quality. The Drought Impact Reporter contains information on 154 impacts from droughts that affected Santa Clara County from January 2017 through January 18, 2023. The following are the categories and reported number of impacts. Note that some impacts have been assigned to more than one category. 269 PSC 09-12-2024 269 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 190 Figure 51: Reported Number of Drought Impacts by Category156F 157 The National Drought Mitigation Center uses three categories to describe drought impacts:  Economic Impacts: These impacts of drought cost people or businesses money. They include farmers’ loss of crops, costs for irrigation or drilling new wells to address low water supply, lost business for companies that sell boats or fishing equipment, and water companies’ costs for additional water supplies.  Environmental Impacts: Plants and animals depend on water. When a drought occurs, their food supply can shrink, and their habitat can be damaged.  Social Impacts: Social impacts include public safety, health, conflicts between people when there is not enough water to go around, and changes in lifestyle. Drought generally does not affect groundwater sources as quickly as surface water supplies, but groundwater supplies generally take longer to recover. Reduced precipitation during a drought means that groundwater supplies are not replenished at a normal rate. This can lead to a reduction in groundwater levels and problems such as reduced pumping capacity or wells going dry. Shallow wells are more susceptible than deep wells. Reduced replenishment of groundwater affects streams. Much of the flow in streams comes from groundwater, especially during the summer when there is less precipitation and after snowmelt ends. Reduced groundwater levels mean that even less water will enter streams when steam flows are lowest. 157 National Drought Mitigation Center. (n.d.). Drought Impact Reporter. https://www.drought.gov/data-maps- tools/drought-impact-reporter-dir 270 PSC 09-12-2024 270 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 191 10.2.7 Responses to Recent Drought Table 60: Recent Federal and State Drought Responses Date Federal and State Drought Response April 2021 Drought emergency proclamation for parts of the state. May 2021 Drought emergency proclamation issued in April 2021 expanded to include Santa Clara County and $5.1 billion package to:  Address immediate emergency needs.  Build regional capacity to endure drought.  Safeguard water supplies for communities, the economy, and the environment. July 2021 Voluntary 15 percent water use reduction. October 2021 State Water Board empowered to prohibit wasteful uses of potable water such as washing sidewalks or driveways. January 2022 State Water Board prohibited using drinking water for activities such as filling decorative fountains/ponds, washing sidewalks and driveways, watering lawns during and right after rain, and using hoses without automatic shutoff nozzles. March 2022 Local water suppliers called to move to Level 2 of their Water Shortage Contingency Plans. U.S Department of Agriculture Livestock Forage Disaster Program activated. August 2022 California’s Water Supply Strategy, which includes creating additional water storage space, recycling and reusing water, increasing efficient water use and conservation, and diversifying water supplies, was released. September 2022 California Legislature provides additional funds to state residents to replace their lawns with drought-resistant plants and landscaping. November 2022 The California Department of Water Resources Control Board adopted new performance standards that require urban retail water suppliers to monitor and reduce leakage in their distribution systems. The California Legislature authorized over a billion dollars in funding to the California Department of Water Resources for drought relief in 2021 and 2022. December 2022 The California Department of Water Resources Control Board extends its emergency regulation to January 2024. Urban Water Suppliers’ Responses to Defined Drought Stages The California Water Code, Sec. 10632 was amended in 2016 to provide guidance on stages of action to be undertaken by urban water suppliers. It requires them to develop a plan that incorporates an urban water shortage contingency analysis that includes each of the following elements that are within the authority of the urban water supplies. Stages of action to be undertaken by the urban water supplier in response to water supply shortages, including up to a 50 percent reduction in water supply. The extreme drought and water shortage emergency condition in summer 2022 called for water use restrictions. In responding to the drought condition, the SCVWD declared a water shortage emergency condition in June 2021 that called for 15 percent water use reduction to minimize water shortage risk. The call for water conservation has been instrumental in reducing county -wide water use and helps alleviate the negative consequence of the ongoing drought. 271 PSC 09-12-2024 271 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 192 Since the call, county-wide water use has been reduced by 6 percent cumulatively against a 2019 baseline.157F 158 In winter 2023 when this plan is being written, conditions continue to improve; but the county is still in a “D-1 Moderate Drought”. Participating municipality retail water providers ’ drought contingency measures are described in the annexes in Volume 2 of this hazard mitigation plan, as applicable. 10.3 Cascading Hazards When natural hazard events overlap or occur in quick succession, the events can compound and cause detrimental effects. Drought is particularly likely to be part of a cascading hazard because it can cover a large area and go on for a long time.158F 159 10.3.1 Drought and Wildfire The hazard most associated with drought is wildfire (see Section 8). A prolonged lack of precipitation dries out vegetation, which becomes increasingly susceptible to ignition as the duration of the drought extends. Reduced ponds, streams, and reservoir levels can also limit withdrawal sources for fighting wildfires. The extreme conditions can also increase the likelihood of shrub and tree mortality by wildfire in previously fire-adapted ecosystems, Millions of board feet of timber have been lost, and in many cases, erosion occurred, which caused considerable damage to aquatic life, irrigation, and power production by heavy silting of streams, reservoirs, and rivers in addition to habitat and infrastructure losses and threats to animal and human life. 10.3.2 Drought and Extreme Heat Drought is often accompanied by extreme heat, exposing people to the risk of sunstroke, heat cramps and heat exhaustion. Periods of extreme heat increase evaporation, leading to reduced water availability in soils and surface water supplies. Periods of dro ught can cause extreme heat due to lack of water in the atmosphere, soils, and rivers, where decreased water availability in the system reduces the amount of evaporation happening at the surface, quickly increasing temperatures. Extreme heat can also incre ase water demands, in which human activities can reduce water supplies, leading to human -caused drought. These hazards occurring together can compound health impacts, reduce energy production, cause loss of aquatic life due to reduced stream and reservoir levels and increased water temperatures, kill vegetation, and create dangerous air quality issues. 10.3.3 Drought and Flooding Drought, along with wildfires that can stem from drought, increases flood risk. Extended drought and wildfire can stress and reduce the amount of vegetation. When it does rain, the reduction of vegetation can increase flooding due to faster runoff rates, compared to normal conditions when abundant vegetation slows runoff and increases water absorption into the ground. Drought or wildfire conditions prior to flooding can also cause water quality deterioration from the increased soil and ash particles in the runoff. On farmlands, drought conditions prior to flooding may also cause a surge of farm chemicals applied to crops to enter streams through runoff. These factors can affect the water quality for aquatic life, animals, and humans, who are all dependent on the water source. Increased instances of flash flooding may also occur. 158 Santa Clara Valley Water District. (2022, November 22). Board of Directors Meeting Agenda. https://scvwd.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx 159 American Planning Association. (2019). Falling Dominoes: A Planner’s Guide to Drought and Cascading Impacts. https://abag.ca.gov/sites/default/files/falling-dominoes-planners-guide-to-drought-and-cascading-impacts.pdf 272 PSC 09-12-2024 272 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 193 10.3.4 Drought and Landslides Droughts can indirectly cause landslides through a cascade of natural hazards. For example, drought can cause dry conditions and increased fuel loads for wildfires that, in turn, can increase the likelihood of flooding. The ash-infused topsoil, which is water repellent, and loss of vegetation can increase runoff and take large amounts of earthen material with them, causing devastating impacts to populations in the path of the landslide event. Such events could cause the loss of infrastructure and life. From an environmental standpoint, they may also affect the water quality of downstream rivers and streams and the habitat for animals, flora, and fauna. Landslides can also alter the topography of the landscape, which can modify surface and groundwater flow patterns. 10.4 Vulnerability Changes in conditions: increase in vulnerability  The CMRA tool in Figure 51 shows an increasing number of days without precipitation and an increase in the consecutive number of days without precipitation.  Extended periods of drought have the potential to impact the water supply in the OA.  Drought results in dryer vegetation and increased tree mortality, which compounds conditions that contribute to wildfire risk.  Loss of vegetation due to drought may increase vulnerability to landslides.  Ongoing drought may contribute to land subsidence if groundwater is not recharged.  SCVWD is implementing recycled and purified water programs to provide access to drought- resistant water supply.  The National Risk Index reports and Expected Annual Loss of $1,771,981 for drought based on crop impacts.  Santa Clara has adopted the Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance to promote water use efficiency and sustainable landscape design practices. 273 PSC 09-12-2024 273 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 194 Figure 52: CMRA Drought Hazard: Days without Precipitation Indicator for Santa Clara County 10.4.1 Population The entire population of the Santa Clara County OA is vulnerable to drought events. Drought can affect people’s health and safety, including health problems related to low water flows, insect infestation, poor water quality, or dust. Droughts can also lead to loss of human life.159F 160 The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has identified the indirect role of drought in people ’s deaths through disruptions of agriculture and water systems, poor air quality, and increased heat -related and respiratory illnesses. In a recent study, they have also addressed the increased occupational psychosocial stress among U.S. farmers.160F 161 Other possible impacts include recreational risks; effects on air quality; diminished living conditions related to energy, air quality, and hygiene; compromised food and nutrition. These negative health effects are more likely to impact populations that already have higher health risks, such as the old or young. Hazus 6.0 demographic data indicates that 260,705 persons or 13.5 percent of the population in the OA are over 64 years old and 422,719 persons or 21.8 percent of the population within the OA under 18 years of age. These people may experience worse effects from poor air quality or reduced nutrition resulting from agricultural production loss. It is also estimated that 2.45 percent of the people within the OA are economically disadvantaged, defined as having household incomes of $20,000 or less. Those with fewer financial resources are often less resilient to hazard impacts. The SCVWD, BAWSCA, regional water purveyors, and other regional stakeholders have devoted considerable time and effort to protect life, safety, and health during times of consecutive dry years, such as the current drought. Provisions and measures have been taken to analyze and account for anticipated 160 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2016, June 15). Drought in America: Slow Moving, Far Reaching. https://www.noaa.gov/explainers/drought-in-america-slow-moving-far-reaching 161 National Integrated Drought Information Systems. (2021, July 24). The Association Between Drought Conditions and Increased Occupational Psychosocial Stress Among U.S. Farmers. https://www.drought.gov/documents/association-between-drought-conditions-and-increased-occupational- psychosocial-stress 274 PSC 09-12-2024 274 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 195 water shortages. With coordination from its cities, the SCVWD has the ability to minimize and reduce impacts on residents and water consumers in the Santa Clara County OA. 10.4.2 Property Significant depletion of groundwater supplies—from drought, excessive groundwater pumping or both— can lead to subsidence, which is the downward collapse of the land surface when groundwater aquifers lack the water to support the weight of the ground. Compaction of aquifer systems is the greatest cause of subsidence in California. Although this is typically due to groundwater pumping rather than drought, drought creates a need for greater groundwater pumping as freshwater sources disappear. Drought - induced subsidence is not as common as wildfire or extreme heat, but it can significantly impact the local environment, floodplain/wetlands, and water supply, and it typically is irreversible. It may cause wetlands to change size and shape, migrate to lower elevations, or disappear entirely. Rivers may change course, and patterns of erosion and deposition may change.161F 162 No structures will be directly affected by drought conditions, though droughts often lead to reduced local fire suppression capabilities which could threaten structures. Some structures may become vulnerable to wildfires, which are more likely following years of drought. Drought conditions may also be the cause of serious foundation problems and have significant impacts on landscapes, which could cause a financial burden to property owners. However, these impacts are not considered critical in planning for impacts from the drought hazard. Drought is detrimental to agricultural assets and other natural resources. Although the agricultural sector is relatively small in the OA, a significant area in the southeast area of the county near Gilroy is involved in agricultural production. Extended drought may diminish the productivity of agricultural lands and impact their value. The National Risk Index reports and Expected Annual Loss of $1,771,981 to crops due to drought in Santa Clara County. This area would likely feel more significant impact of drought due to crop losses caused by drought or impacts to water supplies. 10.4.3 Critical Facilities Critical facilities as defined for this plan will continue to be operational during a drought. Critical facility elements such as landscaping may not be maintained due to limited resources, but the risk to the Santa Clara County OA’s critical facilities functions is low. 10.4.4 Environmental Impact Environmental losses from drought are associated with damage to plants, animals, wildlife habitat, and air and water quality; forest and range fires; degradation of landscape quality; loss of biodiversity; and soil erosion. Some of the effects are short-term and conditions quickly return to normal following the end of the drought. Other environmental effects linger for some time or may even become permanent. Wildlife habitat, for example, may be degraded through the loss of wetlands, lakes, and vegetation. However, many species will eventually recover from this temporary aberration. The degradation of landscape quality, including increased soil erosion, may lead to a more permanent loss of biological productivity. Although environmental losses are difficult to quantify, growing public awareness and 162 United States Geological Survey. (2000, December). Land Subsidence in the United States. https://water.usgs.gov/ogw/pubs/fs00165/#:~:text=Thepercent20sitepercent20ispercent20inpercent20thepercent20Sa npercent20Joaquinpercent20Valley,resultedpercent20inpercent20permanentpercent20subsidencepercent20andperc ent20relatedpercent20groundpercent20failures. 275 PSC 09-12-2024 275 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 196 concern for environmental quality has forced public officials to focus greater attention and resources on these effects. Santa Clara County Tree Mortality Exposure Large numbers of trees have died in California since the beginning of the 2012 -2016 drought. Most of these trees were stressed from higher temperatures and a shortage of water, making them more vulnerable to insects and diseases. California ’s pattern of tree mortality corresponds with global trends that are linked to increasingly dry and hot climatic conditions. Prolonged periods of drought, combined with the increased infestation of native bark beetles, have contributed to the death of millions of trees on federal, state, and private lands across the state. Removal of these dead trees can be costly and challenging, which can add to the financial impacts of drought. “Many trees in California’s forests were turning rust colored as another year of drought and bark beetles or other insects led to higher tree mortality. Trees were stressed from inadequate water and could not produce enough sap or pitch to defend themselves against insects.” Drought Impact Reporter Dashboard October 19, 2022 The following figures show the areas where the state is focused for removal of dead trees. The Tier 1 Tree Mortality High Hazard Zones (see Figure 52) represent areas of tree mortality in direct proximity to assets determined to be important to life and property (including communications, transportation, recreation, communities, and utilities). These areas were designated by state and local governments as being in greatest need of dead tree removal, pursuant to the California Governor ’s Emergency proclamation on October 30, 2015. The Tier 2 Tree Mortality High Hazard Zones, shown in Figure 53, are defined by watersheds that have elevated tree mortality as well as significant community and natural resource assets. 276 PSC 09-12-2024 276 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 197 Figure 53: Tier 1 Tree Mortality High Hazard Zones162F 163 Figure 54: Tier 2 Tree Mortality High Hazard Zones163F 164 163 California State Geoportal. (2022 June 2). California High Hazard Zones (Tier 1). https://gis.data.ca.gov/maps/a71a85136b0b414ea734fdfbe3d7674a/explore?layer=0&location=37.231739%2C - 121.694821%2C9.99 164 California State Geoportal. (2022 June 2). California High Hazard Zones (Tier 2). https://hub.arcgis.com/maps/e50b7577426c4367a518b80b38e9b5d8/explore?location=37.371146%2C - 121.549960%2C10.88 277 PSC 09-12-2024 277 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 198 10.4.5 Economic Impact Drought causes the most significant economic impacts on industries that use water or depend on water for their business, most notably, agriculture and related sectors (forestry, fisheries, and waterborne activities). In addition to losses in yields in crop and livestock production, drought is associated with increased insect infestations, plant diseases, and wind erosion. Water- and lake-related recreational activities including, but not limited to, fishing, swimming, rafting, and canoeing are valuable for the local and regional economy, particularly when the lake/reservoir is located in a rural area with limited other recreational/tourism opportunities. Drought can lead to other losses because so many sectors are affected losses that include reduced income for farmers and reduced business for retailers and others who provide goods and services to farmers. This leads to unemployment, increased credit risk for financial institutions, capital shortfalls, and loss of tax revenue. Prices for food, energy, and other products may also increase as supplies decrease. When a drought occurs, the agricultural industry faces risk of economic impact and damage. During droughts, crops do not mature, resulting in smaller crop yields, undernourishment of wildlife and livestock, decreases in land values, and ultimately financial losses to farmers.164F 165 Agriculture production has been a significant and growing factor in Santa Clara County, especially as agricultural effects on the economy start to normalize (after a period of decline). Evaluation of direct effects (i.e., excluding indirect and induced spending benefits) can occur based on information conveyed in USDA reports. According to the 2017 Census of Agriculture, 890 farms were present in Santa Clara County, encompassing 288,084 acres of total farmland. The average farm size was 324 acres. Santa Clara County farms had a total market value of products sold of $310.2 million ($293.7 million in vegetable crops including nursery and greenhouse; and $18.4 million in cattle, layers, and horses, and related products), averaging $348,524 per farm. A prolonged drought can affect a community’s economy significantly. Increased demand for water and electricity may result in shortages and higher costs of these resources. Industries that rely on water for business may be impacted the most (e.g., landscaping businesses). Although most businesses will still be operational, they may be affected aesthetically—especially the recreation and tourism industry. Moreover, droughts within another area could affect food supply/price of food for residents within the Santa Clara County OA. 10.5 Future Trends in Development Land use planning is also directed by general plans adopted under California ’s General Planning Law. Municipal planning partners are encouraged to establish General Plans with policies directing land use and dealing with issues of water supply and protection of water resources. These plans increase capability at the local municipal level to protect future development from impacts of drought. All planning partners reviewed their general plans under the capability assessments undertaken for this effort. Deficiencies revealed by these reviews can be identified as mitigation actions to increase capability to deal with future trends in development. To confront the challenges of increasing drought vulnerability, several efforts are underway to address water needs in the OA. Santa Clara Valley Water District is investing in locally reliable, sustainable and efficient water supplies such as recycled and purified water. Santa Clara County has adopted a modified Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance to guide future landscape and water management practices to promote long-term water efficiency. 165 National Integrated Drought Information System. (n.d.). Agriculture. https://www.drought.gov/sectors/agriculture 278 PSC 09-12-2024 278 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 199 10.6 Scenario Drought is a cyclic part of the climate of California. Continuation or exacerbation of the current situation across the State (i.e., an extreme, multiyear drought associated with record-breaking rates of low precipitation and high temperatures) is the worst-case scenario for Santa Clara County. Low precipitation and high temperatures increase possibility of wildfires throughout the County, increasing need for water when water is already in limited supply. Surrounding counties, also under drought conditions, could increase their demand for the water supplies on which Santa Clara County also relies, triggering social and political conflicts. The higher density population of the Bay Area increases the likelihood of such conflicts. Additionally, the longer drought conditions last in or near the Santa Clara OA, the greater the effect on the local economy; water-dependent industries especially will undergo setbacks. According to the USGS, “Climate change exacerbates droughts by making them more frequent, longer, and more severe.”165F 166 10.7 Issues Important issues associated with drought in the OA include the following:  Identification and development of alternative water supplies.  Utilization of groundwater recharge techniques to stabilize the groundwater supply.  The probability of increased drought frequencies and durations due to climate change.  The promotion of active water conservation even during non-drought periods.  Monitoring of implementation and benefits of the Long-Term Reliable Water Supply Strategy projects, Water Conservation Implementation Plan projects, and water system capital improvement upgrades.  Application of alternative techniques (groundwater recharge, water recycle, local capture and reuse, desalination, and transfer) to stabilize and offset Sierra Nevada snowpack water supply shortfalls.  Regular occurrence of drought or multiyear droughts that may limit the Operational Area ’s ability to successfully recover from or prepare for more occurrences-particularly noteworthy due to longevity of the current ongoing drought. Table 61: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Drought Subject Ranking Impacts/Drought Health and Safety of Persons in the Area of the Incident Minimal to moderate Drought impact tends to be agricultural; however, because of the lack of precipitation that leads to drought, water supply disruptions can occur, which can affect people. The impact is expected to be minimal. Responders Minimal With proper preparedness and protection, the impact on the responders is expected to be minimal. Continuity of Operations Minimal There is minimal expectation for utilization of the COOP. 166 U.S. Geological Survey. (n.d.). Droughts and Climate Change. https://www.usgs.gov/science/science- explorer/climate/droughts-and-climate-change 279 PSC 09-12-2024 279 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 10: Drought 200 Subject Ranking Impacts/Drought Property, Facilities, and Infrastructure Minimal to severe Impact on property, facilities, and infrastructure could be minimal to severe, depending on the length and intensity of the drought. The structural integrity of buildings and buckling of roads could be affected. Delivery of Services Minimal The impact on the delivery of services should be nonexistent or minimal. Environment Minimal to severe The impact on the environment could be severe. Drought can severely affect farming, ranching, wildlife, and plants due to the lack of precipitation. Economic Conditions Minimal to moderate Impacts on the economy will be dependent on how extreme the drought is and how long it lasts. Communities that depend on water recreation could be tested, as well as agricultural. Public Confidence in Jurisdiction’s Governance Minimal Confidence could be an issue during periods of extreme drought if planning is not in place to address intake needs and the loss of agricultural crops. 280 PSC 09-12-2024 280 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 201 11 Climate Change 11.1 General Background Definitions  Climate Change: changes in average weather conditions that persist over multiple decades or longer1.  Climate Mitigation: action taken to curb climate change by reducing or preventing the emission of greenhouse gases.  Climate Adaptation: action taken to protect the community from the impacts of a changing climate.  Adaptative Capacity: an estimate of the community’s current ability to deal with the projected impacts of climate change. Climate, consisting of patterns of temperature, precipitation, humidity, wind and seasons, plays a fundamental role in shaping natural ecosystems and the human economies and cultures that depend on them. Climate change is defined as “changes in average weather conditions that persist over multiple decades or longer. Climate change encompasses both increases and decreases in temperature, as well as shifts in precipitation, changing risk of certain types of inclement weather events, and changes to other features in the climate system.”166F 167 A key indicator of climate change is the increase of global temperatures. Multiple temperature records from all over the world have shown a warming trend. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has stated that the warming of the climate system is unequivocal.167F 168 The 2022 global average surface temperature was 1.55 °F warmer than the 20th-century average of 57.0 °F and about 1.90 ˚F warmer than the pre-industrial period (1880-1900). In fact, the ten warmest years on record have all occurred since 2010, with the last nine years of 2014-2022 among the ten warmest years.168F 169 2022 ranked as the sixth-warmest year on record since 1880.169F 170 Although this temperature change may seem small, it means a significant increase in accumulated heat worldwide which is driving regional and seasonal temperature extremes, reducing snow cover and sea ice, intensifying heavy rainfall, and changing habitat ranges for plants and animals—expanding some and shrinking others.170F 171 167 Globalchange.gov. (No Date). Glossary. https://www.globalchange.gov/climate-change/glossary 168 The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (n.d.). Summary for Policymakers. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGII_SummaryForPolicymakers.pdf 169 https://www.noaa.gov/news/2022-was-worlds-6th-warmest-year-on-record 170 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2023, January 12). 2022 Was World’s 6 th-Warmest Year on Record. https://www.noaa.gov/news/2022-was-worlds-6th-warmest-year-on-record 171 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2023, January 18). Climate Change: Global Temperature. https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-global-temperature#SnippetTab 281 PSC 09-12-2024 281 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 202 Figure 55: Global Temperature 1880-2022171F 172 The global warming temperature trend and its related impacts are caused by an exponential increase of greenhouse gas emissions including carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and fluorinated gases. Emissions of these gases come from a variety of sources, such as the combustion of fossil fuels for energy and transportation, agricultural production, changes in land use and volcanic eruptions. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), carbon dioxide concentrations measured about 280 parts per million before the industrial era began in the late 1700s and reached 414 parts per million in 2021, a 48% increase.172F 173 See Figure 54. In addition, the concentration of methane has more than doubled since pre-industrial times, and nitrous oxide is being measured at a record high of 334 parts per billion.173F 174 172 NASA. (n.d.). World of Change: Global Temperatures. https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/world-of-change/global- temperatures 173 Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.) Climate Change Indicators: Atmospheric Concentrations of Greenhouse Gases. https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-indicators-atmospheric-concentrations-greenhouse- gases#:~:text=Carbon%20dioxide%20concentrations%20have%20increased,is%20due%20to%20human%20activitie s 174 Wuebbles, D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, D.J. Dokken, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock, eds. (2017). Climate science special report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, volume I. U.S. Global Change Research Program. https://science2017.globalchange.gov/. 282 PSC 09-12-2024 282 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 203 Figure 56: Global Carbon Dioxide Concentrations Over Time174F 175 Scientists can place this rise in carbon dioxide in a longer historical context through the measurement of carbon dioxide in ice cores. According to these records and illustrated in Figure 55, carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere are the highest that they have been in 650,000 years.175F 176 The major scientific agencies of the United States and the world—including NASA, NOAA, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)—agree that long-term climate change is occurring. There is broad scientific consensus (97 percent of scientists) that the current, unprecedented climate - warming trends are very likely due to human activities.176F 177 Unless emissions of greenhouse gases are substantially reduced, this warming trend is expected to continue. 11.1.1 Climate Change Indicators Climate change will affect the people, property, economy, and ecosystems of the Santa Clara County Operational Area (OA) in a variety of ways. Some of these impacts are already being felt. Widespread, pervasive impacts to ecosystems, people, settlements, and infrastructure have resulted from observed increases in the frequency and intensity of climate and weather extremes, including tempera ture extremes on land and in the ocean, heavy precipitation, drought, and fire weather.177F 178 Rising global temperatures have also been accompanied by other more localized changes in weather and climate. 2022 serves as a good example of this. 175 Wuebbles, D.J., D.W. Fahey, K.A. Hibbard, D.J. Dokken, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock, eds. (2017). Climate science special report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, volume I. U.S. Global Change Research Program. https://science2017.globalchange.gov/. 176 NASA. (2023). Carbon Dioxide. https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/ 177 NASA. (n.d.). Scientific Consensus: Earth’s Climate is Warming. https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ 178 The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (n.d.). Summary for Policymakers. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGII_SummaryForPolicymakers.pdf 283 PSC 09-12-2024 283 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 204 The OA started the year in the drought, experienced record high temperatures in the summer that reached as high as 109 degrees Fahrenheit in San José and ended with the start of multiple atmospheric rivers which brought record rainfall and flooding. California’s number of extreme heat events (including both days and nights) has increased. In particular, there has been an increase in nighttime temperatures. Scientists have demonstrated that nighttime temperatures are more sensitive to the greenhouse gases which cause climate change178F 179. This example helps demonstrate the consequence of climate change that are already being felt throughout the region. The planet’s oceans and glaciers have also experienced changes: oceans are warming and becoming more acidic, ice caps are melting, and sea levels are rising.179F 180, 180F 181 Sea level along the U.S. coastline is projected to rise, on average, 10 to 12 inches in the next 30 years (2020 –2050), which will be as much as the rise measured over the last 100 years (1920–2020). This has already put some coastal homes, beaches, roads, bridges, and wildlife at risk. As a coastal county, sea-level rise is one of the most concerning impacts of climate change facing the OA. At the time of the development of this plan, NASA reports the following trends181F 182:  Carbon Dioxide: Increasing trend, currently at 419 parts per million as of February 2023.  Global Temperature: Increasing trend, increase of 1.6 ºF since 1880.  Arctic Ice Minimum: Decreasing trend, 12.6% per decade.  Land Ice: Decreasing trend, Antarctica is losing approximately 150 billion tons a year and Greenland is losing about 270 billion tons per a year.  Sea Level: Increasing trend, 3.8 inches per year. Climate change impacts are most frequently associated with negative consequences, for example, warmer average temperatures could increase air conditioning costs and affect the spread of diseases like Lyme disease but could also improve conditions for growing some crops. More extreme variations in weather are also a threat to society. More frequent and intense extreme heat events can increase illnesses and deaths, especially among vulnerable populations, and damage some crops. While increased precipitation can replenish water supplies and support agriculture, intense storms can damage property, cause loss of life and population displacement, and temporarily disrupt essential services such as transportation, telecommunications, energy, and water supplies.182F 183 The most important effect for the development of this plan is that climate change will have a measurable impact on the occurrence and severity of natural hazards. 11.1.2 Projected Future Impacts The Fourth National Climate Assessment Report for the United States183F 184 indicates that impacts resulting from climate change will continue through the 21st century and beyond. Evidence of human -caused climate change is overwhelming and continues to strengthen. 179 California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. (2019, February 11). Extreme Heat Events. https://oehha.ca.gov/epic/changes-climate/extreme-heat-events 180 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2023, January 12). 2022 Was World’s 6 th-Warmest Year on Record. https://www.noaa.gov/news/2022-was-worlds-6th-warmest-year-on-record 181 U.S. Geological Survey. (2022, March 1). Global and Regional Sea Level Rise Scenarios for the United States. https://www.usgs.gov/publications/global-and-regional-sea-level-rise-scenarios-united-states 182 NASA. (n.d.). Ice Sheets. https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/ice-sheets/ 183 Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.). Climate Change Indicators: Weather and Climate. https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/weather-climate 184 U.S. Global Change Research Program. (n.d.). Fourth National Climate Assessment. https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/ 284 PSC 09-12-2024 284 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 205 The impacts of climate change are intensifying across the country and represent a real threat to Americans’ physical, social, and economic well-being are rising. These impacts are projected to intensify, however how much they intensify will depend on actions taken to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions and to adapt to the risks from climate change now and in the coming decades.184F 185 The California Climate Adaptation Planning Guide (APG) outlines the following climate change impact concerns for the Bay Area Region communities185F 186:  Increased temperature  Reduced precipitation  Sea level rise – coastal inundation and erosion  Public health – heat and air pollution  Reduced agricultural productivity  Inland flooding  Reduced tourism According to the Fourth U.S. National Climate Change Assessment, after the third climate assessment where there were more than twice as many high temperature records as low temperature records broken between 2001 and 2012, global high temperature records continued to be broken in 2014, 2015, and 2016. Heavy rainfall events and large forest fire incidents are becoming more frequent and more severe. Long-term impacts, like a continued decline in arctic ice and increase chronic drought, are expected. Cal-Adapt,186F 187 a resource for public information on how climate change might impact local communities, based on the most current data available, has projected increases in temperature within the OA in particular. Table 62 shows the expected increases in average maximum temperatures and Table 63 addresses the number of extreme heat days per year. The increase in average surface temperatures can also lead to more intense heat waves that can be exacerbated in urbanized areas by what is known as the urban heat island effect. Table 62: Average Maximum Temperature – Santa Clara County187F 188 Baseline (1961–1990) Medium Emissions (RCP 4.5) High Emissions (RCP 8.5) Mid-Century End-Century Mid-Century Mid-Century 30-year average 68.6 oF 72.0 oF 73.1 oF 72.8 oF 76.0 oF 30-year range 68.4–68.8 oF 70.5–73.5 oF 71.0–75.7 oF 70.9–75.0 oF 73.2–80.5 oF 185 U.S. Global Change Research Program. (n.d.). Fourth National Climate Assessment, Chapter 1: Overview. https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/chapter/1/ 186 Cal OES. (June 2020). Climate Adaptation Planning Guide. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/wp- content/uploads/Hazard-Mitigation/Documents/CA-Adaptation-Planning-Guide-FINAL-June-2020-Accessible.pdf 187 Cal-Adapt. (n.d.). Explore and analyze climate data from California’s Climate Change Assessment. https://cal- adapt.org/ 188 Cal-Adapt. (n.d.). Annual Averages. https://cal-adapt.org/tools/annual-averages 285 PSC 09-12-2024 285 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 206 Table 63: Number of Extreme Heat Days Per Year (Heat Is above 92.7 oF) Santa Clara County188F 189 Baseline (1961-1990) Medium Emissions (RCP 4.5) High Emissions (RCP 8.5) Mid-Century End-Century Mid-Century End-Century 30-year average 4 days/yr. 12 days/yr. 17 days/yr. 17 days/yr. 31 days/yr. 30-year range 0–16 days/yr. 0–32 days/yr. 2–44 days/yr. 1–61 days/yr. 0–101 days/yr. Although the California Climate Adaptation Planning Guide projected reduced precipitation in the region, recent Cal-Adapt projections show significant increases in Santa Clara County ’s average annual precipitation levels (see Table 64). Table 64: Average Annual Precipitation – Santa Clara County189F 190 Baseline (1961-1990) Medium Emissions (RCP 4.5) High Emissions (RCP 8.5) Mid-Century End-Century Mid-Century End-Century 30-year average 23.8 inches 26.0 inches 26.0 inches 26.3 inches 9.1–68.6 inches 30-year range 8.2–51.5 inches 9.2–54.5 inches 9.0–51.3 inches 29.2 inches 8.6–63.6 inches Climate change projections contain inherent uncertainty, largely derived from the fact that they depend on future greenhouse gas emission scenarios. Generally, the uncertainty in greenhouse gas emissions is addressed by the presentation of differing scenarios: low-emissions to high-emissions scenarios. In low- emissions scenarios, there is an effort to limit greenhouse gas emissions leading to emissions starting to decline close to mid-century. In high-emissions scenarios, greenhouse gas emissions continue to increase at current rates through the end of the century. Different climate scenarios can also be described in terms of likelihood and confidence. Likelihood refers to the statistical probability of the effect described occurring. Confidence refers to how valid that result is likely to be, based on available data and its consistency with current literature. There will always be some level of uncertainty when estimating future conditions. Uncertainty in outcomes is addressed by averaging a variety of climate change model outcomes or providing a range of outcomes. Despite this general uncertainty, climate change projections present valuable information to help guide decision-making. 189 Cal-Adapt. (n.d.). Extreme Heat Days & Warm Nights. https://cal-adapt.org/tools/extreme-heat 190 Cal-Adapt. (n.d.). Annual Averages. https://cal-adapt.org/tools/annual-averages 286 PSC 09-12-2024 286 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 207 Figure 57: Impacts of Climate Change on Human Health190F 191 11.1.3 How Climate Change Impacts Hazard Mitigation An essential aspect of hazard mitigation is estimating the likelihood of hazard events. Traditionally, the probability of a hazard event occurring has been expressed as a statistical projection based on records of past events. This approach assumes that th e likelihood of hazard events occurring remains essentially unchanged over time. Thus, averages based on the past frequencies of floods, for example, are used to estimate future flooding frequencies: if a river has flooded an average of once every five yea rs for the past 100 years, then it can be expected to continue to flood an average of once every five years. For hazards that are affected by climate conditions, the assumption that future behavior will be equivalent to past behavior may not be valid given that climate conditions are changing. As flooding is generally associated with precipitation frequency and quantity, for example, the frequency of flooding will not remain constant if broad precipitation patterns change over time. 191 California Department of Public Health. (February 2017). Climate Change and Health Profile Report – Santa Clara County. https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/OHE/CDPH%20Document%20Library/CHPRs/CHPR085SantaClara_County2 - 23-17.pdf 287 PSC 09-12-2024 287 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 208 Specifically, as hydrology changes, storms currently considered to be a one percent annual chance flood event (100-year flood) might strike more often, leaving communities at greater risk of flooding. The risks of landslide, severe storms, extreme heat events and wildfire are all affected by climate patterns as well. For this reason, an understanding of climate change is pertinent to efforts to mitigate natural hazards. Information about how climate patterns are changing provides insight on the reliability of future hazard projections used in mitigation analysis. This section summarizes current understandings about climate change in order to provide a context for the recommendation and implementation of hazard mitigation measures. Table 65: Potential Direct and Related Climate Change Impacts in the Operational Area Direct Impacts Related Impacts Rising temperatures  Heat wave  Changes in wind patterns191F 192  Drought  Reduced snowpack  Increased extreme events, including severe storms and wildfires  Shifting human health and disease patterns.  Sea Level Rise  Permanent inundation of previously dry land  Larger area impacted by extreme high tide  Increased coastal erosion  Saltwater intrusion into freshwater systems Changes in precipitation192F 193  Changed seasonal patterns  Flooding  Saturated earth  Reduced snowpack  Drought The links between these climate change indicators and most of the natural and other hazards of concern profiled in this MJHMP are direct but less clear for other hazards as illustrated in Table 66 and discussed later in this section. 192 Columbia Climate School. (2021, January 6). Will Global Warming Bring a Change in the Winds? https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/01/06/westerly-winds-climate-change/ 193 Columbia Climate School. (2021, January 6). Will Global Warming Bring a Change in the Winds? https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/01/06/westerly-winds-climate-change/ 288 PSC 09-12-2024 288 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 209 Table 66: Climate Change Impacts on Natural and Other Hazards Negative Impact on Natural and Other Hazards Climate Change Indicator Natural Hazards Other Da m a n d L e v e e Fa i l u r e Dr o u g h t Ea r t h q u a k e Fl o o d La n d s l i d e In c l e m e n t We a t h e r Ts u n a m i Wi l d f i r e Se a L e v e l R i s e Te r r o r i s m Te c h n o l o g i c a l In c i d e n t s Po w e r O u t a g e s Ep i d e m i c / Pa n d e m i c Fo g Rising temperatures X X X X X X X X X Heat wave X X X X X X X Changes in wind patterns193F 194 X X X X X X X Drought N/A X X X Reduced snowpack X X X Increased extreme events, including severe storms and wildfires X X X N/A X Shifting human health and disease patterns X Sea Level Rise X X X X X N/A X X Changes in precipitation194F 195 X X X X X X X X X Changes in seasonal patterns X X X X X X X X X Flooding X N/A X X X X Saturated earth X X X X X 194 Columbia Climate School. (2021, January 6). Will Global Warming Bring a Change in the Winds? https://news.climate.columbia.edu/2021/01/06/westerly-winds- climate-change/ 289 PSC 09-12-2024 289 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 210 11.2 Responses to Climate Change Communities and governments worldwide are working to address, evaluate and prepare for climate changes that are likely to impact communities in coming decades. Climate change discussions encompass two separate but inter-related considerations: mitigation and adaptation. The term “mitigation” can be confusing because its meaning changes across disciplines:  Mitigation in restoration ecology and related fields generally refers to policies, programs or actions that are intended to reduce or to offset the negative impacts of human activities on natural systems. Mitigation can be understood as avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, reducing, or eliminating, or compensating for known impacts.195F 196  Mitigation in climate change discussions is defined as “reducing emissions of and stabilizing the levels of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.”196F 197 The goal is to stabilize the climate and avoid significant human interference.  Mitigation in emergency management is typically defined as the effort to reduce loss of life and property by lessening the impact of disasters.197F 198 In this section, mitigation is used as defined by the climate change community. In the other sections of this plan, mitigation is primarily used in an emergency management context. The IPCC defines adaptation as “the process of adjustment to actual or expected climate and its effects.” Mitigation and adaptation are related, as the world’s ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will affect the degree of adaptation that will be necessary. Moreover, some initiatives and actions can both reduce greenhouse gas emissions and support adaptation to likely future conditions. The ability to adapt to changing conditions is often referred to as adaptive capacity, which is “the ability of systems, institutions, humans and other organisms to adjust to potential damage, to take advantage of opportunities, or to respond to consequences.”198F 199 Societies across the world are facing the need to adapt to changing conditions and to identify ways to increase their adaptive capacity. Some efforts are already underway. Farmers are altering crops and agricultural methods to deal with changing rainfall and rising temperature; architects and engineers are redesigning buildings; planners are looking at managing water supplies to deal with droughts or flooding. Adaptive capacity goes beyond human systems, as some ecosystems show a remarkable ability to adapt to change and to buffer surrounding areas from the impacts of change. Forests can bind soils and hold large volumes of water during times of plenty, releasing it through the year; floodplains can absorb vast volumes of water during peak flows; coastal ecosystems can hold out against storms, attenuating waves and reducing erosion. Other ecosystem services—such as food provision, timber, materials, medicines, and recreation—can provide a buffer to societies in the face of changing conditions. Ecosystem-based adaptation is the use of biodiversity and ecosystem services as part of an overall strategy to help people adapt to the adverse effects of climate change. This includes the sustainable management, conservation and restoration of specific ecosystems that provide key services. 196 Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.). Types of Mitigation Under CWA Section 404. https://www.epa.gov/cwa- 404/types-mitigation-under-cwa-section-404-avoidance-minimization-and-compensatory- mitigation#:~:text=The%20White%20House%20Council%20on%20Environmental%20Quality%20%28CEQ%29,rectif ying%2C%20reducing%20over%20time%2C%20and%20compensating%20for%20impacts. 197 NASA. (N.D.). Responding to Climate Change. https://climate.nasa.gov/solutions/adaptation-mitigation/ 198 Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2017, November). Fact Sheet, Planning for a Resilient Community. https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_planning -resilient-communities_fact-sheet.pdf 199 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (n.d.). Annex II, Glossary. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WGIIAR5-AnnexII_FINAL.pdf 290 PSC 09-12-2024 290 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 211 One type of mitigation measure that is also important to acknowledge is nature-based solutions (NBS). FEMA defines NBS as sustainable planning, design, environmental management, and engineering practices that weave natural features or processes into the built environment to promote adaptation and resilience199F 200. These actions usually have multiple benefits such as reducing flood risk, reducing urban heat, adding recreation space, protecting nature spaces like shorelines and wetlands, and improving water quality in addition to fighting climate change. They may be more cost-effective than traditional grey infrastructure projects and are often more palatable by the public due to their hard to quantify benefits like additional recreation space, community beautification, increased property values, and better public he alth. The immediacy of some of these benefits can also increase public support for NBS when compared to less clear, long-term benefits of other climate adaptation measures. Many communities within the OA have taken an interest in NBS, also known as green infrastructure, and actively engage in and encourage implementation of NBS separately or in conjunction with traditional infrastructure projects. Further information is included in Volume 2. A coordinated response to climate change is necessary to implement effective risk reduction measures across the OA. Initiatives including the Silicon Valley 2.0 Climate Change Preparedness Tool, the Santa Clara County Climate Collaborative and Climate Resilience Tool, and local climate action and adaptation plans reflect the OA’s commitment to assessing and implementing climate mitigation and adaptation actions. Assessment of the current efforts and adaptive capacity of the planning partners participating in this hazard mitigation plan are included in the jurisdiction-specific Annexes in Volume 2. 11.3 Vulnerability Assessment – Hazards of Concern The following sections provide information on how each identified hazard of concern for this planning process may be impacted by climate change and how these impacts may alter current exposure and vulnerability to these hazards for the people, property, cr itical facilities, and the environment in the OA. 11.3.1 Earthquake Climate Change Impacts on Earthquake Currently, the impact, if any, of climate change on earthquakes is not well understood. “Climate -related stress changes might or might not promote an earthquake to occur, but we have no way of knowing by how much.”200F 201 Some scientists say that melting glaciers could induce tectonic activity. As ice melts and water runs off, tremendous amounts of weight are shifted on the earth’s crust. As newly freed crust returns to its original, pre-glacier shape, it could cause seismic plates to slip and stimulate volcanic activity, according to research into prehistoric earthquakes and volcanic activity. NASA and USGS scientists found that retreating glaciers in southern Alaska may be opening the way for future earthquakes.201F 202 Other researchers are studying whether the stress of alternating periods of drought and heavy precipitation in the Sierra Nevada could potentially be felt on faults in or near the range and whether the increased pumping of groundwater in the Central Valley during times of drought could have an effect on the seismicity on the adjacent San Andreas Fault.202F 203 200 FEMA. (May 2023). Nature-Based Solutions. https://www.fema.gov/emergency-managers/risk- management/nature-based-solutions 201 NASA. (2019, October 29). Can Climate Affect Earthquakes, Or Are the Connections Shaky? https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2926/can-climate-affect-earthquakes-or-are-the-connections-shaky/ 202 NASA. (2004, August 2). Retreating Glaciers Spur Alaskan Earthquakes. https://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2004/jul/HQ_04252_glaciers.html 203 NASA. (2019, October 29). Can Climate Affect Earthquakes, Or Are the Connections Shaky? https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2926/can-climate-affect-earthquakes-or-are-the-connections-shaky/ 291 PSC 09-12-2024 291 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 212 Secondary impacts of earthquakes could be magnified by climate change. Soils saturated by repetitive storms or heavy precipitation could experience liquefaction or an increased propensity for slides during seismic activity due to the increased saturation. Dams storing increased volumes of water due to changes in the hydrograph could fail during seismic events. Exposure, Sensitivity, and Vulnerability Because impacts on the earthquake hazard are not well understood, increases in exposure and vulnerability of the local resources are not able to be determined. In general, everywhere that is susceptible to earthquake-induced liquefaction may be more susceptible if saturated with water due to climate change conditions when an earthquake occurs. 11.3.2 Wildfire Climate Change Impacts on Wildfire Wildfire risk is determined by climate variability, local topography, and human intervention. Climate change has the potential to affect multiple elements of the wildfire system: fire behavior, ignitions, fire management, and vegetation fuels. The frequency of extreme wildfires which burn over 25,000 acres is also expected to increase by nearly 50 percent across the state by 2100 according to the state’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Under both high- and medium-emissions scenarios, the change in acres burned in Santa Clara County is likely to increase until 2050 and then decrease by the end of the century. Fire season for the OA is also expected to begin earlier in the year and last longer 203F 204. The Cal-Adopt projections204F 205 demonstrating how wildfire risk in the areas surrounding the OA is expected to increase over the next century is shown in Table 67. Hot, dry spells create the highest fire risk. Increased temperatures may intensify wildfire risk by warming and drying out vegetation. Changes in climate patterns may impact the distribution and perseverance of insect outbreaks that create dead trees and vegetation, increasing the amount of available fire fuel. Wetter periods followed by a drought can result in increased dry vegetative ready to be burned. When climate alters fuel loads and fuel moisture, forest susceptibility to wildfires changes. Climate change also may increase winds that spread fires. Table 67: Wildfire – Projected Santa Clara County Acres Burned 204 County of Santa Clara Office of Sustainability. (n.d.). Climate Change Projections in Santa Clara County. https://siliconvalleytwopointzero.org/climateprojections/wildfire 205 https://cal-adapt.org/tools/wildfire Baseline (1961–1990) Medium Emissions (RCP 4.5) High Emissions (RCP 8.5) Mid-Century End-Century Mid-Century End-Century 30-year average 6212.0 acres 6848.3 acres 6897.2 acres 6957.8 acres 6613.5 acres 30-year range 6143.0– 6366.3 acres 6512–7295.2 acres 6459.2–7388.5 acres 6570.1–7599.1 acres 6158.9–7378.2 acres 292 PSC 09-12-2024 292 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 213 Exposure, Sensitivity, and Vulnerability Population and Property While previous Cal-Adapt projections showed wildfire risk in the areas surrounding the OA decreasing over the next century, current projections show increased risk to wildfire, with increases in annual acres burned. Table 68 indicates the population and buildings at risk in the moderate, high, and very high FHSZs. Should the risk increase as Cal-Adapt projects, these totals are likely to increase also. WUI fires are an increased concern of the OA. While not all OA residents may experience increased risk to wildfire directly, secondary impacts, such as smoke and poor air quality will impact many more. These impacts are likely to be felt disproportionally. Vulnerable populations, including the elderly, low-income populations, and people with disabilities, will face some of the greatest negative impacts. Long -term impacts to public health, including mental health, will also be important to consider as the frequency and severity of wildfires increase. Table 68: Population and Buildings at Risk – Santa Clara County Moderate FHSZ High FHSZ Very High FHSZ Buildings Population Buildings Population Buildings Population 995 3,714 2,599 9,622 9,547 33,167 Critical Facilities The risk to critical facilities would increase with the overall increased risk of wildfires. Key infrastructure including utilities, water, gas, electric, and communications infrastructure can be damaged during a wildfire. Secondary impacts, like increased power outages, transportation delays or disruptions, and smoke, are also likely to impact the operations of critical facilities. Environment It is possible that the exposure and vulnerability of the environment will be impacted by changes in wildfire risk due to climate change. Natural fire regimes may change, resulting in more frequent or higher intensity burns. While the California ecosystem is adapted to some fire, these types of events and fuel conditions represent risk beyond the norm for the local environment. These changes may alter the composition of the ecosystems in areas in and surrounding the OA including destroying vulnerable fish and wildlife habitats. Economy Recent fires destroyed residences, burned thousands of acres, forced people to evacuate. Costs involved included personal and business losses, lost economic activity, and the cost of containing a wildfire. Seasonal agricultural workers and workers outside on poor air quality days are most likely to experience increased negative impacts or disruptions to their work due to increase wildfire events. Transportation infrastructure could also be impacted. 11.3.3 Inclement Weather Climate Change Impacts on Inclement Weather Climate change presents a challenge for risk management associated with inclement weather. While only slight changes in annual rainfall is expected in the OA, there is an increased risk that this rainfall will occur during an extreme precipitation event. These severe storms will be an essential to replenish fresh water supplies particularly during times of drought however, they may result in increased flooding. The number of weather-related disasters during the 1990s was four times that of the 1950s and led to 14 times as much in economic losses. 293 PSC 09-12-2024 293 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 214 Historically, the County has experienced just two extreme precipitation events per year. Depending on the emissions scenario, the OA is predicted to experience 3-5 events per year by the end of the century.205F 206 The type of inclement weather event may also change. Fewer snow events and additional rain events are predicted. Climate projections such as found in the CMRA tool show an increasing number of days over 95 and over 100 degrees through mid to late century, in both lower and high emission scenarios. Projections also anticipate higher maximum temperatures averaged over a 5 day period, which indicates there may also be extended periods of extreme heat. Extreme cold events are less common in the OA. The Temperature Minimum explorer as part of the ClimRR climate tool, shows the minimum temperature increasing through mid - to end-century. Current projections suggest that climate change may reduce vulnerability to extreme cold in the OA. It is not fully understood how climate change may impact high wind events. Climate change is expected to contribute to more severe weather in the future. However, the Wind Explorer in the ClimRR tool shows little difference in wind miles per hour between mid-and end-century. Further investigation may be needed to fully understand how climate change may impact high winds in the OA. Exposure, Sensitivity, and Vulnerability Population and Property Population and property exposure and vulnerability would be unlikely to increase as a direct result of climate change impacts on the inclement weather hazard. Inclement weather events may occur more frequently, but exposure and vulnerability will remain the same. Secondary impacts, such as the extent of localized flooding, may increase, impacting greater numbers of people and structures. Critical Facilities Critical facility exposure and vulnerability would be unlikely to increase as a result of climate change impacts on the inclement weather hazard; however, critical facility owners and operators may experience more frequent disruption to service provision. For example, more frequent and intense storms may cause more frequent disruptions in power service. Environment Exposure and vulnerability of the environment would be unlikely to increase; however, more frequent storms and heat events and more intense rainfall may place additional stressors on already stressed systems. Economy Climate change impacts on the inclement weather hazard may impact the local economy through more frequent disruption to services, such as power outages. 11.3.4 Drought Climate Change Impacts on Drought Due to a warmer climate, droughts could become more frequent, more severe, and longer lasting. As stated in the National Climate Resilience Toolkit, “higher surface temperatures brought about by global warming increase the potential for drought. Evaporation and the higher rate at which plants lose moisture 206 Santa Clara County. (February 2023) Draft Unincorporated Santa Clara County Climate Vulnerability Assessment. 294 PSC 09-12-2024 294 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 215 through their leaves both increase with temperature. Unless higher evapotranspiration rates are matched by increases in precipitation, environments will tend to dry, promoting drought conditions.206F 207 Drought is one of the most expensive hazards due to its impacts across sectors, particularly the agricultural industry. Valley Water indicates that it poses a severe threat to their normal operations due to the region’s dependency on imported water and increased demand for water across the region. The OA could likely experience what stresses other regions globally have started to experience:  Growing populations  Increased competition for available water  Poor water quality  Environmental claims  Uncertain reserved water rights  Groundwater overdraft  Aging urban water infrastructure California is particularly well-aware of the potential negative impacts of prolonged drought. Until storms in early 2023, the entire state, including the entire OA, was in severe to extreme drought. DWR has noted impacts of climate change on statewide water resources by charting changes in snowpack, sea level, and river flow. As temperatures rise and more precipitation comes in the form of rain instead of snow, these changes will likely continue or grow even more significant. Cal-Adapt indicated in early 2023 that Santa Clara County should expect future April snowpack levels to be reduced by up to 25 inches from the baseline (1961-1990) by 2099.207F 208 These future projections may or may not be adjusted following the area’s recent record-breaking snowpack levels. In addition to snowpack resources, the OA’s water supply is derived from groundwater and surface water resources. Increased incidence of drought may cause a drawdown in groundwater resources without allowing for the opportunity for aquifer recharge. Under the HadGEM-ES simulation, a high-emissions scenario, an extended drought is predicted for California from 2025 –2075.208F 209 Exposure, Sensitivity and Vulnerability Population and Property Population exposure and vulnerability to drought are unlikely to change as a result of climate change given that the entire OA is already exposed to this hazard. Greater numbers of people may need to engage in behavior change, such as water saving efforts, significant life or health impacts are unlikely so long as water supplies can be managed to account for the additional strain. Property exposure and vulnerability may increase as a result of increased drought resulting from climate change, although this would most likely occur in non-structural property such as crops and landscaping. It is unlikely that structure exposure and vulnerability would increase as a direct result of drought, although secondary impacts of drought, such as wildfire, may increase and threaten structures. 207 U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit. (n.d.). Drought. https://toolkit.climate.gov/topics/water/drought#:~:text=Higher%20surface%20temperatures%20brought%20about%2 0by%20global%20warming,environments%20will%20tend%20to%20dry%2C%20promoting%20drought%20condition s. 208 Cal-Adapt. (n.d.). Snowpack. https://cal-adapt.org/tools/snowpack/ 209 Santa Clara County. (February 2023) Draft Unincorporated Santa Clara County Climate Vulnerability Assessment. 295 PSC 09-12-2024 295 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 216 Critical Facilities Critical facility exposure and vulnerability are unlikely to increase as a result of increased drought resulting from climate change; however, critical facility operators may be sensitive to changes and need to alter standard management practices and actively manage resources, particularly in water-related service sectors. Water-related infrastructure may experience disruptions. Environment The vulnerability of the environment may increase as a result of increased drought resulting from climate change. Ecosystems and biodiversity in the Bay Area are already under stress from development and water diversion activities. Prolonged or more frequent drought resulting from climate change may further stress the ecosystems in the region, which include many special status species. Economy Increased incidence of drought could increase the potential for impacts on the local economy including the agricultural and recreational sectors, the wine industry, and related tourism activities. Crop-related losses would be expected to be particularly high given a severe drought. 11.3.5 Dam and Levee Failure Climate Change Impacts on Dam and Levee Failure Dams and levees are engineered barriers designed to retain surface water based on assumptions including information on a river’s flow behavior (depicted on a hydrograph). Safeguards are built into these structures but there is increased risk associated with hazard events that surpass what the impacted dam or levee was designed to withstand. Substantial increases in rainfall or/or snowmelt in an area can have significant effects on the hydrograph used for the design of a dam or levee. If the hydrograph changes, it is conceivable that the dam or levee can lose some or all of its designed margin of safety, also known as freeboard. In the case of dams, if freeboard is reduced, dam operators may be forced to release increased volumes early in a storm cycle in order to maintain the required margins of safety. Such early releases of increased volumes can increase flood potential downstream. According to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), flood flows on many California rivers have been record-setting since the 1950s. This means that water infrastructure, such as dams and levees, have been forced to manage flows for which they were not designed. The California Division of Dam Safety (DSOD) has indicated that climate change may result in the need for increased safety precautions to address higher winter runoff, frequent fluctuations of water levels, and increased potential for sedimentation and debris accumulation from changing erosion patterns and increases in wildfire events. According to the DSOD, climate change also will impact the ability of dam operators to estimate extreme flood events.209F 210 Dams are constructed with safety features known as “spillways.” Spillways are put in place on dams as a safety measure in the event of the reservoir filling too quickly. Spillway overflow events, often referred to as “design failures,” result in increased discharges downstream and increased flooding potential. Although climate change will not increase the probabili ty of catastrophic dam failure, it may increase the probability of design failure. In the case of levees, a reduction in freeboard caused by a changing hydrograph means that a levee may no longer protect an area against the design-storm standard for which it was originally built. This means that risk to the area that a levee is protecting from inundation will increase. 210 California Department of Water Resources. (n.d.). Climate Change Basics. https://water.ca.gov/Water- Basics/Climate-Change-Basics 296 PSC 09-12-2024 296 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 217 Exposure, Sensitivity and Vulnerability Population and Property While the exposure and vulnerability of population and property are unlikely to change significantly as result of climate change alone, the likelihood of failure of water infrastructure (dams and levees) is generally expected to increase because of more frequent exposure to extreme events .210F 211 Dam failures may experience increase overtopping or breaches due to extreme precipitation events, even if the overall precipitation in the OA is expected to decrease. This problem is exacerbated because of the age of many of the dams in the OA and the increasing population living in potential inundation areas. It should be noted that dams, and those levees in the OA that are accredited, are mapped in a FEMA special flood hazard area where flood insurance applies. If a levee loses its accreditation, additional people and property can be considered exposed to increased flood risk. There are a number of ongoing projects in the OA which would impact the existing FEMA flood layers including the Lower Berryessa Flood Protection Project, Permanente Creek Flood Protection Project, Upper Berryessa Creek Flood Protection Project, and Sunnyvale East and West Channels .211F 212 These projects may reduce the local risk to riverine flooding. Critical Facilities Dam owners and operators are sensitive to the risk and may need to alter maintenance and operations to account for changes in the hydrograph and increased sedimentation. Critical facility owners and operators in levee failure inundation areas should always be aware of residual risk from flood events that may overtop the levee system. Environment The exposure and vulnerability of the environment to dam and levee failure may change as a result of climate change. Cascading hazards, as discussed throughout this plan, could have a notable impact on the environment. For example, if there is a long period of drought caused by climate change prior to a dam failure, it could reduce the land’s ability to hold water resulting in increased runoff and damage. Such a scenario could result in additional disaster events, such as landslides and mudslides. Ecosystem services may be used to mitigate some factors that could increase the risk of design failures, such as increasing the natural water storage capacity in watersheds above dams. The use of nature-based solutions or green stormwater infrastructure systems could also help with stormwater collection around the dam. Economy Changes in the dam failure hazard related to climate change may affect the local economy. More frequent flooding events due to dam failure would negatively impact the local economy. Economic impacts may also result from changes to the levee failure hazard if accreditation is lost. 11.3.6 Flood Climate Change Impacts on Flood Climate change is expected to impact both precipitation-driven riverine and surface flooding as well as coastal flooding in the OA. High frequency flood events (e.g., 10-year floods) in particular will likely 211 Mallakpour, I., AghaKouchak, A., & Sadegh, M. (2019). Climate ‐induced changes in the risk of hydrological failure of major dams in California. Geophysical Research Letters. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1029/2018GL081888 212 Silicon Valley 2.0. Memorandum SV2.0 Tool Update – Flood Hazar Layer Map Updates. (June 2021). https://siliconvalleytwopointzero.org/downloads/SiliconValley2.0_Flood-Hazard-Layer-Map-Update-Memo.pdf 297 PSC 09-12-2024 297 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 218 increase with a changing climate. What is currently considered a 1-percent-annual-chance (100-year flood) also may strike more often, leaving many communities at greater risk. Climate change is already impacting water resources, and resource managers have observed the following:  Historical hydrologic patterns can no longer be solely relied upon to forecast the water future.  Precipitation and runoff patterns are changing, increasing the uncertainty for water supply and quality, flood management and ecosystem functions.  Extreme climatic events will become more frequent, necessitating improvement in flood protection, drought preparedness and emergency response. The amount of snow is critical for water supply and environmental needs, but so too is the timing of snowmelt runoff into rivers and streams. Rising snowlines caused by climate change will allow more mountain areas, such as the Sierra Nevada watersheds, to contribute to peak storm runoff. Changes in watershed vegetation and soil moisture conditions will likewise change runoff and recharge patterns. As stream flows and velocities change, erosion patterns will also change, altering channel shapes and depths, possibly increasing sedimentation behind dams, and affecting habitat and water quality. Intense dry periods followed by wet periods will result in additional flooding. With potential increases in the frequency and intensity of wildfires due to climate change, there is potential for more floods following fire, which increase sediment loads and water quality impacts. Use of historical hydrologic data has long been the standard of practice for designing and operating water supply and flood protection projects. For example, historical data are used for flood forecasting models and to forecast snowmelt runoff for water supply. This method of forecasting assumes that the climate of the future will be similar to that of the period of historical record. However, the hydrologic record cannot be used to predict changes in frequency and severity of extreme climate events such as floods. Scientists project greater storm intensity with climate change, resulting in more direct runoff and flooding. Going forward, model calibration must happen more frequently, new forecast-based tools must be developed, and a standard of practice that explicitly considers climate change must be adopted. Exposure, Sensitivity, and Vulnerability Population and Property Population and property exposure and vulnerability may increase as a result of climate change impacts on the flood hazard. Runoff patterns may change, resulting in flooding in areas where it has not previously occurred. People experiencing homelessness are particularly susceptible to the impacts of climate change, including flooding. Critical Facilities Critical facility exposure and vulnerability may increase as a result of climate change impacts on the flood hazard. Runoff patterns may change, resulting in risk to facilities that have not historically been at risk from flooding. Additionally, changes in the management and design of flood protection for critical facilities may be needed as additional stress is placed on these systems. Planners will need to factor a new level of safety into the design, operation, and regulation of flood protection facilities such as dams, bypass channels and levees, as well as the design of local sewers and storm drains. Environment The exposure and vulnerability of the environment may increase as a result of climate change impacts on the flood hazard. Changes in the timing and frequency of flood events may have broader ecosystem impacts that alter the ability of already stressed species to survive. The destruction due to fire or sea level rise of habitats with important flood protection ability may impact the vulnerability of the OA. 298 PSC 09-12-2024 298 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 219 Economy If flooding becomes more frequent, there may be impacts on the local economy. More resources may need to be directed to response and recovery efforts, and businesses may need to close more frequently due to loss of service or access during flood events. Flood damage to essential utilities will also present a major concern for the local economy. 11.3.7 Landslide Climate Change Impacts on Landslide Climate change may impact storm patterns, increasing the probability of more frequent, intense storms with varying duration. Increase in global temperature is likely to affect the snowpack and its ability to hold and store water. Warming temperatures also could increase the occurrence and duration of droughts, which would increase the probability of wildfire, reducing the vegetation that helps to support steep slopes. All of these factors would increase the probability for landslide and/or mudslide occurrences. Exposure, Sensitivity, and Vulnerability Population and Property Population and property exposure and vulnerability would be unlikely to increase as a result of climate change impacts on the landslide hazard. Landslide events may occur more frequently, but the extent and location should be contained within mapped hazard areas or recently burned areas. Critical Facilities Critical facility exposure and vulnerability would be unlikely to increase as a result of climate change impacts on the landslide hazard; however, critical facility owners and operators may experience more frequent disruption to service provision as a result of landslide hazards. For example, transportation systems may experience more frequent delays if slides blocking these systems occur more frequently. Towers supporting power lines and bridges could also collapse during a landslide event. In addition, increased sedimentation resulting from landslides may negatively impact flood control facilities, such as dams and levees. Environment Exposure and vulnerability of the environment would be unlikely to increase as a result of climate change, but more frequent slides in river systems may impact water quality and have negative impacts on stressed species. Economy Changes to the landslide hazard resulting from climate change are unlikely to result in significant impacts on the local economy. The economy of the OA is considered to be highly adaptive to landslide risk. 11.3.8 Tsunami Climate Change Impacts on Tsunami The impacts of global climate change on tsunami probability are unknown. Some scientists say that melting glaciers could induce tectonic activity, inducing earthquakes, which could result in tsunamis. Other scientists have indicated that underwater avalanches (also caused by melting glaciers), may also result in additional tsunamis. Even if climate change does not increase the frequency with which tsunamis occur, it may result in more destructive waves. As sea levels continue to rise, tsunami inundation areas would likely reach further into communities than current mapping indicates. 299 PSC 09-12-2024 299 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 220 Exposure, Sensitivity, and Vulnerability As land area likely to be inundated by tsunami waves increases, exposure and vulnerability to the tsunami hazard may increase for population, property, critical facilities, and the environment. Changes to the tsunami hazard from climate change may result in more direct economic impacts on a greater number of businesses and economic centers, as well as the infrastructure systems that support those businesses. Population and Property The population and property identified in the tsunami inundation areas are mostly likely to experience the most detrimental impacts of a tsunami event. This area is described in Figure 61. While most of the OA is unlikely to experience these impacts, vulnerable populations are at the highest risk of these impacts, including the homeless, elderly, children, and even the historically underserved communities. Based on the National Structure Inventory, 14 commercial buildings and 2 industrial buildings are potentially vulnerable to tsunami. A tsunami has the potential to cause over $6 million in damages to these buildings. If sea level rise increases the tsunami inundation area, then the population and property at risk will increase. Critical Facilities The risk to critical facilities would be similar to that of the flood risk. Key infrastructure including utilities, water, gas, electric, and communications infrastructure can be damaged during a tsunami. Destructive waves can damage buildings, homes, and businesses. Severe flooding, and other impacts, like power outages, transportation disruptions, are also likely to impact the operations of critical facilities. Environment A tsunami has the potential to cause detrimental impacts on the OA’s environment. This may include uprooted trees and plants and destroyed animal habitats such as nesting sites for birds. Tsunami’s may result in the disappearance or abrupt erosion of beaches. During a tsunami event hazardous material infrastructure and pipelines may become damaged, causing the contamination of the environment with oil, raw sewage, and poisonous pollutants. Economy The cost of repair after a tsunami can impacts the economy. The tourism industry may be impacted as historic coastal properties and popular coastal businesses are damaged. Critical facilities and other important assets may be damaged by temporary inundation, resulting in loss of services such as power or wastewater treatment. Local tax revenue may decline as areas that were previously occupied by houses and businesses that may permanently close or have difficulty repairing. 11.3.9 Extreme Temperatures Climate Change Impacts on Extreme Temperatures Extreme temperatures are a serious consequence of climate change. Extreme heat is of particular concern to the OA. Climate change is expected to bring longer, more frequent, and more severe extreme heat events to the region.212F 213 By 2100, the area can expect 6 to 10 heat waves a year. Also, by the end of the century according to a medium emissions model, there will also be an estimated 2 -44 days per year 213 County of Santa Clara Office of Sustainability. (N.D.). Climate Change Projections in Santa Clara County – Extreme Heat. https://siliconvalleytwopointzero.org/climateprojections/extremeheat 300 PSC 09-12-2024 300 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 221 defined as extreme heat days – or days where the maximum temperature is above 92.7 °F.213F 214 Extreme heat days followed by warm nights are dangerous because they don’t allow time for the population, landscapes, and the built environment to cool off. This can result in increased mortality, health issues, and wildfire risk. Exposure, Sensitivity and Vulnerability Population and Property Extreme temperature days can directly harm human health. While flooding is the most common natural disaster, extreme temperatures are the deadliest. Extreme heat can result in a variety of heat -related illness from mild heat stress to fatal heat stroke. Mental health stress and other illnesses can also increase. Vulnerable populations, including the elderly, children, and people with pre-existing conditions will be disproportionally impacted by extreme heat. Soc ietally inequities, such as the distribution of minority populations in areas more exposed to the urban heat island effect, can be exasperated by extreme heat conditions. Critical Facilities The impacts to critical facilities from extreme heat can range from barely noticeable to profound. More and more the value of using building materials that can reduce or withstand the impacts of extreme temperatures is being acknowledged. When building materials are pushed beyond their temperature thresholds, they are at risk of failure. Transportation infrastructure may also be damaged or destroyed, including asphalt, rail tracks, and cars. There is increased demand on energy utilities as the need for air conditioning rises. Back-up generators or alternative cooling methods such as community resilience hubs may be necessary if power supplies are insufficient to cool the community. Environment Extreme temperatures, especially hotter temperatures, can wreak havoc on unprepared ecosystems. They are responsible for reducing biodiversity, resulting in numerous species death. Water supplies are also strained during extreme temperature events. Climate change also alters the range, biogeography, and growth of microbes which could result in additional foodborne and waterborne illnesses .214F 215 Economy The economy will be impacted by the increase in extreme heat days. Extreme heat is associated with loss of productivity, increased chances of mortality, and increased of a workplace accident. A study from UCLA found that workers comp claims occurred more frequently on hotter days for both indoor and outdoor workers. An estimated 15,000 injuries occur per year in California and the financial cost may be between $750 million to $1.25 billion per year.215F 216 It also costs power more to maintain normal operations, such as keep the air conditioning running in an office. Some industries, such as construction, simply may not be able to function in too hot an environment. Research indicates that overall, economic growth declines and crop yields drop during periods of extreme heat. 214 Cal-Adapt. (N.D.) Extreme Heat Days & Warm Nights. https://cal-adapt.org/tools/extreme-heat/ 215 California Department of Public Health. (February 2017). Climate Change and Health Profile Report Santa Clara County. https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/OHE/CDPH%20Document%20Library/CHPRs/CHPR085SantaClara_County2 - 23-17.pdf 216 UCLA Luskin. (June 2021). High Temperatures Increase Workers’ Injury Risk Whether They’re Outdoors or Inside. https://luskin.ucla.edu/high-temperatures-increase-workers-injury-risk-whether-theyre-outdoors-or- inside#:~:text=A%20UCLA%20study%20published%20today%20shows%20that%20hot,from%20California%E2%80 %99s%20workers%E2%80%99%20compensation%20system%2C%20the%20nation%E2%80%99s%20largest. 301 PSC 09-12-2024 301 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 222 11.3.10 Sea Level Rise Climate Change Impacts on Sea Level Rise In addition to impacts on the identified hazards of concern, climate change presents risks related to sea level rise. Sea lev el rise will cause currently dry areas to be permanently inundated. The scope of temporary inundation from extreme tide events and storm surge also will also expand. Within the OA, the cities of Palo Alto, Mountain View, Sunnyvale, Milpitas, and San José are expected to experience t he most impacts from sea level rise.216F 217 Multiple possible sea level rise scenarios are presented in Table 69. Although the exact extent and timing of sea level rise is still uncertain, assessing potential areas at risk provides important information appropriate for planning purposes. Table 69: Silicon Valley 2.0 Santa Clara County Sea Level Rise Projections and Inundation Layers SV 2.0 Tool Scenarios OPC 2018 Projections Permanent Sea Level Rise 100-year Storm Surge (+47”) Timeframe Scenario Risk Tolerance Projection (in) Inundation Layer Used in Tool (in) Projection (in) Inundation Layer Used in Tool (in) Baseline Current n/a 0 none 47 48 Mid-Century Medium Top of likely range 13.2 12 60.2 66 High 1 in 200 22.8 24 69.8 66 Late-Century Medium Top of likely range 40.8 36 87.8 84 Medium-High 1 in 20 52.8 52 99.8 96 High 1 in 200 82.8 84 129.8 131 217 County of Santa Clara Office of Sustainability. (n.d.). Climate Change Projections in Santa Clara County. https://siliconvalleytwopointzero.org/climateprojections/slr 302 PSC 09-12-2024 302 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 223 Exposure, Sensitivity, and Vulnerability The following assessment was conducted using data provided by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. A sea level rise of 48 inches above current mean higher high water was assumed. Population Sea level rise will increase the population exposed to both permanent and temporary inundation. Currently, approximately 0.94 percent of the OA population is estimated to reside in areas subject to sea level rise impacts. The vast majority of these individuals reside in Palo Alto. Table 70 shows exposed population by jurisdiction. Table 70: Estimated Population Residing in Sea Level Rise Inundation Areas Jurisdiction Estimated Population Estimated Population Exposed % of Population Exposed Campbell 43,442 0 0.0% Cupertino 60,646 0 0.0% Gilroy 59,472 0 0.0% Los Altos 31,809 0 0.0% Los Altos Hills 8,452 0 0.0% Los Gatos 33,526 0 0.0% Milpitas 80,248 0 0.0% Monte Sereno 3,450 0 0.0% Morgan Hill 45,037 0 0.0% Mountain View 82,097 60 0.07% Palo Alto 68,523 9,373 13.68% San José 1,014,125 6,275 0.62% Santa Clara (city) 127,608 0 0.0% Saratoga 31,039 0 0.0% Sunnyvale 154,808 2,421 1.56% Unincorporated County 90,253 36 0.04% Total 1,934,535 18,165 0.94% Property The majority of losses from sea level rise are related to residential structures, closely followed by commercial and industrial. The majority of these assets are in Sunnyvale, San José, and Palo Alto. 303 PSC 09-12-2024 303 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 224 Table 71: Structure Type in Sea Level Rise Inundation Areas Jurisdiction Residential Commercial Industrial Agricultural Religious Government Education Total Campbell $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Cupertino $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Gilroy $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Los Altos $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Los Altos Hills $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Los Gatos $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Milpitas $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Monte Sereno $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Morgan Hill $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Mountain View $0 $128,886,000 $83,412,000 $1,034,000 $836,000 $6,966,000 $18,923,000 $240,057,000 Palo Alto $1,415,492,000 $525,812,000 $209,418,000 $4,075,000 $21,582,000 $15,911,000 $206,524,000 $2,398,814,000 San José $489,324,000 $562,847,000 $634,429,000 $4,243,000 $47,844,000 $13,429,000 $16,031,000 $1,768,147,000 Santa Clara (city) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Saratoga $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Sunnyvale $314,344,000 $755,253,000 $774,439,000 $377,000 $238,000 $5,129,000 $0 $1,849,780,000 Unincorporated County $0 $998,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $998,000.00 Total $2,219,160,000 $1,973,796,000 $1,701,698,000 $9,729,000 $70,500,000 $41,435,000 $241,478,000 $6,257,796,000 304 PSC 09-12-2024 304 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 225 Table 72: Structure and Contents Value in Sea Level Rise Inundation Areas Jurisdiction Structures Exposed Estimated Value of Exposed Structures Estimated Value of Exposed Contents Estimated Total Value % of Total Replacement Value Campbell 0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% Cupertino 0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% Gilroy 0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% Los Altos 0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% Los Altos Hills 0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% Los Gatos 0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% Milpitas 635 $468,554,661 $386,407,648 $854,962,309 4.5% Monte Sereno 0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% Morgan Hill 0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% Mountain View 102 $1,012,240,021 $1,110,560,396 $2,122,800,417 8.5% Palo Alto 4,014 $2,069,879,805 $1,642,022,511 $3,711,902,316 14.4% San José 912 $2,573,152,965 $2,275,265,284 $4,848,418,248 2.3% Santa Clara (city) 450 $1,273,778,027 $1,228,024,465 $2,501,802,492 5.8% Saratoga 0 $0 $0 $0 0.0% Sunnyvale 355 $2,632,745,163 $3,074,816,827 $5,707,561,990 13.3% Table 73: Structure and Contents Value in Sea Level Rise Inundation Areas, Unincorporated Santa Clara County Jurisdiction Structures Exposed Estimated Value of Exposed Structures Estimated Value of Exposed Contents Estimated Total Value Unincorporated County 1 $262,260 $131,130 $393,390 County + All Cities 6,469 $10,030,612,900 $9,717,228,260 $19,747,841,162 Critical Facilities There are 72 critical facilities located in OA areas subject to impacts from sea level rise. 305 PSC 09-12-2024 305 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 226 Table 74: Critical Facilities in Sea Level Rise Inundation Areas Jurisdiction Essential Facilities Transportation Utilities Community Assets Hazardous Materials Total Campbell 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cupertino 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gilroy 0 0 0 0 0 0 Los Altos 0 0 0 0 0 0 Los Altos Hills 0 0 0 0 0 0 Los Gatos 0 0 0 0 0 0 Milpitas 0 0 0 0 0 0 Monte Sereno 0 0 0 0 0 0 Morgan Hill 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mountain View 1 0 0 1 2 3 Palo Alto 9 12 3 5 9 29 San José 2 7 1 5 7 20 Santa Clara (city) 0 1 0 0 0 1 Saratoga 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sunnyvale 1 2 0 1 11 14 Unincorporated County 0 0 0 1 0 1 Total 13 26 4 13 29 72 Environment All sea level rise inundation areas are exposed and vulnerable to impacts. Important coastal habitat may be lost as sea level rise permanently inundates areas, or it may be damaged due to extreme tide and storm surge events. Saltwater intrusion into freshwater resources may occur, further altering habitat and ecosystems and threatening the water supply. Protective ecosystem services may be lost as land area and wetlands are permanently inundated. Economy Sea level rise will impact the local economy. The tourism industry may be impacted as historic coastal properties are inundated. Critical facilities and other important assets may be damaged by temporary inundation, resulting in loss of services such as power or wastewater treatment. Coastal businesses may relocate to other areas rather than face high costs from increased risk of storm surge and costs associated with managed retreat. Local tax revenue may decline as areas that were previously occupied by ho uses and businesses are permanently inundated. Future Development The land area of the OA will be reduced as sea level rise permanently inundates areas. This will have significant impacts on land use and planning in local communities. Local General Plans in the OA will guide this future development. 306 PSC 09-12-2024 306 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 227 11.4 Issues This assessment of climate change led to identification of the following issues throughout the Santa Clara County OA:  Planning for climate change related impacts can be difficult due to inherent uncertainties in projection methodologies.  Average temperatures are expected to continue to increase in the OA, which may lead to a host of primary and secondary impacts, such as an increased incidence of heat waves.  Expected changes in precipitation patterns are still poorly understood and could have significant impacts on the water supply and flooding in the OA.  Some impacts of climate change are poorly understood such as potential impacts on the frequency and severity of earthquakes, thunderstorms, and tsunamis.  Heavy rain events may result in inland stormwater flooding after stormwater management systems are overwhelmed.  