HomeMy Public PortalAbout10A TC Multi-Hazard Mitigation PlanAGENDA
ITEM 10.A.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
MEMORANDUM
September 6, 2016
The Honorable City Council
Bryan Cook, City Manager
Via: Michael D. Forbes, AICP, Community Development Director
By: Bryan Ariizumi, Public Safety Supervisor~
SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION NO. 16-5193, ADOPTING THE TEMPLE
CITY MULTI-HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
RECOMMENDATION:
The City Council is requested to adopt Resolution No. 16-5193, adopting the Temple
City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan.
BACKGROUND:
1. On December 29, 2014, the City received notification from FEMA that the plan
was not approved , along with another list of required and recommended revisions.
2. On December 16, 2015, the revised MHMP was re-submitted to FEMA for review
and approval.
3. On December 23, 2015, the City received notification from FEMA that the plan
was not approved , along with another list of required and recommended revisions.
4. On April 26, 2016, the revised MHMP was re-submitted to FEMA for review and
approval.
5. On July 22, 2016, the City received notification from FEMA that the MHMP is
eligible for final approval pending its adoption by the City Council.
ANALYSIS:
Changes to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act have
placed a new emphasis on hazard mitigation planning, primarily moving from post-
disaster mitigation to pre-disaster planning and mitigation.
City Council
September 6, 2016
Page 2 of 2
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (Public Law 1 06-390), requires that every local,
county and state government:
1. Conduct an assessment of the natural hazards that pose a threat to the
jurisdiction;
2. Determine the potential financial impact of these hazards;
3. Create a plan to mitigate these hazards; and
4. Implement the plan to reduce the impacts of natural disasters.
The purpose of the City's MHMP is to have a strategic planning tool available for the
reduction or prevention of injury and damage from natural hazards. The City's planning
process identified which natural hazards Temple City is vulnerable to, determined the
impact of each identified hazard, established a list of potential mitigation actions and
prioritized the actions.
The City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan has been reviewed by the State of
California Governor's Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
Final approval from FEMA requires a formal resolution from the City adopting the
MHMP as part of the City's hazard planning process.
CITY STRATEGIC GOALS:
Adoption of the Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan will further the City's Strategic
Goals of Public Health and Safety, Sustainable Infrastructure, and Citizen Education
and Communication.
FISCAL IMPACT:
This item does not have an impact on the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016-17 City Budget.
Mitigation actions will be incorporated into future budget planning processes.
ATTACHMENT:
A. Resolution No. 16-5193
B. Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION NO. 16-5193
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE
CITY ADOPTING THE TEMPLE CITY MULTI-HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
WHEREAS, on October 30, 2000, the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2002 was enacted, amending
provisions of the Robert T. Stafford Relief Act of 1988, and requiring cities to prepare and submit Natural
Hazard Mitigation Plans in order to qualify for pre-and post-disaster mitigation funds; and
WHEREAS, the City of Temple City recognizes the threat that natural hazards pose to people and
property within our community; and
WHEREAS, undertaking hazard mitigation actions will reduce the potential for harm to people and
property from future hazard occurrences; and
WHEREAS, the City of Temple City fully participated in the FEMA-prescribed mitigation planning
process to prepare this Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan; and
WHEREAS, the State of California Governor's Office of Emergency Services and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Region IX, have reviewed the Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
and approved it contingent upon official adoption by the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TEMPLE CITY DOES HEREBY
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City of Temple City herby adopts the City of Temple City Multi-Hazard
Mitigation Plan ; and
SECTION 2. The City of Temple City will submit this Adoption Resolution to the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, Region IX, to enable to plans final approval.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED ON THIS 6TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016
V1ncent Yu, Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Peggy Kuo, City Clerk Eric Vail, City Attorney
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution, Resolution No. 16-5193, was duly passed, approved and
adopted by the City Council of the City of Temple City at a regular meeting held on the 61h day of
September 2016, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Councilmember-
Councilmember-
Councilmember-
Councilmember-
Peggy Kuo, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT B
City of
Temple City
\ L
1 1 I '--" ·r ( r ,.,.-r \ 1 I I i1. r: .. G F rf.i•'jl
Cl r 't o
MULTI-HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
APRIL 13, 2016
Table of Contents
Part 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................... 6
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. 7
Five -Year Ac ti on Plan ............................................................................................................... 7
Ho\v is the Plan Organized? ........................................................................................................ 7
Who Participated in Developing the Plan? ................................................................................. 7
What is the Plan Mission? ........................................................................................................... 7
What are the Plan Goa ls? ............................................................................................................ 8
How Are the Action Items Organized? ...................................................................................... 9
How Will the Plan be Implemented, Monitored, and Eva luated?............................................ 0
Plan Adoption ....... ................................................................ .................................................... I
Coordinating Body.................................................................................................................... I
Convener .................................................................................................................................. .
Implementation through Existing Programs ............................................................................ .
Econom ic Ana lysis of Mitigation Projects............................................................................... I
Fonnal Revie\v Process............................................................................................................. 2
Continued Pub li c In vo lvement ................................................................................................. 2
Part II: Mitigation Background and Planning..................................................... 3
SECTION 1: Introduction ................................................................................................. 4
Why Develop a Mitigation Plan? .............................................................................................. 5
Whom Does the Mitigation Plan Affect?.................................................................................. 5
Multi-Hazard Land Use Policy in California ............................................................................ 5
Support for Mu lti-Hazard Mitigation........................................................................................ 6
Plan Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 6
Input From the Hazard Mitigation Ad visory Committee ..................................................... 6
takeholder lntervie,vs.......................................................................................................... 7
State and Federal Gu idelines and Requirements fo r Miti gation Plan s ................................. 7
Hazard pecific Research..................................................................................................... 8
Public Workshops ..................................................................................................................... 8
Ho'v the Plan Is Used ................................................................................................................ 8
Part 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................ 9
Part II: Mitigation Background and Planning ....................................................................... 9
Part Ill: Hazard-Specific In formation ................................................................................. 20
Part IV: Appendices .............................................................................................................. 20
Why Plan for Hazards in the City of Temple City? .................................................................. 22
Geography and the Environment .............................................................................................. 22
Con1mun ity Profile .................................................................................................................... 22
Cli1nate ...................................................................................................................................... 26
Minerals and So ils .................................................................................. : .................................. 27
Other ignificant Geologic Features ......................................................................................... 28
Population and Demographics .................................................................................................. 28
Land and Develop1nent ............................................................................................................. 30
City ofTemple City Multi-Ha=ard Mitigation Plan
The City ofTrees .................................................................................................................. 30
Historic Ten1ple City ............................................................................................................. 31
Housing ..................................................................................................................................... 32
Ernployn1ent and Industry ......................................................................................................... 32
Transportation and Com muti ng Patterns .................................................................................. 33
Wildfire Potential ...................................................................................................................... 34
SECTION 3: Risk Assessment ...................................................................................... 37
What is a Risk Assessment? ..................................................................................................... 37
I) Hazard Identification ........................................................................................................ 3 7
2) Profil in g Hazard Events .................................................................................................... 37
3) Vu lnerabi lity Assessment/Inventorying Assets ................................................................ 37
4) Risk Analysis .................................................................................................................... 37
5) Assessing Vu lnerability/ Analyzing Development Trends .............................................. 38
Federal Requirements for Risk Assessment: ............................................................................ 38
Critical Facilities and Infras tructure: ........................................................................................ 39
Surnmary ................................................................................................................................... 43
SECTION 4: Multi-Hazard Goals and Action Items ........................................... 44
Mission ...................................................................................................................................... 44
Goals ......................................................................................................................................... 44
Strategy for Selecting Action Items .......................................................................................... 44
Mitigation Plan Goals ............................................................................................................... 45
Pub! ic Participation ................................................................................................................... 46
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Items ............................................................................. 46
20 16 Mitigation Action Items ................................................................................................... 4 7
SECTION 5: Plan Maintenance ................................................................................... 52
Monitorin g and Implementing the Plan .................................................................................... 52
Plan Adopti on ....................................................................................................................... 52
Coordinating Body ................................................................................................................ 52
Co nvener ............................................................................................................................... 52
Implementation through Existing Programs ......................................................................... 52
Economi c Analysis of Mitigati on Projects ............................................................................... 56
Evaluating and Updating the Plan ............................................................................................. 57
Fo rm al Review Process ......................................................................................................... 57
Continued Publ ic involvement ............................................................................................. 57
Part Ill: Hazard-Specific Information ........................................................................ 59
Introduction: Hazard Probabilities ............................................................................. 60
SECTION 1: Earthquakes ................................................................................................ 63
Why Are Earthquakes a Threat to the City o fTemple City? .................................................... 63
Earthquake-Related Hazards ..................................................................................................... 69
Earthquake Hazard Assessrnent ................................................................................................ 72
Hazard Identification ............................................................................................................ 72
Vu lnerability Assessn1ent ..................................................................................................... 83
Risk Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 83
Community Earthquake Issues ................................................................................................. 84
What is Susceptible to Earthquakes? .................................................................................... 84
Existing Mitigation Activities ................................................................................................... 87
2
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Earthquake Mi tigati on Action Items ......................................................................................... 87
Earthqu ake Resource Directory ................................................................................................ 90
SECTION 2: Floods ............................................................................................................ 94
Fl oods in Los Angeles County .................................................................................................. 94
Floods in the City ofTemple City ............................................................................................ 95
San Gabriel Ri ver Watershed (with Templ e City Location In dicated) ..................................... 96
Flood Hazard Profile ................................................................................................................. 97
Los Angeles Co unty Flood Management Plan ....................................................................... I 03
Current Flood Mi tigation Ordinances ..................................................................................... I 05
NFfP and Repetiti ve Flood Properties .................................................................................... I 05
Fl ood Mitigation Acti on Items ................................................................................................ I 05
Flood Resource Directory ....................................................................................................... I 09
SECTION 3: Windstorms ............................................................................................... 11 5
Wh y are Windstorms a Threat to the City of Temple City? ................................................... 115
Windstorm Characteristics in Southern Cali forn ia ............................................................. 115
Windstorrn Hazard Assess1nent .............................................................................................. I 18
Hazard ldenti fication .......................................................................................................... 118
Community Windstorm Issues ................................................................................................ 11 9
Existing Windstorm Mitigat ion Activities .......................................................................... 122
Windstorm Mitigation Action ftems ....................................................................................... 123
Windstorm Resource Directory .............................................................................................. 126
SECTION 4: Human Threats ........................................................................................ 127
Why are Human-M ade Di sasters a Threat to the City of Temple City? ................................. 127
History of Human-Made Disasters in Southern California ................................................. 127
Characteristics of Major Hum an-Made Disasters in Southern Ca li fornia .......................... 128
Human -Made Hazard Assessment .......................................................................................... 128
Hazard ldenti fication .......................................................................................................... 128
Vulnerability Assessment/ Risk Analysis ........................................................................... 129
Mitigati on Action Items .......................................................................................................... 130
Human Threats Resource Directory ........................................................................................ 133
Part IV: Appendices ......................................................................................................... 134
APPENDIX A: Benefit Cost Analysis ........................................................................ 135
STAPLEE Worksheets ..................................................................................................... 140
APPENDIX B: Public Outreach ................................................................................... 146
APPENDIX C: Funding ..................................................................................................... 149
APPENDIX D: Acronyms ................................................................................................. 154
APPENDIX E: Glossary .................................................................................................... 162
3
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
List of Maps and Figures
Maps
Map of location of Temple City within SoCal. ...................................................... l4
Freeway Map of Los Angeles County ................................................................... 23
Map of Temple City ............................................................................................... 24
Map ofMajor Rivers .............................................................................................. 25
Map of Washes and Channels ................................................................................ 26
Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in Los Angeles County ........................... 35
Section ofVHFHSZ Map showing Temple City ................................................... 36
Map of Water Districts ........................................................................................... 4 1
Map of Critical Facilities ...................................................................................... .42
Evac uati on Routes ................................................................................................. 43
Southern Califo rnia Eart hquake Fau lts .................................................................. 66
Major Faults - Los Ange les Region ...................................................................... 67
Major Earthquakes in Southern Californ ia since 1812 .......................................... 68
Seismic Zones in Californ ia ................................................................................... 70
Earthquake Planning Scenari o Maps ............................................................... 75-82
Santa Fe Dam Failure Inundation Map .................................................................. 85
Los Angeles River Watershed ............................................................................... 95
San Gabri el Ri ver Watershed ................................................................................. 96
Flood Hazard Map from Temple City General Plan .............................................. 98
Nationa l Flood Hazard Layer Map ........................................................................ 99
FEMA FMCS Unprodu ced Im age showing Temple City ................................... ! 00
Eaton Was h and Arcadi a Wash Dra inage Areas .................................................. l 02
Santa Ana Wi nd Il lustration ................................................................................. I 09
4
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Graphs/Charts
Average Temperature ............................................................................................. 27
Precipitation ........................................................................................................... 27
20 I 0 Population Demographics ............................................................................. 29
Jobs by Sector 20 I 0 ............................................................................................... 33
Journey to Work for Residents, Transportati on Mode Choice .............................. 35
Federal Criteria for Ri sk Assessment .................................................................... 39
List of Critical Facilities ........................................................................................ 39
List of Local Ordinances .................................................................................. 53-56
Natural Hazards Probability Chart ......................................................................... 61
Causes and Characteri stics of Earthquakes in Southern California ....................... 65
Abridged Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale ......................................................... 7 1
Eaton Wash Average Monthly Water Depth 2000-2012 ..................................... 101
Arcadia Wash Average Monthly Water Depth .................................................... ! 02
Microburst Graphic .............................................................................................. I 07
Do\.vnburst Grap hic .............................................................................................. I 08
Bea u fort Scale ...................................................................................................... ! II
5
City of Temple City Mult i-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Part 1:
Introduction
6
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Executive Summary
Five-Year Action Plan
The City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Miti gati on Plan includes resources and information to
ass ist City residents, public and private sector organizations. and others interested in
participating in planning fo r natural and hum an-made hazards. The mitigation plan provides a
li st of activities that may assist Temple City in reducing risk and preventing loss from future
hazard events. The action items address multi-hazard issues, as well as activities for
earthquakes. flooding, windstorms and hum an-made hazard s.
How is the Plan Organized?
The miti gation plan contains a fi ve-year action plan. background on the purpose and
methodology used to develop the mitigation plan, a profil e of Temple City. sections detailing
the four hazard s that occur within the City, and a number of appendices. All ofthese sections are
described in Section I, the plan introducti on.
Who Participated in Developing the Plan?
The City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan is the result of a collaborative effort
between Temple City citi zens, public agencies, non-profit organizations, the private sector, and
regional and state organ izations. Public parti cipati on played a key role in development of goals
and action items. Interviews were condu cted with stakeholders across the City, and one public
workshop was held to include City of Temple City residents in plan development. The City
provided a link on its website to allow for ongoing citizen/stakeholder input. A Hazard
Mitigation Advi sory Committee guid ed the process of developing the plan, including the
STAPLEE process, stakeholder and public meetin gs.
T he Hazard Mitigation Advisory Committee was comprised of representatives from:
./ City of Temple City Plann ing
./ City ofTemple City Public Safety Coordinator
./ Los Angeles County Fire Department
./ Los Angeles County Sheriffs Departm ent
./ City of Temple City Finance
./ City ofTemple City Parks and Recreation Department
What is the Plan Mission?
The mi ssion of the City ofTemple City Mu lti-Hazard Mitigation Plan is to promote sound public
policy designed to protect citizens, critical faci lities, infrastructure, pri vate property, and the
envi ron ment fro m natural and human-made hazards. This can be achieved by increasing public
awareness. documenting the resources for risk reduction and loss-prevent ion, and identi fying
acti vities to guide the City towards bu ilding a safer. more sustainable community. The mission
7
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
of th is Plan is to evaluate local hazards and provide leadership and direction for future mitigation
planning.
What are the Plan Goals?
The plan goals describe the overall direction Temple City agencies, organi zations, and citizens
can take to work toward mitigating risk fro m natural and human-made hazards. The goals are
stepping-stones between the broad direction ofthe mi ssion statement and the specifi c
recommendations outlined in the action items.
Protect Life and Property:
../ Implement activities that ass ist in protecting lives by making homes, businesses.
infrastructure, critical faci I ities, and other property more resistant to losses from
natural and hu man-made hazards .
../ Reduce losses and repetitive damages for chronic hazard events whil e promoting
in surance coverage for catastrophic hazards .
../ Improve hazard assessment information to make recommendations fo r discouraging
new development in hi gh hazard areas and encouraging preventative measures for
existing development in areas vulnerable to natural and hum an-made hazards.
Public Awareness:
../ Develop and implement education and outreach programs to increase public
awareness of the risks assoc iated with natu ra l and human-made hazards .
../ Provide information on tools; partnership opportun ities. and funding resources to
assist in implementing mitigati on acti vities.
Natural Systems:
../ Balance natural resource management, and land use planning with mu lti-hazard
mitigation to protect life, property, and the environment.
../ Preserve, rehabilitate. and enhance natural systems to serve multi-hazard mitigation
functions.
Partnerships and Implementation:
../ trengthen communication and coordinate participation among and withi n public
agencies, citizens, non-profit organizati ons, businesses, and indu stry to gain a vested
in terest in implementation .
../ Encourage leadership within public and private sector organizations to prioritize and
8
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
implement local and regional hazard mitigation activities.
Emergency Services:
../ Establish policy to ensu re miti gati on projects for critical facilities. servi ces, and
infrastru cture .
../ Strengthen emergency operati ons by increasing collaboration and coordination
among public agencies, non-profit organi zations, businesses, and industry .
../ Coordinate and integrate multi-hazard mitigation activities. where appropriate. with
emergency operations plans and procedures.
How Are the Action Items Organized?
The action items are a I isting of activities in wh ich City agencies and citizens can be engaged to
reduce risk. Each action item includes an estimate of the timeline for im plementation. hort-
term action items are activit ies that City agencies may implement with existing resources and
authorities within one to two years. Long-term action items may requ ire new or additional
resources or authorities, and may take between one and fi ve years (or more) to implement.
The action items are organized with in the foll owing matrix, which lists al l of the multi-hazard
and hazard-speci fi e acti on items included in the mitigation plan. Data collection and research
and the public participation process resulted in the development of these acti on items. The
fo liO\ ing information is included fo r each action item:
Coordinating Organization:
The coordinatin g organization is th e public agency with regu latory responsibi li ty to address
natural and manmade hazard . or that is\ illing and able to organize resources, find
appropriate funding, or oversee activity implementation, monitoring, and evaluation.
Coordinating organizations may include local, county. or regional agencies that are capable
of or responsible for implementing acti vities and programs.
Timeline:
Action items include both short and long-term activities. Each acti on item includes an
estimate of the timeline for implementation. hort-term action items are activ it ies which
City agencies are capable of implementing with existing resources and authorities within
one to two years. Long-term action items may require new or additional resources or
authorities. and may take bel\ een one and five years (or more) to implement.
Ideas for Implementation:
Each action item includes ideas for implementation and potential resources, whi ch may
include grant programs or human resources.
City ofTemp/e City Multi-! Iazard Mitigation Plan
9
---------------~---------------------------------------------------
Plan Goals Addressed:
The plan goals addressed by each action item are included as a way to monitor and evaluate
how well the mitigation plan is achieving its goals once im plementation begin s. The pl an
goals are organized into the fo ll owing five areas:
../ Protect Life and Property
../ Public Awareness
../ atural Systems
../ Partnerships and Imp lementation
../ Emergency Services
Partner Organizations:
The partner organizations are not listed with the ind ividual action items or in the pl an
matrix. The partner orga nizations listed in the resource directories of the City ofTemple
City Mu lti-Hazard Mitigation Plan are potent ia l partners recommended by the Hazard
Mitigation Advisory Committee but were not necessarily contacted during the development
of the mi tigation plan. Partner organizations should be contacted by the coord inating
organi zation to establish comm itment of time and resources to action items.
Constrain ts:
Constraints may apply to some of the action items. These constraints may be a lack of Ci ty
staff, lack of fu nds, or vested property rights whi ch might expose the City to lega l action as
a resu lt of adverse impacts on private property.
How Will the Plan be Implemented, Monitored, and Evaluated?
The plan maintenance secti on of this document detail s the formal process that will ensure that
the City ofTemple City Mul ti-Hazard Mitigation Plan remains an active and relevant document.
The plan maintenance process includes a schedule for monitoring and evaluating the Plan
annually and producing pl an revision every five years. Thi s section describes how the City wi ll
integrate public participation throughout the plan mai ntenance process. Finally, this section
includes an explanation of how the Ci ty of Temple City government intends to incorporate the
mitigation strategies outl ined in this Plan in to existing planning mechan isms such as the City's
General Plan, Capital Improvement Plans, and Bu ilding & Safety Codes.
10
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Plan Adoption
Adoption ofthe Multi-Hazard Mitigati on Pl an by the local jurisdicti on's governin g body is one
of the prime req uirements for approva l of the Pl an. Once the Plan is compl eted , the City Council
will be responsible for adopting the City o f Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan. The
local agency governing body has the responsibility and authori ty to promote sound public policy
regarding natural and human-made hazards. The City Council will periodi cally need to re-adopt
the Plan as it is revised to meet changes in the hazard risks and exposures in the community. The
approved Multi-H azard Mitigation Pl an will be significant in the future growth and development
of the community.
Coordinating Body
A I Iazard Mitigation Advisory Comm ittee wi ll be responsible for coordinating im plementation
of Plan action items and undertaking the form al review process. The City Manager. or designee.
' ill assign representati ves from City agencies. including. but not limited to, the current Hazard
Mi tigation Advisory Committee members.
Convener
The City Council will adopt the City ofTempl e City Mu lti-Hazard Mitigation Plan, and the
I Iaza rd Mitigation Advisory Com mittee wi ll take responsibi li ty for Plan imp lementati on. The
City Manager, or designee. wi ll serve as a convener to faci litate the Hazard Mitigation Advisory
Committee meetings, and wi ll assign tasks such as updating and presenting the Plan to the
members of the committee. Plan im plementation and evaluation will be a shared responsibility
among all of the Hazard Mitigation Adv isory Committee members.
Implementation through Existing Programs
The City of Temple City addresses statewide planning goa ls and legislative req uirements through
its General Plan, Capital Improvement Plans, and City Bui lding & afety Codes. The Mu lti-
Hazard Mitigation Plan provides a seri es of recomm endations th at are closely related to the goa ls
and objectives of these existing planning programs. The City will have th e opportunity to
implement recommended mitigation acti on items through existing programs and procedures.
Each department identified as the coordin atin g department for each action item has regular
plann ing meetings to address ongoi ng issues. As the funding becomes available the departments
will be directed to in clude the mitigation action item s in their planning for the impl ementation
proces .
Economic Analysis of Mitigation Projects
The Federal Emergency Management Agency's approaches to identi fy costs and benefits
a sociated with multi-hazard mitigation strategies or projects fa ll into t\\O general categories:
benefit/cost analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis. Conducting benefit/cost analysi for a
mit igation activity can assist communities in determining whether a project is worth undertaking
I I
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
now, in order to avoid disaster-related damages later. Cost-effecti veness analysis evaluates how
best to spend a given amount of money to achieve a specific goal. Determining th e econom ic
feasibility of mitigating natural and human-made hazards can provide decision makers with an
understanding of the potential benefits and costs of an activity, as wel l as a bas is upon which to
compare alternative projects.
Formal Review Process
The City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigati on Plan wi ll be evaluated on an annual basis to
determine the effectiveness of programs, and to reflect changes in land development or programs
that may affect mitigation priorities. The evaluation process incl udes a firm schedule and
timeline, and identifies the local agencies and organ izations participating in Plan evaluation. The
conven er will be responsible for contacti ng the Hazard Mitigation Advisory Comm ittee members
and organ izi ng the annual meeting. Comm ittee members wi ll be responsible for monitoring and
evaluatin g the progress of the mitigation strategies in the Plan.
Continued Public Involvement
The City ofTemple City is dedicated to involving the public directly in the conti nual review and
updates of the Mu lti-Hazard Mitigation Plan. Copies of the Plan will be catalogued and made
available at City Hall and at the City publ ic library. The ex istence and location of these copies
wil l be publicized in City newsletters. In addition copies of the Plan and any proposed changes
will be posted on the City website. This site wi ll also contain an email add ress and phone
number to which people can direct the ir comments and concerns.
12
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Part II:
Mitigation
Background
and Planning
City ofTemple City Multi-Ha=ard Mitigation Plan
13
SECTION 1: Introdu ction
Throughout hi story, the residents of the City of Temple City have dealt with the various hazards
affecting the area. Photos, journal entries and newspapers from the 1800s show that residents of
the greater Los Angeles area dealt with earthq uakes. flooding, and windstorms.
Although there were fewer people in the area, the natural hazards adversely affected the lives of
those who depended on the land and climate conditions for food and welfare. As the population
of the City contin ues to increase. the exposure to natural and hu man-made hazards creates an
even higher risk than prev iously experienced.
The City of Temple City offers the bene fits of livi ng in a Mediterranean type of climate.
However, the potential impacts of natural hazards associated with the terrain make the
environment and pop ulation vulnerable to natural disaster situations.