Permanent and temporary inundation resulting from sea level rise has the potential to impact significant portions of the population and assets in the OA. Table 75: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Climate Change Subject Ranking Impacts/Climate Change Public Minimal to Severe Residents across the OA will be impacted by climate change. Noticeable impacts will include changes in temperature, increased frequency and severity of natural hazards, and the permanent inundation of part of the community due to sea level rise. Even residents outside of areas immediately impacted by hazard events will experience secondary effects such as smoke, a reduction in air quality, disruption of services, and transportation delays or disruptions. Responders Minimal to moderate Responders will be relied upon when a disaster event occurs. They may need to consider climate change and the changing likelihood of future events when allocating resources towards certain hazards. However, overall, since climate change is a long-term challenge with occurs over many years, there is unlikely to be significant changes needed to responder’s immediate response and recovery efforts. Continuity of Operations (including continued delivery of services) Minimal to Severe The impacts on continuity of operations depends largely on facility and critical infrastructure location, hazard location, frequency, and severity, and human interference. Certain types of infrastructure, such as wastewater treatment plants which could be inundated by sea level rise or power utilities in high-risk wildfire areas, are more likely to be disrupted or destroyed. Delivery of services may also be slowed or stopped in impacted areas. Since climate change occurs over time, there is the opportunity for at-risk facilities and organizations to develop continuity of operations plans which address the increased risks associated with climate change. Property, Facilities, and Infrastructure Minimal to Severe The localized impact to properties, facilities, and infrastructure could be severe. Sea level rise impact estimates are one of the best examples of how climate change could directly relate to the complete loss of property, facilities, and infrastructure. Increased frequency and severity of other hazard events will likely result in damage, destruction, or disturbances to other structures and infrastructure across the OA. 307 PSC 09-12-2024 307 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 11: Climate Change 228 Subject Ranking Impacts/Climate Change Environment Minimal to Severe California’s ecosystem has adapted to some of the impacts of climate change including wildfires. However, the increased frequency and severity of hazard events could strain the adaptative capacity of an ecosystem already stressed by increased human development. Climate change could result in changes to the watershed, water supply, destroy or damage fish and wildlife habitats, destroy crucial flood protective habitats near the ocean, and increase the spread of invasive spices and the death of trees and vegetation. Economic Conditions Minimal to Severe Climate change may impact the local economy in multiple different ways. Increased severe hazards events will test the financial resilience of the OA. Certain sectors, including agriculture and tourism, are likely to experience the worse impacts of climate change. Disturbances to transportation, communication, power, and water infrastructure due to climate change can also have a significant impact on the economy. Impacts largely depend on how effectively the population and built environment can respond to changing climate conditions. Public Confidence in the Government Minimal to Severe Climate change is at the forefront of the national discussion on natural disasters. The public often has intense opinions on the subject. In general, climate change adaptation measures are widely supported in the OA. Solutions which consider short-term benefits, such as planting trees which increase shade and enhance the community’s curb appeal while at the same time reducing the urban heat island effect, are likely to be the most supported. Consistent messaging, accurate and timely public information, and clear reasoning for climate change adaptation measures will increase public’s confidence in the government. 308 PSC 09-12-2024 308 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 229 12 Dam and Levee Failure Definitions  Dam: Any artificial barrier, together with appurtenant works, which does or may impound or divert water, and which is or will be either 25 feet or more in height from the natural bed of the stream or watercourse at the downstream toe of the barrier, as determined by the department, or from the lowest elevation of the outside limit of the barrier, as determined by the department, if it is not across a stream channel or watercourse, to the maximum possible water storage elevation or has or will have an impounding capacity of 50 acre-feet or more.40  Levee: A man-made structure, usually an earthen embankment, designed and constructed to prevent inland flooding from major storm events and extreme water levels.  Emergency Action Plan: A formal document that identifies potential emergency conditions at a dam and specifies actions to be followed to minimize property damage and loss of life. It contains procedures and information to help the dam owner issue early warning and notification m essages and inundation maps to show emergency management authorities the critical areas for action in case of an emergency.  High Hazard Dam: Dams where failure or improper operation will probably cause loss of at least one human life.  Extremely High Hazard Dam: California’s Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD) has classified some High Hazard Dams as Extremely High Dams. These are expected to cause considerable loss of human life or would result in an inundation area with a population of 1,000 or more. 12.1 General Background Dams and levees are designed to mitigate flood events but sometimes floods larger than the estimated risk occur which can cause a partial or total failure. Other causes of dam and levee failure vary. 12.2 Causes of Dam and Levee Failure A dam failure occurs when the barrier constructed does not obstruct or restrain water as designed, which can rapidly result in a large area of completely inundated land. Levees, though similar, are embankments built to prevent the overflow of a river or stream. 12.2.1 Causes of Dam Failure Dam failures can be catastrophic to human life and property downstream. Dam failures in the United States typically occur in one of four ways:  Overtopping of the primary dam structure, which accounts for 34 percent of all dam failures, can occur due to inadequate spillway design, settlement of the dam crest, blockage of spillways, and other factors.  Foundation defects due to differential settlement, slides, slope instability, uplift pressures, and foundation seepage can also cause dam failure. These account for 30 percent of all dam failures.  Failure due to piping and seepage accounts for 20 percent of all failures. These are caused by internal erosion due to piping and seepage, erosion along hydraulic structures such as spillways, erosion due to animal burrows, and cracks in the dam structure. 309 PSC 09-12-2024 309 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 230  Failure due to problems with conduits and valves, typically caused by the piping of embankment material into conduits through joints or cracks, constitutes 10 percent of all failures. The remaining six percent of U.S. dam failures are due to miscellaneous causes. Many dam failures in the United States have been secondary results of other disasters. The prominent causes are earthquakes, landslides, extreme storms, massive snowmelt, equipment malfunction, structural damage, foundation failures, and sabotage. The most likely disaster-related causes of dam failure in the OA are earthquakes, excessive rainfall, and landslides. Poor construction, lack of maintenance and repair, and deficient operational procedures are preventable or correctable by a program of regular inspections. Terrorism and vandalism are serious concerns that all operators of public facilities must plan for; these threats are under continuous review by public safety agencies. 12.2.2 Causes of Levee Failure A levee breach occurs when part of a levee gives way, creating an opening through which floodwaters may pass. A breach may occur gradually or suddenly. The most dangerous breaches happen quickly during periods of high water. The resulting torrent can quick ly swamp a large area behind the failed levee with little or no warning. When a levee system fails or is overtopped, severe flood damage can occur. Earthen levees can be damaged in several ways. Strong river currents and waves can erode the surface. Trees growing on a levee can blow over, leaving a hole where the root wad and soil used to be. Burrowing animals, such as the California ground squirrel, the salt marsh harvest mouse, or the western burrowing owl can create holes that enable water to pass through a levee. If severe enough, any of these situations can lead to a zone of weakness that could cause a levee breach. In seismically active areas, earthquakes and ground shaking can cause a loss of soil strength, weakening a levee and possibly resulting in failure. Seismic activity can also cause levees to slide or slump, both of which can lead to failure. No levee provides protection from events for which it was not designed, and levees require maintenance to continue to provide the level of protection they were designed and built to offer. Maintenance responsibility belongs to a variety of entities including local, state, and federal government and private landowners. 12.3 Hazard Profiles Levees and dams serve different purposes. Though both can be made with the same materials, their relationship to water is different. Levees run parallel to water while dams lie across. A levee ’s primary focus is to reduce flood risk and protect life and property. Dams also serve risk management functions but deliver other infrastructure benefits for communities and industry. The aging dam infrastructure in the OA is notable. Table 76 shows that the Lake Ranch Dam was built in 1877 and ten dams were built in the 1930s. 12.3.1 Past Dam Failure Events According to the 2018 State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, there have been ten dam failures in the state since 1950. The most recent dam emergency occurred in February 2017 at Oroville Dam in northern California’s Butte County when it was on the verge of overflow. The concrete spillway was damaged by erosion and a massive hole developed. The auxiliary spillway was used to prevent overtopping of the dam and it experiences erosion problems also. Evacuation orders were issued out of concern about a potential large uncontrolled release of water from Lake Oroville. Such a release was ultimately prevented, and evacuees returned to their homes. 310 PSC 09-12-2024 310 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 231 Table 76: Dams Classified as a High Hazard or an Extremely High Hazard Risk 217F 218, 218F 219 Name National ID # Hazard Class Owner Dam Type Dam Height (feet) Crest Length (feet) Reservoir Capacity (acre- feet) Year Built Inundation Map Closest City Almaden CA00289 Extremely High SCVWD Earth 110 500 2,000 1936 Yes San José Almaden Valley CA00661 High San José Water Co. Earth 38 1,100 27 1955 Yes San José Austrian 622.013 Extremely High San José Water Co. Earth 185 700 6,200 1950 Yes Los Gatos Calero 72.003 Extremely High SCVWD Earth 90 840 9,850 1935 Yes San José Cherry Flat CA00158 Extremely High City of San José Earth 60 230 500 1936 Yes San José Coyote CA00287 Extremely High SCVWD Earth and Rock 140 980 22,541 1936 Yes Gilroy Coyote Percolation (Steel flashboard dam being replaced with an inflatable rubber dam) CA00286 High SCVWD Steel Flashboard 24 204 72 1934 Yes San José DeBell CA00686 High City of Gilroy Earth 53 580 120 1952 Yes Gilroy Ed R. Levin CA00890 Extremely High County of Santa Clara Earth 38 470 150 1968 Yes Milpitas Elmer J. Chesbro CA00806 Extremely High SCVWD Earth and Rock 95 690 8,086 1955 Yes Morgan Hill 218 National Inventory of Dams. (n.d.). Dams of the Nation. https://nid.sec.usace.army.mil/#/ 219 California Department of Water Resources. (n.d.). California Dam Breach Inundation Maps. https://fmds.water.ca.gov/maps/damim/ 311 PSC 09-12-2024 311 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 232 Name National ID # Hazard Class Owner Dam Type Dam Height (feet) Crest Length (feet) Reservoir Capacity (acre- feet) Year Built Inundation Map Closest City Felt Lake CA00670 Extremely High Stanford University Board of Trustees Earth 67 590 900 1930 Yes Palo Alto Foothill Park CA00868 High City of Palo Alto Earth 86 600 67 1988 Yes Palo Alto Guadalupe CA00290 Extremely High SCVWD Earth 142 695 3,460 1935 Yes San José Higuera CA00687 Extremely High Wells Fargo Bank Earth 44 525 65 1953 Yes Milpitas James J. Lenihan, “Lexington Reservoir” CA00293 Extremely High SCVWD Earth 208 810 21,430 1953 Yes Los Gatos Kuhn CA00683 Extremely High Private Entity Earth 67 312 85 1947 Yes San José Lake Ranch CA00676 High San José Water Co. Earth 38 160 215 1877 Yes San José Leroy Anderson (inactive) CA00294 Extremely High SCVWD Earth 235 1,430 91,300 1950 Yes Morgan Hill North Fork CA00299 Extremely High Pacheco Pass Water District Earth 100 600 6,150 1939 No Hollister Rinconada Reservoir CA00295 High SCVWD Earth 40 240 46 1969 Yes Campbell Stevens Creek CA00292 Extremely High SCVWD Earth 132 1,080 3,074 1935 Yes Cupertino Uvas CA00807 Extremely High SCVWD Earth 118 1,100 10,000 1957 Yes Morgan Hill Vasona Percolating CA01516 Extremely High SCVWD Earth 34 1,00 410 1935 Yes Los Gatos San Mateo County Dam with an Inundation Area extending into the OA. 312 PSC 09-12-2024 312 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 233 Name National ID # Hazard Class Owner Dam Type Dam Height (feet) Crest Length (feet) Reservoir Capacity (acre- feet) Year Built Inundation Map Closest City Searsville CA00669 Extremely High Stanford Board of Trustees Masonry 68 260 1,840 1890 Yes Palo Alto 313 PSC 09-12-2024 313 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 234 Historically, overtopping caused two of the state’s nine dam failures; the others were caused by seepage or leaks. One failure, the 1963 Baldwin Hills Dam Failure in Los Angeles County, resulted in three deaths because the leak turned into a washout. The historical record indicates that California has had about 45 failures of non-federal dams. The failures occurred for a variety of reasons, the most common being overtopping. Other reasons include shortcomings in the dams or an inadequate assessment of surrounding geomorphologic characteristics. One dam failure event was recorded in the OA in 2017. After a series of slow-moving storms fronts, despite attempts to release water through at outlet at the bottom of the dam, the man-made Anderson Reservoir in Morgan Hill reached its peak capacity and water overtopped Anderson Dam, resulting in flooding downstream along Coyote Creek. The flooding was estimated to have cause $100 million in damages and displaced 14,00 residents219F 220. 12.3.2 Dam Location and Extent According to the USACE National Inventory of Dams (NID), there are 44 regulated dams in the OA (Figure 57). Extremely high hazard dams are indicated in red, high hazard dams are indicated in orange, and dams with a significant hazard are shown in green. Low hazard dams are not mapped. The DSOD has certified all these dams and has designated all of them with a Condition Assessment of “Satisfactory.” In addition, these dams all have the emergency action plan (EAP) required for all dams that do not have a low downstream hazard potential designation220F 221. The EAP requirements include an early warning system and operational procedures that may be used, such as reducing reservoir levels and reducing downstream flows, as well as procedures for notifying affected residents and agencies responsible for emergency management. The Searsville Dam, an Extremely High Hazard Dam located in San Mateo County, has an inundation area that could impact parts of the City of Palo Alto. This dam has been added to Table 76. The Anderson Dam, located three miles east of U.S. 101 in Morgan Hill, was discussed in the 2019 MJHMP but on February 24, 2020, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ordered that Anderson Lake should be drained due to earthquake risk. At the time of writing this update, work on the $576 -million Anderson Dam Seismic Retrofit Project continues. The project is expected to be complete by 2031. Dam Inundation Mapping The most significant issue associated with dam failure involves the potential impact on properties and populations in the inundation zones. As listed in Table 76, all but two of the dams have an approved inundation map. Flooding because of a dam failure would significantly impact these areas. Figure 58 shows dam inundation depth grids within the County. 220 San José Spotlight. (2022, June 1). Valley Water settles with San José residents over 2017 flood. San José flood victims get multimillion-dollar settlement - San José Spotlight (sanjosespotlight.com) 221 California Legislative Information. (n.d.). Water Code, Division 3, Dams and Reservoirs. Chapter 8. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayexpandedbranch.xhtml?tocCode=WAT&division=3.&title=&part= &chapter=&article=&nodetreepath=4 314 PSC 09-12-2024 314 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 235 Figure 58: Location of Dams Impacting Santa Clara County221F 222 222 California Department of Water Resources, Division of Safety of Dams. (n.d.). Dam Breach Inundation Map Web Publisher. https://fmds.water.ca.gov/webgis/?appid=dam_prototype_v2 315 PSC 09-12-2024 315 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 236 Figure 59: Dam Inundation Depth Grids 12.3.3 Levee Location Currently, there are 89 levees listed by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) in Santa Clara County,222F 223 a significant increase from the seven levees listed in 2017. As shown in Figure 59, most of these structures are located in the South San Francisco Bay area. 223 National Levee Database. (n.d.). Levees of the Nation. https://levees.sec.usace.army.mil/#/ 316 PSC 09-12-2024 316 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 237 Figure 60: Levees in Santa Clara County223F 224 The Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) owns and maintains most of these levees. It manages approximately 100 miles of levees in Santa Clara County. About 50 miles provide 100-year flood protection and nearly 18 miles were constructed in partnership with the Corps. Other levee sponsors include U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) (12), the City of Palo Alto (2) Caltrans District 4, and the Alameda County Flood Control District with Santa Clara County (1). Table 77 provides information about levees in the County. Most of the levees have not been screened by the USACE for risk. Of the seven that have been screened, three are considered to be low risk, three are considered moderate risk and one review is labeled “No Verdict.” Of the 89 levees, a total of 14 have been accredited by FEMA and recognized on a Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). One levee is designated as a Provisionally Accredited Levee (PAL). This designation may be used for a levee system that FEMA has previously a ccredited as providing base flood hazard reduction on an effective FIRM, and for which FEMA is awaiting data and/or documentation that will show the levee system is compliant with 44 CFR 65.10. 224 National Levee Database. (n.d.). Levees of the Nation. https://levees.sec.usace.army.mil/#/ 317 PSC 09-12-2024 317 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 238 Table 77: Levees in Santa Clara County 224F 225 FEMA - NFIP/FIRM Information Only listing active levees County Sponsor Total Miles What is Behind the Levee Risk Ac c r e d i t e d Le v e e * US A C E R e h a b * * Levee Name Population Buildings Property Value Coyote Creek, Santa Clara – LB Santa Clara SCVWD 6.72 9,477 1,879 $1.59B Low A A Coyote Creek, Santa Clara – RB Santa Clara SCVWD 4.9 26,188 4,721 $3.47B Moderate A A Coyote Creek, Santa Clara – RB Bypass Alameda, Santa Clara SCVWD 1.67 1,247 21 $219M No Verdict N A Cunningham Flood Detention Facility Certification Project Santa Clara SCVWD 4.32 20,689 3,588 $3.08B Not Screened A N Cunningham Flood Detention Facility Certification Project 2 Santa Clara State 4.5 32,882 6,174 $3.64B Not Screened A N Guadalupe River - LB Santa Clara SCVWD 8.48 30,391 3,364 $3.85B Moderate A A Guadalupe River - RB Santa Clara SCVWD 6.9 24,361 2,335 $3.21B Moderate A A King & Lyons Alameda and Santa Clara Alameda County Flood Control 3.5 3,497 62 $449M Low PAL A Los Gatos Creek Santa Clara Caltrans District 4 .41 92 27 $29.9M Not Screened A N Santa Clara County Levee 1 Alameda, Santa Clara Local 1.33 0 0 0 Not Screened N N 225 National Levee Database. (n.d.). Levees of the Nation. https://levees.sec.usace.army.mil/#/ 318 PSC 09-12-2024 318 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 239 FEMA - NFIP/FIRM Information Only listing active levees County Sponsor Total Miles What is Behind the Levee Risk Ac c r e d i t e d Le v e e * US A C E R e h a b * * Levee Name Population Buildings Property Value Santa Clara County Levee 10 Santa Clara USFWS 0.68 0 1 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 11 Santa Clara USFWS 2.28 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 12 Santa Clara SCVWD 0 0 4 $212M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 13 Santa Clara City of Palo Alto 0.62 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 14 Santa Clara Local 1.06 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 15 Santa Clara SCVWD 1.13 1,632 298 $436M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 16 Santa Clara USFWS 8.66 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 17 Santa Clara SCVWD 1.39 140 21 $248M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 18 Santa Clara USFWS 1.67 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 19 Santa Clara SCVWD 1.42 2,181 727 $450M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 20 Santa Clara SCVWD 0.19 269 89 $134M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 21 Santa Clara SCVWD 1.97 1,512 420 $364M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 22 Santa Clara USFWS 3.24 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 23 Santa Clara SCVWD 1.56 1,722 628 $401M Not Screened N N 319 PSC 09-12-2024 319 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 240 FEMA - NFIP/FIRM Information Only listing active levees County Sponsor Total Miles What is Behind the Levee Risk Ac c r e d i t e d Le v e e * US A C E R e h a b * * Levee Name Population Buildings Property Value Santa Clara County Levee 24 Santa Clara USFWS 1.24 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 25 Santa Clara USFWS 0.43 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 26 Santa Clara SCVWD 2.86 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 27 Santa Clara USFWS 0.66 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 28 Santa Clara SCVWD 4.01 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 29 Santa Clara SCVWD 3.05 5,409 1,719 $1.08B Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 3 San Mateo, Santa Clara SCVWD 7.56 17,748 6,351 $4.45B Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 30 Santa Clara SCVWD 1.31 3,389 750 $628M Not Screened A N Santa Clara County Levee 30.2 Santa Clara - 1.21 4,107 1,315 $777M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 31 Santa Clara USFWS 1.01 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 32 Santa Clara - 0.66 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 33 Santa Clara - 0.11 0 2 $1.09 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 34 Santa Clara USFWS 1.8 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 35 Santa Clara SCVWD 5.7 21,352 715 $6.03B Not Screened A N 320 PSC 09-12-2024 320 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 241 FEMA - NFIP/FIRM Information Only listing active levees County Sponsor Total Miles What is Behind the Levee Risk Ac c r e d i t e d Le v e e * US A C E R e h a b * * Levee Name Population Buildings Property Value Santa Clara County Levee 36 Santa Clara SCVWD 5.19 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 37 Santa Clara SCVWD 2.76 32,113 5,873 $10.6B Not Screened A N Santa Clara County Levee 37 North Santa Clara - 8.89 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 38 Santa Clara SCVWD 3.78 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 4 Santa Clara - 0.08 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 40 Santa Clara SCVWD 1.26 8,031 43 $169M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 41 Santa Clara SCVWD 3.7 2,454 208 $951M Not Screened A N Santa Clara County Levee 42 Santa Clara SCVWD 3.52 11,654 4,092 $2.99B Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 43 Santa Clara SCVWD 0.02 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 44 Santa Clara - 0.26 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 45 Santa Clara SCVWD 3.56 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 46 Santa Clara SCVWD 1.11 5,616 53 $641M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 47 Santa Clara - 0.54 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 48 Santa Clara City of Palo Alto 0.29 865 33 $82M Not Screened N N 321 PSC 09-12-2024 321 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 242 FEMA - NFIP/FIRM Information Only listing active levees County Sponsor Total Miles What is Behind the Levee Risk Ac c r e d i t e d Le v e e * US A C E R e h a b * * Levee Name Population Buildings Property Value Santa Clara County Levee 49 Santa Clara USFWS 0.41 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 5 Santa Clara - 0.21 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 50 Santa Clara - 1.44 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 52 Santa Clara USFWS 2.5 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 53 Santa Clara - 0.03 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 54 Santa Clara SCVWD 1.83 8,645 688 $1.54B Not Screened A N Santa Clara County Levee 55 Santa Clara City of Palo Alto 0.33 2 2 $3.93M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 56 Santa Clara - 0.72 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 57 Santa Clara - 0.36 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 58 Santa Clara - 1.78 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 6 Santa Clara SCVWD 1.51 6,548 1,840 $1.2B Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 61 Santa Clara SCVWD 1.58 2,370 382 $247M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 62 San Benito, Santa Clara SCVWD 2.41 41 14 $24.4M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 64 Santa Clara SCVWD 1.06 50,774 1,610 $10.2B Not Screened N N 322 PSC 09-12-2024 322 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 243 FEMA - NFIP/FIRM Information Only listing active levees County Sponsor Total Miles What is Behind the Levee Risk Ac c r e d i t e d Le v e e * US A C E R e h a b * * Levee Name Population Buildings Property Value Santa Clara County Levee 65 Santa Clara - 1.39 12,714 2,494 $2.6B Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 67 Santa Clara - 0.88 180 48 $82.7M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 7 Santa Clara - 0.2 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 72 Santa Clara SCVWD 0.86 0 5 $2.27M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 73 Santa Clara SCVWD 0.94 475 186 $97.6M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 74 Santa Clara - 0.62 413 128 $63.7M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 75 Santa Clara SCVWD 1.09 181 21 $100M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 79 Santa Clara - 0.87 6,131 1,840 $917M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 8 Santa Clara - 0.56 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 80 Santa Clara - 0.72 47 7 $1.87M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 81 Santa Clara SCVWD 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 82 Santa Clara SCVWD 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 83 San Benito, Santa Clara SCVWD 2.65 149 19 $22.5M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 84 Santa Clara SCVWD 0.54 1,647 759 $253M Not Screened N N 323 PSC 09-12-2024 323 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 244 FEMA - NFIP/FIRM Information Only listing active levees County Sponsor Total Miles What is Behind the Levee Risk Ac c r e d i t e d Le v e e * US A C E R e h a b * * Levee Name Population Buildings Property Value Santa Clara County Levee 85 Santa Clara - 0.87 1,767 551 $246M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 86 Santa Clara SCVWD 1.88 0 0 0 Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 88 Santa Clara SCVWD 0.75 1,517 244 $633M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 89 Santa Clara SCVWD 1.04 9,275 2,261 $1.97B Not Screened A N Santa Clara County Levee 9 Santa Clara SCVWD 3.41 12,080 1,617 $2.79B Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 90 Santa Clara SCVWD 0.81 2,052 344 $191M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 92 Santa Clara SCVWD 0.21 5,982 295 $4224M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 93 Santa Clara - 1.3 13 5 $238M Not Screened N N Santa Clara County Levee 96 Santa Clara - 0.5 273 5 $27.7M Not Screened N N Uvas Creek - LB Santa Clara SCVWD 2.19 14,505 4,377 $1.72B Low A A *Accredited Levee column abbreviations: accredited (A), not accredited (N), and Provisionally Accredited Levee (PAL). **USACE Rehab column abbreviations: active (A) and not active (N). 324 PSC 09-12-2024 324 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 245 12.3.4 Frequency of Dam and Levee Failure Dam and levee failure events are infrequent and usually coincide with events that cause them, such as earthquakes, landslides and excessive rainfall and snowmelt. There is a “residual risk” associated with dams that remains after safeguards have been implemented. The residual risk is associated with events beyond those that the facility was designed to withstand. However, the probability of occurrence of any type of dam failure event is low in today’s regulatory and safety oversight environment. Further information on the impact of climate change on the probability of dam failure is included in Section 11. Probability in OA: Unlikely 12.3.5 Severity FEMA categorizes the downstream hazard potential of a dam into three categories in increasing severity: Low, Significant, and High. The state’s Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD) adds a fourth category of "Extremely High." The OA has dams in all four categories; this plan focuses on the Extremely High Hazard and High Hazard dams. Table 78: Potential Downstream Hazard from Dams225F 226 Hazard Potential Potential Downstream Impacts to Life and Property Number of Dams in the OA Low No probable loss of human life and low economic and environmental losses. Losses are expected to be principally limited to the owner’s property. 13 Significant No probable loss of human life but can cause economic loss, environmental damage, impacts to critical facilities, or other significant impacts. 4 High Expected to cause loss of at least one human life. 6 Extremely High Expected to cause considerable loss of human life or would result in an inundation area with a population of 1,000 or more. 18 12.3.6 Warning Time for Dam Failure EAPs are critical in identifying areas downstream from dams requiring warning and evacuation in the event of dam failure. Warning and evacuation time can dramatically influence the number of persons at risk and the number of fatalities per dam failure. 226 California Department of Water Resources. (2021, September). Downstream Hazard. https://water.ca.gov/- /media/DWR-Website/Web-Pages/Programs/All-Programs/Division-of-Safety-of-Dams/Files/Publications/Division-of- Safety-of-Dams-Definitions-for-Downstream-Hazard-and-Condition-Assessment.pdf 325 PSC 09-12-2024 325 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 246 Advance Warning of Failure Warning time for dam failure varies depending on the cause of the failure. In events of extreme precipitation or massive snowmelt, evacuations can be planned with sufficient time. In the event of a structural failure due to earthquake, there may be no warning time. Time for the Failure to Occur A dam’s structural type also affects warning time. Earthen dams do not tend to fail completely or instantaneously. Once a breach is initiated, discharging water erodes the breach until either the reservoir water is depleted, or the breach resists further erosion. Concrete gravity dams also tend to have a partial breach as one or more monolith sections are forced apart by escaping water. The time of breach formation ranges from a few minutes to a few hours.226F 227 Time after Failure for Notification Time available to notify those in the impacted area will depend on the dam ’s distance from it and the river flow. The warning and protective action process is divided into the following three time periods:  Warning delay time is the period between when a threat is first detected, or when an emergency manager is first notified of the threat and when an emergency manager issues a first alert/warning.  Warning diffusion time is the period after the first alert/warning is issued and the time that people receive that alert/ warning.  Protective action initiation time is the period after people receive the first alert/ warning and when they initiate protective action. In this time period, most people take a range of actions to prepare to implement a protective action and may receive subsequent warning messages.227F 228 Santa Clara County and its planning partners have established protocols for emergency warning and response through the County’s adopted emergency operations plan228F 229. The SCVWD Dam Safety Program maintains the operation of its dams and works with Santa Clara County Emergency Management to provide copies of the most recent dam EAPs and inundation maps and uses this information to plan notification needs for downstream areas in the event of a failure. 12.3.7 Warning Time for Levee Failure As with dam failure, warning time for levee failure depends on the cause of the failure. A levee failure caused by structural failure can be sudden and occur with little to no warning. If heavy rains are impacting a levee system, communities located in the immediate danger zone can be evacuated before a failure occurs. If the levee failure is caused by overtopping, the community may or may not be able to recognize the impending failure and evacuate. If a levee failure occurs suddenly, evacuation may not be possible. 227 Starosolszky, O. and Melder, O.M. (2014, April 23) Hydrology of Disasters: Proceedings of the World Meteorological Organization Technical Conference Held in Geneva, November 1988. https://books.google.com/books?id=DSFpAwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=o nepage&q&f=false 228 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (2019 April 30). A Guide to Public Alerts and Warnings for Dam and Levee Emergencies. https://www.publications.usace.army.mil/Portals/76/Users/182/86/2486/EP%201110-2- 17.pdf?ver=2019-06-20-152050-550 229 Santa Clara County. (2017, January). County of Santa Clara Emergency Operations Plan. Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) - Office of Emergency Management - County of Santa Clara (sccgov.org) 326 PSC 09-12-2024 326 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 247 12.4 Exposure Exposure to the dam failure hazard was assessed by use of GIS spatial analysis, overlaying the inundation areas with data from the underlying population, buildings, and critical facilities. The consistency of the data available to support this risk assessment varied greatly within the OA. The level of analyses varied based on available data. 12.4.1 Population The estimated total population living in the inundation area of an Extremely High Hazard, or a High Hazard dam is 32.17% of the total county population. 12.4.2 Property Table 79 summarizes the estimated property exposure in the inundation area of an Extremely High Hazard or a High Hazard dam. These estimates were determined using a combination of Hazus and GIS data. Table 79: Estimated Exposure and Value of Structures in the Dam Failure Inundation Area Exposure County Total Inundation Area 162.90 square miles Number of Buildings Exposed 168,271 Percentage of Exposed Buildings in the County 31.43% Exposed Value in the County $131,358,283,000 Total Percentage of Exposed Value in the County 34.48% 12.4.3 Environment The environment would be exposed to a number of risks in the event of dam failure. The inundation could introduce many foreign elements into local waterways. This could result in destruction of downstream habitat and could have detrimental effects on many species. 12.5 Vulnerability The vulnerability of people, property, critical facilities , and the environment was evaluated for the combined dam failure inundation area. Countywide summaries are provided below. Change in conditions: no change in vulnerability  Growth in population and building is slow and not concentrated in areas at particular risk to dam failure.  No new dams have been constructed in the OA.  Dams with significant or high hazard potential are required to have an EAP.  Dam safety programs include inspection, maintenance, and ongoing monitoring of dams to ensure stability and proper functioning of dams. 327 PSC 09-12-2024 327 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 248  DSOD and dam owners such as SCVWD periodically undertake special engineering studies to ensure that its dams are compliant with the latest design guidelines and regulations to minimize seismic risks to its dams. • Although vulnerability to dams is not increasing, risk to people and structures in dam inundation remains high. In the unlikely even of a failure, the high volume and velocity of resulting flood waters can have devastating impacts downstream. 12.5.1 Population All populations downstream from dam failures that are incapable of escaping the area within the allowable time period are vulnerable. Those that particularly vulnerable includes the elderly and children, people with medical conditions, people who are visually impaired and/or have vision loss, people with public transportation needs, people with non-visible disabilities, people with limited English proficiency. The vulnerable population also includes those who would not have adequate warning from a television or radio emergency warning system or cell phone alert or people who may unable to get themselves out of the inundation area. The potential for loss of life is affected by the capacity and number of evacuation routes available to populations living in areas of potential inundation. Those who are located closest to the dam would have the least warning time. Table 80 shows the number of households and population within potential dam inundation areas in each city in the OA. These values were obtained using Hazus 6.0 dasymetric census blocks that were within a dam inundation boundary. Table 80: Population in Dam Inundation Area Jurisdiction Population Households Campbell 32,482 13,326 Cupertino 840 284 Gilroy 27,185 7,752 Los Altos 3,242 1,097 Los Altos Hills 0 0 Los Gatos 5,721 2,523 Milpitas 14,242 4,315 Morgan Hill 25,469 8,296 Monte Sereno 0 0 Mountain View 17,931 7,215 Palo Alto 8,200 3,318 San Jose 396,703 137,686 Santa Clara 51,519 18,932 Saratoga 350 111 Sunnyvale 30,143 11,832 Unincorporated 8,955 2,629 Total 622,982 219,316 328 PSC 09-12-2024 328 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 249 12.5.2 Property Vulnerable properties are those closest to the dam inundation area. These properties would experience the largest, most destructive surge of water. Low-lying areas are also vulnerable since they are where the dam waters would collect. Dam inundation areas can be extensive depending on the volume of water contained by the dam. Table 81 shows the value of buildings exposed to potential dam inundation within the OA. This does not take into account any damage functions based on depth of flooding, it is only a summary of building values within the potential inundation zone. 12.5.3 Critical Facilities Typical vulnerabilities of critical facilities impacted by dam failure include road failure with road segments and bridges washed out creating isolation issues., This includes all roads, railroads, and bridges in the path of the dam inundation. Those that are most vulnerable are those that are already in poor condition and would not be able to withstand a large water surge. Utilities such as overhead power lines, cable and phone lines could also be damaged from the rushing water. Other critical facilities buildings can become flooded and inoperable. Loss of these utilities could create additional isolation issues for the inundation areas. Emergency response could also be delayed. The analysis in Santa Clara County shows the following facilities could be impacted by dam failure:  Highway bridges: 352  Rail bridges: 67  Light rail bridges: 6  Light rail facilities: 36  Wastewater treatment facilities: 1  Schools: 158  Fire stations: 24  Hospitals: 7  Communication Facilities: 6  Electric Power Facilities: 7 12.5.4 Environment The environment would be vulnerable to multiple risks in the event of dam failure. The inundation could introduce foreign elements into local waterways, resulting in destruction of downstream habitat and detrimental effects on many species of animals, especially endangered species such as coho salmon. The extent of the vulnerability of the environment is the same as the exposure of the environment. Reservoirs held behind dams affect many ecological aspects of a river. River topography and dynamics depend on a wide range of flows, but rivers below dams often experience long periods of very stable flow conditions or saw-tooth flow patterns caused by releases followed by no releases. Water releases from dams usually contain very little suspended sediment; this can lead to scouring of riverbeds and banks. 329 PSC 09-12-2024 329 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 250 Table 81: Value of Exposed Structures in the Dam Inundation Area by Jurisdiction Jurisdiction Residential Commercial Industrial Agricultural Religious Government Educational Total Campbell $4,338,205,000 $1,534,627,000 $418,973,000 $13,221,000 $90,790,000 $14,829,000 $216,448,000 $6,627,093,000 Cupertino $160,643,000 $6,496,000 $2,027,000 $0 $675,000 $1,054,000 $5,339,000 $176,234,000 Gilroy $2,768,627,000 $1,566,395,000 $507,771,000 $19,205,000 $24,057,000 $66,266,000 $204,184,000 $5,156,505,000 Los Altos $687,482,000 $6,339,000 $12,817,000 $0 $4,831,000 $0 $19,788,000 $731,257,000 Los Altos Hills $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Los Gatos $758,943,000 $615,193,000 $67,764,000 $251,000 $32,366,000 $28,170,000 $107,868,000 $1,610,555,000 Milpitas $1,497,684,000 $626,566,000 $811,058,000 $156,000 $23,605,000 $1,175,000 $31,025,000 $2,991,269,000 Monte Sereno $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Morgan Hill $4,114,421,000 $1,308,828,000 $773,853,000 $17,254,000 $96,415,000 $46,581,000 $161,812,000 $6,519,164,000 Mountain View $2,615,045,000 $1,500,804,000 $562,361,000 $3,282,000 $67,756,000 $19,574,000 $57,915,000 $4,826,737,000 Palo Alto $1,478,921,000 $420,664,000 $27,422,000 $464,000 $5,489,000 $0 $157,677,000 $2,090,637,000 San José $46,073,871,000 $17,490,269,000 $7,035,829,000 $96,030,000 $748,644,000 $925,107,000 $4,665,413,000 $77,035,163,000 Santa Clara (city) $6,161,892,000 $3,784,586,000 $2,203,267,000 $22,795,000 $175,731,000 $44,789,000 $123,534,000 $12,516,594,000 Saratoga $66,875,000 $202,000 $5,927,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $73,004,000 Sunnyvale $4,084,357,000 $1,325,027,000 $745,125,000 $303,000 $36,082,000 $15,642,000 $110,192,000 $6,316,728,000 Unincorporated County $2,183,239,000 $1,458,486,000 $315,766,000 $406,032,000 $40,527,000 $83,070,000 $200,223,000 $4,687,343,000 Total $76,990,205,000 $31,644,482,000 $13,489,960,000 $578,993,000 $1,346,968,000 $1,246,257,000 $6,061,418,000 $131,358,283,000 330 PSC 09-12-2024 330 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 251 12.6 Cascading Hazards Dam and levee failures can lead to cascading hazards including landslides, bank erosion, and destruction of downstream habitat. It could also impact future drought events by releasing stored water resources. 12.7 Regulatory Oversight for Dams Responsibility for dam safety in the OA is distributed among federal agencies, state agencies, the SCVWD and private dam owners. 12.7.1 National Dam Safety Act Potential for catastrophic flooding due to dam failures led to passage of the National Dam Safety Act (Public Law 92-367). The goal of this FEMA-monitored effort is to identify and mitigate the risk of dam failure so as to protect the lives and property of the public. The National Dam Safety Program is a partnership among the states, federal agencies, and other stakeholders that encourages individual and community responsibility for dam safety. Under FEMA ’s leadership, state assistance funds have allowed all participating states to improve their programs through increased inspections, emergency action planning, and purchases of needed equipment. FEMA has also expanded existing and initiated new training programs. Grant assistance from FEMA provides support for improvement of dam safety programs that regulate most of the dams in the United States.229F 230 12.7.2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Dam Safety Program The USACE is responsible for safety inspections of some federal and non-federal dams in the United States that meet size and storage limitations specified in the National Dam Safety Act. The USACE has inventoried dams; surveyed each state and federal agency’s capabilities, practices, and regulations regarding design, construction, operation, and maintenance of dams; and developed guidelines for inspection and evaluation of dam safety.230F 231 12.7.3 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Dam Safety Program The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) cooperates with a large number of federal and state agencies to ensure and promote dam safety. More than 3,000 dams are part of regulated hydroelectric projects in the FERC program. Two-thirds of these are more than 50 years old. As dams age, concern about their safety and integrity grows, so oversight and regular inspection are important. FERC inspects hydroelectric projects on an unscheduled basis to investigate the following:  Potential dam safety problems  Complaints about constructing and operating a project  Safety concerns related to natural disasters  Issues concerning compliance with the terms and conditions of a license 230 Federal Emergency Management Agency. (n.d.). Dam Safety. https://www.fema.gov/emergency-managers/risk- management/dam-safety 231 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (n.d.). Dam Safety Program. https://www.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil- Works/Dam-Safety-Program/ 331 PSC 09-12-2024 331 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 252 Every five years, an independent consulting engineer, approved by the FERC, must inspect and evaluate projects with dams higher than 32.8 feet (10 meters), or with a total storage capacity of more than 2,000 acre-feet. FERC monitors and evaluates seismic research in geographic areas such as California where there are concerns about possibly seismic activity. This information is applied in investigating and performing structural analyses of hydroelectric projects. FERC also evaluates the effects of potential and actual large floods on the safety of dams. During and following floods, FERC visits dams and licensed projects, determines the extent of damage, if any, and directs any necessary studies or remedial measures the licensee must undertake. The FERC publication Engineering Guidelines for the Evaluation of Hydropower Projects (2021) guides the FERC engineering staff and licensees in evaluating dam safety. The publication is frequently revised to reflect current information and methodologies. FERC requires dam licensees to prepare EAPs and conducts training sessions on how to develop and test these plans. The EAPs outline an early warning system if there is an actual or potential sudden release of water from a dam due to failure. The plans include operational procedures that may be used, such as reducing reservoir levels and reducing downstream flows, as well as procedures for notifying affected residents and agencies responsible for emergency management. These plans are frequently updated and evaluated to ensure that everyone knows what to do in emergency situations.231F 232 12.7.4 State of California One of the earliest state regulatory programs was enacted in California in the 1920s. California’s Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD) monitors dam maintenance and safety at the state level. When a new dam is proposed, DSOD engineers and geologists inspect the site and the subsurface. Upon submittal of an application, DSOD reviews the plans and specifications prepared by the owner to ensure that the dam is designed to meet minimum requirements and that the design is appropriate for the known geologic conditions. After approval of the application, DSOD inspects all aspects of the construction to ensure that the work accords with the approved plans and specifications. After construction, DSOD inspects each dam annually to ensure performance as intended and to id entify developing problems. DSOD periodically reviews stability of dams and their major appurtenances in light of improved design approaches, requirements, and new findings regarding earthquake hazards and hydrologic estimates in California.232F 233 Finally, on June 27, 2017, SB 92 required an EAP for all dams that do not have a low downstream hazard potential designation.233F 234 An EAP is a dam owner’s formal plan that identifies potential emergency conditions at a dam and specifies actions to be followed to minimize loss of life and property damage. It includes information that dam owners use to notify local emergency management officials and state an d federal dam safety regulators. The EAPs must do all of the following:  Be based upon an inundation map approved by DWR pursuant to Section 6161 of the state ’s Water Code.  Be developed by the dam’s owner in consultation with any local public safety agency that may be impacted by an incident involving the dam, to the extent a local public safety agency wishes to consult. 232 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. (2015, July). Chapter VI, Emergency Action Plans. https://cmsstage.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-04/chap6.pdf 233 California Department of Water Resources. (2021, June 1). Dam Safety and the Importance of the Division of Safety of Dams with Andy Mangney. https://water.ca.gov/News/Blog/2020/June/DSOD-Andy-Mangney- QA#:~:text=DSOD%20also%20conducts%20independent%20reviews%20of%20applications%20for,in%20light%20of %20improved%20design%20approaches%20and%20requirements. 234 California Legislative Information. (2021). Government Code Title 2, Division 1, Chapter 7. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=8589.5&lawCode=GOV 332 PSC 09-12-2024 332 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 253  Adhere to FEMA guidelines, and include, at a minimum, all of the following: ▪ Notification flowcharts and contact information ▪ The response process ▪ The roles and responsibilities of the dam owner and impacted jurisdictions following an incident involving the dam ▪ Preparedness activities and exercise schedules ▪ Inundation maps approved by the Department of Water Resources pursuant to Section 6161 of the Water Code ▪ Any additional information that may impact life or property 12.7.5 Santa Clara Valley Water District The SCVWD Dam Safety Program includes four main components 234F 235:  Periodic Special Engineering Studies The SCVWD periodically undertakes special engineering studies to ensure that its dams are compliant with the latest design guidelines and regulations to keep pace with the growing body of knowledge surrounding earthquakes. In addition to seismic studies, the SCVWD periodically conducts other special engineering studies to minimize the risks to its dams. Though not required by the regulatory agencies, the water district has proactively expanded this potential failure mode analysis approach to the remainder of our dams.  Surveillance and Monitoring Instrumentation placed in and on the dam furnishes data for water district engineers to determine if the structure is functioning as intended. SCVWD continuously monitors the conditions of its dams and uses automated instrumentation at five dams. The equipment can collect, check, record, and archive the collected data and alert staff when parameters exceed set threshold limits.  Dam Inspections and Maintenance SCVWD routinely inspects and monitors the condition of each dam and provides an annual surveillance report to the DSOD and each year they also jointly inspect each of its dams with DSOD.  Emergency Response and Preparedness At the core of the Dam Safety Program’s emergency response and preparedness is its post- earthquake dam evaluation program team. After significant earthquakes, trained personnel inspect the dams for any signs of damage or potential for failure. SCVWD works with various agencies on emergency action planning and training exercises each year. Under the Dam Safety Program, SCVWD is developing updated maps which estimate what areas could flood in the highly unlikely event of a dam failure. 235 Santa Clara Valley Water District. (n.d.). Dam Safety Program. https://www.valleywater.org/flooding-safety/dam- safety-program 333 PSC 09-12-2024 333 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 254 12.7.6 Regulatory Oversight for Levees Regulatory oversight depends on whether the levee is accredited or not. The USACE has recently updated its guidance for evaluating, designing, and constructing levees. Engineer Manual (EM) 1110 -2- 1913. The document has been available for review and publication was expected at the end of December 2022. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) FEMA does not evaluate the performance of a levee system—this is the responsibility of the levee owner. FEMA is responsible for establishing levee system evaluation and mapping standards for an accredited levee, determining flood insurance risk zones, and reflecting these determinations on FIRMs. State of California The Department of Water Resources (DWR), Division of Flood Management inspects the levees annually and prepares a report which addresses vegetation, animal control, slope stability, erosion, and vehicle traffic. 12.8 Future Trends in Development Land use in the OA is directed by general plans adopted under state law and local regulations. The safety elements of the general plans establish standards and plans for the protection of the community from hazards. Dam and levee failure are currently not addressed as stand-alone hazards in the safety elements, but flooding is. Municipalities participating in this MJHMP have established comprehensive policies regarding sound land use in identified flood hazard areas. Most of the areas vulnerable to the more severe impacts from dam and levee failure intersect the mapped flood hazard areas. Flood-related policies in the general plans will help to reduce the risk associated with dam and levee failure hazard for all future development in the OA. 12.9 Scenario An earthquake in the region could lead to liquefaction of soil around a dam. This could occur without warning during any time of the day. A terrorist or other intentional attack also could cause a catastrophic failure of a dam that impacts the OA. While the probability of dam failure is very low, the probability of flooding associated with changes to dam operational parameters in response to climate change is higher. Dam designs and operations are developed based on hydrographs with historical record. If these hydrographs experience significant changes over time due to the impacts of climate change, the design and operations may no longer be valid for the changed condition. This could have significant impacts on dams that provide flood control. Specified release rates and impound thresholds may have to be changed. This would result in increased discharges downstream of these facilities, thus increasing the probability and severity of flooding. 12.10 Issues There is often limited warning time for dam failure. These events are frequently associated with other natural hazard events such as earthquakes, landslides, or inclement weather, which limits their predictability and compounds the hazard. Important issues associated with dam failure hazards include the following:  Federally regulated dams have an adequate level of oversight and sophistication in the development of an EAP for public notification in the unlikely event of failure. However, the protocol for notification of downstream citizens of imminent failure needs to be tied to local emergency response planning. 334 PSC 09-12-2024 334 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 255  Mapping for federally regulated dams is required and available; however, mapping for non - federal-regulated dams that estimates inundation depths is needed to better assess the risk associated with dam failure from these facilities. Moreover, although mapping is required for federally regulated dams, development downstream of dams and upgrades to older dams may have altered inundation areas; however, these inundation maps may not have been updated for significant periods of time. Encouraging property owners of dams to update EAPs and inundation maps will ensure availability of the most accurate data to assist emergency planners and local officials.  Most dam failure mapping required at federal levels requires determination of the probable maximum flood. While the probable maximum flood represents a worst-case scenario, it is generally the event with the lowest probability of occurrence. For non -federal-regulated dams, mapping of dam failure scenarios that are less extreme than the probable maximum flood but have a higher probability of occurrence can be valuable to emergency managers and community officials downstream of these facilities. This type of mapping can illustrate areas potentially impacted by more frequent events to support emergency response and preparedness.  The concept of residual risk associated with structural flood control projects should be considered in the design of capital projects and the application of land use regulations.  Addressing security concerns and the need to inform the public of the risk associated with dam failure is a challenge for public officials.  Limited financial resources for dam maintenance during economic downturns result in decreased attention to dam structure operational integrity because available funding is often directed to more urgent needs. This could increase potential for maintenance f ailures. Dam failure inundation areas are often not considered special flood hazard areas under the NFIP, so flood insurance coverage in these areas is not common. 12.11 Consequence Analysis When a dam fails, the stored water can be suddenly released and have catastrophic effects on life and property downstream. The amount of warning time depends largely on the nature of the failure. Homes, bridges, and roads may be demolished in minutes. The impact of the event may be felt for an extended period of time. Residents near a significant or high-hazard dam should become familiar with the dam’s emergency action plans if one is available. EAPs written for dams include procedures for notification and coordination with law enforcement and other governmental agencies; information on the potential inundation area; plans for warning and evacuation; and procedures for making emergency repairs. The information in Table 82 provides the consequence analysis of the potential for detrimental impacts of dam failure done for accreditation with the Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP). Table 82: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Dam Failure Subject Ranking Impacts/Dam Failure Health and Safety of Public in the Area of the Incident Severe The localized impact is expected to be severe for the inundation area and moderate to minimal for other affected areas. Responders Minimal The impact on responders is expected to be minimal with proper training. The impact could be severe if there is a lack of training. Continuity of Operations (including continued delivery of services) Minimal Temporary relocation may be necessary if inundation affects government facilities. 335 PSC 09-12-2024 335 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 12: Dam and Levee Failure 256 Subject Ranking Impacts/Dam Failure Property, Facilities, and Infrastructure Minimal to severe The localized impact could be severe for facilities and infrastructure in the inundation area of the incident. The farther away from the incident area, the more likely the damage will lessen, from moderate to minimal. Delivery of Services Minimal to severe Delivery of services could be affected if there is any disruption to the roads and/or utilities due to the inundation. Minimal to severe, depending on area size and location affected. Environment Severe The impact will be severe for the immediate area. The impact will lessen as distance increases from the immediate incident area. Economic Conditions Minimal to severe Impacts on the economy will greatly depend on the scope of the inundation and the amount of time it takes for the water to recede. Public Confidence in the Government Minimal to severe The public’s confidence will vary, depending on the perception of whether the failure could have been prevented, the warning time, and the time it takes for response and recovery. 336 PSC 09-12-2024 336 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 257 13 Flood Definitions  Flood: The inundation of normally dry land.  Floodplain: The land area along the sides of a river that becomes inundated with water during a flood.  1-Percent-Annual-Chance (100-Year) Floodplain: The area flooded by the flood that has a 1- percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in a given year. The 1-percent-annual-chance flood is the standard used by most federal and state agencies.  0.2-Percent-Annual-Chance (500-Year) Floodplain: The area flooded by the flood that has a 0.2- percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in a given year.  Regulatory Floodway: Channel of a river or other water course and adjacent land areas that must be reserved for discharge of the base flood without cumulatively increasing water surface elevation more than a designated height. Communities must regulate development in these floodways to ensure no increases in upstream flood elevations.  Return Period: The average number of years between occurrences of a hazard (equal to the inverse of the annual likelihood of occurrence).  Riparian Zone: The area along the banks of a natural watercourse. 13.1 General Background Flooding is a temporary condition in which normally dry land is partially or completely inundated. There are number of ways in which flooding can happen. The water levels in bodies such as streams, rivers, lakes, and reservoirs can exceed the water body’s banks, causing water to overflow into nearby areas. Heavy precipitation can overwhelm the ability of soil to absorb water or local storm drains to carry it away, causing water to build up on the surface. Water from oceans and bays can inundate shoreline areas during exceptionally high tides or be pushed ashore by the winds of an intense storm during coastal floods. Flooding may also occur from infrastructure fa ilure, such as a burst water tank or pipe. Dam inundation, a specific type of infrastructure failure flood that occurs when a dam partially or completely fails, is discussed separately under Dam Failure. Flooding is California’s second most frequent disaster after wildfire. A floodplain is the area adjacent to a river, creek, or lake that becomes inundated during a flood. Floodplains may be broad, as when a river crosses an extensive flat landscape, or narrow, as when a river is confined in a canyon. When floodwaters recede after a flood event, they leave behind layers of rock and mud. These gradually build up to create a new floor of the floodplain. Floodplains generally contain unconsolidated sediments (accumulations of sand, gravel, loam, silt, and/or clay), often extending below the bed of the stream. These sediments provide a natural filtering system, with water percolating back into the ground and replenishing groundwater. These are often important aquifers, the water drawn from them being filtere d compared to the water in the stream. Fertile, flat reclaimed floodplain lands are commonly used for agriculture, commerce, and residential development. Connections between a river and its floodplain are most apparent during and after major flood events. These areas form a complex physical and biological system that not only supports a variety of natural resources but also provides natural flood and erosion control. When a river is separated from its 337 PSC 09-12-2024 337 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 258 floodplain with levees and other flood control facilities, natural, built -in benefits can be lost, altered, or significantly reduced. Coastal communities face additional unique flooding hazards. This includes storm surge, waves, and erosion. Coastal flooding can be especially dangerous when high waters combine with the power of waves. Storm surge refers to the abnormal rise in seawater level during a storm. It can cause major coastal and inland flooding. Waves are generated by wind blowing across water. During a storm, wind speeds tend to be higher and last longer, creating larger, more powerful waves. These waves can cause significant damage to anything they impact along the coast. In this case, erosion refers to the wearing away of beaches, dunes, or bluffs by the forces of waves, flowing water, and/or winds. This process can quickly change the appearance of a coastline. 13.1.1 Measuring Floods and Floodplains Flood frequency and severity are calculated using a number of variables. Flood studies determine the likelihood that a certain river discharge (flow) level will occur in a given year. For example, the 100 -year flood has a 1-percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. For many years, federal agencies referred to the flood frequency statistics in terms of reoccurrence internals (i.e., the “100-year” or “500-year” flood). However, these measurements reflect statistical averages only; it is p ossible for two or more floods with a 100-year or higher recurrence interval to occur in a short time. The same flood can have different recurrence intervals at different points on a river. In recent years, the terminology has changed to the annual exceedance probability (i.e., 1%, 0.2% chance of occurring) to clear up this confusion.235F 236 The “annual flood” is the greatest flood event expected to occur in a typical year. The extent of flooding associated with a 1-percent annual probability of occurrence (the base flood or 100-year flood) is the standard regulatory boundary for many organizations. Also referred to as the special flood hazard area (SFHA), this boundary is a convenient tool for assessing vulnerability and risk in flood-prone communities. Many communities have maps that show the extent and likely depth of flooding for the base flood. Corresponding water-surface elevations describe the elevation of water that will result from a given discharge level which is important to understand for floodplain management and community development in order to mitigate risk to new and existing structures. 13.1.2 Floodplain Ecosystems Floodplains can support ecosystems that are rich in plant and animal species. A floodplain can contain 100 or even 1,000 times as many species as a river. Wetting of the floodplain soil releases an immediate surge of nutrients: those left over from the last flood, and those that result from the rapid decomposition of organic matter that has accumulated since then. Microscopic organisms thrive and larger species enter a rapid breeding cycle. Opportunistic feeders (particularly birds) move in to take advantage. The production of nutrients peaks and falls away quickly, but the surge of new growth endures for some time. This makes floodplains valuable for agriculture. Species growing in floodplains are markedly different from those that grow outside floodplains. For instance, riparian trees (trees that grow in floodplains) tend to be very tolerant of root disturbance and very quick growing compared to non-riparian trees.236F 237 236 U.S. Geological Survey. (2018, June 7). The 100-Year Flood. https://www.usgs.gov/special-topics/water-science- school/science/100-year- flood#:~:text=The%20USGS%20and%20other%20agencies%20often%20refer%20to,and%20this%20corresponds% 20to%20a%205-year%20recurrence-interval%20flood. 237 International Union of Forest Research Organizations. (n.d.). Riparian and Coastal Ecosystems. https://www.iufro.org/science/divisions/division-8/80000/80100/80105/ 338 PSC 09-12-2024 338 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 259 13.1.3 Effects of Human Activities Because they border water bodies, floodplains have historically been popular sites to establish settlements. Human activities tend to concentrate in floodplains for a number of reasons: water is readily available; land is fertile and suitable for farming; transportation by water is easily accessible; and land is flatter and easier to develop. But human development in floodplains frequently interferes with the natural function of floodplains. It can affect the distribution and timing of drainage, thereby increasing flood problems. Urbanization can create local flooding problems by altering or confining drainage channels. This increases flood potential in two ways: it reduces the stream ’s capacity to contain flows, and it increases flow rates or velocities downstream during all stages of a flood event. River debris, such as the dumping of waste and rubbish, can decrease the conveyance of the river channels. Mining and other industries can change water patterns. Sometimes, humans intentionally make changes, through structural flood control measures such as dams, levees, and embankments. 13.1.4 Federal Flood Programs FEMA Regulatory Flood Zones FEMA Flood Zones are geographic areas FEMA has defined according to their levels of flood risk. These areas are determined via statistical analyses of records of river flow, storm tides, and rainfall; information obtained through consultation with the community; floodplain topographic surveys; and hydrologic and hydraulic analysis. These zones are described in terms of high-, moderate-, and low-risk. The “low-risk” area does not mean “no-risk.” Anywhere it rains, it can flood. About 25-percent of NFIP claims come from properties in a low-risk flood zone. Everyone is in a flood zone, but not everyone is in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). The SFHA is the high-risk area, or the land area covered by floodwaters during the base flood where communities that participate in the NFIP must enforce floodplain management regulations and where mandatory purchase of flood insurance applies for federally backed mortgages. A structure within a 1-percent annual chance floodplain (the SFHA) has a 26-percent chance of undergoing flood damage during the term of a 30-year mortgage. FEMA Flood Zones are further defined as follows:  Zones A1-30 and AE: SFHAs that are subject to inundation by the base flood, determined using detailed hydraulic analysis. Base Flood Elevations are shown within these zones.  Zone A (Also known as Unnumbered A-zones): SFHAs where no Base Flood Elevations or depths are shown because detailed hydraulic analyses have not been performed.  Zone AO: SFHAs subject to inundation by types of shallow flooding where average depths are between 1 and 3 feet. These are normally areas prone to shallow sheet flow flooding on sloping terrain.  Zone VE, V1-30: SFHAs along coasts that are subject to inundation by the base flood with additional hazards due to waves with heights of 3 feet or greater. Base Flood Elevations derived from detailed hydraulic analysis are shown within these zones.  Zone B and X (shaded): Moderates flood hazard areas between the limits of the base flood and the 0.2-percent-annual-chance (or 500-year) flood.  Zones C and X (unshaded): Areas of minimal flood hazards outside the SFHA with an elevation higher than the 0.2-percent-annual-chance flood. Modern visualizations can help residents understand their flood risk. DFIRMS identify locations of specific properties in relation to SFHAs; base flood elevations (1-percent annual chance) at specific sites; magnitudes of flood within specific areas; undeveloped coastal barriers where flood insurance is not available; and regulatory floodways and floodplain boundaries (1-percent and 0.2-percent annual chance floodplain boundaries). FEMA’s National Flood Hazard Layer is a compilation of GIS data including a 339 PSC 09-12-2024 339 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 260 nationwide digital Flood Insurance Rate Map and updated data, like a LOMA (Letter of Map Amendment) or LOMR (Letters of Map Revision) which amend the FIRM. Risk changes over time. These flood maps are not designed to incorporate future conditions including climate change, sea-level rise, and changes in development. Additional studies are necessary when significant changes occur in order to keep up with changing conditions. Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning FEMA’s Risk Mapping, Assessment and Planning (Risk MAP) program develops non -regulatory guidance documents. Risk MAP supports community resilience by providing data, building partnerships, and supporting long-term hazard mitigation planning.237F 238 Each Risk Map product is tailored to the needs of the individual community and may involve different steps, processes, and end results. A “whole community” approach is used throughout the development of these products and the public is provided multiple opportunities to participate. The resulting products are intended to help property owners, community planners, emergency management officials, and others make risk -informed planning and development decisions. Additionally, at the end these products should help local officials identify mitigation opportunities that will work for their communities. There are currently no Risk MAP products available for the Operational Area (OA). However, through Risk MAP FEMA is looking to conduct flood hazard studies for all the populated coastlines in order to update their FIRMs and Flood Insurance Studies (FISs) s o communities have access to the best available data on their coastal flood risk.238F 239 National Flood Insurance Program The NFIP makes federally backed flood insurance available to homeowners, renters, and business owners in participating communities. A federal disaster declaration is not necessary for an NFIP payout. Insurance can also cover significantly more than FEMA’s Individuals and Household Program, which is sometimes available post-disaster. The average NFIP Claims Payment for California between 1996 and 2019 was $18,400.239F 240 Most homeowner’s insurance does not cover flood insurance. Flood insurance is an important measure of a community’s resiliency to the flood hazard. For most participating communities, FEMA has prepared a detailed Flood Insurance Study (FIS). The study presents water surface elevations for floods of various magnitudes, including the 1 -percent annual chance (100-year) flood and the 0.2-percent annual chance (500-year) flood. Base flood elevations and the boundaries of the 100- and 500-year floodplains are shown on Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), which are the principal tools for identifying the extent and location of the flood hazard. FIRMs are the most detailed and consistent data source available, and for many communities they represent the minimum area of oversight under their floodplain management program. Santa Clara County also has DFIRMs. This means the FIRM data is accessible to residents, local governments, and stakeholders online at FEMA’s Map Service Center and National Flood Hazard Layer websites. 238 Federal Emergency Management Association. (2021, November 4). Risk Mapping, Assessment and Planning (Risk MAP). https://www.fema.gov/flood-maps/tools-resources/risk-map 239 Federal Emergency Management Association. (2021, November 4). Risk Mapping, Assessment and Planning (Risk MAP). https://www.fema.gov/flood-maps/tools-resources/risk-map 240 Federal Emergency Management Association. (2022). Historical Flood Risks and Costs. https://www.fema.gov/data-visualization/historical-flood-risk-and-costs 340 PSC 09-12-2024 340 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 261 Participants in the NFIP must, at a minimum, regulate development in the SFHA in accordance with NFIP criteria. The minimum criteria for NFIP participation include, but are not limited to 240F 241:  Require permits for all proposed construction or other development in the community to determine whether such construction or development will be place in flood-prone areas.  Review proposed development to assure that all necessary permits have been received.  Require the elevation of new and substantially improved residential structures to above the base flood level.  Require the elevation or dry floodproofing (making watertight) new or substantially improved non - residential structures in Zone A.  With limited exception, prohibit encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements, and other development within the adopted regulatory floodway.  Adhere to additional requirements to protect buildings in coastal areas from the impacts of waves, high velocity, and storm surge. Table 83 lists each participating municipal jurisdiction’s date of entrance into the NFIP and the effective date for its current FIRM. Table 83: NFIP Status in the Operational Area Community NFIP Community # NFIP Entry Date Current Effective FIRM City of Campbell 060338 06/30/1976 02/19/2014 City of Cupertino 060339 05/01/1980 05/18/2009 City of Gilroy 060340 08/01/1980 05/18/2009 City of Los Altos 060341 07/16/1980 05/18/2009 Los Altos Hills 060342 01/02/1980 05/18/2009 Los Gatos 060343 01/17/1979 02/19/2014 City of Milpitas 060344 07/16/1980 02/19/2014 City of Monte Sereno 060345 05/18/2009 02/19/2014 City of Morgan Hill 060346 06/18/1980 05/18/2009 City of Mountain View 060347 08/15/1980 05/18/2009 City of Palo Alto 060348 09/19/1984 10/16/2012 City of San José 060349 08/02/1982 02/19/2014 City of Santa Clara 060350 07/16/1980 02/19/2014 City of Saratoga 060351 01/17/1979 02/19/2014 City of Sunnyvale 060352 05/15/1978 05/18/2009 Unincorporated County 060337 08/02/1982 02/19/2014 241 Federal Register. (2021). Request for Information on the National Flood Insurance Program’s Floodplain Management Standards. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/10/12/2021-22152/request-for-information- on-the-national-flood-insurance-programs-floodplain-management-standards- for#:~:text=The%20minimum%20NFIP%20requirements%20for%20participating%20communities%20include%2 C,im pacts%20of%20waves%2C%20high%20velocity%2C%20and%20storm%20surge. 341 PSC 09-12-2024 341 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 262 Building codes are an important part of developing resilient communities. All community’s that participate in the NFIP must adhere to the NFIP floodplain management criteria, including adopting a flood damage prevention ordinance. The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) has developed a 2020 model ordinance which reflects NFIP requirements and California Building Standards Code (CCR Title 24). Communities that did not use this ordinance may make amendments to their existing regulations. This ordinance reflects the fact that the flood provisions of CCR Title 24 meet or exceed the minimum requirements for buildings and structures.241F 242 “Substantial improvement” refers to any reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition, or other improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds 50 percent (or less, if defined as so in the jurisdiction ’s floodplain management ordinance) of the market value of the structure before the start of construction of the improvement. “Substantial damage” means any damage of any origin sustained by a structure that would cause the cost of restoring the structure to its before damage condition to equal or exceed 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred. The repairs to a substantially damaged structure are considered a substantial improvement and that structure would be required to meet current NFIP standards in order to protect it from future flood losses. These kind of post-disaster policies and procedures are further described in Volume 2, as applicable. All participating planning partners are currently in good standing with the provisions of the NFIP. In California, the DWR is the coordinating agency for floodplain management. The DWR works with FEMA and local governments by providing grants and technical assistance, evaluating community floodplain management programs, reviewing local floodplain ordinances, participating in statewide flood hazard mitigation planning, and facilitating annual statewide workshops. Compliance is monitored by FEMA regional staff and by the DWR. Maintaining compliance under the NFIP is an important component of flood risk reduction. All planning partners that participate in the NFIP have identified actions to maintain compliance and good standing. Details about participation in the NFIP are further described the individual annexes in Volume 2 of this plan. Risk Rating 2.0 FEMA recently updated the pricing methodology for the NFIP through Risk Rating 2.0. This new methodology builds on years of investment in flood hazard information by leveraging new technology and best practices such as private sector data sets, catastrophe models, and evolving actuarial science to develop rates that are actuarily sound, equitable, easier to understand, and better reflective of risk.242F 243 Previously, rates were based on relatively static measurements, emphasizing a property ’s zone on the FIRM. Now, FEMA is able to incorporate additional flood risk variables into their rating calculations. This includes flood frequency, multiple flood types – river overflow, storm surge, coastal erosion, and heavy rainfall – and distance to water source, along with such property characteristics as elevation, numbers of floors, and the cost to rebuild. This reflects a significant change to their rating system. It is intended to make flood insurance more equitable. Before, policyholders were lower -valued homes were paying more than their share of the risk while policy holders with higher-valued homes were paying less than their share. With Risk Rating 2.0, FEMA is able to distribute premiums across all policyholders based on home value and a property’s unique flood risk.243F 244 Risk Rating 2.0 rates went into effect for new policies in October 2021. All remaining policies renewed on or after April 1, 2022, utilize the new rating methodology as well. The FEMA estimated first -year premium changes for existing NFIP policies in Santa Clara County is displayed in Figure 60: Risk Rating 2.0: Project Premium Changes for Santa Clara County. 242 California Department of Water Resources. (n.d.). National Flood Insurance Program. https://water.ca.gov/nfip/ 243 Federal Emergency Management Association. (2022, April 18). Risk Rating 2.0: Equity in Action. https://www.fema.gov/flood-insurance/risk-rating 244 Federal Emergency Management Association. (2022, April 18). Risk Rating 2.0: Equity in Action. https://www.fema.gov/flood-insurance/risk-rating 342 PSC 09-12-2024 342 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 263 Figure 61: Risk Rating 2.0: Project Premium Changes for Santa Clara County244F 245 The Community Rating System The community rating system (CRS) is a voluntary program within the NFIP that encourages floodplain management activities that exceed the minimum NFIP requirements. Flood insurance premiums are discounted to reflect the reduced flood risk resulting from community actions meeting the following three goals of the CRS:  Reduce flood damage to insurable property.  Strengthen and support the insurance aspects of the NFIP.  Encourage a comprehensive approach to floodplain management. For participating communities, flood insurance premium rates are discounted in increments of 5 percent. For example, a Class 1 community would receive a 45 percent premium discount, and a Class 9 community would receive a 5 percent discount. (Class 10 communities are those that do not participate in the CRS; they receive no discount.) Previously, properties outside of the SFHA received smaller discounts: a 10-percent discount if the community is at Class 1 to 6 and a 5-percent discount if the community is at Class 7 to 9. Now, under Risk Rating 2.0, the discount is applied uniformly to all policies throughout the participating community regardless of whether the structure is located in the SFHA. The CRS classes for local communities are based on 19 creditable activities in the following categories:  Public information  Mapping and regulations 245 Association of State Floodplain Managers. (2021, September). Data Visualization Dashboards for FEMA’s Risk Rating 2.0 Projected Premium Change Analysis. https://floodsciencecenter.org/projects/data-visualization- dashboards-for-fema-risk-rating-2-0-projected-premium-change-analysis/ 343 PSC 09-12-2024 343 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 264  Flood damage reduction  Warning and response Figure 61 shows the nationwide number of CRS communities by class as of October 2022, when there were 1,353 communities receiving flood insurance premium discounts under the CRS program. Figure 62: CRS Communities by Class Nationwide as of October 2022245F 246 CRS activities can help to save lives and reduce property damage. Communities participating in the CRS represent a significant portion of the nation’s flood risk; over 70 percent of the NFIP’s policy base is located in these communities. Communities receiving premium discounts through the CRS range from small to large and represent a broad mixture of flood risks, including both coastal and riverine flood risks. Table 84: CRS Community Status in the Operational Area246F 247 Community NFIP Community # CRS Entry Date Current CRS Classification % Premium Discount, SFHA/non-SFHA Cupertino 060339 10/01/2005 7 15/5 Gilroy* 060340 05/01/2007 8 10/5 Los Altos 060341 10/01/1991 8 10/5 Milpitas 060344 10/01/1991 7 15/5 Morgan Hill 060346 05/01/2003 7 15/5 246 Federal Emergency Management Association. (2022, October). Community Rating System. https://www.fema.gov/floodplain-management/community-rating-system 247 FEMA. (2023). Community Rating System. https://www.fema.gov/floodplain-management/community-rating- system 344 PSC 09-12-2024 344 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 265 Community NFIP Community # CRS Entry Date Current CRS Classification % Premium Discount, SFHA/non-SFHA Mountain View 060347 05/01/2002 8 10/5 Palo Alto 060348 10/01/1991 6 20/10 San José 060349 10/01/1991 7 15/5 Santa Clara (city) 060350 05/01/2002 7 15/5 Sunnyvale 060352 10/01/1998 7 15/5 *Gilroy CRS rating is 8 as of 5/1/2007. Starting 10/1/2023, the rating will be a 7 with a percentage premium discount of 15% of SFHA and 5% for non-SFHA. Santa Clara Valley Water will lead the development of a separate Floodplain Management Plan specifically dedicated to meeting the CRS planning requirements, allowing planning partners that participate in the CRS program to maintain or enhance their CRS classifications. Relevant in formation from this Hazard Mitigation Plan will be incorporated into the Floodplain Management Plan. 13.2 Hazard Profile The following information is extracted from the Santa Clara County Flood Insurance Study 247F 248:  The mountains and foothills in northern Santa Clara County are the sources of the watercourses that flow through the north portion of the OA. Near San José, the major waterways include Los Gatos, Guadalupe, and Alamitos Creeks flowing out of the Santa Cruz Mountains; Coyote Creek and a host of tributaries, including Upper Penitencia and Silver Creeks, flowing out of the Diablo Range; and Fisher Creek with headwaters on the western side of the Coyote Creek Valley. The 75-mile-long Coyote Creek is the primary natural drainage facility for the eastern side of the Santa Clara Valley.  Permanente and Stevens Creeks, which flow north through the OA near Mountain View, are the primary runoff drainage channels in that area. In addition to providing flood control, these creek beds provide gravel lenses that penetrate the impervious underground clay layers. These lenses allow rain runoff to percolate down to replenish the underground water supply.  The principal watercourses in the south portion of the OA are Llagas, Uvas, and Coyote Creeks. Edmundson (Little Llagas), Church, Center, Tennant, Maple, and Foothill Creeks also flow through the area. The area is unusual in that creeks originate in both the Diablo Range, to the east, and the Santa Cruz Mountains, to the west. Waters originating in the area are conveyed to Monterey Bay via the Pajaro River.  Drainage-ways in the OA are a combination of natural channels (creek beds) and channels altered by human activity.  Drainage patterns in the OA have been altered by urbanization, and the runoff, which has increased, is a greater flood threat than in previous years. The construction of water-conservation flood retention facilities has also altered the drainage pattern.  A variety of conditions cause flooding in the Santa Clara County OA. In smaller drainage basins, flooding is usually the result of intense storms. In larger basins, flooding results from storms of long duration. Shallow overland flooding often occurs due to the small capacity of the creeks. 248 Federal Emergency Management Association. (2014, February 19). Flood Insurance Study Santa Clara County. https://www.milpitas.gov/_pdfs/FISReport.pdf 345 PSC 09-12-2024 345 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 266 13.2.1 Types of Flood-Related Hazards Flooding in the Santa Clara County OA typically occurs during the rainy winter season. Four types of flooding primarily affect the County: stormwater runoff, riverine, flash floods, and tidal floods. Stormwater Runoff Floods Stormwater runoff is generated from rain and snowmelt events that flows over land or impervious surfaces, such as parking lots and roads, without being absorbed.248F 249 Stormwater flooding is a result of local drainage issues and high groundwater levels. Locally, heavy precipitation, especially during high lunar tide events, may induce flooding within areas other than delineated floodplains or along recognizable channels. If local conditions cannot accommodate intense precipitation through a combination of infiltration and surface runoff, water may accumulate and cause flooding problems. Flooding issues of this nature generally occur within areas with flat gradients, and generally increase with urbanization, which speeds accumulation of floodwaters because of impervious areas 249F 250. Pump stations may be unable to pump stormwater during a large precipitation event due to insufficient channel capacity or submergence of the pump station, rendering it inoperable. Shallow street flooding can occur unless channels have been improved to account for increased flows. Numerous areas within the County undergo stormwater flooding that contributes to street and structure inundation. Urban flooding is by increased water runoff due to urban development and drainage systems. Drainage systems are designed to remove surface water from developed areas as quickly as possible to prevent localized flooding on streets and within other urban areas. These systems utilize a closed conveyance system that channels water away from an urban area to surrounding streams, and bypasses natural processes of water filtration through the ground, containment, and evaporation of excess water. Because drainage systems reduce the amount of time surface water takes to reach surrounding streams, flooding in those streams can occur more quickly and reach greater depths than prior to development within that area.250F 251 Riverine Floods Riverine flooding is overbank flooding of rivers and streams. Natural processes of riverine flooding add sediment and nutrients to fertile floodplain areas. Flooding in large river systems typically results from large-scale weather systems that generate prolonged rainfall over a wide geographic area, causing flooding in hundreds of smaller streams, which then drain into the major rivers. Shallow area flooding is a special type of riverine flooding. FEMA defines shallow flood hazards as areas inundated by th e 100-year flood with flood depths of only 1 to 3 feet. These areas are generally flooded by low -velocity sheet flows of water. Two types of flood hazards are generally associated with riverine flooding:  Inundation: Inundation occurs when floodwater is present, and debris flows through an area not normally covered by water. These events cause minor to severe damage, depending on velocity and depth of flows, duration of the flood event, quantity of logs and other debr is carried by the flows, and amount and type of development and personal property along the floodwater’s path.  Channel Migration: Erosion of banks and soils worn away by flowing water, combined with sediment deposition, causes migration or lateral movement of a river channel across a floodplain. A channel can also abruptly change location (termed “avulsion”); a shift in channel loca tion over a large distance can occur within as short a time as one flood event. 249 Environmental Protection Agency. (2023, February 2). National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Stormwater Program. https://www.epa.gov/npdes/npdes-stormwater-program 250 FEMA. (1997, January). Multi Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment: The Cornerstone of the National Mitigation Strategy. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=pst.000032338492&view=1up&seq=5 251 Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.). Flow Alteration. https://www.epa.gov/caddis-vol2/flow-alteration 346 PSC 09-12-2024 346 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 267 Natural stream channels in rural parts of the Santa Clara County OA typically can accommodate average rainfall amounts and mild storm systems; however, severe floods occur in years of abnormally high rainfall or unusually severe storms. During those periods of severe floods, high-velocity floodwaters carry debris over long distances, block stream channels, and create severe localized flooding. Flash Floods The National Weather Service defines a flash flood as a rapid and extreme flow of high water into a normally dry area, or a rapid water level rise in a stream or creek above a predetermined flood level. Such floods generally begin within 6 hours of the rain event that causes them. Ongoing flooding can intensify to flash flooding in cases where intense rainfall results in a rapid surge of rising flood waters.251F 252 Flash floods can tear out trees, undermine buildings and bridges, and scour new channels. In urban areas, flash flooding is an increasingly serious problem due to removal of vegetation and replacement of ground cover with impermeable surfaces such as roads, driveways, and parking lots. The greatest risk from flash floods is occurrence with little to no warning. Major factors in predicting potential damage are intensity and duration of rainfall, and steepness of watershed and streams. Coastal Floods Coastal flooding of normally dry land by the coastline is caused by abnormally high tides, storm surge, and persistent onshore winds and waves. Rising and falling water levels, breaking waves, and shifting sands are common sights along the shore. Typically, they are a normal part of life on the coast, however when they strengthen intensity they can threaten life, property, and livelihoods of coastal populations. Coastal floods come with a unique range of concerns including storm, waves, and erosion. All of these can contribute to extensive damage to homes, businesses, and infrastructure. The flooding of bay adjacent SFHAs is likely in the Santa Clara County OA, particularly where land is at or slightly above sea level. Areas mapped as Zone V and Zone VE are considered at high-risk from coastal flooding and are subject to stricter building requirements because of the likelihood of damage from strong waves. High Tide Floods It no longer takes a strong storm or hurricane to flood coastal areas. Tidal floods are characterized by inundation of normally dry lands by the coast, often caused by extreme high tide events that result in shallow flooding of low-lying coastal areas. Colloquially known as “King Tides,” these tides exceed the highest water level reached at high tide on an average day and normally occur once or twice per year. King Tide events are the leading cause of flooding by bay waters. Tidal flooding is becoming increasingly exacerbated by sea level rise as a result of climate change or tectonic activity.252F 253 Average daily water levels are rising along with the oceans. As a result, high tides are reaching higher and extending further inland than in the past. Additional information regarding the impacts and exposure of the OA to sea level rise is presented in Section 11, Climate Change. 252 National Weather Service. (n.d.). Flood Related Hazards. https://www.weather.gov/safety/flood-hazards 253 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (n.d.). Flooding on a Sunny Day? Here’s How. https://oceantoday.noaa.gov/flooding-sunny-day/ 347 PSC 09-12-2024 347 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 268 13.2.2 Principal Flooding Sources FEMA’s Flood Insurance Study for Santa Clara County assessed over 50 creeks, channels, and water bodies, including the following principal flooding sources 253F 254:  Adobe Creek  Alamitos Creek  Alviso Slough  Arastradero Creek  Arroyo Calero  Barron Creek  Berryessa Creek  Calabazas Creek  Canoas Creek  Concepcion Drain  Coyote Creek  Daves Creek  East Little Llagas Creek  East Penitencia Creek  Evergreen Creek  Fisher Creek  Fisher Creek Overbank  Flint Creek  Fowler Creek  Guadalupe River  Guadalupe Slough  Hale Creek  Lions Creek  Llagas Creek  Llagas Overbank  Los Gatos Creek  Lower Penitencia Creek  Matadero Creek  Miguelita Creek  Miller Slough  North Morey Creek  Permanente Creek  Permanente Diversion  Purissima Creek  Quimby Creek  Ronan Channel  Ross Creek  Ruby Creek  San Francisco Bay  San Francisquito Creek  San Joaquin River  Santa Teresa Creek  San Tomas Aquino Creek  San Tomas Aquino Creek Reach 2  Saratoga Creek  Silver Creek  Smith Creek  South Babb Creek  South Morey Creek  Stevens Creek  Sunnyvale East Channel  Sunnyvale West Channel  Thompson Creek  Upper Penitencia Creek  Upper Penitencia Creek Reach 2  Upper Penitencia Creek Reach 2 Overflow  Uvas Creek  West Branch Llagas Creek  West Little Llagas Creek  Wildcat Creek Understanding watershed conditions can help clarify the OA’s vulnerability to flooding. A watershed is the area of land that drains to a common waterway. Every watershed has unique qualities that affect its response to rainfall. Stormwater discharge is influenced by the watershed’s soil type, geology, typography, vegetation, shape, and land use.254F 255 The Santa Clara County OA contains five watersheds255F 256:  Coyote Watershed is the OA’s largest watershed, with 322 square miles. It contains Coyote Creek, which is the longest creek in the county.  Guadalupe Watershed drains the Guadalupe River and its tributaries through downtown San José.  Lower Peninsula Watershed is a small-creek watershed that feeds tidal wetlands along the San Francisco Bay’s southwest shoreline.  Uvas-Llagas Watershed is mainly agricultural land and natural areas. This is the only watershed in the county in which waterways flow southward. 254 Federal Emergency Management Association. (2014, February 19). Flood Insurance Study Santa Clara County. https://www.milpitas.gov/_pdfs/FISReport.pdf 255 USGS. (2019, June 8). Surface Runoff and the Water Cycle. https://www.usgs.gov/special-topics/water-science- school/science/surface-runoff-and-water-cycle 256 Santa Clara Valley Water District. (n.d.). Watersheds of Santa Clara Valley. https://www.valleywater.org/learning- center/watersheds-santa-clara-valley 348 PSC 09-12-2024 348 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 269  West Valley Watershed is the smallest watershed in the county, covering 85 square miles of numerous small creeks. Figure 63: Watersheds in the Operational Area256F 257 13.2.3 Past Events Based on NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information, 141 flood events in the OA were recorded between 1950 and 2022, as summarized in Table 85: History of Flood Events, . These events include flash floods, lakeshore floods, coastal floods, and flooding from heavy multi-day rain events. Since 1954, 10 presidential-declared flood events in the OA have caused in excess of $4.468 billion in property damage throughout the region. According to the USDA’s Risk Management Agency, Santa Clara County received $13,131,222 in payments for insured crop losses on 5,031 affected acres as a result of excessive moisture and flood events between 2003 and 2022. Table 86: Crop Insurance Claims Paid from Excessive Moisture and Flood, 2003-2022 summarizes these payments. The highest damaging year was 2016. Additionally, 39 flood-related federally declared disasters or emergencies have occurred in California since 1953. This equates to a major flood event impacting the state around once every 2 years. 