The City is subject to earthquakes. floodi ng, windstorms and human-made hazards. It is
impossible to predict exactly when these disasters will occur, or the extent to which th ey \ ill
affect the City. However, with careful planni ng and collaboration among pub lic agencies,
private sector organizations, and citizens wi th in the community, it is poss ible to min im ize the
losses that can result fi·om these natural disasters.
The City ofTemp le City most recently ex perienced some destructi on duri ng the 1987 Whittier
Narrows Earthquake.
City of Temple City Multi-Ha=ard Mitigation Plan
14
Why Develop a Mitigation Plan?
As the costs of damage fi·om natural disasters continue to increase, the community realizes the
importance of identifying effecti ve ways to reduce vulnerability to disasters. Mu lti-hazard
mitigation plans ass ist communities in redu cing risk from natural and human-made hazards by
identifyi ng resources, information, and strategies fo r risk reduction, whi le helping to guide and
coordinate mitigation acti vities throughout the City.
The Plan provides a set of action items to reduce risk from natural and human-made hazards
through education and outreach programs and to fo ster the development of partnerships, and
implementation of preventative activities such as land use programs that restrict and control
developm ent in areas subj ect to damage from natural and human-made hazards.
The resources and information within the Mu lti-H azard Mitigation Plan:
(I) Establish a basis for coordination and collaborati on among agencies and the
public in th e City of Temple City;
(2) Identify and prioritize future mitigation projects; and
(3) Assist in meeti ng the requirements of federal assistance progra ms.
The Mitigation Plan works in conjunction with other City plans, including the City General Plan
and Emergency Operations Plan.
Whom Does the Mitigation Plan Affect?
The Multi-Hazard Mitigation Pl an affects the entire city. This Plan provides a framework for
planning for natural and human-made haza rd s. The resou rces and background information in the
Plan is appl icable City-wide. and the goa ls and recomm endations can lay groundwork for local
mitigation plans and partnerships.
Multi-Hazard Land Use Policy in California
Planning fo r hazards sho uld be an integral element of any city's land use planning program. Al l
Ca liforn ia cities and counties have General Plans and the imp lementing ordi nances that are
requ ired to comply with the statewide plann ing regulations.
The continuing challenge faced by local offi cials and state government is to keep the network of
local plans effective in responding to the changin g conditions and needs of Cali fo rni a's diverse
communiti es, parti cul arly in light of the very active seismic region in which we live. This is
particularly true in the case of commun ities which must balance development pressures with
detailed information on the nature and extent of hazards.
Planning for natu ra l and human-made hazards call s for local plans to include inventories,
policies. and ordinances to guide development in hazard areas. These inventories should inc lude
the compendium of hazards facing the community. the built environment at risk, the personal
property that may be damaged by hazard events and most of all. the people who live in the
shadow of these hazard s.
15
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Support for Multi-Hazard Mitigation
All mitigation is local, and the primary responsibili ty for development and implementation of
risk reduction strategies and policies lies with local jurisdictions. Local jurisdictions, however,
are not alone. Partners and resources exist at the regional, state. and fed eral levels. umerous
California state agencies have a role in multi-haza rd mitigati on. Some of the key agencies
include:
../ The California Governor's Office of Emergency Serv ices (Cal OES) is responsible for
disaster mitigation, preparedness, response, recovery, and the admini stration of federal
funds after a major disaster declaration;
../ The Southern Cali forn ia Earthquake Center (SCEC) gathers in formation about
earthquakes, integrates this information on earthquake phenomena, and communicates
this to end-users and the general public to increase earthquake awareness, reduce
economic losses, and save lives .
../ The California Di vision of Forestry (CDF) is responsib le for all aspects of wi ldland fire
protection on private and state land , and it administers forest practice regulations,
including lands I ide mitigation, on non-federal lands .
../ The California Division of Mines and Geology (DMG) is responsible for geologic hazard
characterization, public educati on, the development of partnerships aimed at reducing
risk, and exceptions (based on science-based refinement of tsunami inundation zone
delineation) to state-mandated tsunam i zone restrictions; and
../ The California Division of Water Resources (DWR) plans, designs, constructs, operates,
and maintains the State Water Project; regulates dams; prov ides fl ood protection and
assists in emergency management. It also educates the public and serves local water
needs by providing technical assistance.
Plan Methodology
Information in the Mitigation Plan is based on research from a variety of sources. Staff from the
City ofTemple City conducted data research and ana lysis, faci litated advisory committee
meetings and public workshops, and developed the final mitigation plan. The research methods
and various contributions to the Plan include:
Input Fro m the Hazard Mitigation Advisorv Committee:
The Hazard Mitigation Advisory Committee guided development of the Mitigation Plan. The
committee played an integral role in developing the mi ssion, goals, and action items fo r the
Mitigation Plan .
../ City of Temple City Planning
../ City of Temple City Publ ic afety Coordinator
City ofTemple City Mulli-Ha::.ard Mitigation Plan
16
./ Los Angeles County Fi re Department
./ Los Angeles County Sheriff's Departm ent
./ City of Temple City Fi nance
./ City of Temp le City Parks and Recreation Department
Stakeholder Interviews:
The Temple City Emergency Working Group represents key stakeholders in the Temple City
commun ity. This group reviewed the hazard mitigation plan and di scussed key short-and long-
term activities to reduce risks from hazards. The working group includes:
• Temple City Unified School District
• Temple Stati on LASD
• LA County Fire Department
• City of Rosemead
• Local clergy and service groups
• The American Red Cross
State and Federal Guidelines and Requirements for Mitigation Plans:
Fo llowing are the federa l requi rements fo r approval of a Mu lti-Hazard Mitigation Plan:
./ Open public involvement, with public meetings that introd uce the process and project
requirements .
./ The public must be afford ed opportun ities for in volvement in identifying and assessing
risk, drafting a Plan, and public involvement in approval stages of the Plan .
./ Community cooperation, with opportunity for other local governm ent agencies, the
business community, educational institutions, and non-profits to participate in the
process .
./ Incorporation of local documents, including the City's General Pl an, the Zo ning
Ordinance, the Building Codes, and other pertinent documents.
The following components must be part of the planning process:
./ Complete documentation of th e plannin g process;
./ A detailed ri sk assessment on haza rd exposures in the com munity;
./ A comprehensive mitigation strategy which descri bes the goals and objectives, incl uding
proposed strategies, programs and actions to avoid long-term vu lnerabi lities;
17
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
./ A plan maintenance process, which describes the method and schedule of monitoring.
evaluati ng, and updating the Plan, as ' ell as integration of the mitigation plan into ot her
planni ng mechanisms;
./ Formal adoption by the City Co uncil; and
./ Plan Review by both Cal OE and FEM A.
These requirements are spelled out in greater deta il in the following Plan sections and supporting
documentation.
A public workshop (or other public forums) is recommended to allow for public participation. in
addition to the inclusion of representatives from outside organizations on the planning committee
itself. The tim ing and schedul ing of the workshops may vary from one community to another
depending on how each city's committee organizes its work and th e particular needs of the
community.
City of Temple City staff examined existing mitigation plans from arou nd Los Angeles County
and the tate of Californ ia Multi-Hazard Mitigati on Plan Guidance.
Hazard Specific Research:
Temple City staff co llected data and compi led research on four hazards: earthquakes, nooding,
windstorms and human-made hazards. Research materials came from federal agencies including
FEMA. state agencies includ ing Cal OE and CDF. city resources such as the afcty Plan. and
other sources. City of Temple City staff conducted research by referencing historical local
ne\ spapers. interviewi ng longti me residents and longtime City employee , and locating City
information in historical documents.
City of Templ e City staff identified current mitigati on acti vities, resources and programs. and
potential action items from research materi als and stakeholder interviews.
Public Workshops
City ofTempl e City sta ff fa cilitated a public wo rkshop to gather comments and ideas from
Temple City citizens about mi tigation plann ing and priorities for mitigation plan goals. This was
held on October 16,2012.
How the Plan Is Used
Each secti on of the Mitigation Plan provides information and resource to assist people in
understanding the City and the hazard-related issues fac ing citizens, businesses, and the
environment. Comb ined, the sections of the Plan work together to create a document that guides
the mission to reduce risk and prevent loss from future hazard events.
The structure ofthe Plan enables people to use a section of interest to them. It also al lows Ci ty
governm ent to review and upd ate ections when new data becomes available. The ability to
City ofTemple City Multi-Ha::ard Mitigation Plan
18
update individual sections ofthe Mitigation Pl an places less of a fin ancial burden on th e City.
Decision-makers can allocate funding and staff resources to selected pieces in need of review,
thereby avoid ing a fu ll update, which can be cost ly and tim e-consuming. ew data can be easi ly
incorporated. resultin g in a Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan that remains current and relevant to
City of Temple City.
The plan is divided into four sections: introduction, mit igation background and planning, hazard-
specific information, and appendices.
Part 1: Introduction
Executive Summary:
Th is provides an overvi ew of the Multi-H azard Miti gation Plan mission, goals, and action items.
Th is section describes how the plan was developed, who was involved, the goals of the plan.
how it is organized, and how it will be impl emented and evaluated.
Introduction:
Th is introduction describes the background and purpose of developing the Mi ti gation Plan for
the City of Temple City.
Plan Development:
Who participated in the development of the plan?
Goal of the Plan:
What is thi s plan intended to accomplish?
Organization and Priority of Action Items:
How are the action items for general and specific hazards organized and priorit ized?
Implementation, Monitoring and Evaluation:
How is the new plan implemented? How will th e City monitor and evaluate the progress of the
plan?
Part II: Mitigation Background and Planning
Section 1: Introduction
The Introduction describes the background and purpose of developin g the m itigation plan
for the City of Temple City.
Section 2: Community Profile
Thi s section presents the history, geograph y, demograp hics, and socioeconomics of City of
Temple City. It serves as a tool to provide a historical perspective of natural and human-
made hazards in the City.
19
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Section 3: Risk Assessment
This section provides inform ation on hazard identification, vulnerability and risk
associated with natural and human-made hazards in the City of Temple City.
Section 4: Multi-Hazard Goals and Action Items
This section provides a description of the original acti on items and describes how they
were implemented. This is fo llowed by a list of the new action items for next fi ve years.
Section 5: Plan Maintenance
This section provides information on plan implementation, monitoring, and evaluation.
Part III: Hazard-Specific Information:
Hazard-specific information on four natural and man-made hazards is addressed in this
plan. Chronic hazards occur with some regularity and may be predicted through historic
ev idence and scientific meth ods. The hazards addressed in the plan incl ude:
Section 1:
Section 2:
Section 3:
Section 4:
Earthquake
Flooding
Windstorms
H uman T hreats
Catastrophic hazard s do not occur with the frequency of chronic hazards. but can have
devastating impacts on li fe, property, and the environment. In Southern Cali fo rnia, earthquakes.
earth movement, flooding and hum an-made have the poten tial to be catastrophic as well as
chronic hazards. For the coastal areas of Southern California, tsunamis, while very rare, have the
potential to calami tously devastate low-lying coastal areas.
Each ofthe hazard-specific sections in cludes information on the history, hazard causes and
characteristics, hazard assessment, goals and action items, and local, state, and national
resources.
Part IV: Appendices:
The plan appendices are designed to provide users of the City of Templ e City Multi-Hazard
Mitigation Plan with add itiona l information to assist them in understanding the contents of the
mitigation plan, and potential resources to assist them with implementation.
Appendix A: Cost Benefit Analysis
Th is section descri bes FEMA's requirements for benefi t/cost analysis in natural-
hazards mitigation, as well as various approaches for cond ucting economic analysis of
proposed mitigation acti vit ies.
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
20
Appendix B: Public Outreach
This section describes and documents effo rts to invo lve community stakeho lders in
mitigation planning and coordinatin g.
Appendix C: Potential Grant Funding
This appendix li sts state and federal fundin g that is available for hazard mitigation. and it
includes a summary of current private fund ing opportunities.
Appendix D: List of Acronyms
Thi s section provides a list of acronyms for City, regional, state, and federal agencies
and organizations that may be referred to within the City of Temple City Multi-
Hazard Mitigation Plan.
Appendix E: G lossary
Thi s section provides a glossary of terms used throughout the plan.
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
2 1
SECTION 2: Community Profile
Why Plan for Hazards in the City of Temple City?
Natural and human-made hazards impact citizens, property, the environment, and the economy
of the City ofTemple City. Earthquakes, floodin g, windstorms, and human-created th reats have
ex posed Temple C ity residents and businesses to the financial and emotiona l costs of recoveri ng
after natural and human-made disasters. The ri sk associated with hazards increases as more
people move to areas affected by natural hazards.
Even in those comm unities that are essentially "built-out" (i.e. have little or no vacant land
remaining for development). population density continues to increase when low-density housing
is replaced with medium-and hi gh-density developm ent projects.
The inevitability of natural and human-made hazards, and the growing population and activity
withi n the City create an urgent need to develop strategies, coordinate resources, and increase
pub lic awareness to reduce ri sk and prevent loss from future hazard events. ldenti fying the risks
posed by hazards, and developing strategies to reduce the impact of a hazard event can assist in
protecting life and property of citizens and communities. Local residents and busi nesses can
work togeth er with the City to create a multi-hazard mitigation plan that addresses the potential
impacts of hazard events.
Geography and the E nvironment
The City ofTemple City has an area of4.01 square miles and is located roughly 14 miles
northeast of downtown Los Angeles.
Elevations in the city are fairl y consistent at 38 1 feet above sea level. Temple City is su rrounded
by the following cit ies: Arcadia to the north, El Monte to the south, Rosemead and San Gabriel
to the west, and Monrovia to the east.
Community Profile
The City ofTemple City is rich in history. The fam il ies who settled Temple City were among
the founding members of original business in Los Angeles. Temple City was created in 1926
and incorporated in 1960.
The City is served by the 2 10, I 0, and 605 freeways. The major arterial hi ghways include
Rosemead Blvd. (Hwy 19), Temple City Blvd., and S. Baldwin Blvd., all of which run north to
south. Santa An ita Ave. also runs north to south and prov ides an eastern border for the City.
Running east to west are Li ve Oak Ave. and, creating a south ern border, Lower Azusa Road.
The City ofTemple City is currently involved in several community development projects. the
most comprehensive of whi ch is the Rosemead Blvd . Development. The City plans to
"transform a two-mile segment of Rosemead Blvd. into an accessible. pedestrian-friendly
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
22
co rridor.'' A request for proposal \\·as posted and the city accepted bids through eptember 20.
201 2.
The Gateway project will develop a 75,000 square-foot outd oor retail shopping center at the
probailtyintersection of Rosemead and Las Tunas. Ground was broken and work bega n in
August 20 12. Additionally. Temple City is working on a Bicycle Master Plan. which would
improve safety and usabi lity of existing bike paths and develop new bike paths to connect
existing corridors into a comprehensive system. Also be ing implemented are the City's
Downtown Parking Plan and Traffic Improvement Plan. It is clear that Ci ty offi cials have a
strong vision for comprehensive community development and improvement.
Ventura
County
Freeway Map of Los Angeles County
Kem County
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
LL~ .....
c::J l.ni"'CO'PQflf~Aft•
rnc:or~ ... 10t:M
Orange
County
23
Temple City Street Map
Major Rivers
The nearest major ri ver is the Los Ange les River. This river does not have any potenti al impact
on the City ofTemple City. Normally this river channel is dry and onl y ca rries a signi ficant
water flow during a major rain storm. Two ma in stream systems drain the Temple City area. The
Eaton Wash runs along the western edge of the Ci ty, while East Arcadia Wash runs along the
eastern side ofthe City. Both washes drain into the Rio Hondo Waterway, which passes just
southeast ofTemple City.
25
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Map of Temple City Washes a nd C hann els
WASHES AND CHANNELS
-Roo-ChaMel
C limate
Temperatures in the City of Temple City range from a low of approximately 40 degrees in the
win ter months to a hi gh of 9 1 degrees in th e summer months. However th e temperatures can
vary over a wide range, particularly when th e anta Ana winds blow, bringing higher
temperatures and very low humidity. Temperatu res rarely exceed I 00 degrees Fin the summer
months (June-September), and rarely drop be low 30 degrees F in the winter months ( ovember-
March).
26
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
100'F
90'F
80'F
7(1'f
60"F
SO"F
40'F
JO'F
20'F
Average Temperatures
,. I"'" ...... r--.... ,..--['... """' .,. -~ ~ -~ ~ -... ~ io""""" ~ r---,..,.I""' "" ...... ~
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jtj Aug Sep Od Nov Dec
Dafly high
Average
-Daily low
US average
Rain fal l in the City averages 18.6 inches of rain per year. The term '·average rain fa ll" is
misleading because over the recorded history of rainfall in the City ofTemple City, rainfall
amounts have ranged from one-third the norm al amount to more than double the normal amount.
There are three types of storms th at produce precipitation in Southern California: winter storms,
locally-generated thunderstorms, and summ er tropical storms.
Actual rainfa ll in Southern California tends to fall in large amounts during spo radi c and often
heavy storms, rather than consistently over storms at somewhat regular intervals. Rainfall in
Southern Califo rni a might be characterized as feast or fa mine within a single year. Because the
metropolitan basin is largely built-out, water originating in higher elevation communities can
have a sudden impact on adjoining communities that have a lower elevation.
Precipitation
Gin
Sin -4in City
Average
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun JtJ Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
www.citydata.com
Minerals and Soils
The characteristics of the minerals and soils present in City ofTemple City indicate th e potential
types of hazards that may occur. Rock hardness and soil characteristics can determi ne whether
or not an area will be prone to geologic hazards such as earthquakes. li quefaction, and landslides.
27
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
The surface material in cludes unconsolidated, fine-grained deposits of silt, sand, gravel. and
recent flood plain deposits. Torre ntial fl ood events can introduce large deposits of sand and
gravel. Sand y silt and silt containin g clay are moderately dense and firm. and are prim arily
considered to be prone to liqu efaction, an earthquake-related hazard . Basalti c lava consists
mainly of weathered and non-weathered dense, fin e-gra ined basalt. Temple City is relati ve ly fl at
and not at risk for landslides.
Understanding the geologic characteri stics of Temple City is an important step in hazard
mitigation and avoiding at-risk development.
Other Significant Geologic Features
The City ofTemple City, li ke most of the Los Angeles Basin, lies over the area of one or more
known earthquake faults, and potent ia lly many more unknown fa ults, particularly lateral or bl ind
thrust faults.
The major faults that have the potential to affect the greater Los An geles Basin , and therefore the
City of Temple City, are:
./ San Andreas
./ Newport I Inglewood
./ Palos Verdes
./ Whittier
./ Santa Monica
./ ierra Madre
./ Verdugo
./ Elysian Park
./ Raymond
The Los Angeles Basin has a history of powerful and relati ve ly frequent earthquakes, dating
back to the powerful 8.0+ San Andreas earthquake of 1857, which did substantial damage to th e
relatively few bui ldings that existed at the tim e. Paleoseismological research indicates that large
(8.0+) earthquakes occur on the San Andreas fa ult at intervals between 45 and 332 years with an
average interval of L 40 years. Other lesser faults have also cau sed ve ry damagin g earthquakes
since L 857.
Notable ea1thquakes include the Long Beach earthquake of 1933, the San Fernando ea1thquake
of 1971 , the 1987 Whittier earthquake, and the 1994 orthridge earthquake. In addition, many
areas in the Los Angeles basin ha ve sand y soils that are subject to liquefa ction.
Population and Demographics
Accord ing to the 20 I 0 Census, the City of Temple City has a population of 35,558 peopl e in an
area of 4 square miles. Over the years, the City has experienced a great deal of in-fill
development. This increases the populati on density, creating greater service loads on the bui lt
infrastructure, including roads, water supp ly, sewer services and storm drains.
28
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
---~--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The population ofTemple City has steadily increased from the mid-1 800s through 2000.
Population increased 6.5 % from 2000 to 20 I 0, at about half th e rate of California's average
increase, which was I 0%. Temple City experiences density at a rate that is much higher than the
California average. There are approximately 8,876 people per square mile.
The population increase in the City of Temple City creates more community exposure, and
changes how agencies prepare for and respond to hazards. The City is at risk from a post-
ea rthquake fire. A conflagration could be sta rted by fires result ing from earthquake damage, but
made much worse by the loss of pressure in the fire mains, caused by either lack of electricity to
power water pumps, and/or loss of water pressure resulting from broken water mains. Moreover,
traffic can slow emergency vehicles. An increased rat io of res idents to emergency responders
increases potential response times. Greater hou sing density can promote the spread of urban
wildfires.
2010 Population Demographics
RacCJs trl Temple C1ty. CA
...... _
• Asian a lone-19,682 (55.4%)
• White alone -8,095 (22.8%)
• Hispanic -6,853 (19.3%)
• Two or more races-576 ( 1.6%)
• Black alon e-256 (0.7%)
• American Indian alone-35 (0.1 0%)
• Other race alone-36 (0.1 %)
• Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Isla nder a lone-25 (0.07%)
Read more: http://www.city-data.com/citvffemple-City-
California.html#ixzzl vEsmXwL6
Exam in ing the reach of hazard mitigation po licies to special needs populations may ass ist in
increasing access to servi ces and programs. FEMA's Office of Eq ual Rights addresses this need
29
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
by suggesting that agencies and organizations planning for natural di sasters identify special
needs popu lati ons, make recovery centers more accessible, and review practi ces and procedures
to remedy any di scrimination in relief application or assistance.
The cost of hazard recovery can place an unequal fin ancial responsibility on the general
population when only a small proportion may benefit from governm en tal fu nds used to rebu ild
private structures. Discussions about natural and human-made hazards that inc lude local citizen
groups, insurance co mpani es, and other pub I ic and pri vate sector organizations can help ensure
th at all members of the population are a part of the decision-making processes.
Land and Development
Developm ent in Southern California from the earliest days was a cyc le of boom and bust. The
Second World War however dramatically changed that cycle. Military personnel and defense
workers came to Southern Califo rnia to fill the logistical needs created by the war effort. The
available housin g was rapidly exhausted and ex istin g commercial centers proved inadeq uate for
the influx ofpeople.
Immediately after the war construction bega n on the freeway system. and the face of Southern
Cali fornia was forever changed. Home developments and shoppin g centers sprang up
everywhere and within a few decades, the central basin of Los Angeles Co unty was virtually
built out. This pushed new development furth er and further away from the urban center.
The City of Temp le City addresses the use and development of private land, inclu ding residential
and commercial areas through the City General Plan. This plan is one of the City's most
important tools in add ressing environmental challenges including transportation and air quality,
growth management, conservatio n of natural resources, clean water, and open spaces.
To address developm ent issues. the Planning Division has engaged in activities that improve the
quality of life fo r the citizens of the City of Temple City, including the Rosemead Blvd. Plan, the
Gateway Plan, and the Bike Master Plan and the Traffi c Master Plan. These large-scale effor1s
are termed the City of Temple City community development programs, and include
neighborhood and other public facility improvements, rehabilitation of ex isting housing and
retail space, deve lopment of new retail space and upgrade to the overall aesthetic quality, ease of
use and safety of th e co mmunity. These projects are currentl y being reviewed due to the
Californi a Legislature's reall ocation of redevelopment funding.
The Citv of Trees:
The City ofTemple City has a strong commitment to urban forestry. The City is also
unofficiall y known as the "City of Trees" for its beautiful trees that are found on private and
pub lic property throughout the City. The commitment to urban forestry goes back decades, as
evidenced by the mature trees that line the streets. In 1989 the City developed a master tree plan
that identified the types of trees and locations they should be planted.
In 2003 the City ofTemple City was certified as a Tree City USA commun ity. This award is
sponsored by the Arbor Day Fou ndation and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. This award
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
30
recogni zes a community's commitment to planting and preserving trees and maintaining
standards needed to promote urban forestry. In 20 II a tree advisory commission v a established
to provide oversight and feedback regarding the City's forestry program.
There are an estimated 20.000 trees in th e ity of Temple City urban fores t. The City of Temple
Ci ty has approximately 5,600 trees which are planted along publ ic right-of-\ ays and in park
areas. The rest of the trees are found on pri vate and commercial property. City Arborist Rob
Cruse commented , "Our trees are a $17.4 million asset. Value isn't measured just in dollars, but
how it enhances the look of our comm unity, benefits ou r community, characterizes our
comm unity and brings a green element to how we look at the community.''
The top five tree species in the City includ e Crape Myrtle, weetgum Can·otwood, outhern
Magnolia, and Holly Oak . These trees are selected for their resistance to mildew, di sease, and
drought. Trees that are old or become di eased arc removed.
The greatest ingle loss o f trees in the hi story of the City occurred during the' indstorm of20 II.
Approximately 500 City trees and hu ndreds of private trees were blm n down or damaged. The
City has aggressively sought to replace the trees. In 20 12 the City received a $70,000 grant to
replace some of th e trees that\ ere lost in the windstorm.
Historic Temple City:
Th e modern hi story of Temple City begins in the early 1900s with Walter Temple moving his
fa mily to property inherited from hi s mother. Walter continued purchasing land , and the
discovery of oil provided the famil y with millions of dollars which they used to develop the area.
In 1923 Walter Temple purchased 300 acres of land and announced hi s intention to build the
'·Town ofTemple."
The tO\ n rapidly grew, wi th a commercial di trict beginning with hardware store and tO\\ n
pharmacy. Paci fie Electric Car trains soon connected the town to the rest of the growin g Los
Angeles metropolitan area. The city further expanded during the Second World War. By the
1950s schools were being built, in clu di ng Templ e City High School. In 1960 the City ofTemple
City was incorporated.
With the approach of its 50th anni versary, th e City ofTemple City community began examining
its history. Part of this was the evaluati on of hi storic property in Temple City. A firm was
contracted to conduct the first survey of historic properti es. The City ofTemple City Historic
Resources Survey completed in 201 2 reviewed the history of the City and eva luated the buildings
in the City of historic interest.
The survey determined that most local historic buildings fro m the early 20th century had not been
preserved and many were demoli hed during development projects in the 1950s-60s. The project
made recommendations for the preservation of specific types of architecture to preserve the
historic appearance and character of older buildings in the City. The survey's recomm endations
include the adoption of a Hi stori c Preservation Element in the City General Plan.
3 1
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Housing
In the City ofTemple City, the demand fo r housing outstrips the avai lable supply, and the recent
low interest rates have furth er fueled a pent-up demand. Demand for availab le housing is
extremely high with few existing homes available
The median value of homes in the City of Temple City was estim ated at $241 ,000 in the 2000
Census. By the 20 I 0 Census, the median home price in Temple City had risen to $530,000, and
this fi gure was actually down from peak pri ces in 2006-2007. Between 2000 and 20 I 0 the total
num ber of households in the City increased by 268, or 2.4 percent.
To address development issues, the Planning Department has engaged in activities that promote
the quality of li fe for the citizens of the City ofTemple City. There are several large-scale
efforts that form the City ofTemple City Community Development Program including
neighborhood and other pu blic facility improvements. development of new retai l space and new
residences, im provement of traffic safety and aesth etics throughout the ci ty.
There is an increased concentrati on of resources and capital in Temple City. The best indi cator
of this fact is the increasing per capita personal in come in the region. Per capita income is an
estimate of total income divided by the total population. This estimate can be used to compare
economic areas as a whole, although it does not reflect how the in come is distributed among
residents of the area. The City's per capita income is increasin g re lative to Ca lifornia's and the
United States' per capita incomes, resulting in a more affluent community than the average
population.
Subtle but measurable changes occur in communities that increase the potential loss which may
occur in a major di saster. There are a number of factors that contribute to this increasing loss
potential. First, populations continue to increase, putting more people at risk within a defined
geographic space. Second , in fl ation constantly in creases the worth of rea l property and
permanent improvements. Third, the amount of property owned per capita increases over time.
Employment and Industry
Service industries, manu facturing, and comm erce are the City's principal emp loyment and
industrial activities. Temple City provided 6,724 jobs in 2007. By 20 I 0 this number had
declined by seven percent to 6,25 1.
City of Temple City Mu!ti-Ha::ard Mitigation Plan
32
Jobs bv Sector: 2010
Sources: California Employment Development Oepill'tment. 2010: InfoUSA; and
SCAG
• In 2010, the
Education-Health
sector was the
largest job sector,
accounting for 29.7
percent of total jobs
in the city.
• Other large sectors
included Leisure-
Hospitality (13.3
percent), Retail (12
percent), and
Professional-
Management (9.3
percent).
Traditionally the largest job sectors in the City ofTemple City have been in education/health,
and leisure hospita li ty, retail, and professional management. While the total number of jobs has
declined by seven percent, the distributi on has stayed mostly stab le, with no one sector
decreasing more than one percent.
Mitigation act ivities are needed at the busin e s level to ensure the safety and welfare of workers
and limit damage to industrial infrastructure. Empl oyees are hi ghly mobile, com muting from
surrounding areas to industrial and business center . This creates a greater dependency on roads,
communications, accessibil ity and emergency plans to reunite people with their families. Before
a hazard event. large and small businesses can develop strategies to prepare for hazards. respo nd
efficiently. and prevent loss of life and property.
Transportation and Commuting Patterns
Over the past decade, the Los An geles Metropoli tan tatistica l Area (LAM A) ex peri enced
rapid growth in employment and population wh ich slo\ ed considerably with the recess ion
beginning in 2008.
Private automobi les are the dominant means oftransportation in Southern California and in
Temple City. The Traffic laster Plan addresses the traffic issues that come with urban density
and are often compounded by retail development, such as the Gateway Plan. Its main objectives
are to improve the flow of traffi c and safety through a method called ·'Traffic Calming."
33
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
------·-----------
Journey to Work for Residents
Tr-ansportation Mode Choice: 2000, 2008, 2010
1001!'. •2000 •2000
90'!'o &t.D!I IJ:'lSIII, 116.911.
80%
71Wo
60fo
SOfo
40fo
:J)'Y.
2!Wo
IOfo
Of.
Owe Alone Carpooled Nllic Transit
Sources: 2000 Census; Nielsen Co., 2008 and 2010
•2010
Other
• Between 2000 and
2010, the greatest
change occurred in
the percentage of
individuals who
traveled to work by
carpool, whose share
decreased by 2.6
percentage points.
The City of Temp le City meets its public transportation needs through use of a regional transit
system (MTA). MTA prov ides both bus and light rai l service to the City ofTemp le City and
adjacent areas, and to the Los Angeles County metropolitan area. Passenger transportation is
provided by the Foothill Transit and Metropolita n Transportation Authority bus lines.
The City ofTemple City has also included a Bicycle Master Plan in its vision for community
development. The Bicycle Master Plan aims to make bicyc ling safer and more pleasant. It also
aims to increase the accessibility of nearby MTA light rail and other bus system s adjacent to, but
outside ofThe City ofTemple City, giving residents a safe and efficient alternative to single-
occupant automotive travel.
Wildfire Potential
The Very High Fi re Hazard Severity Zones map of Los Angeles County, created in connection
with Cal Fire and published in the state hazard mitigation plan, shows the level of wil dfire ri sk
for areas within the County. Areas in gray are not in a wildfire zone, while areas in red have the
hi ghest risk of wi ldfires. As shown below in the close-up snapshot following the full map, the
City ofTemple City is in a gray area and is thu s not in a wildfire zone.
34
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
~-Fi¥iP LOS ANGELES COUNTY
VERY HIGH FffiE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONES IN LRA
As Recommended By CAL FIRE
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
~..._-.,MO_, _,,,._ .::::: ..
35
Section of VH FSHZ Map depicting Temple City
36
City o.f Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitig atio11 Plan
SECTION 3: Risk Assessment
What is a Risk Assessment?
Conducting a risk assessment can provide information on the fo llowing: the location of hazards;
the value of existing land and property in hazard locations; and an analysis ofthe risk to li fe.
property. and the environment that may result from natural and human-made hazard events.
1) Hazard Identification
This is the description of the geographic extent, potential intensity and the probabili ty of
occurrence of a given hazard . Maps are frequently used to display hazard ident ification data.
The City ofTemple City ident i tied four major hazards that affect this geographic area. These
hazards include earthquakes, floods, windstorms and human-made hazards.
2) Profiling Hazard Events
This process describes the causes and characteristics of each hazard, how it has affected the City
ofTemple City in the past, and what part of the City ofTemple City's population, infrastructure,
and environment has historically been vulnerab le to each specific hazard. A profile of each
hazard is found in Part Ill.
3) Vulnerability Assessment/Inventorying Assets
This is a combination of hazard identification with an inventory ofthe existing or planned
property development(s) and population(s) exposed to a hazard. Critical facilities are of
particular concern , because th ese entities provid e the public with essential products and services
that are necessary to preserve the welfare and quality of life in the City and to fu lfill important
public safety, emergency response, and/or disaster recovery functions.
4) Risk Analysis
Estimating potenti al losses involves assessing the damage. inj uries, and financial costs likely to
be sustained in a geographic area over a given period of time. The two measurable components
of ri sk analysis are the magnitude of the harm that may result and the likelihood of the harm
occurring. Describ ing vulnerability in terms of dollar losses provides the community and the
state with a common fi·amework in which to measure the effects of hazards on assets.
After the 1994 Northridge earthquake, a seri es of studies were conducted by the di saster research
center of the University of Delaware. These stud ies reviewed the impact ofthe earthquakes on
business recovery. The researchers found that several factors im pact businesses after any major
di saster. They are physical damage, disruption of transportation, and business inacti vity
(Dalhamer & Tierney 1996).
37
City ofTemple City Multi-Ha:::ard Mitigation Plan
Physical damage requires repairs to the business. as we ll as the rem oval of debris. Disruption of
transportati on can impact the local business community in three ways: I) employees cannot get
to work, 2) products cannot be delivered to the business, and 3) the diffi culties in transportation
prevent shoppers from coming to the area. The City ofTemple City had approximately
$11 9,000,000 in retails sales in 2009 (SCAG). A 25% loss in sales wou ld represent $2,975,000
in loss to the local economy. This retail loss does not take into account the losses from phys ical
damage to business and residences.
Dalhamer, J ., & Tierney, K. ( 1996) "Winners and losers: Pred icting business disaster recovery
outcomes fo ll owing the North ridge earthquake." A working paper. The University of Delaware
Disaster Research Center.
5) Assessing Vulnerability/ Analyzing Development Trends
This step provides a general description of land uses and development trends with in the
community so that mitigation options can be considered in land use planning and future land use
decisions. This plan prov ides a comprehensive description of the character ofTemp le City in the
Community Profile. This description inc ludes th e geography and environ ment, population and
demographics, land use and development, housing and community development, empl oyment
and indu stry, and transportation and commuting patterns. Analyzi ng these components of
Temple City can help in identifyin g potential problem areas and can serve as a gui de for
incorporating the goa ls and ideas co ntained in thi s Plan into other community development
plans.
Hazard assessments are subject to the ava ilabil ity of hazard-specific data. Gathering data for a
hazard assessment requires a commitment of resources on the part of participating organizations
and agencies. Each hazard-speci fie secti on of the Plan includes a secti on on hazard
identification using data and information from City. County, or State agency sources.
Federal Requirements for Risk Assessment:
Recent federal regul ations for hazard mitigati on plans outlined in 44 CFR Part 20 I include a
requirement for risk assessment. This ri sk assessment requirement is intended to provide
information that will hel p communities to id entify and prioritize mitigation activ iti es that will
reduce losses from the identi fied hazards. There are fou r hazards profi led in the mitigation plan,
including earthquakes, flooding, windstorm s and human-made hazards.
38
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Federal Criteria for Risk Assessment
Section 322 Plan Requirement How is this addressed?
Identifying Hazards Each hazard section includes an inventory of the best
available data sources that identify hazard areas.
Maps of the various hazards a re fou nd in the hazard specific
sections.
Profiling Hazard Events Each haza rd section includes documentation of the history,
and causes and cha racteristics of the hazard in t he City.
Assessing Vulnerability: The hazard specific sections identify vulnerabilities by
Identifying Assets hazard.
Assessing Vulnerability: The Risk Assessment section of this mitigation plan identifies
key critical facilities and lifelines in the City and includes a Estimating Potential Losses: map of these facilities. Vulnera bility assessments have been
completed for the hazards addressed in the plan.
Assessing Vulnerability: The Community Profile section of this plan provides a
Analyzin~ Development T rends description of the development trends in the City, including
the geography and environment, population and
demographics, land use and development, housing and
community development, employment and industry, and
transportation and commuting patterns.
Critical Facilities and Infrastructure:
Faci lities critical to government response and recovery activities (i.e. life safety and property and
environmental protection) include 9 11 centers, emergency operations centers, sheriffs and fire
stations, public works faci li ties, communications centers, sewer and water facilities, hospitals,
bridges and roads, and shelters. Other fac ilities that, if damaged, could cause serious secondary
impacts may also be considered "criti ca l." A hazardous material facility is one example of this
type of critical facil ity.
Criti cal and essential faci li ti es are those facilities that are vital to the continued delivery of key
government services or that may significantly impact the publ ic's ability to recover from the
emergency. These types of facilities include loca l government buildings, schools, hospitals.
park s, and public safety locations.
City Hall
Temple City Emergency Operations Center
Los Angeles County Fire tation #47
Los Angeles County Fire Station #5
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
9701 Las Tunas Drive
Temple City, CA 9 1780
5938 Kauffman Avenue
Temple City, CA 91780
5946 Kauffman Avenue
Temple City. CA 9 1780
7225 N. Rosemead Boulevard
San Gabriel, CA 9 1775
39
Los Angeles County Fire tation #42
Los Angeles County Fire tation # 166
LA County heri ff's Department-Temple Station
Live Oak Park and Community Center
Cloverl y Elementary
Emperor Elementary
La Rosa Elementary
Longden Elementary
Oak A venue Intermediate chool
Temple City Hi gh School
Dr. Doug ears Learning Center
Cleminson Elementary School
East Pasadena Water Co mpany
unny lope Water Company
Go lden tate Water Company
Cali forn ia American Water Company
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
9319 E Valley Boulevard
Rosemead, CA 91770
3615 Santa Anita Avenue
El Monte. CA 9173 1
8838 E. Las Tunas Drive
Temple City, CA 91780
I 0 144 Bogue treet
Temple City, CA 9 1780
5476 Cloverly Avenue
Temple City. CA 91780
6415 N. Muscatel Avenue
Temple City, CA 9 1780
930 I La Rosa Drive
Temple City, CA 91780
950 I Wendon Street
Temple City, CA 91780
6623 Oak A venue
Temple City, CA 91780
9501 Lemon Avenue
Temple City. CA 91780
9229 Pentland treet
Temple City, CA 91780
5213 Daleview A venue
Temple City, CA 91780
3725 Mounta in View
Pasadena. CA 91 I 07
I 040 El Campo Drive
Pasadena, CA 91 I 07
II 0 E. Live Oak Ave.
Arcadia. CA 91 106
8657 Grand A venue
Rosemead. CA 9 1770
40
San Gabriel County Water District 8366 Grand A ven ue
Rosemead, CA 91770
The fo llowing maps illustrate some of the cri tical and essenti al fac ilities in the City of Temple
Ci ty.
City of Temple City
Water Companies
Information
" +
City ofTomple City
9701LM Tunas DrfYe
T~ploOty, C.lifomla 91780
Phone: 626.185.1171
W~ewww.tomplodty.us
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
41
Critical Facilities Map
. .
t1 SCE (TBI\.E SJISIA!DI1 9)0 IU. BaiTAAIE.
22 SUM S.IH WAIBI 9211lOikml AlE.
23 CA AIBICAN WlR. (UISSOCVO 1\Ul) 94(2lNE OM AlE.
2A GclliH STATE WAlER 4836 EliCialA AlE.
25 CAAIBICANWIR. ~ VIB.l) 'l5lOaNEST
21 Ctifai!MAII!OII WA1Bt 5QX) IU. HAlfAl RD.
lJa CIIUI CMI (DolT c.w) FACIJTB
71 ARK~IaC&f 6539 ROSBYlll\0.
21 Yalll P£aW Yl!.U 6051 ROSBYlll\0.
29 AlmAFmam.KHIRlN!IBI 57QS.57141ll!:AJB.AIE.
lO PACIRC AI9ClS SOIXl 6210 TBIU CllT llW_
31 PlAY fACT<J!Y 9nl GNlMJJ AlE.
32 TBIUCIITQmwll'leOm 601! 8oliDMI AlE.
lJa AIIUI.T CMI FACIJTB
33 SI«<A AliTA RrnllOT aJfTER 5QX) GAAcrtloco AlE.
34 SI«<AAIITA COtiAWCOO tm'IUI. 5522 GAAcrtloco AlE.
35 8UiiN GoiAIOS ~USN~ carat 1071&LM OM AlE.
3& TBIU CllT Hill 00 t9l1M !1917lAS llMS Dll
I • IIIRIXI
42
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Summary
EVACUATION ROUTES
o~"
Soo-V.,-C.W
4l1Wt..r-Dooo
Soo G*oo1. CAt177S
Mu lti-hazard mitigation strategies can reduce the impacts concentrated at large employment and
industri al cente rs, public infrastructure, and critica l facil ities. Multi-hazard mitigation for
industri es and empl oyers may include developing relationships with emergency management
services and their employees before disaster strikes, and estab lishing mitigation strategies
together. Collaboration among the public and pri vate sector to create mitigation plans and
actions can reduce the impacts of natural and hu man-made hazards.
43
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
SECTION 4: Multi-Hazard Goals
and Action Items
This section provides information on the process used to develop goa ls and action items that
pertai n to the four hazards addressed in the mitigation plan. It also describes the framework that
focuses the Plan on developing successfu l mitigation strateg ies. The framework is mad e up of
three parts: the mission, goals, and action items.
Mission
The mission of the Ci ty ofTemple City Multi-H azard Miti gation Plan is to promote sound public
policy designed to protect citi zens, critical facilities, infrastructure, private property, and the
environment from natural and human-made hazards. This can be ach ieved by increasing public
awareness. documenting the resources for risk reduction and loss-prevention, and identifying
activities to gu ide the City towards building a safer, more sustainable community.
Goals
The Plan goals describe the overall direction that City of Temple City agencies, organi zations,
and citizens can take to minimize the impacts of natural and human-made hazards. The goals are
stepping-stones between the broad direction ofthe mission statement and the specific
recommendations that are out lined in the action items.
Strategy for Selecting Action Items
The action items are a li sting of acti vi ti es in which City agencies and citizens can be engaged to
reduce risk. Each action item includes an estimate of the timeline for implementation. Short-
term action items are activities that City agencies may implement with ex isting resources and
authorities within one to two years. Long-term action items may require new or additional
resources or authoriti es, and may take between one and five years (or more) to implement.
Action items were identified by reviewing hazards in the area including the hazards shared by
neighboring cities. These items selected were based on the practical ability of the City ofTemple
City to accompli sh them. The Hazard Mitigati on Advisory Committee determined there was no
advantage in developing action items that were beyond the abil ity of the City to fund or
practically accomplish.
One of the main consid erations for practical accomplishment inc ludes the available staff needed
for a specific project. The full -time Ci ty work force is between 30 and 40 employees
supplemented by contractors. This limits the size and breadth of mitigati on items which can be
completed.
44
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Mitigation Plan Goals
The Plan goals help to guide direction of future acti vit ies aimed at reducing risk and preventing
loss from natural and human-made hazards. The goals listed here serve as checkpoints as
agencies and organizations begin implementing mitigation action items.
Protect Life and Property:
./ Implement activities that assist in protecting lives by making homes,
businesses, infrastructure, critical faci lities, and other property more resistant
to natural and human-made hazards .
./ Reduce losses and repetitive damages for chronic hazard events wh ile
promoting insurance coverage for catastrophic hazards .
./ Improve hazard assessment inform ation to make recommendati ons fo r
discouraging new development and encouraging preventative measures for
ex isti ng development in areas vu lnerable to hazards.
Public Awareness:
./ Deve lop and im plement education and outreach programs to increase pub I ic
awareness of the ri sks associated with natural and human-made hazard s .
./ Provide information on tools, partnership opportu nities, and fund ing resources
to assist in implementing mitigation activities.
Natural Systems:
./ Balance watershed planning, natural resource management, and land use
planning with multi-hazard mitiga ti on to protect life, propetty, and the
environment.
./ Preserve, rehab il itate, and enhance natural systems to serve mu lti-hazard
mitigation functions.
PaJ1nersllips and Implementation:
./ Strengthen communication and coordinate participation among and within
public agencies, citizens, non-profit organi zations, business. and industry to
ga in a vested interest in implementation .
./ Encourage leadership within public and private sector organizations to
prioritize and implement local, county, and regional hazard mitigation
activities.
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
45
Emergency Services:
./ Establish poli cy to ensure mitigation projects for critica l fac ili ties, servi ces,
and infrastructure .
./ Strengthen emergency operations by increasin g collaboration and coordination
among public agencies, non-profit organizations. business, and industry .
./ Coordinate and integrate multi-hazard mitigation activities, where appropri ate,
with emergency operations plans and procedures.
Public Participation
Public input during development of the plan assisted in creating the plan goals. Meetings with
the advisory co mmittee, stakeholder interviews, and a public workshop served the method to
obtain input and identi fy priorities in deve loping goals.
On September 25. 2012, the Temp le City Emergency Working Group, which includes major
stakeholders, held a meeting. These stakeholders were briefed on the progress of the Plan. The
attendees included representatives from public agencies, private organi zations and community
planning organizations. The attendees identified goal s for the Plan by examining th e issues and
concerns they have regarding local hazards. Progress by the Ci ty departments was explained, and
the group discussed potential action items for the next fi ve years.
A public workshop was held October 16, 20 12, to provide the public inform ation about the
mitigati on plan and to solicit their comments. Questions included how the City intends to merge
the mitigation plan with th e five-yea r capital improvement plan.
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Items
The Mitigation Plan identi ties short-and long-term action items developed through data
collecti on and research, and the public participation process. Mitigation plan activities may be
co nsidered for fundin g through federal and state grant programs, and when other funds are made
ava ilable through the City. Action items address multi-hazard and hazard-specific issues. To
help ensure activity implementation, each action item includes information on the timeline and
coordinating organizations. Upon implementation, the coord inating organi zations may look to
partn er organizati ons fo r resources and technical assistance. A resource directory is provided in
each of the hazard sections of the Plan.
Coordinating Organization:
The coordinating organization is the organization th at is willing and able to organize
resources, find appropriate funding, or oversee activity implementati on, monitoring, and
eva luation. Coordinating organizations may include local, City, or regional agencies that are
capable of or responsible for imp lementing activities and programs.
46
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Timeline:
Acti on items include both short and lon g-term activities. Each action item includes an
estimate of the time line for implementation. Short-term action items are activities that City
agencies may implement with existing resources and authorities within one to two years.
Long-term action items may requ ire new or additional resources or authorities, and may take
between one and five years (or more) to implement.
Ideas for Implementation:
Each acti on item includes ideas for imp lementation and potenti al resources, which may
include grant programs or human resources.
Plan Goals Addressed:
The Plan goals add ressed by each acti on item are included as a way to monitor and evaluate
how well the Mitigation Plan is achieving its goals once imp lementation begins.
Constraints:
Constraints may apply to so me of the action items. These constraints may be a lack of City
staff, lack of funds, or vested property rights which might expose the City to legal action as
a result of adverse im pacts on private property.
2016 Mitigation Action Items
The multi-hazard mitigation actions items written for the City for 2016 are listed in the charts on
th e following pages.
47
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Plan Goals Addressed
c
0 .....
ell ..., c ~
€ E Vl ~
Vl C1) (.) Hazard Action Item Ideas for Implementa tio n Coordina tin g Timeline Constraints ~ Vl 0. ·-0.. ~ Vl > E E 1... Organization 0 c ~ :.... ~ ~ -\/) 0.. :.... ...._
Vl ...._ ell Vl 0. >. ~ 3 >. ·-(.) ·-<( \/) ..c c -Vl -:.... ~ u (.) ell C1) OJ)
~ :.... c :....
0 .D ;:I t ~
:.... ;:I 'cii ell E a.. a.. ;z a.. w
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Action Items
Integrate the goals and -Use the mitigation plan to
action items from the help the City's General Plan
Temple City Multi-Hazard in stitutionalize guidelines for
Mitigation Plan into sustainable development in al l
hort ex isting regulatory new construction and Hazard Pendi ng
Term documents and programs, development according to the Mitigation Ongoing funding and X
#I where appropriate. hazard s that impact the City. Advisory ava ilab le
-Integrate th e mitigation plan Committee perso nnel
into current capital
improvement plans to ensure
that development plans include
spcci fie strategies for
mitigation requirements.
ldcnti fy and pursue -Develop public and private
hort funding opportunities to partnerships for hazard Pending
Term develop and implement mitigation activities. Plann ing Ongoing funding and X
#2 local and City mitiga ti on -Track slate and federal grant Department available
activities. programs which support local perso nnel
miti gati on programs.
Develop public and private -Identify orga nizations within
partnerships to foster the City that have programs or
hazard miti gation program interests in hazard miti gation.
coordination and -Involve private businesses Pending
Short co ll aboration in the City of throughout the City in hazard Pl annin g Ongoing fund ing and
Term Temple City. mitigation awareness and Department available X
#3 planning. personnel
-Encourage continuity
planning for local businesses as
part of community-wide hazard
miti gati on efforts.
Strengthen emergency -Ensure ongoing operational
services preparedness and planning for emergencies
response by linking includes recognition and
emergency services with inclusion ofhazard mitigation
hazard miti gation req uirements.
programs. -Coordinate with neighboring Pend ing
Long jurisdictions regardin g their Plann ing Ongoing funding and X
Term specific hazard mitigation Department available
#I challenges and plans. personnel
-Coordinate the maintenance
of emergency transportati on
routes through com munication
with the County Department of
Public Works, ne ighboring
jurisd icti ons, and the California
Department of Transportation.
Establ ish a formal role for -Establish clear roles for Haza rd Pending
Long the City Hazard Mitigation parti cipants, meeting regularly Mitiga ti on fund ing and
Term Advisory Committee to to pursue and evaluate Adv isory Ongo ing available X
#2 deve lop a sustainable implementation of mitigation Committee personn el
49
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
process for implementing, strategies.
evaluating, and monitoring -Oversee implementation of
citywide mitigation the Multi-Hazard Mitigation
activities. Plan.