257 Santa Clara Valley Water District. (2023). Watersheds of Santa Clara Valley. https://www.valleywater.org/learning- center/watersheds-santa-clara-valley 349 PSC 09-12-2024 349 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 270 Table 85: History of Flood Events257F 258, 258F 259 Date Declaration # Type of Event Estimated Damage 2/5/1954 15 Flood & Erosion Not available 12/23/1955 47 Flood Coyote Creek, Stevens Creek, Matadero Creek, San Francisquito Creek, and Guadalupe River flooded 4/4/1958 82 Heavy Rainstorms and Flood Penitencia Creek, Guadalupe River, San Tomas Aquinas Creek, Stevens Creek, Permanente Creek, Matadero Creek, and San Francisquito Creek flooded. $20 million, plus $4 million agricultural damage 3/6/1962 122 Floods Not available 10/24/1962 138 Severe Storms and Flooding $4 million in regional flooding 2/25/1963 145 Severe Storms, Heavy Rains and Flooding Not available 1/16/1973 None Severe Storms and Flooding $86,207 in damage 1/7/1982 651 Severe Storms, Flood, Mudslides and High Tide $273 million, 256 homes and 41 businesses destroyed; 6,259 homes and 1,276 businesses damaged. 2/9/1983 677 Coastal Storms, Floods, Slides and Tornadoes $523 million 2/21/1986 758 Severe Storms and Flooding $407 million; 1,382 homes and 185 businesses destroyed; 12,447 homes and 967 businesses damaged. 2/11/1992– 2/14/1992 None Severe Storms and Flooding $20,000 in damage 1/13/1993 None Severe Storms and Flooding $112,000 in damage 1/10/1995 1044 Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, Landslides, Mud Flows $741 million total; 11 deaths 3/12/1995 1046 Severe Winter Storms, Flooding Landslides, Mud Flow Approx. $1.1 billion total; damage to homes: major 1,322; minor 2,299; destroyed 267. 12/10/1996 None Flood Not available 1/01/1997 None Flash Floods Not available 258 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2017). Storm Events Database. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/ 259 Association of Bay Area Governments. (2010). Data and Research. https://abag.ca.gov/our-work/resilience/data- research 350 PSC 09-12-2024 350 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 271 Date Declaration # Type of Event Estimated Damage 1/4/1997 1155 Severe Storms, Flooding, Mud and Landslides $1.8 billion total; 23,000 homes; 2,000 businesses damaged or destroyed. 1/25/1997 None Flash Flood Not available 2/3/1998 None Flash Flood Not available 2/7/1998 None Flash Flood Not available 2/8/1998 None Flash Flood Not available 2/9/1998 1203 Severe Winter Storms and Flooding $550 million; 17 deaths 2/13/2000 None Flash Flood Mainly on Coyote Creek 10/13/2009 None Heavy Rain and Flooding $400,000 1/18/2010– 1/20/2010 None Heavy Rain and Flooding Localized flooding, roads closed, damage estimate not available. 12/23/2012 None Heavy Rain and Tornado Localized flooding, levee overtopped in East Palo Alto. 2/28/2014 None Heavy Rain and Flooding Flooding of urban areas, small streams and creeks, and a few localized mud and rockslides. 12/2/2014 None Flood Not available 12/3/2014 None Flood Not available 12/11/2014 None Heavy Rain and Flooding Flooding and mudslides 2/06/2015 None Heavy Rain and Flooding Multiple off ramps from I-280 flooded. 10/28/2016 None Flood Not available 12/10/2016 None Flood Not available 2/7/2017 None Flash Flood Not available 2/9/2017 None Flood Not available 2/14/2017 4301 Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, and Mudslides 34 of 57 CA Counties declared for flooding events that occurred from January 3 to January 12, 2017 2/20/2017 None Flood, Flash Flood Not available 2/21/2017 None Flood Not available 1/8/2018 None Flood Not available 1/9/2018 None Flood Not available 1/25/2018 None Flood Not available 3/1/2018 None Flood Not available 4/6/2018 None Flood Not available 11/22/2018 None Flood Not available 11/23/2018 None Flood Not available 11/29/2018 None Flood Not available 351 PSC 09-12-2024 351 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 272 Date Declaration # Type of Event Estimated Damage 12/17/2018 None Flood Not available 1/6/2019 None Flood Not available 1/16/2019 None Flood Not available 1/17/2019 None Flood Not available 2/4/2019 None Flood Not available 2/13/2019 None Flood Not available 2/14/2019 None Flood Not available 2/27/2019 None Flood Not available 5/15/2019 None Flood Not available 11/26/2019 None Flood Not available 12/1/2019 None Flood Not available 12/2/2019 None Flood Not available 1/16/2020 None Flood Not available 1/27/2021 None Flood Not available 3/10/2021 None Flood Not available 12/27/2022– 1/31/2023 4683 Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, Landslides, and Mudslides Damage estimates are ongoing at the time of this writing. Damage was sufficient for a Presidential Disaster Declaration. Note: N/A = Not Applicable. Table 86: Crop Insurance Claims Paid from Excessive Moisture and Flood, 2003-2022259F 260 Crop Year Commodity Acres Affected Indemnity Amount 2003 None None None 2004 None None None 2005 All Other Crops 79 $13,144 2006 All Other Crops 83 $6,937 2007 None None None 2008 None None None 2009 None None None 2010 None None None 2011 Walnuts, Cherries, Processing Apricots 910 2,706,413 2012 Cherries 239 $113,052 2013 None None None 2014 Cherries 18 $29,015 260 United States Department of Agriculture. (n.d.). Cause of Loss Historical Data Files. https://www.rma.usda.gov/Information-Tools/Summary-of-Business/Cause-of-Loss 352 PSC 09-12-2024 352 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 273 Crop Year Commodity Acres Affected Indemnity Amount 2015 Cherries, Processing Apricots, All Other Crops 322 $1,053,095 2016 Cherries, Processing Apricots 1,059 $4,279,020 2017 Cherries, Processing Apricots 119 $69,405 2018 None None None 2019 Cherries, Cultivated Wild Rice, All Other Crops 1,725 $3,975,874 2020 Cherries, Processing Apricots, All Other Crops 245 $337,118 2021 Cherries, Grapes 80 $122,467 2022 Cherries 152 $425,682 Total 5,031 $13,131,222 13.2.4 Location Flooding that has occurred in portions of the OA has been extensively documented by gage records, high water marks, damage surveys, and personal accounts. This documentation was the basis for the 2014 FIRMs generated by FEMA for the Santa Clara County OA. The 2014 current effective Flood Insurance Study is the sole source of data used in this risk assessment to map the extent and location of the flood hazard, as shown in Figure 63: Mapped Flood Hazard Areas in the Operational Area. 353 PSC 09-12-2024 353 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 274 Figure 64: Mapped Flood Hazard Areas in the Operational Area 13.2.5 Frequency Recurrence intervals and average annual numbers of events in the Santa Clara County OA were calculated based on data from 1996 to 2022 in NOAA’s Storm Events Database. Santa Clara County has experienced one hundred fourteen significant events since 1996 classified as “flood” in the database. Smaller floods may occur more frequently and be categorized as a different event type, typically “flash flood” or “winter storm.” Based on these data, floods have a 158 percent chance of occurring in any given year, flash floods have a 33 percent chance, and coastal floods have a 4 percent chance. The total estimated percent chance of occurrence for any type of flood in a given year is 100 percent, meaning that flooding will likely continue to be an annual hazard. 354 PSC 09-12-2024 354 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 275 The frequency and magnitude of floods will likely be influenced by climate change. Climate change may cause an increase in the number of intense rainfall events, resulting in increased flood risk. Sea level rise, which may exacerbate the risk of flooding in shore areas, is also of concern. Further information on the impact of climate change on the probability of flooding is included in Section 11. Probability in OA: Occasional 13.2.6 Severity The principal factors affecting flood damage are flood depth and velocity. The deeper and faster flood flows become, the more damage they can cause. Shallow flooding with high velocities can cause as much damage as deep flooding with slow velocity. This is especially true when a channel migrates over a broad floodplain, redirecting high velocity flows and transporting debris and sediment. Another element that characterizes the community’s flood threat is length of time floodwaters remain above flood stage. Although jurisdictions can implement mitigation and take preventative actions to significantly reduce severity and threat of flood events, some type of residual risk will always exist (i.e., risk of a hazard event occurring despite technical and scientific measures applied to reduce/prevent it). Threats associated with residual risk could include failure of a reservoir, a dam breach, or other infrastructure failure, or a severe flood event that exceeds flood design standards or drainage capacity. Flood severity is often evaluated by examining peak discharges. Table 87 lists peak flows used by FEMA to map the floodplains of the OA as found in the effective Santa Clara County Flood Insurance Study. Table 87: Summary of Peak Discharges Within the Operational Area260F 261 Flooding Source and Location Discharge (Cubic Feet/Second) 10- Year 50- Year 100- Year 500- Year Adobe Creek  Above Railroad (At El Camino Real) 1,350 2,500 2,700a 2,700a  At East Charleston Road 1,400a 1,400a 1,400a 1,400a  At East Meadow Drive 1,350 1,350 1,350 1,350  At Edith Road 1,000 1,830 2,140 2,700  At El Monte Avenue 690 1,340 1,700 2,370  At corporate limits 890 1,650 1,920 2,400  At Foothill Expressway 1,070 2,120 2,320 2,690  At Middlefield Road 1,020a 1,020a 1,020a 1,020a  At Moody Road 590 1,150 1,430 1,930  At Old Altos Road 960 1,760 2,050 2,490  At Pine Lane 1,110 2,150 2,360 2,730 261 Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2014, February 19). Flood Insurance Study. https://map1.msc.fema.gov/data/06/S/PDF/06085CV002B.pdf?LOC=65c0f78954006b048e415150264ffe4b 355 PSC 09-12-2024 355 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 276 Flooding Source and Location Discharge (Cubic Feet/Second) 10- Year 50- Year 100- Year 500- Year  At Railroad 1,350 1,450a 1,450a 1,450a  At U.S. Highway 101 1,660 1,780 1,780 1,780  At Van Buren Road 1,060 1,890 2,220 2,810  Below Alma Street 1,450 1,700 1,700 1,750  Below Purissima Creek 1,040 1,980 2,200 2,510 Alamitos Creek  Downstream of confluence with Arroyo Calero 2,150 5,180 6,750 11,000  Downstream of confluence with Golf Creek 3,530 7,020 8,680 12,700  Downstream of confluence with Greystone Creek 2,940 6,200 7,800 11,800  Downstream of confluence with Randol Creek 2,660 5,800 7,380 11,400  Upstream of confluence with Arroyo Calero 1,430 3,580 4,750 7,900  Upstream of confluence with Guadalupe River 3,630 7,180 8,860 12,900 Alamitos Creek By-Pass Channel b B 3,250 b Alamitos Creek Overflow Area b B 140 b Arastradero Creek At Page Mill Road 140 300 360 460 Arroyo Calero  Downstream of confluence with Santa Teresa Creek 1,020 1,820 2,180 3,010  Upstream of confluence with Alamitos Creek 1,180 1,980 2,330 3,110  Upstream of confluence with Santa Teresa Creek 660 1,120 1,320 1,770 Arroyo De Los Coches  At confluence with Berryessa Creek b B 1,420 b Barron Creek  At El Camino Real 270 270 270 270  At Foothill Expressway 176 364 453 640  At Foothill Expressway 320 630 760 1,100  At Laguna Avenue 180b 180b 180b 180b  At Lower Fremont Road 96 208 268 390  At mouth 320 430 430 430  At Ramona Street 320 430a 430a 430a 356 PSC 09-12-2024 356 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 277 Flooding Source and Location Discharge (Cubic Feet/Second) 10- Year 50- Year 100- Year 500- Year  At Railroad 320 675 675 675  At Upper Fremont Road 32 77 98 143  Downstream of El Camino Real 270 270 270 270  Upstream of Barron Creek Diversion b B 740 b  Upstream of Fabian Way b B 250 b  Upstream of Laguna Avenue b B 1,603 b  Upstream of Railroad 320 820 920 1,080 Berryessa Creek  At confluence with Calera Creek b B 3,600a b  At confluence with Sierra Creek 1,230 2,250 2,580 1,230  At confluence with Tularcitos Creek b B 2,500a b  At confluence with Wrigley Ditch b B 2,000a b  At Morrill Avenue 1,230 1,7001 1,750a 1,230  At Piedmont Road b B 1,600 b  Downstream of confluence with Arroyo De Los Coches b B 2,000a b  Downstream of Montague Expressway 800a 800a 800a 800a Calabazas Creek  Above Prospect Road b B 1,800 b  Above Railroad and Prospect Creek b B 1,140 b  At Coffin Road 3,000 4,100 4,600 5,800  At El Camino Real 2,090d 2,290d 2,340d 2,360d  At Grant Road 1,200 1,600 1,800 2,300  At Interstate Highway 280 1,950 2,490 2,700 3,360  At Junipero Serra 2,000 2,700 3,100 3,900  At Kifer Road 2,600 3,600 4,000 5,200  At Lawrence Expressway 2,100 3,000 3,300 4,200  At Rainbow Drive Below La Mar Court 750 1,070 1,310 1,370  Below Miller Avenue 1,670 2,050 2,210 2,670  Below Tantau Avenue/Upstream of Pruneridge Avenue 1,700a 1,900a 1,950a 2,000a  Downstream of confluence with Rodeo Creek 1,170 1,700 1,950 2,610  Downstream of Prospect Road 7501 1,000e 1,180e 1,220e  Downstream of U.S. Highway 101 2,760d 3,200f 4,780f 5,510f  Through box culvert at Miller Avenue 1,400a 1,550a 1,600a 1,600a 357 PSC 09-12-2024 357 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 278 Flooding Source and Location Discharge (Cubic Feet/Second) 10- Year 50- Year 100- Year 500- Year  Upstream of Benton Street 2,100d 2,170a 2,170a 2,200a  Upstream of Kifer Road 2,550d 2,820d 3,000d 3,340d  Upstream of Lawrence Expressway 2,050d 2,310d 2,370d 2,540d  Upstream of Pomeroy Avenue 2,190d 2,200d 2,200d 2,200d  Upstream of U.S. Highway 101 2,760d 3,020d 3,200d 3,550d  Upstream of State Highway 237 3,010d 3,420d 5,000d 5,100d Calera Creek  At confluence with Berryessa Creek b B 920 b  Upstream of Interstate Highway 680 b B 850 b Canoas Creek  At Blossom Hill Road 1,320 1,390 1,400 1,420  At Capitol Expressway 1,850 1,910 1,960 2,000  At confluence with Guadalupe River 1,900a 1,950a 1,970a 2,000a  At Cottle Road 480 500 510 530  At Santa Teresa Boulevard 780 810 830 850  Upstream of Nightingale Drive 1,990 2,250 2,350 2,500 Concepcion Drainage  At Alto Verde Lane 22 51 68 102 Coyote Creek  At Interstate Highway 280 3,880 10,180 12,630 14,700  At U.S. Geological Survey gage near Edenvale 4,050 10,940 13,670 14,700a  At U.S. geological Survey gage near Madrone 4,500 12,000 15,000 24,000  Downstream of Anderson Reservoir 4,500 11,000 15,000 23,500  Downstream of confluence with Berryessa Creek 7,300 10,500 12,800 15,000  Downstream of confluence with Silver Creek 6,200 10,300 12,500 15,000  Downstream of Silver Creek Diversion 4,000 10,680 13,330 14,700  Upstream of confluence with Fisher Creek 4,410 12,010 14,830 16,400a  Upstream of confluence with Silver Creek 3,790 9,920 11,400a 11,400a  Upstream of Silver Creek Diversion 4,000 10,680 13,330 14,700 358 PSC 09-12-2024 358 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 279 Flooding Source and Location Discharge (Cubic Feet/Second) 10- Year 50- Year 100- Year 500- Year Daves Creek  At Los Gatos Creek 130 230 270 370 East Little Llagas Creek  Approx. 1,500 ft. upstream of Sycamore Avenue b B 2,211 b  At confluence of Church Creek b B 5,355 b  At confluence of San Martin Creek b B 3,712 b  At U.S. Highway 101 700 1,200 1,300 1,700  At Tenant Creek confluence b B 2,881 b  Upstream of Seymour Avenue 330 430 460 490 East Penitencia Creek  Downtown of Trimble Road 280 340a 340a 340a  Upstream of confluence with Lower Penitencia Creek 480 970h 1,080h 1,280h  Upstream of Trimble Road 280 400 450 540 Fisher Creek  At confluence with Coyote Creek 700a 700a 700a 700a  At Kalana Avenue 470 960 1,130 1,500  At Miramonte Avenue 300 600 710 930  At Richmond Avenue 450 700 700 700  At Willow Springs Road 270 460 560 810  Downstream of Bailey Avenue 1,000 1,810 2,160 2,950  Upstream of Bailey Avenue 620 900 900 900  Upstream of Railroad 1,260 2,310 2,560 3,530 Fisher Creek Overbank  500 feet downstream of Richmond Avenue 250 630 900 1,540  At Bailey Avenue 220b 680 970 1,670 Guadalupe River  At Blossom Hill Road 3,500 8,500 11,500 19,000  At Coleman Avenue 7,000 13,500a 15,500a 15,500a  At Hedding Street 7,500 9,800a 9,800a 9,800a  At Hobson Avenue 7,000 11,400a 11,400a 11,400a  At Interstate Highway 280 6,000 7,000a 7,000a 7,000a  At Malone Road 5,600 11,500 11,900a 11,900a  At Railroad 5,800 10,900a 10,900a 10,900a 359 PSC 09-12-2024 359 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 280 Flooding Source and Location Discharge (Cubic Feet/Second) 10- Year 50- Year 100- Year 500- Year  Downstream of confluence with Canoas Creek 5,500 11,000 12,800 12,800  Downstream of confluence with Los Gatos Creek 7,000a 10,000a 10,000a 10,000a  Downstream of confluence with Ross Creek 4,500 9,000 12,500 20,000  Downstream of State Highway 17 7,500 12,000a 13,000a 17,000a  Upstream of confluence with Canoas Creek 4,500 9,500 12,000a 12,000a Hale Creek  At Berry Avenue 510 1,020 1,120 1,580  At confluence with Permanente Creek 710 880 900 960  At Cuesta Drive/North Springer Road 595 750 760 810  At Foothill Expressway 460 970 1,060 1,490  At Interstate Highway 280 101 218 284 440  At Rosita Avenue 595 700a 700a 700a  At Summer Hill Avenue 177 370 472 735 Lions Creek  Upstream of West Branch Llagas Creek b b 1,840 b Llagas Creek  At Rucker Avenue 4,900i 9,700i 10,200i 12,700i  At Railroad 2,200 3,900 5,300 8,500  Downstream of Buena Vista Creek 5,200 10,400 11,000 11,500a  Downstream of Chesbro Reservoir 900 3,100 3,900 6,000  Downstream of East Little Llagas Creek 5,000 9,800 10,400 12,900  Downstream of Hayes Creek 1,800 3,800 4,800 7,500  Downstream of Leavesley Road 5,200d 5,200d 5,200d 5,200d  Downstream of Live Oak Creek 5,500 9,700 9,800 10,300  Downstream of Machado Creek 1,400 3,600 4,500 7,000  Downstream of Panther Creek 5,300 9,700a 9,800a 10,100a  Downstream of Princevalle Drain b b 18,800 b  Downstream of West Branch Llagas Creek b b 17,800 b  Upstream of East Little Llagas Creek 2,500 4,300 5,400 8,600  Upstream of Jones Creek b b 18,800 b  Upstream of Panther Creek 5,200 9,400a 9,400a 9,400a 360 PSC 09-12-2024 360 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 281 Flooding Source and Location Discharge (Cubic Feet/Second) 10- Year 50- Year 100- Year 500- Year Los Gatos Creek  At Leigh Avenue 1,680 6,510 7,440 11,340  At Meridian Avenue 1,770 6,620 7,570 11,500  At Park Road 1,580 6,140 6,990 10,630  At State Highway 17 1,540k 6,370 7,300 11,200  Below Lexington Dam 1,610 5,850 6,650 9,630  Below Vasona Dam 1,550 6,100 6,950 10,600  Upstream of confluence with Guadalupe River 2,130 7,000 7,980 11,900 Lower Penitencia Creek  At Capitol Avenue 740 1,200 1,210 1,220  At confluence with Berryessa Creek 2,550 3,700 3,700 3,700  At Nimitz Freeway 1,750a 3,500a 3,500a 3,500a  At Redwood Avenue 850 1,150j 1,150j 1,150j  At South Main Street 7003 1,120j 1,120j 1,120j  Downstream of confluence with Berryessa Creek 2,550 2,600a 2,600a 2,600a  Downstream of confluence with East Penitencia Creek 800 1,670 2,150 2,840  Downstream of Trimble Road 320 1,060h 1,510h 1,620h Madrone Channel  At East Dunne Avenue b b 600 b  Upstream of East Little Llagas Creek b b 1,200 b Matadero Creek  Above confluence with Arastradero Creek 194 392 506 690  Approximately 270 feet upstream of U.S. Highway 101 b b 2,800 b  At Alma Street 1,380 2,000a 2,000a 2,000a  At corporate limits 402 795 970 1,300  At El Camino Real 1,100 2,100 2,280 2,690  At Louis Road 1,380 1,500b 1,500b 1,500b  At Middlefield Road 1,380 1,900b 1,500b 1,900b  At Railroad b b 2,435 b  At U.S. Highway 101 1,660 1,775 1,775 1,775  Below confluence with Arastradero Creek 325 660 790 1,030  Downstream of Foothill Expressway b b 1,900 b 361 PSC 09-12-2024 361 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 282 Flooding Source and Location Discharge (Cubic Feet/Second) 10- Year 50- Year 100- Year 500- Year  Downstream of Park Boulevard b b 2,700 b  Downstream of U.S. Highway 101 b b 3,100 b  Upstream of Railroad 1,220 2,170 2,520 2,810 Mayfield Slough At Embarcadero Road 10.00 b 10.5 10.8 Miller Slough  At U.S. Highway 101 b b 760 b Middle Road Overflow Area  At convergence with Llagas Creek b b 39 b  At divergence from West Little Llagas Creek b b 658 b North Morey Creek  Upstream of Lions Creek b b 485 b Pajaro River  At U.S. Highway 101 b b 30,500 b Permanente Creek  At confluence with Hale Creek 780l 1,650l 1,780l 1,980l  At El Camino Real 1,150 1,310 1,310 1,310  At Railroad 1,270 1,470 1,600 1,600  Downstream of confluence with Hale Creek 1,000a 1,000a 1,000a 1,000a  Downstream of East Charleston Road 1,390n 1,400a 1,400a 1,400a  Downstream of Miramonte Avenue 370 760 890 1,030  Downstream of Permanente Road 760 1,260 1,480 1,960  Downstream of Portland Avenue 1,340 2,050 2,050 2,050  Downstream of U.S. Highway 101 1,350 1,400a 1,400a 1,400a  Upstream of confluence with Hale Creek 440l 840l 980l 1,110l  Upstream of Interstate Highway 280 1,250 2,160 2,570 3,480  Upstream of Portland Avenue 1,340 2,220 2,700 3,440  Upstream of Tributary, 700 feet upstream of Highway 280 860 1,460 1,720 2,310  Upstream of U.S. Highway 101 1,350 2,250f 4,000f 7,100f Permanente Diversion  At confluence with Stevens Creek 1,230 1,280 1,390 1,550  At Grant Road 1,200 1,240a 1,340a 1,490a  Downstream of Carmel Terrace 1,075a 1,075a 1,075a 1,075a 362 PSC 09-12-2024 362 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 283 Flooding Source and Location Discharge (Cubic Feet/Second) 10- Year 50- Year 100- Year 500- Year  Downstream of Diversion Structure 1,190 1,610 1,610 1,610 Prospect Creek  Upstream of confluence with Calabazas Creek b b 635 b Purissima Creek  At corporate limits 147 320 402 588  At Interstate Highway 280 37 82 104 153  At Viscaino Road 88 182 227 320 San Francisco Bay At confluence of Guadalupe Slough and Coyote Creek b b 10.8 b At crossing of Railroad and Alviso Slough b b 11.3 B At Milpitas b b 11.4 B At Mountain View 10.2 b 10.7 11.0 At Palo Alto 9.9 b 10.5 10.8 At Sunnyvale 3.7 b 10.7 B San Francisquito Creek  At Alma Street 4,350 7,050 8,280 9,850a  At U.S. Geological Survey gage 4,050 6,700 7,860 10,500  Downstream of Chaucer Road 4,350 6,000a 6,000a 6,200a  Downstream of Middlefield Road 4,350 6,350a 6,690a 7,410a  Near Pasteur Drive 4,200 6,850 8,070 10,400  Upstream of Middlefield Road 4,350 7,100 8,330 9,850a San Francisquito Creek – Overflow  At Chaucer Street b b 563 B  At Middlefield Road b b 752 B  Combined Middlefield/Chaucer Overflows b b 1,080 B San Thomas Aquino Creek  At Cabrillo Avenue 2,560f 2,920f 2,920f 2,920f  At confluence with Saratoga Creek 5,900 8,300 9,100 11,000  At El Camino Real 3,570 3,610 3,610 3,610  At Homestead Road 3,450f 3,450f 3,450f 3,450f  At Pruneridge Avenue 3,460 3,820f 3,820f 3,820f  At Saratoga and Los Gatos Roads 620 990 1,140 1,480  At Stevens Creek Boulevard 3,300 3,820f 3,820f 3,820f 363 PSC 09-12-2024 363 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 284 Flooding Source and Location Discharge (Cubic Feet/Second) 10- Year 50- Year 100- Year 500- Year  At U.S. Highway 101 5,900 8,300 9,100 11,000  At U.S. Highway 237 5,900 8,300 9,100 11,000  Downstream of Railroad 5,900 8,300 9,100 11,000  Upstream of Westmont Avenue 2,000 2,900 3,200 4,077o  Near Bicknell and Quito Roads 670 1,050 1,230 1,580  Near Old Adobe and Quito Roads 730 1,150 1,350 1,720 Saratoga Creek  At confluence with San Tomas Aquino Creek 2,700 3,750 4,100 4,800  At El Camino Road 2,700 3,750 4,100 4,800  At Herriman Avenue 1,550 3,020 3,750 4,630  At Homestead Road 2,700 3,750 4,100 4,800  At Kiely Boulevard 2,700 3,750 4,100 4,800  At Stevens Creek Boulevard 2,500 3,500 3,900 4,600  At U.S. Geological Survey gage at Springer 1,350 2,750 3,490 4,450  At Railroad 1,760 3,230 3,950 4,800  Downstream of Benton Street 2,700 3,750 4,100 4,800  Downstream of Kiely Boulevard 2,700 3,750 4,100 4,800  Downstream of Warburton Avenue 2,700 3,750 4,100 4,800 Silver Creek  At confluence with Coyote Creek 2,550 2,650 2,670 2,750  At intersection of King and McKee Roads 2,000a 2,000a 2,000a 2,000a  At Interstate Highway 680 2,210 2,400 2,400 2,400  At Ocala Avenue 1,530 2,000p 2,000p 2,000p  Downstream of confluence with Thompson Creek 2,080 3,200 3,600 4,300  Downstream of Cunningham Avenue 1,420p 2,150p 2,580p 2,600p  Downstream of confluence with Miguelita Creek 2,300 2,300 2,300 2,300  Downstream of confluence with North Babb Creek 1,500a 1,500a 1,500a 1,500a  Downstream of confluence with South Babb Creek 1,940 2,600 2,700 2,700 Smith Creek  At Railroad 200 370 440 610  At Wedgewood Avenue 160 300 350 480 364 PSC 09-12-2024 364 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 285 Flooding Source and Location Discharge (Cubic Feet/Second) 10- Year 50- Year 100- Year 500- Year  Below Smith Creek Drive 125 230 280 390 South Babb Creek  At Clayton Road 390 760 890 1,150  At confluence with Silver Creek 200a 200a 200a 200a  Downstream of White Road 390a 390a 390a 390a  Upstream of Clayton Road B b 890 B  Upstream of Lochner Drive 400 550a 550a 550a  Upstream of White Road 400 570a 570a 570a South Morey Creek  Upstream of Lions Creek B b 420 B Stevens Creek  At Crittenden Lane 2,350g 2,350g 2,350g 2,350g  At Homestead Road 1,110m 4,530 5,570 7,470  At Interstate Highway 280 1,110m 4,460 5,460 7,310  At Stevens Creek Boulevard 1,110m 4,430m 5,430 7,240  At U.S. Geological Survey gaging station No. 262 1,200 2,800 5,400 7,000  At U.S. Highway 101 3,030 5,550 5,750 5,950  Downstream of Interstate Highway 280 1,110 4,460 5,460 7,310  Downstream of Junipero Serra 1,550 3,200 5,580 7,650  Downstream of Stevens Creek Dam 1,140 4,440 5,280 6,940  Downstream of Railroad 2,750 5,350g 5,350g 5,350g  Upstream of Junipero Serra 1,500 3,150 5,500 7,500  Upstream of Permanente Diversion 1,750 3,600 6,000 8,200  Upstream of Railroad 2,750 6,110 7,360 9,610 Sunnyvale East Channel  Downstream of Caribbean Drive B b 1,100 B Sunnyvale West Channel  Downstream of Highway 237 B b 360 B Tennant Creek  Approximately 1,250 feet upstream of Hill Avenue B b 420 B  Downstream of Maple Avenue B b 650 B  Upstream of confluence with East Little Llagas Creek B b 2,015 B 365 PSC 09-12-2024 365 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 286 Flooding Source and Location Discharge (Cubic Feet/Second) 10- Year 50- Year 100- Year 500- Year Thompson Creek  2,000 feet downstream of Aborn Road 1,440 2,550 3,000 3,700  At Aborn Road 1,440 2,350 2,700 3,250  At Quimby Road 1,480 1,900a 1,900a 1,900a  Downstream of Yerba Buena Creek 1,060 1,750 1,950 2,400 Upper Penitencia Creek  At Capitol Avenue 1,350a 1,350a 1,350a 1,350a  At confluence with Coyote Creek 1,110 1,110 1,110 1,110  At Gridley Street 1,460 3,050 3,600 4,950  Upstream of North Jackson Avenue 1,350a 1,350a 1,350a 1,350a  At King Road 960a 960a 960a 960b  At Mabury Avenue 1,050a 1,050a 1,050a 1,050a  At Upper Penitencia Road 1,460 2,810a 2,950a 2,950a  At U.S. Geological survey gage at Dorel Road 1,400 2,940 3,600 5,170 Uvas Creek  At confluence with Bodfish Creek B b 10,910 B  At confluence with Little Arthur Creek B b 8,500 B  At downstream face of Watsonville Road Bridge B b 10,360 B  At Thomas Road B b 14,000 B  At Railroad B b 5,2003 B  At U.S. Highway 101 B b 8,0003 B  At Uvas Road B b 7,800 B  Downstream of Hecker Pass Road B b 13,550 B  Downstream of Santa Teresa Boulevard B b 14,000 B Uvas Creek – East Overbank Above Highway 101  Approximately 1,200 feet above U.S. Highway 101 Q b 2,200 B  At U.S. Highway 101 Q b 1,100 B Uvas Creek – East Overbank Above Railroad  At downstream limit of flooding Q b 3,200 B  At upstream limit of flooding Q b 2,100 B Watson Road Overflow Area  At convergence with Llagas Creek B b 447 B 366 PSC 09-12-2024 366 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 287 Flooding Source and Location Discharge (Cubic Feet/Second) 10- Year 50- Year 100- Year 500- Year  At divergence from West Little Llagas Creek B b 97 B West Branch Llagas Creek  Downstream of divergence from West Branch Llagas Creek – East Split B b 160 B  Upstream of divergence from West Branch Llagas Creek – East Split B b 1,400 B West Branch Llagas Creek – Lower Split  At Day Road Interceptor (NRCS PL566) Q b 1,200 B West Branch Llagas Creek – Middle Split  Downstream of Highland Avenue Q q 80 Q West Branch Llagas Creek – Upper Split  Upstream of Highland Avenue Q q 200 Q West Little Llagas Creek  1,000 feet upstream of Wright Avenue A a 1882 A  At Fourth Street A a 9002 A  At U.S. Highway 101 A a 1,080b A  Downstream of Edmundson Avenue A a 1,269 A  Downstream of Monterey Highway A a 8132 A  Downstream of Railroad A a 4602 A  Upstream of Llagas Avenue A a 1,702b A  Upstream of Monterey Highway A a 1,936 A  Upstream of Seymour Avenue A a 1,770b A Wildcat Creek  Above Portos Drive 480 810 960 1,230  At Saratoga and Los Gatos Roads 310 500 570 740  Below Douglas Lane 430 710 840 1,070 a Decrease in flow rate based on capacity restrictions. b Data not available/computed. c Discharge decrease due to Barron Creek Diversion. d Flow rate accounts for upstream channel spills. e Slow rate reflects upstream capacity restriction. f Flow influenced by spill from adjoining watercourse. g Flow reduction due to bridge or channel capacity restriction. h Increase in flow rate due to spills from neighboring subbasins. i Flow rate reduction due to attenuation in the floodplain. j Reduction in flood rate due to storage behind railroad. k Flow rate reduction due to attenuation in reservoirs. l High flows affected by Permanente Diversion. m Decrease in flow rate due to storage along channel. n High flows diverted to Stevens Creek. o Logarithm extrapolation. p Flow rate reduction due to storage in Lake Cunningham. q Flooding due to spill—drainage area not applicable. 367 PSC 09-12-2024 367 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 288 13.2.7 Warning Time Advanced warning is essential for quick and effective response to a flood threat. Because of the sequential pattern of weather conditions needed to cause serious flooding, occurrence of a flood without warning is unusual. Warning times for floods can be between 24 and 48 hours. Flash flooding can be less predictable, but populations in potential hazard areas can be warned in advance of flash flooding danger. NWS issues watches and warnings when forecasts indicate rivers may approach bank-full levels. Flood extent or severity categories used by NWS include minor flooding, moderate flooding, and major flooding, based on property damage and public threat261F 262:  Minor Flooding: Minimal or no property damage, but possibly some public threat or inconvenience.  Moderate Flooding: Some inundation of structures and roads near streams. Some necessary evacuations of people and/or transfer of property to higher elevations.  Major Flooding: Extensive inundation of structures and roads. Significant evacuations of people and/or transfer of property to higher elevations. When a watch is issued, the public should prepare for the possibility of a flood. When a warning is issued, the public is advised to stay tuned to a local radio station for further information and be prepared to take quick action if needed. A warning means a flood is imminent, generally within 12 hours, or is occurring. Local media broadcast NWS warnings. Thresholds for flood warnings have been established on some of the major rivers in Santa Clara County, based on available stream gage information. Current stream flows are gathered from the following USGS stream gauges in the county262F 263:  USGS 11153000 Pacheco Creek, Dunneville, CA  USGS 11153650 Llagas Creek, Gilroy, CA  USGS 11164500 San Francisquito Creek, Stanford University  USGS 11169025 Guadalupe River along Highway 101, San José, CA  USGS 11169500 Saratoga Creek, Saratoga, CA  USGS 11169800 Coyote Creek, Gilroy, CA  USGS 11173200 Arroyo Hondo, San José CA 13.3 Cascading Impacts One of the most problematic cascading impacts of flooding is bank or coastal erosion, which in some cases can be more harmful than the actual flood. This is especially true in the upper courses of rivers with steep gradients, where floodwaters may pass quickly and without much damage, but scour the banks, edging properties closer to the floodplain or causing them to fall in. Flooding is also responsible for hazards such as landslides or mud flows when high flows over -saturate soils on steep slopes, causing them to fail. In California, there are significant ties between wildfire, floods, and subsequently landslides as one hazard cascades into the next. 262 National Weather Service. (n.d.). Severe Weather 101 – Floods. https://www.nssl.noaa.gov/education/svrwx101/floods/faq/ 263 U.S. Geological Survey. (2023). Current Conditions for California: Streamflow. https://waterdata.usgs.gov/ca/nwis/current/?type=flow 368 PSC 09-12-2024 368 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 289 Hazardous materials spills are also a secondary hazard of flooding if storage tanks rupture and spill into streams, rivers, or storm sewers. Debris of any kind could impact water quality and change the natural flow of water. This could potentially increase the risk next time there is a storm event. Floods could also cause dam failure, or overtopping. The risk of dam failure is described more in Section 12. This risk is of particular concern because it may create a flood substantially larger than the original flood. Depending on the topography of the area downstream of a dam failure event, the floodwaters could remain constrained in a narrow canyon area, preventing them from slowing down before the reach urbanized flatter terrain.263F 264 Furthermore, while floodwaters will travel down and absorb into the ground in flat areas, the water will also pick up sediment and debris as it travels. The sediment and debris in the water may pose additional risks. 13.4 Exposure The Level 2 Hazus protocol was used to assess flood risk in the OA. The model used census data at the block level and FEMA floodplain data, which has a level of accuracy acceptable for planning purposes. Where possible, the Hazus default data was enhanced using local GIS data from local, state, and federal sources. 13.4.1 Population Population counts of those living in the floodplain within the OA were generated by estimating percent of residential buildings in each jurisdiction within the 1-percent-annual-chance flood hazard areas and multiplying this by total population within the OA. This approach yielded an estimated population in the OA of 176,882 living within the 100-year floodplain (9.14% percent of the total OA population).Table 88 lists population estimates by jurisdiction living in the 10-percent, 1-percent and 0.2-percent annual chance flood hazard areas. The City of Gilroy, City of Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, San José, Campbell, Milpitas, and Morgan hill have the highest percentage of population exposed to 1% annual flood hazard, Table 88: Population Within the 10-Percent, 1-Percent, and 0.2-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Areas Jurisdiction 10-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area 1-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area 0.2-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area Population Exposeda % Total of Population Population Exposeda % of Total Population Population Exposeda % of Total Population Campbell 2446 5.63 3685 8.48 4608 10.61 Cupertino 0 0.00 1311 2.16 1740 2.87 Gilroy 5,742 9.65 10,361 17.42 13,398 22.53 Los Altos 0 0.00 0 0.00 11 0.03 Los Altos Hills 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Los Gatos 273 0.81 1,216 3.63 1,485 4.43 264 Santa Clara Valley Water District. (2017, October). Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. https://s3.us-west- 1.amazonaws.com/valleywater.org.us-west-1/s3fs-public/2021- 05/R14163%20%202017%20FINAL%20LOCAL%20HAZARD%20MITIGATION%20PLAN%20v.%2004 -09- 21%20(04-12-21).pdf 369 PSC 09-12-2024 369 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 290 Jurisdiction 10-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area 1-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area 0.2-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area Population Exposeda % Total of Population Population Exposeda % of Total Population Population Exposeda % of Total Population Milpitas 2,691 3.35 5,335 6.65 9,457 11.78 Monte Sereno 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 Morgan Hill 1,758 3.90 2,979 6.61 3,412 7.58 Mountain View 1,687 2.05 4,063 4.95 6,525 7.95 Palo Alto 617 0.90 629 0.92 4,534 6.62 San José 52,257 5.15 111,750 11.02 190,009 18.74 Santa Clara (city) 10,239 8.02 16,644 13.04 35,182 27.57 Saratoga 587 1.89 1,487 4.79 1,790 5.77 Sunnyvale 2,786 1.80 13,969 9.02 21,284 13.75 Unincorporated County 2,241 2.48 3,453 3.83 4,579 5.07 Total 83,324 4.31 176,882 9.14 298,014 15.40 13.4.2 Property Exposed Value Table 89, Table 90, and Table 91 summarize the estimated value of exposed buildings in the OA. This methodology estimated $8.7 billion worth of exposure to the 10-percent-annual-chance flood, representing 2.3 percent of the total replacement value of the OA, $22.4 billion worth of building-and- contents exposure to the 1-percent-annual-chance flood, representing 9.1 percent of the total replacement value of the OA, and $40 billion worth of building-and-contents exposure to the 0.2-percent- annual-chance flood, representing 10.56 percent of the total. Table 89: Value of Structures in the 10-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area Jurisdiction Estimated Value within the Floodplain % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Total Campbell $46,559,000 $43,284,000 $140,698,000 1.60 Cupertino $0 $0 $0 0.00 Gilroy $96,223,000 $165,308,000 $574,813,000 4.86 Los Altos $0 $0 $0 0.00 Los Altos Hills $0 $0 $0 0.00 Los Gatos $16,191,000 $22,610,000 $109,895,000 1.14 Milpitas $44,056,000 $47,811,000 $224,231,000 1.40 Monte Sereno $0 $0 $0 0.00 Morgan Hill $30,975,000 $18,233,000 $67,576,000 0.63 Mountain View $22,645,000 $33,678,000 $140,380,000 0.83 370 PSC 09-12-2024 370 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 291 Jurisdiction Estimated Value within the Floodplain % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Total Palo Alto $7,892,000 $163,325,000 $91,985,000 0.45 San José $1,187,925,000 $2,015,872,000 $6,140,963,000 3.56 Santa Clara (city) $178,713,000 $233,150,000 $766,887,000 2.77 Saratoga $21,643,000 $16,633,000 $51,942,000 0.56 Sunnyvale $41,315,000 $68,059,000 $216,544,000 0.74 Unincorporated County $67,392,000 $67,064,000 $255,548,000 1.25 Total $1,761,529,000 $2,895,027,000 $8,781,462,000 2.30 Table 90: Value of Structures in the 1-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area Jurisdiction Estimated Value within the Floodplain % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Total Campbell $91,932,000 $80,508,000 $257,047,000 8.48 Cupertino $24,021,000 $18,081,000 $59,916,000 2.16 Gilroy $225,196,000 $420,220,000 $1,346,610,000 17.42 Los Altos $1,351,000 $710,000 $2,234,000 0.00 Los Altos Hills $0 $0 $0 0.00 Los Gatos $30,840,000 $42,934,000 $168,827,000 3.63 Milpitas $115,342,000 $137,652,000 $548,317,000 6.65 Monte Sereno $0 $0 $0 0.00 Morgan Hill $115,482,000 $81,114,000 $259,011,000 6.61 Mountain View $75,707,000 $109,233,000 $416,222,000 4.95 Palo Alto $18,739,000 $40,559,000 $157,789,000 0.92 San José $3,271,469,000 $5,761,915,000 $15,986,581,000 11.02 Santa Clara (city) $360,286,000 $476,086,000 $1,462,841,000 13.04 Saratoga $100,151,000 $73,527,000 $226,648,000 4.79 Sunnyvale $208,800,000 $260,543,000 $832,836,000 9.02 Unincorporated County $157,862,000 $178,277,000 $682,246,000 3.83 Total $4,797,178,000 $7,681,359,000 $22,407,125,000 9.14 371 PSC 09-12-2024 371 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 292 Table 91: Value of Structures in the 0.2-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area Jurisdiction Estimated Value within the Floodplain % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Total Campbell $127,488,000 $110,733,000 $355,863,000 4.04 Cupertino $36,263,000 $29,154,000 $94,619,000 0.66 Gilroy $319,375,000 $641,660,000 $2,015,006,000 17.03 Los Altos $1,791,000 $948,000 $3,090,000 0.04 Los Altos Hills $0 $0 $0 0.00 Los Gatos $39,193,000 $56,508,000 $212,717,000 2.21 Milpitas $191,075,000 $242,248,000 $934,245,000 5.84 Monte Sereno $0 $0 $0 0.00 Morgan Hill $161,794,000 $109,502,000 $350,641,000 3.25 Mountain View $119,699,000 $166,238,000 $669,226,000 3.95 Palo Alto $76,861,000 $100,127,000 $367,056,000 1.81 San José $5,656,110,000 $10,606,664,000 $28,947,287,000 16.79 Santa Clara (city) $812,021,000 $1,177,901,000 $3,760,129,000 13.60 Saratoga $127,579,000 $96,493,000 $289,244,000 3.09 Sunnyvale $351,074,000 $419,774,000 $1,361,761,000 4.64 Unincorporated County $225,387,000 $262,239,000 $929,177,000 4.53 Total $8,245,710,000 $14,020,189,000 $40,290,061,000 10.56 13.4.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure Table 92, Table 93, and Table 94 summarize the critical facilities and infrastructure in the 10-, 1-, and 0.2-percent-annual-chance flood hazard areas. Details are provided in the following sections. Toxic Release Inventory Reporting Facilities Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) facilities are known to manufacture, process, store, or otherwise use certain chemicals above minimum thresholds. If damaged by a flood, these facilities could release chemicals that cause cancer or other human health effects, significant adverse acute human health effects, or significant adverse environmental effects.264F 265 During a flood event, containers holding these materials can rupture and leak into the surrounding area, disastrously affecting the environment and residents. Seventy-eight facilities within the 1-percent-annual-chance flood zone are TRI reporting facilities. 265 Environmental Protection Agency. (n.d.). Flooding. https://www.epa.gov/natural-disasters/flooding 372 PSC 09-12-2024 372 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 293 Table 92: Critical Facilities in the 10-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area Jurisdiction Number of Facilities in the Floodplain Essential Facilities Transportation Utilities Community Assets Hazardous Materials Total Campbell 0 1 0 1 0 2 Cupertino 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gilroy 1 8 0 1 0 10 Los Altos 0 0 0 0 0 0 Los Altos Hills 0 0 0 0 0 0 Los Gatos 0 6 0 0 0 6 Milpitas 2 2 0 1 1 6 Monte Sereno 0 0 0 0 0 0 Morgan Hill 0 0 0 1 0 1 Mountain View 0 0 0 1 2 3 Palo Alto 0 1 0 0 3 4 San José 17 50 1 19 37 124 Santa Clara (city) 3 2 0 2 9 16 Saratoga 0 3 0 0 0 3 Sunnyvale 1 1 0 0 2 4 Unincorporated County 0 32 0 3 0 35 Total 24 106 1 29 54 214 Table 93: Critical Facilities in the 1-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area Jurisdiction Number of Facilities in the Floodplain Essential Facilities Transportation Utilities Community Assets Hazardous Materials Total Campbell 1 1 0 2 0 4 Cupertino 0 2 0 1 0 3 Gilroy 5 15 0 5 1 26 Los Altos 0 0 0 0 0 0 Los Altos Hills 0 0 0 0 0 0 Los Gatos 0 7 0 2 0 9 Milpitas 3 10 0 2 1 16 Monte Sereno 0 0 0 0 0 0 Morgan Hill 0 1 0 1 0 2 Mountain View 1 1 0 3 3 8 373 PSC 09-12-2024 373 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 294 Jurisdiction Number of Facilities in the Floodplain Essential Facilities Transportation Utilities Community Assets Hazardous Materials Total Palo Alto 0 1 0 0 4 5 San José 35 87 0 38 48 208 Santa Clara (city) 5 2 3 4 18 32 Saratoga 0 7 0 1 0 8 Sunnyvale 4 2 0 2 3 11 Unincorporated County 4 49 0 3 0 56 Total 58 185 3 64 78 388 Table 94: Critical Facilities in the 0.2-Percent Annual Chance Flood Hazard Area Jurisdiction Number of Facilities in the Floodplain Essential Facilities Transportation Utilities Community Assets Hazardous Materials Total Campbell 1 1 0 2 0 4 Cupertino 0 4 0 1 0 5 Gilroy 7 16 0 6 1 30 Los Altos 0 0 0 0 0 0 Los Altos Hills 0 0 0 0 0 0 Los Gatos 0 8 0 2 0 10 Milpitas 4 11 0 3 3 21 Monte Sereno 0 0 0 0 0 0 Morgan Hill 1 1 0 1 0 3 Mountain View 2 1 0 4 3 10 Palo Alto 2 3 1 0 5 11 San José 52 125 7 60 62 306 Santa Clara (city) 8 7 2 7 51 75 Saratoga 1 11 0 1 0 13 Sunnyvale 7 2 0 3 6 18 Unincorporated County 4 54 0 4 0 62 Total 89 244 10 94 131 568 374 PSC 09-12-2024 374 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 295 Utilities and Infrastructure It is important to determine who may be at risk if infrastructure is damaged by flooding. Roads or railroads that are blocked or damaged can isolate residents and can prevent access throughout the OA, including for emergency service providers needing to get to vulnerable populations or to make repairs. Bridges washed out or blocked by floods or debris also can cause isolation. Water and sewer systems can be flooded or backed up, causing health problems. Underground utilities can be damaged. Dikes can fail or be overtopped, inundating the land that they protect. The following sections describe specific types of critical infrastructure. Roads The following major roads in the OA pass through the 1-percent-annual-chance flood zone and thus are exposed to flooding:  US 101  Interstate 280  Interstate 680  Interstate 880  State Route 9  State Route 17  State Route 82  State Route 85  State Route 87  State Route 152  State Route 237 Some of these roads are built above the flood level, and others function as levees to prevent flooding. Still, in severe flood events these roads can be blocked or damaged, preventing access to some areas. Infrastructure Lifelines Flooding events can significantly impact critical infrastructure lifelines such as highways, bridges, airports, water and wastewater facilities and communication facilities. An analysis showed that there are 629 infrastructure lifelines (241 are bridges) that are in or cross over the 1-percent-annual-chance flood zone and 928 infrastructure lifelines in the 0.2-percent-annual-chance flood zone. Water and Sewer Infrastructure Water and sewer systems can be affected by flooding. Floodwaters can back up drainage systems, causing localized flooding. Culverts can be blocked by debris from flood events, also causing localized urban flooding. Floodwaters can get into drinking water s upplies, causing contamination. Sewer systems can be backed up, causing wastewater to spill into homes, neighborhoods, rivers, and streams. Levees SCVWD constructed flood protection levees in the north, central, and southern portions of the county, some of which provide 1-percent-annual-chance flood protection. The levees along Uvas Creek, King Creek, Lyons Creek, and Coyote Creek participate in Corps’ Levee Program. Levees along the Guadalupe River do not participate. SCVWD does not believe the majority of levees could withstand intensities of a 1-percent annual chance flood. Additionally, coastal flooding from San Francisco Bay circumvents levees near the Bay. Moreover, current flood levels do not account for potential sea level rise, which would exacerbate vulnerability and further reduce the ability of the levees to prevent or reduce flooding. The presence and effects of levee systems in the Santa Clara County OA are not reflected on the FIRM, meaning that areas, structures, and populations vulnerable to failures of those levees cannot be determined. Levee failures could place large numbers of people and great amounts of property at risk. Unlike dams, levees do not serve any purpose beyond providing flood protection and (less frequently) recreational space for residents. A levee failure could be devastating, depending on severity of flooding and amount of land development present. In addition to damaging buildings, infrastructure, trees, and other large objects, levee failure can result in significant water quality and debris disposal issues. Severe erosion is also a consideration. 375 PSC 09-12-2024 375 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 296 13.4.4 Environment Loss estimation platforms such as Hazus are not currently equipped to measure environmental impacts of flood hazards. The best gauge of vulnerability of the environment would be a review of damage from past flood events. Loss data that segregates damage to the environment was not available at the time of this plan. Capturing this data from future events could be beneficial in measuring the vulnerability of the environment for future updates. Habitats that are expected to be impacted by riverine flooding are shown in Table 95. Table 95: Habitats Expected to Be Impacted by Riverine Flooding265F 266 Habitat Type FEMA 100-Year Storm Riverine Flooding Bay Wetlands: Coastal Salt Marsh and Coastal Brackish Marsh 1,695 acres (84%) Freshwater Wetland 2,350 acres (64%) Grassland 3,176 acres (2%) Riparian and Riverine 546 acres (19%) Freshwater Lake and Pond 1,792 acres (57%) Chaparral and Scrubland 358 acres (0.3%) Coastal Scrubland 9 acres (0.2%) Coniferous Forest 20 acres (0.2%) Hardwood Forest 314 acres (0.5%) Oak Woodland 1,341 ac (0.7%) Redwood Forest 40 ac (0.3%) Note: Given that vulnerability to riverine flooding is currently determined by FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS), it is possible that the flooding near the Bay could be occurring from either storm surge or riverine flooding. Specific strategies for each will be required once source confirmation is made. Habitats with vulnerability of less than 1% were not considered highly vulnerable. 266 County of Santa Clara Office of Sustainability and Climate Action. (2015, August). Silicon Valley 2.0 Climate Adaptation Guidebook. https://sustainability.sccgov.org/sites/g/files/exjcpb976/files/documents/1_150803_Final%20Guidebook_W_Appendic es.pdf 376 PSC 09-12-2024 376 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 297 Figure 65: 100-Year Floodplain Area Land Cover266F 267 13.5 Vulnerability Changes in Conditions: No change in vulnerability  The areas vulnerable to 1% and 0.2% flood events have as mapped in FIRMs have not changed.  Population growth and building growth in the OA have been slow.  Flooding can occur in localized areas not identified in special flood hazard areas (SFHAs) during heavy rain. These are more difficult to anticipate in advance and areas at risk may not yet have been recognized.  New development may alter local drainage patterns and change flood potential. 267 County of Santa Clara Office of Sustainability and Climate Action. (2015, August). Silicon Valley 2.0 Climate Adaptation Guidebook. https://sustainability.sccgov.org/sites/g/files/exjcpb976/files/documents/1_150803_Final%20Guidebook_W_Appendic es.pdf 377 PSC 09-12-2024 377 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 298  Warming temperature from climate change may alter the frequency and intensity of storms and increase the associated runoff. 13.5.1 Population Vulnerable Populations A geographic analysis of demographics using the Hazus model identified populations vulnerable to the flood hazard as follows:  Economically Disadvantaged Populations: It is estimated that 2.76 percent of the people within the 100-year floodplain are economically disadvantaged, defined as having household incomes of $20,000 or less.  Population over 64 Years Old: It is estimated that 20,723 persons or 11.7 percent of the population in the census blocks that intersect the 100-year floodplain are over 64 years old.  Population under 16 Years Old: It is estimated that 38,185 persons or 19.9 percent of the population within census blocks located in or near the 100-year floodplain are under 18 years of age. Commuters and visitors are also vulnerable to the flood hazard, in part because they may not be as familiar with evacuation routes and areas that typically flood. Commuters whose workplaces or major transportation routes are in or near the 1-percent-annual-chance flood zone may be especially vulnerable. The most at-risk members of society often experience the greatest losses from disasters. Socially vulnerable populations often live in high-risk floodplains due to lack of affordable housing, historical inequitable land use and housing practices, and other societal barriers. Disasters can exacerbate pre - existing racial and social disparities. According to Plan Bay Area 2050, homes in Equity Priority Communities may be over 50% more likely to experience flooding from sea level rise.267F 268 Estimated Impacts on Persons and Households Impacts on persons and households in the OA were estimated for the 10-, 1-, and 0.2-percent-annual- chance flood events through the Level 2 Hazus analysis . Table 96 summarizes the results. Table 96: Estimated Flood Impact on Persons Jurisdiction Number of Displaced Persons Number of Persons Requiring Short-Term Shelter 10% Annual Chance Flood 1% Annual Chance Flood 0.2% Annual Chance Flood 10% Annual Chance Flood 1% Annual Chance Flood 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Campbell 2,297 3,796 5,047 106 204 232 Cupertino 0 1,078 1,543 0 199 284 Gilroy 5,343 9,782 13,209 304 443 581 Los Altos 0 11 21 0 1 1 Los Altos Hills 0 0 0 0 0 0 268 Plan Bay Area. (2021, October). Final Plan Bay Area 2050. https://www.planbayarea.org/finalplan2050 378 PSC 09-12-2024 378 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 299 Jurisdiction Number of Displaced Persons Number of Persons Requiring Short-Term Shelter 10% Annual Chance Flood 1% Annual Chance Flood 0.2% Annual Chance Flood 10% Annual Chance Flood 1% Annual Chance Flood 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Los Gatos 571 980 1140 48 53 85 Milpitas 4,288 8,115 13,191 304 451 592 Monte Sereno 0 0 0 0 0 0 Morgan Hill 1,424 2,700 3,304 32 32 38 Mountain View 1,505 4,056 6,842 51 244 336 Palo Alto 313 392 3,872 58 72 137 San José 54,856 115,365 192,561 3,879 7,005 11,625 Santa Clara (city) 10,888 17,583 35,621 456 678 1,161 Saratoga 454 1,738 2,022 44 67 73 Sunnyvale 3,054 12,386 21,405 85 448 730 Unincorporated County 1,965 3,522 4,839 90 123 149 Total 86,958 181,504 304,617 5,457 10,020 16,024 Public Health and Safety Floods and their aftermath present numerous threats to public health and safety:  Unsafe food: Floodwaters contain disease-causing bacteria, dirt, oil, human and animal waste, and farm and industrial chemicals. Their contact with food items, including food crops in agricultural lands, can make that food unsafe to eat. Refrigerated and frozen foods are affected during power outages caused by flooding. Foods in cardboard, plastic bags, jars, bottles, and paper packaging may be unhygienic with mold contamination.  Contaminated drinking and washing water and poor sanitation: Flooding impairs clean water sources with pollutants. The pollutants also saturate into the groundwater. Flooded wastewater treatment plants can be overloaded, resulting in backflows of raw sewage. Private wells can be contaminated by floodwaters. Private sewage disposal systems can become a cause of infection if they or overflow.  Mosquitoes and animals: Floods provide new breeding grounds for mosquitoes in wet areas and stagnant pools. The public should dispose of dead animals that can carry viruses and diseases only in accordance with guidelines issued by local animal control authorities. Leptospirosis—a bacterial disease associated predominantly with rats—often accompanies floods in developing countries, although the risk is low in industrialized regions unless cuts or wounds have direct contact with disease-contaminated floodwaters or animals.  Mold and mildew: Excessive exposure to mold and mildew can cause flood victims—especially those with allergies and asthma—to contract upper respiratory diseases, triggering cold-like symptoms. Molds grow in as short a period as 24 to 48 hours in wet and damp areas of buildings and homes that have not been cleaned after flooding, such as water-infiltrated walls, floors, carpets, toilets, and bathrooms. Very small mold spores can be easily inhaled by human bodies and, in large enough quantities, cause allergic reactions, asthma episodes, and other respiratory problems. Infants, children, elderly people, and pregnant women are considered most vulnerable to mold-induced health problems. 379 PSC 09-12-2024 379 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 300  Carbon monoxide poisoning: In the event of power outages following floods, some people use alternative fuels for heating or cooking in enclosed or partly enclosed spaces, such as small gasoline engines, stoves, generators, lanterns, gas ranges, charcoal, or wood. Built -up carbon monoxide from these sources can poison people and animals.  Hazards when reentering and cleaning flooded homes and buildings: Flooded buildings can pose significant health hazards to people entering them. Electrical power systems can become hazardous. Gas leaks can trigger fire and explosion. Flood debris —such as broken bottles, wood, stones, and walls—may cause injuries to those cleaning damaged buildings. Containers of hazardous chemicals may be buried under flood debris. Hazardous dust and mold can circulate through a building and be inhaled by those engaged in cleanup and restoration.  Mental stress and fatigue: People who live through a devastating flood can experience long- term psychological impact. The expense and effort required to repair flood-damaged homes places severe financial and psychological burdens on the people affected. Post-flood recovery can cause, anxiety, anger, depression, lethargy, hyperactivity, and sleeplessness. There is also a long-term concern among the affected that their homes can be flooded again in the future. Current loss estimation models such as Hazus are not equipped to measure public health impacts such as these. The best preparation for these effects includes awareness that they can occur, education of the public on prevention, and planning to deal with them during responses to flood events. 13.5.2 Property Structures and Contents Hazus calculates losses to structures from flooding by looking at depth of flooding and type of structure. Using historical flood insurance claim data, Hazus estimates the percentage of damage to structures and their contents by applying established damage functions to an inventory. The analysis is summarized in Table 97, Table 98, and Table 99 for the 10-, 1-, and 0.2-percent-annual-chance flood events, respectively. Table 97: Loss Estimates for 10-Percent-Annual-Chance Flood Jurisdiction Structures Impacteda Estimated Loss Associated with Flood % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Total Campbell 278 $46,559,000 $43,284,000 $140,698,000 1.60 Cupertino 0 $0 $0 $0 0 Gilroy 382 $96,223,000 $165,308,000 $574,813,000 4.86 Los Altos 0 $0 $0 $0 0 Los Altos Hills 0 $0 $0 $0 0 Los Gatos 17 $16,191,000 $22,610,000 $109,895,000 1.14 Milpitas 234 $44,056,000 $47,811,000 $224,231,000 1.40 Monte Sereno 0 $0 $0 $0 0 Morgan Hill 373 $30,975,000 $18,233,000 $67,576,000 .63 Mountain View 112 $22,645,000 $33,678,000 $140,380,000 .83 Palo Alto 40 $7,892,000 $163,325,000 $91,985,000 .45 San José 4,541 $1,187,925,000 $2,015,872,000 $6,140,963,000 3.56 380 PSC 09-12-2024 380 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 301 Jurisdiction Structures Impacteda Estimated Loss Associated with Flood % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Total Santa Clara (city) 918 $178,713,000 $233,150,000 $766,887,000 2.77 Saratoga 74 $21,643,000 $16,633,000 $51,942,000 .56 Sunnyvale 245 $41,315,000 $68,059,000 $216,544,000 .74 Unincorporated County 104 $67,392,000 $67,064,000 $255,548,000 1.25 Total 7,318 $1,761,529,000 $2,895,027,000 $8,781,462,000 2.30 Note: Values shown are accurate for comparison of results in this plan. See Section 6 for discussion of data limitations. a Impacted structures are those with finished floor elevations below the flood event water surface elevation. These structures are the most likely to receive significant damage in a flood event. Table 98: Loss Estimates for 1-Percent-Annual-Chance Flood Jurisdiction Structures Impacteda Estimated Loss Associated with Flood % of Total Replaceme nt Value Structure Contents Total Campbell 478 $91,932,000 $80,508,000 $257,047,000 2.92 Cupertino 61 $24,021,000 $18,081,000 $59,916,000 .42 Gilroy 1,116 $225,196,000 $420,220,000 $1,346,610,000 11.38 Los Altos 0 $1,351,000 $710,000 $2,234,000 .03 Los Altos Hills 0 $0 $0 $0 0.00 Los Gatos 131 $30,840,000 $42,934,000 $168,827,000 1.76 Milpitas 797 $115,342,000 $137,652,000 $548,317,000 3.43 Monte Sereno 0 $0 $0 $0 0 Morgan Hill 722 $115,482,000 $81,114,000 $259,011,000 2.4 Mountain View 414 $75,707,000 $109,233,000 $416,222,000 2.46 Palo Alto 70 $18,739,000 $40,559,000 $157,789,000 .79 San José 12,496 $3,271,469,000 $5,761,915,000 $15,986,581,000 9.27 Santa Clara (city) 1,999 $360,286,000 $476,086,000 $1,462,841,000 5.29 Saratoga 276 $100,151,000 $73,527,000 $226,648,000 2.42 Sunnyvale 1,520 $208,800,000 $260,543,000 $832,836,000 2.84 381 PSC 09-12-2024 381 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 302 Jurisdiction Structures Impacteda Estimated Loss Associated with Flood % of Total Replaceme nt Value Structure Contents Total Unincorporated County 346 $157,862,000 $178,277,000 $682,246,000 3.33 Total 20,366 $4,797,178,000 $7,681,359,000 $22,407,125,000 5.87 Note: Values shown are accurate for comparison of results in this plan. See Section 6 for discussion of data limitations. a Impacted structures are those with finished floor elevations below the flood event water surface elevation. These structures are the most likely to receive significant damage in a flood event. Table 99: Loss Estimates for 0.2-Percent-Annual-Chance Flood Jurisdiction Structures Impacteda Estimated Loss Associated with Flood % of Total Replacement Value Structure Contents Total Campbell 666 $127,488,000 $110,733,000 $355,863,000 4.04 Cupertino 83 $36,263,000 $29,154,000 $94,619,000 0.66 Gilroy 1,469 $319,375,000 $641,660,000 $2,015,006,000 17.03 Los Altos 0 $1,791,000 $948,000 $3,090,000 0.04 Los Altos Hills 0 $0 $0 $0 0.00 Los Gatos 147 $39,193,000 $56,508,000 $212,717,000 2.21 Milpitas 1,197 $191,075,000 $242,248,000 $934,245,000 5.84 Monte Sereno 0 $0 $0 $0 0 Morgan Hill 837 $161,794,000 $109,502,000 $350,641,000 3.25 Mountain View 732 $119,699,000 $166,238,000 $669,226,000 3.95 Palo Alto 495 $76,861,000 $100,127,000 $367,056,000 1.81 San José 22,052 $5,656,110,000 $10,606,664,000 $28,947,287,000 16.79 Santa Clara (city) 4,635 $812,021,000 $1,177,901,000 $3,760,129,000 13.60 Saratoga 357 $127,579,000 $96,493,000 $289,244,000 3.09 Sunnyvale 2,478 $351,074,000 $419,774,000 $1,361,761,000 4.64 Unincorporated County 541 $225,387,000 $262,239,000 $929,177,000 4.53 Total 35,689 $8,245,710,000 $14,020,189,000 $40,290,061,000 10.56 Note: Values shown are accurate for comparison of results in this plan. See Section 6 for discussion of data limitations. a Impacted structures are those with finished floor elevations below the flood event water surface elevation. These structures are the most likely to receive significant damage in a flood event. 382 PSC 09-12-2024 382 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 303 Key results are as follows:  There would be up to $8.7 billion of flood loss from a 10-percent-annual-chance flood event in the OA. This represents 2.3 percent of the total replacement value for the OA.  There would be up to $22.4 billion of flood loss from a 1-percent-annual-chance flood event in the OA. This represents 5.87 percent of the total replacement value for the OA.  There would be $40.29 billion of flood loss from a 0.2-percent-annual-chance flood event in the OA. This represents 10.56 percent of the total replacement value. Structures permitted or built in the OA before the initial FIRM date are called “pre-FIRM” structures, and structures built after the FIRM date are called “post-FIRM.” The insurance rate is different for the two types of structures. Generally, it can be assumed that unmitigated pre-FIRM structures are more vulnerable to flooding than post-FIRM. Flood-Caused Debris Left over debris from flooding can be costly to remove and have significant consequences if not dealt with properly. The Hazus analysis estimated the amount of flood-caused debris within the OA generated by flooding, as summarized in Table 100. The model breaks debris into three general categories; Finishes (dry wall, insulation, etc.), Structural (wood, brick, etc.), and Foundations (concrete slab, concrete block, rebar, etc.). Table 100: Estimated Flood-Caused Debris Annual Flood Chance Finishes (Tons) Structure (Tons) Foundation (Tons) Total Debris (Tons) 10% Annual- Chance Flood 24,095 3,963 3,847 31,905 1% Annual- Chance Flood 82,351 8,119 7,945 98,415 0.2% Annual- Chance Flood 162,896 14,307 14,287 191,490 Flood Insurance Flood Insurance Statistics Table 101 lists flood insurance statistics that help identify vulnerability in the OA. All 16 municipal planning partners participate in the NFIP, with 12,159 flood insurance policies providing $3.6 billion in insurance coverage. According to FEMA statistics, 1,556 flood insurance claims were paid between November 1978 and February 23, 2023, for a total of $22,996,576, an average of $14,779 per claim. Properties constructed after a FIRM has been adopted are eligible for reduced flood insurance rates. Such structures are less vulnerable to flooding since they were constructed after regulations and codes were adopted to decrease vulnerability. Properties built before a FIRM is adopted are more vulnerable to flooding because they do not meet code or are located in hazardous areas. The first FIRMs in the OA were available in 1975. 383 PSC 09-12-2024 383 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 304 Table 101: Flood Insurance Statistics268F 269 Jurisdiction Date of Entry Initial FIRM Effective Date # of Flood Insurance Policies as of 2/23/2023 Total Coverage Total Annual Premium Claims, 11/1978 to 2/23/2023 Value of Claims paid, 11/1978 to 2/23/2023 Campbell 06/30/1976 28 8,541,000 16,222 1 $0 Cupertino 04/18/1975 64 20,042,400 64,687 20 $812,171 Gilroy 06/04/1976 100 46,698,600 140,441 33 $287, 117 Los Altos 09/24/1976 101 31,769,400 79,333 13 $5,896 Los Altos Hills 11/26/1976 34 11,036,000 26,775 16 $45,641 Los Gatos 02/27/1976 66 20,606,800 39,411 17 $51,957 Milpitas 03/28/1975 1,025 288,494,700 1,062,641 69 $27,829 Monte Sereno 05/18/2009 9 3,150,000 5,123 4 $41,974 Morgan Hill 06/18/1980 309 93,061,100 285,955 74 $603,444 Mountain View 09/19/1975 344 117,867,000 263,363 8 $8,501 Palo Alto 09/06/1989 2,377 655, 737, 600 2,601,795 474 $8,936,790 San José 04/09/1976 4,872 1,351,586,300 4,412,960 626 $10,284,648 Santa Clara (city) 02/11/1977 683 222,286,800 643,583 29 $264,753 Saratoga 11/28/1975 67 22,554,900 58,630 17 $53,676 Sunnyvale 12/05/1975 527 183,134,600 543,354 10 $68,655 Unincorporated County 06/20/1978 276 74,048,500 410,772 130 $1,654,709 Unknown - 1,440 382,986,000 1,555,609 15 135,932 Total 12,322 $2,877,864,100 $12,210,654 1,556 $22,996,576 This data likely has some limitations. The “Unknown” category was not included in the 2016 dataset used in the 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan. It also reflects a decrease in policies since the 2017 plan in every jurisdiction except Los Altos, which gained a total of 18 policies, for a total of 5,000 less policies in force across the OA. It is unclear if this is due to the rising cost of flood insurance, voluntary suspension of flood insurance, or another reason. NFIP Participation As participating communities, each jurisdiction within the OA was required to adopt floodplain management criteria via local regulations that meets NFIP minimum standards. Multiple communities have adopted regulations that exceed these standards. Further detail is included in each annex in Volume II and in the following table. The special districts and fire department that participated in this plan update are not eligible to participate in the NFIP. 269 FEMA Region IX on 2/23/2023 384 PSC 09-12-2024 384 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 305 Table 102: Date of Floodplain Management Regulation Adoption Jurisdiction Adoption Date City of Campbell January, 2014 City of Cupertino June, 2016 City of Gilroy January, 2017 City of Los Altos March, 2009 City of Milpitas November, 1995 City of Morgan Hill September, 2017 City of Mountain View April, 2023 City of Palo Alto 2004 City of San Jose April, 2009 City of Santa Clara June, 2023 City of Saratoga 1996 City of Sunnyvale November, 1994 – anticipated update Oct. 2023 County of Santa Clara April, 2009 Town of Los Altos Hills November, 2001 Town of Los Gatos 2003 Repetitive Loss and Severe Repetitive Loss A repetitive loss property is defined by FEMA as an NFIP-insured property that has experienced any of the following since 1978, regardless of any changes in ownership:  Four or more paid losses in excess of $1,000.  Two paid losses in excess of $1,000 within any rolling 10-year period.  Three or more paid losses that equal or exceed the current value of the insured property. A severe repetitive loss property is further defined as follows:  Four or more paid losses in excess of $5,000 each, with the cumulative amount of such claim payments exceeding $20,000.  At least two separate claim payments made, with the cumulative amount of the building portion of such claims exceeding the market value of the building.  At least two of the above referenced claims occurred within any rolling 10-year period and must be more than 10 days apart. Repetitive loss properties make up only 1 percent of flood insurance policies in force nationally, yet they account for 25 to 30 percent of the nation’s flood insurance claim payments. According the draft 2023 State of California Hazard Mitigation Plan, 34.8 percent of the repetitive properties in the state are located outside of the SFHA. The government has instituted programs encouraging communities to identify and mitigate the causes of repetitive losses. The key identifiers for repetitive loss propertie s are the existence of flood insurance policies and claims paid by the policies. This doesn ’t include properties which have flooded repeatedly but don’t have insurance. Over 50 percent of severe repetitive loss structures nationally are estimated to be without NFIP coverage. 385 PSC 09-12-2024 385 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 306 FEMA-sponsored programs, such as the CRS, require participating communities to identify repetitive loss areas. A repetitive loss area is the portion of a floodplain holding structures that FEMA has identified as meeting the definition of repetitive loss. Identifying repetitive loss areas helps to identify structures that are at risk but are not on FEMA’s list of repetitive loss structures because no flood insurance policy was in force at the time of loss. FEMA’s list of repetitive loss properties identifies four such properties in the OA as of February 23, 2023. The breakdown of the properties by jurisdiction is presented in Table 103. With the potential for flood events annually, all of the mapped floodplain is considered to be susceptible to repetitive flooding. Table 103: Repetitive Loss Properties Jurisdiction Number of Repetitive Loss Properties Type of Repetitive Loss Properties Number of Severe Repetitive Loss Properties Type of Severe Repetitive Loss Properties Cupertino 3 Single Family (1) Other Nonresidential (2) - - Los Gatos 1 2–4 Family (1) - - Morgan Hill 2 Single Family (2) 4 Single Family (2) Business (1) Other Nonresidential (1) Palo Alto 4 Single Family (3) Other Nonresidential (1) 1 Business (1) San José 6 Single Family (6) 1 Single Family (1) Sunnyvale 1 Other Nonresidential (1) - - Unincorporated County 8 Single Family (8) 3 Single Family (3) Unknown 1 2-4 Family (1) - - Total 25 Single Family (20) Other Nonresidential (4) 2-4 Family (2) 9 Single Family (6) Business (2) Other Nonresidential (1) Note: Based on FEMA Region IX Report of Repetitive Losses, 2/23/2023. Substantial Improvement/Substantial Damage In order to be a part of the NFIP, participating jurisdictions commit to implementing substantial improvement / substantial damage provisions of their floodplain management regulations after an event. According to FEMA, these terms are defined as:  Substantial Improvement means any reconstruction, rehabilitation, addition or other improvement to a structure, the total cost of which equals or exceed 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the state of construction of the improvement.  Substantial damage means damage of any origin sustained by a structure whereby the cost of restoring the structure to its before damaged condition would equal or excel 50 percent of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred. Multiple jurisdictions within the OA have adopted higher standards, including a repetitive loss or cumulative damage. These higher standards are described further in Volume II in addition to additional information on how these provisions are implemented. 386 PSC 09-12-2024 386 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 307 Table 104: Substantial Damage/Substantial Improvement Implementation Jurisdiction Responsible Party Higher Standard? City of Campbell Floodplain Administrator No City of Cupertino Building Official Yes City of Gilroy Floodplain Administrator Yes City of Los Altos Floodplain Administrator, Building Official No City of Milpitas City Manager, Floodplain Administrator Yes City of Morgan Hill Floodplain Administrator Yes City of Mountain View Floodplain Administrator or designee Yes City of Palo Alto Floodplain Administrator No City of San Jose Floodplain Manager, other departments/divisions including public works as necessary No City of Santa Clara Floodplain Administrator, Building Official No City of Saratoga City Manager or designee, usually someone from Public Works or Community Development No City of Sunnyvale Floodplain Administrator, Building Official No County of Santa Clara Yes Town of Los Altos Hills Floodplain Administrator No Town of Los Gatos Floodplain Administrator No 13.5.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure Percentage of damage and functional down-time estimates were not generated for critical facilities and infrastructures in the flood scenarios. However, a count of facilities within the flood hazard boundaries was obtained using the Hazus facility inventory (Tables 92-94). Replacement values provided in Hazus were used to estimate the flood loss potential to critical facilities exposed to the flood risk. The Hazus critical facility results are presented in Table 105, Table 106, and Table 107. Table 105: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities and Infrastructure from the 10% Annual Chance Flood Type of Critical Facility Number of Facilities Affected Estimated Replacement Cost Essential Facilities 24 $236,048,440 Transportation 106 $474,684,230 Utilities 1 $1,030,643,100 Community Assets 29 Not Available 387 PSC 09-12-2024 387 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 308 Type of Critical Facility Number of Facilities Affected Estimated Replacement Cost Hazardous Materials 54 Not Available Total/Average 214 $1,741,375,770 Note: N/A = Not Applicable. Table 106: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities and Infrastructure from the 1% Annual Chance Flood Type of Critical Facility Number of Facilities Affected Estimated Replacement Cost Essential Facilities 58 $871,412,940 Transportation 185 $959,350,260 Utilities 3 $1,070,055,100 Community Assets 64 Not Available Hazardous Materials 78 Not Available Total/Average 388 $2,900,818,300 Note: N/A = Not Applicable. Table 107: Estimated Damage to Critical Facilities and Infrastructure from the 0.2% Annual Chance Flood Type of Critical Facility Number of Facilities Affected Estimated Replacement Cost Essential Facilities 89 $3,478,003,120 Transportation 244 $1,348,101,860 Utilities 10 $2,057,661,430 Community Assets 94 Not Available Hazardous Materials 131 Not Available Total/Average 568 $6,883,766,410 Note: N/A = Not Applicable. These tables indicate that a significant number of important assets are currently located within the 10-, 100-, and 500-year floodplains. A breakdown of the number of critical facilities at risk for each jurisdiction can be found in Table 92 through Table 94. Flooding could impact response facilities such as fire and policies stations which may directly damage facilities and equipment within buildings, as well as impact their ability to provide response activities in the immediate aftermath of a flood. Several schools are also in flood hazard zones. Transportation networks such as roadways and railways may be damaged or become temporarily impassable during a flood, which may provide further difficulty for people displaced from their homes and seeking shelter. Numerous other community facilities included in the community assets category are also in hazard zones, which indicates a variety of community support services may disrupted by flooding. Facilities with hazardous materials on site may be compromised by flooding, which may result in contamination of floodwaters and dispersal of harmful materials. The City of San Jose, the City of Gilroy, and the unincorporated county have the highest number of critical facilities and infrastructure at risk to flooding. 388 PSC 09-12-2024 388 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 309 13.5.4 Environment Flooding is a natural event, and floodplains provide many natural and beneficial functions. Nonetheless, flooding can impact the environment in negative ways. Migrating fish can wash into roads or over dikes into flooded fields, with no possibility of escape. Pollution from roads, such as oil, and hazardous materials can wash into rivers and streams. During floods, these can settle onto normally dry soils, polluting them for agricultural uses. Human development such as bridge abutments and levees, and logjams from timber harvesting can increase stream bank erosion, causing rivers and streams to migrate into non-natural courses. Additionally, while the vulnerability assessment typically focuses on human vulnerability to flood events, the opposite is also worth noting. Floodplains have many natural and beneficial functions; however, due to negative impacts of floods, many structura l and other measures have been devised to limit how far a floodplain can extend. Disruption of natural systems can have long-term consequences for entire regions; however, this potential impact has only recently been noted. Some well-known, water-related functions of floodplains include the following269F 270:  Natural flood and erosion control.  Filter nutrients and impurities from runoff.  Provide flood storage and conveyance.  Process organic wastes.  Reduce flood velocities.  Moderate temperatures of water.  Reduce flood peaks.  Groundwater recharge.  Reduce sedimentation.  Promote infiltration and aquifer recharge.  Surface water quality maintenance.  Reduce frequency and duration of low surface flows Areas within the floodplain that typically provide these natural functions are wetlands, riparian areas, sensitive areas, and habitats for rare and endangered species. In the northern end of the county, wetlands (both Bay Wetlands and Freshwater Wetlands) will be impacted by flooding adjacent to the coastline. In the southern end of the county, flooding of the Pajaro River watershed would impact Grassland, Riparian, and Freshwater Wetland habitats.270F 271 Riparian habitat would be impacted throughout the county; however, this habitat type is naturally adapted to withstand some degree of seasonal flooding. 13.5.5 Economic Impact Locations of flooding will experience the heaviest economic impact. Within these areas, renovations of commercial buildings may be necessary, disrupting associated services. Additionally, significant damage within agricultural areas may occur with destruction of crops and other agricultural products. The tourism industry may also be affected by major flood events, as popular vacation areas tend to overlap flood hazard zones. Finally, flooding can cause extensive damage to public utilities and disruptions to delivery of services. Loss of power and communications may occur; and drinking water an d wastewater treatment facilities may be temporarily out of operation. 270 FEMA. (2022, April 1). Benefits of Natural Floodplains. https://www.fema.gov/floodplain-management/wildlife- conservation/benefits-natural 271 Santa Clara Valley Water District. (2017, October). Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Microsoft Word - R14163 2017 FINAL LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN v. 04-09-21 (amazonaws.com) 389 PSC 09-12-2024 389 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 310 13.6 Future Trends in Development Pre-pandemic, Santa Clara County had been one of the state ’s fastest growing counties, averaging a 1.21-percent increase in population per year from 2005 through 2015. The Silicon Valley job market grew, and many young tech employees elected to live in an urban environment rather than commute from the suburbs. The area has not recovered economically since the pandemic. The population decreased slightly from 2021 to 2022, and employment levels for almost all major areas of the economy were still below pre-pandemic levels at last indication.271F 272 Almost 90,000 tech industry employees were laid off in 2022 alone. The Silicon Valley housing market has cooled, but not crashed. A decrease in population and employment, particularly in high-income industries, may reduce the amount of new development in the SFHA. The Santa Clara County Planning Department Website did not show any significant development being proposed in the SFHA in the unincorporated areas of the county at the time of this writing. It is unclear if these trends will continue over the next five years. Any areas of growth could be impacted by the flood hazard if located within the identified hazard areas. The planning partners have appropriate policies, plans, and programs in place to address future growth within flood hazard areas. The SCVWD intends to discourage development within vulnerable areas and/or to encourage higher regulatory standards on the local level. Additionally, all municipal planning partners are participants in the NFIP and have adopted flood damage prevention ordinances which regulate development in high-hazard areas. All municipal planning partners also have general plans that address frequently flooded areas in their safety elements. All partners have committed to linking their general plans to this hazard mitigation plan. More information on planning partners ’ development is available in Volume 2 of this plan. With around 60 percent of communities in the OA participating in the CRS program, there is incentive to adopt consistent, appropriate, higher regulatory standards in areas with the highest degree of flood risk. Additionally, there are many active regional partners involved in land use planning and risk reduction in the Bay Area. Plan Bay Area 2050 is the nine-county San-Francisco Bay Area plan for long-term development. This plan includes 35 strategies for housing, the economy, transportation, and the environment. It maintains urban growth boundaries in order to curb urban sprawl and identifies other strategies to reduce risk from flooding. The 2015 Stronger Housing, Safer Communities report led by ABAG developed a series of strategies for developing safe, smart growth in the Bay Area, including recommendations for flood protection measures. The County of Santa Clara’s Office of Sustainability and Climate Action has also developed the Silicon Valley 2.0 Climate Adaptation Guidebook which provides additional recommendations and examples. Jurisdictions in the OA can expand upon these and other resources to make risk -informed land use and flood mitigation decisions in light of future growth. 13.7 Scenario Historically, floods have regularly affected the Santa Clara County OA. The OA can expect noteworthy flooding about once a year, with a flash flood every 2 to 3 years. Duration and intensity of heavy winter rains and atmospheric river events that cause flooding may increase due to climate change. The floodplains mapped and identified for the Santa Clara County OA will continue to take the brunt of these floods. OA residents prepare themselves for flooding by seeking and receiving information, and by pursuing mitigation. Impacts of flood events should decrease as the OA continues to promote and implement hazard mitigation and preparedness. 272 Silicon Valley Indicators. (n.d.). Data about Silicon Valley’s Economy and Community Health. https://siliconvalleyindicators.org/ 390 PSC 09-12-2024 390 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 311 The worst-case scenario would be a series of heavy rains or storm events during an atmospheric river event, particularly if the rains also occur at high tide. These rains could flood numerous areas within a short time. This could overwhelm the response and floodplain management capability within the OA, as the OA would be subject immediately to flash flooding and coastal flooding, with subsequent influences on the County’s streams. Major roads could be blocked, preventing critical access for many residents and critical functions. High in-channel flows could cause water courses to scour, possibly washing out roads and creating more isolation problems. In the event of multi-basin flooding, Santa Clara County would not be able to make repairs quickly enough to restore critical facilities and assets. 13.8 Issues Important issues associated with floods in the OA include the following:  The extent of the flood-protection currently provided by flood control facilities (dams, dikes, and levees) is not known due to the lack of an established national policy on flood protection standards.  The levee system within the OA is not consistently adequate to mitigate effects of a 1-percent annual chance flood.  The risk associated with the flood hazard overlaps the risk associated with other hazards such as earthquake, landslide, mud slides and fishing losses. This provides an opportunity to seek mitigation alternatives with multiple objectives that can reduce risk for multiple hazards.  There is no consistency of land-use practices and floodplain management scope within the OA.  How climate change will affect flood conditions in the OA is uncertain.  More information is needed on flood risk to support the concept of risk-based analysis of capital projects.  There needs to be a sustained effort to gather historical damage data, such as high -water marks on structures and damage reports, to measure the cost-effectiveness of future mitigation projects.  Ongoing flood hazard mitigation will require funding from multiple sources.  There needs to be a coordinated hazard mitigation effort between jurisdictions affected by flood hazards in the OA.  Floodplain residents need to continue to be educated about flood preparedness and the resources available during and after floods.  The concept of residual risk should be considered in the design of future capital flood control projects and should be communicated with residents living in the floodplain.  The promotion of flood insurance as a means of protecting private property owners from the economic impacts of frequent flood events should continue.  Existing floodplain-compatible uses such as agricultural and open space need to be maintained. There is constant pressure to convert these existing uses to more intense uses within the OA during times of moderate to high growth.  The economy affects a jurisdiction’s ability to manage its floodplains. Budget cuts and personnel losses can strain resources needed to support floodplain management. 391 PSC 09-12-2024 391 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 13: Flood 312 Table 108: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Flood Subject Ranking Impacts/Flood Public Minimal to severe The localized impact is expected to be severe for persons living within the inundation area. Residents of the SFHA are most at risk from flooding. Flooding can result in injury, loss of life, and the loss of property and livelihood. Daily life of residents, visitors, and commuters would be disrupted, particularly if evacuations are necessary. Flood waters could carry containments which impact public health. Water that is slow to recede could act as a habitat for disease-carrying insects. The public would be exposed to risk during flood clean-up, including mold. Vulnerable populations may be disproportionally impacted by a flood event and have unique response and recovery needs. There may long-term public health consequences of a flood event. Responders Minimal to moderate Responders may be responsible for supporting evacuations, closing roads, assisting injured members of the public, and managing the overall incident. Depending on the event, responders may play a significant role in locating and assisting survivors after the flood. During the course of their duties, responders will likely face increased risk of personal injury. They may be directly exposed to the flood water, including any containments. Continuity of Operations (including continue delivery of services) Minimal to severe Temporary relocation may be necessary if inundation affects government facilities. Delivery of services could be affected if there is any disruption to facilities, roads, and/or utilities due to the inundation or cascading impacts. Property, Facilities, and Infrastructure Minimal to severe The localized impact could be severe for property, facilities and infrastructure that are inundated. Additional damage or disruption could be caused by debris, road closures, and stormwater issues. Water and wastewater treatments plants may be overloaded. Environment Minimal to severe Flooding can provide benefits to environment. However, it also can potentially expose the environment to containments, hazardous materials, silt, and debris. Flooding can damage or destroy natural habitats and wildlife like fish caught up in the flood water can die. Floods can additionally cause erosion, landslides, and changes to the watershed. Economic Conditions Minimal to severe Impacts on the economy will greatly depend on the scope of the inundation and the amount of time it takes for the flood water to recede. A major flood event could be costly. There would be emergency response needs, disaster cleanup, delays and disruption in services and transportation, and potential closure to local businesses due to direct flood losses or lack of employees or customers. Public Confidence in the Government Minimal to severe The public’s confidence will vary, depending on the perception of the warning time, the information shared, and the time it takes for response and recovery. Accurate and timely distribution of information before, during, and after the event will influence public trust. 392 PSC 09-12-2024 392 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 313 14 Landslide/Mass Movement Definitions  Landslide: The movement of masses of loosened rock and soil down a hillside or slope. Slope failures occur when the strength of the soils forming the slope is exceeded by the pressure, such as weight or saturation, acting upon them.  Mass Movement: A collective term for landslides, debris flows, and sinkholes.  Mudslide (or Debris Flow): A river of rock, earth, organic matter, and other materials saturated with water. Mudslides develop in the soil overlying bedrock on sloping surfaces when water rapidly accumulates in the ground, such as during heavy rainfall or rapid snowmelt. Water pressure in the pore spaces of the material increases to the point that the internal strength of the soil is drastically weakened. The soil’s reduced resistance can then easily be overcome by gravity, changing the earth into a flowing river of mud or “slurry.” 14.1 General Background The U.S. Geological Survey defines landslides to include a wide range of ground movement, such as rock falls, deep failure of slopes, and shallow debris flows. Although gravity acting on an over -steepened slope is the primary reason for a landslide, there are other contributing factors. Landslides and mudslides can be initiated by storms, earthquakes, fires, volcanic eruptions, or human modification of the land. They can move rapidly down slopes or through channels and can strike with little or no warning at avalanche speeds, posing a serious hazard to properties on or below hillsides. When landslides occur—in response to such changes as increased water content, earthquake shaking, addition of load, or removal of downslope support—they deform and tilt the ground surface. The result can be destruction of foundations, offset of roads, breaking of underground pipes, or overriding of downslope property and structures. The USGS defines land subsidence as the loss of surface elevation due to the removal of subsurface support. In California, the two principal causes for land subsidence are aquifer compaction due to excessive groundwater pumping and decomposition of wetland soils exposed to air after wetland conversion to farmland. 14.1.1 Landslide Types Landslides are commonly categorized by the type of initial ground failure. Common types of slides are shown in Figure 65. The most common is the shallow colluvial slide, occurring particularly in response to intense, short-duration storms. The extent of landslides can range from mild to severe and are dependent on several factors, including the type of event. The largest and most destructive are deep-seated slides (greater than 10 to 15 feet deep), although they are less common than other types. 393 PSC 09-12-2024 393 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 314 Figure 66: Common Types of Landslides Mudslides (or debris flows) are rivers of rock, earth, organic matter, and other soil materials saturated with water. They develop in the soil overlying bedrock on sloping surfaces when water rapidly accumulates in the ground, such as during heavy rainfall or rapid snowmelt. Water pressure in the pore spaces of the material increases to the point that the internal strength of the soil is drastically weaken ed. The soil’s reduced resistance can then easily be overcome by gravity, changing the earth into a flowing river of mud. A debris avalanche (see Figure 66) is a fast-moving debris flow that travels faster than about 10 miles per hour (mph). Speeds in excess of 20 mph are not uncommon, and speeds in excess of 100 mph, although rare, can occur. The slurry can travel miles from its source, growing as it descen ds, picking up trees, boulders, cars, and anything else in its path. Although these slides behave as fluids, they pack many times the hydraulic force of water due to the mass of material included in them. They can be among the most destructive events in nature. 394 PSC 09-12-2024 394 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 315 Figure 67: Typical Debris Avalanche Scar and Track272F 273 Landslides also include the following:  Rock Falls: Blocks of rock that fall away from a bedrock unit without a rotational component.  Rock Topples: Blocks of rock that fall away from a bedrock unit with a rotational component.  Rotational Slumps: Blocks of fine-grained sediment that rotate and move down slope.  Transitional Slides: Sediments that move along a flat surface without a rotational component.  Earth Flows: Fine-grained sediments that flow downhill and typically form a fan structure.  Creep: A slow-moving landslide often only noticed through crooked trees and disturbed structures.  Block Slides: Blocks of rock that slide along a slip plane as a unit down a slope. 14.1.2 Landslide Modeling Two characteristics are essential to conducting an accurate risk assessment of the landslide hazard:  The type of initial ground failure that occurs, as described above  The post-failure movement of the loosened material (“runout”), including travel distance and velocity All current landslide models—those in practical applications and those more recently developed—use simplified hypothetical descriptions of mass movement to simulate the complex behavior of actual flow. The models attempt to reproduce the general features of the moving mass of material through measurable factors, such as base shear, that define a system and determine its behavior. 273 California Department of Conservation. (n.d.). Hazards from “Mudslides” …Debris Avalanches and Debris Flows in Hillside and Wildfire Areas. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Pages/Publications/Note_33.aspx 395 PSC 09-12-2024 395 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 316 Due to the lack of experimental data and the limited current knowledge about the behavior of the moving flows, landslide models use simplified parameters to account for complex aspects that may not be defined. These simplified parameters are not related to specific physical processes that can be directly measured, and there is a great deal of uncertainty in their definition. Some, but not all, models provide estimates of the level of uncertainty associated with the modeling approach. Run-out modeling is complicated because the movement of materials may change over the course of a landslide event, depending on the initial composition, the extent of saturation by water, the ground shape of the path traveled and whether there is additional material incorporated during the event.273F 274 14.1.3 Landslide Causes Mass movements are caused by a combination of geological and climate conditions, as well as encroaching urbanization. Vulnerable natural areas are affected by residential, agricultural, commercial, and industrial development and the infrastructure that supports it. The following factors can contribute to landslide: change in slope of the terrain, increased load on the land, shocks and vibrations, change in water content, groundwater movement, frost action, weathering of rocks, and removing or changing the type of vegetation covering slopes. Excavation and Grading Slope excavation is common in development of home sites or roads on sloping terrain. Grading can result in slopes that are steeper than the pre-existing natural slopes. These steeper slopes can be at an increased risk for landslides. The added weight of fill on slopes can also result in an increased landslide hazard. Small landslides can be common along roads, in either the road cut or the road fill. Landslides below new construction sites are indicators of the potential impacts stemming from excavation. Drainage and Groundwater Alterations Water flowing through or above ground is often the trigger for landslides. Any activity that augments the amount of water flowing into landslide-prone slopes can increase landslide hazards. Broken or leaking water or sewer lines can be especially problematic, as can water retention facilities that direct water onto slopes. However, even lawn irrigation and minor alterations to small streams in landslide-prone locations can result in damaging landslides. Ineffective stormwater management and excess runoff ca n also cause erosion and increase the risk of landslide hazards. Drainage can be affected naturally by the geology and topography of an area. Development that results in an increase in impervious surface impairs the ability of the land to absorb water and may redirect water to other areas. Channels, streams, flooding, and erosion on slopes all indicate potential slope problems. Road and driveway drains, gutters, downspouts, and other constructed drainage facilities can concentrate and accelerate flow. Ground saturation and concentrated velocity flow are major causes of slope problems and may trigger landslides. Changes in Vegetation Removing vegetation from very steep slopes can increase landslide hazards. Areas that have experienced wildfire and land clearing for development may experience long periods of increased landslide hazard. In addition, woody debris in stream channels (both natural and man-made from logging) may cause the impacts from debris flows to be more severe. 274 McDougall, S. (2016). 2014 Canadian Geotechnical Colloquium: Landslide runout analysis — current practice and challenges. Canadian Geotechnical Journal. 54(5): 605-620. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2016-0104 396 PSC 09-12-2024 396 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 317 14.1.4 Landslide Management While small landslides are frequently a result of human activity, the largest landslides are often naturally occurring phenomena with little or no human contribution. The sites of large landslides are typically areas of previous landslide movement that are periodically reactivated by significa nt precipitation or seismic events. These naturally occurring landslides can disrupt roadways and other infrastructure lifelines, destroy private property, and cause flooding, bank erosion, and rapid channel migration. Landslides can create immediate, critical threats to public safety. Engineering solutions to protect structures on or adjacent to large active landslides are often extremely or prohibitively expensive. Despite their destructive potential, landslides can serve beneficial functions to the natural environment. They supply sediment and large wood to the channel network and can contribute to complexity and dynamic channel behavior critical for aquatic and riparian ecological diversity. Effective landslide management should include the following elements:  Continuing investigation to identify natural landslides, understand their mechanics, assess their risk to public health and welfare, and understand their role in ecological systems.  