-Monitor hazard mitigation
implementation by jurisdictions
and participating organizations
through surveys and other
reporting methods.
-Deve lop updates for the
Mitigation Plan based on new
informa tion.
-Conduct a full review of the
Mitigation Plan every 5 years
by evaluating mitigation
successes, fai lures, and areas
that were not addressed.
-Provide tra ining for
Committee members to remain
current on developing issues in
the hazard loss-reducti on fi eld.
Develop and implement -Make the City Mitigati on
outreach program s Plan available to th e public by
designed to educate the publishing the Plan
public about hazard electronically on the City
mitigation. website. Pending
Lon g -Provide information Al l City Ongoing funding and X X
Term regarding mitigati on hazards Departments available
#3 and planning at events personnel
promoted by the City.
-Include emergency
preparedness information
related to hazard miti gation in
50
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
public safety information and
training programs.
Develop a long-term -Review miti gati on efforts
approach to monitoring from the past 6 months for
hazard mitigation pl anning effecti veness.
by conducting meetings of -Identify changes in Hazard Pending
Long the Hazard Mitigation regul ations, regional planning, Mitigation Ongoing funding and X
Term Advisory Committee or technology which may Advi sory available
#4 annuall y. impact ongoing mitigation Committee personn el
plans or programs.
-Prepare an annual report to
the City Manager regardi ng
mitigation efforts in Temple
City.
5 1
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
SECTION 5: Plan Maintenance
The plan maintenance section of this document details the formal process that will ensure that
the City ofTemple City Mu lti-Hazard Mitigati on Plan remains an active and relevant document.
The plan mai ntenance process includes a schedule for monitoring and evaluati ng the Plan
annually and producing a Plan revision every five years. This section describes how the City
wi ll integrate public participati on throughout the plan maintenance process. Finally, this section
includes an explanation of how City ofTemple City government intend s to incorporate the
mitigation strategies out lined in this Plan into existing planning mechanisms such as the City
General Plan, Capital Improvement Plan s, and Building and Safety Codes.
Monitoring and Implementing the Plan
Plan Adoption:
The City Council will be responsible for adopting th e City of Temple City Multi-Hazard
Mitigation Plan. Th is governing body has the auth ority to promote sound public pol icy
regarding natural and human-made hazards. Once the Plan is completed, it will be submitted to
the California Governor's Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES). Upo n approval by Cal
OES, it will then be subm itted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for
review. Upon acceptance by FEMA, the City of Temple City will have an approved multi-hazard
plan and be eli gi ble for federa l hazard miti gation grant program fund s.
Coordinatin g Bodv:
The Hazard Mitigation Advisory Committee will be responsib le for coordinating implementati on
of Plan action items and undertaking the form al review process.
Convener:
The City Council will adopt the City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, and the
Hazard Mitigation Advisory Comm ittee wi ll take j oint responsibility for Plan implementation
with City departments. The City Manager, or designee, will serve as a convener to facilitate the
Hazard Mitigation Adviso ry Committee meetings. and will ass ign tasks necessary for
implementation. The committee shall meet annua lly.
Implementation through Existing Programs:
The City ofTemple C ity addresses statewide planning goals and legislative req uirements through
its General Plan, Capital Improvement Plans, and City Bui lding and afety Codes. The Multi-
Hazard Mitigation Plan provides a series of recommendations. Many of these are closely related
to the goals and objectives of existin g planning programs. This all ows the City of Temple City
the opportunity to implement recommended mitigation action items through existing programs
and procedures.
--·------------------------
The City of Temple City Bui lding Division is responsible for administering the Building &
Safety Codes. Th e committee will work with the various City departments to review, develop
and ensure Building & Safety Codes that are adequate to mitigate or prevent damage by natural
and human-m ade hazards.
List of Local Ordinances
Local Ordinance/Plan County/State Ordinance
Flood
Flood Ord inance No local ordinances. Addressed in the adopted
LA County and State
Building Cod es. 2014
County of Los Angeles
Building Code
Storm water Management Ordinances Low Impact Addressed in the adopted
D evelopment LA County and State
Ordinance (9-lE-31 Bui lding Codes. 20 14
of the TCMC) County of Los Angeles
Building Code
Erosion Control Ordinance 8-3-2 of the TCMC. Add ressed in the adopted
Relies on list of best LA County and State
management practices Bui lding Codes. 2014
establi shed by the County of Los Angeles
Californi a Regional Water Building Code
Quality Control Board
Landslide
Building Codes Title 7-I -3 requires Adopted LA County and
grading report to address tate Bui lding Codes.
landslides 2014 County of Los
Angeles Building Code
Drainage Control Regulations No loca l ordinances Addressed in th e adopted
LA County and State
Building Codes. 20 14
County of Los Angeles
Building Code
Grading Ordinances 8-3-2 of the TCMC. Addressed in the adopted
Rei ies on I ist of best LA County and State
management practices Buildin g Codes .. 20 14
established by th e County of Los Angeles
Cali fornia Regional Water Building Code
Quality Control Board
Hillside Deve lopment Ordinances No local ordin ances Addressed in the adopted
LA County and State
Building Codes.
Subdivision Ordinances Chapter 2 of the TCMC.
53
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Sanitary System Codes No local ord inances Addressed in the adopted
LA County and State
Building Codes.
Erosion Control Ordinance 8-3 -2 of the TCMC. Addressed in the adopted
Rei ies on I ist of best LA County and State
management practices Building Codes ..
established by the Cal ifornia Regional Water
Ca lifornia Regional Water Quality Control Board
Quality Control Board
Slope Stabilization Improvements No local ord inances Addressed in the adopted
LA County and tate
Building Codes. 2014
County of Los Angeles
Building Code
Severe Weather
Util ity Underground Ordinance Chapter 3 of the TCMC.
Extreme Temperature
Heating and Cooling Centers
Subsidence
City Building Codes 4-2C-2 defines subsidence
as a public nuisance and
prohibits it.
Earthquake
Unreinforced Masonr y Building Title 7 of the TCMC Addressed in the adopted
Ordinance - 199 1-all buildings LA County and State
reinforced except I Tiltup Building Codes. 2014
County of Los Angeles
Building Code
Concrete Building Constructed prior Title 7 of the TCMC Addressed in the adopted
to 197 1 -all buildings reinforced LA County and State
City Hall, Police Building Codes. 2014
County of Los Angeles
Building Code
Building Codes Title 7 of the TCMC Addressed in the adopted
LA County and State
Building Codes. 20 14
County of Los Angeles
Build ing Code
Drought
Water Supply Shortage Conservation None Responsibi li ty of the local
Plan water purveyors
54
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Land scape Ordinance State Model Water
Efficient Landscape
Ordinance (Assembly Bil l
188l)is place
Local Water Efficient
Land scape Ordinance in
process
Water Regulations None Responsibility of the local
water purveyors
Water Quality Ord inance Low Impact Addressed in the adopted
D evelopment LA County and State
Ordinance (9-lE-31 Building Codes.
of the T CMC)
Building Code/Plumbing Code Title 7 of the TCMC Addressed in the adopted
LA County and State
Building Codes. 2014
County of Los Angeles
Bu ilding Code
Wildfire
Fuel Modification Zones No local ordinance or plan Addressed in the adopted
LA Co unty and State
Building Codes. 20 14
County of Los Angeles
Bui lding Code
Weed Abatement 4-21-5 ofthe TCMC
Qrohibits dead vegetation
Fire Preven ti on Standards No local ord inance Addressed in the adopted
LA County and State
Building Codes. 20 14
County of Los Angeles
Fire Code
Bu ilding Code/Fire Code Title 7 of the TCMC Adopted LA County and
State Building Codes.
20 14 County of Los
Angeles Bui lding an d Fire
Code
Structure Fires
Bu ilding Code/Fire Code Title 7 of the TCMC Adopted LA County and
State Building Codes.
20 14 Count) of Los
Angeles Bui lding and Fire
Code
Hazardous Materials
55
City ofTemple City Mufti-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Registry with Fire Department Required to register with
Los Angeles County Fire
Department
Building Code/Fire Code T itle 7 of the TCMC Addressed in the adopted
LA County and State
Building Codes. 2014
County of Los Angeles
Build ing and Fire Code
Participate in County di sposal Yes. Athens di sposal
program for residential household provides regular
hazardous waste hazardous materials round
up
Fire-Trained responders to low Yes. The City contracts
level hazardous materials incidents with Los Angeles County
Fire Department, which
has personnel on staff
trained to handle
hazardous materials
Public Health
Pandemic vaccine distribution points Los Ange les County
Health Department
provides hea lth services.
The goals and action items in the Mitigation Plan may be achieved through activities
recommended in the City's Capital Improvement Plans (CIP). Various City departments develop
CIPs, and review them on an annual basis. Upon annual rev iew ofthe CIPs, the Hazard
Miti gat ion Advisory Committee will work with the City departments to identify areas that the
mitigation plan acti on items are consistent with CIP planning goals and integrate them where
appropriate.
Within six months of formal adoption of the Mitigation Plan, the recomm endations listed above
will be incorporated into the process of existing planning mechani sms at the City level. The
meetings of th e Hazard Miti gation Advisory Com mittee wi ll provide an opportuni ty for
committee members to report back on the progress made on the integration o f mitigation
planning elements into City plan ning documents and procedures.
Economic Ana lysis of Mitigation Projects
FEMA's approaches to identify the costs and benefits associated with multi-hazard mitigation
strategies, measures, or projects fa ll in to two general categories: benefit/cost analysis and cost-
effectiveness analysis.
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
56
Conducting benefi t/cost analysis for a mitigation activity can assist communities in determining
whether a project is w01th undertak ing now, in order to avoid disaster-related damages later.
Cost-effectiveness analysis eva luates how best to spend a gi ven amount of money to achieve a
specific goal. Determin ing the econom ic feasibi lity of mitigating hazards can provide decision-
makers with an und erstanding ofthe potential benefits and costs of an acti vity, as well as a basis
upon which to compare alternative projects.
Durin g the current economic downturn it may be challenging to use these methods due to the
many needs requiring funding. The City of Temple City wil l continue to use the FEMA approach
balanced by the money available for any type of projects.
Evaluating and U pdating the Plan
Formal Review Process:
The City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigati on Plan wi ll be evaluated on an annu al basis to
determine the effectiveness of programs, and to reflect changes in land development or programs
that may affect mitigation priorities. The evaluation process includes a fi rm schedul e and
timeline, and identifi es the local agencies and organizations participating in Plan evaluation.
The convener or designee will be responsible for contacting the Hazard Mitigation Advisory
Committee members and organizing the annual meeting. Committee members and City
Departments will be responsib le for monitorin g and evaluatin g the progress of the mitigation
strategies in the Plan.
The committee will review the goals and action items to determine their relevance to changing
situations in the City, as well as changes in state or fede ral policy, and to ensure they are
addressing current and expected conditions. The committee will also review the risk assessment
portion ofthe Plan to determine if thi s information should be updated or modified, given any
new avai lable data. The coordinatin g organi zations responsible for the various action items wi ll
report on the status of their projects, the success of various implementation processes, difficult ies
encountered, success of coordinati on efforts, and which strategies should be revised.
Continued Public Involvement:
Temple City is dedicated to involving the publ ic directly in review and updates ofthe Hazard
Mit igation Plan. The Hazard Mitigation Advisory Committee members are responsible for the
an nual review and upd ate of the Plan.
The publ ic wi ll also have the opportu nity to provide feedback about the Plan. Copies of the Plan
wi ll be kept at al l of the appropriate agencies in the City. The adopted plan will be posted online.
In addition, information on how to obta in copies of the Plan and any proposed changes will be
posted on the City website. This site wil l also contain an email address and phone number to
whi ch people ca n direct their comments and concerns.
57
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
A public meeting will also be held after each annual evaluation or when deemed necessary by the
Hazard Mitigat ion Advisory Committee. The meetin gs wi ll prov ide the public a forum for
which they can ex press its concerns, opinions, or id eas about the Plan. The City Publ ic
Info rm ation Officer will be responsible fo r using City resources to publicize the annual public
meetings and maintain public involvement through the publ ic access channel, web page, and
newspapers.
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
58
------~--
Part Ill:
Hazard-
Specific
Information
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
59
Introduction: Hazard Probabilities
One of the most important parts of any haza rd mitigation planning is determining the local
natural hazards. For the City ofTemple City mitigation plan, earthquakes, fl oodi ng, and
windstorms we re selected. For some cities, hazard s can be easily be determined by the
frequen cy with whi ch they stri ke the area. This is not as easy fo r parts of Southern Cal ifo rnia.
The City of Temple City is not near the coast or near hills or an urban wi ldfire interface area.
Earthquakes occur infrequently, there are few fl oods in Los An geles County, and the severity of
the windstorm of20 ll had not occurred in the past I 00 years.
There are several schools of theory on developin g probabilities. Al l theoretical approaches agree
that large amounts of data are needed to develop probabilistic models. The only natural hazard
in Southern Cali forn ia with thi s type of data set is earthquakes. This does not exist for other
hazards that were considered.
Within the var ious theoretical approaches for the development of earthquake probabilities. there
are several schools even within the U.S. Geological Survey. Some researchers be lieve that the
presence of small earthqu akes does not produ ce useful information. Another group of
researchers believes the tracking of small earthquakes can aid sc ientists in predicting large
ea11hqu akes. Others believe the onl y va lid predictive approach is trenchi ng fault li nes to
examine the recent geological record.
These various lines ofthought leave mitigation planners the difficult task of determining a
probability of a certain natural event with limi ted data and conflictin g ex pert opinions. For the
purposes of this plan, hazards were selected and probabilistic estim ates were made based on the
information that was avai lable, the frequency of the event, or the potential damage related to
such an event. Three natural hazards were selected: earthquakes, windstorm s, and fl oods.
60
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Severity
Earthquake Probability
Natural Hazard
Probability
Chart
Earthquake probabi lity in Southern California has been studied by various experts. The US
Geological Survey (USGS) and Cal Tech conducted a study in 2008. The study indi cated the
probabil ity of an earthquake greater than 7.0 intensity with in the next 30 years is hi gh. This is in
the range ofVIll on th e modified Mercalli Intensity Scale. In 20 14 the US GS sponsored the
Working Group on Californ ia Earthquake Probability. This group developed the Third Uniform
California Earthquake Forecast (UCERF3). This forecast indicates there is an increase in the
probability of a major eat1hquake in the Los Angeles region. On average Southern California has
thousands of small to moderate earthquakes annually. Thi s indicates the frequency is high.
The 1994 orth ridge Earthquake was eva luated for cost in death, injuries, and property loss.
There were 57 deaths, 9,000 injuries and a property loss of over 20 billion doll ars. The impact
was felt in six counties with 125,000 residents left temporarily homeless. The recovery efforts
lasted for yea rs. The latest Cal Tech estimates of a maj or earthquake is a loss of$200 bi ll ion in
property and economic activity with a likelihood of I ,800 fatalities. This indicates the severity of
thi s type of event is high.
61
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Windstorm Probability
The issue of predicting long-term patterns related to windstorm activity is problematic. Studies
have been conducted by the Unive rsity of Washington, UC Los Angeles, the US Forest Service
and the National Weather Service. There have been significant advances in downslope wind
modeling which is directl y related to the phenomenon kn own as Santa Ana winds in Southern
Ca li fornia. A system for monitoring and pred ictin g these winds ca lled the Offshore Flow
Severity Index is providing accurate modeling and predictive data up to 96 hours.
Studies of these conditions indicate that long-term probab ilities of when windstorms may occur
are di fficu lt because of the dynam ic nature of the va riables which influence these events. ln 2015
all research indi cated a major El ino condition which would result in heavy winter rainstorms
in Southern California for 20 15-2016. These did not occur and high light the difficu lty of
developing probabiliti es and predictions of long-term weather patterns.
There has been one signifi cant wi ndstorm in Los Angeles County in the past hundred years-the
20 I I San Gabriel Vall ey Windstorm. Peak winds were reported at I 00 mph which are Category
12 hurricane wind s on the Beaufort Wind Sca le. The City of Temple City had over $10 mill ion
in damages. There were no deaths. The entire city was impacted for over a week with blocked
streets and loss of public utilities. Compared to a major earthquake event, th e severity is
moderate and the frequen cy is low.
Floods
There have been no recorded floods or flood losses in Temple City since the development of Los
Angeles County Flood Control District nearly I 00 years ago. FEMA, the tate of Ca lifornia, and
the County of Los Angles have studied flood events in Los Angeles County and declared there is
no fl ood risk in the City ofTemple City. This means the freq uency and severity are very low.
62
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
SECTION 1: Earthquakes
W hy A re Earthquakes a Threa t to the City of Templ e City?
The most recent significant earthquake event affecting Southern California was the January 17,
1994. orthridge earthquake. At 4:3 1 A.M. on Monday. January 17, an earthquake with a
magnitude of6.7 struck the San Fernando Valley. In the fo llowing days and weeks, thousands of
aftershocks occurred, causing additional damage to affected structures.
Fifty-seven people were killed and more than I ,500 peopl e seriously injured. For days
afterward , thousands of homes and businesses were without electricity; tens of thousands had no
gas; and nearly 50,000 had litt le or no water. Approxim ately 15,000 structures were moderately
to severely damaged, leaving thousands of people temporari ly homeless. 66,500 buildings were
inspected. early 4,000 were severely damaged and over I I ,000 were moderately damaged .
Several collapsed bridges and overpasses created commuter havoc on the freeway system.
Extensive damage was caused by ground shakin g, but earthq uake-triggered liquefaction and
dozens of fires also caused additional severe damage. This extremely strong ground motion in
large portions of Los Angeles County resulted in record economic losses.
The earthquake occurred early in the morning on a holiday. This circum stance considerably
reduced the potential effects. Many co llapsed bu ildings were unoccupied, and most businesses
were not yet open. Still, the direct and indirect economic losses ran into the tens of billions of
doll ars.
Historical and geological records show that Cali fornia has a long history of seismi c events.
Southern California is probably best known for the an Andreas Fault, a 400-mi le long fault
running fro m the Mexican border to a poin t offshore, west of San Francisco. Geologic studies
show that over the past I ,400 to 1.500 years large earthquakes have occurred at about 130-year
interva ls on the southern San Andreas Faul t. As the last large earthquake on the southern San
Andreas occurred in 1857, that section of the fault is considered a likely location for an
ea rthquake within the next few decades.
Although the most famous of the faults, the San Andreas, is capable of producing an earthquake
with a magnitude of 8+ on the Richter scale, some of the "lesser" faults have the potential to
inflict greater damage on the urban co re of the Los Angeles Basin. eismologists believe that a
6.0 earthq uake on the Newport-Inglewood area would resu lt in far more death and destruction
than a "great" quake on the San Andreas, because the San Andreas is relatively remote from the
urban centers of Southern Ca li forn ia.
The two largest fau lts in th e Temple City area are the Sierra Madre Fau lt, a reverse fault on the
north boundary of the City, and the Raymond Fault. The Raymond Fau lt is a left lateral strike
slip fau lt. A rupture of either fault would result in major damage to the City. earby faults
include the Verdugo, Hollywood. Whittier, and Elys ian Park fault zones. Any of these fau lts
have the potential to cause serious damage to Temple City.
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
63
In I 987 Rosemead, the city directly south of Temple City, was the epicenter of the 5.9
magnitude Whittier Narrows earthquake. The ea t1hquake caused approximately $358 million in
damage to commercial structures, resi dences and infrastructure in surrounding communities, and
was fe lt as far away as Las Vegas. Eight deaths are attributed to the quake. This quake was on a
previously unknown blind thrust fau lt. Many scholars believe a large ea rthquake on a fault such
as thi s could cause more catastrophic damage to the Los Angeles Basin and East Los Angeles
regions than a large earthquake on the San Andreas Fault. The City ofTemp le City would be
greatly impacted by such an event.
To better understand the earthquake hazard, the scientific co mmunity has looked at historical
records and accelerated research on those fau lts that are the sources of the earthquakes occurring
in the Southern California reg ion. Historical earthquake records can generally be divided into
records of the pre-instrumental period and the instrum ental peri od. In the absence of
instrumentation, the detection of earthquakes is based on observations and felt reports, and is
dependent upon population density and distribution. Since Ca lifornia was sparsely populated in
the 1800s. the detection of pre-instrumental earthquakes is relatively difficu lt.
Two very large earthquakes, the Fort Tejon in 1857 (7.9) and the Owens Valley in 1872 (7 .6) are
evidence ofthe tremendously damaging potential of earthquakes in Southern California. In more
recent times two 7.3 earthquakes struck Southern California, in Kern County ( 1952) and Landers
( 1992). The damage from these four large eat1hquakes was lim ited because they occurred in
areas wh ich were sparsely popu lated at th e time they happened. The seismi c risk is much more
severe today than in the past because the popul ation at risk is in the millions, rather than a few
hundred or a few thousand persons.
64
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Causes and Characteristics of Earthquakes in Southern California
Earthquake Faults
A fault is a fracture between blocks of th e earth 's cru st where
either side moves relative to the oth er along a parallel plane to the
fracture.
Strike-slip
Strike-slip faults are vertical or almost vertical ri fts where the
earth 's plates move mostly horizontally. From the observer's
perspective, if the opposite block looking across the fau lt moves
to the right. the slip style is ca ll ed a ri ght lateral faul t; if the block
moves left. the shift is called a left lateral faul t.
Dip-slip
Dip-s lip fa ults are slanted fractures where the blocks mostly shi ft
Strike-Slip Fault
vertically. lfthe earth above an inclined fault moves down, the Normal Fault
fault is call ed a normal fau lt, but when the rock above the fault
moves up, th e fault is called a reverse fa ult. Thrust fau lts have a
reverse fa ult with a dip of 45 o or less.
City ofTemp!e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Thrust Fault
65
Southern California Earthquake Faults
0 25 Miles
-==!
~RN COUNTY II
LOS ANGELES
COUNlY L
N
• Bor.;toN
• 'ven-ura
Fau lt Map
Major roulis
Inferred faults
or offshore
escarpements
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
SAN BERNARDINO
COUNlY
BANiimv
G RIVERSIDE
~-'V COUNTY ~("\ -?k ~b
SAN DIEGO
COUNTY
66
Elevation
above
Sea Level
Major Faults-Los Angeles Region
Map: Southern California Earthquake Data Center
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
67
&(
30 '
Major Earthquakes in Southern California since 1812
··' ' • ·~· .,.;t'~ 1,.~. t ·. . ~i\ J-~ • :.···.:\'. ".N VAriA ' ~' < • • '\ : : ~ .~·tie • ,·, \ ~ .. ~~ ~¥') ,.,f I ;r ~~·,;/I~~ l
< • f • 0
1 ' y ,· L ,;,.:.. ' , I ~ • ~ •' 1.~ 1 t 1
I'. j \ . '/I IJ )• I , • ' . . • ~ ~~· J .:, ~·--, '•} Ba ker~fleld · .. r:~·H ·:', _:,:.~ ·l; ... , ~~ 1 ,· .. ---., I. •
· ~ .... ., _. ... ~________, • ~ -t'l 9 ,i-~·,r 1• " ~ . __
'--. ·• · -~"-"c-f r---·-""·" ~..., •' • • ' .,J •·,.,<·eaker , (-' ' •• , \-I . •• I, -,,,. l.'. )I'. ' 'o ! , -t 71 ~ • • --~I S~ I' ·. .\ ;_-j .t,_z. t, • J.;. -A-~' , ·• .•' . nUIS I/ ' • ' -·-~ I • • • , ' 4 ·~" • , . ( . , • "I .-~ ~--L • • • • J r \)£11spe~ ·.·... 1
' 1 • -jr•1ojav~ ··, ---_..,.._e .... 1 .-1 .~
1 I , .t . : . ' ( ' I _......_ ,. • .-• ' } 't,• HI . , · ·';j ~f . 11 BahtOW'~----, ,, ',{• _. -~---~ .~} -· '·<·.·t.-,~.,.-.. · ·~-.~~,t :1--I i " ~ 'J ,·_.· ;.1~ .. , .. · , ,
' • ,' .a '.4' ., ; .....-.. \ ~ l f ' • -\ ·\·~ 0.'~o'(f.QU1 ' .•ffl l' r·•·.-:' 1 #' • 0 t It . ... ..... " . '. ,. , 11"1,• PI . --· ~ . I . , -~->=a.c~:~;,. .... ,,.,.,._~·'ll \.,.-.. \ J. (' :,·. .• J '
, ....... _._ :_ ... -· :;~ .p)f•' ,; -.:_ ';J; ,, ·-~ \ ~~:~ ~-~-~·";~~·~,:~-~~~· ........ ,(·_• ~----~"~~ )~~---!
·-·' ' .... , ... : ~-"' ·~-~ --~.--.. , •• l .. f '\, .. " .lj. . ~---, ~.g .... ~~~J . I . '---~ ~ -'•· • :~'· • ,. ' -. ·~ '"• \rnv~ \'i:> . , '· : . ~ ~~--, ..... ·. • :t .. ~ ..
MA GN ITUD ES (;_, ..::!\; ~. -'!.. J ,\,·~, -~~~~-"--:!.#~~-.:--;;;-----' __ _}__
4.5 to 4.9 ._ . 1 ~,'.~",. . , '.r-~, , -~· , • "'u 'r") J ' ~~~) I .,. • 5.0 to 5.4 ~ '•~ J..-1 , •. -·"r~--.;·c:.,. ·' l.:'o --,~, ' ~~ . --:; .. ' , . .. •. . e 5.5 to 5.9 ~ \ l ·, J • . , •• • ~ .. ~·.,(1··~-~~.~.~ 6.0 tO 6.4 '. 1 .. \L" .,.It;..,, ~-• I j' 11 _, .;, 't;_, '• 'I
• 6.5 to 6.9 ~ (0~n__-:~-.L~,.: :·r;~ •--~.-_ _ ~. 1e.9.o , •• .(•:!I~" ,-----, iii;;. 7.0 to 7.4 r ) , --:l : -.----• ~ . •. ~ ·.~.-.'-. -~·~ ·-... 7.5 to 7.9
··')~<··~E teO. .
• '·. :.· • j . ' ' , ;
8.0 anci greater 100 Kt-.·1
Dr. Kerry S ieh of Cal Tech has investigated the San Andreas Fault at Pallett C reek and reports,
"The record at Pallett Creek shows that rupture has recurred about every 130 years, on average,
over the past 1500 years. But actua l inte rva ls have varied greatly, fi·om less than 50 years to
more than 300. The physical cause of such irregul ar recurrence remains un known." Damage
from a great quake on the San Andreas would be widespread throughout Southern California.
68
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Earthquake-Related Hazards
Ground shaking, landslides, liq uefaction, and amplificati on are the speci fi c hazards associated
with earthquakes. The severity of these hazards depends on several factors, including soil and
slope conditions, proximity to the fault, earthquake magnitude, and the type of ea rthquake.
Ground Shaking:
Ground shaking is the motion fe lt on the earth's surface caused by seismic waves generated by
the earthquake. It is the primary cause of earthquake damage. The strength of ground shaking
depends on the magnitude ofthe earthquake, the type of fault, and di stance from the epicenter
(where the earthquake originates). Buildings on poorly conso lidated and thick soils wi ll
typically see more damage than buildings on consolidated soils and bedrock.
Earthquake-Induced Landslides:
Earthqu ake-induced landslides are secondary earthquake hazards that occur from ground
shaking. They can destroy the roads, buildings, utilities, and other critical facilities necessary to
respond and recover from an earthquake. Many communities in Southern California have a high
likelihood of encountering such ri sks, especiall y in areas with steep slopes.
Liquefaction:
Liquefaction occurs when ground shaking causes wet granular soils to change from a solid state
to a liquid state. This results in the loss of soil strength and the soil's ability to support weight.
Buildings and their occupants are at ri sk when the ground can no longer support these buildin gs
and structures. Many communities in Southern California are built on ancient river bottoms and
have sandy so il. In some cases this ground may be subject to liquefaction, depending on the
depth of the water table.
Amplification:
Soils and soft sedimentary rocks near the earth's surface ca n modify ground shaking caused by
earthquakes. One ofthese modifications is amplification. Amplification increases the
magnitude of the seismic waves generated by the earthquake. The amount of amp I i fication is
influenced by the thickness of geologic materials and their physical pro perties . Buildings and
structures built on soft and unconsolidated so ils can face greater ri sk. Amplificati on can also
occur in areas with deep sediment-fi lied basins and on ridge tops.
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
69
Seismic Zones In California
Darker Shaded Areas indicate Greater Potential Shaking
Source: USGS Website
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
70
------------------------------------------------------------------
Abridged Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale
Average Peak Aver age Peak
Velocity Acceleration
Intensity Value and Description (g = gravity )
(em/sec)
Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances <0.1 <0.0017
(I Rossi-Forel scale). Damage potential: None.
II. Felt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper floors of high-rise
buildings. Delicately suspended objects may swing.
(I to II Rossi-Forel scale). Damage potential: None.
Ill. Felt quite noticeably indoors, especially on upper floors of buildings, but many
people do not recognize it as an earthquake. Standing automobiles may rock
slightly. Vibration like passing of truck. Duration estimated. (Ill Rossi-Forel
scale). Damage potential: None.
IV. During the day felt indoors by many, outdoors by few. At night some 1.1-3.4 0 .014 -0.039
awakened. Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make creaking sound.
Sensation like a heavy truck striking building. Standing automobiles rocked
noticeably. (IV to V Rossi-Forel scale). Damage potential: None. Perceived
shaking: Light. v. Felt by nearly everyone, many awakened. Some dishes, windows, and so on 3.4 -8.1 0 .039-0.092
broken; cracked plaster in a few places; unstable objects overturned.
Disturbances of trees, poles, and other tall objects sometimes noticed.
Pendulum clocks may stop. {V to VI Rossi-Forel scale). Damage potential:
Very light. Perceived shaking: Moderate.
VI. Felt by all, many frightened and run outdoors. Some heavy furniture moved, 8.1 -16 0.092 -0.18
few Instances of fallen plaster and damaged chimneys. Damage slight. (VI to
VII Rossi-Forel scale). Damage potential: Light. Perceived shaking: Strong.
VII. Everybody runs outdoors. Damage negligible in buildings of good design and 16 -31 0.18 -0.34
construction; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures; considerable
in poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken. Noticed
by persons driving cars. (VIII Rossi-Forel scale). Damage potential: Moderate.
Perceived shaking: Very strong.
VIII. Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable in ordinary 31-60 0.34 -0.65
substantial buildings with partial collapse; great in poorly built structures.
Panel walls thrown out of frame structures. Fall of chimneys, factory stacks,
columns, monuments, and walls. Heavy furniture overturned. Sand and mud
ejected in small amounts. Changes in well water. Persons driving cars
disturbed. (VIII+ to IX Rossi-Forel scale). Damage potential: Moderate to
heavy. Perceived shaking: Severe.
IX. Damage considerable in specially designed structures; well-designed frame 60 -116 0.65-1.24
structures thrown out of plumb; great in substantial buildings with partial
collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations. Ground cracked conspicuously.
Underground pipes broken. (IX+ Rossi-Forel scale). Damage potential: Heavy.
Perceived shaking: Violent.
X. Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame > 116 > 1.24
structures destroyed; ground badly cracked. Rails bent. Landslides
considerable from river banks and steep slopes. Shifted sand and mud. Wate
splashed, slopped over banks. (X Rossi-Forel scale). Damage potential: Very
heavy. Perceived shaking: Extreme.
XI. Few, if any, (masonry) structures remain standing. Bridges destroyed. Broad
fissures in ground. Underground pipelines completely out of service. Earth
slumps and land slips in soft ground. Rails bent greatly.
XII. Damage total. Waves seen on ground surface. Lines of sight and level
distorted. Objects thrown into air.
7 1
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Earthquake Hazard Assessment
Hazard Identifica tion:
In Cali forni a, many agencies are focused on seismic safety issues : the State's Seismic Safety
Commissio n, the Applied Technology Counci l, Californ ia Governor's Office of Emergency
Services (Cal OES), United tates Geological Survey. Cal Tech, and the Califo rnia Geological
Survey, as well as a number of un iversities and private fou ndations.
These organizations, in partnersh ip with other state and federal agencies, have undertaken a
rigorous program in Ca lifornia to identify seismic hazards and risks including active fau lt
identification, bedroc k shak ing, tsunami in undati on zones, ground motion amplification,
liquefaction, and earthquake induced land slides. Seismic hazard maps have been published and
are available for many co mm un ities in Cali fo rn ia th rough the State Div ision of Mines and
Geo logy.
Note: The fol lowing descriptions of earthquake faults. the probable recurrence rate, and the
esti mated severity of a potential earthquake were developed by the Working Group on Californ ia
Earthquake Probabilities (WGCEP) sponsored by the US and California Geological Surveys.
San Andreas Fault Zone:
The San Andreas Fault is the pri nc ipal boundary between the Pacific and orth American plates,
and as such, it is considered the '·Master Fault" because it has frequent (geologically speaking),
large earthquakes, and it controls the seismic hazard in southern Californ ia. T he fault extends
over 1.000 miles (I 600 kilometers) from near Cape Mendoci no in northern California to the
Salton Sea region in so uthern Ca li fo rnia. At its closest approach, the San Andreas Fault is
approximately 2 1 miles (33 km) north of Temple City.
Large faults, such as the San Andreas Fault, are generally di vided into segments in order to
evaluate their future eatt hquake potential. The segments are generally defined at disconti nuiti es
along the fault that may affect the rupture length. In central and southern Cali forni a, the Sa n
Andreas Fault zone is divided in to fi ve segments named, from notth to south, the Cholame,
Carrizo, Mojave, San Bernardino Mountains, and Coache lla Valley segments.
Each segment is assumed to have a characteristic slip rate (rate of movement averaged over
time), recurrence interval (time between moderate to large earthquakes), and displacement
(amount of offset during an earthquake). Whi le this meth odology has some va lue in predicting
earthquakes, historica l records and studies of prehistoric earthquakes show th at it is possible for
more than one segment to rupture during a large quake or for ruptures to overlap into adjacent
segments.
The last major earthquake on the south ern portion of the San Andreas Faul t was the 1857 Fort
Tejon (M 8) event. This is the largest earthquake reported in California. The 1857 surface
rupture broke the Cholame, Carrizo, and Mojave segments, result ing in displacements of as
much as 27 feet (9 meters) along the rupture zone. These fa ult segments are thought to have an
incident recurrence interval of bet\ een I 04 and 296 years.
72
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
L
The Mojave segment of the an Andreas fault is 83 miles ( 133 km) long. extending from
approximately Three Points southward to just northwest of Cajon Creek, at the southern limit of
the 185 7 ruptu re. Scienti sts estimate a recurrence interva l of 150 years for this segment. The
Mojave segment is estimated to be capable of producing a magnitude 7.1 earthquake. Earthquake
researchers believe th is segment has a 26 percent probability of rupturing sometime between
1994 and 2024.
The an Bernardino Mountains segment extends approximate ly 49 miles (78 km) from Cajon
Creek to the an Gorgonio Pass. This segment is a structurally com plex zone that is poorly
understood. and for which there are scant data on fault behav ior. It has been estimated there is a
probable recu rrence interval on thi s fa ult of approximately 146 years. This fault segment is
estimated capable of producing a magnitude 7.3 earthquake. If this fault segment ruptu res
together with the Mojave and Coachella Valley segments, higher ground moti ons would be
expected. In 1994 the WGCEP ( 1995) calculated that this fault segment had a 28 percent
probability of ru pturing sometime in the next 30 years.
The Coachella Val ley segment is about 71 miles (1 14 km) long and extends from an Gorgonio
Pa s to the alton Sea. This segment has not produced any large surface-rupturin g earthquakes
in historic times (Sieh and Williams, 1990). Paleoseismic studies suggest that the last surface-
rupturing earthquake on this segment occurred around 1680. The data also suggest that during
the 1680 earthquake and the one prior to that, in 1450. both the Coachell a Valley and an
Bernardino Mounta in segments ruptured simultaneously. The WGCEP derived a recurrence
interval fo r the Coachella Valley segment of ap proximately 220 yea rs. This segment is thought
ca pabl e of produ cing a magn itude 7.4 ea rthq uake. The WGCEP ( 1995) also calculated a 22
percent probability that thi s fau lt segment wi ll generate an earth quake sometime between 1994
and 2024.
ierra Madre Fault:
The ierra Madre fa ult zone is a nort h-d ip ping reverse fau lt zone approximately 47 miles (75
km) long that extends along the so uth ern nank of the an Gabriel Mountains from an Fernando
to an Antonio Canyon, where it continues southeastward as the Cucamonga fault. The Sierra
Madre fault has been divided into five segments, and each segment seem s to have a different rate
of acti vity.
The northwestern-m ost segment of the Sierra Mad re fault (the San Fernando segment) ruptured
in 1971, causing the Mw 6.7 an Fernando (or ylmar) earthquake. As a result of th is
earthq uake, the ierra Madre fault has been known to be active. In the 1980s, Crook and others
( 1987) studied the Transverse Ranges u ing genera l geologic and geomorphic mapping, coupled
with a few trenching locations, and suggested that the segments of the ierra Madre fault east of
th e an Fernando segment have not generated major earthq uakes in several thou ands of years,
and possibl y as long as I I ,000 years. By California's definiti ons of active faulting, most of the
ierra Madre fa ult woul d therefore be classified as not active. The segment in Los Angeles
County is active and may ge nerate an earthquake in the future.
73
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Verdugo Fault:
The Verdugo fault is a 13-mile (2 1 km) long, southeast-striking fault that that lies along the
southern fl ank of the Verdugo Mountains, near Burbank. Earthquake researchers have
interpreted thi s fa ult as both a reverse fa ult and a left-lateral stri ke-slip fa ult. Results of these
studi es suggest that the Verdugo faul t changes in character from a reverse fault adjacent to the
Pacoima Hills, to a normal fault at the south west edge of the Verdugo Mountains. Vertical
separati on on the fault is at least I ,000 meters. Th e fault's recurrence interva l is unknown.
Raymond Fault:
The Raymond fau lt is a left-lateral, strike-slip fault about 13 mi les (20 km) long that ex tends
across th e San Gabriel Valley, and is just north/northeast from The City of Temple City. The
fault is arcuate in shape, trending east-west in its western secti on, and east-northeast in its eastern
section. The fault produces a very obvious sout h-facing scarp along much of its length, which
led many geologists to favor reverse-slip as the predominant sense of fault motion. However,
left-deflected channels, shutter-ridges, sag ponds, and pressure ridges indi cate that the Raymond
fault is predominantly a left-l ateral strike-slip fault. The Raymond fault appears to transfer slip
southward from the Sierra Madre fault zone to other fa ult systems. This sense of motion is
confirmed by the seismological record, especiall y the main-shock and aftershock sequence to the
1988 Pasadena earthquake of local magnitude (ML) 4.9 that probably occurred on this fau lt.
(Jones et at., 1990; 1-Iauksson and Jones, 199 1 ). Research indicates that the Raymond fau lt may
rupture alone, or together with other nearby faults, such as the Hollywood fa ult. The recurrence
rate is uncertain .
The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, passed in 1990. addresses non-s urface fa ult rupture
earthquake hazards, inc luding liquefaction and seismi cally-induced landslides. The State
Department of Conservation operates the Seismic Mapping Program for California. Extensive
information is avai lable at their website: http://gmw.consrv.ca.gov/shmp/index.htm
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
74
--Earthquake Planning Scenario -
Rapid Instrumental Intensity Map for San Andreas 1857 rupture Scenario
Soenaro Date: Fri Feb 15, 2002 08:00:00 AM PST M 7.8 N35.70 W1 20.30 Depth: 1 O.Okm
36.5"
36"
35.5"
35"
34.5"
34"
33.5 "
-121" -120" -119" -118" -117"
PLANNING SCENARIO ONLY··· Processed: Mon Jan 12,200404:55:46 PM PST
City ofTemp!e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
75
-----------------------------------
--Earthquake Planning Scenario --
Rapid Instrumental Intensity Map for San Andreas southern rupture Scenario
Scenario Date: Wed Nov 14,2001 04:00:00 AM PST M 7.4 N33.92 W116.47 Depth: 10.0km
35"
34.5"
34"
33.5"
33"
32.6"
-118" -11r -116" -115"
PLANNING SCENARIO ONLY ·· P1ocessed: Mon Jan 12, 200410:55:42 AM PST
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
76
--Earthquake Planning Scenario-
Rapid Instrumental Intensity Map for Raymond Fault M6.5 Scenario
Scenario Date: Thu Apr 4, 2002 09:15: DO AM PST M 6.5 N34.14 W11 8. 06 Depth: 13.Dkm
34.5"
34"
-118"
PLANNING SCENARIO ONL Y ··Processed: WedJul 7,200410:51:50 PM PDT
PERCEIVED SHAIOIC NotteH Weak Light lll'roderate Strorg Very strong StMire Violent Ex1reme
POTENTIAL DAMAGE none none none Very lgh1 Ugh1
PEAK.Aa:{~) <.17 .17-1.4 1.4-3.9 3.Q..Q.2 9.2-18 18-34 34-65 65-124 >124
PEAK VEL(crn'IO) ~.1 0.1-1.1 1.1-3.4 3.48.1 8.1-16 1~31 31-BD BD-116 >116
INSTRUIIE~Al It/TENS II-II rv v VI VI
City ofTemp!e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
77
-Earthquake Planning Scenario--
Rapid Instrumental Intensity Map for Verdugo Fault M6.7 Scenario
Seen arc Date: Tue Oct 30,2001 04:00:00 AM PST M 6.7 N34.18 W118.25 Depth: S.Okm
34.5"
34"
-1 19" -118"
PLANNING SCENARIO ONLY·· Prooessed: WedJu17,2004 111>1:41 PM PDT
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
78
-Earthquake Planning Scenario-
Rapid Instrumental Intensity Map for Puente Hi lls Scenario
Scenario Date: Sat Jan 11, 2003 04:00:00 AM PST M 7.1 N33.93 W117.95 Depth: 12.5km
34.5"
34"
33.5"
-119" -118" -117"
PLANNING SCENARIO ONLY ·· Pnx:essed~ M:lnJan 12, 200411:54:00AM PST
79
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
-Earthquake Planning Seen aria -
Rapid Instrumental Intensity Map for Whittier M6.8 Fault Scenario
Scenario Date: Man Mar 11 ,2002 04:00:00 AM PST M 6.8 N33.96 W117.96 Depth: 10.0km
34.5"
34"
33.5"
-118"
PLANNING SCEIIIARIO ONI.. Y •• Processed: !.Ibn Jan 12, 200_. 11:36:25 Al.r1 PST
City ofTemple City Multi-Ha::ard Mitigation Plan
80
--Earthquake Planning Scenario--
Rapid Instrumental Intensity Map for Santa Monica M6.6 Scenario
Scenario Date: Mon Jul16, 2001 05:00:00 AM PDT M 6.6 N34.03 W118.52 Depth: 13.0km
34.5"
34"
PLANNING SCENARIO ONI.. Y ·• Processed: Mon Jan 12, 200412:10:17 PM PST
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
81
34.5"
34"
33.5"
-Earthquake Planning Scenario--
Rapid Instrumental In tensity Map for Newport-Inglewood M6 .9 Scenario
Scenario Date: Fri Aug 3, 2001 05:00:00 AM PDT M 6.9 N33.78 W118.13 Depth: S.Okm
-1 19" -11 a·
PLANNING SCENARIO ONLY --Processed: Wed Jul 7, 200410:40:-H PM PDT
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
82
Vulnerabilitv Assessment:
The effects of earthquakes span a large area, and large earthquakes occurring in many parts of
the Southern Califo rnia region would probably be felt throughout the region. However, the
degree to which th e earthquakes are fe lt, and the damages associated with them, may vary. At
ri sk from earthquake damage are large stocks of old buildings and bridges; many high tech and
hazardous materials facilities; extensive sewer, water. and natural gas pipelines; earth dams;
petroleum pipelines; and other critical fac ilities and private property located in the county. The
relative or secondary earthquake hazards, whi ch are liquefaction, ground shaking, amplification,
and earthquake-induced landslides. can be just as devastating as the earthquake.
The Cali forni a Geological Survey has identified areas most vulnerable to liquefaction.
Liquefaction occurs when ground shaking causes wet granul ar soil s to change from a solid state
to a liquid state. This resul ts in the loss of soil strength and the soil's ab ili ty to support weight.
Buildings and the ir occupants are at risk when the ground can no longer support these buildings
and structures.
Southern California has many active landslide areas, and a large ear1hquake could trigger
accelerated movement in these slide areas, in add ition to jarring loose other unknown areas of
landsli de risk.
Risk Analvsis:
Risk analysis is the third phase of a hazard assessment. Risk ana lysis involves estim ating the
damage and costs likely to be experienced in a geographic area over a period of time. Factors
inc luded in assessing earthq uake ri sk include population and property distribution in the hazard
area, the frequency of earthquake events, landslide susceptibi lity, bu ildings, infrastructure. and
disaster preparedness of the regi on. Th is type of analysis can generate estimates of the damages
to the region due to an earthquake event in a specific location. FEMA 's software program,
HAZUS, uses mathematical formulas and information about bu ilding stock, local geology and
the locati on and size of potential earthquakes, economic data, and other information to estim ate
losses from a potential earthquake. The HAZUS software is available from FEMA at no cost.
For greater Southern Cali fornia, there are mu ltiple worst-case scenarios, depending on wh ich
fault might rupture, and which communities are in proxi mity to the fault. But damage wi ll not
necessarily be limited to immediately adjoining communities. Depending on the hypocenter of
the earthquake, seismic waves may be transmitted through the ground to unsuspecting
comm unities. In the Northridge 1994 earthquake. Santa Mon ica suffered extensive damage,
even though there was a range of mounta ins between it and the origin of the ear1hquake.
Damages for a large earthquake almost anywhere in Southern Cali fornia are likely to run into the
billions of dollars. Although buildin g codes are some of the most strin gent in the world, tens of
th ousands of older ex isting buildings were built under much less rigid codes. Cali fornia has laws
affecting unreinforced masonry buildings (URM's) and although many building owners have
retrofitted their buil dings, hundreds ofpre-1933 buildings still have not been brought up to
current standards. As of2005. the City of Temple City retrofitting of all unreinforced masonry
bui ldings was com plete.
83
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
-------------------------------------------
Community Earthquake Issues
What is Susceptible to Earthquakes?
Earthquake damage occurs because human s have bui lt structures that cannot withstand severe
shakin g. Buildings, airports, schools. and lifelines (highways and utility lines) suffer damage in
earthquakes and can cause death or injury to humans. The wei fare of homes, maj or businesses,
and public infrastru cture is very important. Addressing th e reliab ility of build ings, critical
fa cilities, and infrastructure, and understanding the potential costs to government, businesses,
and indi viduals as a result of an earthquake, are chall enges faced by the City.
Dams:
There are a total of I 03 dams in Los Angeles County, owned by 23 agencies or organizati ons,
ranging fro m the federal govern ment to home owner associations. These dams hold billions of
gallons of \Vater in reservoirs. Releases of water from the major reservoirs are des igned to
protect Southern Californi a from floodwaters and to store domestic water.
Seismic activi ty can compromise the dam structures. and the resultant floodi ng could cause
catastrophic fl ooding. Following the 1971 Sylmar earthquake, the Lower Van Norm an Dam
showed signs of structural compromise, and tens of thousands of persons had to be evacuated
until the dam could be drained.
The Santa Fe Dam inundation path impacts the southeast corner of the city, especially along
Lower Azusa Road. It would al so great ly impact cities to the east, northeast and so utheast. The
dam is usuall y dry, but can hold more than 45 ,000 acre feet of water du ri ng major storms. It is
part of the San Gabriel River system and drains into several spreading grounds along the Rio
Hondo waterway. In March 2009 the US Army Corps of Engineers rated the Santa Fe Dam as
Dam Safety Action Class II , or DSAC II. Th is means that the dam could experience fai lure
during normal operations or a result of an event such as an earthquake. The USACE has
undertaken a four-year study and sa fety program , with possib le repairs to begin once the study
has been completed.
Because the dam is often dry, an earthquake wi ll most likely not pose an inundation threat.
However, in the event of heavy rain s, such as an El ino weather pattern , additional seismic
stress could cause the dam to fail, posing a threat to all those in the inu ndation path.
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
84
Santa Fe Dam Failure Inundation Map
Buildings:
JUTA r«: N tl rlllfiMI(IIf\'H..AW
Moitlfl,.... .. t#
The built environment is susceptib le to damage from earthquakes. Buildings that col lapse can
trap and bury people. Lives are at risk and the cost to clean up the damages is great. In most
Californ ia communiti es, including the City ofTemple City, many buildings were built before
L 933, when building codes were not as strict. Recent changes in the Temple City building codes
regarding the use of sheer wall techniques have helped to protect new construction.
Infrastructure and Communication:
Residents in the City of Temple City commute frequ ently by automobiles and public
tran sportation such as buses and li ght rail. An earthquake can greatly damage bridges and roads,
hampering emergency response efforts and the normal movement of people and goods.
Damaged infrastructure strongly affects the economy of the community because it disconnects
people fi·om work, schoo l, food, and leisure, and separates bu sinesses fr om their customers and
suppli ers.
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
85
Ground shaking and amp lification can cause pipes to break open, power lines to fall, roads and
railways to crack or move, and radio and telephone communication to cease. Disruption to
transportation makes it especially difficult to bring in supplies or services. Lifelines need to be
usable after an earthquake to al low for rescue, recovery, and rebuilding efforts and to relay
imp011ant in formation to th e public.
Disruption of Critical Services:
Critical facilities include sheriffs stations, fire stations, hospitals, shelters, and other facilities
that provide important services to the community. These fac ilities and their services need to be
functional after an earthquake event.
Businesses:
Seismic activity can cau se great loss to businesses, both large-scale corporations and small retai l
shops. When a company is forced to stop production for just a day, the economic loss can be
tremendous, especially when its market is at a national or global level. Seismic activity can
create economic loss that presents a burden to large and small shop owners who may have
difficul ty recovering from their losses.