Regulation of development in or near existing landslides or areas of natural instability through the Santa Clara County Code and City ordinances.  Preparation for emergency response to landslides to facilitate rapid, coordinated action among Santa Clara County, local cities, and state and federal agencies, and to provide emergency assistance to affected or at-risk citizens.  Evaluation of options including landslide stabilization or structure relocation where landslides are identified that threaten critical public structures or infrastructure. 14.1.5 Land Subsidence Effects Subsidence is one of the most diverse forms of ground failure, ranging from small or local collapses to broad regional lowering of the earth’s surface. The causes of subsidence, mostly associated with human activities, are as diverse as the forms of failure, and include dewatering (oxidation) of peat or organic soils, dissolution in limestone aquifers, first-time wetting of moisture-deficient low-density soils, natural compaction, liquefaction, crustal deformation, subterranean mining, and withdrawal of fluids (groundwater, petroleum, geothermal). The compaction of susceptible aquifer systems caused by excessive groundwater pumping is the single largest cause of subsidence in California. The second largest cause of subsidence in California is the oxidation (decomposition) of organic soils.274F 275 Alteration to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in the late 1800s through the creation of levees and ground water pumping is known as the single largest human alternation of the Earths’ surface topography, but it left over 5,200 square miles of areas susceptible to subsidence, primarily from decomposition of organic carbon in the peat soils.275F 276 275 U.S. Geological Survey. (2018, October 18). Decomposition of Organic Soils in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. https://www.usgs.gov/centers/land-subsidence-in-california/science/decomposition-organic-soils-sacramento- san-joaquin 276 U.S. Geological Survey. (2018, November 29). Land Subsidence Along the California Aqueduct in West -central San Joaquin Valley, California. https://www.usgs.gov/publications/land-subsidence-along-california-aqueduct-west- central-san-joaquin-valley-california 397 PSC 09-12-2024 397 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 318 Aquifer Compaction Aquifer compaction due to groundwater pumping affects both manmade infrastructures and natural systems. The greatest effects are on infrastructure that traverses a subsiding area. In the San Joaquin Valley, the main problems reported are related to water conveyance structures. Many water conveyance structures, including long stretches of the California Aqueduct, are gravity driven through the use of very small gradients; even minor changes in these gradients can cause reductions in designed flow capacity. Managers of the canals, such as the California Department of Water Resources, the San Luis Delta- Mendota Authority, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Central California Irrigation District, have to repeatedly retrofit their canals to keep the water flowing, even at reduced amounts. Subsidence also affects roads, railways, bridges, pipelines, buildings, and wells. Compaction of an aquifer system may permanently decrease the aquifer’s capacity to store water. Even when water levels rise, sediments can remain compacted; most compaction that occurs as a result of historically low groundwater levels is irreversible. Additionally, as the topography of the land changes by varying amounts in different places, low areas, such as wetlands, change size and shape, migrate to lower elevations, or even disappear. Rivers may change course or erosion/deposition patterns to reach a new equilibrium. Decomposition of Wetland Soils The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta of California was once a great tidal freshwater marsh. It is blanketed by peat and peaty alluvium deposited where streams that originate in the Sierra Nevada, Coast Ranges, and South Cascade Range enter San Francisco Bay. I n the late 1800s, levees were built along the stream channels, and the land thus protected from flooding was drained, cleared, and planted. The leveed tracts and islands help to protect water-export facilities in the southern Delta from saltwater intrusion by displacing water and maintaining favorable freshwater gradients. However, the decomposition of organic carbon in the peat soils causes land subsidence in the Delta and increases stresses on the levees. Ongoing subsidence behind the levees, where the la nd has been drained, exposed to the atmosphere, and planted, increases stresses on the levee system, making it less stable. This threatens to damage agricultural and developed lands and degrade water quality in the massive water-transfer system. 14.2 Hazard Profile 14.2.1 Past Events Losses from landslides are typically lower than those from flooding. However, in the El Niño storms of early 1998, the USGS documented $150 million in losses due to approximately 300 landslides in the Bay Area and Santa Clara County. The slides ranged from a 25-cubic-meter failure of engineered material to reactivation of the 13 million-cubic-meter Mission Peak earth flow complex in Alameda County. Landslides have occurred in conjunction with earthquakes and heavy rains events in Santa Clara County. Table 109 lists known landslide events that affected Santa Clara County between 1980 and 2023. Other landslides around the Bay Area near the OA, particularly in the Santa Cruz Mountains, are documented by the California Geological Survey.276F 277 277 California Geological Survey. (2011). Susceptibility to Deep -Seated Landslides in California. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Documents/Publications/Map -Sheets/MS_058.pdf 398 PSC 09-12-2024 398 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 319 Table 109: Landslide Events in Santa Clara County277F 278, 278F 279, 279F 280, 280F 281, 281F 282 Dates of Event Event Type FEMA Declaration Location Losses/Impacts 12/19/1981 to 1/08/1982 Severe storms, flood, mudslides, high tide 651 San Francisco Bay area Prolonged heavy rains and saturated soils caused numerous slope failures and mud flows on steep and unstable slopes throughout the San Francisco Bay area. 1/21/1983 to 3/30/1983 Coastal storms, floods, slides, tornadoes 677 San Francisco Bay area A landslide restricted Clayton Road to one lane just east of the community of Alum Rock. Another, on the east side of Milpitas, resulted in vertical and horizontal offset of a roadway. 4/24/1984 Morgan Hill Earthquake None Calaveras fault east of San José. This 6.2 magnitude earthquake caused minor landslides throughout the region. 10/17/1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake 845 San Andreas fault near Loma Prieta. Landslides and rockslides in Santa Clara County on steep slopes in the Santa Cruz Mountains blocked roads, damaged structures, and caused at least two deaths. 1/03/1995 to 2/10/1995 Severe winter storms, flooding, landslides, mud flows 1044 San Francisco Bay area Minor landslide damage in Santa Clara County was attributed to heavy rains and saturated soils. 2/13/1995 to 4/19/1995 Severe winter storms, flooding, landslides, mud flows 1046 San Francisco Bay area Minor landslide damage in Santa Clara County was attributed to heavy rains and saturated soils. 278 Association of Bay Area Governments. (2011). 2011 Bay Area Hazard Mitigation Plan. https://abag.ca.gov/2011-bay-area-hazard-mitigation-plan 279 U.S. Geological Survey. (1987). The Morgan Hill, California, Earthquake of April 24, 1984. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 16 39. https://pubs.usgs.gov/bul/1639/report.pdf 280 U.S. Geological Survey (1989). The Severity of an Earthquake. https://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/earthq4/severity_text.html 281 NOAA. (2023). Storm Events Database. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/ 282 California Department of Conservation. (n.d.). Reported California Landslides Database. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/landslides 399 PSC 09-12-2024 399 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 320 Dates of Event Event Type FEMA Declaration Location Losses/Impacts 2/02/1998 to 4/30/1998 Severe Winter Storms and El Nino Rainstorm 1203 San Francisco Bay region $7.6 million in Santa Clara County landslide damage occurred mostly in the northern county, along the range front of the Santa Clara Valley. $6.1 million in damage was attributed to reactivation of three local landslides. The rest was attributed to small debris flows along road cuts or narrow canyon walls. In Alum Rock, the Penitencia Creek landslide caused extensive damage to water and sewer lines and closed roads. Another landslide closed Clayton Road east of Alum Rock area. The third, near Old Piedmont Road on the east side of Milpitas, had a displacement near the toe of about 20 cm. 1/10/2017 Debris Flow, Heavy Rain None Santa Clara, Montalvo The third and final system in a string of Atmospheric River events between January 2 to 11. This system resulted in widespread roadway flooding and debris flows across the CWA. Black road at Gist Road is impassable due to major mudslide or rockslide. 1/18/2017 Debris Flow, Heavy Rain None Santa Clara, Redwood Estates Three storm systems swept through the region between January 18-23. The first occurred on January 18 as a cold front moved through. Heavy rain, widespread flooding, and debris flows were observed. Mud/rock/dirt slide blocking one lane heading towards Highway 17 from Bear Creek Rd. 2/07/2017 Debris Flow, Heavy Rain None Santa Clara, Los Gatos An atmospheric river swept through the Bay Area beginning on the night of Feb 6. This system produced widespread roadway flooding, debris flows, and strong winds. Mud slide reported at 18500 Limekiln Canyon Road. 2/09/2017 Debris Flow, Heavy Rain None Santa Clara, Los Altos Hills A cold front passed over the area Thursday Feb 9. There were strong winds ahead of the front and heavy rains associated with the frontal passage that produced roadway flooding and debris flows. Mud/dirt/rockslide blocking south bound lanes Skyline Dr at Alpine. 400 PSC 09-12-2024 400 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 321 Dates of Event Event Type FEMA Declaration Location Losses/Impacts 2/09/2017 Debris Flow, Heavy Rain None Santa Clara, Saratoga A cold front passed over the area Thursday, Feb 9. There were strong winds ahead of the front and heavy rains associated with the frontal passage that produced roadway flooding and debris flows. Second mudslide in area and a tree down partially blocking 23600 SR9 near Savannah- Chanelle Vineyard. 2/20/2017 Debris Flow, Heavy Rain None Santa Clara, Los Gatos Potent AR brought copious amounts of rain to the region causing widespread flooding, debris flow, accidents, and over topping of reservoir spillways. Highway 17 southbound shut down due to a rockslide just north of Lexington Reservoir. 1/06/2019 Debris Flow, Heavy Rain None Santa Clara, Los Gatos A vigorous cold front swept through California on January 5th bringing widespread rainfall and gusty winds. Unstable air behind the frontal passage and sufficient low level shear allowed shallow thunderstorms to develop over the coastal waters, some of which contained rotating cells. Two waterspouts developed and made landfall as tornadoes on the 6th. Additionally, heavy rainfall and strong winds caused roadway flooding, minor debris flows, and numerous downed trees across the region. This storm system caused two fatalities; one caused by a downed tree in Berkeley and another man died in Santa Rosa Creek due to rising waters. Mud slide reported at Cats/Lexington south side on Hwy 17. 1/17/2019 Flood, Heavy Rain None Santa Clara, Saratoga A moderate to strong atmospheric river impacted much of California in the middle of the month. A weak surface low developed off the coast on January 15th bringing moderate to heavy rainfall to portions of the region. Over the next 24 to 36 hours a second strong low pressure system moved to the north and east bringing heavy rain, destructive winds, high surf, flooding, and thunderstorms to the Bay Area. Numerous reports were received of downed trees and power lines. Winds were recorded between 60 and 100 mph. Downed trees resulted in two fatalities. Mud/dirt/rock at Mt Eden Rd and Orchard Meadow Dr blocking most of roadway. 401 PSC 09-12-2024 401 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 322 Dates of Event Event Type FEMA Declaration Location Losses/Impacts 2/04/2019 Debris Flow, Heavy Rain None Santa Clara, Redwood Estates A mid/upper low with a very cold airmass moved through in early February bringing snow to lower elevation peaks across the region prompting a rare Winter Weather Advisory. Junipero Serra Peak received around a foot of snow. Rainfall just ahead of this system also brought roadway flooding and minor debris flows. Mud, rock, and debris covered Hicks Road resulting in a multiday closure. Highway 35 closed due to sinkhole. 2/10/2019 Debris Flow, Heavy Rain None Santa Clara, Bells Station A cold front moved through the region into February 10th lowering snow levels below 1500 ft, per the Bodega Bay Profiler. The areas peaks saw another dusting to several inches of snow as a result with Mount Hamilton recording almost 6 inches. Additionally, showers ahead of the front the previous evening caused some minor roadway flooding. Mud and rocks in slow lane on WB HWY 152. 2/11/2019 Landslide None Santa Clara 160 meters east of intersection of Hicks Road and Pheasant Road. Mud, rock, and debris covered Hicks Road resulting in multiday closure 2/13/2019 Debris Flow, Heavy Rain None Santa Clara, Robertsville An atmospheric river with an associated cold front moved through the region from February 12th to the 15th bringing widespread flooding and debris flows. Multiple mainstem rivers flooded prompting evacuations from local officials. Strong wind gusts caused downed trees, power outages, and structural damage. Additionally, a tree fell on a car causing one fatality and one serious injury on Highway 17 while another downed tree caused a serious multi-car traffic accident that resulted in another fatality as well as major injuries. The areas peaks received upwards of 10 inches of rainfall and widespread wind gusts of 50 to 60 mph were observed. Mount Saint Helena recorded wind gusts of 80 mph. Mudslide blocking both lanes of Hicks Rd in south San José. 402 PSC 09-12-2024 402 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 323 Dates of Event Event Type FEMA Declaration Location Losses/Impacts 2/13/2019 Flood, Heavy Rain None Santa Clara, Saratoga An atmospheric river with an associated cold front moved through the region from February 12th to the 15th bringing widespread flooding and debris flows. Multiple mainstem rivers flooded prompting evacuations from local officials. Strong wind gusts caused downed trees, power outages, and structural damage. Additionally, a tree fell on a car causing one fatality and one serious injury on Highway 17 while another downed tree caused a serious multi-car traffic accident that resulted in another fatality as well as major injuries. The areas peaks received upwards of 10 inches of rainfall and widespread wind gusts of 50 to 60 mph were observed. Mount Saint Helena recorded wind gusts of 80 mph. Mud in NB lane of CA-9 1 mile south of Redwood Gulch. 2/14/2019 Debris Flow, Heavy Rain None Santa Clara, Saratoga An atmospheric river with an associated cold front moved through the region from February 12th to the 15th bringing widespread flooding and debris flows. Multiple mainstem rivers flooded prompting evacuations from local officials. Strong wind gusts caused downed trees, power outages, and structural damage. Additionally, a tree fell on a car causing one fatality and one serious injury on Highway 17 while another downed tree caused a serious multi-car traffic accident that resulted in another fatality as well as major injuries. The areas peaks received upwards of 10 inches of rainfall and widespread wind gusts of 50 to 60 mph were observed. Mount Saint Helena recorded wind gusts of 80 mph. Mud slide blocking lanes at SR 9 and Booker Creek Rd. 403 PSC 09-12-2024 403 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 324 Dates of Event Event Type FEMA Declaration Location Losses/Impacts 1/27/2021 Debris Flow, Heavy Rain None Santa Clara, Coyote A plume of moisture from the tropical Pacific brought an Atmospheric River to the Bay Area January 26–29. This system generated heavy rain rates causing flooding and debris flows over area burn scars as well as 15 to 20 inches of rain in the Santa Lucia Mountains. Mudflows near the River Fire burn scar in Monterey County caused damage to homes, covered roadways, and trapped animals at local ranches. Debris flows near the Dolan Fire burn scar caused an entire section of Highway 1 near Rat Creek to collapse into the Pacific Ocean. This was an unusually cold system for an Atmospheric River resulting in lower snow levels and allowing for accumulating snow as low as 1300 feet in elevation. Additionally, strong south to southeast winds gusted to 60-70 mph across area peaks with Mt Diablo reaching 80 mph. Valley locations were gusting up to 40 mph. Numerous trees fell across the region including into homes and onto cars. Multiple power outages were also reported. It is estimated that the storm caused millions of dollars in damage across Santa Cruz County. Mud/dirt/rocks in roadway at Metcalf Rd and Monterey Hwy. 3/10/2021 Flood, Heavy Rain None Santa Clara, San José A cold upper low moved through the region in early March bringing widespread showers and isolated thunderstorms to the Greater Bay Area. This system caused roadway flooding, debris flows, lightning, and small hail. Snow was also reported on some of the area’s peaks throughout the region as snow levels dropped down to 2,000 ft. A mudslide occurred along the River Fire burn scar in Monterey County sending mud and debris into nearby homes. Roadway flooding northbound 280 & 87 due to heavy rain. 404 PSC 09-12-2024 404 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 325 Dates of Event Event Type FEMA Declaration Location Losses/Impacts 3/10/2021 Hail None Santa Clara, San José International Airport A cold upper low moved through the region in early March bringing widespread showers and isolated thunderstorms to the Greater Bay Area. This system caused roadway flooding, debris flows, lightning, and small hail. Snow was also reported on some of the area’s peaks throughout the region as snow levels dropped down to 2,000 ft. A mudslide occurred along the River Fire burn scar in Monterey County sending mud and debris into nearby homes. Image on social media showing small hail near the San José International Airport. 405 PSC 09-12-2024 405 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 326 Figure 68: A Santa Clara County Debris Flow Triggered by Winter Storms Following the Loma Fire, 2017282F 283 According to the Santa Clara Valley Water District,283F 284 Santa Clara County has experienced as many as 13 feet of subsidence caused by excessive pumping of groundwater in the early 1900s. The SCVWD was created in the early 1930s to protect groundwater resources and minimize land subsidence. To reduce the demand on groundwater and minimize subsidence, the SCVWD uses a combination of imported surface water (from the State Water Project and San Francisco’s Hetch-Hetchy system), recycled water, and groundwater. Figure 68 shows the history of land surface elevation, groundwater elevation, and the estimated population of Santa Clara County from 1900 up to 2020. The SCVWD started importing water in the 1960s when the groundwater elevation reached its lowest elevation. 283 Swanson, B. (n.d.). A Santa Clara County debris flow triggered by winter storms following the Loma Fire, 2017 [Photograph]. California Geologic Survey. 284 SCVWD. (n.d.). Subsidence. https://www.valleywater.org/your-water/where-your-water- comes/groundwater/subsidence#:~:text=Land%20subsidence%20is%20a%20settling%20of%20the%20Earth%27s,J ose%20to%20southern%20San%20Francisco%20Bay%20were%20impacted. 406 PSC 09-12-2024 406 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 327 Figure 69: SCVWD Historic Groundwater Conditions284F 285 14.2.2 Location In general, landslide hazard areas are where the land has characteristics that contribute to the risk of the downhill movement of material, such as the following:  A history of landslide activity or movement during the last 10,000 years .  A steep slope.  Stream or wave activity, which has caused erosion, undercut a bank, or cut into a bank to cause the surrounding land to be unstable.  Recent wildfires, as debris flows often occur in areas that experienced wildfires the previous year.285F 286  Recent construction, construction debris, or erosion due to construction .  The presence of an alluvial fan (geologic features built by runoff spreading out in a wide fan-like area), indicating vulnerability to the flow of debris or sediments . 285 Santa Clara Valley Water District. (2021). Imported Water: Vital to Santa Clara Valley [Photograph]. https://www.valleywater.org/your-water/where-your-water-comes/imported-water 286 USGS California Water Science Center. (2018, October 31). Post-Fire Flooding and Debris Flow. https://ca.water.usgs.gov/wildfires/wildfires-debris-flow.html 407 PSC 09-12-2024 407 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 328  The presence of impermeable soils, such as silt or clay, which are mixed with granular soils such as sand and gravel. The best available predictor of where movement of slides and earth flows might occur is the location of past movements. Past landslides can be recognized by their distinctive topographic shapes, which can remain in place for thousands of years. Most landsl ides recognizable in this fashion range from a few acres to several square miles. Most show no evidence of recent movement and are not currently active. A small proportion of them may become active in any given year, with movements concentrated within all or part of the landslide masses or around their edges. The recognition of ancient dormant mass movement sites is important in the identification of areas susceptible to flows and slides because they can be reactivated by earthquakes or by exceptionally wet weather. Also, because they consist of broken materials and frequently involve disruption of groundwater flow, these dormant sites are vulnerable to construction -triggered sliding. The California Landslide Hazard Identification Act directs the State Geologist to identify and map hazardous landslide areas for use by municipalities in planning and decision-making on grading and building permits. Three factors that characterize landslide hazard areas include significant slope, weak rocks, and heavy rains. This program focuses on urban areas and growth areas that exhibit these characteristics. The OA includes both high- and low-risk landslide areas. The Association of Bay Area Governments Resilience Program286F 287 provides more detailed mapping for the Bay Area through use of USGS Summary of Distribution of Slides and Earth Flows (1997) and Map Showing Principal Debris-Flow Source Areas (1997). The County of Santa Clara overlaid these data on its jurisdictional boundaries to develop Geological Hazard Zones to suggest areas specific geologic hazards may be present. Additional geologic reports are required for construction in areas where a specific geologic hazard may be present. 287 Association of Bay Area Governments. (n.d.). Resilience. https://abag.ca.gov/our-work/resilience 408 PSC 09-12-2024 408 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 329 Figure 70: Deep-Seated Landslide Susceptibility in Santa Clara County 409 PSC 09-12-2024 409 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 330 14.2.3 Frequency There are over 75,000 active and dormant landslides mapped in the Bay Area and other natural hazards such as earthquakes, heavy rain, floods, or wildfires continue to trigger landslides so there will likely be more landslide activity in the OA on an annual basis.287F 288 In the OA, landslides typically occur where landslides and earth flows have occurred in the past. These previous locations may not show any evidence of recent movement and may not be currently active, but some portion of them may become active in any given year from natural hazard events. As shown in Table 109, damage from the El Niño rainstorm event in 1998 was mainly attributed to reactivation of landslide locations and because of sequential severe storms that saturated steep, vulnerable soils. Landslide events occurred during the severe storms of 1983, 1995, and 1998. Atmospheric rivers that occurred along the west coast in 2021 and 2022 also caused landslide events in California. As more frequent storms hit the west coast and wildfires become more frequent due to climate change, there will likely be increased landslide incidents. Until better data is generated specifically for landslide hazards, this severe storm frequency is appropriate for the purpose of ranking risk associated with the landslide hazard. Subsidence is hard to predict. Given that it is a generally slow and gradual process which develops over time including in areas like the San Joaquin River Delta, it can be assumed the OA is at continuous risk from this hazard. Further information on the impact of climate change on the probability of landslide/mass movement is included in Section 11. Probability in OA: Occasional 14.2.4 Severity Landslides destroy property and infrastructure and can take the lives of people. Slope failures in the United States result in an average of 25 to 50 lives lost per year and are estimated to cost society billions of dollars in damages. Landslides can pose a serious hazard to properties on or below hillsides. When landslides occur—in response to such changes as increased water content, earthquake shaking, addition of load, or removal of downslope support—they deform and tilt the ground surface. The result can be destruction of foundations, offset of roads, breaking of underground pipes, or overriding of downslope property and structures. 14.2.5 Warning Time The speed of mass movements may range from inches per year to many feet per second, depending on slope, material, and water content. Some monitoring methods can provide an idea of the type of movement and the amount of time prior to failure. It is also possible to determine what areas are at risk during general time periods. Assessing geology, vegetation and predicted precipitation can help in predictions. Landslide early warning systems (LEWS) have gained more attention from researcher, government officials, and other decision makers in recent years.288F 289 The San Francisco Bay region was once home to the to the first public debris-flow hazard advisory in the United States however, it had to be shut down due to lack of resources. There is currently no practical warning system for individual landslides. The current standard operating procedure is to monitor situations case-by-case and respond after the event has occurred. Warning signs for landslide activity include the following:  Springs, seeps, or saturated ground in areas that have not typically been wet before 288 Santa Clara Valley Water District. (2017). Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. https://www.valleywater.org/flooding- safety/local-hazard-mitigation-plan 289 Guzzetti, F., & Gariano, S. L., & Peruccacci, S., & Brunetti, M. T., & Marchesini, I., & Rossi, M., & Melillo, M. (2020, January). Geographical Landslide Early Warning Systems. Earth -Science Reviews. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0012825219304635 410 PSC 09-12-2024 410 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 331  New cracks or unusual bulges in the ground, street pavements or sidewalks  Soil moving away from foundations  Ancillary structures such as decks and patios tilting and/or moving relative to the main house  Tilting or cracking of concrete floors and foundations  Broken water lines and other underground utilities  Leaning telephone poles, trees, retaining walls or fences  Offset fence lines  Sunken or down-dropped roadbeds  Rapid increase in creek water levels, possibly accompanied by increased turbidity (soil content)  Sudden decrease in creek water levels though rain is still falling or just recently stopped  Sticking doors and windows, and visible open spaces indicating jambs and frames out of plumb  A faint rumbling sound that increases in volume as the landslide nears  Unusual sounds, such as trees cracking or boulders knocking together 14.3 Cascading Impacts Landslides can cause secondary effects such as blocking access to roads, which can isolate residents and businesses and delay transportation. This could result in economic losses for businesses. Other potential problems resulting from landslides are power and communication failures. Vegetation or poles on slopes can be knocked over, resulting in possible losses to power and communication lines. Landslides also have the potential of destabilizing the foundation of structures, which may result in monetary loss for residents. The damage of destruction of culverts, levees, dams, or other flood mitigation infrastructure during a landslide can result in increased likelihood and damage from flooding. They also can damage rivers or streams, potentially harming water quality, fisheries, and spawning habitat. 14.4 Exposure 14.4.1 Population Population could not be examined by landslide hazard area because the boundaries of census block groups do not coincide with the hazard area boundaries. However, population was estimated using the building count from the National Structure Inventory multiplied by the most recent average household size from the U.S. Census Bureau. Using this approach, the estimated population living in a moderate to high landslide risk area is 182,752. Table 110 shows the population residing in landslide hazard areas by city. Table 110: Population Exposed to Landslide Hazard Jurisdiction Population in hazard area % of Total City Population Campbell 629 1.45 Cupertino 4,530 7.47 Gilroy 2,578 4.33 Los Altos 1,082 3.40 411 PSC 09-12-2024 411 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 332 Jurisdiction Population in hazard area % of Total City Population Los Altos Hills 2,986 35.33 Los Gatos 7,527 22.45 Milpitas 2,217 2.76 Monte Sereno 575 16.67 Morgan Hill 4,583 10.18 Mountain View 337 .41 Palo Alto 620 .90 San Jose 39,694 3.91 Santa Clara 614 .48 Saratoga 6,639 21.39 Sunnyvale 611 .39 Unincorporated 16,158 17.90 County Total 91,379 4.72 14.4.2 Property There are 506,562 acres of land in the OA in a moderate to high landslide risk area. There is also a high number of existing structures and personal vehicles in the OA with an estimated value of $23 billion. Table 111 shows the number and replacement value of structures exposed to the landslide risk and Table 112 shows the land by acreage exposed to moderate to high landslide hazard in the OA. Table 111: Exposure and Value of Structures in Moderate to High Landslide Risk Areas Jurisdiction Estimated Value within the Landslide Risk Area % of Total Replace ment Value Structure Contents Vehicle Total Campbell $119,347,275 $93,490,164 $17,091,000 $229,928,440 1.45 Cupertino $642,077,740 $352,803,132 $46,269,000 $1,041,149,872 7.47 Gilroy $426,639,497 $241,668,405 $24,615,000 $692,922,903 4.33 Los Altos $183,084,928 $112,059,655 $11,295,000 $306,439,583 3.40 Los Altos Hills $551,842,500 $29,164,233 $30,159,000 $611,165,733 35.33 Los Gatos $1,329,885,950 $802,145,351 $97,668,000 $2,229,699,302 22.45 Milpitas $280,013,499 $146,512,485 $22,212,000 $448,737,984 2.76 Monte Sereno $102,860,017 $52,144,778 $6,264,000 $161,268,795 16.67 Morgan Hill $636,319,187 $339,329,715 $46,368,000 $1,022,016,903 10.18 Mountain View $50,017,254 $26,790,401 $6,714,000 $83,521,656 0.41 Palo Alto $278,075,584 $207,755,004 $33,669,000 $519,499,589 0.90 San José $5,567,073,749 $3,165,037,570 $450,567,000 $9,182,678,320 3.91 412 PSC 09-12-2024 412 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 333 Jurisdiction Estimated Value within the Landslide Risk Area % of Total Replace ment Value Structure Contents Vehicle Total Santa Clara (city) $84,759,092 $49,960,448 $14,184,000 $148,903,541 0.48 Saratoga $1,136,966,663 $661,435,350 $78,399,000 $1,876,801,014 21.39 Sunnyvale $104,153,879 $87,361,931 $8,604,000 $200,119,810 0.39 Unincorporated County $2,611,823,403 $1,557,860,929 $220,905,000 $4,390,589,332 17.90 Total $14,104,940,226 $7,925,519,558 $1,114,983,000 $23,145,442,784 4.72 Table 112: Acreage in Moderate to High Landslide Hazard Areas Jurisdiction Moderate to High Hazard Area Area (acres) % of Total Campbell 143.29 3.7% Cupertino 2616.51 36.3% Gilroy 3880.9 36.6% Los Altos 247.32 5.9% Los Altos Hills 2321.63 40.0% Los Gatos 2954.63 39.6% Milpitas 1572.02 18.1% Monte Sereno 222 21.4% Morgan Hill 1996.03 24.2% Mountain View 105.14 1.3% Palo Alto 4605.85 27.7% San José 24693.71 21.3% Santa Clara (city) 121.54 1.0% Saratoga 2999.47 36.7% Sunnyvale 144.7 1.0% Unincorporated County 457938.24 75.9% Total 506562.98 60.7% 14.4.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure Table 113 summarizes critical facilities exposed to the landslide hazard in moderate, high, and very high risk areas. No loss estimation of these facilities was performed due to the lack of established damage functions for the landslide hazard. A significant amount of infrastructure, under the Infrastructure Lifeline category, can be exposed to mass movements: 413 PSC 09-12-2024 413 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 334  Roads: Access to major roads is crucial after a disaster event. Landslides can block roads, causing neighborhood isolation and transportation delays. This can result in economic losses for businesses.  Bridges: Landslides can damage road bridges. Mass movements can knock out bridge abutments or significantly weaken the soil supporting them, making them hazardous for use.  Power Lines: Power lines are generally elevated above steep slopes; but the towers supporting them can be subject to landslides. A landslide could trigger failure of the soil underneath a tower, causing it to collapse and ripping down the lines. 414 PSC 09-12-2024 414 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 335 Table 113: Critical Facilities and Infrastructure in Moderate to Very High Landslide Risk Areas Jurisdiction Essential Facilities Transportation Utilities Community Assets Hazardous Materials Total Campbell 0 5 0 1 0 6 Cupertino 0 10 0 2 0 12 Gilroy 0 0 0 1 0 1 Los Altos 1 3 0 0 0 4 Los Altos Hills 2 10 0 0 0 12 Los Gatos 3 12 0 0 0 15 Milpitas 0 5 0 0 0 5 Monte Sereno 0 0 0 0 0 0 Morgan Hill 1 1 0 0 0 2 Mountain View 0 9 0 0 0 9 Palo Alto 0 5 1 3 0 9 San José 11 110 1 10 0 132 Santa Clara (city) 0 11 0 1 0 12 Saratoga 5 14 0 3 0 22 Sunnyvale 0 2 0 0 0 2 Unincorporated County 12 73 4 30 0 119 Total 35 269 6 49 0 359 415 PSC 09-12-2024 415 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 336 14.4.4 Environment Environmental problems as a result of mass movements can be numerous. Landslides that fall into streams may significantly impact fish and wildlife habitat, as well as affecting water quality. Hillsides that provide wildlife habitat can be lost for prolong periods of time due to landslides. Some habitat types support more diverse species than others. In California, riparian areas contain the greatest diversity of species. For an area such as Santa Clara County, where steeps slopes, landslide potential, and other related geologic hazards are prevalent, erosion control is important to minimize the related adverse effects of a mass-movement event.289F 290 14.5 Vulnerability Change in conditions: Increase in vulnerability  As shown in section 14.2.1, an increasing number of landslide events have been documented since 2017.  There has been a recent increase in the number of heavy rainfall events. Increased precipitation contributes to saturated soils which may stimulate landslide movement.  Landslide risk is highest in the foothills. Roads here are often narrow, or may have limited access such as dead-end spur roads. This makes ingress and egress difficult if roadways become blocked by slides. 14.5.1 Population All of the estimated 91,379 persons exposed to high landslide risk areas are considered to be vulnerable. Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, and Saratoga have the highest percentage of population residing in areas at high risk to landslides. Increasing population and the fact that many homes are built on view property atop or below bluffs and on steep slopes subject to mass movement, increases the number of lives endangered by this hazard. Landslides losses don’t tend to be as heavily felt by socially vulnerable populations as other hazards. Everyone that lives in high-risk areas is at risk. There has been little research on human vulnerability to landslide as most research focuses on structural vulnerability however, some studies suggest that human behavior can play an important role in predicting potential losses.290F 291 While the size and timing of some landslides mean that injury or death is highly likely, advanced warning and immediate action (such as moving to a higher floor) can sometimes make all the difference. Education and outreach could help mitigate this risk to the public. Some landslides onset too quickly for protective action to be taken, which can affect all demographic groups. However, residents who are older, those who are young, those who are visually or hearing impaired, or those who have mobility difficulties due to physical impairments may be particularly at risk to landslide. In cases where warning time is possible prior to a landslide, people with limited English proficiency may have difficulty receiving or understanding warning from a television, radio emergency warning system or cell phone alert to take appropriate action. 290 County of Santa Clara. (1994). Santa Clara County General Plan. https://stgenpln.blob.core.windows.net/document/GP_Book_A.pdf 291 Pollock, W. & Wartman, J. (2020, October 4). Human Vulnerability to Landslides. National Library of Medicine. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7567151/ 416 PSC 09-12-2024 416 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 337 14.5.2 Property Although complete historical documentation of the landslide threat in the OA is lacking, the mountainous terrain surrounding the Santa Clara Valley indicates potential for landslides. Loss estimations for the landslide hazard are not based on modeling utilizing damage functions, because no such damage functions have been generated. Instead, loss estimates were developed representing 10 percent, 30 percent, and 50 percent of the replacement value of exposed structures. This allows emergency managers to select a range of economic impact based on an estimate of the percent of damage to the general building stock. Table 114 shows the general building stock loss estimates in the aggregate of all landslide risk areas. Table 114: Loss Potential Based on All Building Stock in Aggregated Landslide Areas Jurisdiction Exposed Value Estimated Loss Potential from Landslide 10% Damage 30% Damage 50% Damage Campbell $229,928,440 $22,992,844 $68,978,532 $114,964,220 Cupertino $1,041,149,872 $104,114,987 $312,344,962 $520,574,936 Gilroy $692,922,903 $69,292,290 $207,876,871 $346,461,452 Los Altos $306,439,583 $30,643,958 $91,931,875 $153,219,792 Los Altos Hills $611,165,733 $61,116,573 $183,349,720 $305,582,867 Los Gatos $2,229,699,302 $222,969,930 $668,909,791 $1,114,849,651 Milpitas $448,737,984 $44,873,798 $134,621,395 $224,368,992 Monte Sereno $161,268,795 $16,126,880 $48,380,639 $80,634,398 Morgan Hill $1,022,016,903 $102,201,690 $306,605,071 $511,008,452 Mountain View $83,521,656 $8,352,166 $25,056,497 $41,760,828 Palo Alto $519,499,589 $51,949,959 $155,849,877 $259,749,795 San José $9,182,678,320 $918,267,832 $2,754,803,496 $4,591,339,160 Santa Clara (city) $148,903,541 $14,890,354 $44,671,062 $74,451,771 Saratoga $1,876,801,014 $187,680,101 $563,040,304 $938,400,507 Sunnyvale $200,119,810 $20,011,981 $60,035,943 $100,059,905 Unincorporated County $4,390,589,332 $439,058,933 $1,317,176,800 $2,195,294,666 Total $23,145,442,784 $2,314,544,278 $6,943,632,835 $11,572,721,392 14.5.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure There are 398 critical facilities exposed to the landslide hazard to some degree. A more in -depth analysis of the mitigation measures taken by these facilities to prevent damage from mass movements should be done to determine if they could withstand impacts of a mass movement. Several types of infrastructure are exposed to mass movements, including transportation, water and sewer and power infrastructure. Highly susceptible areas of the OA include mountain roads and transportation infrastructure. At this time all infrastructure and transportation corridors identified as exposed to the landslide hazard are considered vulnerable until more information becomes available. 417 PSC 09-12-2024 417 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 338 14.5.4 Environment Landslides and other mass movements impact the environment through changing the earth’s topography; diverting or reducing the quality of rivers, streams, and groundwater; destroying forests and vegetation; and the destruction of natural habitats particularly around at-risk water bodies. Erosion from landslide can significantly degrade the potability water and its capacity to serve as a habitat for fish and other wildfire. Landslides are difficult to predict. The environment most vulnerable to landslide hazard is the same as the environment exposed to the hazard. 14.6 Future Trends in Development Santa Clara County has been one of the state’s fastest growing counties from 2010-2020, but more recently has experienced a decrease in population. It can be assumed the OA will continue to grow, though at a slower pace. Mass movements are becoming more of a concern as development moves outside of urban centers and into areas less developed in terms of infrastructure. The planning partners are equipped to handle future growth within landslide hazard areas. Landslide risk areas are addressed in the safety elements of local general plans. All planning partners have committed to linking their general plans to this hazard mitigation plan. This will create an opportunity for wise land use decisions as future growth impacts landslide hazard areas. Additionally, the State of California has adopted the International Building Code (IBC) by reference in its California Building Standards Code. The IBC includes provisions for geotechnical analyses in steep slope areas that have soil types considered susceptible to landslide hazards. These provisions assure that new construction is built to standards that reduce the vulnerability to landslide risk. California real estate disclosure laws will also help ensure the public is aware of their risk. 14.7 Scenario Major landslides could occur in the OA as a result of soil conditions that have been affected by severe storms, groundwater, or human development. The worst-case scenario for landslide hazards in the OA would generally correspond to a severe storm such which includes heavy rain and causes flooding in the OA. Landslides are most likely during late winter when the water table is high. After heavy rains from November to December, soils become saturated with water. As water seeps downward through upper soils that may consist of permeable sands and gravels and accumulates on impermeable silt, it will cause weakness and destabilization in the slope. As rains continue, the groundwater table rises, adding to the weakening of the slope. Gravity, poor drainage, a rising groundwater table and poor soil exacerbate hazardous conditions. An intense storm could cause saturated soil to move, resulting in landslides. Continued heavy rains and flooding will complicate the problem further. As emergency response resources are applied to problems with flooding, it is possible they will be unavailable to assist with landslides occurring all over the OA. In this scenario, it is probable that private and public property, including infrastructure, could be affected. Members of the public could be injured or killed. Road obstructions caused by mass movements would create isolation problems for residents and businesses in sparsely developed areas. Mass movements could affect bridges that pass over landslide prone ravines and knock out rail service through the OA. Landslides carrying vegetation such as shrubs and trees may cause a break in utility lines, cutting off power and communication access to residents. The impacts to the immediate vicinity of a landslide would be severe while the impacts to the OA would depend on what public infrastructure, including transportation routes, are involved. 14.8 Issues Important issues associated with landslides in the OA include the following:  There are existing homes in landslide risk areas throughout the OA. The degree of vulnerability of these structures depends on the codes and standards the structures were constructed to. Information to this level of detail is not currently available. 418 PSC 09-12-2024 418 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 339  Future development could lead to more homes in landslide risk areas.  Mapping and assessment of landslide hazards are constantly evolving. As new data and science become available, assessments of landslide risk should be reevaluated.  The impact of climate change on landslides is uncertain. If climate change impacts atmospheric conditions, then exposure to landslide risks is likely to increase.  Landslides may cause negative environmental consequences, including water quality degradation.  The risk associated with the landslide hazard overlaps the risk associated with other hazards such as earthquake, flood, and wildfire. This provides an opportunity to seek mitigation alternatives with multiple objectives that can reduce risk for multiple hazards. Table 115: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Landslide/Mass Movement Subject  Ranking  Impacts/Landslide/Mass Movement Public  Minimal to moderate The public is at risk from injury, loss of life, and loss of property from a landslide, debris flow, or other mass movement event. Because of the localized nature of these events, the damage would be severe in the immediate vicinity and less impactful further away from the site. Responders  Minimal  Responders may be called upon in the event of a landslide/mass movement event. They may be asked to assess the situation, rescue survivors, divert traffic, and manage the overall incident. During the course of their duties, they may be exposed to an increased risk of personal injury. Responders responding to another hazard event could also be at risk from a landslide caused by an event like an earthquake’s aftershock or flood. Continuity of Operations (including continued delivery of services) Minimal to moderate Continuity of operations and continued delivery of services would depend on if a facility was in the immediate vicinity of the landslide/mass movement event. There also may be transportation delays if key roadways are impacted. Property, Facilities, and Infrastructure  Minimal to severe Landslides are a serious hazard to property, facilities, and infrastructure. They can result in damage and destruction to property through the destruction of foundations, offset of roads, destruction of bridges, breaking of underground pipes, or overriding of downslope property and structures. Environment  Minimal to moderate Landslides and other mass movement events can alter the earth’s topography, change water courses and water quality, remove forests and vegetation, destroy natural habitats, and cause erosion. Landslide areas are prone to repeated slides. Economic Conditions  Minimal to moderate  Impacts to the economy will depend on the location of the event. Disruptions to impacted facilities, critical infrastructure, or transportation routes could have a long- term effect on the local economy. 419 PSC 09-12-2024 419 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Pla n Section 14: Landslide/Mass Movement 340 Subject  Ranking  Impacts/Landslide/Mass Movement Public Confidence in the Government  Minimal to severe  The public’s confidence will depend on the government’s ability to manage and properly message the event. Prompt and accurate information will influence public trust. 420 PSC 09-12-2024 420 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 15: Tsunami 341 15 Tsunami Definitions  Tsunami: A series of traveling ocean waves of extremely long wavelength usually caused by displacement of the ocean floor and typically generated by seismic or volcanic activity or by underwater landslides.  Seiche: A standing wave in an enclosed or partially enclosed body of water such as bays and lakes. Seiches are typically caused when strong winds and rapid changes in atmospheric pressure or an earthquake push water from one end of a body of water to the other. 15.1 General Background 15.1.1 Tsunami A tsunami consists of a series of high-energy waves that radiate outward like pond ripples from an area where a generating event occurs. Earthquakes may produce displacements of the sea floor that can set the overlying column of water in motion, initiating a tsunami, depending on the magnitude of the earthquake and the type of faulting. Landslides, including from glaciers melting, and underwater volcanos are also sources of these events. Tsunamis are typically classified as local or distant. Locally generated tsunamis have minimal warning times, leaving few options except to relocate to high ground. They may be accompanied by damage resulting from the triggering earthquake due to ground shaking, surface faulting, liquefaction, or landslides. Distant tsunamis may travel for hours before striking a coastline, giving a community a chance to implement evacuation plans. In the open ocean, a tsunami may be only a few inches or feet high, but it can travel with speeds approaching 600 miles per hour. Tsunami waves arrive at shorelines over an extended period. Figure 70 shows likely travel times across the Pacific Ocean for a tsunami generated along the California coastline near the San Francisco Bay Area. As a tsunami enters the shoaling waters near a coastline, its speed diminishes, its wavelength decreases, and its height increases greatly. The first wave usually is not the largest. Several larger and more destructive waves often follow the first one. As tsunamis reach the shoreline, they may take the form of a fast-rising tide, a cresting wave, or a bore (a large, turbulent wall-like wave). The bore phenomenon resembles a step-like change in the water level that advances rapidly (from 10 to 60 miles per hour). The configuration of the coastline, the shape of the ocean floor, and the characteristics of advancing waves play important roles in the destructiveness of the waves. Offshore canyons can focus tsunami wave energy and islands can filter the energy. The orientation of the coastline determines whether the waves strike head-on or are refracted from other parts of the coastline. A wave may be small at one point on a coast and much larger at other points. Bays, sounds, inlets, rivers, streams, offshore canyons, islands, and flood control channels may cause various effects that alter the level of damage. It has been estimated, for example, that a tsunami wave entering a flood control channel could reach a mile or more inland, especially if it enters at high tide. 421 PSC 09-12-2024 421 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 15: Tsunami 342 The first visible indication of an approaching tsunami may be recession of water (draw down) caused by the trough preceding the advancing, large inbound wave crest. Rapid draw down can create strong currents in harbor inlets and channels that can severely damage coastal structures due to erosive scour around piers and pilings. As the water’s surface drops, piers can be damaged by boats or ships straining at or breaking their mooring lines. The vessels can overturn or sink due to strong currents, collisions with other objects, or impact with the harbor bottom. Figure 71: Potential Tsunami Travel Times in the Pacific Ocean, In Hours 291F 292 Conversely, the first indication of a tsunami may be a rise in water level. The advancing tsunami may initially resemble a strong surge increasing the sea level like the rising tide, but the tsunami surge rises faster and does not stop at the shoreline. Even if the wave height appears to be small, 3 to 6 feet for example, the strength of the accompanying surge can be deadly. Waist-high surges can cause strong currents that float cars, small structures, and other debris. Boats and debris are often carried in land by the surge and left stranded when the water recedes. At some locations, the advancing turbulent wave front will be the most destructive part of the wave. In other situations, the greatest damage will be caused by the outflow of water back to the sea between crests, sweeping all before it and undermining roads, buildings, bulkheads, and other structures. This outflow action can carry enormous amounts of highly damaging debris with it, resulting in further destruction. Ships and boats, unless moved away from shore, may be dashed against breakwaters, wharves, and other craft, or be washed ashore and left grounded after the withdrawal of the seawater. 292 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (n.d.). Estimated Tsunami Travel Times to Coastal Locations. https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/maps/ttt_coastal_locations/ 422 PSC 09-12-2024 422 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 15: Tsunami 343 15.1.2 Seiche A seiche is a standing wave in an enclosed or partially enclosed body of water, such as San Francisco Bay. Seiches are typically caused when strong winds and rapid changes in atmospheric pressure or an earthquake push water from one end of a body of water to the other. The largest seiche that was ever measured in the San Francisco Bay, following the 1906 earthquake, was 4 inches high. The Bay Area has not been adversely affected by seiches.292F 293 However, the OA may see seiches on creeks if there was a local earthquake event. These kinds of seiches could have devastating environmental impacts. 15.2 Hazard Profile 15.2.1 Past Events According to the 2023 California State Hazard Mitigation Plan,293F 294 over 80 tsunamis have been observed or recorded along the coast of California in the past 150 years. The National Centers for Environmental Information294F 295 has recorded the California coastline being impacted by tsunami wave events on six dates since 2005: November 15, 2006, February 27, 2010, March 11, 2011, September 16, 2015, January 1, 2022, and January 15, 2022. Together these events caused approximately $55 million in property damage and cost one life. The Santa Clara County OA has never been impacted by a tsunami. The closest tsunami to affect the OA was the tsunami event on March 10, 2011, that occurred in Japan and traveled across the Pacific Ocean to create wave surges that damaged coastal areas in nearby Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties. These counties were included in FEMA-1968-DR-CA declaration. The largest impact of this tsunami experienced in the San Francisco Bay was at Berkeley Marina, where the tsunami caused about $50,000 in damages. 15.2.2 Location Although the OA has not been significantly impacted by tsunami or seiche events before, the recent tsunamis due to disaster events around the world – including earthquakes and an underwater volcano eruption - has underscored how vulnerable the California coastline is to this type of hazard. Following these events, there have been a number of new studies and reports expanding on the State of California’s understanding of its exposure to tsunami risk. Cal OES, in conjunction with the University of Southern California and FEMA, developed Tsunami Hazard Areas Maps to assist cities and counties in identifying their tsunami hazard for tsunami response planning utilizing the best available scientific information. The risk areas are not defined in terms of human-created geographic features, however, according to the 2022 California Geological Survey Tsunami Hazard Area Map295F 296 – County of Santa Clara, approximately the area of the OA around the San Francisco Bay including parts of Sunnyvale, San José, Palo Alto, and Mountain View are in the Tsunami Hazard Area. While only a relatively small portion of the OA may be directly impacted by a tsunami wave, additional tsunami impacts could be felt in the OA along area creeks that would rise with floodwaters from a San Francisco Bay tsunami caused by a local earthquake. 293 Alameda County Community Development Agency. (2022, March 17). Safety Element of the Alameda County General Plan. https://www.acgov.org/cda/planning/generalplans/documents/SafetyElement- updateapprovedbyBOS31722-FINAL.pdf 294 California Office of Emergency Services. (2023). Hazard Mitigation Planning. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/office-of- the-director/operations/recovery-directorate/hazard-mitigation/state-hazard-mitigation-planning/ 295 National Centers for Environmental Information. (n.d.). Storm Events Database. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/ 296 California Department of Conservation. (2022, October 7). California Tsunami Maps and Data. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/tsunami/maps 423 PSC 09-12-2024 423 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 15: Tsunami 344 Figure 71 shows potential tsunami inundation areas on the southern portion of the San Francisco Bay and Coyote Creek, which is the northern portion of the Santa Clara County OA. Figure 72: Tsunami Hazard Area 15.2.3 Frequency The frequency of tsunamis is related to the frequency of the events that cause them, so it is similar to the frequency of seismic, volcanic activities, or landslides around the Pacific Basin. Generally, four or five tsunamis occur every year in the Pacific Basin. It is unclear what impact future conditions such as climate change may have on the frequency of tsunami events. It is possible that increased severe flood events, wildfires, and warming conditions could impact 424 PSC 09-12-2024 424 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 15: Tsunami 345 the frequency of landslides, which are one known sources of tsunamis. However, they make up only a relatively small percentage of the root causes of tsunamis. Earthquakes are the most common cause of tsunamis. Current data indicates that there is not a statistically significant impact of climate change as we know it on earthquakes. This doesn’t necessarily mean that climate change does not have impact. Current science may simply lack the capability to distinguish a direct correlation between these hazards. For example, earthquakes can be triggered by changes to the amount of stress on a fault. According to NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory at the California Institute of Technology, changing conditions, such as surface water levels, due to hazards such as flooding and droughts may impact earthquakes, but we have no way of knowing by how much. It is unlikely that the OA would notice a significant change in the frequency of tsunami events due to climate change. Further information on the impact of climate change on the probability of tsunamis is included in Section 11. Probability in OA: Unlikely 15.2.4 Severity Tsunamis are a threat to life and property to anyone living or visiting near the ocean. The full extent of a tsunami event can be severe, and is often measured by magnitude, similar to earthquakes. The higher the magnitude, the more severe and destructive the tsunami may be. From 1950 to 2007, 478 tsunamis were recorded globally. Fifty-one of these events caused fatalities, to a total of over 308,000 coastal residents. The overwhelming majority of these events occurred in the Pacific basin. Recent tsunamis have struck Nicaragua, Indonesia, and Japan, killing several thousand people. Property damage due to these waves was nearly $1 billion. The San Francisco Bay faces the greatest threat from distant tsunamis originating in areas such as Alaska, Washington, and Japan. It is general consensus that the Santa Clara County OA would not likely see significant impacts from a tsunami originating in the Pacific Ocean, given the area’s primarily inland location. The extent of the damage would be limited to the immediate area. Boats, docks, and property near the bay may suffer some impacts if they were to be hit directly. Additionally, the OA would likely see minor tsunami impacts on creeks from a local earthquake event, with any floodwaters flowing up creeks impacting people visiting the creeks. A local earthquake tsunami can occur any time, and the resulting floodwater waves can carry damaging debris. Some studies suggest that future conditions such as climate change are likely to increase the severity of tsunamis. Sea-level rise is one of the main reasons why. These additional impacts will most severely be experienced in low-elevation Pacific islands however, all coastal communities are at risk of the dangers associate with sea-level rise. Scientists studying the probability of an Alaska-Aleutian subduction zone earthquake and the subsequent impact to southern California supported the conclusion that rising sea levels can increase tsunami impacts. If the sea continues to rise as predicted, someday the impacts of a small tsunami will be similar to a large tsunami of today. The risk to the OA may change over time. 15.2.5 Warning Time Typical signs of a tsunami hazard are earthquakes and/or sudden and unexpected rise or fall in coastal water. The large waves are often preceded by coastal flooding and followed by a quick recession of the water. Tsunamis are difficult to detect in the open ocean; with waves less than 3 feet high. The tsunami’s size and speed, as well as the coastal area’s form and depth, affect the impact of a tsunami; wave heights of 50 feet are not uncommon. In general, scientists believe it requires an earthquake of at least a magnitude 7 to produce a tsunami. 425 PSC 09-12-2024 425 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 15: Tsunami 346 The Pacific tsunami warning system evolved from a program initiated in 1946. It is a cooperative effort involving 26 countries along with numerous seismic stations, water level stations and information distribution centers. The National Weather Service296F 297 operates two regional information distribution centers. One is located in Ewa Beach, Hawaii, and the other is in Palmer, Alaska. The Ewa Beach center also serves as an administrative hub for the Pacific warning system. The warning system only begins to function when a Pacific basin earthquake of magnitude 6.5 or greater triggers an earthquake alarm. When this occurs, the following sequence of actions occurs:  Data is interpolated to determine epicenter and magnitude of the event.  If the event is magnitude 7.5 or greater and located at sea, a TSUNAMI WATCH is issued.  Participating tide stations in the earthquake area are requested to monitor their gages. If unusual tide levels are noted, the tsunami watch is upgraded to a TSUNAMI WARNING.  Tsunami travel times are calculated, and the warning is transmitted to the disseminating agencies and thus relayed to the public.  The Ewa Beach center will cancel the watch or warning if reports from the stations indicate that no tsunami was generated or that the tsunami was inconsequential. This system is not considered to be effective for communities located close to the tsunami because the first wave would arrive before the data were processed and analyzed. In this case, strong ground shaking would provide the first warning of a potential tsunami. 15.2.6 Extent The extent of Tsunami can be measured through the new tsunami intensity scale which was proposed by Papadopoulos and Imamura in 2001. This intensity scale defines the ranges of anticipated intensities of Tsunami as: Table 116: Tsunami Intensity Scale297F 298 Category Description I. Not Felt a) Not felt even under the most favorable circumstances. b) No effect. c) No damage. II. Scarcely Felt a) Felt by a few people on board in small vessels. Not observed in the coast. b) No effect. c) No damage. III. Weak a) Felt by most people on board in small vessels. Observed by a few people in the coast. b) No effect. c) No damage. 297 National Weather Service. (n.d.). Pacific Tsunami Warning Center. https://www.tsunami.gov/?page=history 298 UNESCO. (n.d.) The New Tsunami Intensity Scale. https://neamtic.ioc-unesco.org/images/Neamtic/PDF/intensity- scale.pdf 426 PSC 09-12-2024 426 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 15: Tsunami 347 Category Description IV. Largely Observed a) Felt by all on board in small vessels and by few people on board in large vessels. b) Few small vessels move slightly onshore. c) No damage. V. Strong a) Felt by all on board in large vessels and observed by all in the coast. Few people are frightened and run to higher ground. b) Many small vessels move strongly onshore, few of them crash each other or overturn. Traces of sand layer are left behind in grounds of favorable conditions. Limited flooding of cultivated land. c) Limited flooding of outdoor facilities (e.g. gardens) of near-shore structures. VI. Slightly Damaging a) Many people are frightened and run to higher ground. b) Most small vessels move violently onshore, or crash strongly into each other, or overturn. b) Damage and flooding in a few wooden structures. Most masonry buildings withstand. VII. Damaging a) Most people are frightened and try to run in higher ground. b) Many small vessels damaged. Few large vessels oscillate violently. Objects of variable size and stability overturn and drift. Sand layer and accumulations of pebbles are left behind. Few aquaculture rafts washed away. c) Many wooden structures damaged, few are demolished or washed away. Damage of grade 1 and flooding in a few masonry buildings. VIII. Heavily Damaging a) All people escape to higher ground, a few are washed away. b) Most of the small vessels are damaged, many are washed away. Few large vessels are moved ashore or crashed each other. Big objects are drifted away. Erosion and littering in the beach. Extensive flooding. Slight damage in tsunami control forest, stop drifts. Many aquaculture rafts washed away, few partially damaged. c) Most wooden structures are washed away or demolished. Damage of grade 2 in a few masonry buildings. Most RC buildings sustain damage, in a few damage of grade 1 and flooding is observed. IX. Destructive a) Many people are washed away. b) Most small vessels are destroyed or washed away. Many large vessels are moved violently ashore, few are destroyed. Extensive erosion and littering of the beach. Local ground subsidence. Partial destruction in tsunami control forest, stops drifts. Most aquaculture rafts washed away, many partially damaged. c) Damage of grade 3 in many masonry buildings, few RC buildings suffer damage grade 2. 427 PSC 09-12-2024 427 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 15: Tsunami 348 Category Description X. Very Destructive a) General panic. Most people are washed away. b) Most large vessels are moved violently ashore, many are destroyed or collided with buildings. Small boulders from the sea bottom are moved inland. Cars overturned and drifted. Oil spill, fires start. Extensive ground subsidence. c) Damage of grade 4 in many masonry buildings, few RC buildings suffer damage grade 3. Artificial embankments collapse, port water breaks damaged. XI. Devastating Lifelines interrupted. Extensive fires. Water backwash drifts cars and other objects in the sea. Big boulders from the sea bottom are moved inland. Damage of grade 5 in many masonry buildings. Few RC buildings suffer damage grade 4, many suffer damage grade 3. XII. Completely Devastating Practically all masonry buildings demolished. Most RC buildings suffer at least damage grade 3. 15.3 Cascading Impact One additional direct impact a tsunami wave may have on the Santa Clara County OA is through floating debris that can cause damage to any affected areas. The removal of this debris would also take OA time and resources. Another cascading hazard includes tsunami-triggered fires. This refers to fires that burn after a tsunami event in spilled oil, debris, cargo, vehicles, vegetation as well as residential, commercial, or industrial buildings. These fires could result in injury, death, damage, and c ontamination of the environment by releasing potentially toxic gases and smoke into the air. Inundation of wastewater treatments plants, three out of four which sit close to the mapped Tsunami Inundation Area, would also be of concern. This could release raw sewage, waste chemicals, and chemicals used in the treatment of wastewaters into the OA. 15.4 Exposure and Vulnerability Changes in conditions: no change in vulnerability  No changes in conditions leading to the occurrence of a tsunami have changed.  Development is not taking place in the potential tsunami hazard, so vulnerability is not increasing. 15.4.1 Population The population of the Santa Clara County OA is located outside of a tsunami inundation area; therefore, no population exposure exists for the tsunami hazard. No residential properties were identified in the potential tsunami evacuation zone. Minimal risk may be present to employees or recreational visitors to the two parks in the area. 428 PSC 09-12-2024 428 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 15: Tsunami 349 15.4.2 Property Based on the National Structure Inventory, 14 commercial buildings and 2 industrial buildings are potentially vulnerable to tsunami. These buildings have a total value of $6.7 million. Limited additional information is currently available about these facilities to determine additional impacts. 15.4.3 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure Critical facilities and infrastructure in the Santa Clara County OA that are located within the tsunami inundation area include 5 ports, 3 railroad bridges, 4 highway bridges, 2 parks , and 1 open space. Port location data was obtained from Hazus but little additional information about the function or these facilities and potential impacts from interruption or loss of operation. Two highway bridges are located on McCarthy Blvd near the northern border of Milpitas and San Jose. These are located near the outer edge of the potential inundation area and alternative routes are nearby. Another is located in Mountain View, also on the outer-most edge of the hazard area where alternate routes are available. A forth is in San Jose in the Alviso area, across the Guadalupe River which also has alternate routes. Two of the Southern Pacific railway bridges are also in the Alviso area, which is near the outer edge of the hazard zone. However, one bridge on this rail line is located closer to the shoreline and may experience more severe effects from a tsunami. 15.4.4 Environment Waterways originating from southern portion of San Francisco Bay would be exposed to the effects of a tsunami or seiche; inundation of water and introduction of foreign debris could be hazardous to the environment. All wildlife inhabiting the area is exposed. Erosion and the de struction of naturally occurring marine habitats would be a concern. All of San Francisco Bay is in the Tsunami Hazard Area. The vulnerability of aquatic habit and associated ecosystems would be highest in low-lying areas close to the southern portion of San Francisco Bay coastline. Tsunami waves and seiches can carry destructive debris and pollutants that can have devastating impacts on all facets of the environment. Millions of dollars spent on habitat restoration and conservation in the OA could be wiped out by one significant tsunami. There are currently limited tools available to measure these impacts. However, it is conceivable that the potential financial impact of a tsunami or seiche event on the environment could equal or exceed the impact on property. Community planners and emergency managers should take this into account when preparing for the tsunami hazard and considering future development. 15.5 Future Trends in Development Land along the coast in the OA which could be impacted by a tsunami is primarily already developed or preserved as green space. Most of the land is classified as parks, including CPAD open space, Williamson Act parcels, and conservation easements according to the Plan Bay Area 2050. Additionally, the Tsunami Hazard Area in the OA is within flood hazard areas that are already regulated under floodplain management regulations. However, current FEMA flood maps do not consider tsunami flood risk. Additional data is needed to understand tsunami risk. FEMA has produced the website, “Thinking Beyond Flood Maps – Using FEMA’s Coastal Data to Reduce Risk and Build Resilience” as well as other non-regulatory products to support coastal communities ’ development. FEMA also participates in the National Tsunami Hazard Mitigation Program (NTHMP), which is administered by NOAA. The NTHMP works to reduce the impacts of tsunamis through collaboration, communication, and financial and technical support. The Mitigation and Education component provides recommendations to reduce tsunami risk. Additionally, NOAA, through the National Weather Service, sponsors the NWS TsunamiReady Program which helps communities minimize the risk posed by tsunamis through better 429 PSC 09-12-2024 429 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 15: Tsunami 350 risk assessment, planning, education, and early warning systems. Resources like these provide planning partners and developers with the tools needed to ensure any future development is at reduced risk from tsunami events. 15.6 Scenario The worst-case scenario that may directly impact the OA is a local tsunami or seiche event originating in the San Francisco Bay triggered by a seismic event. This event could occur anytime and could be particularly severe given the limited warning time. There is potentia l for loss of life and injury. Property and business in the Tsunami Hazard Area could impacted. The series of floodwater waves that would occur would carry damaging debris and cause environmental impacts deep into the OA. These environmental impacts may be the longest impacts felt after the event, particularly if complex debris, crude oil, legacy contaminants, or other pollutants get into the nearby coastal marine environments or onshore. This could potentially have a long-term impact on the immediate local economy. The largest kind tsunami event that may indirectly impact the OA would be a catastrophic earthquake and tsunami along one of the faults near California. For example, in anticipation of a full rupture along the 800-mile-long Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) which lies off the northwest coast of the United States, the State of California is preparing for impacts of a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and the resulting tsunami waves, aftershocks, and flooding. Historical evidence suggests that an event of this magnitude will occur within the next 200 years. It is assumed this will be a “no-notice” event. If the CSZ experiences a full fault rupture, it will have a significant impact on surrounding areas, including other counties, states, and countries. According to the California Cascadia Subduction Zone Earthquake and Tsunami Response Plan, there may be over a thousand deaths, 1,500 injured, and 28,000 structures damaged or destroyed in northern coastal California alone. The cascading impacts of this event would also be su bstantial. It can be assumed if this were to occur, there would be an immediate need for support from first responders, volunteers, NGOS, and public health and medical services from outside the affected area. The 20 hospitals in Santa Clara County and mass care sheltering venues would need to be prepared to support survivors, including the injured. There would also be a noticeable impact to the daily life of OA residents, including potential disruption to critical infrastructure such as transportation, ener gy, telecommunications, utility systems, and public health and medical systems. The region, the State, and the Nation may face long-term economic repercussions. The Science Application for Risk Reduction (SAFRR) Tsunami Scenario 298F 299 includes additional information on potential tsunami scenarios on the California pacific coast. This, and other resources, were consulted when developing the consequence analysis in Table 117: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Tsunami. 15.7 Issues Important issues associated with tsunamis in the OA include the following:  As tsunami warning technologies evolve, the tsunami warning capability within the OA will need to be enhanced to provide the highest degree of warning.  With the possibility of climate change, the issue of sea level rise may become an important consideration as probable tsunami inundation areas are identified through future studies. Special attention will need to be focused on the vulnerable communities in the tsunami zone and on hazard mitigation through public education and outreach. 299 U.S. Geological Survey. (2013). The SFARR Tsunami Scenario. https://www.usgs.gov/publications/safrr-science- application-risk-reduction-tsunami-scenario 430 PSC 09-12-2024 430 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 15: Tsunami 351 Table 117: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Tsunami Subject Ranking Impacts/Tsunami Public Minimal to Moderate Home and property owners within the Tsunami Hazard Area are most at risk of impacts from a tsunami event. Impacts to the public include potential for injury or loss of life, destruction and or/loss of lands and property, and contamination of water due to flooding. Flood water can pose health risks even after the initial wave. Post-tsunami cleanup would also have to be done appropriately to reduce exposure to pollutants in water, debris, and moldy structures. Educating the public in advance on their tsunami risk and ways to mitigate their risk will enhance the public’s ability to respond and recover. Responders Minimal First responders, such as fire and police, would be relied upon to respond to this event. The impact on responders is expected to be minimal with proper training. The impact could be severe if there is a lack of training. It is important responders are aware and on the lookout for the secondary effects of tsunamis. Continuity of Operations (including continue delivery of services) Minimal Temporary relocation may be necessary in the unlikely event inundation affects government facilities. Delivery of services could be impacted if there is any disruption to the roads and/or utilities due to the inundation. Property, Facilities, and Infrastructure Minimal to moderate Potential damages include damage or loss of properties, temporary impacts to transportation routes, debris build up, and potential stormwater system and wastewater overload. Communication systems could also be limited. The localized impact could be significant for facilities and infrastructure in the inundation area of the incident. The farther away from the incident area, the more likely the damage will lessen, from moderate to minimal. Environment Minimal to severe The impact to the environment could be severe, depending on the size and unique characteristics of a tsunami. There may be significant and complicated debris removal required including a diverse array of pollutants spilling into the environment. Marine habitats may be damaged by contaminants, which may have a short or long-term impact on the environment and health of the coastal ecosystem. The shoreline may erode. The environmental impacts may not be limited to waterways. Debris, toxins, airborne ash after a tsunami-related fire, and more could enter the surrounding land and air. Economic Conditions Minimal to severe Impacts on the economy will greatly depend on the scope of the inundation and the amount of time it takes for the water to recede as well as any leftover debris or contaminants. Secondary hazards experienced will also impact the economy’s recovery. Industries such as fishing, tourism, and environmental recreation may experience more significant impacts. 431 PSC 09-12-2024 431 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 15: Tsunami 352 Subject Ranking Impacts/Tsunami Public Confidence in the Government Minimal to severe The public’s confidence will vary, depending on the perception of whether the failure could have been prevented, the warning time, and the time it takes for response and recovery. Proactive preparation in advance of a tsunami event and effectively implementing response plans will support confidence in government. 432 PSC 09-12-2024 432 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 353 16 Other Hazards of Interest Definitions  Terrorism: The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments. Terrorism is either foreign or domestic, depending on the origin, base, and objectives of the terrorist or organization.  Weapons of Mass Destruction: Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive weapons associated with terrorism.  Active Threat: An active threat is a situation involving an individual or individuals using or threatening to use deadly physical force on others in a confined and populated area .  Cyber Threat: Any circumstance or event with the potential to adversely impact organizational operations (including mission, functions, image, or reputation), organizational assets, or individuals through an information system via unauthorized access, destruction, disclosure, modification of information, and/or denial of service.  Technological Hazards: Hazards from accidents associated with human activities such as the manufacture, transportation, storage, and use of hazardous materials.  Epidemic/Pandemic: An epidemic is a sudden increase in the number of cases of a disease above what is normally expected in that population in a specific area. A pandemic is an epidemic that occurs over a broad geographic region, usually nationally or globally.  Fog: visible cloud water droplets that are low-lying and influenced by nearby bodies of water, topography, and wind conditions. 16.1 General Background In addition to the hazards of concern presented in the preceding sections, four other hazards of interest, which were addressed in the 2017 Plan, are also included in this MJHMP: 1. Intentional criminal, malicious acts, including acts of terrorism, cyber threats, and active threats. 2. Technological incidents that arise accidentally from human activities such as the manufacture, transportation, storage, and use of hazardous materials; transportation accidents; pipeline failure and release; and utility failure. 3. Epidemics and pandemics of human disease. 4. Fog Although they may not be traditionally profiled in hazard mitigation plans like some of the other hazards in the plan, they are included for the following reasons:  This plan takes a proactive approach to disaster preparedness to protect the public safety of all citizens.  Preparation for and response to an event involving these hazards of interest will involve many of the same staff, critical decisions, and commitment of resources as a natural hazard.  The multi-hazard mitigation planning effort is an opportunity to inform the public about all hazards, including those beyond the natural hazards of concern.  The likelihood of an event involving one of these hazards of interest in the Santa Clara County OA is greater than some of the identified natural hazards in this plan. 433 PSC 09-12-2024 433 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 354 The sections below provide short profiles of each of the four other hazards of interest. No formal risk assessment was performed and mitigation actions for these hazards are not mandatory under 44 CFR Section §201.6(c)(2)(i). The “Identified Needs” identified at the end of this section shall serve in the place of a formal action plan. All planning partners for the MJHMP should be aware of these hazards and take steps to reduce the risks they present whenever it is practical to do so. 16.1.1 EMAP Consequence Analysis The planning team decided to include one comprehensive analysis for all of the other hazards of interest. The analysis results are provided in Table 118. Table 118: EMAP Consequence Analysis: Other Hazards of Interest Subject Ranking Impacts Public Severe Impact of the immediate area could be severe, especially in the event of intentional hazards. Impact for less affected areas could be moderate to light. Responders Severe Impact to responders could be severe for unprotected personnel and moderate to light for prepared personnel. In the event of some hazards, responders may be specifically targeted. Continuity of Operations (including continued delivery of services) Moderate There is some expectation of execution of the COOP. This will vary depending on the severity of the event. Services may need to be conducted at a secondary and secure location. Property, Facilities, and Infrastructure Severe Critical facilities are often targeted, making impacts potentially severe. Utilities, technology, transportation systems, and infrastructure are most likely to be damaged or impacted. Environment Severe Surrounding environment of targeted or impacted areas can be severe. The greatest impact will be to trees, bushes, foliage, crops, and wildlife. Economic Conditions Minimal to Severe Impacts to the economy will greatly depend on the severity of the event, and any damages sustained such as utilities and roads. In a localized event damages may be minimal, but economic impacts can become severe when the event is more widespread. Public Confidence in the Government Minimal to Severe Response and recovery will be in question if not timely and effective. 434 PSC 09-12-2024 434 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 355 16.2 Intentional Hazards 16.2.1 Terrorism and Weapons of Mass Destruction Terrorist activities are those that involve an illegal use of force or violence against people and property in violation of criminal laws of the United States with the intent to intimidate, coerce, or ransom. FEMA states that acts of terrorism include the use of weapons of mass destruction, including biological, chemical, nuclear, and radiological weapons; arson, incendiary, explosive and armed attacks; industrial sabotage and intentional hazardous materials releases; agro-terrorism; and cyber-terrorism299F 300. The threat of violence is also a component of terrorism. The following are potential methods used by terrorists that could affect the Santa Clara OA as a direct target or collaterally:  Bombings; improvised explosive devices  Conventional firearms/mass shootings  Suicide attacks  Secondary attacks  Chemical or biological weapons  Cyber-terrorism  Radiological dispersal device  Agro-terrorism  Vehicle/aircraft attacks  Kidnappings/assassinations  Conventional firearms/mass shootings  Nuclear weapons (fission or thermonuclear) The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) categorizes two types of terrorism in the United States 300F 301:  International Terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups who are inspired by, or associated with, designated foreign terrorist organizations or nations (state- sponsored).  Domestic Terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, or environmental nature. The effects of terrorism can include injuries, loss of life, property damage, or disruption of services such as electricity, water supplies, transportation, or communications. Effects may be immediate or delayed. Terrorists often choose targets that offer limited danger to themselves and areas with relatively easy public access. Foreign terrorists look for visible targets where they can avoid detection before and after an attack, such as international airports, large cities, major special events, and high-profile landmarks. Cal OES and local governments have identified high profile targets for potential terrorists within their jurisdictions. Large business centers, high visibility tourist attractions, transportation providers, and critical infrastructure in Santa Clara County may become a target for terrorism and can present security challenges of an ongoing nature. Multiple incidents can happen simultaneously, and typically require a multi-agency, multijurisdictional response. 300 FEMA. (n.d.) Terrorism. https://www.fema.gov/pdf/areyouready/terrorism.pdf#:~:text=Terrorism%20is%20the%20use%20of%20force%20or% 20violence,States%20for%20purposes%20of%20intimidation%2C%20coercion%2C%20or%20ransom. 301 Federal Bureau of Investigation. (n.d.) Terrorism. https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/terrorism 435 PSC 09-12-2024 435 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 356 Those involved with terrorism response, including law enforcement, fire and rescue, public health and public information staff, are trained to deal with the public ’s emotional reaction swiftly as response to the event occurs. The area of the event must be clearly identified in all emergency alert messages to prevent those not affected by the incident from overwhelming local emergency rooms and response resources therefore reducing service to those actually affected. The public will be informed clearly and frequently about what government agencies are doing to mitigate the impacts of the event. The public will also be given clear directions on how to protect the health of individuals and families. Table 119 provides a hazard profile summary for terrorism-related hazards. Most terrorist events in the United States have been involved detonated and undetonated explosive devices, tear gas, pipe bombs, and firebombs. 436 PSC 09-12-2024 436 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 357 Table 119: Event Profiles for Terrorism301F 302 Hazard Application Modea Hazard Durationb Static/Dynamic Characteristicsc Mitigating and Exacerbating Conditionsd Conventional Bomb Detonation of explosive device on or near target; delivery via person, vehicle, or projectile. Instantaneous; additional secondary devices, or diversionary activities may be used, lengthening the duration of the hazard until the attack site is determined to be clear. Extent of damage is determined by type and quantity of explosive. Effects generally static other than cascading consequences, incremental structural failure, etc. Overpressure at a given standoff is inversely proportional to the cube of the distance from the blast; thus, each additional increment of standoff provides progressively more protection. Terrain, forestation, structures, etc. can provide shielding by absorbing and/or deflecting energy and debris. Exacerbating conditions include ease of access to target; lack of barriers and shielding; poor construction; and ease of concealment of device. Chemical Agent Liquid/aerosol contaminants dispersed using sprayers or other aerosol generators; liquids vaporizing from puddles/ containers; or munitions. Hours to weeks, depending on the agent and the conditions in which it exists. Contamination can be carried out of the initial target area by persons, vehicles, water, and wind. Chemicals may be corrosive or otherwise damaging over time if not remediated. Air temperature can affect evaporation of aerosols. Ground temperature affects evaporation of liquids. Humidity can enlarge aerosol particles, reducing inhalation hazard. Precipitation can dilute and disperse agents but can spread contamination. Wind can disperse vapors but also cause target area to be dynamic. The micro- meteorological effects of buildings and terrain can alter travel and duration of agents. Shielding in the form of sheltering in place can protect people and property from harmful effects. 302 Federal Emergency Management Agency (2003). Integrating Manmade Hazards into Mitigation Planning. https://gema.georgia.gov/document/publication/howto7pdf/download 437 PSC 09-12-2024 437 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 358 Hazard Application Modea Hazard Durationb Static/Dynamic Characteristicsc Mitigating and Exacerbating Conditionsd Arson/ Incendiary Attack Initiation of fire or explosion on or near target via direct contact or remotely via projectile. Generally minutes to hours. Extent of damage is determined by type and quantity of device, accelerant, and materials present at or near target. Effects generally static other than cascading consequences, incremental structural failure, etc. Mitigation factors include built-in fire detection and protection systems and fire- resistive construction techniques. Inadequate security can allow easy access to target, easy concealment of an incendiary device, and undetected initiation of a fire. Non-compliance with fire and building codes, as well as failure to maintain existing fire protection systems, can substantially increase the effectiveness of a fire weapon. Armed Attack Tactical assault or sniping from remote location, or random attack based on fear, emotion, or mental instability. Generally minutes to days. Varies based on the perpetrators’ intent and capabilities. Inadequate security can allow easy access to target, easy concealment of weapons, and undetected initiation of an attack. Biological Agent Liquid or solid contaminants dispersed using sprayers/ aerosol generators or by point or line sources such as munitions, covert deposits, and moving sprayers. Hours to years, depending on the agent and the conditions in which it exists. Depending on the agent used and the effectiveness with which it is deployed, contamination can be spread via wind and water. Infection can spread via humans or animals. Altitude of release above ground can affect dispersion; sunlight is destructive to many bacteria and viruses; light to moderate wind will disperse agents but higher winds can break up aerosol clouds; the micro-meteorological effects of buildings and terrain can influence aerosolization and travel of agents. Agro-terrorism Direct, generally covert contamination of food supplies or introduction of pests and/or disease agents to crops and livestock. Days to months. Varies by type of incident. Food contamination events may be limited to specific distribution sites, whereas pests and diseases may spread widely. Generally, no effects on built environment. Inadequate security can facilitate adulteration of food and introduction of pests and disease agents to crops and livestock. 438 PSC 09-12-2024 438 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 359 Hazard Application Modea Hazard Durationb Static/Dynamic Characteristicsc Mitigating and Exacerbating Conditionsd Radiological Agent Radioactive contaminants dispersed using sprayers/ aerosol generators, or by point or line sources such as munitions. Seconds to years, depending on material used. Initial effects will be localized to site of attack; depending on meteorological conditions, subsequent behavior of radioactive contaminants may be dynamic. Duration of exposure, distance from source of radiation, and the amount of shielding between source and target determine exposure to radiation. Nuclear Bomb Detonation of nuclear device underground, at the surface, in the air, or at high altitude. Light/heat flash and blast/shock wave last for seconds; nuclear radiation and fallout hazards can persist for years. Electromagnetic pulse from a high- altitude detonation lasts for seconds and affects only unprotected electronic systems. Initial light, heat, and blast effects of a subsurface, ground or air burst are static and determined by the device’s characteristics and employment; fallout of radioactive contaminants may be dynamic, depending on meteorological conditions. Harmful effects of radiation can be reduced by minimizing the time of exposure. Light, heat, and blast energy decrease logarithmically as a function of distance from seat of blast. Terrain, forestation, structures, etc. can provide shielding by absorbing and/or deflecting radiation and radioactive contaminants. Intentional Hazardous Material Release (fixed facility or transportation) Solid, liquid, and/or gaseous contaminants released from fixed or mobile containers Hours to days. Chemicals may be corrosive or otherwise damaging over time. Explosion and/or fire may be subsequent. Contamination may be carried out of the incident area by persons, vehicles, water, and wind. Weather conditions directly affect how the hazard develops. The micro- meteorological effects of buildings and terrain can alter travel and duration of agents. Shielding in the form of sheltering in place can protect people and property from harmful effects. Non- compliance with fire and building codes, as well as failure to maintain existing fire protection and containment features, can substantially increase the damage from a hazardous materials release. a. Application Mode: Application mode describes the human acts or unintended events necessary to cause the hazard to occur. b. Duration: Duration is the length of time the hazard is present. For example, a chemical warfare agent such as mustard gas, if un - remediated, can persist for hours or weeks under the right conditions. 439 PSC 09-12-2024 439 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 360 c. Dynamic or Static Characteristics: These characteristics of a hazard describe its tendency, or that of its effects, to either expand, contract, or remain confined in time, magnitude, and space. For example, the physical destruction caused by an earthquake is generally con fined to the place in which it occurs, and it does not usually get worse unless aftershocks or other cascading failures occur; in contrast, a cl oud of chlorine gas leaking from a storage tank can change location by drifting with the wind and can diminish in danger by dissipating over time. d. Mitigation and Exacerbating Conditions: Mitigating conditions are characteristics of the target and its physical environment that can reduce the effects of a hazard. For example, earthen berms can provide protection from bombs; exposure to sunlight can render some biolo gical agents ineffective; and effective perimeter lighting and surveillance can minimize the likelihood of someone approaching a target unseen. In co ntrast, exacerbating conditions are characteristics that can enhance or magnify the effects of a hazard. For example, depressions o r low areas in terrain can trap heavy vapors, and a proliferation of street furniture (trash receptacles, newspaper vending machines, mailboxes, etc.) can provide hiding places for explosive devices. 440 PSC 09-12-2024 440 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 361 16.2.2 Active Threat Active Shooter Active shooter attacks are typically motivated by the desire to maximize human casualties. They are differentiated from other attack types by the indiscriminate nature of the victims, who often are targets of opportunity. Active shooter attacks range from “lone wolf” shooters who act alone and without any organizational affiliation to organized groups acting in concert to achieve a specific objective. Active shooter tactics sometimes employ a blend of lone shooters and multi-person teams as part of a larger assault. Active shooters may use small arms, light weapons, or a combination of the two depending on the type of attack. Small arms are revolvers, automatic pistols, rifles, shotguns, assault rifles, light machine guns, etc. Light weapons are medium caliber and explosive ordinance, grenade launchers, rocket propelled grenades, etc. Attackers can increase their likelihood of success by using a wider array of weapons, including improvised explosive devices. Biological Attack Biological hazards include disease-causing microorganisms and pathogens, such as bacteria and viruses, which multiply within a host and cause an infection. Some bacteria and viruses can spread from one individual to another. Infections typically occur as a result of airborne exposure, skin contact, or ingestion. In general, exposure to bacteria and viruses can occur through inhalation (as is the case with airborne B. anthracis spores, which cause anthrax), ingestion of contaminated food or water (the case with E. coli, which causes gastrointestinal infection), contact with infected individuals, or contact with contaminated surfaces (which may be harboring, for example, viruses that cause influenza). Domestic and transnational threat groups have considered targeting heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems of large commercial buildings. Anthrax has been used as a weapon for nearly 100 years and is one of the most likely agents to be used in a biological threat. Its spores are easily found in nature, can be produced in a lab, and can last for a long time. It can be released quietly and without anyone knowing. Microscopic spores can be put into powders, sprays, food, and water. Due to their size, victims may not be able to see, smell or taste them.302F 303 Terrorists may release anthrax spores in public places. In 2001, letters containing powdered anthrax spores were sent through the U.S. mail, causing skin and lung anthrax in 22 people. Five people died, all due to lung anthrax.303F 304 If a biological attack were to occur in the Santa Clara County OA, a large number of personnel could be impacted. Buildings in the impacted area and transportation infrastructure might be closed for investigation and cleanup. These areas would not be accessible until cleanup is completed, which would impact the businesses. Hospitals could become overwhelmed with people coming in fearing contamination. Residents and businesses may need to shelter in place in the area of the attack. 303 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.) The Threat of an Anthrax Attack. https://www.cdc.gov/anthrax/bioterrorism/threat.html 304 Chan, C. & Pan, E. (n.d.). Anthrax in the air? San Francisco Department of Public Health. https://www.sfcdcp.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/SFDPH.Anthrax_in_the_Air._SF_Med._Society_article.pdf 441 PSC 09-12-2024 441 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 362 Chemical Attack Chemical weapons are poisonous vapors, aerosols, liquids, and solids that have toxic effects on humans, animals, and plants. A chemical attack is the spreading of toxic chemicals with the intent to do harm. A wide variety of chemicals could be made, stolen, or otherwise acquired for use in an attack. Harmful chemicals that could be used in an attack include:304F 305  Chemical weapons (warfare agents) developed for military use;  Toxic industrial and commercial chemicals that are produced, transported, and stored in the making of petroleum, textiles, plastics, fertilizers, paper, foods, pesticides, household cleaners, and other products; and  Chemical toxins of biological origin such as ricin. Exposure pathways include inhalation, skin contact, ingestion, or injection. Depending on the severity of exposure, impacts may include temporary illness or injury, permanent medical conditions, or death. An attack using chemicals can come without warning. Signs of a chemical release include difficulty breathing; choking or eye irritation; losing coordination; nausea; or a burning sensation in the nose, throat, and lungs.305F 306 A chemical release in the Santa Clara County OA could lead to closure of streets and major transportation routes (including bridges) for extended periods of time, causing transportation delays and traffic. Many homes and businesses would also be impacted as they would need to be evacuated for an extended period of time. There could also be impact on the environment and/or natural resources that would require cleanup. Hazardous material response teams and fire-rescue would be needed to respond to the incident and coordinate cleanup efforts. Radiological Attacks The radiological accident hazard has been identified in the State hazard mitigation plan with a low probability. Terrorist acts involving radiological or nuclear materials (e.g., radiological dispersion device or an improvised nuclear device) is presented as an example of potential radiologic releases but not discussed further. Explosive Devices Improvised explosive device (IED) attacks are a favored method of terrorist groups around the world. The evolution in explosive materials and firing devices and their ease of concealment and delivery have increased the effectiveness of this hazard. IED attacks are typically motivated by the desire to maximize human casualties. The intention may also be to create fear in the community. Explosive incidents account for 70 percent of all terrorist attacks worldwide. These types of attacks range from small -scale letter bombs to large-scale attacks on specific buildings. IEDs generally consist of TNT equivalent explosives (e.g., black or smokeless powder) in a container (e.g., galvanized pipe, paint can, etc.). These propellants are easily purchased on the commercial market. IEDs may also contain added shrapnel to induce greater casualties or shaped charges that direct the force of the explosive toward the target. Devices may be hidden in everyday objects such as briefcases, flowerpots, or garbage cans, or on the person of the attacker in the case of suicide bombers. The most commonly used container is galvanized pipe, followed by PVC pipe. 305 Department of Homeland Security. (n.d.). Chemical Attack Fact Sheet: Warfare Agents, Industrial Chemicals, and Toxins. https://www.dhs.gov/publication/chemical-attack-fact-sheet 306 Federal Emergency Management Agency. (n.d.). Chemicals and Hazardous Materials Incidents. https://www.ready.gov/hazmat#during 442 PSC 09-12-2024 442 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 363 When shrapnel is added to the device, the type of shrapnel varies —bullets and other small pieces of hardware are common, as are glass and gravel. An attack using IEDs or other explosive device in the Santa Clara County OA has potential large -scale consequences that may require multi-agency and multijurisdictional coordination. Depending on the location of the attack, businesses and other venues may be closed for investigation and due to damage. If the attack occurred in or near residences, evacuations and/or sheltering may occur. Fire as a Weapon The use of fire for criminal, gang, and terrorist activities, as well as targeting first responders, is one of numerous increasingly complex approaches to terrorism. This tactic can include arson, improved incendiary devices (IIDs), deliberate forest fires, and more. Human-causes are the leading cause of wildfires in California. Between the last plan update and 2022, the annual acres burned due to arson caused wildfires ranged from 483 acres (2022) to 44,609 acres (2020).306F 307 Fire, and incendiary devices such as Molotov cocktails, have been used more frequently recently both during civil disturbances and in an attempt to break up otherwise peaceful protests. IID incidents have also increased. Between 2019 and 2020 alone, IID incidents targeting government facilities increased 210%, incidents targeting critical infrastructure facilities increased 141%, and incidents targeting commercial facilities increased 113 percent.307F 308 16.2.3 Hazard Profile Past Events The South Bay Area has not experienced a major regional terrorism event. According to the Cal OES Terrorism Response Plan, California has had a long history of defending the public against domestic and foreign terrorists. Domestic terrorist groups in California have been focused on political or social issues, while the limited internationally based incidents have targeted the state ’s immigrant communities due to foreign disputes. Advanced technologies and communication have allowed these groups to become more sophisticated and better organized, with remote members linked electronically. In California, most terrorist events have involved explosives, followed by incendiaries and firearms, as shown in Figure 72. During a recent three-month period, the Bomb Squad from the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office was called out three times:308F 309  September 5, 2022: Explosive Material Mitigation: The Bomb Squad was called to the scene of a man that was attempting to manufacture homemade explosives causing an explosion at his home. The explosion took off the suspect’s right hand and caused serious trauma to his lower face. Bomb Technicians deployed bomb disposal robots to extract the explosive material and precursor chemicals from the trailer to facilitate a controlled demolition and render the scene safe.  October 31, 2022: Suspected IED Mitigation: The Bomb Squad was called for a suspicious item suspected of being an IED that was abandoned on the side of the roadway. The item was made to look like an IED but was not viable. 307 Cal Fire. (December 2022). Arson Caused Wildfires – Acres Burned. https://34c031f8-c9fd-4018-8c5a- 4159cdff6b0d-cdn-endpoint.azureedge.net/-/media/calfire-website/images---misc/arson-acres-burned- 2022.jpg?rev=83a9dd360a794b6cb627bdf7371f2791&hash=7F588C79EC88FF533701B966B2E0138A 308 Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency. (n.d.). Fire As A Weapon. https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/Fire%20as%20a%20Weapon%20Action%20Guide_Final%20508 %20%2804.12.21%29v.2_1.pdf 309 Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office. (2023). Military Equipment Use Report, 6 -Month Report. Military Equipment Use 6-Month Report_FINAL DRAFT (2.15.23).pdf (sccgov.org) 443 PSC 09-12-2024 443 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 364  November 15, 2022: Suspected IED Mitigation: The Bomb Squad was called to a Lockheed Martin Facility in Santa Clara for a reported IED in the shipping and receiving room. The item was made to look like an IED but was not viable. Other agencies responded to two other incidents involving explosives.  March 1, 2023: Explosive Material Mitigation: The City of San José bomb squad was called to a South San José home as part of an investigation into someone possessing explosives and illegal drugs.  February 7,2020: Suspected Terrorist Attack: Assailants in a vehicle opened fire on a Sikh police officer patrolling in Morgan Hill, California, United States. A Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Deputy was injured in the assault. No group claimed responsibility for the attack.” These are not the first incidents in the OA. One other example includes an attack in 2014 at a PG&E Corporation’s Metcalf transmission substation in San José when an unknown person entered an underground vault and cut telephone cables. Within half an hour, snipers opened fire on a nearby electrical substation. Shooting for 19 minutes, the persons were able to knock out 17 giant transformers that funnel power to Silicon Valley. Electric-grid officials were able to reroute power around the site and requested power plants in Silicon Valley to produce more electricity, but it took utility workers 27 days to conduct repairs and make the substation functional. The Wall Street Journal reported the incident at the time was called “the most significant incident of domestic terrorism involving the grid that has ever occurred.” There have been no arrests or persons charged for the incident .309F 310 Figure 73: Weapon Types Used in Terrorist Events in California310F 311 310 Smith, Rebecca. (February 2014). Assault on California Power Stations Raises Alarm on Potential for Terrorism; April Sniper Attack Knocked Out Substation, Raises Concern for Country’s Power Grid. Assault on California Power Station Raises Alarm on Potential for Terrorism - WSJ 311 Global Terrorism Database. (n.d.). Database Search Results. https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/Results.aspx?charttype=bar&chart=target&search=california 444 PSC 09-12-2024 444 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 365 Terrorist attacks can occur anywhere in the Santa Clara County OA. Past targets in California have included businesses, private citizens, government, educational institutions and many more. In California, as shown in Figure 74, businesses are the most frequent targets, accounting for 28 percent of all terrorist attacks in the state. Figure 74: Targets of Terrorist Attacks in California311F 312 Severity The severity of terrorist attacks ranges from inconsequential when the attack fails, to catastrophic. The effects of terrorism can include injuries, loss of life, property damage, or disruption of services such as electricity, water supplies, transportation, or communications. Effects may be immediate or delayed. Terrorists often choose targets that offer limited danger to themselves and areas with relatively easy public access. Foreign terrorists look for visible targets where they can avoid detection before and after an attack, such as international airports, large cities, major special events, and high-profile landmarks. In recent months, there has been a rise in physical attacks against utility infrastructure in North Carolina and the Pacific Northwest.312F 313 Attackers targeted substations and used guns, fire, metal chains, and other weapons during their attack. As of this writing, the FBI is currently investigating. 312 Global Terrorism Database. (n.d.). Database Search Results. https://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/search/Results.aspx?charttype=bar&chart=target&search=california 313 Oregon Public Broadcasting. (December 2022). String of electrical grid attacks in Pacific Northwest is unsolved. https://www.opb.org/article/2022/12/08/string-of-electrical-grid-attacks-in-pacific-northwest-are-unsolved/ 445 PSC 09-12-2024 445 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 366 Warning Time For this hazard, warning time relates to warnings to local law enforcement from federal authorities and other law enforcement agencies as well as warnings to the public. In dealing with terrorism, the unpredictability of human beings must be considered. While education, heightened awareness, and early warning of unusual circumstances may deter terrorism, intentional acts that harm people and property are possible at any time. Public safety entities must react to the threat, locating, isolating, and neutrali zing further damage and investigating potential scenes and suspects to bring criminals to justice. People with a desire to perform such acts may seek out targets of opportunity that may not fall into established lists of critical areas or facilities. First responders in the Santa Clara County OA train to respond not only to organized terrorism incidents, but also to random acts by individuals who may choose to harm others and destroy property. The Intelligence Unit of the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office is comprised of a Sergeant and a Deputy that are assigned to the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) and the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center (NCRIC) respectively with the goal of helping safeguard the Santa Clara County community by conducting terrorism investigations, sharing criminal intelligence and threat assessment information with regional partners, and by processing and assessing Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) submitted by local law enforcement and the public. AlertSCC is the County of Santa Clara’s official emergency alert and warning system for the most up-to- date information on emergencies and disasters happening in the area. Critical Facilities, Infrastructure, and the Environment Critical facilities, infrastructure, and the environment are common targets of terrorist attacks. The environment may be impacted depending on the size and location of the terrorist attack. Human-caused fires pose a serious threat, as well as hazardous materials release. Future Trends in Development Terrorist attacks in urban areas would cause significantly more harm, injury, death, or property damage than it would rural areas. As the Santa Clara OA continues to develop, the target area for terror attacks expands as does the number of potential victims of an attack. Cascading Impacts A completed terror attack on critical facilities and infrastructure and the environment could involve multiple other hazards including power outage, utility failure, and hazardous materials release. 16.2.4 Cyber Threats A cyber threat is an intentional and malicious crime that compromises that digital infrastructure of a government, person, or organization, often for financial or terror-related reasons. Such attacks vary in nature and are perpetrated using digital mediums or sometimes social engineering to target human operators. Generally, attacks last minutes to days, but large-scale events and their impacts can last much longer. As information technology continues to grow in capability and interconnectivity, cyber threa ts become increasingly frequent and destructive. In 2014, internet security teams at Symantec and Verizon indicated that nearly a million new pieces of malware —malicious code designed to steal or destroy information—were created every day.313F 314 314 Symantec. (2015). Protection from Advanced Threats with Symantec Insight and SONAR. Broadcom. https://docs.broadcom.com/doc/protection-from-advanced-threats-with-insight-sonar-en. 446 PSC 09-12-2024 446 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 367 Cyber threats can vary in their severity, based on the systems affected by an attack, the warning time, and the ability to preempt an attack.314F 315 They also differ by motive, attack type and perpetrator profile. Motives range from the pursuit of financial gain to political or social aims. Types of threats include using viruses to erase entire systems, breaking into systems and altering files, using someone’s personal computer to attack others, or stealing confidential information. Municipalities and private businesses within the Santa Clara County OA are susceptible to the most current and common cyber -attacks, such as socially engineered Trojans, unpatched software, phishing attacks, network-traveling worms, and advanced persistent threats. Many of these attacks are engineered to automatically seek technological vulnerabilities. Possible cyberterrorist targets include the banking industry, power plan ts, air traffic control centers, and water systems. The spectrum of cyber risks is limitless, with threats having a wide range of effects on the individual, community, organizational, and national threat.315F 316 “[The cyber threat] has exploded. It has become more diffuse, more sophisticated, more dangerous than ever before.” Lisa O. Monaco, Deputy Attorney General (DAG) Address at Annual Munich Cybersecurity Conference (Feb. 17, 2021)316F 317 This risk assessment includes cyberattacks and cyberterrorism. The terms often are used interchangeably, though they are not the same. While all cyberterrorism is a form of cyberattack, not all cyberattacks are cyberterrorism. Cyberattack Public and private computer systems are subject to a variety of cyberattacks, from blanket malware infection to target attacks on system capabilities. Cyber -attacks seek to breach IT security measures designed to protect an individual or organization. The initial attack if followed by more severe attacks for the purpose of causing harm, stealing data, or financial gain. One of the most common cyber threats is malware. Malware refers to malicious software that a cybercriminal or hacker has created to disrupt or damage a legitimate user ’s computer. It is often spread via an unsolicited email attachment or other legitimate-looking download. Types of malware include the following:  Viruses: A self-replicating program that attaches itself to clean file and spreads throughout a computer system, infecting files with malicious code.  Trojans: Programs disguised as legitimate software where the victim is tricked into uploading trojans onto their computer where they cause damage or obtain sensitive and/or valuable data.  Spyware: This malicious software is designed to enter your computer or other device, gather data about you, and forward it to a third-party without your consent. In December 2022, a U.S. lawmaker predicted spyware hacks of U.S. government employees could be in the hundreds, including diplomats.317F 318 315 Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency. (n.d.). Cyber Threats and Advisories. https://www.cisa.gov/topics/cyber-threats-and-advisories 316 Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2022). Cybersecurity. https://www.ready.gov/cybersecurity#:~:text=1%20Accessing%20your%20personal%20computers%2C%20mobile% 20phones%2C%20gaming,services.%205%20Impacting%20transportation%20and%20the%20power%20grid. 317 U.S. Department of Justice. (2022 July). Comprehensive Cyber Review. https://www.justice.gov/media/1232936/dl?inline= 318 Center for Strategic & International Studies. (2023). Significant Cyber Incidents. https://www.csis.org/programs/strategic-technologies-program/significant-cyber-incidents 447 PSC 09-12-2024 447 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 368  Ransomware: Ransomware is a type of malware used by cyber actors to extort owners of computer systems. Since 2013, ransomware attacks are becoming increasingly common. On April 22, 2021, an apparent ransomware attack on the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), paralyzed many of the agency’s computer systems for days.318F 319 The hacker group claimed that it stole 150 gigabytes of data from the transit authority and threatened to post it publicly if VTA does not “cooperate.”  Malvertising: Malware downloaded to a system when the victim clicks on an affected ad. Other types of cyber threats include the following:  Phishing: Malicious email messages that ask users to click a link or download a program. Phishing attacks may appear as legitimate emails from trusted third parties.  Man in the Middle Attack: Man-in-the-Middle is a type of cyber threat where a cybercriminal intercepts communication between two individuals in order to steal data.  Denial of Service Attacks: These attacks that focus on disrupting service by flooding computer networks and servers with traffic until the network can no longer function.  Advanced Persistent Threat (APT): An attack in which the attacker gains access to a network and remains undetected. APT attacks are designed to steal data instead of cause damage. With millions of threats created each day, the importance of protection against cyberattacks becomes a necessary function of everyday operations for individuals, government facilities, and businesses. The increasing dependency on technology for vital information storage and the often automated method of infection means higher stakes for the success of measurable protection and education. Cyberterrorism Cyberterrorism is the use of computers and information, particularly over the internet, to recruit others to an organization’s cause, cause physical or financial harm, or cause a severe disruption of infrastructure service. Such disruptions can be driven by religious, political, or other motives. Like traditional terrorism tactics, cyberterrorism seeks to evoke very strong emotional reactions, but it does so through information technology rather than a physically violent or disruptive action. Cyberterrorism has three main types of objectives:319F 320 1. Organizational: Cyberterrorism with an organizational objective includes specific functions outside of or in addition to a typical cyber-attack. Terrorist groups today use the internet daily for recruitment, training, fundraising, communication, or planning. Organizationa l cyberterrorism can use platforms such as social media as a tool to spread a message beyond country borders and instigate physical forms of terrorism. Additionally, organizational goals may use systematic attacks as a tool for training new members of a faction in cyber warfare. 2. Undermining: Cyberterrorism with undermining as an objective seeks to hinder the normal functioning of computer systems, services, or websites. Such methods include defacing, denying, and exposing information. While undermining tactics are typically used due to high de pendence on online structures to support vital operational functions, they typically do not result in grave consequences unless undertaken as part of a larger attack. Undermining attacks on computers include the following: 319 The Mercury News. (2021, April 22). VTA Targeted in Apparent Ransomware Attack, Hackers Threaten to Release Trove of Data. https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/04/22/cyberattack-targets-vta-unclear-if-personal- information-breached/ 320 INFOSEC. (2012, December 21). Cyberterrorism Defined (as distinct from “Cybercrime”). https://resources.infosecinstitute.com/topic/cyberterrorism -distinct-from-cybercrime/ 448 PSC 09-12-2024 448 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 369 a. Directing conventional kinetic weapons against computer equipment, a computer facility, or transmission lines to create a physical attack that disrupts the reliability of equipment. b. Using electromagnetic energy, most commonly in the form of an electromagnetic pulse, to create an electronic attack against computer equipment or data transmissions. By overheating circuitry or jamming communications, an electronic attack disrupts the reli ability of equipment and the integrity of data. c. Using malicious code directed against computer processing code, instruction logic, or data. The code can generate a stream of malicious network packets that disrupt data or logic by exploiting vulnerability in computer software, or a weakness in computer security practices. This type of cyber-attack can disrupt the reliability of equipment, the integrity of data, and the confidentiality of communications. 3. Destructive: The destructive objective for cyberterrorism is what organizations fear most. Using computer technology and the internet, the terrorists seek to inflict destruction or damage on tangible property or assets, and even death or injury to individuals. 16.2.5 Hazard Profile Past Events Previous cyberattacks have occurred against the local government, critical infrastructure, and businesses in the OA. For example, in 2021, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority experienced a ransomware cyberattack, with the intention of obtaining data and disrupting essential services . The location of Silicon Valley within the OA also makes the area a significant target to major cyberattacks on businesses. In 2022, Nvidia, a major chip manufacturer based in Santa Clara, experienced a cyberattack in which valuable data was stolen. The attackers demanded a ransom to protect Nvidia’s data. Location Cyberattacks are local in nature. They can occur from anywhere. Severity A cyberattack, even a successful one, could have a minor impact on the victims or it could be catastrophic, depending on the situation. Warning Time The severity and timing of cyber threats are impossible to predict. There may be no warning. Some cyber incidents take weeks, months, or even years to be discovered and identified.320F 321 Critical Facilities, Infrastructure, and the Environment Critical facilities and infrastructure are common targets of cyberattacks. There is not expected to be significant environmental impacts. 321 Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2022). Cybersecurity. https://www.ready.gov/cybersecurity#:~:text=1%20Accessing%20your%20personal%20computers%2C%20mobile% 20phones%2C%20gaming,services.%205%20Impacting%20transportation%20and%20the%20power%20grid.. 449 PSC 09-12-2024 449 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 370 Future Trends in Development Future development is unlikely to be significantly influenced by cyber -attacks. However, cyberattacks that could impact larger populations could cause significantly more harm, injury, death, or property damage. Expanding the local economy also presents additional targets for cyber-attacks. Cascading Impacts Cyberattacks can have many cascading impacts depending on the target, timeframe, and success of the attack. As stated in the 2018 State of California Hazard Mitigation Plan, “Computer system failures have the potential to result in cascading hazards such as energy outages, hazardous materials releas e, oil spills, transportation accidents, or dam failure.”321F 322 16.3 Technological Incidents Technological hazards are associated with human activities such as the manufacture, transportation, storage, and the use of hazardous materials. Incidents related to these hazards are assumed to be accidental with unintended consequences. Given the complex system of transportation networks, the large population, and the number of businesses in California, incidents occur on a regular basis throughout the state, as reported by the news media. Technological hazards can be categorized as follows:  Hazardous materials incidents  Transportation incidents  Pipeline and tank hazards  Utility failure Hazardous Materials Incidents A hazardous material is any substance that is flammable, combustible, corrosive, poisonous, toxic, explosive, or radioactive. Hazardous materials are present across the United States in facilities that produce, store, or use them. For example, water treatm ent plants use chlorine on-site to eliminate bacterial contaminants, and dry-cleaning businesses may use solvents that contain perchloroethylene. Even the natural gas used in homes and businesses is a dangerous substance when a leak occurs. Hazardous materials are transported along interstate highways and railways daily. The following are the most common types of hazardous material incidents:  Fixed-Facility Hazardous Materials Incident: This is the uncontrolled release of materials from a fixed site capable of posing a risk to health, safety, and property. It is possible to identify and prepare for a fixed-site incident because laws require those facilities to notify state and local authorities about what is being used or produced at the site.  Hazardous Materials Transportation Incident: This is any event resulting in uncontrolled release during transport of materials that can pose a risk to health, safety, and property. Transportation incidents are difficult to prepare for because there is little if any notice about what materials could be involved should an accident happen. These incidents can occur anywhere, although most occur on major federal or state highways or major rail lines. In addition to materials such as chlorine that are shipped throughout the country by rail, thousands of shipments of radiological materials (mostly medical materials and low-level radioactive waste) take place via ground transportation across the United States. 322 California Office of Emergency Services. (2018). 2018 State of California Hazard Mitigation Plan. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/office-of-the-director/operations/recovery-directorate/hazard-mitigation/state-hazard- mitigation-planning/ 450 PSC 09-12-2024 450 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 371  Many incidents occur in sparsely populated areas and affect few people. However, hazardous materials have been involved in accidents in areas with much higher population densities, as shown in Figure 74. Figure 75: Highly Populated Areas with Hazardous Material Incidents Within Santa Clara County322F 323  Pipeline Hazardous Materials Incident: Numerous natural gas pipelines, heating oil, and petroleum pipelines run through the Santa Clara County OA and surroundings. These are used to provide these products to utilities in the region and to transport the materials from production facilities to end users. Federal regulations govern the transportation of hazardous materials in all modes of transportation: air, highway, rail, and water (Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations; Transportation, Code of Federal Regulations, Hazardous Materials Regulations). Title 49 CFR lists thousands of hazardous materials, including gasoline, insecticides, household cleaning products, and radioa ctive materials. California regulated substances that have the greatest probability of adversely impacting the community are listed in state code (Title 19, Division 2, Chapter 4.5, Sections 2735-2785; Hazardous Material Management Plan/Hazardous Material Inventory). Even though information for 2022 is not complete, it appears that the total number of hazardous material incidents in Santa Clara County has decreased in the last few years. The number of injuries and fatalities has also decreased. The total incidents are outlined in Table 120. 323 National Pipeline Mapping System. (n.d.). NPMS Public Viewer. https://pvnpms.phmsa.dot.gov/PublicViewer/ 451 PSC 09-12-2024 451 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 372 Table 120: Santa Clara County Hazardous Materials Spills 2019 –2022323F 324 Year Total Incidents Type Injuries Fatalities Petroleum Chemical Sewage Railroad Railroad Derailment Vapor Other 2019 196 22 13 27 24 4 9 4 11 12 2020 153 76 11 17 20 2 3 19 10 7 2021 157 70 13 20 20 2 7 18 9 11 2022 87 42 8 14 13 3 3 13 6 8 Santa Clara County has four Certified United Program Agencies that administer hazardous materials, hazardous waste , and underground storage tank programs within their jurisdictions:  Hazardous Materials Compliance Division of the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health (for all areas of Santa Clara County other than the cities of Santa Clara, Gilroy, and Sunnyvale)  Santa Clara City Fire Department  Gilroy Building, Life, and Environmental Safety to Community Development Department, Fire Prevention Division  Sunnyvale Department of Public Safety Participating Agencies are local fire agencies that coordinate their activities under a memorandum of understanding with Sant a Clara County Department of Environmental Health:  Milpitas Fire Department  Mountain View Fire Department  Palo Alto Fire Department  Santa Clara County Fire Department 324 California Office of Emergency Services. (n.d.). Spill Release Reporting. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/office-of-the-director/operations/response-operations/fire- rescue/hazardous-materials/spill-release-reporting/ 452 PSC 09-12-2024 452 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 373 Transportation Incidents Transportation incidents are those involving air, road or rail travelers resulting in death or serious injury. The potential for transportation accidents that block movement through the OA is significant, as is the likelihood of hazardous material incidents resulting from a traffic or rail accident. The Bay Area has a number of airports, including the San Francisco International Airport, Oakland International Airport, and San José International Airport, as well as San Martin Airport and Reid Hillview Airport, which are smaller municipal airports that enhance the potential for an air disaster. Major transportation routes in the OA include the following:  Major highways include Interstates 880 (Nimitz Freeway) and 280; U.S. Highway 101 and Highway 237; and State Routes 87, 85, and 17. ▪ The 49 miles of light rail serving Santa Clara County is operated by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), which oversees public transit services in the county. The Santa Clara VTA is continuing development for Phase II of its BART Silicon Valley Extension. The project is planning four stations: 28th Street/Little Portugal Station, Downtown San José Station, Diridon Station, and Santa Clara Station. Construction of Phase II is estimated to carry 54,600 passengers each weekday to destination s throughout the Bay Area by 2040.324F 325  Amtrak has a train station in San José at Santa Clara University.  The Santa Clara Depot, in the City of Santa Clara, is served by the Caltrain from San Francisco and the Altamont Corridor Express from Stockton.  The Great America station in the City of Santa Clara hosts Amtrak’s Capitol Corridor trains and Altamont Corridor Express trains. The station is close to Levi’s Stadium and California’s Great America.  There are 15 Caltrain stations in the OA. Caltrain is a commuter rail between San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties.  The Santa Fe railroad has a right of way that parallels U.S. Highway 101 through the eastern edge of the county.  Daily commuter traffic is very high in the OA due to Silicon Valley ’s dense-employment population. Pipeline Hazards Approximately 300,000 miles of gas transmission pipelines and 170,000 miles of hazardous liquid pipelines move their products throughout the United States every day. Transmission pipelines connect urban areas, and only occasionally traverse highly populated areas. Numerous natural gas pipelines, heating oil, and petroleum pipelines run through the Santa Clara County OA and surroundings (see Figure 76). 325 Valley Transportation Authority. (n.d.). VTA’s BART Silicon Valley Phase II. https://www.vta.org/projects/bart-sv/phase-ii 453 PSC 09-12-2024 453 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 374 Figure 76: Gas and Hazardous Liquids Pipelines in Santa Clara County325F 326 Pipeline Systems and Risks Around 1945, the United States invested in the development of a nation-wide system of pipelines for the purpose of transporting natural gas and petroleum products. Most of these materials are moved by hazardous liquid and gas transport operators through a system of pipelines ranging in diameter from 20 to 42 inches. These pipes reach from the material origin wells to their destination in refineries that further process the material. Although pipelines are the safest and most reliable way to transport natura l gas, crude oil, liquid petroleum products, and chemical products, there is still an inherent risk due to the nature of the hazardous materials. Transmission pipelines are those that transport raw material for further refinement. These pipes are large and far reaching, operating under high pressure. Distribution pipelines are those that provide processed materials to end users. Distribution pipelines serve homes and businesses and thus are located where people live and work. These are smaller in diameter, some as small as a half an inch, and operate under lower pressure. Because of the extensive reach of the distribution system, incidents have the potential to be far reaching. For example, a pipeline leak may release material into a migration pathway, such as a sewer line, and reach an ignition source far from the location of the actual leak. Due to the far-reaching underground and unpredictable nature of the pipeline failure hazard, it is difficult to gauge the extent to which the hazard affects the Santa Clara County OA. Minor pipe leaks may remain undetected for years until identified during renovation, excavation, or maintenance. In some scenarios, such leaks may go undetected until the severity has increased, resulting in a noticeable smell or, in the worst-case scenario, an explosion. Incident causes are grouped as follows:  Corrosion: Incidents caused by galvanic, atmospheric, stray current, microbiological, or other corrosive action.  Excavation Damage: Incidents resulting directly from excavation damage by operator’s personnel (oftentimes referred to as "first party" excavation damage), by the operator ’s contractor (oftentimes referred to as "second party" excavation damage), or by people or contractors not 326 National Pipeline Mapping System. (n.d.). NPMS Public Viewer. https://pvnpms.phmsa.dot.gov/PublicViewer/ 454 PSC 09-12-2024 454 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 375 associated with the operator (oftentimes referred to as "third party" excavation damage). This cause type also includes those incidents determined to have resulted from previous damage due to excavation activity.  Incorrect Operation: Incidents caused by operating, maintenance, repair, or other errors by facility personnel, including but not limited to improper valve selection or operation, inadvertent over pressurization, or improper selection or installation of equipment.  Material/Weld/Equipment Failure: Incidents in main or service pipe, or in welds, joints, or connections joining main pipe or service pipe due to faulty manufacturing procedures; defects resulting from poor construction, installation, or fabrication practices; and in -service stresses such as vibration, fatigue, and environmental cracking. also included are incidents resulting from equipment failures such as: malfunction of control/relief equipment (valves, regulators, or other instrumentation); failures of the body of equipment, vessel plate, or other material; and all other equipment-related failures.  Natural Force Damage: Incidents resulting from earth movement, earthquakes, landslides, subsidence, lightning, heavy rains/floods, washouts, flotation, mudslides, scouring, temperature, frost heave, frozen components, high winds, or similar natural causes.  Other Outside Force Damage: Incidents caused by non-excavation-related outside forces, such as fire or explosion; damage by vehicles or other equipment; nearby industry; failures due to mechanical damage; and intentional damage including vandalism and terrorism. The greatest risk to the public regarding pipelines is the unintended release of a material being transported through the system. These materials are hazardous and have the capability to severely impact the surrounding environment, population, and property . These impacts may lead to severe injury or death. Combustible material transported through these pipelines may ignite or explode. Hazardous liquids may contaminate water systems. Families that rely on the transported material to heat their households may experience disruption of service. Pipeline failures also have the potential to negatively impact the economy, causing business interruptions or severely damaging vital infrastructure. Depending on the pipeline material, age of the system, and transported product, pipelines may experience one or more general types of corrosion. Table 121 identifies corrosion types and a description of each. Table 121: Corrosion Type Corrosion Type Description External External corrosion occurs due to environmental conditions on the outside of the pipe. Internal Corrosion on the internal wall of a natural gas pipeline can occur when the pipe wall is exposed to water and contaminants in the gas, such as O2, H2S, CO2, or chlorides. Atmospheric Atmospheric corrosion occurs on a steel surface in a thin wet film created by the humidity in the air in combination with impurities. Stress Cracking Stress corrosion cracking is the initiation of cracks and their propagation, possibly up to complete failure of a component, due to the combined action of tensile mechanical loading and a corrosive medium. Pipeline material plays an important role in the possibility of experiencing a pipeline failure. The main causes for both hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines failure are corrosion, material or welding 455 PSC 09-12-2024 455 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 376 failure, or damage due to excavation.326F 327 Plastic pipes installed for natural gas distribution systems from the 1960s through the early 1980s may be vulnerable to cracking, resulting in gas leakage and potential hazards to the public. Hundreds of thousands of miles of plastic pipe have been insta lled, with a significant amount installed prior to the mid-1980s. While distribution systems may widely vary in terms of construction material, nearly all transmission pipeline systems are constructed from high -strength steel treated with an anti-corrosive chemical.327F 328 Pipeline incidents may lead to severe injury or death. Combustible material transported through these pipelines may ignite or explode. In the case of a spill, the released product becomes a hazard by dispersing in the environment, contaminating water bodies, soil, and potentially affecting people and wildlife. Families that rely on the transported material to heat their households may experience disruption of service. Pipeline failures also have the potential to negatively impact the economy, causing business interruptions or severely damaging vital infrastructure. Pipelines are monitored by system control and data acquisition systems that measure flow rate, temperature, and pressure. These systems transfer real-time data via satellite from the pipelines to a control center where valves, pumps, and motors are remotely operated. If tampering with a pipeline occurs, an alarm sounds. The ensuing valve reaction is instantaneous, with the alarm system isolating any rupture and setting off a chain reaction that shuts down pipeline pumps and alerts pipeline operators within seconds. Pipeline Oversight Pipelines are regulated in California by the Office of the State Fire Marshal Pipeline Safety Division. CERCLA, the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, and California law require responsible parties to report hazardous material releases if certain criteria are met. CERCLA requires that all releases of hazardous substances exceeding reportable quantities be reported by the responsible party to the National Response Center. If an accidental chemical release exceeds the Right -to-Know Act applicable minimal reportable quantity, the facility must notify state emergency response commissions and local emergency planning committees for any area likely to be affected by the release and provide a detailed written follow-up as soon as practicable. Information about accidental chemical releases must be made available to the public. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) serves as the state regulation authority regarding pipeline operations. The CPUC conducts operation and maintenance compliance inspections and accident investigations. It reviews utilities’ reports and records, conducts construction inspections, conducts special studies, and acts in response to complaints and inquiries from the public on issues regarding gas pipeline safety. The CPUC also endorses the system safety approach embodied in feder al government regulations. The U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) is responsible for providing federal regulatory oversight of transmission pipelines. The agency ’s Integrity Management Program is a transmission pipeline program started in 2000. This program focuses on regulations for transmission pipelines in high consequence areas, such as pipelines passing through high population centers or particularly sensitive ecological areas. 327 Pipeline Association for Public Awareness. (2023). Pipeline Safety Facts and Statistics. https://pipelineawareness.org/safety-information/pipeline-safety-facts- statistics/#:~:text=According%20to%20government%20and%20industry,failure%2C%20human%20error%20and%20 corrosion. 328 Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. (2023, May 4). Pipeline Safety: Gas Pipeline Leak Detection and Repair. https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/2023- 05/Gas%20Pipeline%20Leak%20Detection%20and%20Repair%20NPRM%20-%20May%202023.pdf 456 PSC 09-12-2024 456 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 377 The Integrity Management Program specifies how pipeline operators must identify, prioritize, assess, repair, and validate the integrity of their pipelines through comprehensive analysis. PHMSA’s 2005 Distribution Integrity Management Program Phase One report found a lack of risk-based assessment in managing distribution pipeline systems. A guidance document was developed to assist operators in deciding what actions are needed to comply with standards of the distribution integrity management program.328F 329 In 2002, PHMSA released control guidelines for gas leakage. The guidelines included a regulatory classification for leakage severity, as shown in Table 122. Table 122: Leak Classifications Grade Description Examples Action Criteria 1 A leak that represents an existing or probable hazard to persons or property and requires immediate repair or continuous action until the conditions are no longer hazardous. Any leak which, in the judgment of operating personnel at the scene is regarded as an immediate hazard. Escaping gas that has ignited. Any indication of gas which has migrated into or under a building or into a tunnel. Any reading at the outside wall of a building or where gas would likely migrate to an outside wall of a building. Any leak that can be seen, heard, or felt and which is in any location that may endanger the general public or property. Requires prompt action to protect life and property. Action may require one or more of the following:  Implementing a company emergency plan  Evacuating premises  Blocking off an area  Rerouting traffic  Eliminating sources of ignition  Venting the area  Stopping the flow of gas by closing valves or other means  Notifying police and fire departments 2 A leak that is recognized as being non-hazardous at the time of detection, but requires scheduled repair based on probable future hazard. Any leak which, under frozen or other adverse soil conditions, would likely migrate to the outside wall of a building (Note: This type of Grade 2 leak must be repaired ahead of seasonal freeze/thaw conditions). Any leak which, in the judgment of operating Leaks should be repaired or cleared within one calendar year but no later than 15 months from the date they were reported. In determining the repair priority, criteria such as the following should be considered: 329 Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. (2005). Gas Distribution Integrity Management Program (DIMP) Integrity Management for Gas Distribution: Report of Phase 1 Investigations.https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/pipeline/gas-distribution-integrity-management/dimp-integrity-management- gas-distribution-report-of-phase-1-investigations-2005 457 PSC 09-12-2024 457 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 378 Grade Description Examples Action Criteria personnel at the scene, is of sufficient magnitude to justify scheduled repair.  Amount and migration of gas  Proximity of gas to buildings and subsurface elements  Extent of pavement  Soil type and soil conditions such as frost cap, moisture, and natural venting 3 A leak that is non- hazardous at the time of detection and can be reasonably expected to remain non-hazardous. Because petroleum gas is heavier than air and will collect in low areas instead of dissipating, few leaks can safely be classified as Grade 3. Any reading under a street in areas without wall-to-wall paving where it is unlikely the gas could migrate to the outside wall of a building. These leaks should be re- evaluated during the next scheduled survey, or within 15 months of the date reported, whichever occurs first, until the leak is re-graded or no longer results in a reading. Source: PHMSA, 2002 16.3.2 Hazard Profile Past Events PHMSA records of natural gas pipeline events in the State of California do not include any events in Santa Clara County. The Bay Area has not experienced a hazardous materials release event with a regional impact. Hazardous material releases are often localized due to the limited release of such events.329F 330 Location All technological hazards including hazardous materials incidents, transportation incidents, pipeline hazards, and power failure are local in nature, but may cross jurisdictional lines. Severity The impact of leaks or spills of hazardous materials on the environment depends on the scale of the incident, the materials involved and the location of the spill. Spills along the California coast are well documented. Warning Time There is rarely any warning time before a leak or spill of hazardous materials. Explosions or fires associated with pipeline incidents can occur instantly and escalate quickly. 330 California Office of Emergency Services. (2018). 2018 State of California Hazard Mitigation Plan. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/office-of-the-director/operations/recovery-directorate/hazard-mitigation/state-hazard- mitigation-planning/ 458 PSC 09-12-2024 458 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 379 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure It is unlikely that an oil spill will have a direct impact on most critical facilities and infrastructure. An important exception would be an oil spill near the intake of a water treatment plant, a power plant that uses water for cooling, or an industrial facility that uses water in its processing. Environment The impact of leaks or spills of hazardous materials on the environment depends on the scale of the incident, the materials involved and the sensitivity of the spill location. Spills can impact air quality, waterways, fish, and wildlife as well as damage habits. Future Trends in Development The anticipated additional development in the county’s urban areas, which are already near the pipelines (see Figure 75), will increase the number of people and businesses exposed to this hazard. Cascading Impacts Cascading impacts associated with the pipeline hazard include:  Urban structure fires;  Public health consequences for pipeline failures; and  Potential significant environmental impacts both long and short term, depending on the pipeline location. 16.3.3 Utility Failure, Power Outages, and Public Safety Power Shutoff Utility Failure Utility failure is defined as any interruption or loss of utility service due to disruption of service transmission caused by accident, sabotage, natural hazards, or equipment failure. A significant utility failure is defined as any incident of a long duration, which would require the involvement of the local and/or state emergency management organizations to coordinate provision of food, water, heating, cooling, and shelter. Widespread outages can occur without warning or as a result of a forecasted event. Generally, warning times are short in the case of utility failure. In cases where a failure is caused by natural hazards, greater warning time is possible. Except for the cities of Palo Alto and Santa Clara, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) is responsible for operating and maintaining the electrical transmission and distribution system in the OA. The utility supplies electricity to an approximate population of 1.7 million residential and business customers in 1,260 square miles of the OA. PG&E has both overhead and underground lines throughout the OA. The Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority was created to help generate electricity from clean sources in the OA and currently serves 270,000 residents and businesses. Wastewater and potable water utility restoration are essential to community continuity and recovery. Interruption of these services may have cascading economic and environmental impacts. Utility failure can cause cascading impacts including:  Chemical accidents can occur after power is restored to industrial facilities. Power interruptions at chemical handling plants are of particular concern because of the potential for a chemical spill during restart (EPA, 2001).  Without proper procedures for backup of data and systems, the loss of data, systems, and telecommunications is a risk incurred by utility failure. Data and telecommunications provide a primary method for service to the community by the government and the private sector. A loss of 459 PSC 09-12-2024 459 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 380 data or a system could result in loss of emergency dispatch capabilities, emergency planning services, infrastructure monitoring capabilities, access to statistical data, and loss of financial and personnel records. Loss of communication capability by firs t responders could have negative impacts on public safety. Backup systems such as amateur radio operators may be required during disaster to augment communications capabilities. Power outages can also lead to instances of civil disturbance, including looting. Power Outages Power outages are defined as any electrical system failure due to an unplanned disruption of service transmission caused by natural hazards, cyber-attacks, transportation accidents, accidental construction- related damage, sabotage, equipment failure or an intentional interruption through rolling blackouts or power shutoffs. A significant outage is an incident of a long duration, which would require the involvement of the local and/or state emergency management organizations to coordinate provision of food, water, heating, cooling, and shelter. Widespread outages can occur without warning or as a result of a forecasted event. Generally, warning times are short in the case of utility failure. In cases where a failure is caused by natural hazards, greater warning time is possible. In the OA, electric power is provided to the cities by ten utilities, as shown in Table 123. 460 PSC 09-12-2024 460 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 381 Table 123: Electric Providers in Santa Clara County330F 331 Jurisdiction Commercial Energy of California Freedom Energy Hudson Energy Pacific Gas and Electric Company Palo Alto Utilities Pilot Power Group Public Power & Utility of Maryland San José Clean Energy Silicon Valley Power StateWise Energy Campbell 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% Cupertino 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% Gilroy 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% Los Altos 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% Los Altos Hills 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% Los Gatos 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% Milpitas 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% Monte Sereno 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% Morgan Hill 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% Mountain View 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% Palo Alto 1.30% 1.30% 1.30% 1.30% 90.88% 1.30% 1.30% 1.30% 1.30% 1.30% San José 12.52% 12.52% 12.52% 12.52% 12.52% 12.52% 12.52% 12.38% 12.52% 12.52% Santa Clara 49.92% 50.08% Saratoga 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% Sunnyvale 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 14.29% 331 Find Energy LLC. (2022 August 9). Santa Clara County, California Electricity Rates and Statistics. https://findenergy.com/ca/santa-clara-county-electricity/#city- coverage 461 PSC 09-12-2024 461 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 382 16.3.4 Hazard Profile Public Safety Power Shutoff In 2012, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) ruled that the California Public Utility Code gives electric utilities the authority to shut off electric power to protect public safety, since power supply systems have the potential to ignite wildfires. These shutoffs typically end within 24 hours after the weather conditions have subsided but may extend beyond the 24-hour timeframe, depending on conditions. An extended power outage due to a power shutoff, is likely to have the same impacts on a community as described above for an unplanned power outage. Past Events The California Public Utilities Commission collects and compiles data on public safety power shutoffs Their records from 2019 through October 2021 show that the number of days with power shutoffs anywhere in the system has increased each year (see Table 124). Table 124: Power Shutoffs Statewide331F 332 Year Calendar Days with a Power Shutoff Anywhere in California Power Shutoff Duration Shortest Longest 2019 26 0 days, 1 hr., 19 min. 5 days, 21 hr., 0 min. 2020 31 0 days, 0 hr., 16 min. 5 days, 10 hr., 32 min. 2021 (through 10/22/21) 42 0 days, 2 hr., 52 min. 4 days, 18 hr., 38 min. Location Each power shutoff is linked to a specific circuit, but on many days, multiple circuits experience shutdowns, resulting in widespread power outages. Power loss from other causes is typically limited to local areas but could also affect larger regions. Severity The severity of power loss of any type relates to the number of days without power and the situation of the population and businesses without power. A 16-minute power loss is not significant to most, but to a person with a critical electrical medical devic e the loss would be severe. A loss of power for four days would be considered severe by all. 332 Union of Concerned Scientists. (2022, February 2). California Utilities Shut Off Power for Fewer People, But Too Many Are Still in the Dark. https://blog.ucsusa.org/mark-specht/california-utilities-shut-off-power-for-fewer-people-but- too-many-are-still-in-the-dark/ 462 PSC 09-12-2024 462 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 383 Warning Time Warning time for power outages will depend on the cause. An outage caused by hitting a distribution line or by an accident at a substation will occur without warning. However, an outage caused by weather conditions may come with some advance notice. Public safety power shutoffs are intended to provide adequate warning time. Critical Facilities and Infrastructure The impact of power outage on the facilities themselves is likely to be minimal but disruption of critical services would be significant. Environment The impact of power outage on the environment is unlikely but not impossible. Future Trends in Development In a growing community, more people and more businesses mean more are inconvenienced and/or negatively impacted by power outages. Cascading Impacts A county or city in the dark because of a power outage or shutdown could see an increase in crime. Other impacts could include the following:  Individuals would not have use of power-dependent medical equipment.  Chemical accidents can occur after power is restored to industrial facilities. Power interruptions at chemical handling plants are of particular concern because of the potential for a chemical spill during restart.332F 333  Disrupting communications.  Without proper procedures for backup of data and systems, the loss of data, systems, and telecommunications is a risk incurred by power outages. Data and telecommunications provide a primary method for service to the community by the government and the private sector. A loss of data or a system could result in loss of emergency dispatch capabilities, emergency planning services, infrastructure monitoring capabilities, access to statistical data, and loss of financial and personnel records. Loss of communication capability by first responders could have negative impacts on public safety. Backup systems such as amateur radio operators may be required during disasters to augment communications capabilities.  Closing retail businesses, grocery stores, gas stations, ATMs, banks, and other services.  Causing food spoilage and water contamination.  Discomfort for those living without heat or without cooling during the outage.  Power outages can also lead to instances of civil disturbance, including looting. 333 Environmental Protection Agency. (2021, February). Risk of Chemical Accidents During Process Startup. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-02/documents/ncistartupsafety-enforcementalert.pdf 463 PSC 09-12-2024 463 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 384 16.4 Epidemic and Pandemic An outbreak occurs when there are more cases of a particular disease than expected in each area, or among a specific group of people, over a particular period of time. Epidemic has a similar definition, but generally refers to when a larger number of people or larger geographic area are experiencing an outbreak. In an outbreak or epidemic, it is presumed that the cases are related to one another or that they have a common cause.333F 334 A pandemic then refers to an epidemic which has spread over a large area such as an entire country, or even a continent, usually affecting a larger number of people. The Santa Clara County Department of Public Health is responsible for protecting and improving the health of the community within the OA. The public health department responds to public health related emergencies and disasters and supports field responders at medical and rescue incidents. The OA has numerous health care facilities within its borders, including the following:  The Stanford Health Care-Stanford Hospital in Stanford  El Camino Hospital in Mountain View  Santa Clara Medical Center, in Santa Clara  Good Samaritan Hospital in San José  Kaiser Permanente San José Medical Center  Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital at Stanford The following sections describe commonly recognized human health hazards that are a concern in the OA. COVID-19 In late 2019, patients were reported exhibiting symptoms of an abnormal flu -like illness. The initial outbreak rapidly expanded across the world over the next few months and became known as COVID -19, a respiratory disease caused by SARS-CoV-2, a type of coronavirus. The disease spreads from person- to-person, usually through close contact such as when someone in conversat ional distance coughs, sneezes, speaks, sings, or breathes.334F 335 The disease can also spread through the air in congested areas where people tend to conjugate and through touching surfaces contaminated by the virus. Symptoms of COVID-19 include fevers, chills, and sore throat. Other symptoms include muscle aches, severe fatigue or tiredness, headache, new and persistent cough, shortness of breath, and loss or change of sense of taste or smell. Symptoms usually begin within 5-6 days from the time of exposure. However, some people with the disease remain asymptomatic. It is believed that some asymptomatic people may have been able to transmit the disease to others, but further research is needed. Everyone is able to be infected although older people, people with pre-existing conditions, and people who are pregnant are more likely to be infected or have a serious infection. By March 4, 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom declared a State of Emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the state prepare for broader spread of COVID-19. The proclamation came as the number of positive California cases rose and following one official COVID-19 death. Since then, cases 334 Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.). Lesson 1: Introduction to Epidemiology. https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/lesson1/section11.html 335 World Health Organization. (December 2021). Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): How is it transmitted? https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/question-and-answers-hub/q-a-detail/coronavirus- disease-covid-19-how-is-it- transmitted?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI_oSJxvnq_gIVFdiGCh2sYQe4EAAYASAAEgJByfD_BwE 464 PSC 09-12-2024 464 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 385 continued to rise and over 1.1 million people died of COVID-19 in the United States alone. Measures were implemented to reduce the rapid spread including social distancing, mandatory testing, and isolation and quarantine policies. Figure 77 illustrates the course of COVID-19 in Santa Clara County from onset through January 2023. As this plan is being prepared, the California COVID-19 State of Emergency ended on February 28, 2023, and the COVID-19 national emergency and public health emergency is scheduled to end on May 11, 2023. Figure 77: Santa Clara COVID Cases 2020–2023335F 336 Almost 7,000 cases of COVID-19 per day were recorded across the county at the peak of the pandemic, as shown in Table 125, but the percentages of each city’s population that were infected ranged from 9.6% in Monte Sereno to 37.3% in Gilroy. 336 Santa Clara County Public Health. (2023). COVID Cases and Deaths Dashboard. https://covid19.sccgov.org/dashboard-cases-and-deaths 465 PSC 09-12-2024 465 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 386 Table 125: COVID-19 Cases Countywide and by City of Residence336F 337 County/City Cases Population Rate City Cases Population Rate Santa Clara Countya 496,338 1,885,508 26.3% Monte Sereno 331 3,492 9.5% Campbell 10,005 42,470 23.6% Morgan Hill 13,696 43,876 31.2% Cupertino 8,523 60,614 14.1% Mountain View 13,885 80,993 17.1% Gilroy 20,715 55,525 37.3% Palo Alto 10,714 67,019 16.0% Los Altos 4,913 30,588 16.1% San José 285,709 1,026,658 27.8% Los Altos Hills 1,231 8,517 14.5% Santa Clara 27,388 126,209 21.7% Los Gatos 6,805 30,922 22.0% Saratoga 4,540 30,886 14.7% Milpitas 17,293 77,457 22.3% Sunnyvale 27,079 152,323 17.8% a Countywide total (includes city cases). The spread and scope of COVID-19 was more than sufficient for it to be declared a pandemic. The only comparable outbreak in modern times could be the 1918 flu pandemic which affected an estimated one third of the world’s population. The two pandemics shared similar characteristics; their exact origins are unknown, it took multiple years for the diseases to run their course, and they required significant local, regional, and global efforts to respond and recover from. Today, COVID-19 still represents a series threat however, some of that threat has been mitigated by the development of COVID testing capabilities and vaccines. COVID vaccines have been shown to effectively decrease the severity and likelihood of infection. COVID-19 is expected to be endemic, meaning that it will remain present in certain parts of the world with relatively low spread except for occasional outbreaks. For this reason, it will continue to be a challenge that public health professionals will hav e to prepare for and respond to. There are still many unknowns about the disease as well. One significant threat is being referred to as “long COVID” or Post-COVID Conditions (PCC). Some people who develop the disease are experiencing long-term symptoms that continue or develop after the initial infection. These symptoms can include a wide range of problems including tiredness, fatigue, fever, difficulty breathing, coughing, difficulty thinking of concentrating, and more. While scientists work to develop ef fective treatment, the public, government, and private sector should be aware of this poorly understood condition.337F 338 Disease Outbreaks In addition to COVID-19, there have been other major disease outbreaks within Santa Clara County since 2018 (see Table 126).338F 339 337 Santa Clara County Public Health. (2023). COVID Cases and Deaths Dashboard. https://covid19.sccgov.org/dashboard-cases-and-deaths 338 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (December 2022). Long COVID. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/long-term- effects/index.html?s_cid=11841:%2Blong%20%2Bcovid:sem.b:p:RG:GM:gen:PTN:FY23 339 California Office of Emergency Services. (2023). California State Hazard Mitigation Plan – Part 3. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/Hazard-Mitigation/Documents/California-SHMP_PublicReview_Vol1- Part3.pdf 466 PSC 09-12-2024 466 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 387 Lyme Disease Lyme disease is caused by certain bacteria (called Borrelia burgdorferi) that can spread from the bite of an infected western blacklegged tick. Lyme disease may start as a mild illness that begins 3 to 30 days after a tick bite and might easily be mistaken for other common illnesses like a cold or flu. Signs and symptoms also can include a red, painless rash that may spread over time. If Lyme disease is not treated, it might develop into more severe health problems.339F 340 Valley Fever Valley fever (also called coccidioidomycosis or “cocci”) is a disease caused by a fungus that grows in the soil and dirt in some areas of California and the southwestern United States. People and animals can get sick when they breathe in dust that contains the Valley fever fungus. This fungus usually infects the lungs and can cause respiratory symptoms including cough, fever, chest pain, and tiredness.340F 341 West Nile Virus West Nile Virus (WNV) is a mosquito-borne disease that was first detected in the United States in 1999. WNV first appeared in California in 2003, and by 2004, WNV had spread to all 58 counties. In 2022, there was one human case, 26 dead birds and 23 mosquito samples taken.341F 342 Risk of infection is reduced through the coordinated efforts of local and state public health and vector control agencies. People can protect themselves from WNV by taking precautions to prevent mosquito bites.342F 343 Table 126: Disease Outbreaks Identified in Santa Clara County, 2018–2022343F 344 Disease Outbreaks 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 COVID-19 x x x Lyme Disease x x Valley Fever x x x x x West Nile Virus x x x x Other Diseases of Concern Influenza Epidemics of the flu typically occur in the fall and winter. Because flu seasons fluctuate in length and severity, a single estimate cannot be used to summarize influenza-associated deaths. Figure 78 depicts the weekly percentage of emergency department visits for influenza-like illness in Santa Clara County by influenza season. The most recent reports are for February 22, 2023. 340 California Department of Public Health. (n.d.) Lyme Disease. https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/LymeDisease.aspx 341 California Department of Public Health. (n.d.). What is Valley Fever? https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/pages/Coccidioidomycosis.aspx 342 California Department of Public Health. (n.d.) 2022 West Nile Virus Activity in California. West Nile. https://westnile.ca.gov/ 343California Department of Public Health. (n.d.) West Nile Virus. https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/WestNileVirus.aspx 344 California Department of Public Health. (n.d.) Diseases and Conditions. https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Pages/allDiseases.aspx 467 PSC 09-12-2024 467 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 388 Figure 78: Weekly Percentage of Emergency Department Visits for Influenza-Like Illness in Santa Clara County, 2019, to February 22, 2023344F 345 H1N1 In April 2009, the World Health Organization (WHO) issued a health advisory on an outbreak of influenza- like illness caused by a new subtype of influenza A (A/H1N1) in Mexico and the United States. The disease spread rapidly, and in June the WHO declared an H1N1 pandemic, marking the first global pandemic since the 1968 Hong Kong flu. In October, the U.S. declared H1N1 a national emergency. In August 2010, the WHO declared an end to the pandemic globally. H1N1 viruses and seasonal influenza viruses are co-circulating in many parts of the world. It is likely that the 2009 H1N1 virus will continue to spread for years to come, like a regular seasonal influenza virus. H5N1/H7N9 The highly pathogenic H5N1 avian influenza virus is an influenza A subtype that occurs mainly in birds, causing high mortality among birds and domestic poultry. Outbreaks of highly pathogenic H5N1 among poultry and wild birds are ongoing in a number of countries. H5N1 virus infections of humans are rare, and most cases have been associated with direct poultry contact during poultry outbreaks. Rare cases of limited human-to-human spread of H5N1 virus may have occurred, but there is no evidence of sustained human -to-human transmission. Nonetheless, because all influenza viruses have the ability to change and mutate, scientists are concerned that H5N1 viruses one day could be able to infect humans more easily and spread more easily from one person to another, potentially causing another pandemic. 345 Santa Clara County Public Health. (2023). Influenza Report. https://publichealthproviders.sccgov.org/diseases/influenza/influenza -report 468 PSC 09-12-2024 468 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 389 While the H5N1 virus does not now infect people easily, infection in humans is much more serious when it occurs than is infection with H1N1. More than half of people reported infected with H5N1 have died. Infections in humans and poultry by a new avian influenza A virus (H7N9) continue to be occasionally. The last outbreak was in 2017 in China. Another case was reported in Malaysia. While mild illness in human cases has been seen, most patients have had severe respiratory illness, and some have died. Source investigation by Chinese authorities is ongoing. Many of the people infected with H7N9 reportedly have had contact with poultry. However, some cases reportedly have not had such contact. Close contacts of confirmed H7N9 patients are being followed to determine whether any human-to- human spread of H7N9 is occurring. No sustained person-to-person spread of the H7N9 virus has been found at this time. However, based on previous experience with avian flu viruses, some limited human- to-human spread of this the virus would not be surprising. As of the time of this writing, there is currently an outbreak of avian flu in birds. Over 58 million birds have been impacted, primarily in North and South Dakota345F 346. Santa Clara County has not reported any cases of avian influenza. The first case of influenza A (H5N1) in humans was reported in the U.S. in April 2022. Despite the unlikely transmission of the bird flu to humans, the CDC still recommends preventative measures for those exposed to infected birds. No cases of H7N9 have been detected in people in the United States. Smallpox Smallpox is a sometimes-fatal infectious disease. There is no specific treatment, and the only prevention is vaccination. Symptoms include raised bumps on the face and body of an infected person. The oldest evidence of smallpox was found on the body of Pharaoh Ramses V of Egypt who died in 1157 BC. Outbreaks have occurred from time to time for thousands of years, but the disease is now eradicated after a successful worldwide vaccination program. The last case of smallpox in the United States was in 1949. The last naturally occurring case in the world was in Somalia in 1977. As of the publication of this document, there are no cases of smallpox in the world. Currently only two locations in the world have samples of smallpox: The Center for Disease Control (CDC) in Atlanta and the Ivanovsky Institute of Virology in Russia. After the disease was eliminated, routine vaccination among the general public was stopped. Therefore, any cases of smallpox in the world would be considered an immediate international emergency. In 2003, the Wisconsin Division of Public Health conducted an investigation of state residents who became ill after having contact with prairie dogs. The cases appeared in May and June of 2003, and symptoms in the human cases included fever, cough, pox-like rash and swollen lymph nodes. CDC laboratory test results indicated that the cause of the human illness was Monkeypox, an orthopox virus that could be transmitted by prairie dogs. This outbreak, and the potential use of smallpox as a weapon of bioterrorism, brought the fear of smallpox back to the forefront of the population. A detailed nationwide smallpox response plan created at the end of 2002 is designed to quickly contain a potential outbreak and vaccinate the population. 346 U.S. Department of Agriculture. (May 2023). 2022-2023 Confirmations of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza in Commercial and Backyard Flocks. https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalhealth/animal-disease- information/avian/avian-influenza/hpai-2022/2022-hpai-commercial-backyard-flocks 469 PSC 09-12-2024 469 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 390 Viral Hemorrhagic Fevers Viral hemorrhagic fevers (VHFs) are a group of illnesses caused by several distinct families of viruses. VHF describes a multisystem syndrome (multiple systems in the body are affected). Characteristically, the overall vascular system is damaged and the body’s ability to regulate itself is impaired. These symptoms are often accompanied by hemorrhage (bleeding); however, the bleeding itself is rarely life- threatening. While some types of hemorrhagic fever viruses can cause relatively mild illnesses, many ca use severe, life-threatening disease. The viruses that cause VHFs are distributed over much of the globe. However, because each virus is associated with one or more particular host species, the virus and the disease it causes are usually seen only where the host species live. Some hosts, such as the rodent species carrying several of the New World arenaviruses, live in geographically restricted areas. Therefore, the risk of getting VHFs caused by these viruses is restricted to those areas. Other hosts range over continents, such as the rodents that carry viruses that cause the Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome in North and South America, or the rodents that carry viruses that cause hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome in Europe and Asia. Ebola The 2014 Ebola virus outbreak was unprecedented in geographical reach and impact on health care systems across the globe. This was the largest and deadliest Ebola virus outbreak ever recorded. It was the first time the West African countries of Guinea, Lib eria, Sierra Leone, Nigeria, Mali, and Senegal saw the virus. Ebola is more common in Central African countries, such as the Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan, where it was first discovered in 1976. It was also the first time that Ebola made it to the United States and Europe, prompting world-wide preparedness and response efforts. The outbreak was closely monitored, and traveler screenings were developed for those returning from West Africa. In August 2014 two U.S. healthcare workers returned to the United States for treatment for Ebola. The case that most impacted the health care system in the United States was a patient diagnosed with Ebola in Dallas, Texas who died due to Ebola in October 2014. The nurse who provided care for him later tested positive for Ebola. This caused responses across the country from hospitals, emergency medical teams, fire departments and public health agencies to enhance isolation precautions, develop emergency policies, train with personal protective equipment, and conduct multi-agency emergency exercises in case the spread of Ebola became a pandemic. Before the 2014 outbreak, only 2,200 cases of Ebola had been recorded and 68 percent were fatal. Twenty percent of new Ebola infections were linked to burial traditions in which family and community members wash and touch dead bodies before burial. In Guinea, 60 percent of Ebola infections were linked to traditional burial practices. Plague Plague is a potentially fatal infectious disease of animals and humans caused by the Yersinia pestis bacterium. People usually get plague from being bitten by a flea that is carrying the plague bacterium or by handling an infected animal. Today, modern ant ibiotics are effective against plague, but if an infected person is not treated promptly, the disease is likely to cause illness or death. Plague is an ancient disease but outbreaks throughout the world continue. Major plague epidemics occurred in the middle of the sixth century in Egypt, Europe, and Asia; during the 14th century in Europe, following caravan routes; in the 18th century in Austria and the Balkans; and in the late 19th century worldwide (but mostly in China and India). Manchuria in 1910–1911 witnessed about 60,000 deaths due to pneumonic plague with a repeat in 1920–1921. A minor outbreak occurred as recently as the summer of 1994 in Surat, India, closely following an earthquake in September 1993. Globally, the WHO reports 1,000 to 3,000 cases of plague every year. In North America, plague is found in certain animals and their fleas from the Pacific Coast to the Great Plains, and from southwestern Canada to Mexico. The last urban plague epidemic in the United States 470 PSC 09-12-2024 470 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 391 occurred in Los Angeles in 1924–25. Since then, human plague in the U.S. has occurred as mostly scattered cases in rural areas (an average of 10 to 15 persons each year per the CDC). Most human cases in the United States occur in northern New Mexico, northern Arizona, southern Colorado, California, southern Oregon, and far western Nevada. Zika Virus Zika is a disease transmitted by yellow fever mosquito (Aedes aegypti) and the Asian tiger mosquito (Aedes albopictus). An Aedes mosquito can only transmit Zika virus after it bites a person who has this virus in their blood. The most common symptoms of Zika are fever, rash, joint pain, and conjunctivitis (red eyes). The illness is usually mild, with symptoms lasting for several day s to a week after being bitten by an infected mosquito. People usually do not get sick enough to go to the hospital, and they rarely die from the Zika virus. For this reason, many people might not realize they have been infected. However, Zika virus infection during pregnancy can cause a serious birth defect called microcephaly (abnormally small head and brain), as well as other severe fetal brain defects. Once a person has been infected, he or she is likely to be protected from future infections. Zika virus is not spread through casual contact but can be spread by infected men to their sexual partners. There is a growing association between Zika and Guillain-Barré Syndrome, a disease affecting the nervous system. The mosquitos that carry Zika are not native to California and from 2015 to the publishing of this document, there has been no local mosquito-borne transmission of Zika virus in California.346F 347 However, infestations have been reported in multiple counties in California. Most cases were documented in people who were infected while traveling outside the United States. The CDC maintains a list of countries where zika has been reported. Required reporting for Zika in California began in 2016. These numbers may be underestimated given multiple factors, including the fact many people are asymptomatic. Currently, the represent a decrease in cases in Santa Clara County. Thirty-six cases were reported from 2015 to 2016, 14 in 2017, 8 in 2018, 3 in 2019, and no cases since. 16.4.2 Hazard Profile Location These diseases are a worldwide threat, occasionally increasing in severity in some locations. Areas with higher concentrations of vulnerable populations are more likely to experience a serious outbreak. Severity The severity can range from very localized, in just case of just a few infected, to severe with widespread infection and complications. Widespread sickness and loss of life have resulted from the COVID-19 Pandemic. The most recent totals available as this plan is being written show a total of 496,338 confirmed cases and 2,714 deaths in Santa Clara County. Warning Time The first human cases of the diseases discussed in this MJHMP appeared with very little warning, as did the start of recent outbreaks. Air travel radically increases the speed at which disease spreads around the world. Today’s communication does provide warning to local communities of diseases which could be a problem for them in the future. 347 The Mercury News. (2016, March). Four Zika virus cases reported in Bay Area. https://www.mercurynews.com/2016/03/03/four-zika-virus-cases-reported-in-bay-area/ 471 PSC 09-12-2024 471 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 392 Critical Facilities and Infrastructure No direct impact is expected on the facilities, but the operation of medical-related facilities can and have been overwhelmed. The operation of critical infrastructure can be impacted by employee absence due to illness. Environment Epidemic, pandemic, and vector-borne diseases can be directly or indirectly tied to environmental impacts. Air pollution in California dropped suddenly during the COVID-19 lockdown between March 19 and May 7, 2020. Changes in the environment, due to human stressors or climate change, may increase vector-borne diseases and drive disease emergence in wildlife which could be transmitted to humans .347F 348 Future Trends in Development Future development in Santa Clara County is not anticipated to have any direct impact on the risk of epidemic/pandemic disease. There could be an indirect impact from the development of buildable lands in that the population that could be exposed to this hazard would be increased. However, no direct impact is expected. Cascading Impacts In general, cascading impacts are not anticipated. A widespread pandemic like COVID -19 could threaten global supply chains and the local economy due to disruptions, delays, and shutdowns due to preventative employee health measures and lack of healthy workers. 16.5 Fog The National Weather Service describes nine types of fog.348F 349 Fog in the Santa Clara County OA has different origins depending on the time of year. In summer, fog forms when warm, moist, and stable air is blown across a cooler surface (land or water). The air temperature falls until the dew point is reached and condensation occurs. Fog typically occurs in the Bay Area in June, July, and August. It is usually foggy in the morning, with fog burning off as the temperatures rise. In winter, fog typically originates from the Great Valley. Radiation (ground) fog forms in the moist regions of the Sacramento River Delta and arrives to the region via Suisun and San Pablo Bays and San Francisco Bays on cool easterly winds. While this type of fog is less frequent than summer fog, appearing one winter and not again for years, it is typically denser and more likely to lead to significantly reduced visibility.349F 350 The fog typical for the San Francisco Bay Area is known as advection fog. This type of fog forms when warm, moist, and stable air is blown across a cooler surface (land or water). The air temperature falls until the dew point is reached and condensation occurs. Fog typically occurs in the Bay Area in the June, July , and August. It is usually foggy in the morning, with fog burning off as the temperatures rise. 348 Semenza JC, Rocklöv J, Ebi KL. (May 2022). Climate Change and Cascading Risks from Infectious Disease. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9334478/ 349 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (n.d.). National Weather Service Glossary. https://w1.weather.gov/glossary/index.php?word=fog 350 L.A. Times. (n.d.). Inside the return of Tule fog in California’s Central Valley. https://www.latimes.com/projects/return-tule-fog-california-central-valley 472 PSC 09-12-2024 472 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 393 16.5.1 Hazard Profile Past Events The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Storm Events Database reports 5 events of dense fog since the last plan update. Dense fog means the visibility was limited to a quarter of a mile or less. However, this database does not account for the more common fog events in the OA, which typically occur in the morning when the temperatures are cool, and the relative humidity is high. Location, Frequency, and Warning Time Fog can occur almost anywhere during any season and is classified based on how it forms, which is related to where it forms. Certain seasons are more likely to have foggy days or nights based on a number of factors, including topography, nearby bodies of water, and wind conditions. Fog can form overnight. Local National Weather Service offices issue a Dense Fog Advisory when widespread dense fog develops. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has implemented a fog detection and warning system that uses speed and visibility detectors to assess road conditions, traffic management software to process data and control the field devices, and changeable message signs to provide information to the traveling public.350F 351 Severity Heavy fog is particularly hazardous when it reduces visibility to ¼ mile or less. Although fog seems like a minor hazard, it can have significant impacts. Severe fog incidents can close roads, cause vehicle accidents, cause airport delays, and impair the effectiveness of emergency response. The California Highway Patrol records and news reports describe highway accidents, many with serious injuries or deaths, due to low visibility in dense fog. Many of those accidents involve chain reaction crashes including recent crashes in Santa Clara County. Financial losses associated with transportation delays caused by fog have not been calculated in the United States, but it is likely to be substantial. Critical Facilities and Infrastructure Critical facilities and infrastructure in the Santa Clara County OA would only be impacted indirectly by the fog hazard. Environment In the context of the MJHMP Update, fog is considered to be a hazard, but fog plays a key role in California’s ecosystems and agricultural sector. Future Trends in Development As more lands are developed in the Santa Clara County OA and more people use the area’s highways, the fog hazard’s impact will increase. Cascading Impacts Potential cascading impacts of dense fog involve delays in response to all other hazard events in the vicinity and relate to highway accidents, some of which could involve hazardous materials. 351 Berman, M., Liu, J., and Justison, L. (2009). Caltrans Fog Detection and Warning System. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/27652 473 PSC 09-12-2024 473 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 394 Scenario The worst-case scenario for the fog hazard is probably the situation today. The negatives of delays, inconvenience, and potential traffic accidents are clear. Increases in temperatures in the Santa Clara County OA and likely related decreases in fog could have a more long-term negative impact on the environment and agriculture. 16.6 Identified Needs This assessment of the other hazards of interest led to identification of the following needs throughout the Santa Clara County OA:  Continue regular and redundant emergency preparedness training for field level responders (police, fire, and public works) and public information staff in order to respond quickly in the event of a disaster associated with the identified hazards of interes t. Enhance awareness training for all local government employees to recognize threats or suspicious activity in order to prevent an incident from occurring.  Continue all facets of hazardous materials team training and response through commitment of resources from the Environmental Health Department, local fire departments, and potential funding through homeland security budgets.  Continue to improve response times for public safety throughout the Santa Clara County OA so as to reduce exposure to human-caused incidents. Maintain appropriate staffing levels of public safety personnel to address vulnerabilities identified in this section.  Continue to implement the hazardous materials business plan with enhancements, as warranted by the type of uses in the Santa Clara County OA and innovative technologies in preventing hazardous materials incidents.  Continue to work proactively with industrial businesses regarding placards and labeling of containers, emergency plans and coordination, standardized response procedures, and notification of the types of materials being transported through the Santa Clara County OA. On at least an annual basis, conduct random inspections of transporters as allowed by the business; install mitigating techniques at critical locations; implement routine hazard communication initiatives; enhance security along the transportation corridors; and continuously look to the use of safer alternative products to conduct all business and transportation operations.  Participate in regional, state, and federal efforts to gather terrorism information at all levels and keep public safety officials briefed at all times regarding any local threats. Further develop response capabilities based on emerging threats.  Commit support to the Bay Area Urban Area Security Initiative by dedicating fire, emergency medical services, emergency management grant managers, and police personnel to the program as funded with Homeland Security grants.  Participate in the Cal OES Disaster Resistant California annual conference and other training sessions sponsored by regional, state, and federal agencies.  Use Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design in future planning efforts as well as enhancing existing infrastructure and buildings to prevent or mitigate human -cause incidents. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design is an urban planning design process that integrates crime prevention with neighborhood design and community development. The process is based on the theory that the proper design and effective use of the built environment can reduce crime and the fear of crime and improve the quality of life. It creates an environment where the physical characteristics, building layout, and site planning allow inhabitants to become key agents in ensuring their own security. 474 PSC 09-12-2024 474 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 395  Participate in regional training exercises per the requirements of Homeland Security Presidential Directive #8 in support of national preparedness. These training exercises may be sponsored by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security San José office, the Bay Area Urban Area Security Initiative, local government offices of homeland security, grant funds through Cal OES, or FEMA. Training exercises test and evaluate the ability to coordinate the activities of local and state government first responders, volunteer organizations and the private sector in responding to terrorism and technological hazards. The trainings enhance interagency coordination, provide training to staff, test response and recovery capabilities, and implement the Standardized Emergency Management System, the National Incident Management System, and the California and national mutual aid systems.  Work with the private sector to enhance and create business continuity plans to be followed in the event of an emergency.  Review existing automatic aid and mutual aid agreements with other public safety agencies to identify opportunities for enhancement.  Identify, relocate, or construct a redundant Emergency Operations Center in a location away from hazards.  Maintain an emergency services information line that the public can contact 24 hours a day during an emergency to ask questions of emergency staff.  Coordinate with all school districts in the OA and individual cities to ensure that their emergency preparedness plans include preparation for human-caused incidents.  Encourage local businesses to adopt information technology and telecommunications recovery plans.  Promote 72-hour self-sufficiency through the United Neighborhoods of Santa Clara County and other neighborhood associations, emergency preparedness efforts through local governments, emergency preparedness websites of local governments, civic organizations and the private sector, public outreach, and other means. Ensure inclusion of program information for people with disabilities and others with access and functional needs.  Prepare and present the human-caused hazard risk and preparedness program to the public through meetings, town hall gatherings, and preparedness fairs and outreach.  Maintain any and all citizen advisory groups and periodically e-mail emergency preparedness information including human-caused hazard preparedness instructions and reminders.  Support disease prevention through vaccination and personal emergency and disaster preparation to help reduce the impacts of human health hazards.  Integrate medical and response personnel in a unified command to provide care when needed in response to human health hazards.  Adequately train and supply medical and response personnel.  Carry out up-to-date and functional all-hazard contingency planning.  Develop a system for informing the public with a unified message about the human health hazard.  Provide health agencies and facilities with surge capacity management and adaptation to the rising number and needs of the region. 475 PSC 09-12-2024 475 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 16: Other Hazards of Interest 396 16.7 Related Plans The following plans also address issues related to the “other hazards,” including response priorities. Santa Clara County Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan and Annexes The Santa Clara County OA Emergency Operations Plan is an all-hazards document describing the OA’s Emergency Operations organization, compliance with relevant legal statutes, other guidelines, and critical components of the Emergency Response System. The Emergency Operations Plan consists of threat summaries based on a Santa Clara County OA hazard analysis. This hazard analysis was conducted by Santa Clara County OEM staff, providing a description of the local area, risk factors and the anticipated nature of situations that could occur in the Santa Clara County OA. The Emergency Operations Plan is activated during extraordinary emergency situations associated with large-scale disasters or emergencies affecting the Santa Clara County OA. Santa Clara County Public Health Department Plan This Santa Clara County Public Health Department Plan outlines the efforts to prepare for response to a disaster that has a medical/health component. The Countywide Medical Response System plan is focused on the goal of terrorism preparedness, and addresses topics such as risk communications, decontamination, personal protective equipment, mass prophylaxis, education, training, and exercises. Each topic identifies participating agencies, including fire, law enforcement, hospitals, emergency management, schools, the medical examiner, mental health services, and many others. The plan further enumerates a list of responsibilities to the Countywide Medical Response System for each identified agency, as well as a list of public health commitments through the syst em that will assist those agencies. Hazardous Materials Business Plans Hazardous materials business plans are implemented by Certified Unified Program Agencies within their jurisdictions, along with local fire departments to protect human health and the environment from hazardous materials incidents. 