Of businesses that close during a disaster, forty percent do not reopen afterwards, and another
twenty-five percent fai l within one year, according to the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA). Similar stati stics from the United States Small Business Admin istrati on
indicate that over ninety percent of businesses which close during a disaster fa il within two years
after being stru ck.
Individual Preparedness:
Because the potential for earthquake occurrences and earthquake-related property damage is
relatively hi gh in the City ofTemple City, increasing indi vidual preparedness is a significant
need. Strapping down heavy furn iture, water heaters, and expensive personal property, as well as
being earthquake-insured and anchoring buildings to foundations, are just a few steps individuals
ca n take to prepare fo r an earthquake.
Death and Injury:
Death and injury can occur both inside and outside of bui ldings due to collapsed buildings falling
equipment, furniture, debris, and structural materi als. Downed power lines and broken water and
gas lines can also endanger human life,
Fire:
Downed power lin es or broken gas mains can trigger fires. When fire stations suffer bui lding or
lifeline damage, quick response to extinguish fires is less li kely. Furthermore, major incidents
will demand a larger share of resources, and initia lly smal ler fires and problems will receive little
or insufficient resources in the initial hours after a major earthquake event. Loss of electricity
may cause a loss of water pressure in some communities, further hampering firefighting ability.
86
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Debris:
After damage to a variety of structures, much time is spent cleaning up brick, glass, wood, steel
or concrete building elements, office and home contents, and other materials. Developing a
strong debris management strategy is essential in post-disaster recovery. Occurrence of a
disaster does not exempt the City ofTemple City from compli ance with AB 939 regulations.
Existing Mitigation Activities
Existing mitigation activities include current mi tigation programs and activities that are being
implemented by county, regional, state, or federa l agencies or organizations.
City of Temple City Codes:
Implementation of earthquake mitigation policy most often takes place at the local government
level. The City ofTemple City Planning Department enforces the zoning and land use
regulations relating to earthquake hazards.
Generally, these codes seek to discourage development in areas that could be prone to fl oodin g
and/or or seismic hazards and, where development is permitted , to ensure that the applicable
construction standards are met. Developers in hazard-prone areas may be required to reta in a
qualified professional engineer to evaluate level of risk on the site and recommend appropriate
miti gation measures.
The City ofTemple City Bu ilding Code sets the minimum design and construction standards fo r
new buildings. In 20 I 0, the City of Temple City adopted the most recent seismic standards in its
building code, including all LA County amendments, which requires that new buildings be buil t
at a higher seismi c standard. These changes put the City in compli ance with new Californ ia
earthquake standards. Changes includ e stronger ordinances for footin gs/foundations and
increased sheer wall requirements.
Title 7 of the Temple City Municipal Code was amended in 199 1 to require all unreinforced
masonry buildings to be reinforced and required improvements to concrete buildings constru cted
prior to 1971 .
Chapters 16 and 16A of the 20 I 0 California Buil ding Code address structural design. Sections
1613 and 1613A focus specifica ll y on earthq uake specifi c hazard s.
Earthquake Mitigation Action Items
The earthquake mitigation acti on items provid e guidance on suggesting specific activities that
agencies, organizations, and residents in the City ofTemple City can undertake to reduce ri sk
and prevent loss from earthquake events. Each action item is followed by ideas for
implementation, which can be used by the adv isory committee and local decision makers in
pursuing strategies for im plementation.
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
87
Plan Goals Addressed
c: 0 -s c: Q)
>-. E Cl'l -Q) Q) .... Cl'l -~ Hazard Action Item Ideas for Implementation Coordinating Timeline Constraints Q) Cl'l a. 0. Q) Cl'l ;>
0 c: E E .... Organization Q) .... ~ Q) .::::::: r:/) 0. ..... Cl'l ...._ c;s Cl'l a. >. ~ ~ >-. ·-(.) ·-<t:: r:/) ...c: c: -Cll -Q) 0 c;s .... OJ) -~ Q)
Q) .... c: ....
0 .D ::l t Q) -E .... ::l ro ro
0... 0... ;z 0... w
Earthquake Mitigation Action Items
Incorporate all earthquake -Conduct a review to
evacuation pl anning determine if any changes
developed by the Los Ange les have been made to area-Temple Pending
hart County Emergency Alliance, wide evacuati on plans. heriffs and I year funding and X
Term Sheriff's Department, and -Integrate any Los LA County Fire available
#I Mutual Aid Area D into the Angeles County evacuation personnel
City Emergency Operation s routes data into the City
Plan. Emergency Operations
Plan .
Encourage purchase of -Prov ide earthquake
ea rthquake hazard insurance. insurance information to
Long Temple City residents. Haza rd Pending
Term -Coordinate with the State Mitigation Ongo ing funding and X X
#I ofCalifornia program to Advi sory available
produce and distribute Committee personnel
earthquake insurance
information.
Conduct seismic evaluati ons -Examine City facilities
of critical facilities in Temple and their contents to
City to id entify vulnerabilities determine any
of bui I dings and infrastructure. vulnerabilities that may be
Long caused by a major Pending
Term earthquake . Planning 5 years funding and X X
#2 -Prov ide inform ation to Department available
private building owners on personnel
potential risks from
earthquake damage and
options for mitigating these
effects.
Devel op education materials -Develop earthquake-
for homeowners of older specific mitigation
properties on how to preserve information for older or
their architectural integrity historical properties.
while strengthening the -Work with local Community Pending
Long structure to withstand an preservation groups to Development; 3-5 years funding and X X X X
Term earthquake. include earthquake Local histori cal available
#3 miti gation planning in societies personnel
historic preservation
awa reness campa1gns.
-Provide earthquake
miti gation training for
loca l preservation groups.
89
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Earthquake Resource Directory
Local and Regional Resources
Los Angeles County Public Works Depa rtment
Level: County Hazard: Multi http://ladpw.org
900 . Fremont Ave.
Temple City, CA 9 1803 Ph: 626-458-5 100 Fx:
otes: The Los Angeles County Department of Public Works protects property and promotes
public safety th rough Flood Control, Water Conservation, Road Maintenance, Bridges, Buses
and Bicycle Trails, Building and afety, Land Development, Waterworks, Sewers,
Engineering. Capital Projects and Airports
Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC)
Level: Regional Hazard: Earthquake www.scec.org
365 1 Trousdale Parkway Suite 169
Los Angeles, CA 90089-0742 Ph: 213-740-5843 Fx: 2131740-00 II
Notes: The Southern Cal ifornia Earthquake Center (SCEC) gathers new information about
earthquakes in Southern California, integrates thi s information into a comprehensive and
predictive understanding of earthquake phenomena, and communicates this understanding to
end-users and the general public in order to increase earthquake awareness, reduce economic
losses, and save lives.
State Resources
California Department ofTran portation (CaiT rans)
Level: State Hazard: Multi http://www.dot.ca.gov/
120 S. Spring Street
Los Angeles, CA 900 12 Ph: 213-897-3656 Fx:
Notes: CaiTrans is responsible for the design, construction, maintenance, and operation of the
California State Highway System, as well as that portion of the Interstate Highway System
within the state's boundaries. Alone and in prutnership with Amtrak, CaiTrans is also involved
in the support of intercity passenger rail service in California.
California Resources Agency
Level: State Hazard: Mult i
1416 inth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
http://resources.ca.gov/
Suite 1311
Ph: 916-653-5656 Fx:
otes: The Cali forn ia Resources Agency restores, protects ru1d manages the state's natural,
historical and cultural resources for current and future generations using solutions based on
science. collaboration and respect for al l the communities and interests involved.
California Division of Mines and Geology (DMG)
Level: State Hazard: Multi www.consrv.ca.gov/cgs/index.htm
80 I K Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
MS 12-30
Ph : 916-445-1825 Fx: 916-445-57 18
Notes: The Californi a Geological Survey develops and disseminates technical information and
advice on California's geology, geologic hazards, and mineral resources.
California Department of Conservation: Southern California Regional Office
Level: State Hazard: Multi wvA.v.consrv.ca.gov
655 S. Hope Street #700
Los Angeles, CA 90017-2321 Ph: 213-239-0878 Fx: 2 13-239-0984
Notes: The Department of Conservation provides services and info rmation that promote
environmental health, eco nomic vitality, informed land-use decisions and sound management
of our state's natural resources.
California Planning Information Network
Level : State Hazard: Multi www.calpin.ca.gov
Notes: The Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) pub! ishes basic information on
local planning agencies, known as the California Planners' Book of Lists. This local pl anning
information is available on-line with new sea rch capabilities and up-to-the-minute updates.
California Governor's Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES)
Level: State Hazard: Multi www.oes.ca.gov
P.O. Box 4 19047
3650 Schriever Ave. Mather, CA 95655 Ph: 9 16 845-85 1 0 Fx: 916 845-85 11
Notes: Cal OES coordinates overall state agency response to major disasters in support of local
government. The office is responsi bl e fo r ass uring the state's read iness to respond to and
recover from natural, manmade, and war-caused emergencies, and for assisting local
governments in their emergency preparedness, response and recovery efforts.
Federal and National Resources
Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC)
Level: Hazard: Earthquake www.bssconline.org
National
1090 Vermont Ave., NW Suite 700
Washi ngton, DC 20005 Ph: 202-289-7800 Fx: 202-289-109
Notes: The Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC) develops and promotes building
ea1thquake risk miti gation regulatory provisions for the nation.
City ofTemple City MulLi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
9 1
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region IX
Level: Federal Hazard: Multi www. fema.gov
I I I I Broadway Suite 1200
Oakland, CA 94607 Ph: 510-627-7 100 Fx: 510-627-7112
Notes: The Federal Emergency Management Agency is tasked with responding to, planning
for, recovering from , and mitigating against disasters.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Mitigation Division
Level: Federal Hazard: Multi ·www. fema.govlfima/planhowto.shtm
500 C Street, S. W.
Washington, D.C. 20472 Ph: 202-566-1600 Fx:
Notes: The Mitigation Division manages the National Flood Lnsurance Program and oversees
FEMA's mitigation programs. It has a number of programs and activities which provide
citizens Protection, with flood insurance; Prevention. with mitigation measures and
Partnerships, with communities throughout the country.
United States Geological Survey
Level: Federal Hazard : Mult i
345 Middlefield Road
Menlo Park, CA 94025
http://www. usgs.gov/
Ph: 650-853-8300 Fx:
Notes: The USGS provides reliable scientifi c information to describe and understand the
Earth; minimize loss of li fe and property from natural disasters; manage water, biological,
energy, and mineral resources; and enhance and protect our quality of life.
Western States Seismic Policy Council (WSSPC)
Level: Hazard: Earthquake www.wsspc.org/home.html
Regional
125 California Avenue Suite D201, #I
Palo Alto, CA 94306 Ph: 650-330-1 10 I Fx: 650-326-1 769
Notes: WSSPC is a regional earthquake consortium funded mai nly by FEMA. Its website is a
great resource, with information clearly categorized - from policy to engi neering to education.
Institute fo1· Business & Home Safety
Level: Hazard: Mul ti http://www.ibhs.org/
National
4775 E. Fowler Avenue
Tampa, FL 336 17 Ph: 81 3-286-3400 Fx: 8 1 3-286-9960
Notes: The Institute fo r Business & Home Safety (IBHS) is a nonprofit association that
engages in communication, education, engineering and research. The Institute works to
reduce deaths, inj uries, property damage, economic losses and human sufferi ng caused by
natural disasters.
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
92
Publications:
"Land Use Plan nin g for Earthquake Hazard Miti gation: Handbook for Planners"
Wolfe, Myer R. et. al., ( 1986) University of Colorado, Institute of Behavioral cience, at ional
Science Foundation.
This handbook provides techniques that planners and others can uti lize to help mitigate for
sei smic hazards, It prov ides information on th e effects of earthquakes, sources on risk
assessment, and effects of earthquakes on the bui lt environment. Th e handbook also gives
examples on app lication and implementation of plann ing techniques to be used by local
communities.
Contact: atural Hazards Research and Appli cations In formation Center
Address: University of Colorado, 482 UC B,
Boulder, CO 80309-0482
Phone: (3 03) 492-68 18
Fax: (303) 492-215 1
Website: http://www,colorado.edu/UCB/Research/IB /hazards
"Public Assistance Debris Management Guide", FEMA (July 2000).
The Debris Ma nagement Gu ide was developed to assist loca l officials in planning, mobil izing,
organizing. and controlling large-scale debris clearance, removal, and disposal operations, Debris
management is generally associated with post-di saster recove ry. While it should be compliant
with local and county emergency operations plans, developing strategies to ensure strong debris
management is a way to integrate debris management within miti gation acti vities. The ·'Public
Ass istance Debris Management Guide" is availabl e in hard copy or on the FEMA website.
93
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
SECTION 2: Floods
Floods in Los Angeles County
Southern California is a coastal region with a Mediterranean climate. The County of Los Angeles
averages approximately 35 wet-weather days annuall y, with an average annual rain fa ll of about
15 inches. There are a number of ri vers in the Southern California region, but the river with the
best recorded hi story is the Los Angeles River. The fl ood history of the Los Angeles River is
generally indicative ofthe fl ood history of much of Southern California.
Records show that since 1811 the Los Angeles River has flooded 30 times, on average once
every 6.1 years. But averages are deceiving, for the Los Angeles Basin goes through periods of
drought and then periods of above-average rainfa ll. Between 1889 and 1891 , the river flooded
every year, and from 194 1 to 1945, the river flooded 5 times. Conversely, from 1896 to 1914. a
period of 18 years, and again from 1944 to 1969, a period of25 years, the river did not have
seri ous floods.
The Santa Monica, Santa Susana, and Verdugo Mountains which surro und three sides of the
valley seldom reach heights above three thousand feet. The western San Gabriel Mountains, in
contrast, have elevations of more than seven th ousa nd feet. These higher ridges often trap
eastern-moving winter storms. Although downtown Los Angeles averages just fifteen inches of
rain a year, some mountai n peaks in the San Gabriel range receive more than forty inches of
precipitation annuall y.
San Gabriel River
In 1914 a flood caused $10 million dollars of damage in the County of Los Angeles, which led to
the formation of Los Angeles County Flood Control District. The District began a program of
dam building and channelization. Th is included projects in the San Gabriel River valley flood
plain. A series of floo ds in 1938 caused dam age in Los Ange les County, but the nood control
projects along th e San Gabriel River we re instrumental in limiting flooding and preventing
94
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
-------------
damage. In 1984 the Flood Control District entered into an operational agreement with the Los
Angeles County Depat1m ent of Public Works. which now oversees the flood control
management for Los Angeles County.
Ptu ifi~ o,-,,,
Legend
• Approximate loaltion of
Temple City
M Watershed Boundary
(!>Lakes
"""-"Rivers
-Freeways NORTH
4 2 0 4
~ IMiles
Floods in the City of Temple City
There is no history of flooding in the City of Temple City. In 2008 FEMA and the County of Los
Angeles Department of Public Works conducted a joint flo od in surance study of Los Angeles
County. The study concluded, '·The City ofTemple City is identified as a non-flood-prone
community.'· A review of local media archi ves reveals the only flooding mentioned refers to
201 5 rai nfall backup from storm dra ins blocked by trash and debris. A yard was partially
95
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
flooded, and water reached a garage but did not flood the residence. T he blockage was cleared by
homeowners, allowing the backup to drain.
San Gabriel River Watershed (with Temple City Location Indicated)
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
SAN GABRIEL RIVER WATERSHED
lf40I)
0 -CJ.IIIIG.-~ ~--u·~I#ICA ~-~
~'&..AM•~
96
City ofTemple City Mult i-Hazard Mitigation Plan
The historic San Gabriel Ri ver fl oodplain was fed by the San Gabriel River which originates in
the southern slopes of the San Gabriel mountain range. The current ri ver runs approximately 60
miles from the San Gabri el Mountain s though urban areas of the San Gabriel va lley and into the
coastal basin of Los Angeles and Orange County. There have been significant changes especially
in the northern portions of this flood plain near the City o f Temple City.
Beginn ing with the fl ood control projects of the early 20th century and urban ization ofthe
surrounding flood plain areas, the northern portion ofthe hi storic San Gabriel floodplain has
chan ged dramatically. In 2007 a study was conducted by Southern California Coastal Water
Research project titled, "Historic Ecology and Landscape Changes of the San Gabriel River and
Floodplain." This study concluded that the combination of flood control projects and
urbanization have gradually eliminated most of th e northern thi rd ofthe an Gabriel historic
floodplain. In describ ing the upper floodplain, the report states, "The river at this point has been
channelized and the hi stori c alluvial fan is no longer ev ident."
The report concluded that a majority of the upper hi storic floodp lai n has been replaced by the
flood control system, which includes spreading ground s designed to percolate water and replace
the level of the San Gabriel Valley aquifer. rt has al so been covered up by urban development
with a storm drain system designed to prevent local fl ooding and redirect water back into the
flood control system. The fl ood control system, spreading grounds, and urbani zation have
greatly reduced the possibl y of fl ooding.
Flood Hazard Profile
In developing a fl ood hazard profile, FEMA evaluates five areas: flood hazard s, vulnerability.
recurrence interval, flood frequency probability, and storm flow records. Flood hazard is
discussed in the section on floodplain management. FEMA defines flood hazard as "the potential
for inundation that involves risk to life, hea lth, and property" involving natural floodplain
resources and fun ctions.
FEMA employs seven sources of information for determining flood hazard risks: site-specific
data, rainfall records, historic information (including newspaper accounts), flood level markings,
botanical eviden ce, geomorphic evidence, and regional information. Due to the lack of a flooding
history the City ofTemple City has no site-specific data, historic information, tlood level
markings, or geomorphic evidence of flooding. This is further su pported by the data in the five
FEMA flood evaluation areas. The low average annual rainfalls, limited vulnerabi lity due to the
LA County Flood Control Project, and lack of the any history of fl oodin g resulted in a finding of
no significant fl ooding hazard by FEMA and the LA County Department of Publ ic Works.
Vulnerability
The term vulnerability is defined by FEMA as "the measure of the capacity to weather or resist
the impact of harm." The measure of specific flooding vulnerability in the City ofTemple City
is directly tied to the presence of the flood control channelization/wash system located in Templ e
City. The possibility of fl ooding inundation is limited to the east side of the City, as shown
below.
97
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
.A. North
raxil
iWJJ[ Flood lnundaUon Potential ~Temple City
~General Plan
Flood Hazard Map from Temple City General Plan
The technical report of the City's general plan states the following:
"Because of its location in the San Gabriel Valley, Temple City is not vulnerable to flooding.
The only inundation hazard to the City would be the complete collapse of the Santa Anita Dam,
which is located in Monrovia and Arcadia northeast of Temple City. A failure ofthe Santa Anita
Dam would inundate fairly large portions of Arcadia, Monrovia, and a small part ofTemple
City. Most of the flooding in the Temple City vicinity would be confined to the area east of the
Arcadia Wash ... The failure of the Santa Anita Dam is considered unlikely.
98
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
In 2015 the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works began a project for seismic
strengthenin g of the Santa Anita Dam and to increase the spillway capacity. Thi s increases the
capabi lity to safe ly di scharge ra inwater that might suddenly collect during a storm.
Recurrence Interval
FEMA rates the recurrence interval fo r a flood as an average period of time, expressed in years,
for a flood that equals or exceeds a given magnitude. FEMA rates the City of Temple City as
having a 500-year probable recurrence interval.
Flood Frequency Probability
The National Flood Hazard Layer (NFHL) is th e digital database of the National Flood Insurance
Program. The NFHL is a digital database that contai ns flood hazard mapping data. The map
below is the FHL map entered on Temple C ity which ind icates Minimal Flood Risk Zone X.
National Flood Hazard Layer Map
T he national Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFI RM) fl ood in surance rate map displays
areas that fa ll within a I 00-year fl ood boundary. The maps identify Special Flood Hazard Areas.
These areas are subj ect to a l 00-year flood hazard. A I 00-year flood is a flood that has a one
percent chance of occurring during a calendar year. The DFIRM system has a series of zone
designations which describe the factors such as elevations and fl ood depth s which can affect the
chance of a flood.
The Temple City DFIRM map is found in the FEMA DFIRM electronic data base Panel # 1675F.
T he data base is conn ected to FEMA's Flood Map Service Center (FMSC). A data search of the
FMSC reveals the maps for the City ofTemple City have not been produced due to the low risk
of flooding. The City ofTemple City has been designated as a Zone X area. Zone X is an area of
99
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
minimal flood hazard determined to be outside the 500-year flood and protected by fl ood control
measures for a 100-year flood. FEMA has evaluated the C ity ofTemple Ci ty as having a .02
probability of an annual fl ood.
.... "U -\ . :::::: :~,::::::: ~;::::: :~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::::::: ........ :
. ' ~r~'f ......... ·D ...... < •••.•• ' ••........•. ' . ~b ••••••••• J •••• ,· • • • . ' + ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '-~ ' ' ' ' ' ' • ' ' ' ' ' ' · · · · · · · ·;..a(ilHtiOi ./Ill · • · · • · · · · • ·I · • • • • • • • . . . .......... ...., ..................... ·"' ................ •\•...... .
• • • • • • • • • • • • • CJ)" • 0 • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 • • 0 • • • • • 0 • ~-• • • ot • • •
:: -::::::::::: ~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:::::: :
~~a~i~~~~i >~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ........ ~ ::::\::::::::::::: :~::::::::::::::::::: :~;~H·; h:::::::::: U :,:·::::::::::
~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~] ~i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~T~ii~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
• 'toJoGdr'l • • · · • · • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Cttyf>arlc; • · · • • • • • '>' · · · · · · !i · · · · · • · • · · · · · · · · : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : ; :~~~!.~~~ : : : : : :; ; .. ~: : i~~ ~: : ·: : : ~ ~: : : : : ..............•.....••.........•. 060371l1675f·-o-. ~ .•.......• ·1>' ••••••••• -•• -•••• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PANEd ~Ebii ...... ~-..... ·~ .............. .
:::::::: :~::::::::::::: :·::::::::::::::::: :1:::::::::: J:c D Selected Flood Map Boundary • • • • • • • . . ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... ': . . . . . . . ..
• 0 •••••• 0 . 0. 0. 0. 0 •• 0 ••• 0 ••• 0 ••••• 0. 0 ••• 0 0 ••••• 0 ,. •••• D Printed Flood Map Boundary
§Noo-prnedFoodMapBoundary ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~e~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ : .. ~.::
I!!;J Unmapped Area • • '3' · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 1· · · · ~st. · · · ... ..._------~-..,---': : ~: : : : : : ,:~~.:1-J~~E:::. p~~orm~~ ~~~~ClJ>~j_~ ~-.... ~-'\-: .. : : . . . : .
Analysis of Storm Flow Records
There are no specific storm flow records for the washes in Temple City. There are annual flow
heights for each of the washes from 2000-2012.
Eaton Wash
The Eaton Wash is an engineered channel that stari s in Pasadena down stream from the Eaton
Dam. The wash travels eight mil es into the City of Temple City and terminates at the junction
with the Rio Hondo River in El Monte. The wash is a concrete-lined box channel with vertical
wall s (15'). Flow in the wash is partl y regulated by release flow from the Eaton Dam.
The Los Angeles County Flood Control District is responsible for the wash. The maintenance
and operation of the wash are managed by the District's Flood Maintenance Division. The
District collects flow and water depth data in the Wash. The following chati represents the
average monthly water depth in inches measured from 2000 to 201 2.
100
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Eaton Wash Average Monthly Water Depth (2000 -2012)
15 .0
-Monthly Water Depth
0.0 +----.---.----.----.---,,---,----.----.---.----.----.---~
'"'()() ,.,_,()" ,.,_,()'1.-,.,_,()"J '"'"' ,.._,()~ '"'(jJ '"'()" '"'()'0 '"'()~ '"'"() '"-'"" '"'"'}.. ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~' ~' ~'
Date
Arcadia Wash
The Arcadia Wash is an engineered channel wh ich is connected to an underground channel in
the City of San Marino near the border of Sierra Madre and Arcadia.The channel is a concrete-
lined box channel with vertical walls. It flows aproximately five mil es from San Marino through
the City ofTemple City, where it connects with the Rio Hondo River in El Monte.
The Los Angeles County Flood Control District is responsible for the wash. The maintenance
and operation of the Wash are managed by th e District's Flood Maintenance Division. The
Distri ct collects flow and water depth data in the wash. The following chart represents the
average monthly water depth in inches measured from 2000 to 2012
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
101
,.....,
{I) 4.1
15.0
-s 10.0 = ·-.......,
-= .... 0. 4.1 0
1.. ~ C'CI 5.0 ::
Arcadia Wash Average Monthly Water Depth (2000-2012)
-Monthly Water Depth I
Date
Both average monthl y water depths show even the hi ghest levels are less than ten inches in a
concrete wash that is twenty feet deep.
DRAINAGI! ARI!A
j t
Urban Artl
N I
SMILES 2 MILES
Eaton Wash and Arcadia Wash Drainage Areas
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
102
Los Angeles County Flood Management Plan
The National Flood Insurance Plan (NFJP) floodplai n management protocols all ow a Zone X
area to use another accredited flood contro l system for floodplain management. The City of
Temple City uses the Los Angeles County Floodplain Management Plan sin ce the County
controls the flood control system in the City.