476 PSC 09-12-2024 476 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 397 17 Mitigation Strategy 17.1 Goals and Objectives Hazard mitigation plans must identify goals for reducing long-term vulnerabilities to identified hazards (44 CFR Section 201.6(c)(3)(i)). A guiding principle, a set of goals and measurable objectives for this plan were reviewed and approved by the larger Planning Team based on data from the preliminary risk assessment and updates to mitigation priorities since the previous MJHMP. The guiding principle, goals, objectives, and actions in this plan all support each other. Goals were selected to support the gui ding principle. Objectives were selected that met multiple goals. Actions were prioritized based on the action meeting multiple objectives. 17.1.1 Guiding Principle A guiding principle focuses the range of objectives and actions to be considered. This is not a goal because it does not describe a hazard mitigation outcome, and it is broader than a hazard -specific objective. The guiding principle for this hazard mitigation plan is as follows: To equitably reduce risk and increase resilience by establishing and promoting a comprehensive mitigation program and efforts to protect the Whole Community and environment from identified natural and human- induced hazards. 17.1.2 Goals The following are the mitigation goals for this plan: 1. Actively develop community awareness, understanding, and interest in hazard mitigation and empower the Operational Area to engage in the shaping of associated mitigation policies and programs. 2. Minimize potential for loss of life, injury, social impacts, and dislocation due to hazards. 3. Minimize potential for damage to property, economic impacts, and unusual public expense due to hazards. 4. Minimize likelihood and impact of hazards causing environmental damage or damaging open space/nature preserves in the County and preserving ecological connectivity in the region and by working with residents to help build community capacity to respond and adapt to hazards and emergencies. 5. Effectively deliver essential information to the whole community that promotes personal preparedness and includes advice to reduce personal vulnerability to hazards. 6. Encourage programs and projects that promote community resiliency by maintaining the functionality of critical Operational Area resources, facilities, and infrastructure. 7. Pursue feasible, cost-effective, grant eligible, and environmentally sound hazard mitigation measures. 8. Increase adaptive capacity to reduce risk from hazard impacts that stem from a changing climate. 477 PSC 09-12-2024 477 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 398 9. Remove barriers for local governments to access mitigation funding (broad vs. specific) and reduce the administrative pain points to recipient agencies during the project deployment and auditing phases. The effectiveness of a mitigation strategy is assessed by determining how well these goals are achieved. 17.1.3 Objectives Each selected objective meets multiple goals, serving as a stand-alone measurement of the effectiveness of a mitigation action, rather than as a subset of a goal. The objectives also are used to help establish priorities and have been reviewed and approved by the Mitigation Strategy Working Group, and the larger Planning Team. The objectives are as follows: 1. Establish and maintain partnerships in the identification and implementation of mitigation measures in the Operational Area. 2. Implement hazard mitigation programs and projects that protect life, property, and the environment. 3. Develop and provide updated information about threats, hazards, vulnerabilities, and mitigation strategies to state, regional, and local agencies, as well as private sector groups, community - based organizations, and non-profits. 4. Improve understanding of the locations, potential impacts, and linkages among threats, hazards, vulnerability, and measures needed to protect life, property, and the environment. 5. Encourage the incorporation of mitigation best management measures into plans, codes, and other regulatory standards for public, private, and non-governmental entities within the Operational Area. 6. Inform the public on the risk exposure to natural hazards and ways to increase the public ’s capability to prevent, prepare, respond, recover, and mitigate impacts of these events. 7. Advance community and natural environment sustainability and resilience to future impacts through preparation and implementation of state, regional, and local projects. 8. Reduce repetitive property losses from all hazards. 9. Where feasible and cost-effective, encourage property protection measures for vulnerable structures located in hazard areas. 10. Improve the process on how public agencies select systems that provide warning and emergency communications for a broad array of agencies. This includes improving the selection process and ensuring warning and emergency communications processes are effective and accessible. 11. Partner with educational institutions that provide research, case studies and the like to help bolster agency communication that demonstrates the value of hazard mitigation. 17.2 Mitigation Alternatives Catalogs of natural hazard mitigation alternatives were developed that present a broad range of alternatives to be considered for use in the OA, in compliance with 44 CFR (Section 201.6(c)(3)(ii)). One catalog was developed for each natural hazard of concern evaluated in this plan. The catalogs present alternatives that are categorized in two ways:  By who would have responsibility for implementation: ▪ Individuals (personal scale). ▪ Businesses (corporate scale). 478 PSC 09-12-2024 478 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 399 ▪ Government (government scale).  By what the alternative would do: ▪ Manipulate the hazard. ▪ Reduce exposure to the hazard. ▪ Reduce vulnerability to the hazard. ▪ Increase the ability to respond to or be prepared for the hazard. Hazard mitigation actions recommended in this plan were selected from among the alternatives presented in the catalogs. The catalogs provide a baseline of mitigation alternatives that are backed by a planning process, are consistent with the established goals and objectives, and are within the capabilities of the planning partners to implement. Some of these actions may not be feasible based on the selection criteria identified for this plan. The purpose of the catalog was to provide a list of what could be considered to reduce risk of the flood hazard within the OA. Actions in the catalog that are not included for the partnership’s action plan were not selected for one or more of the following reasons:  The action is not feasible.  The action is already being implemented.  There is an apparently more cost-effective alternative.  The action does not have public or political support. The catalogs for each hazard are presented in Table 127 through Table 134. Table 127: Alternatives to Mitigate the Dam and Levee Failure Hazard What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Manipulate the Hazard None. Remove dams. Remove levees. Harden dams. Remove dams. Remove levees. Harden dams. Reduce Exposure to the Hazard Relocate out of dam failure inundation areas. Replace earthen dams with hardened structures. Replace earthen dams with hardened structures. Relocate critical facilities out of dam failure inundation areas. Consider open space land use in designated dam failure inundation areas. Reduce Vulnerability to the Hazard Elevate home to appropriate levels. Flood-proof facilities within dam failure inundation areas. Adopt higher floodplain standards in mapped dam failure inundation areas. Retrofit critical facilities within dam failure inundation areas. 479 PSC 09-12-2024 479 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 400 What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Increase the Ability to Respond to or Be Prepared for the Hazard Learn about risk reduction for the dam failure hazard. Learn the evacuation routes for a dam failure event. Educate yourself on early warning systems and the dissemination of warnings. Educate employees on the probable impacts of a dam failure. Develop a continuity of operations plan. Map dam failure inundation areas. Enhance emergency operations plan to include a dam failure component. Institute monthly communications checks with dam operators. Inform the public on risk reduction techniques. Adopt real-estate disclosure requirements for the re-sale of property located within dam failure inundation areas. Consider the probable impacts of climate in assessing the risk associated with the dam failure hazard. Establish early warning capability downstream of listed high hazard dams. Consider the residual risk associated with protection provided by dams in future land use decisions. Table 128: Alternatives to Mitigate the Drought Hazard What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Manipulate the Hazard None. None. Groundwater recharge through stormwater management Reduce Exposure to the Hazard None. None. Identify and create groundwater backup sources. Reduce Vulnerability to the Hazard Drought-resistant landscapes. Drought-resistant landscapes. Water use conflict regulations. 480 PSC 09-12-2024 480 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 401 What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Reduce water system losses. Modify plumbing systems through water saving kits. Reduce private water system losses. Reduce water system losses. Distribute water saving kits. Increase the Ability to Respond to or Be Prepared for the Hazard Practice active water conservation. Practice active water conservation. Public education on drought resistance. Identify alternative water supplies for times of drought and create mutual aid agreements with alternative suppliers. Develop drought contingency plan. Develop criteria “triggers” for drought- related actions. Improve accuracy of water supply forecasts. Modify rate structure to influence active water conservation techniques. Table 129: Alternatives to Mitigate the Earthquake Hazard What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Manipulate the Hazard None. None. None. Reduce Exposure to the Hazard Locate outside of hazard area (off soft soils). Locate or relocate mission-critical functions outside hazard area where possible. Locate critical facilities or functions outside hazard area where possible. Reduce Vulnerability to the Hazard Retrofit structure (anchor house structure to foundation). Build redundancy for critical functions and facilities. Harden infrastructure. Provide redundancy for critical functions. 481 PSC 09-12-2024 481 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 402 What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Secure household items that can cause injury or damage (such as water heaters, bookcases, and other appliances). Build to higher design. Retrofit critical buildings and areas housing mission-critical functions. Adopt higher regulatory standards. Increase the Ability to Respond to or Be Prepared for the Hazard Practice “drop, cover, and hold.” Develop household mitigation plan, such as creating a retrofit savings account, communication capability with outside, and 72-hour self-sufficiency during an event. Keep cash reserves for reconstruction. Become informed on the hazard and risk reduction alternatives available. Develop a post-disaster action plan for your household. Adopt higher standard for new construction; consider “performance- based design” when building new structures. Keep cash reserves for reconstruction. Inform your employees on the possible impacts of earthquake and how to deal with them at your work facility. Develop a continuity of operations plan. Provide better hazard maps. Provide technical information and guidance. Enact tools to help manage development in hazard areas (e.g., tax incentives, information). Include retrofitting and replacement of critical system elements in capital improvement plan. Develop strategy to take advantage of post- disaster opportunities. Warehouse critical infrastructure components such as pipe, power line, and road repair materials. Develop and adopt a continuity of operations plan. Initiate triggers guiding improvements (such as <50% substantial damage or improvements). Further enhance seismic risk assessment to target 482 PSC 09-12-2024 482 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 403 What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale high hazard buildings for mitigation opportunities. Develop a post- disaster action plan that includes grant funding and debris removal components. Table 130: Alternatives to Mitigate the Flooding Hazard What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Manipulate the Hazard Clear storm drains and culverts. Use low-impact development techniques. Clear storm drains and culverts. Use low-impact development techniques. Maintain drainage system. Institute low-impact development techniques on property. Dredging, levee construction, and providing regional retention areas. Structural flood control, levees, channelization, or revetments. Stormwater management regulations and master planning. Acquire vacant land or promote open space uses in developing watersheds to control increases in runoff. Reduce Exposure to the Hazard Locate outside of hazard area. Elevate utilities above base flood elevation. Use low-impact development techniques. Locate critical facilities or functions outside hazard area. Use low-impact development techniques. Locate or relocate critical facilities outside of hazard area. Acquire or relocate identified repetitive loss properties. Promote open space uses in identified high hazard areas via techniques such as: planned unit developments, easements, setbacks, 483 PSC 09-12-2024 483 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 404 What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale greenways, sensitive area tracks. Adopt land development criteria such as planned unit developments, density transfers, clustering. Institute low impact development techniques on property. Acquire vacant land or promote open space uses in developing watersheds to control increases in runoff. Reduce Vulnerability to the Hazard Raise structures above base flood elevation. Elevate items within house above base flood elevation. Build new homes above base flood elevation. Flood-proof structures. Build redundancy for critical functions or retrofit critical buildings. Provide flood- proofing when new critical infrastructure must be located in floodplains. Harden infrastructure, bridge replacement program. Provide redundancy for critical functions and infrastructure. Adopt regulatory standards such as freeboard standards, cumulative substantial improvement or damage, lower substantial damage threshold; compensatory storage, non- conversion deed restrictions. Stormwater management regulations and master planning. Adopt “no-adverse impact” floodplain management policies that strive to not increase the flood risk on downstream communities. Increase the Ability to Respond to or Be Prepared for the Hazard Buy flood insurance. Develop household plan, such as retrofit savings, communication with outside, 72-hour self- sufficiency during and after an event. Keep cash reserves for reconstruction. Support and implement hazard disclosure for sale of property in risk zones. Produce better hazard maps. Provide technical information and guidance. Enact tools to help manage development in hazard areas (stronger controls, tax incentives, and information). 484 PSC 09-12-2024 484 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 405 What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Solicit cost-sharing through partnerships with others on projects with multiple benefits. Incorporate retrofitting or replacement of critical system elements in capital improvement plan. Develop strategy to take advantage of post-disaster opportunities. Warehouse critical infrastructure components. Develop and adopt a continuity of operations plan. Consider participation in the Community Rating System. Maintain and collect data to define risks and vulnerability. Train emergency responders. Create an elevation inventory of structures in the floodplain. Develop and implement a public information strategy. Charge a hazard mitigation fee. Integrate floodplain management policies into other planning mechanisms within the OA. Consider the probable impacts of climate change on the risk associated with the flood hazard. Consider the residual risk associated with structural flood control in future land use decisions. 485 PSC 09-12-2024 485 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 406 What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Enforce National Flood Insurance Program. Adopt a Stormwater Management Master Plan. Table 131: Alternatives to Mitigate the Landslide/Mass Movement Hazard What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Manipulate the Hazard Stabilize slope (dewater, armor toe). Reduce weight on top of slope. Minimize vegetation removal and the addition of impervious surfaces. Stabilize slope (dewater, armor toe). Reduce weight on top of slope. Stabilize slope (dewater, armor toe). Reduce weight on top of slope. Reduce Exposure to the Hazard Locate structures outside of hazard area (off unstable land and away from slide-run out area). Locate structures outside of hazard area (off unstable land and away from slide-run out area). Acquire properties in high-risk landslide areas. Adopt land use policies that prohibit the placement of habitable structures in high-risk landslide areas. Reduce Vulnerability to the Hazard Retrofit home. Retrofit at-risk facilities. Adopt higher regulatory standards for new development within unstable slope areas. Armor/retrofit critical infrastructure against the impact of landslides. Increase the Ability to Respond to or Be Prepared for the Hazard Institute warning system and develop evacuation plan. Keep cash reserves for reconstruction. Educate yourself on risk reduction techniques for landslide hazards. Institute warning system and develop evacuation plan. Keep cash reserves for reconstruction. Develop a continuity of operations plan. Produce better hazard maps. Provide technical information and guidance. Enact tools to help manage development in hazard areas: better 486 PSC 09-12-2024 486 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 407 What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Educate employees on the potential exposure to landslide hazards and emergency response protocol. land controls, tax incentives, information. Develop strategy to take advantage of post- disaster opportunities. Warehouse critical infrastructure components. Develop and adopt a continuity of operations plan. Educate the public on the landslide hazard and appropriate risk reduction alternatives. Table 132: Alternatives to Mitigate the Inclement Weather Hazard What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Manipulate the Hazard None. None. None. Reduce Exposure to the Hazard None. None. None. Reduce Vulnerability to the Hazard Insulate house. Provide redundant heat and power. Insulate structure. Plant appropriate trees near home and power lines (“Right tree, right place” National Arbor Day Foundation Program). Relocate critical infrastructure (such as power lines) underground. Reinforce or relocate critical infrastructure such as power lines to meet performance expectations. Install tree wire. Harden infrastructure such as locating utilities underground. Trim trees back from power lines. Increase the Ability to Respond to or Be Prepared for the Hazard Trim or remove trees that could affect power lines. Trim or remove trees that could affect power lines. Create redundancy. Support programs such as “Tree Watch” that proactively manage problem areas through use of selective 487 PSC 09-12-2024 487 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 408 What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Promote 72-hour self- sufficiency. Obtain a NOAA weather radio. Obtain an emergency generator. Equip facilities with a NOAA weather radio. Equip vital facilities with emergency power sources. removal of hazardous trees, tree replacement, etc. Increase communication alternatives. Modify land use and environmental regulations to support vegetation management activities that improve reliability in utility corridors. Modify landscape and other ordinances to encourage appropriate planting near overhead power, cable, and phone lines. Provide NOAA weather radios to the public. Table 133: Alternatives to Mitigate the Tsunami Hazard What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Manipulate the Hazard None. None. Build wave abatement structures (e.g., the “Jacks” looking structure designed by the Japanese). Reduce Exposure to the Hazard Locate outside of hazard area. Locate structure or mission critical functions outside of hazard area whenever possible. Locate structure or functions outside of hazard area whenever possible. Harden infrastructure for tsunami impacts. Relocate identified critical facilities located in tsunami high hazard areas. Reduce Vulnerability to the Hazard Apply personal property mitigation techniques to your home such as anchoring Mitigate personal property for the impacts of tsunami. Adopt higher regulatory standards that will provide higher 488 PSC 09-12-2024 488 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 409 What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale your foundation and foundation openings to allow flow through. levels of protection to structures built in a tsunami inundation area. Utilize tsunami mapping once available, to guide development away from high-risk areas through land use planning. Increase the Ability to Respond to or Be Prepared for the Hazard Develop and practice a household evacuation plan. Support/participate in the Redwood Coast Tsunami Working Group. Educate yourself on the risk exposure from the tsunami hazard and ways to minimize that risk. Develop and practice a corporate evacuation plan. Support/participate in the Redwood Coast Tsunami Working Group. Educate employees on the risk exposure from the tsunami hazard and ways to minimize that risk. Create a probabilistic tsunami map for the OA. Provide incentives to guide development away from hazard areas. Develop a tsunami warning and response system. Provide residents with tsunami inundation maps. Join NOAA’s Tsunami Ready program. Develop and communicate evacuation routes. Enhance the public information program to include risk reduction options for the tsunami hazard. 489 PSC 09-12-2024 489 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 410 Table 134: Alternatives to Mitigate the Wildfire Hazard What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Manipulate the Hazard Clear potential fuels on property such as dry overgrown underbrush and diseased trees. Clear potential fuels on property such as dry underbrush and diseased trees. Clear potential fuels on property such as dry underbrush and diseased trees. Implement best management practices on public lands. Reduce Exposure to the Hazard Create and maintain defensible space around structures. Locate outside of hazard area. Mow regularly. Create and maintain defensible space around structures and infrastructure. Locate outside of hazard area. Create and maintain defensible space around structures and infrastructure. Locate outside of hazard area. Enhance building code to include use of fire resistant materials in high hazard area. Reduce Vulnerability to the Hazard Create and maintain defensible space around structures and provide water on site. Use fire-retardant building materials. Create defensible spaces around home. Create and maintain defensible space around structures and infrastructure and provide water on site. Use fire-retardant building materials. Use fire-resistant plantings in buffer areas of high wildfire threat. Create and maintain defensible space around structures and infrastructure. Use fire-retardant building materials. Use fire-resistant plantings in buffer areas of high wildfire threat. Consider higher regulatory standards (such as Class A roofing). Establish biomass reclamation initiatives. Increase the Ability to Respond to or Be Prepared for the Hazard Employ techniques from the National Fire Protection Association’s Firewise Communities program to safeguard home. Identify alternative water supplies for firefighting. Support Firewise community initiatives. Create /establish stored water supplies to be utilized for firefighting. More public outreach and education efforts, including an active Firewise program. Possible weapons of mass destruction funds available to enhance fire capability in high-risk areas. 490 PSC 09-12-2024 490 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 411 What Alternative Would Do Personal Scale Corporate Scale Government Scale Install/replace roofing material with non- combustible roofing materials. Identify fire response and alternative evacuation routes. Seek alternative water supplies. Become a Firewise community. Use academia to study impacts/solutions to wildfire risk. Establish/maintain mutual aid agreements between fire service agencies. Create/implement fire plans. Consider the probable impacts of climate change on the risk associated with the wildfire hazard in future land use decisions. 17.3 Santa Clara County 2023 Mitigation Action Plan An action plan is a detailed document that identifies specific steps required to achieve a particular goal. The document breaks down the goal into actionable and measurable tasks that can be easily followed and tracked. These actions are determined by the risk of natural hazards impacting a community and the identifying solutions. The purpose of an action plan is to define specific steps necessary for achieving a certain goal, including required resources and a timeline for completing tasks. The 2017 Santa Clara County MJHMP included action items for the entire Operational Area. The participants did not choose to continue to identify area-wide actions and opted for actions by jurisdiction only. The area-wide actions were integrated as appropriate in the Santa Clara County Annex and their status is summarized in Volume II Section 13. Each individual jurisdictions and special districts information can be found in each annex in Volume 2. The planning partners utilized the following criteria to prioritize action items into the categories of high, medium, or low.  High Priority— A project that: ▪ Meets multiple goals and objectives (i.e., multiple hazards); ▪ Addresses multiple hazards; ▪ Has benefits that exceed cost; ▪ Has funding secured or is an ongoing project; 491 PSC 09-12-2024 491 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 412 ▪ Meets eligibility requirements for Hazard Mitigation Assistance grants; ▪ Can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years); ▪ Addresses immediate short-term impacts of climate change; ▪ Benefits underserved and/or socially vulnerable populations; AND ▪ Considers the Multi-Benefit Criteria utilized by the Santa Clara County Climate Collaborative, including equity, long-term value, ecosystem benefit, community benefit, and cross - jurisdictional alignment.  Medium Priority— A project that: ▪ Meets multiple goals and objectives; ▪ Addresses multiple hazards; ▪ Has benefits that exceed costs; ▪ Has funding has not been secured, but that is grant eligible under Hazard Mitigation Assistance grants or other grant programs; ▪ Project can be completed in the short term (1-5 years), once funding is secured. Medium priority projects will become high priority projects once funding is secured; ▪ Addresses immediate short-term impacts of climate change; ▪ Benefits underserved and/or socially vulnerable populations; AND ▪ Considers the Multi-Benefit Criteria utilized by the Santa Clara County Climate Collaborative, including equity, long-term value, ecosystem benefit, community benefit, and cross - jurisdictional alignment.  Low Priority— A project that: ▪ Will mitigate the risk of at least one hazard; ▪ Has benefits that do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify: ▪ Does not have secured funding; ▪ Is not eligible for Hazard Mitigation Assistance grant funding; ▪ Has a timeline for completion that is long term (greater than 5 years). Low priority projects may be eligible for other sources of grant funding from other programs; ▪ May address impacts of climate change; ▪ May benefit underserved and/or socially vulnerable populations; AND ▪ Considers the Multi-Benefit Criteria utilized by the Santa Clara County Climate Collaborative, including equity, long-term value, ecosystem benefit, community benefit, and cross - jurisdictional alignment. 492 PSC 09-12-2024 492 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 413 Table 135 County of Santa Clara 2023 Action Items Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority SCC-1* Maintain, implement, and update as appropriate, the County unincorporated CWPP, while expanding the planning scope to integrate all of the Operational Area’s jurisdictions. Create defensible space programs on a county-wide basis. Using the 2023 Santa Clara County CWPP as a guide, implement fuel management and fuel reduction treatment throughout the county specifically adjacent to areas classified as high and extreme risk to structures to reduce the potential for catastrophic wildfire. Wildfire Santa Clara County Fire Department- or- FireSafe Council SCCFD General Budget; County OEM General Budget; HMGP; PDM; EMPG Ongoing Low 493 PSC 09-12-2024 493 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 414 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority SCC-2* CAL FIRE, South County Fire, and the Santa Clara County Fire Department should prepare for coordinated wildfire response operations through the development of a Wildfire Annex to the County's Emergency Operations Plan. In August 2020 in response to the SCU Lightning Complex, the Wildfire Annex was used to shed light into the response and recovery activities that unfolded. Wildfire County OEM SCCFD General Budget; County OEM General Budget; HMGP; EMPG Short-term Low SCC-4* Continue to promote programs that mitigate vegetation fire, such as diseased tree removal, creating defensible space, and FireWise community programs. In accordance with the 2023 CWPP, promote public education and outreach to engage citizens in helping to reduce risk around individual property, particularly in areas with larger drive times from fire response. Utilize Fire Safe Councils free chipping programs, teach Firewise landscaping techniques, and organize community cleanup and green waste removal in high risk areas to reduce ignitability. Wildfire Santa Clara County Fire Department SCCFD General Budget; County OEM General Budget; South County Fire General Budget; HMGP; and EMPG Ongoing Low 494 PSC 09-12-2024 494 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 415 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority SCC-8* Develop, update, and maintain GIS inventories of essential facilities, at- risk buildings and infrastructure and prioritize mitigation projects. Ideas for Implementation: • Identify critical facilities at risk from natural hazards events. • Develop strategies to mitigate risk to these facilities, or to utilize alternative facilities should natural hazard events cause damage to the facilities in question. • Identify bridges at risk from flood or earthquake hazards. All Hazards, Flood, Earthquake, Wildfire ISD (GIS) County ISD Budget, County OEM Budget, Emergency Management Performance Grant Program, HMGP; PDM; FMA; EMPG Long- term/Ongoing Medium SCC-9* Maintain the WebEOC system so that it is up to date. For example, review the WebEOC vendor's Road Map, assess the vendor technology's fitness relative to the needs of the County's situational awareness process and IT infrastructure; consider upgrading to a new system if necessary. All Hazards, Wildfire, Flood, Inclement Weather – Heavy Precipitation/Atmospheric River, Inclement Weather – High Winds ISD (GIS) County ISD Budget, County OEM Budget, Emergency Management Performance Grant Program, HMGP; PDM; FMA; EMPG Short-term Medium 495 PSC 09-12-2024 495 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 416 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority SCC- 10* Participate in statewide effort to collaborate on spatial data standardization, data sharing platform, common operating procedures. All Hazards, Earthquake, Wildfire/Wildfire Smoke/Air Quality, Inclement Weather – Heavy Precipitation/Atmospheric River/Extreme Temperatures/High Winds/Space Weather, Drought, Climate Change, Dam/Levee Failure, Flood, Landslide/Mass Movement TSS (GIS) County ISD Budget, County OEM Budget, Emergency Management Performance Grant Program, HMGP; PDM; FMA; EMPG Ongoing Medium SCC- 11* Develop and provide the Indoor Mapping, Evacuation Routing to Emergency Response Personnel. All Hazards, Wildfire TSS (GIS) County ISD Budget, Emergency Management Performance Grant Program, HMGP; PDM; FMA; EMPG Long-term Medium 496 PSC 09-12-2024 496 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 417 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority SCC- 13A* Identify county facilities vulnerable to earthquakes and develop appropriate actions. Identify county facilities vulnerable to earthquakes (may include building age, soft story structures, building materials more vulnerable to earthquake damage). Consider options to retrofit, relocate or consider alternate methods to minimize earthquake damage and maintain response functionality. Earthquakes ISD (GIS) County ISD Budget Fleet and Facilities Budget Emergency Management Program, HMGP; PDM; FMA; EMGP Long-term Medium SCC- 13B* Identify the most seismically vulnerable bridges on county roads. Establish priorities for repair, retrofit, or other efforts to harden bridges against earthquake damage to maintain transportation functionality and facilitate emergency response. Earthquakes ISD (GIS) County ISD Budget Fleet and Facilities Budget Emergency Management Program, HMGP; PDM; FMA; EMGP Long-term Medium 497 PSC 09-12-2024 497 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 418 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority SCC- 15* Deploy plume modeling software and enable OEM staff to manage data input to assess hazardous materials atmospheric risk. Due to the COVID-19 global pandemic there has been no progress on this ongoing capability. All Hazards, Wildfire, Climate Change, Inclement Weather – High Wind County Fire, Consumer and Environmental Protection Agency (Department of Environmental Health) County ISD Budget, County OEM Budget; County Public Health Budget; SCCFD; EMPG; the State Homeland Security Grant Program Long-term Medium SCC- 18* Miguelito Road Repairs for two road sections (located in east side of San Jose): Section 1, located near the intersection of Camino Vista Way and Miguelito Road, would replace the current soldier pile wall with a new retaining wall and repave the roadway. Section 2, located near the intersection of Rica Vista Way and Miguelito Road, would repair the slope failure. All Hazards, Landslide Roads and Airports County Roads and Airports Budget; County OEM Budget; HMGP; PDM; FMA Long-term Medium 498 PSC 09-12-2024 498 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 419 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority SCC- 21* Alma Bridge Road Slide Repair (located in Los Gatos): Project site is 0.75 mile south of the Los Gatos Rowing Club @ Lexington Reservoir Dam Failure, Landslide Roads and Airports County Roads and Airports Budget; County OEM Budget; HMGP; PDM; FMA Long-term Medium SCC- 23* Review and implement selected recommendations detailed in the Loma Fire Watershed Emergency Response Team Final Report, October 25, 2016 (CA-SCU- 006912). Potential actions may include, but are not limited to deployment of an early warning system, infrastructure improvements, establishment of a Firewise community program, waterway clearance, general watershed restoration, etc. Wildfire County OEM County Roads and Airports Budget; County OEM Budget; HMGP; PDM; FMA Long-Term Medium 499 PSC 09-12-2024 499 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 420 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority SCC- 24* Review critical facilities and capital projects for mitigation project potential- including, but not limited to: water drainage, power production maintenance/ upgrades, etc. Review flood risk assessment of critical facilities at risk to 100 and 500 year flood. Initiate further study to determine appropriate methods to reduce flood risk, which might include stormwater capture or drainage, use of permeable surfaces, changes to landscaping, flood control structures, relocation, or alternatives. All Hazards Flood Fleet and Facilities County Roads and Airports Budget, County OEM Budget, County Fleet and Facilities Budget, County Roads and Airports Budget, County Planning & Development Budget; HMGP; PDM; FMA; EMPG; the State Homeland Security Grant Program Short-term Medium 500 PSC 09-12-2024 500 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 421 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority SCC- 25* Provide technical information and guidance to public on individual risk identification using information sharing/ GIS platforms. Use GIS tools such as StoryMaps or other GIS platforms or web applications for public education and outreach. Provide a method for residents to understand where they are in relation to potential hazards, and educate them on what actions they can take to reduce their personal risk. All Hazards, Wildfire, Drought, Climate Change, Flood ISD (GIS) County ISD Budget, County OEM Budget, SCCFD; EMPG; the State Homeland Security Grant Program Short-term High SCC- 26* Develop strategy to take advantage of post disaster opportunities through the development of Disaster Recovery Planning, Disaster Cost Recovery Planning, etc. All Hazards, Earthquake, Wildfire/Wildfire Smoke/Air Quality, Inclement Weather – Heavy Precipitation/Atmospheric River/Extreme Temperatures/High Winds/Space Weather, Drought, Climate Change, Dam/Levee Failure, Flood, Landslide/Mass Movement County OEM County OEM Budget; SCCFD; County Finance Agency Budget; EMPG; the State Homeland Security Grant Program; HMGP Long-term Medium 501 PSC 09-12-2024 501 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 422 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority SCC- 27* Develop and adopt a COOP for County Departments, as appropriate. All Hazards, Earthquake, Wildfire/Wildfire Smoke/Air Quality, Inclement Weather – Heavy Precipitation/Atmospheric River/Extreme Temperatures/High Winds/Space Weather, Drought, Climate Change, Dam/Levee Failure, Flood, Landslide/Mass Movement County OEM County OEM Budget; SCCFD; County ISD; EMPG; the State Homeland Security Grant Program; HMGP Short-Term Medium SCC- 28* Maintain existing data and gather new data needed to define risks and vulnerabilities impacting the County. New data should be integrated into County policies, including but not limited to stormwater management, post- disaster recovery, real estate disclosures, environmental protection, climate change, fire suppression, and seismic activity. All Hazards, Climate Change, Wildfire, Earthquake County OEM County OEM Budget; SCCFD; County ISD; EMPG; the State Homeland Security Grant Program; HMGP Ongoing Medium 502 PSC 09-12-2024 502 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 423 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority SCC- 29* Maintain existing data and gather new data needed to define risks and vulnerability impacting the County. New data should be integrated into County plans, including but not limited to the County's General Plan, Capital Improvement Plan, Stormwater Plan, Habitat Conservation Plan, Community Wildfire Protection Plan, Forest Management Plan, Climate Action Plan, Emergency Operations Plan, Threat & Hazard Identification & Risk Assessment, Post-Disaster Recovery Framework, Continuity of Operations Plan, and Public Health plans. All Hazards, Earthquake, Wildfire/Wildfire Smoke/Air Quality, Inclement Weather – Heavy Precipitation/Atmospheric River/Extreme Temperatures/High Winds/Space Weather, Drought, Climate Change, Dam/Levee Failure, Flood, Landslide/Mass Movement County OEM County OEM Budget; SCCFD; County ISD; EMPG; the State Homeland Security Grant Program; HMGP; BRIC Ongoing Medium 503 PSC 09-12-2024 503 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 424 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority SCC- 30* Develop a Debris Collection and Management Plan. Earthquake, Wildfire, Inclement Weather – Heavy Precipitation/Atmospheric River/ /High Winds, Dam/Levee Failure, Flood, Landslide/Mass Movement County Roads and Airports County OEM Budget; SCCFD; County ISD; County Roads & Airports Budget; County Public Health Budget; EMPG; the State Homeland Security Grant Program; EMPG Short-term High SCC- 32* Integrate the hazard mitigation plan into other plans, ordinances, and programs that dictate land use decisions within the community. All Hazards, Earthquake, Wildfire/Wildfire Smoke/Air Quality, Inclement Weather – Heavy Precipitation/Atmospheric River/Extreme Temperatures/High Winds/Space Weather, Drought, Climate Change, Dam/Levee Failure, Flood, Landslide/Mass Movement County OEM County OEM Budget, SCCFD Budget, County Planning & Development Budget Ongoing Medium 504 PSC 09-12-2024 504 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 425 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority SCC- 33* Development and implement a program to capture perishable data significant events (e.g. high water marks, locations of poor draining following heavy rain, roadways or culverts that have been damaged in flood events, damage from high wind events, preliminary damage estimates, damage photos) to support future mitigation efforts including the implementation and maintenance of the hazard mitigation plan. All Hazards, Earthquake, Wildfire/Wildfire Smoke/Air Quality, Inclement Weather – Heavy Precipitation/Atmospheric River/Extreme Temperatures/High Winds/Space Weather, Drought, Climate Change, Dam/Levee Failure, Flood, Landslide/Mass Movement County OEM County OEM Budget, SCCFD Budget, County ISD/GIS Budget, County Finance Agency Budget Long-term Medium SCC- 34* Actively participate in the plan maintenance protocols outlined in Volume 1 of the hazard mitigation plan. All Hazards, Earthquake, Wildfire/Wildfire Smoke/Air Quality, Inclement Weather – Heavy Precipitation/Atmospheric River/Extreme Temperatures/High Winds/Space Weather, Drought, Climate Change, Dam/Levee Failure, Flood, Landslide/Mass Movement County OEM County OEM Budget, HMGP, BRIC Ongoing Medium 505 PSC 09-12-2024 505 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 426 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority SCC- 35* Coordinate with the private sector on prioritization of critical facilities before and during restoration of utility services. All Hazards, Earthquake, Wildfire/Wildfire Smoke/Air Quality, Inclement Weather – Heavy Precipitation/Atmospheric River/Extreme Temperatures/High Winds/Space Weather, Drought, Climate Change, Dam/Levee Failure, Flood, Landslide/Mass Movement County OEM County OEM Budget Ongoing Medium 1 Address gaps in data and missing information within this Annex for the next plan update. All Hazards, Earthquake, Wildfire/Wildfire Smoke/Air Quality, Inclement Weather – Heavy Precipitation/Atmospheric River/Extreme Temperatures/High Winds/Space Weather, Drought, Climate Change, Dam/Levee Failure, Flood, Landslide/Mass Movement All Departments General fund, Short term Medium 506 PSC 09-12-2024 506 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 427 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority 2 Maintain a coordinated, multi- lingual public awareness campaign to educate and engage the public about hazard risk, preparedness, and safety to provide real-time health related information during extreme heat and poor air quality warning days and information on cooling center, resiliency hubs, emergency shelters, and other preparedness and post disaster resources for the region. Inclement Weather – Extreme Temperatures, Wildfire/Wildfire Smoke/Air Quality County OEM General fund Ongoing Medium 3 Consider nature-based solutions such as a goal to plant 1,000 trees annually Countywide in areas to address issues such as urban heat islands, low tree canopy, poor air quality and stormwater management. Work with local governments, agencies, and nonprofit partners to build a comprehensive urban forest. Inclement Weather – Extreme Temperatures, Flood Office of Sustainability General fund, BRIC Medium-term Medium 507 PSC 09-12-2024 507 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 428 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority 4 In coordination with SCVWD, host regular workshops and classes on water conservation, including providing information on drought- tolerant landscaping, available rebates for water retrofits, and water efficiency strategies in new buildings. Distribute outreach materials for water conservation. Drought County OEM? General Fund Medium-term Medium 5 Work with local jurisdictions in dam inundation zones to ensure residents and businesses are aware of the potential risk, and that dam inundation mitigation strategies are integrated into local planning efforts. Work with local jurisdictions to identify vulnerable populations and unique information needs to communicate their risk. Use GIS mapping for risk analysis and communication as appropriate. Dam/Levee Failure County OEM General Fund Medium Term Medium 508 PSC 09-12-2024 508 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 429 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Position, Office, Department, or Division Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Sources Expected Timeline for Completion Priority 6 Identify facilities to serve as warming or cooling centers/short- term severe weather shelters in an effort to reduce loss of life. Assist vulnerable populations by facilitating and also notifying them about warming centers (a short- term emergency shelter that operates when temperatures or a combination of precipitation, wind chill, wind and temperature become dangerously inclement). Extreme Heat, Extreme Cold, High Wind, Heavy Rain County OEM General Fund Medium Term Medium 7 Identify areas with above ground utilities at risk to damage from high wind and evaluate feasibility of pursuing funding for undergrounding of utilities. Consider areas where powerlines may be near areas with high wildfire risk. High Wind, Wildfire County OEM General Fund Medium Term Medium 509 PSC 09-12-2024 509 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 430 17.4 Financial Capabilities Determining current and/or potential funding sources is an important step of the mitigation planning process. By exploring, identifying, and evaluating alternative sources now, planning partners are positioned to select and implement actions which are fina ncially obtainable. This plan is written in accordance with federal guidelines in order to ensure participants remain eligible for certain mitigation funds. Under the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 44, Part 201.6 (44 CFR §201.6), Local Mitigation Plans, local governm ents must have a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)-approved plan in order to apply for and/or receive hazard mitigation project grant funds for hazard mitigation programs including:  Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)  HMGP Post Fire Program (HMGP-PF)  Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC)  Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA)  Safeguarding Tomorrow Revolving Loan Fund Program It is important to consider a variety of funding streams. Mitigation actions can and should be funded through multiple different avenues. Funding opportunities may include federal agencies; state, local, and tribal programs, as applicable; or private funding. Potential Federal, State, and Local funding opportunities are described below. 17.4.1 Federal FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) grants fund eligible mitigation measures to reduce future disaster losses. Eligible applicants include state agencies, local governments, special districts, federally recognized tribes, and private non-profit organizations. California’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) administers hazard mitigation assistance grants on behalf of FEMA. Cal OES supports outreach to inform eligible jurisdictions of available grants, reviews applications, and provides technical assistance. Cal OES is also responsible for submitting applications to FEMA by FEMA’s stated deadline. When eligible entities are interested in applying for these funds, the State Hazard Mitigation Officer (SHMO) can provide additional guidance and education about available grants and the grant application process. 510 PSC 09-12-2024 510 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 431 Table 136: FEMA Mitigation Funding Sources Program Timeframe Description Lead Agency or Agencies Resource(s) Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP / 404 Mitigation) Post-disaster - application period opens on the date of the presidential declaration. Provides funding to state, local, tribal, and territorial governments to develop hazard mitigation plans and implement mitigation products to reduce or eliminate future disaster losses. Eligible project types including planning and enforcement, flood protection, retrofitting, and construction. An approved hazard mitigation plan is required to receive funding. Because the State of California has an enhanced HMP, the State is eligible for additional HMGP funds, up to 20% of the federal share of disaster assistance provided after a federally declared disaster. FEMA https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation /hazard-mitigation https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation /hazard-mitigation-assistance-guidance HMGP Post Fire (HMGP-PF) State’s first FMAG declaration of the fiscal year to 6 months after the end of that fiscal year Helps communities implement hazard mitigation measures after wildfires disasters. Funding depends on the 10- year national average assistance provided under Fire Management Assistance Grants (FMAG) declarations for States. FEMA https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation /hazard-mitigation-assistance-guidance https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files /2020-07/fema_DRRA-1204-policy.pdf Fire Management Assistance Grants (FMAG) Post-Fire Management Assistance Declaration Available to states, local and tribal governments for the mitigation, management, and control of fires on publicly or privately owned forests or grasslands. FEMA https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files /documents/fema_fmagppg_063121.pd f Public Assistance 406 Program Post-federal disaster declaration Public Assistance funded mitigation measures for disaster-damaged facilities. Limited to eligible counties and eligible damaged facilities, as well FEMA https://www.fema.gov/press- release/20220328/fema-hazard- mitigation-grants-404-and-406 511 PSC 09-12-2024 511 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 432 Program Timeframe Description Lead Agency or Agencies Resource(s) as only the parts of the facility that are damaged. Designed to reduce the potential of future losses through a similar disaster to the same eligible facility. Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) Annual Funding for cost-effective measures to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood damage to buildings, manufactured homes, and other structures insured under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). FEMA https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation /floods Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) Annual Provides funding to states, local communities, tribes, and territories to implement mitigation projects. This program is designed to support capability- and capacity-building, promote partnerships, and enable large projects. It emphasizes nature-based solutions, community lifelines, and benefitting underserved communities. Each State has allocated funds as well as a nationally competitive fund. FEMA https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files /documents/fema_bric-policy-fp-008- 05_program_policy.pdf https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files /documents/fema_riskmap-nature- based-solutions-guide_2021.pdf https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files /documents/fema_fy-22-mitigation- action-portfolio.pdf Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Congressionally appropriated Makes funding available for state, local, tribal, and territorial governments to plan for and implement sustainable cost-effective measures designed to reduce the risk to individuals and property from future natural hazards. Previously replaced by the BRIC program, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2022 reauthorized PDM for FY22. FEMA https://www.fema.gov/grants/mitigation /pre-disaster 512 PSC 09-12-2024 512 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 433 Program Timeframe Description Lead Agency or Agencies Resource(s) Rehabilitation of High Hazard Potential Dam (HHPD) Grant Program Annual Provides technical, planning, design, and construction assistance in the form of grants for rehabilitation of eligible high hazard potential dams. The dam must be located in a jurisdiction with a FEMA-approved plan that includes dam risks. FEMA https://www.fema.gov/emergency- managers/risk-management/dam- safety/rehabilitation-high-hazard- potential-dams https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files /documents/fema_hhpd-fact-sheet_05- 19-2020.pdf National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Ongoing Eligible property owners, renters and businesses who purchase flood insurance through the NFIP may be eligible for funds to repair their property. Increased Cost of Compliance (ICC) claim benefits may be available for compliance activities including elevation, flood-proofing, relocation, and demolition. FEMA https://www.fema.gov/flood-insurance Planning partners may soon have access to additional mitigation funds through FEMA’s new Safeguarding Tomorrow Revolving Loan Fund Program. The Safeguarding Tomorrow through Ongoing Risk Mitigation (STORM) Act became law on January 1, 2021, and authorized FEMA to provide grants to eligible entities including the State of California for the development of a revolving loan fund for hazard mitigation initiatives. Once established, this revolving loan fund will provide low interest loans to jurisdictions to reduce vulnerability to natural disaster, foster resilience, and reduce disaster suffering. These loans may be used as the non-federal cost match for other HMA grant applications. The first application for STORM is currently open as of the time of this writing. FEMA funds should not be the only source of mitigation funding a community considers. Other federal resources are described in Table 137. 513 PSC 09-12-2024 513 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 434 Table 137: Additional Federal Funding Sources Program Timeframe Description Lead Agency or Agencies Resource(s) Community Development Block Grant – Disaster Recovery (CDBG-DR) Congressionally Appropriated Grants to states and local governments to develop viable communities (e.g., housing, suitable living environment, expanded economic opportunities) and recover from federally declared disasters. Principally for low- and moderate-income areas. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) https://www.hud.gov/progr am_offices/comm_plannin g/cdbg CDBG-Mitigation (CDBG- MIT) Congressionally Appropriated Supports a range of mitigation activities focused on reducing or eliminating the long-term impacts of future disasters. HUD https://www.hud.gov/progr am_offices/comm_plannin g/cdbg-dr/cdbg-mit Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program Upon request Provides low-cost, long-term financing for economic development and community development projects, including improvements to increase resilience. HUD https://www.hudexchange. info/programs/section- 108/section-108-program- eligibility- requirements/#overview Natural Resources Conversation Services (NRCS) Ongoing Can provide funding and technical assistance to communities to address threats to watersheds, including conducting damage assessment and evaluating potential solutions. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) https://www.nrcs.usda.gov / Urban Waters Small Grants Program Every two years Program that protects and restores urban waters by improving water quality through activities that also support community revitalization and other local priorities. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) https://www.epa.gov/urban waterspartners/urban- waters-small- grants#:~:text=Overview% 20Since%20the%20incept ion%20of%20the%20Urba n%20Waters,with%20indiv idual%20award%20amou nts%20of%20up%20to%2 0%2460%2C000. https://www.epa.gov/sites/ default/files/2016- 10/documents/uwsg_flyer _october2016.pdf 514 PSC 09-12-2024 514 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 435 Program Timeframe Description Lead Agency or Agencies Resource(s) Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) Annual Provides low-cost financing for a range of water infrastructure projects. EPA https://www.epa.gov/cwsrf https://www.epa.gov/nps/f unding-resources- watershed-protection-and- restoration WaterSmart Annual Funding opportunity to support adequate and safe water supplies through water conservation, water management, and restoration projects. Bureau of Reclamation https://www.usbr.gov/wate rsmart/ Partners for Fish and Wildlife Ongoing Financial and technical assistance to private landowners, corporations, local governments, and universities interested in pursuing restoration projects affecting wetlands and riparian habitats. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) https://www.fws.gov/progr am/partners-fish-and- wildlife National Coastal Resilience Fund Annual Funds nature-based solutions designed to improve the resilience of coastal communities and ecosystems. National Fish and Wildlife Foundation https://www.nfwf.org/progr ams/national-coastal- resilience- fund?activeTab=tab-1 Flood Risk Management Program (FRMP) Upon request Program designed to focus the policies, programs, and expertise of the Corps toward reducing overall flood risk. USACE works with local government partners to coordinate flood risk management within the context of shared responsibility, including helping communities understand their flood risk, communicate flood risk to the public, and develop solutions. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers https://www.iwr.usace.arm y.mil/Missions/Flood-Risk- Management/Flood-Risk- Management- Program/Partners-in- Shared- Responsibility/State-and- Local/ 515 PSC 09-12-2024 515 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 436 Program Timeframe Description Lead Agency or Agencies Resource(s) Community Wildfire Assistance Ongoing Technical and funding assistance for wildfire mitigation measures and training. Department of Interior Bureau of Land Management https://www.blm.gov/site- page/programs-public- safety-and-fire-fire-and- aviation-regional- information-montana- dakotas-3 Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG) Annual Grant designed to support state, local, tribal, and territorial emergency management agencies in the implementation of the National Preparedness System and the National Preparedness Goal of a secure and resilient nation. FY23 EMPG program also included an emphasis on the national priorities of equity; climate resilience; and readiness. DHS/FEMA https://www.fema.gov/gran ts/preparedness/emergen cy-management- performance Emergency Watershed Protection Ongoing Program that offers technical and financial assistance to help local communities relieve imminent threats to life and property caused by natural disasters that impair the watershed. USDA https://www.nrcs.usda.gov /programs-initiatives/ewp- emergency-watershed- protection Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations (WVFPO) Program Ongoing Provides technical and financial assistance to help plan and implement watershed projects. USDA https://www.nrcs.usda.gov /programs- initiatives/watershed-and- flood-prevention- operations-wfpo- program#:~:text=The%20 Watershed%20Protection %20and%20Flood%20Pre vention%20%28WFPO%2 9%20Program,Watershed %20and%20Flood%20Pre vention%20Operations%2 0%28WFPO%29%20Prog ram%20OVERVIEW 516 PSC 09-12-2024 516 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 437 17.4.2 State The State of California proactively invests in hazard mitigation and climate adaptation in order to develop more resilient co mmunities. Open grants can be found online through the California Grants Portal. Table 138 lists some of the state-led funding sources available or likely to become available. Table 138: State Mitigation Funding Sources Program Timeframe Description Lead Agency or Agencies Resource(s) Prepare California As Funded Initiative to advance local capabilities through funding additional staff and covering the non- federal cost share for mitigation actions. Cal OES https://www.caloes.ca.gov/ office-of-the- director/operations/recove ry-directorate/hazard- mitigation/prepare- california/ Earthquake Brace + Bolt (EBB) Program TBD Grants for qualified homeowners with eligible houses in higher-earthquake-risk areas to seismically retrofit their house. California Earthquake Authority https://portal.earthquakea uthority.com/Discounts- Grants/Brace-and-Bolt- Grants#:~:text=CEA%20of fers%20two%20brace%20 %2B%20bolt%20grant%2 0programs,help%20CEA %20policyholders%20pay %20for%20a%20seismic %20retrofit. Proposition 84 Ongoing The California Safe Drinking Water, Water Quality and Supply, Flood Control, River and Coastal Protection Bond Act (Proposition) makes new funding available for flood protection and water management programs. Multiple http://bondaccountability.r esources.ca.gov/p84.aspx http://bondaccountability.r esources.ca.gov/PDF/Pro p1E/PROPOSITION_84_f act.pdf 517 PSC 09-12-2024 517 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 438 Program Timeframe Description Lead Agency or Agencies Resource(s) Integrated Regional Water Management Grant Program Ongoing A collaborative grant program that covers planning, project implementation, and disadvantaged communities and tribes in order to implement water management solutions on a regional scale. Department of Water Resources https://water.ca.gov/Progr ams/Integrated-Regional- Water-Management Urban Community Drought Relief Funding As Funded Offers financial assistance to address drought impacts, including drought resilience planning, climate resilience activities, and water conservation activities. Department of Water Resources https://water.ca.gov/Water -Basics/Drought/Urban- Drought-Grant https://water.ca.gov/- /media/DWR- Website/Web- Pages/Water- Basics/Drought/Files/Urba n-Community-Drought- Relief/FrequentlyAskedQu estions.pdf Wildfire Prevention Grants Annual Funding for eligible applicants to conduct hazardous fuels reduction activities, wildfire prevention planning, and wildfire prevention education. CAL FIRE https://www.fire.ca.gov/wh at-we-do/grants/wildfire- prevention-grants Wildfire Resilience Block Grants As Funded Provides technical and financial assistance for forest management including reducing the risk of wildfires. CAL FIRE https://www.fire.ca.gov/wh at-we-do/natural-resource- management/wildfire- resilience#ResilienceGran tAnchor 518 PSC 09-12-2024 518 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 439 Program Timeframe Description Lead Agency or Agencies Resource(s) Listos California Funded for 2023 Local resilience grants for community-based organizations throughout the state to provide disaster training and resources to vulnerable and diverse populations. Cal OES https://www.grants.ca.gov/ grants/2022-23-listos- california-statewide-grant- ls-program-rfp/ https://news.caloes.ca.gov /cal-oes-released-2023- funding-opportunities-for- listos-california-campaign/ California Climate Investments Ongoing Over 70 programs that fund various projects related to climate change and climate resilience. More than 20 state agencies https://www.caclimateinve stments.ca.gov/all- programs Resilient California Ongoing Resources for climate resilience including grant programs. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research https://resilientca.org/topic s/investing-in-adaptation/ Integrated Climate Adaptation and Resiliency Program (ICARP) Ongoing Three grant programs designed to support mitigation and climate adaptation through adaptation planning, climate resilience efforts, and preparing for the impacts of extreme heat. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research https://opr.ca.gov/climate/i carp/ Climate Smart Land Management Program Funded for 2023 New grant opportunity to implement projects and develop plans that increase climate action on California’s natural and working lands Department of Conservation https://www.conservation. ca.gov/dlrp/grant- programs/Pages/Climate- Smart-Land-Management- Program.aspx 519 PSC 09-12-2024 519 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 440 17.4.3 Local Local capability to fund mitigation actions can come from a variety of sources. Some sources local jurisdictions may have access to include:  Capital improvements project funding.  Taxes levied for specific purposes.  User fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric services.  Stormwater utility fees.  General obligation bonds.  Special tax bonds.  Private activity bonds.  Development impact fees for homebuyers or developers.  Public or private partnerships. The individual resources of each participating planning partner are discussed in each annex in Volume 2. 17.5 Action Plan Prioritization The planning partners utilized the following criteria to prioritize action items into the categories of high, medium, or low.  High Priority— A project that: ▪ Meets multiple goals and objectives (i.e., multiple hazards); ▪ Addresses multiple hazards; ▪ Has benefits that exceed cost; ▪ Has funding secured or is an ongoing project; ▪ Meets eligibility requirements for Hazard Mitigation Assistance grants; ▪ Can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years); ▪ Addresses immediate short-term impacts of climate change; ▪ Benefits underserved and/or socially vulnerable populations; AND ▪ Considers the Multi-Benefit Criteria utilized by the Santa Clara County Climate Collaborative, including equity, long-term value, ecosystem benefit, community benefit, and cross - jurisdictional alignment.  Medium Priority— A project that: ▪ Meets multiple goals and objectives; ▪ Addresses multiple hazards; ▪ Has benefits that exceed costs; ▪ Has funding has not been secured, but that is grant eligible under Hazard Mitigation Assistance grants or other grant programs; 520 PSC 09-12-2024 520 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 441 ▪ Project can be completed in the short term (1-5 years), once funding is secured. Medium priority projects will become high priority projects once funding is secured; ▪ Addresses immediate short-term impacts of climate change; ▪ Benefits underserved and/or socially vulnerable populations; AND ▪ Considers the Multi-Benefit Criteria utilized by the Santa Clara County Climate Collaborative, including equity, long-term value, ecosystem benefit, community benefit, and cross - jurisdictional alignment.  Low Priority— A project that: ▪ Will mitigate the risk of at least one hazard; ▪ Has benefits that do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify: ▪ Does not have secured funding; ▪ Is not eligible for Hazard Mitigation Assistance grant funding; ▪ Has a timeline for completion that is long term (greater than 5 years). Low priority projects may be eligible for other sources of grant funding from other programs; ▪ May address impacts of climate change; ▪ May benefit underserved and/or socially vulnerable populations; AND ▪ Considers the Multi-Benefit Criteria utilized by the Santa Clara County Climate Collaborative, including equity, long-term value, ecosystem benefit, community benefit, and cross - jurisdictional alignment. 17.5.1 Benefit-Cost Review One of the criteria used to prioritize proposed mitigation actions was a benefit-cost review. This review was not of the detailed benefit-cost analysis required by FEMA for project grant eligibility under Hazard Mitigation Assistance grants. A less formal approach was used because some projects may not be implemented for up to 10 years, and associated costs and benefits could change dramatically in that time. Therefore, a review of the apparent benefits versus the apparent cost of each project was performed. Parameters were established for assigning subjective ratings (high, med ium, and low) to the costs and benefits of these projects. Cost ratings were defined as follows:  High—Existing funding will not cover the cost of the project; implementation would require new revenue through an alternative source (for example, bonds, grants, and fee increases).  Medium—The project could be implemented with existing funding but would require a re- apportionment of the budget or a budget amendment, or the cost of the project would have to be spread over multiple years.  Low—The project could be funded under the existing budget. The project is part of or can be part of an ongoing existing program. Benefit ratings were defined as follows:  High—Project will provide an immediate reduction of risk exposure for life and property.  Medium—Project will have a long-term impact on the reduction of risk exposure for life and property, or project will provide an immediate reduction in the risk exposure for property. 521 PSC 09-12-2024 521 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 442  Low—Long-term benefits of the project are difficult to quantify in the short term. Using this approach, projects with positive benefit versus cost ratios (such as high over high, high over medium, medium over low, etc.) are considered cost-beneficial and are prioritized accordingly. For many of the strategies identified in this action plan, financial assistance may be available through FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance grants, all of which require detailed benefit/cost analyses. These analyses will be performed on projects at the time of application using the FEMA benefit-cost model. For projects not seeking financial assistance from grant programs that require detailed analysis, “benefits” can be defined according to parameters that meet the goals and objectives of this plan. 17.6 Plan Adoption A hazard mitigation plan must document that it has been formally adopted by the governing bodies of the jurisdictions requesting federal approval of the plan (44 CFR Section 201.6(c)(5)). For multi-jurisdictional plans, each jurisdiction requesting approva l must document that is has been formally adopted. Once the MJHMP has received FEMA Approvable Pending Adoption (APA) status, each participating jurisdiction or special district will take the plan to their governing body for final public comment and adopti on. Copies of the resolutions adopting this plan for all planning partners can be found in Appendix B of this volume. 17.7 Plan Maintenance Strategy A hazard mitigation plan must present a plan maintenance process that includes the following (44 CFR Section 201.6(c)(4)):  A section describing the method and schedule of monitoring, evaluating, and updating the mitigation plan over a 5-year cycle (44 CFR Section 201.6(c)(4)(i)).  A process by which local governments incorporate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms, such as comprehensive or capital improvement plans, when appropriate (44 CFR Section 201.6(c)(4)(ii)).  A discussion on how the community will continue public participation in the plan maintenance process (44 CFR Section 201.6(c)(4)(iii)). This section details the formal process that will ensure that the hazard mitigation plan remains an active and relevant document and that the planning partners maintain their eligibility for applicable funding sources. The plan maintenance process includes a schedule for monitoring and evaluating the plan annually and producing an updated plan every five years. This section also describes how public participation will be integrated throughout the plan maintenance and implementation process. It also explains how the mitigation strategies outlined in this plan will be incorporated into existing planning mechanisms and programs, such as comprehensive land-use planning processes, capital improvement planning, and building code enforcement and implementation. The plan’s format allows sections to be reviewed and updated when new data become available, resulting in a plan that will remain current and relevant. Pursuant to 44CFR 201.6(c)(4)(i), the plan maintenance matrix shown in Table 139 provides a synopsis of responsibilities for plan monitoring, evaluation, and update, which are discussed in further detail in the sections below. 522 PSC 09-12-2024 522 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 443 Table 139: Plan Maintenance Matrix Task Approach Timeline Lead Responsibility Support Responsibility Monitoring Preparation of status updates and action implementation tracking as part of submission for Annual Progress Report. January to February, or upon comprehensive update to General Plan or major disaster Jurisdictional points of contact identified in Volume 2 annexes Local Planning Team Members identified in Volume 2 annexes Evaluation Review the status of previous actions to assess the effectiveness of the plan Progress report completed and submitted to MJHMP County Project Manager each year Jurisdictional points of contact identified in Volume 2 annexes MJHMP County Project Manager, as appropriate Update Reconvene the planning partners, at a minimum, every 5 years to guide a comprehensive update to review and revise the plan. Every 5 years, or upon comprehensive update to General Plan or major disaster MJHMP County Project Manager Jurisdictional points of contacts identified in Volume 2 annexes 17.8 Plan Implementation Each planning partner is responsible for implementing specific mitigation actions as described in the mitigation strategies located in the annexes. In each mitigation strategy, every proposed action is assigned to a specific department or division in order to assign responsibility and accountability and increase the likelihood of subsequent implementation. This approach enables individual participants to update their unique mitigation strategy as needed, without altering the broader focus of the countywide plan. The separate adoption of participant-specific actions also ensures that each plan member is not held responsible for monitoring and implementing the actions of other jurisdictions or special districts involved in the planning process. The Santa Clara County MJHMP Project Manager is the lead position for plan implementation and will work with the planning partner to ensure mitigation actions are implemented according to jurisdictional or special district capabilities and planning procedures. Each partner will implement the plan and their individual mitigation actions, as resources permit, through existing plans, programs, and policies and in the timeframe appropriate for their planning processes. This implementation will be done by reviewing the MJHMP and mitigation strategy during the update of the planning mechanisms identified. As necessary, partners may consider seeking outside funding sources to implement mitigation projects in both the pre-disaster and post-disaster environments. When applicable, potential funding sources have been identified for proposed actions listed in the mitigation strategies. 17.9 Plan Maintenance Element Planning partner points of contact will continue to collaborate as a planning group in coordination with the Santa Clara County MJHMP Project Manager. Primary contact will be through emails and conference calls. Partner points of contact will jointly lead the plan maintenance and update process by:  Discussing methods for continued public involvement and education; 523 PSC 09-12-2024 523 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 444  Documenting successes and lessons learned;  Researching new or updated data, laws, policies, regulations, or initiatives that can contribute to hazard histories, risk assessments, loss estimates, vulnerabilities of assets, or action items for plan participants;  Reviewing potential funding availability, including state and federal grant program Notices of Funding Opportunities;  Assessing the progress of previously implemented actions that reduce vulnerability and losses, and any new opportunities for mitigation actions; and  Maintaining and completing documentation of the MJHMP maintenance process. Each planning partner is responsible for monitoring and tracking the progress of action items identified by their jurisdiction or special district in this MJHMP and submitting a status summary to the County ’s project manager on a yearly basis. Additionally, each planning partner point of contact will work with their Local Planning Teams and other jurisdictional or special district representatives to:  Review existing action items to determine appropriateness for local funding;  Prioritize potential mitigation projects; and  Update decision makers on progress of the plan. 17.9.1 Plan Update The planning partners intend to update the hazard mitigation plan on a 5-year cycle from the date of initial plan adoption in accordance with the update schedule outlined in the DMA 2000. This cycle may be accelerated to less than 5 years based on the following triggers:  A Presidential Disaster Declaration that impacts the OA.  A hazard event that causes loss of life.  A comprehensive update of a planning partner ’s general plan. It will not be the intent of future updates to develop a completely new hazard mitigation plan for the OA. The update will, at a minimum, include the following elements:  The update process will be convened through a new planning partner group.  The hazard risk assessment will be reviewed and, if necessary, updated using best available information and technologies.  The action plans will be reviewed and revised to account for any actions completed, no longer relevant, or changed and to account for changes in the risk assessment or new policies identified under other planning mechanisms.  The draft update will be sent to appropriate agencies and organizations for comment.  The public will be given an opportunity to comment on the update prior to adoption.  planning partner governing bodies will adopt the updated plan. 524 PSC 09-12-2024 524 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 445 17.9.2 Grant Monitoring and Coordination Santa Clara County OEM intends to be a resource to the planning partnership in the support of project grant writing and development. The degree of this support will depend on the level of assistance requested by the partnership during open windows for grant applications. It is not Santa Clara County OEM’s intent to lead any grant application effort for any specific planning partner requesting assistance. It will be the role of Santa Clara County OEM staff to provide support to a lead jurisdiction by providi ng or identifying resources for project development, scoping, feasibility, grant writing, environmental/historic preservation application, and benefit/cost analyses. As part of grant monitoring and coordination, Santa Clara County OEM agrees to provide the following:  Notification to planning partners about impending grant opportunities.  A current list of eligible, jurisdiction-specific projects for funding pursuit consideration.  Notification about mitigation priorities for the fiscal year to assist the planning partners in the selection of appropriate projects.  Training on the FEMA benefit-cost analysis tool upon request.  Training on the sub-applicant system upon request.  Grant writing technical assistance upon request.  Technical review of the completed sub-applicant package upon request. Grant monitoring and coordination is expected to occur on an annual basis in coordination with the annual progress report or as needed based on the availability of non-HMA or post-disaster funding opportunities. 17.9.3 Continuing Public Involvement Each planning partner has agreed to provide links to the hazard mitigation plan website on their individual jurisdictional websites to increase avenues of public access to the plan. Santa Clara County OEM has agreed to maintain the hazard mitigation plan website. This site will not only house the final plan, but it will also become the one-stop shop for information regarding the plan, the partnership and plan implementation. The plan will be posted to the Office of Emergency Management’s website, where ther e will be an opportunity for continued public feedback and engagement with the County mitigation planning team by providing their contact information. To ensure continued public engagement on issues relating to hazard mitigation, all comments received from the public and from interested agencies on this hazard mitigation plan will be reviewed as part of the plan maintenance procedures. Public participation will be sought throughout the implementation, evaluation, and maintenance of the MJHMP. This participation can be sought in a multitude of ways, including but not limited to periodic presentations on the plan’s progress to elected officials, schools, or other community groups; questionnaires or surveys; public meetings; and postings on social media and participant websites. Each participant in this plan is responsible for creating and documenting continued public involvement opportunities throughout the life of the MJHMP. The Santa Clara County NHMP Project Manager may facilitate countywide public involvement strategies that include plan participants, such as partnering with the countywide groups and organizations to distribute and disseminate public surveys and information related to mitigation. Copies of the MJHMP and annual revisions will be posted on the websites of plan participants, as appropriate. The Santa Clara County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan acts as a foundation plan for the entire County. MJHMP will inform many other planning efforts such as plans relating to infrastructure projects (green or otherwise), the County of Santa Clara Emergency Operations Plan, the County of Santa Clara Disaster Recovery Framework (currently in draft), and the Office of Emergency Management 525 PSC 09-12-2024 525 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 446 Strategic Visioning Plan. Additionally, all other County plans that require a review of hazards and vulnerability will be informed by the MJHMP. 17.9.4 Incorporation into Other Planning Mechanisms The information on hazard, risk, vulnerability, and mitigation contained in this plan is based on the best science and technology available at the time this plan was prepared. The general plans of the planning partners are considered to be integral parts of this plan. The planning partners, through adoption of general plans and zoning ordinances, have planned for the impact of natural hazards. The plan development process provided them with the opportunity to review and expand on policies contained within these planning mechanisms. The planning partners used their general plans and the hazard mitigation plan as complementary documents that work together to achieve the goal of reducing risk exposure to the citizens of the OA. An update to a general plan may trigger an update to the ha zard mitigation plan. All municipal planning partners are committed to creating a linkage between the hazard mitigation plan and their individual general plan. Additionally, all planning partners are committed to being in full compliance with California Assembly Bill 2140 and Senate Bill 379, which promote the integration of local hazard mitigation plans and general plans and mandate that these plans address climate change. Other planning processes and programs to be coordinated with the recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan include the following:  Emergency response plans.  Training and exercise of emergency response plans.  Debris Management Plans.  Recovery Plans.  Capital improvement programs.  Municipal codes.  Community design guidelines.  Water-efficient landscape design guidelines.  Stormwater management programs.  Water system vulnerability assessments.  Community Wildfire Protection Plans.  Comprehensive Flood Hazard Management Plans.  Resiliency Plans.  Community Development Block Grant-Disaster Recovery action plans.  Public information/Education plans. Santa Clara County understands the importance of integrating plans in order to align efforts and increase the chances of success. Plan integration, including working closely with the County’s Safety Element update team and the countywide Community Wildfire Protection Plan team, has been a key element of this plan update. In addition to collaborating with these plan updates to integrate public feedback and wildfire risk data, the County will integrate this plan into other planning mechanisms as well. The MJMHP acts as a foundation plan for the entire County. It will inform many other planning efforts such as plans relating to infrastructure projects (green infrastructure or otherwise), the County of Santa Clara Emergency Operations Plan, the County of Santa Clara Disaster Recovery Framework (currently in draft), 526 PSC 09-12-2024 526 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Section 17: Mitigation Strategy 447 and the Office of Emergency Management Strategic Visioning Plan. Additionally, all other County plans that require a review of hazards and vulnerability will be informed by the MJHMP. Including a broad range of internal partners helps ensure the planning partners that participated in this plan update will be able to carry over knowledge of this plan and its actions into other planning mechanisms. Additional information on how each plan participants will integrate this plan into other planning mechanisms is included in Volume II. Some action items do not need to be implemented through regulation. Instead, these items can be implemented through the creation of new educational programs, continued interagency coordination, or improved public participation. As information becomes available from other planning mechanisms that can enhance this plan, that information will be incorporated via the update process . 527 PSC 09-12-2024 527 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-1 Appendix A: Public Engagement Results Public Survey Results A 35-question survey was available to the public for seven weeks, from April 4 –May 19, 2023. The survey results helped the Planning Team learn how the public viewed their risks and vulnerabilities to the hazards they felt could occur in the OA along with their viewpoint on impacts from climate change. With this survey, the MJHMP planning process better supported the viewpoints and concerns of the public. Figure 79: Sample of Public Survey Advertisement The MJHMP public survey received 588 responses. There were 576 responses to the English survey, ten (10) responses to the Chinese survey, and two (2) responses to the Spanish survey. The survey asked participants to pick a statement that best described their level of concern for each hazard. These levels of concern include: • Not Concerned • Somewhat Concerned • Very Concerned • Not Sure – Not Enough Information The survey results are provided in the following tables. 528 PSC 09-12-2024 528 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-2 Table 140: Survey Results Level of Hazard Concern Hazard Very Concerned Somewhat Concerned Not Concerned Not Sure/Needs More Information Drought 355 180 45 6 Earthquake 296 245 38 4 Thunderstorms 29 152 268 34 Flood 85 268 200 30 Dam/Levee Failure 44 160 316 62 Terrorism 67 209 248 58 Tsunami 11 48 456 70 Extreme Heat/Cold 161 234 170 19 Hazardous Materials 69 252 218 44 Atmospheric River 148 264 149 24 Smoke/ Air Quality 304 193 73 14 Weapons of Mass Destruction 73 146 291 74 Wildfire 208 217 138 20 Landslide 54 202 284 43 Tornadoes 11 46 458 69 Windstorms 110 279 172 21 Pandemics 162 275 129 18 Space Weather/Other 25 90 319 149 Table 141: Level of Concern for Climate Change Impacts Climate Effect Very Concerned Somewhat Concerned Not Concerned Not Sure/Needs More Information Sea Level Rise 120 260 173 2 Increased Severity of Hazard Events 227 229 99 0 Hotter Temperatures 285 201 83 1 Damage to the Environment 310 175 84 1 Human Health Issues 227 247 93 0 529 PSC 09-12-2024 529 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-3 Climate Effect Very Concerned Somewhat Concerned Not Concerned Not Sure/Needs More Information Increased Frequency of Hazard Events 232 231 92 0 Decreased Water Resources 392 147 37 2 Damage to Structures Not Built for Climate Change 232 216 108 1 Harm to Food Production 224 239 97 2 Decreased Outdoor Worker Productivity 109 264 173 2 Effect on Vulnerable Populations 245 194 112 1 Table 142: Types of Stakeholders Represented Group Represented Response (%) Academia 6.4 Community Based Organizations 15.6 Special District 1.7 Neighboring Community 6.2 Healthcare Agency 2.1 Faith Based Organization 8.3 Private Organization 8.3 Private Utility 0.3 Table 143 lists comments received from the public survey and how this input that was taken into account during the plan update. Comments that didn’t relate to the hazard mitigation plan or were not a suggestion were not included. Table 143: Public Comments Public Comment Response Our traditional methods for planning and preparation cannot keep pace with the changing natural hazard landscape. The current planning cycles are simply too slow. The Plan Maintenance Strategy in this plan update emphasizes the need for more engagement and timely update to information as appropriate. 530 PSC 09-12-2024 530 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-4 Public Comment Response I like the hazard maps. Nice to know I'm not in a tsunami zone but was surprised that part of the Baylands is in a tsunami zone - and yet proposals to build homes and businesses quite close to the bay keep coming. We should be building near 280 not near the SF Bay. I was shocked Saltworks on an average of 1 foot of elevation in Redwood City was even considered. I think there are big projects scheduled for Brisbane and some in the East Bay too. I have not seen any documentation of the risks of sea rise affecting Facebook or Google or NASA building very close to the bay. How can we overcome the lure of building on the cheapest land when that land is cheaper because of hazards? This plan includes additional information on the Tsunami hazard which was not previously profiled. This question is too broad for this plan update to address but reflects a real concern for the OA. Please keep the urban forest a priority and please push back when the state wants us to increase our population. We do not have the natural water for it. Changes in development and planning for hazards including drought which includes water shortage is addressed in this plan. Reduce flood risks and obvious fire risks. Mitigation of flood risks from San Franciscquito Creek should be immediately accelerated as many are at known risk from this; homeowners and businesses should be educated and encouraged to reduce dry brush/fire risks, including trimming dry trees/foliage from growing up to affect such things as electrical lines. Code enforcement should be stronger since we all see dead wood, etc. close to and eventually affecting power lines. Utilities should be required to evaluate and remedy these when they pose a risk. Actions to reduce flood and fire risk are included in this plan. More work needs to be done with clearing fallen trees in creek and streams. While not strictly speaking mitigation, this is an ongoing theme of public feedback. Therefore, multiple jurisdictions have in progress work towards debris management plans, and others selected to include actions related to debris. As a CERT in Los Gatos, we practice responding to large scale earthquakes. For the community, not just my property, the risk of wildfire, landslide, flooding, dam release, gas leaks is has high probabilities in specific areas. So the survey should not be confined to an individual’s property alone. My property is near, but not on, landslide/flooding/wildfire zones. This survey was open to all. Individuals who live near, but not in, high risk areas are welcome to participate in future hazard mitigation opportunities as relevant. There is so little help for disabled people, and most of it is useless in practice. Equity in mitigation is an important concept. This is integrated into the County and its stakeholders approach to this plan update, and will be something discussed in the future as well. 531 PSC 09-12-2024 531 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-5 Public Comment Response In Louisiana, parishes have designated hurricane evacuation routes. These are communicated to the public and signs are posted along the routes that say "Hurricane Evacuation Route." Should Santa Clara County consider publishing evacuation routes? Maybe it's no longer necessary since we have Apple Maps. But one would think the county should optimize the routes and assign certain routes to certain neighborhoods to minimize the chaos during evacuations. For example, in New Orleans, they convert all Interstate 10 lanes to westbound only during evacuations to get twice the traffic flow out of the city. Would something like this ever be needed here? Evacuation routes were not profiled as a part of this plan update. However, other plans currently be updated including the countywide Community Wildfire Protection Plan will evaluate the current evacuation route situation. People are not well-informed about hazards in their area and what can be done about it, Multiple public education and outreach actions were included as a part of the 2023 action items listed in this plan in attempt to promote public awareness of the risks to the OA and what can be done about it, including mitigation. I wish there had been a specific mention of soft- story earthquake hazards in 2-story apartments built in the 1950s–1970s. There are dozens, if not hundreds, of these in Mountain View alone. There doesn't seem to be much progress on addressing this well-known hazard. I also wish there had been a way to share my level of concern about large-scale environmental "tipping points" that might lead to runaway rises in methane and carbon dioxide. I am highly concerned about them! This is noted as a Jurisdiction-Specific Vulnerability. I would like to be involved. Gilroy is not well represented or serviced in SCCo. Gilroy was an active participate in this plan update and because of this, will be eligible for future mitigation funding opportunities. All are welcome to participate in future plan maintenance and implementation initiatives. Further information can be found on Santa Clara County’s website. How are you going to prioritize among all of the issues and needs? The planning teams prioritized each action in accordance with the criteria listed in this plan. Solutions should not be forced on residents, rather provide them with a variety of options or alternatives to pick from. Everyone wants the best for the environment and wants to be safe, but no one wants to be dictated to on exactly how, OR, have their options taken away and left with only one method. The majority of hazard mitigation actions are voluntary, not mandatory, initiatives. Multiple jurisdictions selected additional public education and outreach actions to take in order to share with residents their options for conducting hazard mitigation. I believe everyone in coastal California should be required to have earthquake insurance. This suggestion was considered beyond the scope of this hazard mitigation plan update. 532 PSC 09-12-2024 532 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-6 Public Comment Response Building new housing needs to have support infrastructure such as roads so people can escape their neighborhoods in emergencies and not be trapped due to traffic. This suggestion was considered beyond the scope of this hazard mitigation plan update however, other current planning initiatives are evaluating evacuation routes. I’m concerned about the lack of communication abilities when the cell phone towers are down. Power failure was discussed during the planning meetings as well. A variety of related mitigation activities were identified in the plan participant’s lists of mitigation actions. Traffic hazards, such as the dangerous southbound 101 entrance from Charleston should be closed and replaced by one from San Antonio Road with an auxiliary lane connecting to the off- ramp at Rengstorff. Traffic incidents were not profiled in this plan update as it focused on natural hazards in accordance with FEMA local mitigation planning guidance. However, it may be considered in future updates. Stronger support and funding are needed Mitigation is an ongoing process. Gathering support and funding for projects are common challenges. Additional actions and funding capabilities that could be enhanced to support this goal are included in the list of 2023 actions. The most concerning time for us was the 2020 wildfires that caused awful smoke throughout our area. Wildfire smoke was also a concern of the Core Planning Team. It was considered important to address this in this plan update, particularly given recent events. Wildfire smoke was addressed under the “Wildfire” hazard in this plan update. Ban fires in the Santa Clara Valley. The smoke enters my home and causes breathing problems. The entire neighborhood is affected when people hold bonfires. This recommendation was considered beyond the scope of this hazard mitigation plan update. Wildfires were considered the primary source of concern for smoke. Smoke from wildfires was addressed in this plan update. Despite heavy rains, still need to focus on future drought conditions. Also, future pandemics. Would anticipate domestic infrastructure also represent increasing targets for domestic terrorism Mitigation actions were identified for both inclement weather and drought as a part of this plan update. Terrorism was not profiled as this plan update focused on natural hazards in accordance with FEMA local mitigation planning guidance. However, it may be considered in future updates. Never hear of any task force I can join Multiple plan participants selected additional public education and outreach as a part of their mitigation actions. Future opportunities to participate will be advertised publicly. All are encouraged to review the Santa Clara County website for additional information. 