The County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works (CLDPW) is currently developing a
new floodplain management plan. The new plan will involve the fl ood control projects wh ich
pass through the City of Templ e City. This plan is being developed by the Flood Control
District's Watershed Management Division. The purpose of this plan is to develop "an overal l
strategy of programs, projects and measures aimed at reducing the adverse impacts of fl ood
hazard s on the community" (LA County Floodplain Management Plan Update 20 15).
The goa l of the plan is to introduce mitigation strategies for flood plain management that suppo11
County and local community areas in the fl oodplain. The plan is intended to reduce the adverse
impact of fl ooding. Tt is designed to '·protect life, property, the economy, and the environment of
Los Angeles County by identifying and commun icating risks and sustainabl e actions to reduce
flood hazards" (LA County Flood Management Plan Update 2015).
CLDPW Morris Dam above the San Gabriel River
103
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Specific goals of the CLDP W flood man agement plan include the following:
• Working with local citizens and watershed management groups to educate people on
regiona l fl ood hazards
• Increasin g resilience of infrastructure and crit ica l facilities
• Accounting fo r fl ood risk in planning and land use
• Preserving, enhan cing or restoring the environment
• Encouraging the developm ent of long-range flood hazard mitigation projects
The plan is divided into two areas: hazard/risk assessment and mitigation.
Hazard and Risk Assessment
There are four areas of hazard and risk assessment: hazards, exposure, vuln erabil ity, and
capability.
Hazards are the source of danger from fl oods. They include both primary risks such as cycl ic
increases in annual rai n and collateral ri sks such as brushfire burn areas, wh ich lose their ab ility
to absorb runoff and thus contribute to higher-than-average ru noff. When these risks combine
with assoc iated fac tors such as debris blockin g wash areas, the potential for flooding exists.
Exposure is described as manmade or natural features exposed to potential flooding. These
include areas im med iately adjacent to current natural or human-made flood paths or water
co ll ection points such as the LA County wash, debris basins, and dam systems.
Vulnerability refers to damage susceptibility of exposed featu res, including buildings,
infrastructure, and natural/open landscapes such as parks.
The fourth area, capabili ty, involves a combination of factors: regulatory, technical and fi nancial.
Regulatory refers to the development of laws to promote fl oodplain management. Technical
capabilities refer to the skill s, knowledge, and technical resources to manage the floodplai n.
Financial capabilities refe r to managing the fun ding to support these and other floodplain
management efforts.
These areas are directly related to a th ree-part approach of prevention. partnership, and
protection which includes structural flood control to manipu late the risk, property management
to reduce exposure, retrofitting of systems and conditions to reduce vu lnerabil ity, and increasing
capability to support preparation, technica l assistance and planning.
Risk Assessment Specifics
The LA County Flood Management Plan has speci fie factors relating to risk assessment. They
are divided in to three areas: hazard assessment, exposure dete rmin ation, and vulnerability
assessment.
Hazard Assessment
Past Events: When have fl oods occurred?
Areas Most Effected: Where did they occur?
Frequency: How often have they occurred?
Severity: How severe were the floods?
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
104
The City ofTemple City has no past flood events as determined by FEMA.
Exposure Assessment
Locators: Where did flooding occur?
Inven tories: What was the path of th e floods?
Nature of the Ex posure: Is the exposure direct or indirect?
There is no flooding data to evaluate. The on ly possible inundation data is based on older
inu ndation models related to the catastroph ic fai lure of the flood control projects such as the
Santa Anita Dam. This dam is currently und ergo ing seismic upgrades to prevent thi s type of
failure.
Assess Vulnerability
Estimate possible losses: What will this flood cost?
Prioritize mitigation: Prioritize projects based on vu lnerab il ities.
Vulnerabi lity is very limited given the limited fl ooding hazard and exposure assessments in the
City of Temple Ci ty.
Current Flood Mitigation Ordinances
The following ordinances regulate fl ooding hazards in the City ofTemple City. Storm water
management is located in the Low Impact Developm ent Ordinance 9-l£-3 1 ofthe Temple City
Mun icipal Code. Thi s code is also connected to the storm water ordinances in the 2014 County
of Los Angeles Building Code co-adopted by the City of Temple City. Erosion Control
Ordinance 8-3-2 of the Temple City Mu nicipal Code is based on the erosion control
recommendations establ ished by the California Regional Wate r Quality board. Th is issue is also
addressed in the 20 14 County of Los Angeles Bui lding Code co-adopted by the City ofTemple
City.
NFIP and Repetitive Flood Properties
The County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works and FEMA estimate that since
1978 there have been 50 repetitive flood properties in Los Ange les County. There are no
repetitive fl ood properties in the City ofTempl e City or in areas immediately surrounding the
City. The City of Temple City is not currently participating in the ational Flood Insurance
Program.
Flood Mitigation Action Items
The fl ood mitigation action items provide direction on specific activities that orga nizations and
residents in the City of Temple City can undertake to reduce ri sk and prevent loss from flood
events. Each acti on item is fo llowed by ideas for implementation, wh ich can be used by the
advisory committee and local decision makers in pursuing strategies for implementation.
105
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Plan Goals Addressed
s:: 0 ·;::;
c:tS ..... s:: ~
£ E Vl ~
Vl ~ -~ Hazard Action Item Ideas for Implementation Coordinating Timeline Constraints ~ Vl 0. 0. Vl > ~ E ...... Organization 0 s:: E ~ ...... ~ ~ :::::::: r:/J 0. ...... ...... Vl --c:tS Vl 0. >. ~ 3 >. ·-u ·-<( r:/J ..s:: s:: -Vl ....... -...... v u u c:tS ~ OJ)
~ ...... t: ......
0 ..D 2 t v
...... :l c:tS c:tS E
0... 0... ;z 0... w
Flood Mitigation Ac tion Items
Analyze potenti al flood -Identify appropriate and
properties or locations within feas ible mitigation opti ons for Hazard Pending
Short the City, and identi fy potential fl ood properti es. Mitigation funding and
Term appropriate and feasib le Advi sory 1-2 years ava ilable X X
#I mitigati on opti ons. -Encourage and ass ist Comm ittee; personnel
property owners to engage in LA County
mi tigation activiti es. Public Works
Develop an education -Provide the residents in this
program for residents living area with education material s
in the potential inundation about protecting their homes,
area along the Santa Anita shou ld fl ooding occur. This
Short Ave. corridor. would include suggestions for Community 1-2 years X X
Term landscaping whi ch could serve Development
#2 as a barrier if water should
co llect in these areas.
Develop a warning system -Develop an emergency
for storm events or for the program to cooperate with the
rel ease of water in the LA LA County Department of
Co unty Flood Control Public Works to warn
ystem in the City of Temple residents of the release of
Short City. water into the wash system. Public Safety 1-2 years X X X
Term Supervisor
#3 -Develop a program to
monitor information from
Operational Area D and the
National Weather Servi ce
when storms are expected and
provide the information to the
residents using the City
emergency notification
system.
Examine the City storm drain -Continue ann ual sewer
system. Temple City has inspections.
many miles of storm drains, Planning Pending
Long some of wh ich are over 30 -Restore/replace any Department; 2 years fu nding and X X
Term yea rs old. Normal use, damaged section of the sewer LA County available
#1 combined with frequent system. Public Works personnel
se ismic events, can gradually
weaken the system and result
in failure du ring periods of
heavy water flow.
107
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Repair and replace broken -Continue annual inspections.
concrete gutters and curbs in -Restore/replace any
the City. The gutters and damaged portions of the curb Plann ing Pending
Long curbs arc criti cal in directing or gutter system. Department; funding and
Term run off durin g fl ooding LA County 2 years available X X
#2 co nditions. They protect Public Works personnel
veh icles and pedestrians as
we ll as structures during
nooding events. Gutters and
curbs are often damaged or
di splaced by tree roots.
108
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Flood Resource Directory
The following resource directory lists the resources and programs that can assist county
communities and organiza ti ons. The resource directory wi ll provide contact information for
local, county, regional , state, and fede ral programs that deal with natural hazards.
Countv Resources:
Los Angeles County Public Works Departmen t
900 S. Fremont Ave.
Alhambra, CA 91803
Ph: 626-458-5 100
Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County
1955 Workman Mi ll Road
Whittier, CA 90607
Ph: 562-699-7411 x230 1
State Resources:
California Governor's Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES)
365 0 Schriever Ave.
Mather, CA 95655
Ph: 916 845-8510
Fx: 916 845-85 1 I
California Resources Agency
141 6 inth Street, Suite 131 I
Sacramento, CA 958 14
Ph: 9 16-653-5656
California Department of Water Resources (DWR)
1416 9th Street
Sacramento, CA 958 14
Ph: 916-653-6192
California Department of Conservation: So uthern California Regional Office
655 S. Hope treet, #700
Los Angeles, CA 900 17-2321
Ph: 213-239-0878
Fx : 213-239-0984
Federal Resources and Programs:
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
FE MA provides maps of flood hazard areas, various publications related to fl ood mitigation,
funding fo r fl ood mitigation projects, and technical assistance, FEMA also operates the ational
Flood Insurance Program. FEMA 's mi ssion is to reduce loss of life and property and protect the
nation's critical infrastructure from all types of hazard s through a comprehensive, risk-based,
emergency management program of mitigation. preparedness, response and recovery.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region IX
II II Broadway, Suite 1200
Oakland, CA 94607
Ph: 510-627-7100
Fx: 5 10-627-711 2
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Mitigation Division
500 C Street, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 204 72
Ph: 202-566-1 600
FEMA's List of Flood-Related Websites
This site contains a long list of flood related In ternet sites fro m ''American Heritage Rivers" to
"The Weather Channel" and is a good starting point for flood information on the Internet.
Contact: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Phone: (800) 480-2520
Website: http://www. fema.gov/n fip/related.htm
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
In Southern California many cities lie within flood zones as defined in FEMA Flood Maps. The
City of Temple City is not a community within a designated flood zone. Flood insurance is
available to citizens in communities that adopt and implement NFIP building standards. The
standards are applied to development that occurs within a delineated floodplain, a drainage
hazard area, and properties' within 250 feet of a floodplain boundary. These areas are depicted
on federal Flood Insurance Rate Maps ava ilable thro ugh the co unty.
National Floodplain Insurance Program (NFIP)
500 C Street, .W.
Wash ington, D.C. 20472
Ph: 202 -566-1 600
The Floodplain Management Association
The Floodplain Management website was established by the Floodplain Management
Association (FMA) to serve the entire floodplain management community. It includes full-text
articles, a calendar of upcoming events, a li st of positions available, an index of pub lications
available free or at nominal cost, a li st of associations, a list offtrms and consultants in
fl oodplain management, an index of newsletters deali ng with flood issues (with hypertext links if
available), a section on the basics of fl oodplain management, a list of frequently asked questions
(FAQs) about the Website. and a catalog of Web links.
Floodplain Management Associat ion
110
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
P.O. Box 50891
Sparks, V 89435-089 1
Ph: 775-626-6389
Fx: 775-626-6389
The Association of State Floodplain Managers
The Association of State Fl oodplain Managers is an organization of professionals involved in
fl oodplain management, flood hazard mitigation, the ational Flood Insurance Program, and
fl ood preparedness, warning, and recovery. ASFPM fosters communication among those
responsible for fl ood hazard activities, provides technical advice to governments and other
entities about proposed actions or polic ies that will affect fl ood hazards, and encourages fl ood
hazard research, education, and train ing. The ASFPM Web site includes information on how to
become a member, the organi zation's constitution and bylaws, directories of officers and
committees, a pub licati ons list, information on upcoming conferences, a history of the
association, and other usefu l in fo rm ation and Internet links.
Contact: The Association of State Floodp lain Managers
Address: 2809 Fish Hatchery Road, Madison, Wl 53713 Phone: (608) 274-01 23
Website: http://wvvw.floods.org
National Weather Service
The National Weather Service provides flood watches, warnings, and informational statements
for rivers in the City ofTemple City.
National Weather Service
520 North Elevar Street
Oxnard , CA 93030
Ph: 805-988-66 15
Office of Hydrology, National Weather Service
The ational Weather Services Office of Hydrology (O H) and its Hydrological Information
Center offer information on floods and other aquatic disasters, This site offers current and
historical data in cluding an archive of past flood summaries, informat ion on current hydrologic
conditions, water supp ly outlooks, an Automated Local Flood Warnin g Systems Handbook,
Natural Disaster Survey Reports, and other scientific publications on hydrology and fl ooding.
National Weather Service, Office of Hydrologic Development
1325 East West Highway, SSMC2
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Ph: 30 1-71 3-1 658
Fx: 30 1-71 3-0 963
National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), US Department of Agriculture
NRCS provides a suite of federal programs des igned to assist state and local governments and
landowners in mitigating the impacts of flood events. The Watershed Surveys and Planning
Program and the Small Watershed Program provide technical and financial assistance to help
participants solve natural resource and related economic problems on a watershed basis. The
Wetland s Reserve Program and the Flood Risk Reduction Program provide financial in centives
to landowners to put as ide land that is either a wetland resource, or that experiences frequent
floodin g. The Emerge ncy Watershed Protection Program (EWP) provides technical and
Il l
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
---------------------
financial assistance to clear debris from clogged waterways, restore vegetation, and stabilizi ng
riverbanks. The measures taken under EWP mu st be environmentall y and economically sound
and generally benefit more than one property.
National Resources Conservation Service
14th and Ind ependence Ave., S W, Room 51 05-A
Washington, DC 20250
Ph: 202-720-7246
Fx: 202-720-7690
USGS Water Resources
This web page offers current US water news; extensive current (including real-time) and
historical water data; numerous fact sheets and other pub lications; vari ous technica l resources;
descriptions of ongoin g water survey programs; local water information; and conn ections to
other sources of water information.
USG S Water Reso urces
6000 J Street Placer Hall
Sacramento, CA 958 19-6 129
Ph: 916-278-3000
Fx: 916-278-3070
Bureau of Reclamation
The mission of the Bureau of Reclamati on is to manage, develop, and protect wate r and related
resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American
publ ic. The Bureau provides leadership and technical expertise in water resources development
and in the efficient use of water through in itiati ves including conservation, reuse, and research.
It protects the public and the environment through the adequate maintenance and appropriate
operation of Reclamation's facil ities and manages Reclamation's fac il ities to fu lfill water user
contracts and protect and/or enhance conditio ns for fish, wild life, land, and cultural resources.
Mid Pacific Regional Office
Federal Office Building
2800 Cottage Way
Sacramento CA 95825-1 898
Ph: 916-978-5000
Fax 9 16-978-5599
http://www.usbr.gov/
Army Corps of Engineers
The Co rps of Engineers admin isters a permit program to ensure that the nation's waterways are
used in the public interest. Any person, fi nn, or agency pl anning to work in waters of the Uni ted
States must first obta in a permi t from the Army Corps of Engineers. The Corps is responsible
fo r th e protection and development of the nation's water reso urces, including nav igation, flood
control, energy production through hyd ropower management, water supply storage and
recreation.
US Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 53271 1
Los Angeles, CA 90053-2325
Ph: 2 13-452-392 1
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
11 2
Other National Resources:
American Public Works A sociation
2345 Grand Boul evard, Suite 500
Kansas City, MO 64 108-264 1
Ph: 816-472-6100
Fx: 816-472-1610
Publications:
NFIP Community Rating System Coordinator's Manual
Indianapolis, IN.
This informative brochure exp lains how the Community Rating System works and what the
benefits are to communities. It explains in detail the CR point system, and what activities
communities ca n pursue to earn points. These points then add up to the "rating" for the
community, and flood insurance premium discounts are calculated based upon that "rating" The
brochure also provides a table on the percent discount realized for each rating ( 1-1 0).
Instructions on how to apply to be a CR community are also included.
Co ntact: FIP Comm unity Rating ystem
Phone: (800) 480-2520 or (3 17) 848-2898
Website: http://www.fema.gov/nfip/crs
Floodplain Management: A Local F loodplain Administrator's Guide to the NFIP
Thi s document disc usses fl oodplain processes and terminology. It contains flood plain
management and miti gati on strategies, as wel l as in formation on the NFIP. CR , Community
Assistance Visits. and fl oodpl ain development standards.
Contact: ational Flood Insurance Program Phone: (800) 480-2520
Website: http://www.fema.gov/nfip/
Flood Hazard Mitigation Planning: A Community Guide, (June 1997).
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management.
This informative guide offers a I 0-step process for successfu l flood hazard mitigation. teps
include: map hazards, determine potential damage areas, take an inventory of faci lities in the
fl ood zone, determine what is or is not being done about fl oodin g, identify gaps in protection,
brainstorm alternatives and actions, determine feasible actions, coordinate with others, prioritize
actions, develop strategies for implementation. and adopt and monitor the plan.
Contact: Massachusetts Fl ood Hazard Management Program Phone: (617) 626-1250
Website: http://www.magnetstate.m a.us/dem/programs/mitigate
Reducing Losses in High Risk Flood Hazard Areas: A Guidebook for Local Officials,
(February 1987), FEMA-116.
Th is guidebook offers a table on actions that communities can take to reduce flood losses. It also
offers a table with sources for floodplain mapping assistance for the various types of flooding
hazards. There is information on various types of fl ood hazard s with regard to existing mitigation
efforts and options for ac tion (policy and programs. mapping, regulatory. non-regulatory). Types
of nooding which are covered include allu vial fan. areas behind levees, areas be low un afe
113
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
--------------
dams, coastal flooding, flash floods, fluctuating lake level floods, ground fa il ure triggered by
earthquakes, ice jam flooding, and mudslides.
Contact: Federa l Emergency Management Agency Phone: (800) 480-2520
Website: http://www.fema.gov
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
114
SECTION 3: Windstorms
Why are Windstorms a Threat to the City of Temple City?
Severe windstorms pose a significant risk to li fe and property in the region by creating
conditions that di srupt essential systems such as public utilities, te lecommunications, and
transportation routes. High winds can and do occasionally cause tornado-like damage to local
homes and busin esses. Severe windstorms can present a very destabilizing effect on the dry
brush that covers local hill sides and urban wildl and interface areas. High winds can have
destructive impacts, especially to trees, power lines, and other utility services.
Windstorm Characteristics in Southern California:
Santa Ana Winds and Tornado-Like Wind Activity:
Based on local history, most incidents of high winds in the City ofTemple City are the result of
the Santa Ana wind conditions. While high im pact incidents are not frequent in the area,
significant Santa Ana wind events and sporadic tornado acti vi ty have been known to negatively
impact the local community.
What are Santa Ana Winds?
Santa Ana winds are generally defined as wa rm, dry win ds that blow from the east or northeast
(offshore). These winds occur below the passes and canyons ofthe coastal ranges of Southern
California and in th e Los Angeles basin. Santa Ana wi nd s often blow with exceptional speed in
the Santa Ana Canyon (the canyon from which it derives its name). Forecasters at the ational
Weather Service offi ces in Oxnard and San Diego usually place speed minimums on these winds
and reserve the use of "Santa Ana" for winds greater than 25 knots. These winds accelerate to
speeds of 35 knots as they move through canyons and passes, with gusts to 50 or even 60 kn ots.
The complex topography of southern California, combined with various atmospheric conditions,
creates numerous scenarios that may cause widespread or isolated Santa Ana events.
Commonly, Santa Ana winds develop when a region of high pressure builds over th e Great Basin
(the hi gh plateau east ofthe Sierra Mountains and west of the Rocky Mo untains, including most
of evada and Utah). Clockwise circul ation around the center of th is high pressure area forces
air down-slope from the high plateau. The air wa rms as it descends toward the Cali fornia coast
at th e rate of 5 degrees Fahrenheit per I 000 feet due to compressional heating. Thus,
compressional heating provides the primary source of wa rming. The air is dry since it originated
in the desert, and it dries out even more as it is heated.
These regional wi nds typically occur from October to March and, accord ing to most accounts,
are named either for the Santa Ana Ri ver Valley where they originate or for the Santa Ana
Canyon southeast of Lost Angeles. where they pick up speed.
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
115
Tornados:
Tornados are spawned when there is warm and moist air near the ground, cool air al oft, and
winds that speed up and change direction. An obstructi on, such as a house, in the path of the
wind causes it to change directi on. This change increases pressure on parts of the house, and the
combination of increased pressures and fluctuating wi nd speeds creates stresses that freq uently
cause structural fai lures.
Severe wind events are in frequent but possible in Los Angeles County. Waterspouts occur off
the coast and several small tornados have occurred. One of the most serious tornados was a
tornado that struck the City of Hawthorne on September 30, 1983. Roofs were torn off eight
homes and sixty other homes were damaged. Three people were injured.
Micro bursts:
Microbursts are strong, damaging winds which strike the ground and often give the impression a
tornado has struck. They frequently occur during intense thunderstorms. The origin of a
m icroburst is downward moving air from a thunderstorm · s core. But un I ike a tornado, they
affect only a rather small area.
Dty mlcroburs1.
Oty (ct'y ~:!l!lbAIJc
la~e ~
'Wei mlcroburst
University of Chicago storm researcher Dr. Ted Fujita first coin ed the term ·'downburst" to
describe strong, downdraft winds flowing out of a thunderstorm cell that he believed were
responsible for the crash of Eastern Airlines Flight 66 in June of 1975.
A downburst is a straight-directi on surface wind in excess of39 mil es per hour caused by a
small-scale, strong downdraft from the base of convective thundershowers and thunderstorms.
During Dr. Fujita's investigation s into the phenomena, he defi ned two sub-categories of
downbursts: the larger macrobursts and small mi crobursts.
Macrobursts are downbursts with wind s up to 11 7 miles per hour which spread ac ross a path
greater than 2.5 mi les wide at the surface and whi ch last from 5 to 30 min utes. The microburst,
on the other hand, is confi ned to an even smaller area, less than 2.5 miles in diameter fro m the
initial poin t of downdraft impact. An intense microburst can result in damaging winds near 170
miles per hour and often lasts for less than fi ve minutes.
116
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Contact Stage Outburst Stage
\)} \\J
\ I I, I \~ . I ' _.)
Down bursts of al l sizes descend from the upper regions of severe thunderstorm s when the air
accelerates downward through either exceptionally strong evaporative cooling or by very heavy
rain, which drags dry air down with it. When the rapidly descending ai r strikes the ground, it
spreads outward in all directions, like a fast-running faucet stream hitting the bottom of the sink.
Cushion Stage Exln!me Winds
When the microburst wind hits an object o n the ground such as a house, garage, or tree, it can
flatten the build ings and strip limbs and branches from the tree. After striking the ground. the
powerful outward running gust can wreak further havoc along its path.
Damage associated with a microburst is often mi staken for the work of a tornado, particularly
directly under the microburst. However, dam age patterns away from the impact area are
characteri stic of straight line winds rath er than the twisted pattern oftornado damage.
Tornados, like those that occur every year in the Midwest and Southeast portions of the United
States, are a rare phenomenon in most of Cali forni a, with most tornado-like activity coming from
m icrobursts.
Local History of Windstorm Events:
The City ofTemple City has had several strong windstorms which resulted in local damages and
power outages, the most significant of whi ch occurred in December 20 II . Southern California
experienced widespread dam age and disruption in a histori c Santa Ana wind event th at generated
sustained gusts of over 80 mph with peak winds at 100 MPH. The City of Temple City
experienced downed trees and power lines resulting in power outages lasting for over a week,
prompting the city to declare a state of emergency. Damages were estimated at $10 million.
117
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Windstorm Haza rd Assessment
Hazard Identification:
A windstorm event in the region can range from short-term microburst activity lasting only
minutes to a long-du ration Santa Ana wind condition which may last for several days, as was the
case in the December 20 II Santa Ana wind event. Windstorm s in the City of Temple City and
surrounding areas can cause extensive damage including the destructi on of trees, loca l
infrastructure, and critical fac ilities.
With an analysis of the high wind and tornado events as depicted, we can deduce the common
windstorm impact areas, including the e ffect on life, property, utilities, infrastructure, and
transportation. Additionally, if a windstorm disrupts power to local res idential comm unities, the
American Red Cross and City resources might be called upon for care and shelter duties.
Displacing residents and utilizing City resources for shelter staffin g and disaster cleanu p can
cause an economic hardship on the community.
Santa Ana Win d Illustration
&rea t Basin
The above ill ustration shows clearly the direction of the Santa Ana winds as they travel from the
stab le, high pressure weather system ca lled the Great Bas in through th e canyo ns and towards the
low pressure system off the Pacific. Clearly, the City ofTemp le City is in the di rect path of the
ocean bound Santa Ana winds.
118
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Community Windstorm Issues
What is Susceptible to Windstorms?
Life and Property:
Based on the history of the region. windstorm events can be expected. perhaps annually. across
widespread areas of the region. Obviously, the City and surrounding region ca n be adversely
impacted during a windstorm event.
This can resu lt in the involvement in the City of Temple City's emergency response personnel
during a wide-ran ging windstorm or microburst tornadic activity.
Both residenti al and commercial structures with weak reinforcement are susceptible to damage.
Wind pressure can create a direct and frontal assault on a structure, pushing walls, doors, and
windows inward. Conversely, passing currents can create lift suction forces that pull building
components and surfaces outward. With extreme wind forces, th e roof or entire building can
fail causing considerab le damage.