533 PSC 09-12-2024 533 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-7 Public Comment Response There was no mention of pesticides/herbicides esp. from professional gardeners. Also air pollution from living near freeways and greatly increased population driving in in SC Valley in recent years. Affordable access to organic food (vs. genetically modified and sprayed with pesticides/herbicides). I've had a lot of ground settling -- 1 foot drop since the Loma Prieta EQ in 1989, and with cold and wet weather recently more ground settling and my front door latch would hold the door closed so had to get a barn latch put in -- lots of expansion and contraction of house and building materials. ... Way too much population increase in Silicon Valley, very concerned about future resources, availability for everyone, and costing more and getting less. Food resources were not considered as a part of this hazard mitigation update. Offer inexpensive yet good coverage insurance The recommendation was considered beyond the scope of this hazard mitigation plan update but is noted. I hope some action is taken to secure Saratoga Heights area where landslides happened in 80's and now we see similar issues causing many issues for residents, and all public utilities providers like PG&E, SJ Water and Cupertino/West Valley Sanitation District. An action item was added by the City of Saratoga to stabilize Saratoga Heights Drive to reduce the possibility of landslide, erosion, and roadway obstruction. I would like to see more community projects that encourage people to get involved in environment preservation. Noted. Great job on forming this working group. I’m hoping the working group incorporates all different age/sex/race/disability groups, Including the young, teens and differently abled folks. Telling folks to get insurance, only solves the end result… driving preemptive solutions would be more effective. E.g. employing more environmental solution minded folks and involving ALL in discussions would be other suggestions. The planning process was open to all. Further public outreach and education as well as plan maintenance opportunities can be targeted toward a broad range of stakeholders. The best thing you can do for county residents is repave our roads and add drainage points. The County included an action item on identifying potential water drainage mitigation projects. Resources need to be allocated toward hazards affecting renters. The housing stock in SCC is old; the majority of landlords appear reluctant to update their properties to mitigate the hazards that routinely impact renters (extreme heat/cold events) or would we catastrophic if they occurred (severe earthquake). Multiple plan participants selected additional public education and outreach initiatives as a part of their mitigation actions. Renters are one group that may need additional outreach to understand their options. Require use of EcoAtlas.org database of headwater streams for all hillside community planning. Require composite mapping of landslides from property geotech reports in hillside communities. This suggestion was not included at this time. 534 PSC 09-12-2024 534 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-8 Public Comment Response Please include multilingual community forums. Please include changing street light post bulbs, my community has very dim lightbulbs and some streets are not safely lit. Multilingual public education and outreach opportunities was noted as a capability that could be expanded. Would like to see more communities build up many more CERTs since we will need to rely on each other during a disaster CERTs were considered a capability of multiple participating jurisdictions. Multiple plan participants included mitigation actions regarding support CERTs. Thanks you for what you are doing -- and especially for publicizing this in various languages. These issues affect all of us in Santa Clara County, and it's so important that the information be disseminated in languages besides English. The Core Planning Team agreed. In addition to the multilingual engagement conducted during this plan update process, multilingual public education and outreach opportunities was noted as a capability that could be expanded. Multiple plan participants highlighted public education and outreach as a part of their mitigation actions. Targeted marketing to neighborhoods and level risks. Often, news and warnings are not relevant to all neighborhoods. Targeted outreach can be a great way to get relevant information into the hands of the people who need it the most. Multiple plan participants selected to include additional public education and outreach efforts as a part of their mitigation actions. We need to slow or stop growth due to traffic congestion and the greater problems that creates in an emergency, and due to the overbuilding adding risk to more people, and stop building tall buildings on corners of major intersections. Traffic incidents were not profiled as a hazard in this plan update as this plan focused on natural hazards in accordance with FEMA local mitigation planning guidance however, it could be considered in future updates. A lot of the rules have changed since the late 1970s early 1980 when I purchased my home in San Jose. I have not heard of any Hazard Mitigation being done in my area of San Jose. A discussion of San Jose’s previous mitigation action items and mitigation success stories is included in the City’s annex in Volume II. Trees offer significant protection against heat and wind as well as soil moisture retention but the city of San Jose has official policies which deforest the city by burdening low-income residents with the cost of maintaining trees and adjacent utility infrastructure, a significant cost risk which average households in the East Side and downtown cannot bear. This was not identified by the City as a concern during their capability assessment or actions. However, the city is currently developing other environmental-focused plans which may consider this point further. I am very concerned about the environment of Santa Clara County and the whole world. I would like to learn more and be an advocate for change. I would be happy to do some community outreach to help reduce the plastic use in the valley and to see more trees planted and to see the trees near power lines and trees at risk of falling are pruned for safety. All are encouraged to become involved in future plan maintenance and implementation opportunities. Please refer to the Santa Clara County website for more information. Ensure that there is informed public review of plan. The public was provided a two-week opportunity to review the plan and specific representatives of community-based organizations were invited to review it in additional to planning stakeholders. 535 PSC 09-12-2024 535 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-9 Public Comment Response We need to keep water in Anderson to mitigate fire risk and wildlife damage/death. Mitigation for possible earthquake shouldn’t trump fire dangers This suggestion was considered beyond the scope of this hazard mitigation plan update however it is noted. Where are hazardous materials in my community located? What are the disaster plans for my community? These are good questions which reflect the need for additional public education and outreach. Multiple plan participants selected these kinds of actions in their action plan. I’d like to see power and utility lines go underground. Multiple plan participants are actively working on this or selected to include it as an action item. From a wildland fire hazard perspective, all communities south of Los Gatos served by the Highway 17 corridor can only be honestly described as death traps. A heavy emphasis on evacuation, including fuels reductions along major public roads, is the only way to prevent significant loss of life. Mitigations would include adequate defensible space, planned developments with emergency exits, additional fire agency coverage, a volunteer fire program for the Santa Clara side as Santa Cruz side has, and last but not least, cooperation with certain public and private landowners who either do not care about or do not have the funding to address significant wildfire and fuel hazards. ESPECIALLY SAN JOSE WATER COMPANY. All of these types of mitigation measures have been evaluated. Multiple plan participants listed similar actions in their action plans. San Jose Water was identified as a potential planning partner however, they did not participate in this plan update. Fire risks are still extremely real. Homeowners Insurance is tied to this risk. Defensible space is the key. It’s neither fun or enjoyable work, but it’s essential to community safety. Defensible space is listed as a mitigation action item for multiple plan participants. You should include traffic planning as a possible mitigation measure. With many communities narrowing roadways to slow traffic, I'm concerned that if people need to be moved from one area to another, what was once a possible escape corridor that could handle more traffic, has greatly reduced the traffic flow capacity. The city has installed permanent features that narrow the roadway to a single lane in each direction with no option to expand the flow if needed for an evacuation. This hazard mitigation plan focused on natural hazards in accordance with FEMA local mitigation planning guidance, but this can be reevaluated in future updates. Using social media to spread the word has drawbacks — it can exclude many from marginalized communities. Please be sure to broaden your messaging beyond the suburban upper-middle class. Multiple in-person meetings were conducted as a part of this plan update. Further, multiple plan participants selected additional public education and outreach as a part of their mitigation actions moving forward. Allow us to buy reasonably priced earthquake insurance covering less than total destruction. Allow us to remove trees next to houses for fire safety even when they are healthy. These suggestions were considered beyond the scope of this hazard mitigation plan update but are noted. 536 PSC 09-12-2024 536 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-10 Public Comment Response Don’t let this winter’s record rainfall make you forget that we live in a drought zone! This hazard mitigation plan update focused on all hazards, including both Heavy rain, heavy winds, extreme temperatures and drought. (1) Stanford climate scientist, Noah Diffenbaugh, published peer-reviewed research showing that we will be subject more frequently and regularly to both extreme dry spells (leading to wildfires and water shortages) and extreme wind & rain patterns (leading to flooding, landslides, and power outages), all lasting longer periods. We need to plan for our critical infrastructure (i.e. electricity and medical services) to sustain this kind of situations. (2) We need to be ready for a devastating earthquake hitting in a bitter and rainy winter. The Hazard Mitigation Plan is designed to help communities plan to reduce risk to critical infrastructure, including community lifelines. Both climate change and cascading impacts are considered throughout this plan update. Fire evacuation in some parts of my community (Los Altos Hills) will be severely hampered by one-lane roads and bottlenecks (e.g., Moody Road by Foothill College) if traffic is not actively controlled (by a human) to keep vehicles moving. Specifically, if traffic lights are not deactivated (or set to blink yellow), they alone will create a massive logjam. The evaluation of specific evacuation routes was not a part of the scope of this plan update however, other current planning processes around the County are looking into evacuation routes. Stop building more high density homes in a area that has regular droughts, limiting people helps w low supplies. Stop building in areas anyone w common sense knows could be dangerous, like below Anderson Dam during the last 25 years when it was known to be not earthquake safe. The life's that would have been loss are huge. Areas in SJ that had landslides in the 1960's should never be built on yet many are. See what I mean??? Look at how much concrete covers our land, backyards, water tables cannot be replenished like that. Common sense folks!!!! This comment is considered beyond the scope of this hazard mitigation plan however, integrating the risk and changes in development information listed in this plan into future planning mechanisms, permitting, and development decisions may lead to the result requested. Please include local CERT members in you group. I am currently work in quality and I am very good at spotting potential hazards and developing scenarios to fix the issues. SJ CERT program manager can vouch for me & person in charge of CERT, my instructor at Santa Clara County Fire also can. My wife and I are always prepared, 100% all the time! Stakeholders including CERT members were invited to planning meetings. All were welcome to attend the public meetings and provide feedback on the plan during the review process. All are welcome to participate in future plan maintenance and implementation opportunities. More information will be made available on the Santa Clara County website. We need to retrofit buildings in which housing is built on top of garage or parking, due to increase risk of collapse in an earthquake. Mitigation includes retrofitting buildings at risk from collapse during an earthquake. Multiple plan participants listed seismic retrofitting as a part of their mitigation actions. 537 PSC 09-12-2024 537 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-11 Public Comment Response Please consider making a plan for an electromagnetic pulse or a coronal mass ejection. Also, i lost power 3 times in the last 2 years due to pg&e’s equipment failure. Each of these times was for 30 hours or more. Twice during a heatwave. Last summer’s power outage cause me heat exhaustion, with confusion and rapid heart rate. It was 113 degrees in my neighborhood and no power. This is so dangerous and I fear it will happen again, it seems pg&e temporarily fixes the problem but under strain the equipment breaks again when we need it most. Mitigation measures are important for the private sector to consider as well. PG&E participated as a stakeholder in this hazard mitigation plan but did not develop specific actions as a participating jurisdiction. Educate hillside communities on the CA aquatic resource inventory (EcoAtlas.org) by SFEI - prohibit development near these small streams for public safety. Compile complete map of all minor and major landslide areas - most hillside developments require GeoTech reports which map these slides but a complete county-wide map is not publicly available These actions were not selected at this time. Additional landslide mapping is available in Volume II for each participating jurisdiction. I have questions, how will all of this be funded? Who pays? Potential funding sources are listed in this plan update for each action. Thank you for doing this. The county needs to consider a more proactive central role in disaster planning that umbrellas the cities. The County is actively involved in supporting emergency management and hazard mitigation efforts. The engagement between jurisdictions and stakeholders that was conducted for this plan update is described above as well as in each annex. Freeway exit at Arastradero from 280 North is overgrown with weeds and has flammable debris build-up. The area needs annual weeds/tree debris mitigation, but this to my knowledge has never been done. Fire from cigarettes or ignition from other sources could spread quickly up hill and into the surrounding fields and community. Please attend to this area annually. A related action was included in the community where this comment came from. Manage the water supply to homes effectively. Invest in rainwater harvesting mechanisms at the household level. Multiple plan participants noted their support for rainwater collection during their capability assessment. Further education and outreach on this topic could help residents implement this on a household level. Multiple plan participants indicated their support for additional public education and outreach in their mitigation actions. Hazmat releases are also concerning. This plan focused on natural hazards in accordance with FEMA local hazard mitigation planning guidance however, this comment is noted and can be evaluated during future updates. 538 PSC 09-12-2024 538 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-12 Public Comment Response Has the group done a mapping assessment to understand the number and location of multijurisdictional areas? We live in SCC, but 4 houses up and down is Los Altos. Across the street is Los Altos Hills. We have several hazard issues that need coordination. Coordination is one of the main goals of the multijurisdictional hazard mitigation planning process. This plan update provided the opportunity to map and assess risk across jurisdictions in Santa Clara County as well as bring partners together. Future opportunities for plan maintenance and the next plan update are intended to continue to promote coordination. Make users pay to put power and water in the urban forest interface if they want to live there. Not a government or PGE function. This suggestion was considered beyond the scope of this hazard mitigation plan update but is noted. I am interested in boosting the flood control around Palo Alto. My neighborhood association, AMNA, has discussed it. All are welcome to participate in future plan maintenance and implantation opportunities. Further information will be able on the Santa Clara County website. Ideas for how to reduce flood risk in Palo Alto are also listed in this plan update. We could incorporate this hazard mitigation plan into all other plans for the future of our community to ensure that hazard mitigation is the standard and not the bare minimum. Future plan integration is a goal of all the plan participants. We were able to afford putting in some things like a Big watertank, propane generator, solar cells for the sole purpose of mobile electricity, Big bus batteries to store it, etc. I wish there were small kiosks where residents could go that they were aware of--in plain sight, but not commonly operational--for electricity and water (a tank that was always filled, and then refilled during an emergency, as needed). It could hand out masks, tests, do shots, etc. This current system of trying to figure out your insurance, etc, was too much. We could use a single site that was passed everyday by people, a 30-minute walk from people during an emergency. This recommendation was considered outside the scope of this hazard mitigation plan update but is noted. How to protect communities in Santa Clara County? This plan addresses multiple actions and alternatives which can help reduce risk from the hazards Santa Clara County faces. Need the City of Santa Clara to hold public hearings on these topics! Residents of the City of Santa Clara were welcome to attend two virtual and five in-person meetings on this plan update. Residents are encouraged to keep in touch with the city via social media for future opportunities. consider incentive programs for personal emergency preparedness: rebates on expenses. This suggestion was considered beyond the scope of this hazard mitigation plan update but is noted. As an apartment renter, unclear what I can do or what I should ask for/about wrt(sic) hazard mitigation. Renters often need additional information to understand their options. Multiple plan participants included public education and outreach initiatives as a part of their mitigation actions. 539 PSC 09-12-2024 539 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-13 Public Comment Response Please create a plan and educate the community. Multiple plan participants included public education and outreach initiatives as a part of their mitigation actions. We are on a ridge, hence no personal concern related to flood or dam failure. Built home in 1980. Structure and property did just fine in Loma Prieta quake so we feel very fortunate. Extremely concerned about potential for wildfire issues however. No problem with insurance so far, but have intentionally avoided discussing the issue with our long-standing provider. New buyers in our neighborhood have been consistently turned down for insurance due to fire hazard. I am president of our small (20 properties) HOA and would welcome being a conduit for any relevant information. Many thanks to whoever is reading this for all that you are doing for our county-wide community! All are welcome to participate in future plan maintenance and implementation opportunities, including HOAs. Further information will be available on the Santa Clara County website. Good Job on the survey. I think the most important hazard is fire as we live in a valley surrounded by hillsides. Sea Rise might be next (flooding in Sunnyvale all the way to El Camino?) and then earthquakes. I think more regular people should be trained in emergency preparedness. Thanks again for the opportunity to participate in the survey. All of the hazards listed are profiled in this hazard mitigation plan update. Additional public education and outreach initiatives were selected as part of multiple plan participants’ mitigation actions. Fire Hazard risk reporting system should be available and a well-known like 911 The area we live in Cupertino has very high risk of Fire Hazard due to poor maintenance of the open area. But I still have not found an effective authority to contact after many years Issues like knowing who to contact can be resolved through additional education and outreach. Multiple plan participants included additional public education and outreach activities as a part of their mitigation actions. Please get Caltrans and the State to clear the overgrown and dead foliage on Highway 9 (Saratoga-Los Gatos Rd.) It's the only wildfire evacuation route for my house and many others. This activity was considered beyond the scope of this hazard mitigation plan update but is noted. I think it is time to re-implement natural disaster and civil defense training & preparedness for communities. Evacuation plans, how to shelter-in- place, community/neighborhood-based support groups. Better to be prepared than to panic. Multiple plan participants included additional public education and outreach activities as a part of their mitigation actions. It is vitally important to actively go into the community and send specialists to observe survey storm and any disaster damages to private property, non-county maintained roads and infrastructures, wells, etc. in unincorporated areas of County-- so to NOT FAIL in acquiring constituents needed relief, and Hazard Mitigation funding for resilience planning for all Disasters, including Wildfire. The County actively supports obtaining Hazard Mitigation funding and identified this as a capability that can be increased this planning cycle. 540 PSC 09-12-2024 540 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-14 Public Meeting Summary A total of seven public meetings, two virtual and five in -person, were held across the OA. During these meetings, members of the public were surveyed in-person, invited to take the digital MJHMP survey, and had the opportunity to discuss their hazard-related concerns. The results helped the plan participants including the County learn about the public’s interests, hazard impacts, and awareness of their risks. Figure 80: Sample Public Feedback on Hazard Impacts - Gilroy Meeting 541 PSC 09-12-2024 541 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-15 Figure 81: Sample Public Feedback on Hazard Impacts - Campbell Meeting 542 PSC 09-12-2024 542 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-16 Figure 82: Sample In-Person Feedback Option - Gilroy Meeting Table 144: General Feedback Received Public Feedback Wind is a real concern. Falling trees and powerlines are scary to deal with. Residents are not universally affected by flooding. Needs to be planning for evacuation on non-County maintained roads. How many residents are in Lexington Hills? No one is paying attention or communicating what is going on in these areas. PG&E doesn’t care about their mess. Power is slow to come back on in current event. (Note: There was a heat wave at the time of this meeting) “Priorities” shift seasonally, but they are all important. Living with wildfires is a new reality for us. People are working outside when the air is unbreathable. Indoor workers work without money for air filtration systems. Not just need for cool centers, but filtration. 543 PSC 09-12-2024 543 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-17 Public Feedback Drought – a community well system is expensive. This is another hazard that is seasonal. Need better system for capturing stormwater runoff. Need more education and funding. Need help installing residential and community systems. San Jose Water increasing rates, doing a lot of work right now Flooding – takes a long time to recover from losses, get back to pre-disaster state. Roads washing out. Flooding is an additional insurance, many areas didn’t know it was something they needed. Extreme heat events happening more frequently and closer together than they use to. (“Once in 25 year rainfall” is happening five times per month) Weekly newsletters/newspapers to spread information Sirens in Gilroy, used them in ’98, haven’t used recently to signify floods. Five minutes can make a big difference as a house floods. Monterey County uses Alert/Sheriff system all the time – has evacuation warning and fire maps. Make you respond that they’ve reached out. How much time is enough time to evacuate and prepare? Depends on the event. Storms vs fire vs drought have really different timescale. Averages don’t always capture the real situation on the ground – also look at min and max. Why are these outreach meetings not also being sent out as press release to local news media for general circulation. Weekly newspapers service each of the different areas of the County unincorporated areas: make a requirement for public notice? County failed to designate evacuation route planning since 2009 CWPP recommendations. Subdivisions of 30+ homes share a single egress route. Participants expressed some frustration that the County does not engage with the South County communities enough. Many questions about how the County is letting people in general know about hazards, specifically flood zones and flood risks, and how are the County is specifically reaching out to farm worker camps. A reminder that mailing the property owners (directly or through water bill, etc) does not always provide information to renters or temporary residents. One question about noxious fumes from a sewage plant impacting a neighborhood. Advance Earthquake warning system should be in place. Flood area warning system for the public within the areas that are known to flood regularly. Air quality and evacuation for farm workers. The recent fires showed that the farm workers were not given notices for evacuations or poor air quality like the homeowners in the new housing tracks. A few key takeaways from this public feedback was how concerned the public is with their risk from the hazards the OA face. Climate-change related changes in hazard frequency and severity is already being felt across the OA. This puts more people in harm ’s way from hazards they were not aware they would have to face. Further impacts are discussed throughout the hazard profiles and jurisdictional -specific vulnerabilities are highlighted in Volume II of this plan. Further, there is significant need for additional public education and outreach. The public may be aware of some hazards, but not all risk is equal. Outreach to both homeowners and renters is important. Mitigation measures such as air filtration are also needed not only for public infrastructure, but residential and private sector structures as well. Additional public education and outreach actions are identified in Volume II of this plan. 544 PSC 09-12-2024 544 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-18 Listening Section Summaries Summary Safety Element/MJHMP Update Listening Session # 1: CARAS December 15, 2022 5:30 – 7:00 PM Facilitators: Sam Gutierrez, Principal Planner, County of Santa Clara Location: CARAS, Gilroy, CA The Listening Session began with a poll to help the County better understand community demographics and experiences. As illustrated in Figure 1. What City Do you Live In/Near? A majority of residents live in or near Gilroy. Figure 1. What City Do you Live In/Near? As illustrated in Figure 2. Hazardous Events with the Greatest Impact, participants have experienced a broad range of hazardous events with Extreme Heat the primary event. Drought, wildfire + smoke, and Q1: What City Do You Live In/Near? Watsonville Morgan Hill 11% 4% Milpitas 4% Gilroy Milpitas Morgan Hill Watsonville Gilroy 81% 545 PSC 09-12-2024 545 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-19 flooding were experienced by 14 percent of participants. 82 percent of all participants have experienced a hazardous event that has impacted their life or home in the past 5 years. Figure 2. Hazardous Events with the Greatest Impact Approximately 4 out of 5 participants do not have a home emergency preparedness kit or supplies to support their household in the event of an emergency. Figure 3. Emergency Preparedness Supplies Finally, only 15 percent of participants were aware of County Services or Programs to support them prepare or respond to a hazardous event as illustrated in in Figure 4. County Services Awareness. Q2: In the Past 5 Years, What Hazardous Event Has Had the Greatest Impact on Your Life/Home? Other 4% None of the Above 18% Earthquake + Landslide 8% Flooding 12% Extreme Heat Flooding Other Drought Wildfire + Smoke Earthquake + Landslide None of the Above Wildfire + Smoke 14% Drought 12% Extreme Heat 32% Q3: Do You Have Emergency Preparedness Supplies? Partial 7% Yes 15% No 78% Yes No Partial 546 PSC 09-12-2024 546 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-20 Figure 4. County Services Awareness. County staff facilitated a interactive session where participants could respond to questions posted on whiteboards. The following are their responses. 1. What are your primary hazards of concern and why? Q4: Are You Aware of County Services and Programs? Unsure 15% No 70% Yes No Unsure Yes 15% 547 PSC 09-12-2024 547 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-21 1. Extreme Heat / Calorextremo a. I do not have air conditioning in my home / No tengo aire acondicionado en mi casa 6 b. I have air conditioning in my home, but cannot afford to run it during all heat events / Tengo aire acondicionado en mi casa, pero no puedo costearlo durante eventos de calor extremo 8 c. I work outdoors / Trabajoal airelibre 0 d. I have a family member or friends that work outdoors / Tengo un familiaro amigos que trabajan al aire libre 7 e. No close access to a cooling facility such as a park, library, or community center / Las instalacionesdel centrode enfriamiento, comoparques, bibliotecaso centroscomunitarios, no se encuentrancercade mí 2 f. There are cooling facilities such as a park, library, or community center in my community, but I don’t have physical access or do not feel safe going. / Instalaciones de centros de enfriamiento, como un parque, bibliotecas o centros comunitarios en mi comunidad, pero no puedo viajar allí debido al acceso físico o problemas de seguridad 2 2. Drought / Sequía a. Plants are dying / Las plantas se están poniendo marrones y/o muriendo 3 b. Financial hardship of increased water cost / El aumento de los costos del agua es un desafío para mí 6 c. Water restrictions affect my health and well-being / Las restricciones de agua afectan mi salud y bienestar 3 548 PSC 09-12-2024 548 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-22 d. I work in agriculture or a related and drought has led to less work / Trabajo en el sector agrícola y la sequía ha provocado menos trabajo 5 3. Wildfire + Smoke / Incendioforestal+ Humo a. Injury to myself, family, friends / Lesión a mí mismo, familia, amigos 6 b. Loss of home, car, belongings / Pérdidade casa, coche, pertenencias 5 c. Don’t have insurance to cover my belongings / No tengo seguro contra incendios para proteger mi propiedad y pertenencias 6 d. I am sensitive to smoke and pollution / Soy sensible al humo y la contaminación del aire 4 e. I have a family member or friends that are sensitive to smoke and pollution / Tengo un familiaro amigos que son sensibles al humo y la contaminación del aire 4 f. Fear of not being able to escape wildfire / Miedo a no poder escapar de un incendio forestal 5 g. Don’t have information where to go during event of a wildfire evacuation / No sabe adónde ir durante un evento de evacuación por incendio forestall 5 4. Flooding / Inundación a. Injury to myself, family, friends / Lesión a mí mismo, familia, amigos 10 b. Loss of home, car, belongings / Pérdidade casa, coche, pertenencias 6 c. Don’t have insurance to cover my belongings / No tengo seguro contra inundaciones para proteger mi propiedad y pertenencias 6 d. Fear of not being able to escape a flood / / Miedo a no poder escapar de una inundación 4 e. Don’t have information where to go during event of a flooding evacuation / No sabe adónde ir durante un evento de evacuación por inundación 6 5. Earthquake+ Landslide / Terremoto+ Deslizamientode tierra a. Injury to myself, family, friends / Lesión a mí mismo, familia, amigos 10 b. Loss of home, car, belongings / Pérdidade casa, coche, pertenencias 8 c. Don’t have insurance to cover my belongings / No tengo seguro contra terremotos para proteger mi propiedad y pertenencias 5 d. Fear of not being able to escape landslide / No sé si los peligros de deslizamientos de tierra son una preocupación para mi comunidad 5 e. Don’t have information where to go during event of an earthquake evacuation / No sabe qué hacer o adónde ir después de un terremoto 9 549 PSC 09-12-2024 549 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-23 2. Which of the following applies to your household? Check all that apply. a. My household can easily cover the cost of housing. / Mi hogar puede cubrir fácilmente el costo de la vivienda. 1 b. My household can easily cover other regular expenses like transportation, food, and healthcare. / Mi hogar puede cubrir fácilmente otros gastos regulares como transporte, comida y atención médica. 1 c. My household has spent more than $100 in the past year on repairing damages caused by the environment or reducing potential impacts. / Mi hogar ha gastado más de $100 el año pasado en reparar daños causados por peligros o reducir problemas futuros. 4 d. We have delayed repairs we want to do to our home (like roof, windows, mold) because of cost. / Hemos retrasado las reparaciones que queremos hacer en nuestra casa (como el techo, las ventanas, el moho) debido al costo. 5 e. We do not have or need flood insurance. / No tenemos seguro contra inundaciones. 5 f. We do not have earthquake insurance. / No tenemossegurocontra terremotos. 9 g. If my household faced a $400 emergency expense, we would not be able to immediately pay for it in cash. / Si mi hogar enfrentara un gasto de emergencia de $400, no podríamos pagarlo inmediatamente en efectivo. 10 h. In order to pay a $400 emergency expense, my household would have to pay with a credit card or borrow the money. / Para pagar un gasto de emergencia de $400, mi hogar tendría que pagar con una tarjeta de crédito o pedir prestado el dinero. 9 i. Other / Otro 550 PSC 09-12-2024 550 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-24 3. What information or materials would be helpful to make you feel safer in future hazardous events? What County resources or programs (e.g., fire safety) would be helpful to prepare you for future hazardous events? What information or materials would be helpful to make you feel safer in future hazardous events? a. Emergency alerts / Alertasde emergencia 7 b. Know evacuation routes / Conoce las rutas de evacuación 7 c. Items to keep in an emergency preparedness kit / Artículos para tener en un kit de preparación para emergencias 5 d. What to do with pets / Que hacer con las mascotas 4 e. Where are shelters or temporary cooling centers / Dondese ubican albergueso centros de enfriamiento temporal 5 What County resources or programs (e.g., fire safety) would be helpful to prepare you for future hazardous events? a. Phone app that provides alerts / Aplicación de teléfono que proporciona alertas 3 b. Information about financial resources or services to support preparedness / Información sobre recursos financieros o servicios para apoyar la preparación 2 c. Written information provided in my language spoken / Información escrita proporcionada en mi idioma hablado 2 d. The ability to call someone at the County for support in my language / La capacidad de llamar 2 551 PSC 09-12-2024 551 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-25 aalguien en el condado para obtener apoyo en mi idioma 5. Which of the following would you prioritize for neighborhood improvements? a. Improved transit infrastructure (bus stops, signs, benches) / Infraestructurade tránsitomejorada(paradasde autobús, letreros, bancos) 8 b. Safer biking routes / Rutasciclistasmásseguras 2 c. Pedestrian safety (sidewalks, crosswalks, speed bumps) / Rutas peatonales más seguras (aceras, cruces peatonales, badenes) 4 d. Improved water supply (safe drinking, firefighting) / Mejor suministro de agua (bebida segura, extinción de incendios) 4 e. Flood barriers / Barreras contra inundaciones 2 f. Security cameras for safety and dumping / Cámaras de seguridad para seguridad y vertido 3 g. More or improved parks /Más parqueso mejorados 2 h. Improved roads (potholes) / Carreterasmejoradas(baches) 4 i. Air quality monitoring / Monitoreo de la calidad del aire 2 j. Cool and clean air shelters (community center) / Centrosde enfriamiento/refugiosde airelimpio(centrocomunitario) 0 552 PSC 09-12-2024 552 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-26 Summary Safety Element/MJHMP Update Listening Session # 3: CRC March 15, 2023 5:30 – 7:00 PM Facilitators: Sam Gutierrez, Principal Planner, County of Santa Clara Location: Campbell Community Center, Campbell, CA The Listening Session began with a poll to help the County better understand community demographics and experiences. As illustrated in Figure 1. What City Do you Live In/Near? A majority of residents live in or near Sunnyvale. Figure 1. What City Do you Live In/Near? Santa Clara 9% San Jose 27% Sunnyvale 46% Sunnyvale Palo Alto Palo Alto 9% Lexington Hills San Jose Santa Clara As illustrated in Figure 2. Hazardous Events with the Greatest Impact, participants have experienced a broad range of hazardous events with Extreme Heat the primary event, followed by Drought. Wildfire + smoke, and flooding were experienced by at least 11 percent of participants. 97 percent of all participants have experienced a hazardous event that has impacted their life or home in the past 5 years. Lexington Hills 9% 553 PSC 09-12-2024 553 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-27 Figure 2. Hazardous Events with the Greatest Impact None of the Earthquake + Landslide 7% Other 11% Above 3% Extreme Heat 29% Wildfire + Smoke 18% Flooding 11% Drought 21% Extreme Heat Drought Flooding Wildfire + Smoke Earthquake + Landslide Other None of the Above Approximately 1/3 of participants do not have a home emergency preparedness kit or supplies to support their household in the event of an emergency as shown in Figure 3. Figure 3. Emergency Preparedness Supplies Yes No Partial Finally, only 46 percent of participants were aware of County Services or Programs to support them prepare or respond to a hazardous event as illustrated in in Figure 4. County Services Awareness. Yes 18% Partial 46% No 36% 554 PSC 09-12-2024 554 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-28 Figure 4. County Services Awareness. Yes No Unsure County staff facilitated a interactive session where participants could respond to questions posted on whiteboards. The following are their responses. 1. What are your primary hazards of concern and why? Wildfire, severe rainstorms and evacuation planning, eroded roads 1. Extreme Heat / Calorextremo a. I do not have air conditioning in my home / No tengo aire acondicionado en mi casa 1 b. I have air conditioning in my home, but cannot afford to run it during all heat events / Tengo aire acondicionado en mi casa, pero no puedo costearlo durante eventos de calor extremo 1 c. I work outdoors / Trabajoal airelibre d. I have a family member or friends that work outdoors / Tengo un familiaro amigos que trabajan al aire libre 1 e. No close access to a cooling facility such as a park, library, or community center / Las instalacionesdel centrode enfriamiento, comoparques, bibliotecaso centroscomunitarios, no se encuentrancercade mí f. There are cooling facilities such as a park, library, or community center in my community, but I don’t have physical access or do not feel safe going. / Instalaciones de centros de enfriamiento, como un parque, bibliotecas o centros comunitarios en mi comunidad, pero no puedo viajar allí debido al acceso físico o problemas de seguridad Yes 46% No 45% Unsure 9% 555 PSC 09-12-2024 555 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-29 2. Drought / Sequía a. Plants are dying / Las plantas se están poniendo marrones y/o muriendo 3 b. Financial hardship of increased water cost / El aumento de los costos del agua es un desafío para mí 3 c. Water restrictions affect my health and well-being / Las restricciones de agua afectan mi salud y bienestar 1 d. I work in agriculture or a related and drought has led to less work / Trabajo en el sector agrícola y la sequía ha provocado menos trabajo 3.Wildfire + Smoke / Incendioforestal+ Humo a. Injury to myself, family, friends / Lesión a mí mismo, familia, amigos 1 b. Loss of home, car, belongings / Pérdidade casa, coche, pertenencias 1 c. Don’t have insurance to cover my belongings / No tengo seguro contra incendios para proteger mi propiedad y pertenencias 1 d. I am sensitive to smoke and pollution / Soy sensible al humo y la contaminación del aire 5 e. I have a family member or friends that are sensitive to smoke and pollution / Tengo un familiaro amigos que son sensibles al humo y la contaminación del aire 5 f. Fear of not being able to escape wildfire / Miedo a no poder escapar de un incendio forestal 2 g. Don’t have information where to go during event of a wildfire evacuation / No sabe adónde ir durante un evento de evacuación por incendio forestall 5 4. Flooding / Inundación a. Injury to myself, family, friends / Lesión a mí mismo, familia, amigos b. Loss of home, car, belongings / Pérdidade casa, coche, pertenencias c. Don’t have insurance to cover my belongings / No tengo seguro contra inundaciones para proteger mi propiedad y pertenencias 4 d. Fear of not being able to escape a flood / / Miedo a no poder escapar de una inundación 4 e. Don’t have information where to go during event of a flooding evacuation / No sabe adónde ir durante un evento de evacuación por inundación 2 5. Earthquake+ Landslide / Terremoto+ Deslizamientode tierra a. Injury to myself, family, friends / Lesión a mí mismo, familia, amigos 4 b. Loss of home, car, belongings / Pérdidade casa, coche, pertenencias 3 c. Don’t have insurance to cover my belongings / No tengo seguro contra terremotos para proteger mi propiedad y pertenencias 3 d. Fear of not being able to escape landslide / No sé si los peligros de deslizamientos de tierra son una preocupación para mi comunidad 2 e. Don’t have information where to go during event of an earthquake evacuation / No sabe qué hacer o adónde ir después de un terremoto 3 556 PSC 09-12-2024 556 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-30 2. Which of the following applies to your household? Check all that apply. a. My household can easily cover the cost of housing. / Mi hogar puede cubrir fácilmente el costo de la vivienda. 2 b. My household can easily cover other regular expenses like transportation, food, and healthcare. / Mi hogar puede cubrir fácilmente otros gastos regulares como transporte, comida y atención médica. 2 c. My household has spent more than $100 in the past year on repairing damages caused by the environment or reducing potential impacts. / Mi hogar ha gastado más de $100 el año pasado en reparar daños causados por peligros o reducir problemas futuros. 3 d. We have delayed repairs we want to do to our home (like roof, windows, mold) because of cost. / Hemos retrasado las reparaciones que queremos hacer en nuestra casa (como el techo, las ventanas, el moho) debido al costo. 3 e. We do not have or need flood insurance. / No tenemos seguro contra inundaciones. 4 f. We do not have earthquake insurance. / No tenemossegurocontra terremotos. 2 g. If my household faced a $400 emergency expense, we would not be able to immediately pay for it in cash. / Si mi hogar enfrentara un gasto de emergencia de $400, no podríamos pagarlo inmediatamente en efectivo. 1 h. In order to pay a $400 emergency expense, my household would have to pay with a credit card or borrow the money. / Para pagar un gasto de emergencia de $400, mi hogar tendría que pagar con una tarjeta de crédito o pedir prestado el dinero. 1 i. Other / Otro 3. What information or materials would be helpful to make you feel safer in future hazardous events? What County resources or programs (e.g., fire safety) would be helpful to prepare you for future hazardous events? a. Emergency alerts / Alertasde emergencia 5 b. Know evacuation routes / Conoce las rutas de evacuación 5 c. Items to keep in an emergency preparedness kit / Artículos para tener en un kit de preparación para emergencias 3 d. What to do with pets / Que hacer con las mascotas 2 e. Where are shelters or temporary cooling centers / Dondese ubican albergueso centros de enfriamiento temporal 3 557 PSC 09-12-2024 557 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-31 What County resources or programs (e.g., fire safety) would be helpful to prepare you for future hazardous events? a. Phone app that provides alerts / Aplicación de teléfono que proporciona alertas 4 b. Information about financial resources or services to support preparedness / Información sobre recursos financieros o servicios para apoyar la preparación 3 c. Written information provided in my language spoken / Información escrita proporcionada en mi idioma hablado 1 d. The ability to call someone at the County for support in my language / La capacidad de llamar aalguien en el condado para obtener apoyo en mi idioma 5. Which of the following would you prioritize for neighborhood improvements? a. Improved transit infrastructure (bus stops, signs, benches) / Infraestructurade tránsitomejorada(paradasde autobús, letreros, bancos) 1 b. Safer biking routes / Rutasciclistasmásseguras c. Pedestrian safety (sidewalks, crosswalks, speed bumps) / Rutas peatonales más seguras (aceras, cruces peatonales, badenes) 3 d. Improved water supply (safe drinking, firefighting) / Mejor suministro de agua (bebida segura, extinción de incendios) 1 e. Flood barriers / Barreras contra inundaciones 2 f. Security cameras for safety and dumping / Cámaras de seguridad para seguridad y vertido 1 g. More or improved parks /Más parqueso mejorados 1 h. Improved roads (potholes) / Carreterasmejoradas(baches) 4 i. Air quality monitoring / Monitoreo de la calidad del aire 3 j. Cool and clean air shelters (community center) / Centrosde enfriamiento/refugiosde airelimpio(centrocomunitario) General comments: • Wind is a real concern. Falling trees and powerlines are scary to deal with. • Residents are not universally affected by flooding. • Needs to be planning for evacuation on non-County maintained roads. How many residents are in Lexington Hills? No one is paying attention or communicating what is going on in these areas. • PG&E doesn’t care about their mess. • Power is slow to come back on in current event. (Note: These was a heat wave at time of listening session.) • “Priorities” shift seasonally, but they are all important. • Living with wildfires is a new reality for us. o People are working outside when the air is unbreathable. o Indoors [workers] work without money for air filtration systems. o Not just need for cooling centers, but filtration. 558 PSC 09-12-2024 558 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix A: Public Engagement Results A-32 • Drought – A community well system is expensive. o This is another hazard that is seasonal. o Need better system for capturing stormwater runoff. Need more education and funding. Need help installing residential and community systems. • San Jose Water increasing rates, doing a lot of work right now • Flooding o Takes a long time to recover from losses, get back to pre-disaster state o Roads washing out o Flooding is an additional insurance, many areas didn’t know it was something they needed. • Extreme heat events happening more frequently and closer together than they use to. (“Once in 25 year rainfall” is happening five times per month) • Weekly newsletters/newspapers to spread information. • Sirens in Gilroy, used them in ’98, haven’t used recently to signify floods. o Five minutes can make a big difference as a house floods. • Monterey County uses Alert/Sheriff system all the time – has evacuation warning and fire maps. o Make you respond that they’ve reached you. • How much time is enough time to evacuate and prepare? Depends on the event. Storms vs fire vs drought have really different timescale. • Averages don’t always capture the real situation on the ground – also look at min and max. • Why are these outreach meetings not also being sent out as press release to local news media for general circulation. Weekly newspapers service each of the different areas of the County unincorporated areas: Make a requirement for Public Notice? • County failed to designate evacuation route planning since 2009 CWPP recommendations. Subdivisions of 30+ homes share a single egress route. 559 PSC 09-12-2024 559 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Appendix B: Adoption Resolution B-1 Appendix B: Adoption Resolution Once the 2023 Santa Clara Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) has received FEMA “Approvable Pending Adoption” (APA) status, the governing body of every participating jurisdiction will formally adopt this MJHMP. After FEMA has determined that all plan requirements have been met, including receipt of the formal adoption documentation, FEMA will provide a letter indicating the plan is approved. A copy of the adoption resolutions and approval letter are included in this appendix. 560 PSC 09-12-2024 560 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2023 Update City of Cupertino Annex February 21, 2024 561 PSC 09-12-2024 561 of 647 This page intentionally left blank. 562 PSC 09-12-2024 562 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 3 2. City of Cupertino 2.1. Hazard Mitigation Plan Points of Contact The point of contact during the Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) planning process for the City of Cupertino was the Emergency Management Analyst. This annex within the MJHMP was developed using information provided by the City of Cupertino’s Local Planning Team. Table 1: City of Cupertino Local Planning Team Members for the 2023 Santa Clara County MJHMP Name Position Organization Role on Team and in Planning Process Meredith Albert Emergency Management Analyst City of Cupertino General oversight, hazard identification, and plan development Thomas Chin Emergency Manager City of Cupertino Hazard identification and plan development Andre Duurvoort Sustainability Manager City of Cupertino Hazard identification and plan development Susan Michael Capital Improvement Program Manager City of Cupertino Hazard identification and plan development Jimmy Tan Assistant Director of Public Works City of Cupertino Hazard identification and plan development Chad Mosley Acting Director of Public Works City of Cupertino Hazard identification and plan development Jennifer Chu Senior Civil Engineer, City Public Works City of Cupertino Hazard identification and plan development Esther Kwon Public Information Officer City of Cupertino Hazard identification and plan development The City’s Local Planning Team Members participated in the MJHMP by attending meetings on the Plan Kick-Off, Risk Assessment, Mitigation Strategy, Wrap-up, and two one-on-one meetings with the planning consultant. In addition, the city filled out the requested forms on each section which were used to develop this annex. The city also shared information regarding public opportunities to participate in the draft plan update utilizing the digital survey and seven in-person and virtual public outreach meetings. Further, the City team was provided the opportunity to review the draft plan prior to submittal to Cal OES and FEMA. 563 PSC 09-12-2024 563 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 4 Table 2: External Stakeholders Invited to Be Involved in Planning Process Agency or Organization Stakeholder Type Description American Red Cross Representatives of nonprofit organizations, including community-based organizations, that work directly with and/or provide support to underserved communities and socially vulnerable populations, among others. A nonprofit humanitarian organization that provides emergency assistance, disaster relief, and disaster preparedness education in the United States. American Red Cross – Silicon Valley Chapter Representatives of nonprofit organizations, including community-based organizations, that work directly with and/or provide support to underserved communities and socially vulnerable populations, among others. A nonprofit humanitarian organization that provides emergency assistance, disaster relief, and disaster preparedness education in the United States. Amateur Radio Emergency Service (ARES) Representatives of businesses, academia, and other private organizations. A corps of trained amateur radio operator volunteers organized to assist in public service and emergency communications. Cal OES Local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities. Office responsible for overseeing and coordinating emergency preparedness, response, recovery, and homeland security activities within the state. California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities. The fire department of the California Natural Resources Agency. California Department of Transportation Agencies that have the authority to regulate development. An executive department of the U.S. state of California. Cattlemen’s Association Representatives of businesses, academia, and other private organizations. A nonprofit trade association that represents California's ranchers and beef producers in political affairs. City of East Palo Alto Neighboring communities. A city in San Mateo County, California, United States. City of Menlo Park Neighboring communities. Menlo Park is a city at the eastern edge of San Mateo County. Cooper-Garrod Estate Vineyards Representatives of businesses, academia, and other private organizations. Garrod Farms is a family-owned and operated estate winery and stables. Cupertino Sanitation District Agencies that have the authority to regulate development. Providing wastewater collection and conveyance to the City of Cupertino and areas of Saratoga. 564 PSC 09-12-2024 564 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 5 Agency or Organization Stakeholder Type Description Department of Homeland Security Agencies that have the authority to regulate development. The U.S. federal executive department responsible for public security, roughly comparable to the interior or home ministries of other countries. Department of Toxic Substances Agencies that have the authority to regulate development. An agency of the government of the state of California that protects public health and the environment from hazardous waste. Emergency Medical Services Agencies that have the authority to regulate development. Provides statewide coordination and leadership for the planning, development, and implementation of local EMS systems. Emergency Services Volunteer Representative Local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities. Organization that ensures public safety, security, and health by addressing and resolving different emergencies. Federal Aviation Administration Agencies that have the authority to regulate development. Offers civil aviation safety enforcement services. Google Representatives of businesses, academia, and other private organizations. American multinational technology company focusing on artificial intelligence, online advertising, search engine technology, cloud computing, computer software, quantum computing, e-commerce, and consumer electronics. Hidden Villa Farm Representatives of nonprofit organizations, including community-based organizations, that work directly with and/or provide support to underserved communities and socially vulnerable populations, among others. Nonprofit educational organization teaching programs on environmental and multicultural awareness. Intel Corporation Representatives of businesses, academia, and other private organizations. An American multinational corporation and technology company headquartered in Santa Clara, California Kaiser Permanente—Santa Clara Representatives of businesses, academia, and other private organizations. An American integrated managed care consortium. Life Moves Representatives of businesses, academia, and other private organizations. Provides interim housing and supportive services for homeless families and individuals to rapidly return to stable housing. 565 PSC 09-12-2024 565 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 6 Agency or Organization Stakeholder Type Description Moffett Field Ames Research Center, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Representatives of businesses, academia, and other private organizations. Major NASA research center at Moffett Federal Airfield in California's Silicon Valley. National Weather Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Agencies that have the authority to regulate development. Scientific and regulatory agency within the U.S. Department of Commerce. Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) Representatives of businesses, academia, and other private organizations, and neighboring communities. One of the largest combination natural gas and electric utilities in the United States. Regional Water Quality Control Board Agencies that have the authority to regulate development. Provides government regulatory services related to water pollution and control. Rotating Safe Car Park Local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, and neighboring communities. Allows for temporary overnight parking for homeless individuals or families living out of their cars as a safe alternative to sleeping on the streets or in a homeless shelter. Santa Clara County CERT Representatives of nonprofit organizations, including community-based organizations, that work directly with and/or provide support to underserved communities and socially vulnerable populations. Trains residents to prepare for and respond to life-threatening events in their community. Santa Clara County FireSafe Council Representatives of nonprofit organizations, including community-based organizations, that work directly with and/or provide support to underserved communities and socially vulnerable populations. A nonprofit, grassroots organization that provides education and project assistance for homeowners. Santa Clara County Local Oversight Program Local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities. Program to oversee assessment and mitigation of contaminated sites to protect groundwater resources, human health, safety, and the environment. Santa Clara County Parks Agencies that have the authority to regulate development, and neighboring communities. Provide, protect, and preserve regional parklands for the enjoyment and education. Santa Clara County Planning & Development Agencies that have the authority to regulate development, and neighboring communities. Plays a key role in supporting economic development and ensuring opportunities for the public to participate in land development. 566 PSC 09-12-2024 566 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 7 Agency or Organization Stakeholder Type Description Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office Agencies that have the authority to regulate development, and neighboring communities. A local law enforcement agency that serves Santa Clara County, California. Santa Clara University Representatives of businesses, academia, and other private organizations. A private Jesuit university in Santa Clara, California. Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority Neighboring communities. An independent special district in Santa Clara County. Santa Clara Valley Open Space Authority Neighboring communities. An independent special district in Santa Clara County. St. Louise Hospital (Santa Clara County Hospital System) Representatives of nonprofit organizations, including community-based organizations, that work directly with and/or provide support to underserved communities and socially vulnerable populations. Community hospital. Stanford Healthcare Representatives of businesses, academia, and other private organizations, and neighboring communities. Multispecialty clinic that provides convenient access to advanced, specialty care in the South Bay. Vista Center for the Blind and Visually Impaired Representatives of businesses, academia, and other private organizations. Empowers individuals who are blind or visually impaired to embrace life to the fullest through evaluation, counseling, education, and training. Westwind Barn Representatives of businesses, academia, and other private organizations. State-of-the-art horse boarding and training facility. County of Santa Clara Neighboring jurisdiction, local agency involved in hazard mitigation. Responsible for engaging the whole community in assessing needs and developing strategies to achieve stronger mitigation capabilities within the Santa Clara County Operational Area. City of Campbell Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County. City of Gilroy Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County. City of Los Altos Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County. Town of Los Altos Hills Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County. Town of Los Gatos Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County. City of Milpitas Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County. City of Morgan Hill Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County. City of Mountain View Neighboring communities. A city in Santa Clara County. City of Palo Alto Neighboring communities. Located in Silicon Valley. City of San José Neighboring communities. Located in Silicon Valley. 567 PSC 09-12-2024 567 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 8 Agency or Organization Stakeholder Type Description City of Santa Clara Neighboring communities. A city near San Jose, in California’s Silicon Valley. City of Saratoga Neighboring communities. Located in Silicon Valley. City of Sunnyvale Neighboring communities. Located in the Santa Clara Valley. Santa Clara County Fire Department Local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, and neighboring communities. A California Fire Protection District serving Santa Clara County. Santa Clara Valley Water District Representatives of businesses, academia, and other private organizations, and neighboring communities. Provides stream stewardship, wholesale water supply, and flood protection for Santa Clara County, California. The City supported a “whole community” approach to this plan update. Neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved in mitigation activities, agencies that have the authority to regulate development as well as businesses, academia, and other private and nonprofit interests were invited to be involved in the planning process by participating in planning meetings, public meetings, or reviewing the draft plan. In addition to the wide variety of stakeholders identified by the County, other stakeholders the City of Cupertino recommended including included the Santa Clara Valley Water District, PG & E, Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office, Santa Clara County Fire Department, San Jose Water, and CalWater. Additional stakeholders that were able to participate are included in Volume 1 of this plan. The City did not identify additional changes in priorities to be highlighted in their annex. 2.1.1. Public Outreach and Engagement In addition to inviting a wide range of stakeholders, the City supported public outreach and engagement through distributing a digital survey utilizing social media and publicizing the availability of the survey at an in-person Earth Day event. This survey reached members of underserved populations, including primarily non-English speaking households. 568 PSC 09-12-2024 568 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 9 Figure 1: City of Cupertino Digital Survey Twitter Post Figure 2: City of Cupertino Multilingual Website Post 569 PSC 09-12-2024 569 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 10 Figure 3: City of Cupertino Outreach at Earth Day Event In addition, the MJHMP was discussed at two virtual and five in-person public meetings across Santa Clara County. These in-person meetings were targeted towards areas with socially vulnerably populations. These meetings were also designed to be accessible for AFN (access and functional needs) populations. The public was also provided the opportunity to comment on the draft plan. Comments from the public survey were reviewed, evaluated for alignment with planning priorities, and incorporated as appropriate. Overall, the public expressed similar concerns as the participating jurisdictions including concerns regarding hazards like wildfire (including wildfire smoke), extreme heat, and flooding. In particular, evacuation routes and warning systems including public outreach to help inform people about their options. This feedback is reflected in the mitigation actions the City of Cupertino selected. In addition to directly providing the public the opportunity to comment on the plan, the Santa Clara County Access and Functional Needs and Cultural Competency Working Group, which represents tens of community and faith-based organizations within the SCC operational area, was consulted on the plan. They provided feedback based on the populations they serve, representing approximately 100 non-profits and VOAD members participating in the AFN and Cultural Competency Working Group. SCC also has representation from community centers and two consulate generals. In addition, some advocates do not have an affiliation but are Santa Clara County residents and provided input on LGBTQ+ and Disability topics. Some organizations include but are not limited to San Andreas Regional Center, Immigrant Info Services, Vista Center for the Blind, American Red Cross, Parents Helping Parents, and Lighthouse. The direct interaction and represented voices generally shared similar concerns for the extreme heat and wildfire hazards, community preparedness, and education and outreach activities. Therefore, prioritization 570 PSC 09-12-2024 570 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 11 of the wildfire hazard and the corresponding mitigation actions, along with high attention to public outreach and education efforts, informed the plan's many related mitigation actions. The participation of the City of Cupertino and its stakeholders helped informed the development of the MJHMP and this annex in accordance with current priorities. The new plan continues to expand upon the work of the prior plan including emphasizing partnerships both within jurisdictions and special districts as well as with external stakeholders. Further, there is an increased emphasis on climate change, reflecting the increased understanding of the risk this hazard poses to the OA. The City did not identify additional changes in priorities to be highlighted in their annex. 2.2. Jurisdiction Profile The following is a summary of key information about the jurisdiction and its history:  Date of Incorporation: 1995  Current Population: 59,610 as of January 1, 2022  Population Growth: According to the California Department of Finance there was a 0.5 percent decrease in the population from 2021 (59,884) to 2022 (59,610).  Location and Description: Cupertino, California is located in the heart of Silicon Valley against the foothills of the Santa Cruz Mountains. With a population of almost 60,000 residents, Cupertino is 42 miles south of San Francisco and on the western edge of Santa Clara County. The City enjoys convenient access from Highways 280 and 85 and is situated along Stevens Creek Boulevard. The City shares borders with San José to the east and south, Sunnyvale to the north, Santa Clara to the northeast, and Los Altos to the northwest.  Brief History: In 1776, Spanish explorer Captain Juan Bautista de Anza led a group up the coast of California. During the expedition, the group encamped in what is now Cupertino. Anza’s cartographer christened the creek next to the encampment the Arroyo San Joseph Cupertino (known today as Stevens Creek) in honor of his patron, San Guiseppe (San Joseph) of Copertino, Italy. The village of Cupertino sprang up at the crossroads of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road (now DeAnza Boulevard) and Stevens Creek Boulevard. The initial primary economic activity was fruit agriculture, including prune, plum, apricot, and cherry orchards, as well as wineries. Cupertino officially became the 13th city in Santa Clara County on October 10, 1955.  Climate: Cupertino has mild weather, wet winters, and mild, dry summers. Averages in January range from 38.7 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) to 58.2 °F. Averages in July range from 54.1 °F to 82.0 °F. The average annual rainfall is 14.9 inches.  Governing Body Format: The City of Cupertino is governed by a five-member council. The City consists of five departments which are overseen by the City Manager: Administrative Services, Community Development, Information Services, Public Works, and Recreation and Community Services. The City has thirteen commissions and committees, that report to the City Council. The City Council appoints the City Manager. The City Council is responsible for adopting this plan. The City Manager is responsible for overseeing its implementation. 2.3. Development Trends Cupertino is considered one of the most prestigious cities in which to live and work within Silicon Valley and the San Francisco Bay Area. The City is world-renowned as the home of high-tech giants, such as Apple Computer Inc., Hewlett Packard, and Symantec, and as a community with stellar public schools. Quality education and proximity to high-tech jobs make Cupertino a desired location for a highly educated and culturally diverse population. The City’s business sector is thriving, as evidenced by its low vacancy rates and flagship tenants. High- profile tenants include Whole Foods, Strike Bowling, and Ducati motorcycles. Cupertino is known for its 571 PSC 09-12-2024 571 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 12 computing companies, but over 100 other businesses produce software, telecommunications, and health care products. The City promotes economic and developmental growth through different programs like the Cupertino Business Outreach Program. Rich in opportunity, culture and sunshine, Cupertino is a progressive and diverse hometown in Silicon Valley for residents, businesses, and visitors. The City of Cupertino has increased its population since the previous plan was developed, thereby increasing its vulnerability to flooding. Cupertino has and will continue to monitor the vulnerability of its population through the adoption and enforcement of floodplain management requirements, including regulating new construction in Special Floodplain Hazard Areas, Floodplain identification and mapping, and local requests for map updating and monitoring of flood activities. Table 3: Recent and Expected Future Development Trends Criterion Response Has your jurisdiction annexed any land since the development of the previous hazard mitigation plan?  If yes, give the estimated area annexed and estimated number of parcels or structures. Yes, 8 acres at Lawrence Mitty Park with no structures. Is your jurisdiction expected to annex any areas during the performance period of this plan?  If yes, please describe land areas and dominant uses.  If yes, who currently has permitting authority over these areas? No Are any areas targeted for development or major redevelopment in the next five years?  If yes, please briefly describe, including whether any of the areas are in known hazard risk areas. Yes, the area targeted for development is in a flood hazard zone (minimal chances). How many building permits were issued in your jurisdiction since the development of the previous hazard mitigation plan? 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Total Number of Permits 3,219 3,230 3,274 3,089 3,716 3,416 Please provide the number of permits for each hazard area or provide a qualitative description of where development has occurred. The City has not historically had the ability to track development by hazard area. Development has occurred throughout the City during the performance period for this plan. For hazards with a clearly defined extent and location, the City cannot estimate development impacts. For hazards with impacts citywide, it is safe to assume that this new development could be subject to impacts from those hazards. However, it is important to note that all new development was subject to the regulatory capabilities identified in this annex. 572 PSC 09-12-2024 572 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 13 Criterion Response Please describe the level of buildout in the jurisdiction, based on your jurisdiction’s buildable lands inventory. If no such inventory exists, provide a qualitative description. The City does not currently maintain a buildable lands inventory, but the City Interactive Zoning Map includes layers showing vacant land and development potential. 2.4. Capability Assessment 2.4.1. Resources for the 2023 Planning Initiative The following technical reports, plans, and regulatory mechanisms were reviewed to provide information for inclusion into the 2023 MJHMP for both Volume 1 and Volume 2 (City of Cupertino Annex). All the below items were additionally reviewed as part of the full capability assessment for the City of Cupertino.  Cupertino General Plan - The General Plan, including the Land Use, Transportation and Safety Elements, were reviewed for information regarding goals and policies consistent with hazard mitigation for carry over as goals and objectives.  Capital Improvements Plan - The Capital Improvements Plan was reviewed to identify cross- planning initiatives.  Cupertino Economic Development Plan – The Economic Development Strategic Plan was analyzed for potential integrative planning efforts.  Cupertino Emergency Operations Plan – The EOP Base Plan was reviewed to identify existing and potential mitigation planning strategies.  Green Plans – The Green Infrastructure, Green Stormwater Infrastructure, Green Development and Construction, Green City Plans and even the Parks and Recreation Master Plan were reviewed to identify possible integrative mitigation planning initiatives.  Cupertino Municipal Code - The Municipal Code was reviewed for the full capability assessment and to identify opportunities for action plan integration.  Ordinances - The Flood Damage Prevention, Zoning, Subdivision, Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection, and Open Space ordinances were analyzed for alignment with natural hazard planning efforts. 2.4.2. Full Capability Assessment An assessment of legal and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table 22 and Table 23. An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table 24. An assessment of staffing capabilities is presented in Table 25. An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table 26. Information on National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) compliance is presented in Table 27. An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table 28. Classifications under various community mitigation programs are presented in Table 29. Development and permitting capabilities are presented in Table 30, and the community’s adaptive capacity for the impacts of climate change is presented in Table 31. 573 PSC 09-12-2024 573 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 14 Table 4: Legal and Regulatory Capability: Codes, Ordinances, and Requirements Local Authority Other Jurisdiction Authority State Mandated Integration Opportunity? Building Code Yes Yes Yes No Comment: 2022 California Building Code, Volumes 1 and 2, Chapter 16.04. Zoning Ordinance Yes No Yes No Comment: Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 19: Zoning Subdivision Ordinance Yes Yes Yes No Comment: Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 1: Subdivisions Stormwater Management Ordinance Yes Yes Yes No Comment: Cupertino Municipal Code, Chapter 9.18: Stormwater Pollution Prevention and Watershed Protection Other Natural Hazard- Specific Ordinances Yes No Yes Yes Comment: Cupertino Municipal Code, Chapter 16.52 : Prevention of Flood Damage Post-Disaster Recovery No No No No Comment: None Identified Real Estate Disclosure No No Yes No Comment: California Civil Code §1102 et seq. Growth Management Yes Yes Yes No Comment: Local Agency Formation Commission; California Government Code §65300 et seq. Site Plan Review Yes No No No Comment: Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 19: Zoning Environmental Protection Yes Yes Yes No Comment: Cupertino General Plan, Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 9: Health and Sanitation; California Environmental Quality Act (Guideline: California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Sections 15000–15387). Flood Damage Prevention Yes Yes Yes Yes Comment: Cupertino Municipal Code, Chapter 16.52: Prevention of Flood Damage Emergency Management Yes Yes Yes No 574 PSC 09-12-2024 574 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 15 Local Authority Other Jurisdiction Authority State Mandated Integration Opportunity? Comment: Santa Clara County Fire; Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 2.40: Disaster Council Climate Change Yes No Yes Yes Comment: General Plan Environmental Resources and Sustainability Element & Cupertino Climate Action Plan; California SB-379. Acquisition of land for open space and public recreation uses Yes No No No Comment: City Code, Chapter 19.88 Table 5: Planning, Legal and Regulatory Capabilities Planning, Legal and Regulatory Capabilities Local Authority Other Jurisdiction Authority State Mandated Integration Opportunity? General Plan Yes No No Yes Is the plan compliant with Assembly Bill 2140? Yes Comment: General Plan: Community Vision 2015-2040, Adopted October 201 Capital Improvement Plan Yes No No Yes How often is the plan updated? Annually Comment: Part of the adopted budget. Floodplain or Watershed Plan No Yes No Yes Comment: Santa Clara Valley Water District – Flood Control Stormwater Management Plan No No No No Comment: None Identified. Urban Water Management Plan No Yes Yes No Comment: Municipal Regional Permit, State Water Resources Control Board Habitat Conservation Plan No No No No Comment: None identified; Cupertino is outside of the Santa Clara County Habitat Conservation Plan Permit Area. Green Infrastructure Plan Yes No No Yes Comment: The City of Cupertino Green Stormwater Infrastructure Plan Parks or Open Space Plan Yes No No Yes Comment: The Cupertino Parks and Recreation System Master Plan was adopted February 18, 2020. 575 PSC 09-12-2024 575 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 16 Planning, Legal and Regulatory Capabilities Local Authority Other Jurisdiction Authority State Mandated Integration Opportunity? Economic Development Plan Yes No No Yes Comment: The City of Cupertino’s Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP) is a policy document intended to guide the City’s economic development activities over the next three to five years. Transportation Plan Yes No No Yes Comment: It is part of the City’s General Plan. Shoreline Management Plan No No No No Comment: No plan identified. Community Wildfire Protection Plan Yes Yes Yes Yes Comment: The Santa Clara County Fire Department has developed a Community Wildfire Protection Plan. The plan is undergoing the 2022-2023 update.  Forest Management Plan No No No No Comment: None Identified. Climate Action Plan Yes No Yes Yes Comment: Cupertino’s Climate Action Plan 2.0 was adopted by City Council on August 16, 2022.. Local Emergency Operations Plan Yes No No Yes Comment: The Cupertino Emergency Operations Plan was adopted June 18, 2019. Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA) No No Yes No Comment: Urban Area Security Initiative THIRA – 2016; As a jurisdiction within the Santa Clara Operational Area, Cupertino is covered by UASI. Post-Disaster Recovery Plan No No No No Comment: None Identified. Continuity of Operations Plan Yes No No Yes Comment: The plan was adopted in June 2021. Public Health Plan No No No No Comment: None Identified. Table 6: Fiscal Capability Financial Capability Could the resource be used to fund future mitigation activities? Has the funding resource been used in the past for mitigation activities? If yes, for what type of mitigation activities? Community Development Block Grants Yes No Other Federal Funding Programs Yes No 576 PSC 09-12-2024 576 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 17 Financial Capability Could the resource be used to fund future mitigation activities? Has the funding resource been used in the past for mitigation activities? If yes, for what type of mitigation activities? Capital Improvements Project Funding Yes Yes, to upgrade and update storm drainage systems, build out shared community spaces, infrastructural hardening, electrification of infrastructure, and bridge and road maintenance projects (evacuation routes). Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Yes No User Fees for Water, Sewer, Gas or Electric Services No No Stormwater Utility Fee No No Incur Debt through General Obligation Bonds No No Incur Debt through Special Tax Bonds No No Incur Debt through Private Activity Bonds Yes No Withhold Public Expenditures in Hazard-Prone Areas No No State Funding Programs Yes No Development Impact Fees for Homebuyers or Developers Yes Yes, for the transportation impact fee program. Public or Private Partnership Funding Sources Yes No Other Funding Sources No No Table 7: Staffing Capabilities Staffing Capability Have Capability? Is staffing adequate to enforce regulations? Is staff trained on natural hazards and mitigation? Chief Building Official  Yes  Full Time  Community Development Department Yes Yes Parks and Recreation Director  Yes  Full Time  Parks and Recreation Department Yes Yes 577 PSC 09-12-2024 577 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 18 Staffing Capability Have Capability? Is staffing adequate to enforce regulations? Is staff trained on natural hazards and mitigation? Emergency Manager  Yes  Full Time  Office of Emergency Management Yes Yes Community Planner  Yes  Full Time  Community Development Department Yes Yes Civil Engineer  Yes  Full Time  Community Development Department Yes Yes Engineers or professionals trained in building or infrastructure construction practices  Yes  Full Time  Community Development Department Yes Yes Planners or engineers with knowledge of land development and land management practices  Yes  Full Time  Community Development Department Yes Yes Planners or engineers with an understanding of natural hazards  Yes  Full Time  Community Development Department Yes Yes Surveyors  Yes  Contracted Yes Yes GIS Coordinator or personnel skilled or trained in GIS applications  Yes  Full Time  GIS Division Yes Yes Public Works Director  Yes  Full Time  Department of Public Works Yes Yes Fire Chief  Yes  Full Time  Santa Clara County Fire Department Yes Yes 578 PSC 09-12-2024 578 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 19 Staffing Capability Have Capability? Is staffing adequate to enforce regulations? Is staff trained on natural hazards and mitigation? Environmental Director  Yes  Full Time  Department of Environment and Sustainability Yes Yes Staff with training in benefit/cost analysis  Yes  Contracted Yes Yes Scientist familiar with natural hazards in local area  Yes  Contracted Yes Yes Table 8: Administrative and Technical Capabilities Administrative or Technical Capability Have Capability? Has the capability been used to assess or mitigate risk in the past? If yes, what type of hazard event? Maintenance programs to reduce risk Yes Yes, the Public Works Department maintains trees and median islands. Mutual aid agreements No N/A Hazard data and information Yes Yes, to plan for possible evacuation routes and appropriate temporary evacuation points, and to identify areas in the community that may be particularly vulnerable to the impacts of disasters. Hazus analysis or GIS software Yes Yes, ArcGIS was used in past mitigation efforts. Grant writing Yes No Does your jurisdiction have any established warning systems or services for hazard events? Yes Yes, AlertSCC. Alerts are sent directly to your mobile device, landline, and or email. Alerts for fire, earthquake, Heavy Precipitaion, High Wind, Extreme Temperatures, crime, and instructions during a disaster. Table 9: National Flood Insurance Program Compliance Topic Response What department in your jurisdiction is responsible for floodplain management? Public Works Department Who acts as your jurisdiction’s floodplain administrator? Senior Civil Engineer in the Public Works Department 579 PSC 09-12-2024 579 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 20 Topic Response Is the floodplain administrator or NFIP Coordinator certified? Yes Is floodplain management an auxiliary function in your jurisdiction? No What is the date of adoption of your flood damage prevention ordinance? 2016 Do floodplain development regulations meet or exceed FEMA or state minimum requirements? If regulations exceed requirements, in what ways? Yes exceed requirements. Increased freeboard (1’) and cumulative substantial damage. How are the substantial improvement/substantial damage provisions implemented? The Building Official is responsible for assessing substantial improvement and substantial damage structures in accordance with the City’s policy titled “Alterations and Additions Located in Special Flood Hazard Areas,” dated June 1, 2016, and any subsequent revisions approved and implemented by the Building Official. The Floodplain Administer is responsible for ensuring the Building Official has made any and all substantial improvement/substantial damage determinations, as applicable. In addition to the standard definition of substantial damage, additionally any structure that is damaged by flooding on two separate occasions during a 10- year period for which the cost of repairs at the time of each such event, on the average, equals or exceeds 25% of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred shall be deemed substantially damaged. Permits are required in the Special Flood Hazard Area and the Floodplain Administer is responsible for reviewing all development permits which, in addition to any other SI/SD determinations, can be used to track development over time. Provide an explanation of the permitting process for development within the floodplain. See City Code 16.52.002: Development Permit 16.52.022 Development Permit. (amlegal.com) When did your jurisdiction enter the NFIP? June 30, 1976 Is your jurisdiction in good standing with the NFIP? Yes Are the jurisdiction’s Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) digital, paper, or both? Digital Explanation of NFIP administration services within your jurisdiction. Unknown Barriers to running an effective NFIP program in your jurisdiction. No known barriers When was the most recent Community Assistance Visit (CAV) or Community Assistance Contact (CAC)? 2015 580 PSC 09-12-2024 580 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 21 Topic Response Is a CAV or CAC scheduled or needed? No Does your jurisdiction have any outstanding NFIP compliance violations that need to be addressed? No Do your flood hazard maps adequately address the flood risk within your jurisdiction? Yes Does your floodplain management staff need any assistance or training to support its floodplain management program? No Does your jurisdiction participate in the Community Rating System (CRS)? Yes, Current Class: 7 How many structures are exposed to flood risk within your jurisdiction?  In 10% annual chance flood hazard area: 82   In 1% annual chance flood hazard area: 87  In 0.2% annual chance flood hazard area: 9,677  How many flood insurance policies are in force in your jurisdiction?  What is the insurance in force?  What is the premium in force?  64 policies in force   $20,042,400 insurance in force   $66,002 premium in force  Areas of flood risk with limited NFIP policy coverage. No known areas How many total loss claims have been filed in your jurisdiction?  How many claims were closed without payment or are still open?  What is the total amount of paid claims?  How many claims were for substantial damage?  20 total loss claims have been filed   10 claims closed without payment  $812,170.73 total payments for losses  How NFIP compliance will be continued during the next 5 years.  Adoption and enforcement of floodplain management requirements, including regulating new construction in Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs).  Floodplain identification and mapping, including any local requests for map updates.  Description of community assistance and monitoring activities. 581 PSC 09-12-2024 581 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 22 Table 10: Education and Outreach Education or Outreach Capability Response How does the personnel, program, or organization relate to disaster resilience and mitigation? Could the personnel, program, or organization help implement future mitigation activities? Does your jurisdiction have a Public Information Officer or Communications Office? Yes The PIO may communicate hazard and disaster related information to the community. Yes Does your jurisdiction have personnel skilled or trained in website development? Yes Websites can be developed to include hazard awareness information, and other mitigation initiatives. Yes Does your jurisdiction have hazard mitigation information available on your website? Yes There is emergency preparedness information on the City’s website. Yes Does your jurisdiction utilize social media for hazard mitigation education and outreach? Yes Websites and social media sites, as well as Ready 95014 provide hazard information and education. Yes Does your jurisdiction have any citizen boards or commissions that address issues related to hazard mitigation? Yes The Mitigation Planning Committee identifies hazards, conducts a risk and vulnerability assessment, and creates and monitors mitigation actions. Yes Does your jurisdiction have any ongoing public education or information programs that could be used to communicate hazard-related information? Yes The interactive GIS maps and open data portal helps communicate hazard information. Yes Does your jurisdiction have local citizen groups or nonprofit organizations focused on environmental protection, emergency preparedness, and/or underserved populations? Yes The CERT and Public Safety Commission address disaster resilience and mitigation. Yes Does your jurisdiction have natural disaster or safety related school programs? Yes The Wildfire Awareness Initiative (WAI) Monta Vista School Student Organization builds resilience by creating hazard awareness. Yes 582 PSC 09-12-2024 582 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 23 Education or Outreach Capability Response How does the personnel, program, or organization relate to disaster resilience and mitigation? Could the personnel, program, or organization help implement future mitigation activities? Does your jurisdiction have public/private partnership initiatives addressing disaster-related issues Yes CERT, Red Cross, West Valley Community Center (unhoused population services), and the Chamber of Commerce all address citywide disaster issues. Potential expansion of partnerships include the Boy and Girl Scout troops and the Firewise program. Yes Table 11: Community Classifications Participating? Classification Date Classified Community Rating System Yes 7 October 1, 2005 Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule Yes 2 October 18, 2014 Insurance Services Office (ISO) Fire Rating Yes 2/2Y May 1, 2021 National Weather Service Storm Ready Program® No N/A N/A Firewise USA® Program No N/A N/A Table 12: Development and Permitting Capabilities Development or Permitting Capability Response Does your jurisdiction issue development permits?  If no, who does? If yes, which department? Yes, the City of Cupertino Community Development Department. Does your jurisdiction have the ability to track permits by hazard area? No Does your jurisdiction have a buildable lands inventory? No 583 PSC 09-12-2024 583 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 24 Table 13: Adaptive Capacity for Climate Change Adaptive Capacity Assessment Question Jurisdiction Rating Technical Capacity Jurisdiction-level understanding of potential climate change impacts Medium Comment: The Climate Action Plan was adopted in 2015 and updated in 2022. The City has identified six hazards of concern: adverse air quality impacts, extreme heat, extreme precipitation/storm flooding, wildfire, drought, and sea level rise. Several impacts of these hazards are felt now and are projected to intensify in the future. Based on an analysis of potential impacts and the City’s adaptive capacity, Cupertino is most vulnerable to adverse air quality impacts and extreme heat, and the City has medium vulnerability to drought, wildfire, and extreme precipitation/storm flooding. Cupertino is least vulnerable to sea level rise, however indirect effects from sea level rise may be felt in the region (Climate Action Plan 2.0 p20). Jurisdiction-level monitoring of climate change impacts Medium Comment: Cupertino’s inventory methods rely on the U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Version 1.2) and are consistent with the [GHG measurement] methodologies used by other cities throughout the State of California (Climate Action Plan 2.0 p30). Technical resources to assess proposed strategies for feasibility and externalities Medium Comment: To help assess the feasibility of proposed strategies the City is currently developing an inventory of land-use and emergency planning documents and regulations. Examples include the City Climate Action Plan and the Building and Construction Ordinance. This inventory is being used to evaluate where proposed hazard mitigation projects fit into existing planning documents, and to track different City initiatives that share goals and resources. The inventory also allows the City to leverage and build on existing strategies already supported in some way. In this way hazard mitigation strategies are being integrated into established City planning priorities. This enhances the likelihood of their adoption. Additionally, City staff and appointed leadership on the Planning, Building and Sustainability Commissions provide expertise and input into the feasibility of proposed strategies. Jurisdiction-level capacity for development of greenhouse gas emissions inventory High Comment: Completed initial GHG inventory with adoption of Climate Action Plan in 2015, updated 2017 and reflected in CAP 2.0 (2022). Capital planning and land use decisions informed by potential climate impacts Medium Comment: The Climate Action Plan 2.0 identifies 21 GHG reduction actions. These actions, in conjunction with projects identified through the Capital Improvement Plan and the Safety Element in the General Plan guide land use decisions taking potential climate impacts into consideration. In addition, the City passed a Bicycle Transportation Plan (2016) and a companion Pedestrian Transportation Plan (2018). Both plans take potential climate impacts into account and are considered for planning and land use decisions. Other City planning documents also inform planning and land use decisions, taking climate change and vulnerability to extreme weather into account. For example, the Green Infrastructure Plan, and the Clean Water and Storm Protection Program. Participation in regional groups addressing climate risks High Comment: Joint Venture Silicon Valley Public Climate Task Force: Santa Clara County’s Silicon Valley 2.0: Joint Policy Committee Bay Area Climate & Resiliency Project, Regional Heat and Air Quality Resilience Working Group. 584 PSC 09-12-2024 584 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 25 Adaptive Capacity Assessment Question Jurisdiction Rating Implementation Capacity Clear authority/mandate to consider climate change impacts during public decision-making processes Low Comment: General Plan Environmental Resources & Sustainability Element Goal ES-1.1 provides the vision to incorporate principles of sustainability into Cupertino’s planning, infrastructure, and development processes. Identified strategies for greenhouse gas mitigation efforts High Comment: The City’s Climate Action Plan outlines over 200 strategies to reduce GHG community- wide and for municipal operations. Identified strategies for adaptation to impacts Low Comment: These two important documents are a start for addressing adaption impacts:  General Plan Environmental Resources & Sustainability Element Strategy ES-1.1.3: Climate Adaption & Resiliency  Cupertino’s Climate Action Plan Chapter 6 Climate Adaption & Resiliency Champions for climate action in local government departments High Comment: Champions for climate action starts in the City Manager’s office and can be found within all levels of the organization and within each department. Departments report on their progress towards Climate Action Plan strategies yearly. Additionally, every staff report that goes to City Council has a section where staff need to explain the sustainability impact of the item. Political support for implementing climate change adaptation strategies High Comment: A sustainability commission created by the City in 2015 to oversee implementation of the Climate Action Plan meets quarterly. Financial resources devoted to climate change adaptation Low Comment: None solely focused on climate change adaptation. Local authority over sectors likely to be negative impacted Medium Comment: Authority to regulate/ require compliance with different aspects of the City code which provide for sustainable building/development practices. Example 1: The City updated its local ordinance to conform to the new State requirements while maintaining a streamlined approval process. The updated local ordinance are reflected in the City’s Landscaping Ordinance found in Chapter 14.15 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. New development projects that include landscape areas of 500 sq. ft. or more are subject to the Ordinance. This applies to residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional projects that require a permit, plan check or design review. Example 2: The City of Cupertino Environmental Programs Division administers various requirements that must be included in new or redeveloped private commercial and single/multifamily housing projects. Covered projects include new construction, tenant improvements, and/or new or modified development use permits. These requirements are required to be implemented to conform with State stormwater pollution requirements and solid waste reduction and recycling mandates. 585 PSC 09-12-2024 585 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 26 Adaptive Capacity Assessment Question Jurisdiction Rating Public Capacity Local residents knowledge of and understanding of climate risk Unknown Comment: This information can be updated after implementation of GP Strategy ES-1.1.3 Climate Vulnerability Assessment. Local residents support of adaptation efforts Unknown Comment: This information can be updated after implementation of GP Strategy ES-1.1.3 Climate Vulnerability Assessment. Local residents’ capacity to adapt to climate impacts Unknown Comment: This information can be updated after implementation of GP Strategy ES-1.1.3 Climate Vulnerability Assessment. Local economy current capacity to adapt to climate impacts Unknown Comment: This information can be updated after implementation of GP Strategy ES-1.1.3 Climate Vulnerability Assessment. Local ecosystems capacity to adapt to climate impacts Unknown Comment: This information can be updated after implementation of GP Strategy ES-1.1.3 Climate Vulnerability Assessment. 2.4.3. Opportunities to Expand Upon and Improve Existing Capabilities The hazard mitigation planning process presented the opportunity for the community to discuss and evaluate their current capabilities however, building mitigation capabilities is an ongoing process. New capabilities can be added which will support mitigation. Current capabilities can also be enhanced to actively support mitigation and reduce risk. Significant efforts have been made to increase the capabilities of jurisdictions across the OA. By participating in this plan update, each community is reinforcing their support for mitigation and understanding of the capabilities they need to successfully implement mitigation measures. Actions that can expand and improve existing authorities, plans, policies, and resources for mitigation include:  Developing a Climate Action Plan which incorporates hazard data and actions to adapt to a changing climate.  Budgeting and passing policies and procedures for mitigation actions.  Adopting and implementing stricter mitigation regulations.  Approving the training of staff for mitigation activities.  Approving mitigation updates to existing plans as new needs are recognized.  Continuing to update plans as necessary to ensure they are current and reflect the needs of the community or special district.  Further developing warning systems and messaging.  Creating and implementing additional public education and outreach offerings and increasing the volume of translated materials.  Ensuring grant opportunities are capitalized upon to meet mitigation goals. 586 PSC 09-12-2024 586 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 27 Each type of the four FEMA-identified capabilities were evaluated, in addition to OA-priority capabilities like adaptive capacity. Gaps and limitations, if any, are discussed in the tables above. Additional jurisdiction-specific opportunities to expand on and improve capabilities for reducing risk include:  Complete the city’s inventory of land-use and emergency planning documents and regulations which can be used to track plan integration and action implementation.  Implementation of General Plan Strategy ES-1.1.3 Climate Vulnerability Assessment.  Continue to participate in the Community Rating System and identify additional actions to both reduce flood risk and reduce flood insurance premiums.  Since the last plan update, multiple new grant programs that support mitigation measures have been established. FEMA’s annual BRIC grant program funds a variety of mitigation actions, including infrastructure projects, nature-based solutions, climate adaptation, hazard resistant building codes, and projects benefitting disadvantaged communities. This program is funded annually, meaning the City can apply on a consistent basis, rather than waiting for a disaster declaration to make additional mitigation funds available. Within California, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research has established the Integrated Climate Adaptation and Resiliency Program (ICARP), which funds multiple grants related to climate adaptation and resilience. Types of projects that could be funded under ICARP grants include adaptation planning, capacity building, climate resilience measures, and reducing the impacts of extreme heat. Regional partnerships are also a priority. In addition to local funding, pursuing these types of grant programs can help the City fund additional mitigation actions and increase their financial capabilities. 2.5. Integration with Other Planning Initiatives This section describes the process for integrating the hazard mitigation plan into local planning mechanisms. 2.5.1. Existing Integration The following plans and programs currently integrate the goals, risk assessment and/or recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan:  Cupertino General Plan: Currently incorporates information on hazard risks and strategies for hazard risk reduction through its development plans and strategies. At the time of the next update, information obtained in the update of the hazard mitigation plan will be integrated into the General Plan as appropriate.  Green Stormwater Infrastructure Plan: The plan coordinates strategies to achieve community benefits that are related to reduced local flooding, climate resiliency, the urban environment, and more.  Community Wildfire Protection Plan: The Santa Clara County Fire Department has developed a Community Wildfire Protection Plan to reduce wildland fire risks to communities and the environment.  City of Cupertino Climate Action Plan 2.0: This plan outlines efforts to mitigate climate change impacts and directly references the Santa Clara County 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan.  Cupertino Ordinances: The flood damage prevention ordinance identifies areas at risk from the flood hazard and includes specific standards and regulations designed to reduce risk to structures within those areas. Other ordinances such as the Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision ordinance have also been identified as effective measures for reducing hazard impacts. 587 PSC 09-12-2024 587 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 28  Parks and Recreation Systems Master Plan: This plan directly outlines strategies that support overall disaster resilience within the City. 2.5.2. Opportunities for Future Integration The following plans and programs do not currently integrate the goals, risk assessment and/or recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan, but provide an opportunity for future integration:  The Cupertino Emergency Operations Plan: This plan does not outline any mitigation strategies but could be considered in the future as it establishes the overall operational concepts associated with the management of incidents, emergencies, crises, disasters, and catastrophes within the City.  Continuity of Operations Plan: The COOP currently does not identify any projects to include in the mitigation strategy. However, as the plan is updated in the future, this could be a good opportunity to integrate mitigation goals.  Economic Development Strategic Plan: The city’s Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP) includes an analysis of potential challenges relate to economic development. This could include additional information on hazard risks and actions which support both economic development and risk reduction. Like other jurisdictions within the OA, the city’s process for integrating this plan’s data, information, and hazard mitigation goals and actions into other planning mechanisms relies on providing the relevant information to the city’s Planning Division and Planning Commission which are responsible for developing and implementing city plans. The Local Planning Team will be responsible for integrating this plan into other planning mechanisms through the city’s current approach to planning. 2.6. Jurisdiction-Specific Natural Hazard Event History The City of Cupertino did not experience any natural hazard events or damage from natural hazards outside of those detailed in Volume 1. 2.7. Jurisdiction-Specific Vulnerabilities Repetitive loss records are as follows:  Number of Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)-identified Repetitive Loss (RL) Properties: 5  Number of FEMA-identified Severe-Repetitive-Loss (SRL) Properties: 0  Number of RL Properties or SRL Properties that have been mitigated: 0 Other noted vulnerabilities include:  The Increasing frequency and intensity of inclement weather brings a higher likelihood of simultaneous events, or cascading events, where the impacts accumulate rapidly. When only one type of inclement weather impacts the City, residents and City resources are less likely to be affected. When multiple types of inclement weather occur simultaneously, or in close succession, the risks are greater. More frequent periods of drought and extreme heat due to climate change has resulted in a lengthening of the fire season. Dry spells during the winter months, especially when combined with winds and dead fuels, may result in fires that burn with a high intensity and rate. Increased occurrence of extreme heat has health implications, particularly for vulnerable populations such as older adults or those with medical conditions that may be exacerbated by prolonged high temperatures. Inclement weather events happening near Cupertino may impact the City, with more severe impacts possible as a broader geographic region is affected. Because 588 PSC 09-12-2024 588 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 29 of the variable nature of intensity and location of impact of heavy rain, wind, and other inclement weather, it is difficult to identify specific structures, critical facilities, or populations at risk. Identifying structures that are more resilient to these hazards may allow the city to provide places of safety for vulnerable populations during a severe weather event, including heavy rain, wind, or extreme temperatures. Residents who do not speak English as their primary language may have difficulty receiving or understanding weather-related information and may need additional communication resources. With the increase in inclement weather events, regional transportation and communications lifelines are increasingly at risk.  Drought-impacted vegetation is more vulnerable to disease and wildfire. Limits on landscape irrigation during periods of water shortages contributes to low soil moisture and heightened risk of wildfire. Loss of vegetation detracts from the ability of green spaces to serve as carbon sinks. Drought is not expected to impact the functionality of critical facilities or infrastructure, but these entities can consider options to reduce water consumption for overall community benefit. Although populations are not expected to be harmed directly from drought, some people may be indirectly impacted from drought-related restrictions or shortages. Populations also play an important role in adapting to reduced water use in homes and residential landscaping and benefit from public outreach and volunteer efforts to use water sustainably. In a prolonged and widespread drought, issues such as food insecurity may particularly impact vulnerable populations, such as individuals with lower income. Climate change is anticipated to affect future drought conditions and may result in increasing occurrences or severity of drought. There are 16,413 buildings with vulnerability to earthquake (with an estimated value of structure and contents of $13,890,786,985). Based on property loss estimates conducted through the Level 2 Hazus analysis for the 100-year and 500-year earthquakes, Cupertino total losses range from about $623 million to about $2 billion. Of the three earthquake fault scenarios considered for Santa Clara County, Cupertino is most vulnerable to an earthquake along the San Andreas Fault. A strong earthquake will be felt throughout the region and damage to facilities and infrastructure will likely be widespread. The Hazus analysis did not include damage estimates for individual city critical infrastructure, but a total of 75 critical facilities, infrastructure, and other community assets were identified within Cupertino that may be at risk to damage or service interruption resulting from an earthquake. The 17,460 residents of Cupertino may experience a variety of impacts from earthquake, including physical injury, damage to housing, or other economic impacts. Climate change impacts on earthquake are not currently well understood, and are not anticipated to result in a change in earthquake risk.  Earthquake risk from ground shaking exists throughout Cupertino and therefore could affect multiple vulnerable populations throughout the city. Older persons or those with access and functional needs or other disabilities may have difficulty relocating to temporary housing if needed. Lower income households may be more likely to live in older housing that may not have modern seismic construction standards and may experience more severe damage. Renters and those in multi-unit housing tend to be disproportionately displaced by disasters, but these individuals may also lack financial resources to seek temporary housing.  The Citywide Building Condition Assessment (BCA) identified several areas of concern with the Sports Center facility. Several structural deficiencies were identified that were deemed high priority. Some are being addressed this year with the Sports Center Seismic Retrofit project, but additional improvements have been requested and additional study needed to identify all the renovations or repairs required.  Potential danger to a population of 4,284 living in a dam inundation area, and the potential for damage to populated areas downstream of Stevens Creek Dam exists. Approximately 1,200 buildings are exposed (majority residential), with an estimated value of about $1.14 billion (2016 Santa Clara County Tax Assessor’s data).  Cupertino owns and maintains seven bridges in the city, and six have been identified as needing rehabilitation and improvements to prolong their useful life, as recommended in the Caltrans Bridge Report. Several bridges across Stephens Creek and the Junipero Serra Freeway are also in potential dam inundation areas, Stephens Creek Blvd is a primary transportation route in the 589 PSC 09-12-2024 589 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 30 city that is within dam inundation and 1% flood zones. These routes are also important alternatives for pedestrian and bike traffic for individuals without personal vehicles. Bridges already in need of rehabilitation may be more susceptible to damage from earthquake, flood, or other hazards.  Stephen’s Creek creates a natural separation of the eastern part of the city. Stephen’s Creek Boulevard and McClellan Road are critical transportation routes to and from this area. Damage or impediments to these routes would limit options for ingress and egress, which could lead to congestion and difficulty in the event an evacuation is needed. Bridges on these routes are of concern for flooding and dam inundation of the creek, and possibly damage from ground shaking in an earthquake. Several areas along the banks of the creek are identified as high susceptibility to landslide. Slopes may become more instable during or following heavy precipitation and flooding events. Climate change may increase the severity of future precipitation events, which may have a associated increase in landslide potential.  Five infrastructure lifelines intersect with the Stevens Creek Dam Flood inundation zone (refer to the City Hazard Map: https://gis.cupertino.org/servicefinder/?#hazard). These Infrastructure lifelines link Cupertino with the region. Damage caused by flooding to any of these lifelines would result in regional transportation delays and service disruption by agencies dependent on the roads. The northwest area of Cupertino (such as Creston Drive and Phar Lap Drive) is within the inundation area and also has moderately high social vulnerability. Further investigation may be needed to determine specific population vulnerabilities and how these contribute to vulnerability to dam failure.  A total of 292 Cupertino residents live within the 148 acres comprising the 10% flood hazard area, 310 Cupertino residents live within 179 acres for the 1%, and 33,871 Cupertino residents live within 4,993 acres for the 0.2% flood hazard areas. Structures within each of the three flood hazard area scenarios are valued between $27 million and $6 billion, according to the 2017 MJHMP. Flood risk is highest along Stephens Creek, and the Social Vulnerability Index shows moderate to moderately high vulnerability in this area.  An evaluation of the City’s storm drain system indicated areas of concern and possible repairs needed at Pumpkin Drive, Fiesta Lane, September Drive, and Festival Drive, as well as on Stephen’s Creek Boulevard over Calavasas Creek.  A total of 4,530 residents are in areas exposed to moderate to high landslide susceptibility. Over $1 billion in structure and contents values are also exposed. The highest risk is along Stephen’s Creek and in the foothills. The 2017 Regnart Road Slope Stability Study identified several areas along Regnart Road that exhibit poor drainage characteristics, slope stability concerns that require partial road reconstruction to avoid costly road or slope failures, and lengthy road closures. The retaining wall along Cordova Rd also shows signs of potential failure. Heavy precipitation can contribute to slope movement. If climate change results in increased extreme precipitation events as anticipated, an increase in slope movement is also possible. Many of the areas of Cupertino in the western area most likely to be impacted by landslide are either above age 65, or younger than 17. These individuals may be more dependent on others for care and mobility. If roadways become blocked by landslides, these individuals be disproportionally affected by delays in receiving aid.  Areas of the City near high wildfire threat zones may also be vulnerable to the landslide debris flow risks from burn scars after an event where the landscape is denuded by fire and impacted subsequently by rain. Some neighborhoods in the foothills of west Cupertino are characterized by steep terrain and narrow roads where even shallow landslides could impact access.  Heavy rain events may result in flooding on roadways and low-lying areas. Atmospheric river events have a cumulative impact on the water level of Steven’s Creek Reservoir and on the creeks and streams making up the City’s watershed, increasing the likelihood of flooding downstream. When inclement weather, including atmospheric river events, combines with other weather events, impacts to the City population and infrastructure are compounded. As a result, 590 PSC 09-12-2024 590 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 31 shelters and disaster services may be needed to support residents and maintain continuous services necessary for life safety. Combined impacts of inclement weather events also have the potential to impact community resources. Atmospheric river events contribute to a higher water level in Steven’s Creek Reservoir. If an earthquake occurs when the water level is high, the potential impact of a dam failure is greater, with more downstream damage projected.  Extreme precipitation events such as atmospheric rives may occur with greater frequency or increased severity in the future due to climate change. Flooding from heavy rain and atmospheric rivers are among the hazards of concern for the City of Cupertino Climate Action Plan. Sustainable actions and nature-based solutions to address the effect of flooding and heavy rain are among the priorities for the city and are addressed in the mitigation plan actions.  High wind can cause damage to residences or other structures, can result in fallen branches or trees that can further damage property, and can damage and disrupt power and communication systems. Debris from high wind can cause temporarily obstructed roadways.  As a mostly urbanized community, Cupertino can experience a “heat island effect,” which can contribute to extreme heat. The city is committed to providing more pedestrian and bike friendly infrastructure to also reduce GHG emissions in ongoing efforts to address the impacts of climate change and increasing temperatures. Tree planting and other nature-based solutions may help address heat island effects. Climate change may lead to increasing occurrences of extreme heat events in the future.  Communication is critical to warn people of quick onset severe weather events, including heavy rain, high wind, and extreme temperature, for people to take proper precautions, seek shelter, or take other safety actions to reduce their risk. A variety of methods may be needed to reach various vulnerable communities.  In 2022 the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection updated its wildfire risk map. The new map shows an increase in fire hazard in state responsibility areas, including those adjacent to the City of Cupertino. The areas in the foothills near Stephens Creek Road or Regnart Road have higher wildfire risk, and several roads have limited access or dead-end spurs. Additional planning may be needed to identify transportation bottlenecks or other barriers to safe evacuation and necessary improvements to road design or signage. Impacted populations include those living or working within the wildland-urban interface in the foothills of west Cupertino, as well as people with chronic lung problems and other preexisting health conditions, children, pregnant women, and older adults. Ongoing management is needed to address vegetative fuel growth. Property owners can play an important role in reducing wildfire risk around their properties but may lack information regarding what actions to take or resources to make protective actions financially feasible. Climate change is anticipated to lead to increases in wildfire risk. Increases in drought longevity and intensity and increasing extreme heat events contribute to changes in vegetation and more extreme wildfire risk conditions. In addition to populations vulnerable to the health risks from wildfire smoke, other vulnerable populations include those with disabilities or access and functional needs that may have difficulty evacuating if their area experiences a wildfire. Individuals without personal vehicles may also be unable to evacuate. Those who don’t speak English well may have more difficulty finding information about wildfire risk and receiving information regarding what actions to take during a wildfire. Lower income households may have more difficulty upgrading homes to more wildfire resistant materials or completing other defensible space projects.  The 2017/18 Comprehensive Facility Condition and Use Assessment identified deficiencies at city facilities. The Senior Center and Monta Vista Recreation Center and Service Center (Administration and Mechanics shops) were prioritized as being particularly in need of repair or other adaptations to avoid damage or service interruptions. These facilities may be particularly vulnerable to the impacts of earthquake, heavy rain or high wind, and other hazards. 591 PSC 09-12-2024 591 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 32  Quinlan Community Center serves as the City's primary Mass Care and Shelter facility and Cooling Center and requires emergency power/systems upgrades to be able to provide this function.  Cupertino is not located on the bay shoreline and has no direct tsunami risk, so this hazard was not profiled for this annex. 2.7.1. Social Vulnerability Figure 16 shows the social vulnerability for Cupertino and the surrounding area. Most of the area has low to moderate vulnerability based on overall SVI score, indicating the social characteristics of the area will enable the people to be fairly resilient to a natural hazard. Socioeconomic status risk is low across the city. Most of Cupertino has a high level of vulnerability in the Racial and Ethnic Minority Status theme. A key indicator in this theme a high percentage of Asian population, which accounts for 67% of the total city population. Household characteristics do not indicate a high percentage of people who speak English “less than well.” Officials should consider what unique cultural needs this population may need and identify any cultural barriers to providing information about hazard risk prior to or providing aid after a disaster. Wildfire and landslide hazards are highest in the south-western portion of the city, and overall vulnerability is higher in some corresponding areas in the western portion of the city. There is also some overlap in the moderately high vulnerable area in the north-west portion of the city and the 1% annual chance floodplain. This area has heightened risk in housing and transportation and household characteristics themes. In particular, this area has relatively high percentages of persons younger than 17 or older than 65, as well as 9.6% with a disability, and 7.5% speaking English less than well. 21.3 % live in multi-unit housing and 12.4 % have no vehicle available. This may present difficulties for people to evacuate or otherwise relocate following the impact of a hazard. Other areas of the city have moderately high vulnerability scores but do not correspond with the geographic extent of a particular hazard. Drought and inclement weather hazards have the potential to affect the entire city. 592 PSC 09-12-2024 592 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 33 Figure 4: Cupertino Social Vulnerability 2.8. Hazard Risk Index Table 32 presents the hazards of concern from highest risk index number to lowest as assigned by the City of Cupertino. Table 14: Hazard Risk Index Hazard Probability Life Impact Property Impact Percentage of Area Impacted Maximum Probable Extent Earthquake Likely Catastrophic Catastrophic Extensive Major Wildfire Highly Likely Critical Minor Extensive Major Heavy Rain Highly Likely Minor Minor Significant Moderate High Wind Likely Minor Minor Significant Moderate Extreme Heat Likely Minor Minor Significant Moderate Climate Change Highly Likely Limited Minor Extensive Major Drought Highly Likely Minor Limited Extensive Moderate 593 PSC 09-12-2024 593 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 34 Hazard Probability Life Impact Property Impact Percentage of Area Impacted Maximum Probable Extent Flood Occasional Minor Minor Significant Moderate Landslide/Mass Movement Occasional Minor Minor Minimal Weak Dam/Levee Failure Unlikely Minor Limited Significant Moderate Table 15: Comparison of Cupertino Risk Index to Operational Area (OA) Risk Score Earth- quake Dam/Levee Failure Heavy Rain High Wind Extreme Heat Wildfire Drought Flood Land- slide Climate Change Cupertino 2.7 0.45 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.9 1.45 0.5 0.4 1.55 OA 2.24 1.19 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.68 1.21 .90 0.36 1.13 2.9. Future Needs to Better Understand Risk/Vulnerability A citywide inspection of all critical facilities is needed to determine if hardening or retrofit projects are needed. A citywide inventory of invasive and fire-prone vegetation would help to target vegetation management efforts. Socio-economic and demographic analysis of the City population, including residents, people who work in the City, and commuters who traverse the City on their way to or from other places, would help to inform public messaging needs, including alert and warning messaging. Increasing dialogue with private sector and non-governmental partners about resource sharing in a disaster may help in locating CPODs. Increasing regional dialogue and planning with neighboring/adjacent jurisdictions can help west County communities leverage shared resources during disasters that are likely to impact more than one jurisdiction. Surveying the location of cellular towers in the high fire threat areas of west Cupertino can help the City anticipate impacts to cellular communications from wildfire-caused outages. 2.10. Status of Previous Plan Actions Participants were asked to report the status of their mitigation actions listed in the previous plan as a part of this plan update. Where further information isn’t provided, the answers are defined as follows:  Completed – work on this action is totally complete.  Completed and ongoing – work on this action is complete; however, it is an ongoing project that will continue to be implemented. An example is a public outreach campaign that was created and will continue to be implemented.  In progress – work on this action has begun and is in progress, but the action is not yet complete.  Retain – work on this action has not begun yet, the action is still relevant, and it should be in the 2023 MJHMP.  No longer relevant – Action item is no longer relevant due to reduce or eliminated risk, it no longer being feasible, there has been a change in jurisdictional or organizational priorities, or another reason as stated. Unless specifically requested otherwise, only those actions listed as “retain” are incorporated into the 2023 action plan. 594 PSC 09-12-2024 594 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 35 Table 16: Status of Action Items from the 2017 MJHMP Action Item Number* Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Current Status and Comments CPT-1 Require all new construction, including public facilities, to be built in accordance with the most recent Building and Fire Code standards. All Hazards Completed and ongoing CPT-2 Continue to enforce and/or comply with State- mandated requirements, such as the California Environmental Quality Act and environmental regulations to ensure that urban development is conducted in a way to minimize air pollution. Specifically, developed a Sustainable Land Use and Green Building Policy to expand on the work that was done to achieve these goals in the 2005 General Plan Sustainability Section. All Hazards Completed and ongoing CPT-3 Increase the use of clean, alternative energy, by subscribing to and supporting Community Choice Energy. Severe Weather Completed and ongoing CPT-4 Increase recycling rates in local government operations and in the community. Wildfire Completed and ongoing CPT-5 Promote or increase the resiliency of critical and essential facilities/ infrastructure following a major natural disaster through various means. All Hazards Completed and ongoing CPT-6 Help educate the public, schools, other jurisdictions, professional associations, business, and industry about reducing global warming pollution. Severe Weather In progress CPT-7 Maintain and update a GIS layer of localized flooding "hot spots" throughout the city. Flood and Severe Weather No longer relevant CPT-8 Develop a storm drain master plan to develop and prioritize capital projects. Flood and Severe Weather Completed and ongoing CPT-9 Continue to maintain good standing and compliance under the National Flood Insurance Program. This will be accomplished through the implementation of floodplain management programs that will, at a minimum, meet the requirements of the NFIP:  Enforcement of the flood damage prevention ordinance  Participate in floodplain identification and mapping updates  Provide public assistance/ information on floodplain requirements and impacts Flood Completed and ongoing CPT-10 Where appropriate, support retrofitting, purchase or relocation of structures located in high hazard areas and prioritize those structures that have experience repetitive losses. All Hazards Completed and ongoing 595 PSC 09-12-2024 595 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 36 Action Item Number* Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Current Status and Comments CPT-11 Integrate the hazard mitigation plan into other plans, ordinances and programs that dictate land use decisions within the community. All Hazards In progress CPT-12 Actively participate in the plan maintenance protocols outlines in Volume 1 of the hazard mitigation plan. All Hazards Completed * Number given to action item in 2017 Santa Clara County Operational Area Hazard Mitigation Plan 2.11. Hazard Mitigation Action Plan and Evaluation of Recommended Actions Table 35 expands on many of the actions identified in the 2017 Plan, offering a more detailed and measurable way to track actions. Table 35 lists the actions that make up the updated City of Cupertino hazard mitigation plan. The maps in Figure 17 through Figure 24 present the City’s critical facilities, infrastructure, and identified hazard risk areas. Descriptions of the expected time frames for actions are provided below:  Short term: 1–5 years  Medium term: 5–10 years  Long term: Over 10 years  Ongoing: Currently being funded and implemented under existing programs The planning partners utilized the following criteria to prioritize action items into the categories of high, medium, or low.  High Priority— A project that:  Meets multiple goals and objectives (i.e., multiple hazards);  Addresses multiple hazards;  Has benefits that exceed cost;  Has funding secured or is an ongoing project;  Meets eligibility requirements for Hazard Mitigation Assistance grants;  Can be completed in the short term (1 to 5 years);  Addresses immediate short-term impacts of climate change;  Benefits underserved and/or socially vulnerable populations; AND  Considers the Multi-Benefit Criteria utilized by the Santa Clara County Climate Collaborative, including equity, long-term value, ecosystem benefit, community benefit, and cross- jurisdictional alignment.  Medium Priority— A project that:  Meets multiple goals and objectives;  Addresses multiple hazards; 596 PSC 09-12-2024 596 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 37  Has benefits that exceed costs;  Has funding has not been secured, but that is grant eligible under Hazard Mitigation Assistance grants or other grant programs;  Project can be completed in the short term (1-5 years), once funding is secured. Medium priority projects will become high priority projects once funding is secured;  Addresses immediate short-term impacts of climate change;  Benefits underserved and/or socially vulnerable populations; AND  Considers the Multi-Benefit Criteria utilized by the Santa Clara County Climate Collaborative, including equity, long-term value, ecosystem benefit, community benefit, and cross- jurisdictional alignment.  Low Priority— A project that:  Will mitigate the risk of at least one hazard;  Has benefits that do not exceed the costs or are difficult to quantify:  Does not have secured funding;  Is not eligible for Hazard Mitigation Assistance grant funding;  Has a timeline for completion that is long term (greater than 5 years). Low priority projects may be eligible for other sources of grant funding from other programs;  May address impacts of climate change;  May benefit underserved and/or socially vulnerable populations; AND  Considers the Multi-Benefit Criteria utilized by the Santa Clara County Climate Collaborative, including equity, long-term value, ecosystem benefit, community benefit, and cross- jurisdictional alignment. 597 PSC 09-12-2024 597 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 38 Table 17: City of Cupertino 2023 Action Items Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 1 Plan Integration Index: Develop and utilize an index that tracks the development of new plans and initiatives. Use this index to relate new products to existing plans, providing a method for ensuring internal consistency, reduce duplicative efforts, and build on existing hazard mitigation efforts. All Hazards Office of Emergency Management (OEM)/Office of Communications General fund Short term High 2 Expand Public Information Outreach: Recommend that City staff, commissions and council encourage sharing of public messaging further in the community by “deputizing” the public to share information with community members who may not otherwise receive it. Recommend that City staff, commissions and council address information sharing as a regular component of public communication. All Hazards OEM/Office of Communications None Short term Medium 3 Social media and risk mitigation: Develop a strategic communication / engagement plan to disseminate emergency information throughout the year through City Office of Communications social media. Identify topics and messages to prioritize for scheduled release on a twelve- month cycle. Include volunteer outreach regularly in monthly social media posts to increase engagement in City OEM volunteer programs. All Hazards OEM/Office of Communications Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities Grant (BRIC) Short term High 4 Develop City Community Resilience Hubs: 1. Define criteria for being considered a CRH in Cupertino 2. Develop a list of existing CRHs. Use this list to prioritize facility improvements resource allocation before and during disasters, for example during high winds, heavy precipitation, extreme temperature events. All Hazards, including Heavy Rain, High Wind, Extreme Heat or Cold OEM General fund Short term High 598 PSC 09-12-2024 598 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 39 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 5 Evacuation Route and Temporary Evacuation Point Inventory: With City GIS, aggregate primary vehicle routes, traffic control points, and evacuation end points identified in evacuation pre-plans. Include bicycle and pedestrian routes. Highlight City transit corridors, intersections and features that may be used in evacuations. All Hazards OEM General fund Short term Medium 6 Raising Emergency Awareness of Community Hazards (REACH) Initiative: Develop a process for sharing information about extreme weather events with the community using City OEM volunteers. Formalize the expectation for information sharing among volunteers, track and analyze how emergency information is disseminated by volunteers, begin to understand linguistic capacity of volunteers in message dissemination. All Hazards OEM General fund Ongoing High 7 Community Program Integration: Combining volunteering opportunities available through the Sustainability Division's Greenblocks program and the Office of Emergency Services and Block Leaders program. Combine outreach efforts and trainings for program participants to emphasize the role of sustainability in emergency preparedness. All Hazards, including Drought OEM General fund Ongoing Low 8 City GIS Operations Dashboard: By December 2023 build a situational awareness and information sharing GIS dashboard. Platform capabilities for City departments and emergency management partner agencies/ organizations. Include data such as PG&E power outages, evacuation zone status, flood inundation area, critical facilities, and primary evacuation routes. All Hazards Information Technology (IT)/OEM General fund Short term High 599 PSC 09-12-2024 599 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 40 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 9 Evacuation Planning Initiative: Build and maintain evacuation planning maps. Coordinate the development of evacuation zone pre-plans to include primary evacuation routes, critical facilities, potential traffic control points, and potential temporary evacuation points with public safety partner agencies. All Hazards OEM General fund Ongoing Medium 10 Firewise Program Promotion: Identify vulnerable communities based on the EBRPD and Santa Clara County Fire Department (SCCFD) input about vegetation risk. Provide targeted outreach to neighborhoods, HOAs, condo units, through existing Block leaders, describing Firewise community initiative. Provide information and support to interested neighborhoods. Help private property owners to position themselves for available grant funding when available. Wildfire, Climate Change, Drought, High Wind OEM/ SCCFD/ SCCFSC General fund, USFS Grants Long term Medium 11 Vegetation Management Initiative: Identify, evaluate, mitigate hazardous trees and brush throughout the City. Hazardous vegetation includes both highly flammable invasive species and vegetation that poses a risk to the public (fall risk, ailing or dead trees combined with wind events, overgrowth impacting pedestrian and vehicle access to evacuation routes). This initiative complements the FPP action (Firewise Program Promotion). Climate Change, Drought, Heavy Rain, High Wind, Wildfire, Landslide OEM/ SCCFSC/ Public Works (PW) General fund, Cal Fire Grants, USFS Grants, USDA Grants Long term Low 12 Community Rating System Flood Response Public Information Initiative: Develop and disseminate locally tailored messages in support of the broader SCC Multijurisdictional Program for Public Information. Some of the outreach efforts are credible for Community Rating System (CRS) points, part of FEMA's NFIP. Other outreach efforts are not creditable for points but still build community resilience. Climate Change, Flood, Heavy Rain OEM/ SCCFD/ SCCFSC General fund Long term Medium 600 PSC 09-12-2024 600 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 41 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 13 Waste Management Measure 1 (Climate Action Plan): Implement SB 1383 requirements and reduce community wide landfilled organics 75% by 2025 and inorganic waste 35% by 2030 and reduce all waste 90% by 2040. Climate Change Sustainability General fund, CPRG Grants, EPA Grants Long term Medium 14 Waste Management Measure 2 (Climate Action Plan): Reduce overall waste disposed to garbage, recycling, and compost per capita by 15% by 2035. Climate Change Sustainability General fund, CPRG Grants, EPA Grants Long term Medium 15 Waste Management Measure 3 (Climate Action Plan): Meet or exceed the SB 1383 recycled organics products procurement requirements and sequester or avoid at least 0.018 MT CO2e per person by through 2045. Climate Change Sustainability General fund, CPRG Grants, EPA Grants Long term Medium 16 Water Management Measure 1 (Climate Action Plan): Reduce per capita water consumption 15% compared to 2019 levels by 2030 and maintain through 2040. Water conservation measures will increase resilience to drought. Climate Change, Drought Sustainability General fund, CPRG Grants, EPA Grants Long term Medium 17 Water Management Measure 2 (Climate Action Plan): Support the SJ-SC RWF in implementing GHG emissions reduction projects. Establish a program or function for supporting SJ-SC Regional Wastewater Facility in obtaining grant funding for methane capture or other GHG reduction infrastructure. Explore opportunities related to methane capture and conversion to biofuel through the state's Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) program. Collaborate with the cities of San Jose, Santa Clara, Campbell, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, and Saratoga, and the County to advocate and support GHG reductions at the SJ-SC RWF. Explore opportunities to scale beyond regional coordination. Climate Change, Drought Sustainability General fund, CPRG Grants, EPA Grants Long term Medium 18 Sustainable Built Environment Measure 1 (Climate Action Plan): Reduce non-SVCE usage rate to 2% for residential and 10% for commercial by 2030 and maintain through 2040. Climate Change Sustainability General fund, CPRG Grants, EPA Grants Long term Medium 601 PSC 09-12-2024 601 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 42 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 19 Sustainable Built Environment Measure 2 (Climate Action Plan): Electrify existing residential buildings to reduce annual residential natural gas usage from 129 therms per person in 2018 to at most 71 therms per person in 2030 and 16 therms per person in 2040. Climate Change Sustainability General fund, CPRG Grants, EPA Grants Long term Medium 20 Sustainable Built Environment Measure 3 (Climate Action Plan): Electrify existing commercial buildings to reduce annual commercial natural gas usage from 119 therms per person in 2018 to at most 90 therms per person in 2030 and 54 therms per person in 2040. Climate Change Sustainability General fund, CPRG Grants, EPA Grants Long term Medium 21 Sustainable Built Environment Measure 4 (Climate Action Plan): Require new residential and commercial development to be all-electric at time of construction. Climate Change Sustainability General fund, CPRG Grants, EPA Grants Long term Medium 22 Sustainable Built Environment Measure 5 (Climate Action Plan): Develop specific requirements for procurement of carbon free fuels in lieu of natural gas for new projects that cannot be electrified. Climate Change Sustainability General fund, CPRG Grants, EPA Grants Long term Medium 23 Sustainable Transportation Measure 1 (Climate Action Plan): Develop and implement an Active Transportation Plan to achieve 15% of active transportation mode share by 2030 and 23% by 2040. Climate Change, All hazards with an evacuation component Sustainability General fund, CPRG Grants, EPA Grants Long term Medium 24 Sustainable Transportation Measure 2 (Climate Action Plan): Implement public and shared transit programs to achieve 29% of public transit mode share by 2030 and maintain through 2040. Climate Change, All hazards with an evacuation component Sustainability General fund, CPRG Grants, EPA Grants Long term Medium 25 Sustainable Transportation Measure 3 (Climate Action Plan): Increase zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) adoption to 35% for passenger vehicles and 20% for commercial vehicles by 2030 and 100% for all vehicles by 2040. Climate Change, All hazards with an evacuation component Sustainability General fund, CPRG Grants, EPA Grants Long term Medium 602 PSC 09-12-2024 602 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 43 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 26 Sustainable Transportation Measure 4 (Climate Action Plan): Re-focus transportation infrastructure away from single occupancy gasoline vehicles to support the bicycle/pedestrian, public transit, and ZEV goals of Measures TR-1, TR-2, and TR-3. Climate Change, All hazards with an evacuation component Sustainability General fund, CPRG Grants, EPA Grants Long term Medium 27 Sustainable Transportation Measure 5 (Climate Action Plan): Electrify or otherwise decarbonize 34% of off-road equipment by 2030 and 35% by 2040. Climate Change Sustainability General fund, CPRG Grants, EPA Grants Long term Medium 28 Carbon Sequestration Measure 1 (Climate Action Plan): Increase carbon sequestration through tree planting by developing and implementing an Urban Forest Management Plan. This initiative complements the SRBE and VMI actions (Sustainable/Resilient Built Environment and Vegetation Management Initiative). Climate Change, Extreme Heat Sustainability The Urban and Community Forestry Grant Program Long term Medium 29 Carbon Sequestration Measure 2 (Climate Action Plan): Leverage the carbon sequestration potential of open space and carbon removal. Climate Change Sustainability General fund, The Urban and Community Forestry Grant Program Long term Medium 30 Adaptation and Resilience Measure 1 (Climate Action Plan): Increase usage of natural infrastructure solutions such as bioswales, rainwater storage systems, and permeable pavements to enhance infrastructure resiliency. Climate Change, Flooding, Heavy Rain, Drought Sustainability General fund, Water & Waste Disposal Loan & Grant Program Long term Medium 603 PSC 09-12-2024 603 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 44 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 31 Adaptation and Resilience Measure 2 (Climate Action Plan): Bolster emergency preparedness and response by integrating climate adaptation and improving climate- related communications. Actions to bolster the City's preparedness develop and include air quality Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) into live interactive public dashboards, offering guidelines on wildfire smoke for municipal employees (this is being done, in part, through the Extreme Weather protocol), integrating vulnerability assessment results into emergency preparedness and response systems, incorporating information about health impacts of extreme weather into emergency preparedness and response protocols, developing multi-lingual outreach materials for climate hazards identified in the vulnerability assessment. All Hazards, including Wildfire, Extreme Temperature, Heavy Rain Sustainability General fund, Adaptation Planning Grant Program Long term Medium 32 Adaptation and Resilience Measure 3 (Climate Action Plan): Strengthen community capacity and resilience through education, resources, and policies. This includes: Educating communities about the health risks of climate hazards and engaging them in strengthening community resilience such as block-level climate resilience training and resilience hubs; and enrolling 400 households by the end of Phase 2 to participate in a climate resiliency GREENBLOCKS training program. The curriculum will include household preparedness planning as well as basic education on climate hazard awareness; Bring policies for the City Council to consider that would achieve gold ratings in all categories set forth by the County of Santa Clara Healthy Cities Index (https://publichealth.sccgov.org/health-information/safe- and-healthy-communities/healthy-cities-program). Climate Change, Extreme Heat, Heavy Rain Sustainability General fund, Adaptation Planning Grant Program Long term Medium 604 PSC 09-12-2024 604 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 45 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 33 Adaptation and Resilience Measure 4 (Climate Action Plan): Update the Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan in Coordination with the County of Santa Clara. Cascade recommendations from the climate vulnerability assessment into the Cupertino General Plan – Safety Element as required by State Bill (SB) 379. Climate Change Sustainability Adaptation Planning Grant Program, General fund Long term Medium 34 Civic Center Microgrid: The proposed project will install canopies with solar mounts in the Civic Center Plaza parking lots and install an extensive system of solar photovoltaic panels, step down transformer, and solar charged batteries with connections to all three Civic Center buildings. The project may also require the removal of some trees along the edge of the parking lot if they are tall enough to interfere with power generation. Finally, the project will install and launch microgrid software that allows City staff to operate the microgrid as it switches between grid power, solar generation use, and battery backup power. All Hazards Public Works General fund, Grants Long term Medium 35 Conduct storm drain repair measures at Stevens Creek Boulevard / Calabazas Creek. Flooding, Extreme Weather Public Works General fund, Storm Water Grant Program (SWGP) Long term Medium 36 10445 Torre Avenue Improvements (City Hall Annex): Program and plan facility improvements required for interim facility to accommodate staff when City Hall is remodeled, as well as the long-term use of this facility. The proximity of this property to the Civic Center, and its central location within the City, lends itself to numerous uses, including a satellite and/or interim City Hall facility. This facility may serve as a backup EOC. All Hazards Public Works General fund, Grants Long term Medium 605 PSC 09-12-2024 605 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 46 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 37 Carmen Bridge Road Right-of-way: The Carmen Road Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge will provide a safe connection for pedestrians and bicyclists between neighborhoods separated by Stevens Creek Blvd between Foothill Blvd and Phar Lap Dr. Initiate a process for acquiring property to facilitate the construction of a Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge over Stevens Creek Boulevard, reconnecting Carmen Road. Project will fill a gap in the bicycle/pedestrian network resulting from the bisection of the neighborhood by Stevens Creek Blvd. All hazards with an evacuation component, Flood, Wildfire Public Works General fund, Urban Greening Program Long term Medium 38 City Hall and Community Hall Improvements: Programming and Feasibility- Feasibility and Community Outreach to form the basis of a renovation strategy for the buildings. The existing City Hall does not meet current or projected needs for office space; structural, mechanical and other code-related modifications are needed to meet code standards. Community Hall: Use of the building could be maximized with the addition of conference space and remodeled kitchen space. All Hazards Public Works General fund Long term Medium 39 Electric Vehicle Parking Expansion: Expansion of the existing level 2 charging ports at municipal properties from twelve (12) ports to thirty-two (32) ports. In addition, install five (5) level 3 (DC Fast Charging) ports. All charging ports would be available for public use. This basis of design that would bring Cupertino in line with industry benchmarks for utilization (20 monthly sessions per port), assuming a steady utilization rate of 630 charging sessions each month. Growing the EV charging ports further, anticipating future demand increases, would require substantial electrical study and upgrades which are not proposed today. Climate Change Public Works General fund, California Energy Commission’s Clean Transportation Program Long term Medium 606 PSC 09-12-2024 606 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 47 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 40 Homestead/De Anza - Construction: Construction: Modify traffic signal to relocate median-mounted mast arm poles to the corners. Transportation received a Highway Safety Improvement Program Grant for this work. Project goal is to improve safety at the intersection by enhancing the visibility of the northbound and southbound signal indications. Climate Change, All hazards with an evacuation component, Wildfire Public Works General fund Long term Medium 41 Pumpkin and Fiesta Storm Drain Project, Phase 1 & 2: Design storm drainage improvements at Pumpkin Drive, Fiesta Lane, September Drive, and Festival Drive between Bubb Road and State Route 85. Construct storm drainage improvements at Fiesta Lane, September Drive and Festival Drive between UPRR tracks and State Route 85. The 2018 Storm Drain Master evaluated the City's storm drainage system and identified areas subject to flooding during a 10-year storm. The plan also identified and prioritized projects to mitigate potential for flooding in areas of deficiency. The Pumpkin and Fiesta Phase 1 and 2 Projects received highest priority Phase 1 will be constructed as part of this project. Phase 2 will require additional funding in the future. Climate Change, Extreme Weather, Flooding Public Works General fund, Storm Water Grant Program (SWGP) Long term Medium 42 Stelling and Alves Crosswalk Installation: Stelling and Alves Crosswalk Installation: Install a crosswalk and pedestrian-actuated RRFB (rectangular rapid-flashing beacon) across Stelling at the north leg of the intersection with Alves Drive. Evaluate removal of existing crosswalk at the south leg of the intersection. This is one of the few remaining Tier 1 projects in the 2018 Cupertino Pedestrian Transportation Plan. This scope removes pedestrian- crossing conflicts with left-turning cars and improves bicycle-crossings as well. Climate Change, All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, Office of Traffic Safety Grants (OTS) Long term Medium 607 PSC 09-12-2024 607 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 48 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 43 Stevens Creek Boulevard Class IV Bikeway Phase 2 - Construction: Stevens Creek Boulevard Class IV Bikeway Phase 2 – Construction: Construction of the separated bikeway along Stevens Creek Blvd from Wolfe Road to De Anza Blvd. Improvements include traffic signal modifications at Wolfe Road and De Anza Blvd to provide separate bicycle phasing. The 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan identifies improvement needed and priorities to enhance and promote safer bicycle transportation in the City. The number one priority of the Plan was to provide a separated Class IV bicycle lane on Stevens Creek Blvd. This project is the second phase to address that priority. Climate Change, All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, The Recreational Trails Program (RTP) Long term Medium 44 Tree Inventory - Stevens Creek Corridor: Stevens Creek Corridor: To inventory and map City-owned trees (above a threshold size) that are within the Stevens Creek Corridor, including the BBF golf course. A tree inventory has not been done for some portions of the Stevens Creek Corridor since 1995, and other portions have never been inventoried. Some of the largest and oldest trees in the City are along Stevens Creek. The majority of the trees along the creek banks, including large numbers of very large native trees, have not been systematically mapped, identified, nor logged in the GIS system. The trees form the backbone of the riparian greenbelt, whose health is integral to the well-being of the creek ecosystem, including state and federally protected wildlife species which live there. To support environmental stewardship and appropriate management, the trees in the Stevens Creek corridor should be inventoried and mapped. Maintaining a healthy urban forest may help reduce urban heat island effects. Climate Change, Extreme Heat, Flood Public Works General fund, Urban and Community Forestry Grant Long term Medium 608 PSC 09-12-2024 608 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 49 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 45 ADA Improvements: ADA Improvement This is an ongoing program funded annually to improve accessibility at all public facilities throughout the City. An update of the City’s ADA Transition Plan was completed in April 2015. The plan identifies improvements needed and priorities to achieve compliance with ADA in public buildings, parks, and the public right of way. All Hazards Public Works General fund, Grants Long term Medium 46 Bicycle Wayfinding: Implement the Bicycle Wayfinding Plan that recommends the locations and messaging for the bicycle wayfinding signage. Bicycle wayfinding assists residents, tourists, and visitors in finding key community destinations by bicycle. Signs may also include “distance to” information, which displays mileage to community destinations. Climate Change, All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, Active Transportation Program Long term Medium 47 Bicycle Boulevard Interim Improvements, Phase 2: Bike boulevards provide a network of Class III shared bike routes along local residential streets, enhanced with traffic calming features to maintain low traffic volumes and speeds, providing bicycle-friendly alternatives to busy roadways. Improvements identified in 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan. Construct bike boulevard improvements along residential streets. Improvements to consist of signing, striping, bike channelizers and flexible post bulb-outs. Climate Change, All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, Active Transportation Program Long term Medium 48 Bicycle Boulevard Interim Improvements, Phase 3: Bike boulevards provide a network of Class III shared bike routes along local residential streets, enhanced with traffic calming features to maintain low traffic volumes and speeds, providing bicycle-friendly alternatives to busy roadways. Improvements identified in 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan. Installation of improvements without raised curbs or crosswalks, only minimal changes to drainage, and installation of temporary bollards. All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, Active Transportation Program Long term Medium 609 PSC 09-12-2024 609 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 50 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 49 Citywide Building Condition Assessment Implementation: Implement recommendations at the Senior Center, Monta Vista Recreation Center and Service Center (Administration and Mechanics shops) identified as a priority in the Comprehensive Facility Condition and Use Assessment. The 2017/18 Comprehensive Facility Condition and Use Assessments project assessed the condition of nearly every City owned facility. Senior Center, Monta Vista Recreation Center, and Service Center (Administration and Mechanics shops) were identified as high priority facilities with significant deficiencies that need to be addressed to avoid costly repairs and extended service interruptions. Climate Change, Extreme Weather, Flood Public Works General fund Long term Medium 50 Civic Center Parking Analysis: Analyze the parking requirement for the Civic Center and proposed Library Expansion. Design and construct additional parking as necessary. This project would analyze the parking condition at the Civic Center including any additional library parking required to mitigate the impact of the proposed library expansion. The analysis will evaluate the existing parking supply versus demand, identify the impact of the proposed library expansion, identify parking mitigation, design and construct or implement that mitigation. Impacting Library Field should be avoided if possible. Climate Change, All Hazards Public Works General fund Long term Medium 610 PSC 09-12-2024 610 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 51 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 51 Interim City Hall (deferred): Establish an interim facility to accommodate City Staff if existing City Hall were to be replaced or significantly remodeled. As a result of the renovation of the existing City Hall building or any substantial work to the building, the Staff and Operations will need to relocate temporarily. The temporary facilities require initial programming to determine the public-facing and back of house requirements, design work, documentation, construction administration and construction services. All Hazards Public Works General fund Long term Medium 52 Lawrence-Mitty Master Plan: Develop a Master Plan (programming, public outreach, and design) for a proposed neighborhood park located on several acres of land adjacent to Saratoga Creek, near the intersection of Lawrence Expressway and Mi y Way. Complete annexation process on the parcel at Lawrence Expressway and Mi y Ave for trail expansion and park development for development of a neighborhood park. The City is under-served for neighborhood parks to meet the level of service goal of the City’s General Plan. The east side of the City is particularly under-served. All Hazards Public Works General fund, Land and Water Conservation Fund Long term Medium 53 Library Expansion Project: Develop, design, and construct a 5600 SF addition to the existing Library building for program rooms that will seat up to 130 and serve as a multi-function meeting space for library events. Using the “Perch” option from the Civic Center Master Plan. This expansion provides alternative meeting space and program space for the library operator. This project includes extensive community outreach. All Hazards Public Works General fund, The Inspiration Grants Long term Medium 611 PSC 09-12-2024 611 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 52 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 54 Quinlan Preschool Shade Structure: Design and construct a new shade structure over the existing play area and sand box at the preschool. The current playground has a shade structure that is ineffective, leaving young preschool students in direct sunlight during use of the playground. The current shade structure is too small and sits squarely over the top of the playground, doing little to provide needed shade. Climate Change, Extreme Heat Public Works General fund, Child Care and Development Infrastructure Grant Program Long term Medium 55 Regnart Road Improvements: Phase 1 will construct a retaining wall to stabilize the road slope to the creek. This project continues the stabilization efforts along Regnart Road and compliments the 2017 Outfall Repair and Slope Stabilization project and the Retaining wall project. The 2017 Regnart Road Slope Stability Study identified several areas along Regnart Road that exhibit poor drainage characteristics, slope stability concerns that require partial road reconstruction in order to avoid costly road or slope failures and lengthy road closures. Proposed improvements include additional drainage structures, regrading/repaving the road to drain towards the creek, slope stabilization and erosion control measures and retaining walls. Climate Change, Heavy Rain, Flood, Landslide Public Works General fund, State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Long term Medium 56 Retaining Wall Repair - Cordova Road: Replace failing retaining wall lagging with City forces. There is an existing wall along Cordova Rd. that retains soil adjacent to private property. The existing retaining wall is showing signs of deferred maintenance and potential premature failure. This project will replace the wood planks (i.e., lagging) in the wall and extend the useful life of the wall. Climate Change, Heavy Rain, Flood, Landslide Public Works General fund Long term Medium 612 PSC 09-12-2024 612 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 53 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 57 Sports Center Community Needs Analysis: Evaluate the potential long-term needs of the facility, the cost of renovations and repairs and the cost-effectiveness of those improvements. The Citywide Building Condition Assessment (BCA) identified several areas of concern with the Sports Center facility. Several structural deficiencies were identified that were deemed high priority and are being addressed this year with the Sports Center Seismic Retrofit project. Additional improvements have been requested and before we implement those projects, we need to identify all the renovations required, the cost and priority of those projects and the cost-effectiveness of repairs versus replacement. All Hazards Public Works General fund Long term Medium 58 Stevens Creek Bank Repair Concept: a conceptual design for repairs to creek banks that will protect property from further erosion and stabilize the bank and is compatible with existing goals and requirements for the creek corridor. Climate Change, Extreme Weather, Flood, Landslide Public Works General fund, Urban Streams Restoration Program Long term Medium 59 Stevens Creek Boulevard CL IV Bikeway - Phase 2 - Design: Next Phase of the SCB Cl IV bikeway, from Wolfe Road to U.S.-85. Design includes signal improvements and a concrete island separating vehicles from bicyclists. This is the second phase of a three-phase program to design and construct separated bikeways from the east City limit to Foothill Expressway. This project funds design only and will result in a shovel ready project and detailed estimate which will better position the City for grant funding in the future. All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, Recreational Trails Program Long term Medium 613 PSC 09-12-2024 613 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 54 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 60 Bubb Road Separated Bikeway - McClellan Road to Stevens Creek Boulevard: Installation of protected bike lanes, sidewalks, a new crosswalk with a pedestrian refuge median island and pedestrian activated flashing beacons and revised lane striping. Apple has offered the City funds to complete these pedestrian and bicycle improvements in order to enhance safety along the section of Bubb Road, between the UPRR Railroad Tracks and Stevens Creek Blvd. Improvements to this section of Bubb Road are included in the Bicycle Transportation Plan. All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, Recreational Trails Program Long term Medium 61 City Bridge Maintenance Repairs: Design and construct 5 bridges' repairs as recommended in the Caltrans Bridge Report along with additional improvements to prolong the useful life of the bridges. The City of Cupertino owns and maintains a total of seven vehicular bridges. Caltrans inspects these bridges and prepares a biennial report detailing the recommended repairs. Six of the seven bridges require rehabilitation; SCB over Stevens Creek has issues not covered by maintenance. The rehabilitation includes the required repairs as recommended in the Caltrans Bridge Report as well as additional work to prolong the life and use of the bridges. Approximately 88% of the project costs are eligible for Federal reimbursement through Caltrans’ Bridge Preventive Maintenance Program (BPMP). Climate Change, Extreme Weather, Flood Public Works General fund, Bridge Investment Program Long term Medium 614 PSC 09-12-2024 614 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 55 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 62 Homestead/De Anza - Design: Improves pedestrian and bicycle safety by realigning the intersection and reconfiguring the vehicle movements. Improvements include relocating two signal mast arms and poles, related electrical, concrete, and striping work, and elimination of the free right turn lanes from eastbound McClellan Road and westbound Pacifica Drive Transportation received a Highway Safety Improvement Program Grant for this work. Project goal is to improve safety at the intersection by enhancing the visibility of the northbound and southbound signal indications. All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, Recreational Trails Program Long term Medium 63 I-280/Junipero Serra Trail - Central Segment: The I-280 Trail formerly known as the Junipero Serra Trail will provide an off-street bicycle and pedestrian connection between the Don Burnett Bicycle-Pedestrian Bridge and Calabazas Creek, along the existing Junipero Serra Channel (south of Interstate 280). Basic design of an off- street bicycle and pedestrian facility parallel to the existing Junipero Serra Channel from De Anza Blvd. Wolfe Road. All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, Recreational Trails Program Long term Medium 64 I-280/Junipero Serra Trail - East Segment: The I-280 Trail formerly known as the Junipero Serra Trail will provide an off-street bicycle and pedestrian connection between the Don Burnett Bicycle-Pedestrian Bridge and Calabazas Creek, along the existing Junipero Serra Channel (south of Interstate 280). Basic design of an off-street bicycle and pedestrian facility parallel to the existing Junipero Serra Channel from Wolfe Road to Vallco Parkway. All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, Recreational Trails Program Long term Medium 615 PSC 09-12-2024 615 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 56 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 65 I-280/Junipero Serra Trail - West Segment: The I-280 Trail formerly known as the Junipero Serra Trail will provide an off-street bicycle and pedestrian connection between the Don Burnett Bicycle-Pedestrian Bridge and Calabazas Creek, along the existing Junipero Serra Channel (south of Interstate 280). Basic design of an off-street bicycle and pedestrian facility parallel to the existing Junipero Serra Channel from the Don Burnett Bicycle – Pedestrian Bridge to De Anza Blvd. All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, Recreational Trails Program Long term Medium 66 Mary Avenue Protected Bikeway: A Class IV bike lane (also called a separated bike lane) is an exclusive facility for bicyclists that is located within or directly adjacent to the roadway and is physically separated from motor vehicle traffic with a vertical element. Design and construct a protected bikeway from Stevens Creek Blvd. to the Don Burnett Bicycle- Pedestrian Bridge. All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, Recreational Trails Program Long term Medium 67 McClellan Road Separated Bike Corridor, Phase 3: A Class IV bike lane (also called a separated bike lane) is an exclusive facility for bicyclists that is located within or directly adjacent to the roadway and is physically separated from motor vehicle traffic with a vertical element. Improves pedestrian and bicycle safety by realigning the intersection and reconfiguring the vehicle movements. Improvements include relocating two signal mast arms and poles, related electrical, concrete and striping work, and elimination of the free right turn lanes from eastbound McClellan Road and westbound Pacifica Drive. Improve traffic flow, efficiency, and bicycle safety at this complex intersection. All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, Recreational Trails Program Long term Medium 616 PSC 09-12-2024 616 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 57 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 68 McClellan Road Separated Bike Corridor - Byrne Ave to Imperial Ave, Phase 4: A Class IV bike lane (also called a separated bike lane) is an exclusive facility for bicyclists that is located within or directly adjacent to the roadway and is physically separated from motor vehicle traffic with a vertical element. Design and construct separated bike lanes on McClellan Rd. from Imperial Ave to Byrne Ave. The 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan identifies improvement needed and priorities to enhance and promote safer bicycle transportation in the City. This project is the last phase of a four-phase program that installed separated bikeway on McClellan Road. All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, Recreational Trails Program Long term Medium 69 QCC Multi-Site Sustainable Infrastructure Upgrade: Develop recommendations for Council on a facility upgrades of heating and cooling system, emergency power system, and renewable energy sources. Staff will recommend options based on operational need, sustainability, funding availability, and life-cycle cost analysis. Faced with several critical needs at the City's community buildings, including Quinlan, the City can maximize energy savings by comprehensively auditing the real estate portfolio and implementing alternative and efficient energy system upgrades. Many of our facilities' systems need major re-work to support new energy systems and improve normal day-to-day services. Quinlan Community Center, as the City's primary Mass Care and Shelter facility and Cooling Center, requires emergency power/systems upgrades as well. All Hazards, including Extreme Heat, Heavy Rain, High Wind, Earthquake, Wildfire, Flood Public Works General fund, The California Energy Commission Long term Medium 617 PSC 09-12-2024 617 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 58 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 70 Regnart Creek Trail: Construction of a multi-use trail along Regnart Creek. The 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan identifies improvements and priorities needed to enhance and promote safer bicycle transportation in the City. The Regnart Creek Trail was identified as a priority in that plan. The Regnart Creek Trail Feasibility Study was completed and approved by City Council, and additional funding was later authorized for design and construction of the trail. All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, Recreational Trails Program Long term Medium 71 Sidewalk Improvements - Orange & Byrne: Acquire right- of-way as needed, initiate design and construction of sidewalks where there are gaps, as well as curb, gutter and drainage improvements. Utility poles currently in the street to be relocated. The Monta Vista neighborhood was annexed to the City without having standard right-of-way improvements, including sidewalks. Orange avenue is a designated bike route that connects several schools on McClellan. Adding sidewalks to the neighborhood will improve pedestrian safety. All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund Long term Medium 72 Stevens Creek Blvd. and Bandley Dr. Signal Upgrades: Design and construct upgrades to the traffic signal at Bandley Dr. and Stevens Creek Blvd. Improvements include new conduit, wiring, traffic signal boxes, two new signal heads, and a split phase signal operation for vehicles entering onto Stevens Creek Blvd. This project will significantly enhance pedestrian safety and pedestrian connectivity across Stevens Creek Blvd within the Crossroads district by reducing pedestrian-vehicle conflicts. Vehicle safety will also be increased for vehicles exiting the Crossroads driveway and Bandley Drive. All hazards with an evacuation component Public Works General fund, California Office of Traffic Safety OTS Grants Long term Medium 618 PSC 09-12-2024 618 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 59 Action Item Number Action Item Description Hazard(s) Mitigated Lead Responsible for Implementation Potential Funding Completion Priority 73 Develop City Community Resilience Hubs: 1. Define criteria for being considered a CRH in Cupertino 2. Develop a list of existing CRHs. Use this list to prioritize facility improvements resource allocation before and after seismic events. Earthquake OEM General Fund, ICARP Ongoing High 619 PSC 09-12-2024 619 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 60 Figure 5: City of Cupertino Critical Facilities 620 PSC 09-12-2024 620 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 61 Figure 6: City of Cupertino Critical Infrastructure 621 PSC 09-12-2024 621 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 62 Figure 7: City of Cupertino Flood Hazard Map 622 PSC 09-12-2024 622 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 63 Figure 8: City of Cupertino Deep-Seated Landslide Susceptibility Map 623 PSC 09-12-2024 623 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 64 Figure 9: City of Cupertino Liquefaction Susceptibility 624 PSC 09-12-2024 624 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 65 Figure 10: City of Cupertino Fire Hazard Severity Zones and Historic Fires 625 PSC 09-12-2024 625 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: City of Cupertino 66 Figure 11: City of Cupertino Wildfire Hazard Classification Map 626 PSC 09-12-2024 626 of 647 Santa Clara County Multijurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Volume 2: Town of Los Gatos 67 Figure 12: City of Cupertino Risk to Structure 627 PSC 09-12-2024 627 of 647 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item 24-13386 Agenda Date: 9/12/2024 Agenda #: 5. Subject: Report by the Santa Clara County Fire District Receive Report by the Santa Clara County Fire District Presenter: Deputy Chief Hector Estrada CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 9/9/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™628 PSC 09-12-2024 628 of 647 Serving Santa Clara County and the communities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, and Saratoga. SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032 | (408) 378-4010 | www.sccfd.org June 13, 2024 Cupertino Public Safety Commission 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Subject: Fire Report for May 2024 To Whom It May Concern: The May 2024 fire reports for the City of Cupertino are enclosed. Significant Events (Last Month): C241320046 Structure Fire: This was a structure fire at a church in an out building on Miller Avenue. Fire damage extended from the building of origin to an attached multipurpose building with an estimated property and content loss of $1,500,000. No injuries to citizens or emergency responders were reported. 1. Incident Counts by Year (YTD): This bar graph represents the total incident count for YTD and for the past five years. 2. Incident Counts by Month: This bar graphs represents the incident count by month. 3. Incident and Response Counts by Hour of Day: This bar graph represents both unique incidents and unit responses by hour of day for the previous 12 months. 4. Average Response Times Analysis (by Unit ID): This table shows the average response times and count by urbanization code for units responding into the jurisdictional boundary. 5. Incident Counts by Type: This table provides the volume and percentage of code two and code three calls by incident category. 6. Incident Types: This pie chart provides a breakdown of the number of calls by incident category. 7. Dollar Loss by Month: This field shows the total dollar loss and incident count for the month. 8. Community Education and Risk Reduction Activities: This table shows the total number of attendees, programs, and staff hours at educational events for the month. Please let me know if you have any questions about the data contained in this report. Sincerely, Matt Yost Deputy Chief Enclosures cc: Suwanna Kerdkaew, Fire Chief MY:kp 629 PSC 09-12-2024 629 of 647 May May 2024 - Incident Snapshot City of Cupe rtino 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 0 500 1000 1500 2000 1,738 1,641 1,304 1,384 1,500 1,534 1,749 Incident Counts by Year (YTD) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 0 100 200 300 Incident and Response Count by Hour of Day Orange = Incidents | Blue = Responses Urban Densities Avg. Code 3 Resp. Time (secs)Responses Rural Densities Avg. Code 3 Resp. Time (secs)Responses B74 E71 E72 E76 E77 H72 R73 T71 28 0 8 28 4 17 90 1 00:04:53 00:04:59 00:05:39 00:04:35 00:05:02 00:05:01 00:04:17 00:09:42 32 2 1 1 00:04:57 00:07:44 00:06:13 00:05:49 Average Response Times Analysis (by Unit ID, Code 3) Jun-2023Jul-2023Aug-2023Sep-2023Oct-2023Nov-2023Dec-2023Jan-2024Feb-2024Mar-2024Apr-2024May-2024 0 100 200 300 400 319 286 325 278 344 347 383 376 372 366 299 336 Incident Counts by Month (Last 12 Months) Incidents % of Total EMS SERVICE FIRE OTHER RESCUE FIRE ALARM HAZ. COND.1.49% 8.33% 0.30% 6.55% 1.49% 12.80% 69.05% 5 28 1 22 5 43 232 Incident Counts by Type 13% 69% 0% 7% 1% 8% 1% EMS FIRE FIRE ALARM HAZ. COND. OTHER RESCUE SERVICE Dollar Loss (May) $1,506,500.00 Incident Count 2 Attendees Programs Staff hours 22:307292 Community Education and Risk Reduction Activities 630 PSC 09-12-2024 630 of 647 Pe rm anente Cr e ek 280 Foothill E x p y Los Altos Golf & Country Club Rancho San Antonio County Park Loyola Stevens Creek Ste vens C a n y o n Rd M o n t e b ello R d Stevens Creek County Park Ste ven s Cre ek Sar atoga C re e k C alab aza s C r eek S B e r n a r d o A v e H en de r s on Ave Inverness Wa y The D a ll es A v e Cascade Dr Oak Av e P o p l a r A v e R a i nbow Dr Rain bow Dr Carlisle Wa yB e l l e v i l l e W a y Lewi s t o n Dr Jo h n s o n Ave A l der b r o o k LnBu b b R d C r e s t o n D r N B l a n e y A v e N S t e l l i n g R d S S t e l l i n g Rd E Esta t esDr S T antau A ve S B lan e y A v e Gr a n tRd S un n y v a l e S a r a t o g a R d Ste vens C reek B lv d W F r e m o n t A v e Homestead Rd Fremon t Ave Mil le r A v e E Homestead Rd N W o lf e R d S D e A n z a B l v d N D e A n z a B lv d L a w r e nc e E x p y E E l C a m i n o Re al F o ot hi ll E x p y W V a l l e y F w y Cupertino G2 Prospect Rd S a r a t o g a S u n n y v a l e R d Q u i t o R d W V a lle y F w y P om eroy A ve Woo dh am s Rd N o b i l i A v e Wa rburto n Av e Borina D r Blackford A v e Doyle R d K i e l y B l vd BowersAve H a mi l ton A v e Bu c k nal l Rd ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !!! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! 77 71 72 79 Jurisdiction Cupertino Fire Stations !Incidents (May 2024) !EMS !Fire !Fire Alarm !Haz. Cond. !Other !Rescue !Service I01½ Miles C:631 PSC 09-12-2024 631 of 647 Serving Santa Clara County and the communities of Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, and Saratoga. SANTA CLARA COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 14700 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos, CA 95032 | (408) 378-4010 | www.sccfd.org July 11, 2024 Cupertino Public Safety Commission 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Subject: Fire Report for June 2024 To Whom It May Concern: The June 2024 fire reports for the City of Cupertino are enclosed. Significant Events (Last Month): C241540032 Structure Fire: This was a fire at a single-family residence on Culbertson Drive. Fire damage was contained to the building of origin with an estimated property and content loss of $150,000. No injuries to citizens or emergency responders were reported. C241690089 Structure Fire: This was a fire in an outbuilding on Pacifica Drive. An arrest was made in connection with this fire. Fire damage was contained to the building of origin with an estimated property and content loss of $50,000. No injuries to citizens or emergency responders were reported. 1. Incident Counts by Year (YTD): This bar graph represents the total incident count for YTD and for the past five years. 2. Incident Counts by Month: This bar graphs represents the incident count by month. 3. Incident and Response Counts by Hour of Day: This bar graph represents both unique incidents and unit responses by hour of day for the previous 12 months. 4. Average Response Times Analysis (by Unit ID): This table shows the average response times and count by urbanization code for units responding into the jurisdictional boundary. 5. Incident Counts by Type: This table provides the volume and percentage of code two and code three calls by incident category. 6. Incident Types: This pie chart provides a breakdown of the number of calls by incident category. 7. Dollar Loss by Month: This field shows the total dollar loss and incident count for the month. 8. Community Education and Risk Reduction Activities: This table shows the total number of attendees, programs, and staff hours at educational events for the month. Please let me know if you have any questions about the data contained in this report. Sincerely, Bill Murphy Acting Deputy Chief Enclosures cc: Suwanna Kerdkaew, Fire Chief BM:kp 632 PSC 09-12-2024 632 of 647 June June 2024 - Incident Snapshot 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 0K 1K 2K 2,069 1,971 1,552 1,681 1,860 1,853 2,064 Incident Counts by Year (YTD) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 0 100 200 300 Incident and Response Count by Hour of Day Orange = Incidents | Blue = Responses Urban Densities Avg. Code 3 Resp. Time (secs)Responses Rural Densities Avg. Code 3 Resp. Time (secs)Responses E71 E72 E73 E76 E77 H72 R74 T71 Mutual Aid/Other 1 26 1 1 33 1 1 13 93 00:04:55 00:04:31 00:00:00 00:03:25 00:04:31 00:10:44 00:22:48 00:04:57 00:04:30 32 2 1 00:04:56 00:06:56 00:10:36 Average Response Times Analysis (by Unit ID, Code 3) Jul-2023Aug-2023Sep-2023Oct-2023Nov-2023Dec-2023Jan-2024Feb-2024Mar-2024Apr-2024May-2024Jun-2024 0 100 200 300 400 286 325 278 344 347 383 376 372 366 299 336 315 Incident Counts by Month (Last 12 Months) Incidents % of Total EMS SERVICE FIRE OTHER RESCUE FIRE ALARM HAZ. COND.0.63% 8.57% 0.32% 3.81% 2.54% 17.46% 66.67% 2 27 1 12 8 55 210 Incident Counts by Type 17% 67% 0% 4% 1% 9% 3% EMS FIRE FIRE ALARM HAZ. COND. OTHER RESCUE SERVICE Dollar Loss (June) $211,700.00 Incident Count 5 Attendees Programs Staff hours 55:309359 Community Education and Risk Reduction Activities City of Cupertino 633 PSC 09-12-2024 633 of 647 Pe rm anente Cr e ek 280 Foothill E x p y Los Altos Golf & Country Club Rancho San Antonio County Park Loyola Stevens Creek Ste vens C a n y o n Rd M o n t e b ello R d Stevens Creek County Park Ste ven s Cre ek Sar atoga C re e k C alab aza s C r eek S B e r n a r d o A v e H en de r s on Ave Inverness Wa y The D a ll es A v e Cascade Dr Oak Av e P o p l a r A v e R a i nbow Dr Rain bow Dr Carlisle Wa yB e l l e v i l l e W a y Lewi s t o n Dr Jo h n s o n Ave A l der b r o o k LnBu b b R d C r e s t o n D r N B l a n e y A v e N S t e l l i n g R d S S t e l l i n g Rd E Esta t esDr S T antau A ve S B lan e y A v e Gr a n tRd S un n y v a l e S a r a t o g a R d Ste vens C reek B lv d W F r e m o n t A v e Homestead Rd Fremon t Ave Mil le r A v e E Homestead Rd N W o lf e R d S D e A n z a B l v d N D e A n z a B lv d L a w r e nc e E x p y E E l C a m i n o Re al F o ot hi ll E x p y W V a l l e y F w y Cupertino G2 Prospect Rd S a r a t o g a S u n n y v a l e R d Q u i t o R d W V a lle y F w y P om eroy A ve Woo dh am s Rd N o b i l i A v e Wa rburto n Av e Borina D r Blackford A v e Doyle R d K i e l y B l vd BowersAve H a mi l ton A v e Bu c k nal l Rd ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 77 71 72 79 Jurisdiction Cupertino Fire Stations !Incidents (Jun 2024) !EMS !Fire !Fire Alarm !Haz. Cond. !Other !Rescue !Service I01½ Miles C:634 PSC 09-12-2024 634 of 647 August 16, 2024 Cupertino Public Safety Commission 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Subject: Fire Report for July 2024 To Whom It May Concern: The July 2024 fire reports for the City of Cupertino are enclosed. Significant Events (Last Month): C242010011 Structure Fire: This was a fire at a four-plex on Westlynn Way. Fire damage was contained to the unit of origin with an estimated property and content loss of $1,000,000. No injuries to citizens or emergency responders were reported. 1.Incident Counts by Year (YTD): This bar graph represents the total incident count for YTD and for the past five years. 2.Incident Counts by Month: This bar graphs represents the incident count by month. 3.Incident and Response Counts by Hour of Day: This bar graph represents both unique incidents and unit responses by hour of day for the previous 12 months. 4.Average Response Times Analysis (by Unit ID): This table shows the average response times and count by urbanization code for units responding into the jurisdictional boundary. 5.Incident Counts by Type: This table provides the volume and percentage of code two and code three calls by incident category. 6.Incident Types: This pie chart provides a breakdown of the number of calls by incident category. 7.Dollar Loss by Month: This field shows the total dollar loss and incident count for the month. 8.Community Education and Risk Reduction Activities: This table shows the total number of attendees, programs, and staff hours at educational events for the month. Please let me know if you have any questions about the data contained in this report. Sincerely, Bill Murphy Acting Deputy Chief Enclosures cc: Suwanna Kerdkaew, Fire Chief BM:kp 635 PSC 09-12-2024 635 of 647 July July 2024 - Incident Snapshot City of Cupertino 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 0K 1K 2K 2,363 2,304 1,825 2,027 2,214 2,139 2,398 Incident Counts by Year (YTD) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 0 100 200 300 Value Incident and Response Count by Hour of Day Orange = Incidents | Blue = Responses Urban Densities Avg. Code 3 Resp. Time (secs)Responses Rural Densities Avg. Code 3 Resp. Time (secs)Responses E71 E72 E73 E76 E77 E79 H72 T71 28 2 1 33 3 1 14 84 00:04:25 00:04:48 00:06:51 00:04:08 00:07:42 00:04:41 00:04:28 00:04:19 33 1 00:05:18 00:06:42 Average Response Times Analysis (by Unit ID, Code 3) Aug-2023 Sep-2023 Oct-2023 Nov-2023 Dec-2023 Jan-2024 Feb-2024 Mar-2024 Apr-2024 May-2024 Jun-2024 Jul-2024 0 100 200 300 400 325 278 344 347 383 376 372 366 299 336 315 334 Incident Counts by Month (Last 12 Months) Incidents % of Total EMS SERVICE FIRE OTHER FIRE ALARM HAZ. COND.1.20% 12.57% 2.10% 2.69% 18.56% 62.87% 4 42 7 9 62 210 Incident Counts by Type 19% 13% 63% 2% 1% 3% EMS FIRE FIRE ALARM HAZ. COND. OTHER SERVICE Dollar Loss (July) $1,003,000.00 Incident Count 3 Attendees Programs Staff hours 14:15489 Community Education and Risk Reduction Activities 636 PSC 09-12-2024 636 of 647 Pe rm anente Cr e ek 280 Foothill E x p y Los Altos Golf & Country Club Rancho San Antonio County Park Loyola Stevens Creek Ste vens C a n y o n Rd M o n t e b ello R d Stevens Creek County Park Ste ven s Cre ek Sar atoga C re e k C alab aza s C r eek S B e r n a r d o A v e H en de r s on Ave Inverness Wa y The D a ll es A v e Cascade Dr Oak Av e P o p l a r A v e R a i nbow Dr Rain bow Dr Carlisle Wa yB e l l e v i l l e W a y Lewi s t o n Dr Jo h n s o n Ave A l der b r o o k LnBu b b R d C r e s t o n D r N B l a n e y A v e N S t e l l i n g R d S S t e l l i n g Rd E Esta t esDr S T antau A ve S B lan e y A v e Ste vens C reek B lv d S un n y v a l e S a r a t o g a R d W F r e m o n t A v e Gr a n tRd Homestead Rd Fremon t Ave Mil le r A v e E Homestead Rd N W o lf e R d S D e A n z a B l v d N D e A n z a B lv d L a w r e nc e E x p y E E l C a m i n o Re al F o ot hi ll E x p y W V a l l e y F w y Cupertino G2 S a r a t o g a S u n n y v a l e R d Prospect Rd Q u i t o R d W V a lle y F w y P om eroy A ve Woo dh am s Rd N o b i l i A v e Wa rburto n Av e Borina D r Blackford A v e Doyle R d K i e l y B l vd BowersAve H a mi l ton A v e Bu c k nal l Rd ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 77 71 72 79 Jurisdiction Cupertino Fire Stations !Incidents (Jul 2024) !EMS !Fire !Fire Alarm !Haz. Cond. !Other !Rescue !Service I01½ Miles C:637 PSC 09-12-2024 637 of 647 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item 24-13387 Agenda Date: 9/12/2024 Agenda #: 6. Subject: Report by the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office Receive report by the Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office Presenter: Captain Neil Valenzuela CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 9/9/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™638 PSC 09-12-2024 638 of 647 City of Cupertino July 2024 Statistical Data and Public Safety Report Office of the Sheriff County of Santa Clara 639 PSC 09-12-2024 639 of 647 Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Tme Time Calls Target Time 1 5.78 7 5 3.97 5 5 4.28 10 5 2.57 7 5 2.45 8 5 3.00 9 5 3.82 5 5 5.80 5 5 6.32 9 5 6.16 5 5 14.40 1 5 5.40 10 5 5.33 81 5 2 6.74 349 9 6.83 303 9 7.28 342 9 6.97 374 9 6.39 351 9 6.60 431 9 7.65 343 9 6.28 357 9 6.07 367 9 7.69 357 9 7.24 338 9 7.51 382 9 6.94 4294 9 3 12.03 253 20 12.33 263 20 9.94 282 20 11.60 248 20 10.85 274 20 16.29 290 20 11.54 268 20 13.62 307 20 9.86 254 20 10.81 323 20 11.55 244 20 10.29 243 20 11.73 3249 20 Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time 1 7.81 6 5 4.96 6 5 4.45 13 5 7.64 8 5 4.41 6 5 7.61 11 5 5.00 8 5 3.65 11 5 0.92 3 5 9.90 3 5 7.11 4 5 8.10 1 5 5.96 80 5 2 6.77 345 9 9.84 355 9 8.15 386 9 7.60 328 9 7.36 336 9 7.33 369 9 7.68 381 9 9.26 379 9 4.30 425 9 6.92 478 9 6.16 461 9 5.84 424 9 7.27 4667 9 3 14.03 242 20 13.22 220 20 13.55 291 20 14.42 242 20 14.42 241 20 15.31 286 20 13.40 291 20 11.64 289 20 5.40 401 20 5.66 378 20 6.54 314 20 6.44 292 20 11.17 3487 20 Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time Time Calls Target Time 1 7.38 6 5 5.67 6 5 5.47 2 5 4.41 3 5 6.95 1 5 5.16 4 5 4.63 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5.67 24 5 2 5.99 446 9 5.68 437 9 6.13 476 9 6.02 430 9 5.93 457 9 5.90 521 9 5.80 534 9 9 9 9 9 9 5.92 3301 9 3 7.22 308 20 7.55 242 20 7.57 294 20 7.24 296 20 7.66 366 20 8.04 347 20 6.61 328 20 20 20 20 20 20 7.41 2181 20 Target Time September October NovemberApril Avg Time December Total Calls May June July August Priority January February March Cupertino 2024 March April May June July August September October Target Time Avg Time Total Calls December Avg Time Total Calls November December Target Time Cupertino 2023 Priority January February July August SeptemberAprilMay Response Times for Cupertino 2022 - 2024 Cupertino 2022 Priority January February March June October November 640 PSC 09-12-2024 640 of 647 Code Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 5 2 2 3 1 3 1 1 0 0 1 1 20 2023 1 3 3 2 1 1 2 1 0 0 6 2 22 2024 3 0 5 0 2 3 3 16 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 4 7 5 6 6 6 7 6 9 7 11 11 85 2023 11 4 9 6 4 3 3 8 8 4 5 3 68 2024 9 6 4 6 10 5 4 44 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 9 8 7 6 8 4 12 10 11 10 5 5 95 2023 9 6 5 4 10 15 12 12 6 5 14 11 109 2024 7 10 8 9 7 7 4 52 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 17 27 19 13 15 16 7 8 7 13 6 5 153 2023 13 20 10 9 4 7 8 10 7 4 3 14 109 2024 8 11 5 8 11 13 18 74 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 15 33 23 16 17 17 20 19 8 28 17 4 217 2023 12 11 19 12 7 23 8 11 6 5 12 7 133 2024 15 14 4 7 11 12 10 73 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 2 14 6 5 2 7 6 5 3 3 2 2 57 2023 3 5 2 4 3 2 3 4 2 7 5 1 41 2024 3 0 3 1 2 5 4 18 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 13 17 10 8 5 10 7 4 2 10 8 8 102 2023 10 3 7 5 9 11 7 6 11 5 2 2 78 2024 2 7 5 6 4 3 3 30 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 12 8 7 8 15 12 4 15 15 17 18 11 142 2023 11 15 11 17 10 13 17 8 19 15 16 6 158 2024 19 12 12 15 16 25 15 114 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 1 2 6 4 4 7 4 1 5 3 5 1 43 2023 5 3 2 6 2 7 4 6 2 2 6 6 51 2024 2 8 3 6 5 3 7 34 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 3 4 3 0 5 4 3 3 2 3 2 5 37 2023 3 5 3 7 4 4 5 5 8 1 0 3 48 2024 3 1 2 1 4 2 5 18 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 0 3 2 2 2 3 2 1 2 1 1 2 21 2023 0 1 4 1 1 3 4 0 2 2 2 0 20 2024 0 0 1 4 2 0 1 8 Identity Theft Forgery Fraud 4700 4702 Vandalism 5940 5941 Sex Crimes 2610 2615 2880 2885 2890 2895 Domestic Violence 2430 2730 Simple & Aggravated Assaults 2400 2401 2402 2403 2404 2405 Burglary, Commercial 4591 4592 Burglary, Vehicle 4593 Auto Theft 4703 Grand Theft 4870 Burglary, Residential 4590 Robbery 2110 2115 City of Cupertino Page 1Public Safety Report Selected Crimes 641 PSC 09-12-2024 641 of 647 Code Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 11 7 21 33 14 12 10 14 13 16 6 8 165 2023 6 11 13 22 7 9 10 11 9 4 9 9 120 2024 8 16 9 20 8 10 11 82 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 8 2 8 8 3 3 6 5 10 6 6 4 69 2023 6 8 6 3 6 5 4 2 5 4 1 3 53 2024 3 5 13 3 6 4 8 42 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 67 47 47 85 38 41 42 60 54 59 42 28 610 2023 39 58 49 44 60 88 76 91 109 97 56 53 820 2024 81 106 99 55 88 92 55 576 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 3 5 3 5 2 1 3 5 5 1 1 2 36 2023 4 2 1 2 0 2 3 4 2 4 2 1 27 2024 1 3 3 0 3 2 6 18 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 4 2 2 1 7 7 8 6 3 6 1 1 48 2023 3 1 1 2 7 3 6 3 5 4 3 3 41 2024 3 8 2 1 1 0 2 17 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 10 5 4 10 9 10 6 7 8 5 5 9 88 2023 3 7 6 8 8 9 10 20 7 10 8 9 105 2024 15 12 15 8 6 13 3 72 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 2023 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 2024 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 4 Other Citations 8310 8315 8320 8325 8330 8335 Accidents, DUI 8050 8055 8060 Accidents, Injury 8000 8005 8030 8035 Accidents, Property Damage 8010 8015 8020 8025 8040 8045 DUIs 8500 8505 8510 Speeding Citations 8305 City of Cupertino Page 2Public Safety Report Traffic Related Activity – Patrol Units Moving Violations 8300 642 PSC 09-12-2024 642 of 647 Code Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 74 166 193 77 143 124 106 98 153 130 94 103 1461 2023 193 103 135 90 134 126 64 84 97 99 127 84 1336 2024 77 163 192 199 176 104 133 1044 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 109 197 200 135 206 107 32 21 64 38 45 20 1174 2023 38 16 19 21 84 55 93 57 52 50 51 34 570 2024 17 63 33 57 50 31 41 292 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 144 148 197 106 154 80 53 49 93 125 115 72 1336 2023 152 71 85 134 120 78 62 77 131 89 91 73 1163 2024 75 61 151 158 150 149 180 924 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2023 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2024 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 4 3 5 7 4 5 5 4 5 4 6 4 56 2023 4 3 5 2 3 5 7 8 4 5 3 1 50 2024 5 2 6 2 6 9 5 35 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 9 12 16 19 11 13 10 15 8 16 16 19 164 2023 25 27 29 12 18 24 26 20 15 21 19 18 254 2024 19 10 20 16 25 24 25 139 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2023 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2024 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 Other Citations 8310 8315 8320 8325 8330 8335 Accidents, DUI 8050 8055 8060 Accidents, Injury 8000 8005 8030 8035 Accidents, Property Damage 8010 8015 8020 8025 8040 8045 DUIs 8500 8505 8510 Speeding Citations 8305 City of Cupertino Page 3Public Safety Report Traffic Related Activity – Traffic Units Moving Violations 8300 643 PSC 09-12-2024 643 of 647 Code Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 85 173 214 110 157 136 116 112 166 146 100 111 1626 2023 199 114 148 112 141 135 74 95 106 103 136 93 1456 2024 85 179 201 219 184 114 144 0 0 0 0 0 1126 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 117 199 208 143 209 110 38 26 74 44 51 24 1243 2023 44 24 25 24 90 60 97 59 57 54 52 37 623 2024 20 68 46 60 56 35 49 0 0 0 0 0 334 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 211 195 244 191 192 121 95 109 147 184 157 100 1946 2023 191 129 134 178 180 166 138 168 240 186 147 126 1983 2024 156 167 250 213 238 241 235 0 0 0 0 0 1500 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 3 5 3 5 2 1 3 5 5 1 1 2 36 2023 5 2 1 2 0 3 3 4 2 4 2 1 29 2024 1 3 3 0 3 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 18 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 8 5 7 8 11 12 13 10 8 10 7 5 104 2023 7 4 6 4 10 8 13 11 9 9 6 4 91 2024 8 10 8 3 7 9 7 0 0 0 0 0 52 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 19 17 20 29 20 23 16 22 16 21 21 28 252 2023 28 34 35 20 26 33 36 40 22 31 27 27 359 2024 34 22 35 24 31 37 28 0 0 0 0 0 211 Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL 2022 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 2023 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 4 2024 1 0 2 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Other Citations 8310 8315 8320 8325 8330 8335 Accidents, DUI 8050 8055 8060 Accidents, Injury 8000 8005 8030 8035 Accidents, Property Damage 8010 8015 8020 8025 8040 8045 DUIs 8500 8505 8510 Speeding Citations 8305 City of Cupertino Page 4Public Safety Report Traffic Related Activity – Patrol and Traffic Units Combined Moving Violations 8300 644 PSC 09-12-2024 644 of 647 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec TOTAL Injury (8000, 8005)8 10 8 3 7 7 7 50 Property Damage (8010)22 16 19 13 17 27 18 132 Accident, No Details (8015)0 0 2 0 2 1 1 6 Bike / Pedestrian (8020, 8025)1 0 1 1 2 3 0 8 Hit & Run - Injury (8030, 8035)0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 Hit & Run - Property Damage (8040)11 5 11 9 8 5 9 58 Hit & Run - No Details (8045)0 1 2 1 2 1 0 7 DUI - Injury (8050, 8055)1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 DUI - Property Damage (8060)0 0 2 0 1 1 0 4 TOTAL ACCIDENTS 43 32 45 27 40 47 35 0 0 0 0 0 269 38.4 West Valley Patrol Accidents Cupertino July 2024 32 45 27 40 47 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 645 PSC 09-12-2024 645 of 647 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item 24-13388 Agenda Date: 9/12/2024 Agenda #: 7. Subject: Report by the City of Cupertino Office of Emergency Management Receive report by the City of Cupertino Office of Emergency Management Presenter: Thomas Chin, Emergency Manager, City of Cupertino CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 9/9/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™646 PSC 09-12-2024 646 of 647 CITY OF CUPERTINO Agenda Item 24-13389 Agenda Date: 9/12/2024 Agenda #: 8. Subject: Commissioner’s Reports Receive Commissioners' reports CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 9/9/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™647 PSC 09-12-2024 647 of 647