Debris carried along by extreme winds can directly contribute to loss o f life and indirectly to the
failure of protective bui !ding envelopes, siding, or walls. When severe windstorms strike a
community, downed trees, power lines, and damaged property can be major hindrances to
emerge ncy response and disaster recovery.
11 9
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
The Beaufort Scale, as illustrated below, il lustrates the effect that varyi ng wind speed can have
on sea swells and structures.
BEAUFORT SCALE
Beaufort Speed Wind Description -State of Sea -Effects on land Force (mph)
0 less 1 Calm-Mirror-like-Smoke rises vertically
1 1-3 light -Air ripples look like scales; No crests of foam -Smoke drift shows
direction of wind , but wind vanes do not
2 4-7 light Breeze -Small but pronounced wavelets; Crests do not break -Wind
vanes move; leaves rustle; You can feel wind on the face
Gentle Breeze -large Wavelets; Crests break; Glassy foam; A few
3 8-12 whitecaps -leaves and small twigs move constantly; Small, light flags are
extended
4 13-18 Moderate Breeze -longer waves; Whitecaps - Wind lifts dust and loose
paper, Small branches move
5 19-24 Fresh Breeze-Moderate, long waves; Many whitecaps; Some spray -
Small trees with leaves begin to move
6 25-31 Strong Breeze-Some large waves; Crests of white foam; Spray -large
branches move; Telegraph wires whistle; Hard to hold umbrellas
7 32-38 Near Gale -White foam from breaking waves blows in streaks with the wind
-Whole trees move; Resistance felt walking into wind
Gale -Waves high and moderately long; Crests break into spin drift,
a 39-46 blowing foam in well marked streaks -Twigs and small branches break off
trees; Difficult to walk
9 47-54 Strong Gale -High waves with wave crests that tumble; Dense streaks of
foam in wind; Poor visibility from spray -Slight structural damage
Storm -Very high waves with long, curling crests; Sea surface appears
10 55-63 white from blowing foam ; Heavy tumbling of sea; Poor visibility -Trees
broken or uprooted; Considerable structural damage
Violent Storm -Waves high enough to hide small and medium sized ships;
11 64-73 Sea covered with patches of white foam; Edges of wave crests blown into
froth; Poor visibility -Seldom experienced inland; Considerable structural
damage
12 >74 Hurricane -Sea white with spray. Foam and spray render visibility almost
non-existent -Widespread damage. Very rarely experienced on land.
s~ hnp ~vww compuwratber com decoder-charts html
120
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Utilities:
Histori cally, falling trees have been the major cause of power outages in the region. Wind storm s
such as strong microbursts and Santa Ana wind cond itions can cause flyin g debris and downed
utili ty lines. For example, tree limbs breakin g in winds of onl y 45 mph can be th rown over 75
feet. As such. overhead power lines can be damaged even in relati vely minor wind stom1 events.
Falling trees ca n bring el ectric power lines down to the pavement, creating the possibility of
lethal electric shock. Ri sing population growth and new infrastructure in the region creates a
higher probabi lity for damage to occur from windstorms as more life and property are exposed to
ri sk.
Infrastructure:
Windstorms can damage buildi ngs, power lines, and other property and infrastructure due to
falling trees and branches. During wet winters, saturated soi ls cause trees to become less stable
and more vulnerable to uprooting from high wi nds.
Windstorms can result in collapsed or damaged buildings or blocked roads and bridges. damaged
traffic signals, streetlights, and parks. among others. Roads blocked by fallen trees during a
windstorm may have severe consequences to people who need access to emergency services.
Emergency response operations can be complicated when roads are blocked or when power
supplies are interrupted. Industry and commerce can suffe r losses from interrupti ons in electric
services and from extended road cl osures. They can also sustain direct losses to buildings,
personnel, and other vital equipment. There are direct consequences to the local economy
resulting from wi ndstorm s related to both physical damages and interrupted services.
Increased Fire Threat:
Perhaps the greatest danger from wi ndstorm activity in Southern Ca liforn ia comes from the
combination of the Santa Ana wind s with the major fires that occur every few years in the
urban/wildland interface. With the Santa Ana winds driving the fl ames, th e speed and reach of
the flames is even greater than in times of calm wind conditions. The higher fire hazard raised
by a Santa Ana wind condition requires that even more care and attention be paid to proper brush
clearances on property in the wildland/urban interface areas.
Transportation:
Windstorm activity can have an impact on local transportati on in addition to the problems caused
by downed trees and electri cal wires blockin g streets and highways. During periods of
extremely strong Santa Ana winds, major highways can be temporarily closed to truck and
recreational vehi cle traffic. However, typically these disru ptions are not long-lasting, nor do
they carry a severe long-term economic impact on the region.
121
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Existin g Windstorm Mitigatio n Activities:
As stated, one of the most common problems associated with wind storm s is power outage. High
winds commonly occur during winter storms, and ca n cause trees to bend , sag, or fa il (tree lim bs
or entire trees), comi ng into contact with nearby distribution power lines. Fall en trees can cause
short-circuiting and conductor overloadi ng. Wind-induced da mage to the power system causes
power outages to customers, incurs cost to make repairs, and in some cases can lead to igniti ons
that start wild land fi res.
One of the strongest and most widespread existing mitigation strategies pertains to tree
clearance. Currently, Cal iforni a State Law requ ires utility companies to maintain specific
clearances (depending on the type of vo ltage running through the lin e) between electric power
lines and all vegetation.
Enforcement of the fo llowi ng Cali forn ia Public Resource Code Sections provides guidance on
tree pruning regulations.
4293: Power Line Clearance Required
4292: Power Line Hazard Reducti on
429 1: Reduction of Fire Hazards Around Bu ildings
417 1: Public ui sa nces
The following pertain to tree pruning regu lations and are taken from the Ca liforn ia Code of
Regulations:
Title 14: Minimum Clearance Provisions
Sections: 1250 -1258
General Indu stry Sa fety Orders
Title 8: Group 3: Articles 12, 13, 36, 37, 38
California Penal Code: Section 385
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
122
Finally, the fol lowing California Public Utilities comm iss ion sect ion has additi onal guidance:
California Pub li c Utilities Comm ission
General Order 95: Rule 35
Homeowner Liability:
Fa ilure to allow a util ity company to compl y with the law can result in liabil ity to the
homeowner for damages or injuries resulting from a vegetation hazard. Many in surance
companies do not cover these types of damages ifthe policy owner has refused to allow the
haza rd to be eliminated.
The power companies, in compliance wi th the above regulations, collect data about tree fa ilures
and their impact on power lines. This mitigati on strategy assists the power company in
preventing fu ture tree fai lures. From the co llection of th is data, the power company can advise
residents as to the most appropriate vegetative planting and pruning procedures. The local
electric utility, outhern Cali fornia Edison, provides extensive in formation on trees and PO\ er
lines at their website: www.sce.com.
Windstorm Mitigation Action Item s
The windstorm mitigation action items provide direction on specific activiti es that organizations
and residents in the City of Temple City can un dertake to reduce risk and prevent loss from
windstorm events. Each action item is foll owed by ideas for implementation, wh ich can be used
by the Hazard Mitigation Advi sory Committee and loca l decision makers in pu rsuing strategies
for implementation.
123
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Plan Goals Addressed
c 0 ·-~ ..... c
C1)
>. E VJ ..... ~ C1)
Coordinating ..... VJ u Hazard Action Item Ideas for Implementation Timeline Constraints C1) VJ VJ 0.. > 0.. C1) .... E ..... Organization 0 c t: a; .....
0.. C1) C1) --C/) ~ ..... VJ --VJ 0.. >. ~ 3 >. ·-u -< C/) ...c c VJ ...... -..... C1)
u u t':l C1) O[j
C1) ..... c .....
0 ..0 :J t C1)
..... :J ~ t':l E a.. c... ;z a.. w
Windstorm Mitigation Action Items
Provide public warnin g -Provide warnings on the
Short du ring peri ods when hi gh City website. Emerge ncy Pendi ng
Term winds are forecast for the -Provide pu blic service Management Ongo ing fundin g and X
#I area. announcements to the med ia. Department avai lable
personnel
Develop info rmati on -This inform ation wo uld be
materials fo r residential and provided through handouts
commerc ial property owners and web-based materials. Tt
about maintaining the trees could also be presented in
hort on their pro perty. This will publ ic seminars targeting Parks and 1-2 years Staffing X X X
Te rm improve the survivabi lity of property owners with large Recreation
#2 the urban forest during trees.
unusual wind events. -This informati on could also
be presented in concert with
the SoCal Edi son publ ic
training on power line safety.
Assist private property -Provide information on the
owners regarding wind storm City website about annual
mi tigation activities. tree maintenance programs to Pending
Long limit damage from falling LA County Ongoing funding and
Term debris, including tree Public Works available X
#I trimming and debris removal. personnel
-Prov ide information on the
City website regarding
property protection strategies
to limit damage from
windstorms.
Long Upgrade the current utility -Continue annual Planning Pending
Term pole system in the City. inspecti ons. Department; Annual funding and X X
#2 -Restore/replace any worn SoCal Ed ison available
or damaged power poles. personnel
125
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Windstorm Resource Directory
State Resources:
Otlifornia Division of Forestry & Fire Protection
141 6 9th Street
PO Box 944246
Sacramento Californi a 94244-2460
(91 6) 653-5 123
http://www.fire.ca .gov/php/index.php
Federal Resources and Programs:
National Weather Service
Los Angeles/Oxnard Weather Forecast Office
520 North Elevar Street
Oxnard, CA 93 030
Forecast and weather info: (805) 988-661 0
Administrative issues: (805) 988-661 5
E-mail: Webmaster.LOX@noaa.gov
http://weather.noaa .gov/
Additional Resources:
International Society of Arboriculture.
P.O. Box 3 129
Champaign, IL 61826-3 I 29
Phone: (2 17) 355-941 I
Fax: (2 17) 355-9516
Web: www.isa-arbor.com
E-mail: isa@isa-arbor.com
Publications:
WINDSTORMS: Protect Your Fami ly and Property from the Hazards of Violent Windstorms
http://emd.wa.gov/5-prep/trng/pubed/Wind strm .pdf
Preparin g Yo ur Home for Severe Windstorm s is available from
http://www .ch ubb.com/personal/html/hel pful_ tips _home_ windstorm. htm I
SECTION 4: Human Threats
Why are Human-Made Disasters a Threat to the City of Temple City?
The City of Temple City is in one of the most densely populated urban areas in the United
States. This proximity offers tremendous economic, social, and cultural advantages and
opportunities. It also presents Templ e City a series of potential hu man-made di sasters and
emergen cies which can impact the communi ty. These threats can be divided into four areas:
accidents, criminal acts, terrori sm and disease.
History of Human-Made Disasters in Southern California:
In the past one hundred years, Southern Cali forn ia has suffered fr om many disasters from
accid ents, criminal acts, terrorism, and di sease. Some of the most infamous incidents
include:
Accidents
Some of the most noteworthy southern Cali forn ia accidents in recent history have in vo lved
transportation. In 1978 and 1986 commercial airlin es collided with pri vate planes. The
1978 crash involved a PSA jet inbound to San Diego airport. The 1986 mid-air crash
involved an Aero Mexico 737 jet with a small pl ane over Cerritos. Both crashes were
determined to be pilot error and resulted in the total loss o f the passengers and numerous
persons on the groun d.
The 2003 Santa Monica Promenade auto crash in vo lved an elderl y dri ver crashi ng his car
on a street whi ch had been closed fo r a street fa ir. Ten people were killed and 63 injured.
Southern Cali fornia has also had several maj or mass transportation acc idents in volvin g the
Metrolink commuter system. In 2008, a Metrolink trai n crashed head-on into a Union
Pacific freight train in Chatsworth, resul tin g in 25 fata li ties.
Criminal Acts
One of the worst crimina l acts in the past ten ye ars invo lved a cras h oftwo Metrolink trains
in 2005 in Glendale. This crash resulted in II fata lities and nearly 200 injuries. The crash
was caused by a subject who parked his truck in the tracks in front ofthe oncoming train s.
The driver was convi cted of 22 counts of murder. Los Angeles has also been the scene of
several ri ots, including the 1992 ·'Rodn ey King" riot.
Terrorism
Like every major urban area Los Angeles has been the target of repeated terrorist th rea ts.
The first major terrorist attack was the bombing of the Los Angeles T imes building in 192 1
by two disgruntled members of a trade union; the attack resulted in 2 1 fataliti es.
The Los Angeles International Airport has also been the target of terrori sm. In 1974, a
subject known as the "Alphabet Bomber" committed a series of arson fires and bombin g
attacks on the ho mes of government offi cials, culminating with placing a bomb in a locker
at the airport, resulting in four fata lities. In 1999 an A lgeri an immigrant was intercepted
enterin g the United States. The sus pect was part of the '·Mil lennium" bomb pl ot intended
127
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
by several terrorist groups to strike targets around the worl d. He was carryin g explosives
and plans for an attack on Los Angeles In ternational Airport. Following the 9/11 attacks
federal authoriti es intercepted a plot to fl y a hij acked airliner into buildings in downtown
Los Angeles. In 2002 an Egypti an national attacked the ticket counter ofEI AI Airlines,
ki lling three people before being shot by a security guard .
Disease
Disease in urban areas is a constant and evolving threat. In th e past century the United
States and speci fi cally Los Angeles have been struck by pandemic outbreaks. In 1918 the
Spanish Flu, a form of the H L I swine flu , killed between 50 and I 00 million people
worldwide. In th e United States the flu simultaneously origin ated in the Midwest and ew
England and rapidly moved across the country killing thousands on the west coast.
Among the greatest threats to urban areas are pandemi cs whi ch originate from anim als and
are transmitted to hum ans through a process call ed zoonosis. Examples of di seases which
are zoonotic include Ebola, anthrax, and Lassa fever. Of greatest concern to urban areas are
influenza strains such the avian fl u (HSN I) and swine flu (HI N I). In I 971 and 2002 the
so uthwestern United States. from Californ ia to Texas, was stru ck by an avian flu strain
called Exotic ewcastle Disease. This di sease spread rapidly and devastated the
commercial poultry industry.
Characteristics of Major Human-Made Disasters in Southern California:
Major hum an-made disasters tend to occur in areas wi th hi gh popu lation density and a hi gh
level of personal interaction. The significance of population density can be illustrated by
the fact that a private plane th at crashes on a ranch in Mojave Desert has a fa r lower
probabil ity of inj uring local residents than a plane which stri kes a neighborhood near
downtown Los Angeles.
The level of interacti on also pl ays an important part. Areas where large crowds are
interacting in economic, commercial, or social activities are natural places where human-
made disasters can occur. T he larger the numbers of peopl e present, the grea ter the number
of potential interactions. These interactions can result in accidents as well as provide
attractive targets for criminals and terrori sts.
Human-Made Hazard Assessment
Hazard Identification:
There are four areas whi ch pose a signifi cant threat to the City of Temple City:
transportati on disasters, terrori sm, civil un rest, and disease.
Transportation Disasters
Temple City has three types of threats from transportation systems: air crash, local
freeways, and the Union Pacific Railroad tracks which run along the southwest border of
the city. All of Los Angeles County is vulnerable to ai r di sasters. There are numerous
airports. handling both large commercial destinations and local av iation, within a flight
128
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
short distance of the City. An aircraft damaged by a midair colli sion and suffering engine
fa ilure could stri ke the City. In 2002 a Cesena 172 private airplane crashed in Alhambra
after running out of fu el.
The City of Temple City is surrounded by th e 2 10 freeway from downtown Los Angeles to
the north , Interstate I 0 to the south, and the 605 freeway to the east. A truck accident with
a hazard ous materials spill could result in the release of a toxic cloud .
Terrorism
It is unlikely that Templ e City will be targeted by intern ational terrorist groups. It is very
possible that a local comm unity could be ta rgeted by individuals claiming al legiance to
international terrorist groups. The LAX Alph abet Bomber Muharem Kurbegovich recentl y
wrote fro m pri so n he now claims al leg iance to th e AI Qaeda terrorist organization.
Terrorist acts by individuals again st less protected targets could become more comm on in
th e next ten years.
Civil Unrest
Civil unrest seems to be occurring more frequently as problems of unemployment and a
lack of economic growth spread across the country. The downtown area of Los Angeles is a
freq uent site of demonstrati ons due to the presence of government bu ildi ngs. It is
conce ivable th at a demonstration could turn to violence and begin spreading into
neighboring communities. Cri minal street ga ngs often use th e necessity for poli ce to
concentrate resources as an opp ortunity to co mmit cri minal acts in neighboring ci ties.
Pandemics
T he Centers for Disease Co ntrol and the Los Angeles County Hea lth Department have
considered the impact of pandemi c influenza outbreaks on urban areas in the United States.
The rapid transmission of influenza could result in th e cl osure of local schools and a
reduced ability to prov ide basic City services inc luding public safety.
Vulnerability Assessment/ Risk Analysis:
Transportation Disasters
The greatest threat fo r a transpo rtation di saster is related to the nearby freeways wh ich
service The City of Temple Ci ty.
Terrorism
Temple City is vulnerable to terrorist acts by local individ uals who may claim al legiance
with international terrori st groups.
Civil Unrest
An in fi nite number of factors can precipitate civil unrest. These va ri ables ca n also ca use an
incident to spread to areas th at we re not the origin point fo r the unrest.
129
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Pandemics
The ease oftransmission couple with th e virility o f emerging contagions makes every
community in major urban areas especially vulnerable to pandemics.
Mitigation Action Items
Miti gation actions for hum an threats may be found in the chart on the followin g page.
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
130
Plan Goals Addressed
c: 0
§
c ~
£ E U')
~
U') ~ (.) Hazard Action Item Ideas for Implementation Coordinating T imeline Constraints ~ <I) a.. > a.. <I) ~ E E .... Organization 0 c ~ .... ~ ~ :::::: r:/) a.. -<I) -.. ~ <I) a.. >. ~ ~ >. ·-(.) ·---< (/] ..c: c -<I) -.... ~
(.) (.) ~ ~ 01)
~ '-c .... -..0 :::l ...... ~ 0 til .... r .... :::l ~ c a.. a.. z a.. w
Human T hreats M itigation Action Items
Develop contingency plans -Develop and coordinate Temple Pending
Short for responding to a terrorist planning with Mutual Aid Area Sheriff's; 1-2 years funding and X X
Term incide nt in the City of D for terrorist events involving LA County avail able
#I Temple City. mass casualties. Fire personnel
Develop contingency plans -Develop and coordinate
for responding to a planning with the LA County
pandemic outbreak Department of Health for
Short in volving the City of distri bution of medicines. Public Pending
Term Temple City. -Prepare a plan for reducing Safety 1-2 years funding and X X
#2 City services due to sickness. Supe rvisor available
-Prepare an operational plan personnel
for coordination of efforts with
the local school district.
Develop contingency plans -Develop and coordinate
Long for responding to a mass planning with LA County Temple Pending
Term casualty incident involving Mutual Aid Area D. heriff's; 1-2 years funding and X X
#I the C ity of Temple City. -Prepare a plan with local LA County available
hospitals and the LA County Fire personnel
Coroner's office.
-Prepare an operation plan for
coordinati on of efforts with the
local school district.
132
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Human Threats Resource Directory
The Los Angeles County Fire Department is responsible for fire suppression on all private lands within the
City ofTemple City. The Los Angeles County Fire Deprutment constantly monitors the fire hazard in the
City and has ongoing programs for investigation and alleviation of hazardous situations. Firefighting
resources in the immediate Temple City ru·ea include the Los Angeles County Fire Deprutment Stations
and response capabilities fi·om neighboring mutual aid cities.
The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Deprutment is responsible for police services in the City. They provide
24-hour uni fonned patrol response, as well as a wide variety of associated services, including traffic control
and criminal investigations.l11e department actively participates in Los Angeles County Mutual Aid Area
C, wh ich provides immediate personnel and equipment resources during unusual occurrences.
Federal law enforcement resources are coordinated by the Los Angeles field office of the FBI. Intelligence
information related to terrorism is shared by local cities and coordinated through the LA Regional Terrorism
Early Wruning system. The Los Angeles County Emergency Operations Center is jointly operated by the
Los Angeles County Sheriffs Deprutment and the Los Angeles County Office of Emergency Services.
Federal Resources:
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Los Angeles Field Office
II 000 Wilshire Boulevard
Suite 1700
Los Angeles, CA 90024
Phone: (3 1 0) 477-6565
Fax: (3 1 0) 996-3359
County Resources:
Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department
4700 Ramona Blvd.
Monterey Park, Ca. 91754
800-698-8255
Los Angeles County Fire D epartment
1320 Eastern Ave.
Los Angeles, Ca.
323-88 1-2455
Part IV:
Appendices
134
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
APPENDIX A: Benefit Cost Analysis
Economic Analysis of Natural-Hazard-Mitigation Projects
Benefit/cost analys is is a key mechanism used by Cal OES, the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA), and other state and federal agencies in evaluating hazard-mitigation projects,
and is required by the Robert T. tafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, Public
Law 93 -288, as amended.
This appendix outli nes several approaches for conducting economic analyses of natural-hazard-
mitigation projects. lt describes th e importance of implementing mitigation activities, different
approaches to economic analys is of mitigation strategies, and methods to calculate costs and
benefits associated with miti gation strategies. Information in this section is derived in part from
The Interagency Hazards Mitigation Team, State Hazard Mitigation Plan, (Oregon State Police,
Office of Emergency Management, 2000), and Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) Publication 33 1, Report on Costs and Benefits of Natu ral Hazard Mitigation.
This section is not intended to provide a comprehensive description of benefit/cost analysis, nor
is it intended to provide the details of economic-analysis methods that can be used to evaluate
local projects. It is intended to (I) raise benefit/cost analysis as an important issue, and
(2) prov ide some background on how economi c analysis can be used to evaluate mitigation
projects.
Why Evaluate Mitigation Strategies?
Mitigation acti vi ties reduce th e cost of disasters by minimizing property damage, injuries. and
the potential fo r loss of life, and by reducin g emergency response costs, which would otherwise
be incurred.
Evaluating hazard mitigation provides decision makers with an understanding of the potential
benefits and costs of an activity, as well as a basis on whi ch to compare alternative projects.
Evaluating mitigation projects is a complex and difficult undertaking that is influenced by many
variab les.
First, natural disasters affect all segments of th e community including individuals, businesses,
and publ ic services such as fire. police, uti lities, and schoo ls. Second, although some of the direct
and indirect costs of di saster damages are measu rable. some of the costs are nonfinancial and
diffi cult to quantify in dollars. Third , many of the impacts of such events produce "ripple-
effects'' throughout the com muni ty, greatly increasing the disaster's social and econom ic
consequences.
Economic-Analysis Approaches
The approaches used to ident ify the costs and benefits associated wi th hazard mitigation
strategies, measures, or projects fa ll into two general categories: benefit/cost analys is and cost-
effectiveness analysis. The distinction between the two methods is the way in which the relati ve
costs and benefits are measured. Add itionally, there are varying approaches to assessing the
value of mitigation fo r public-sector and pri vate-sector activities.
135
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Benefit/Cost Analysis
Benefit/cost analys is is used to show whether the benefits to li fe and property protected through
mitigation efforts exceed the cost of the miti gation activity. Co nducting benefit/cost analysis for
a mitigation activity can ass ist communities in determining whether a project is worth
undertaking now, in order to avoid disaster-related damages later. Benefi t/cost analysis is based
on calculating the freq uency and severity of a hazard and avoiding future damages and risk.
Tn benefit/cost analys is, all costs and benefits are evaluated in terms of dollars, and a net
benefi t/cost ratio is computed to determ ine whether a project should be implemented (i.e. if net
benefits exceed net costs, the project is worth pursuing). A project must have a benefit/cost ratio
greater than I in order to be funded.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
Cost-effectiveness analysis evaluates how best to spend a given amount of money to achieve a
specific goal. This type of analysis, however, does not necessari ly measure costs and benefits in
terms of dol lars. Determi ning the economic feasibi I ity of 111 iti gating natural hazards can also be
organized acco rd ing to the perspective of th ose with an economi c interest in the outcome. Hence,
economic-analysis approaches are covered for both public and private sectors as follows.
Investing in public-sector mitigation activities.
Evaluating mitigation strategies in the public sector is complicated because it invo lves estimating
all of the economic benefits and costs regardless of wh o rea lizes them, potentially by a large
number of people and economic entities. Some benefits cannot be evaluated monetarily, but sti II
affect the publ ic in profound ways. Economists have developed methods to evaluate the
economic feasibil ity of pu blic decisions that involve a diverse set of bene fi ciaries and nonmarket
benefits.
Investing in private-sector mitigation activities.
Pri vate-sector mitigation projects may occur on the basis of one of two approaches: it may be
mandated by a regulation or standard, or it may be economi cally justified on its own merits.
Wh ether a private entity or a public agency, a bu il ding or landowner required to conform to a
mandated sta ndard may consider the fol low ing options:
I. Request cost sharing from public agencies;
2. Dispose of the bu ildi ng or land either by sale or demolition;
3. Change the designated use of the building or land and change the hazard-mitiga tion
compliance req uirement; or
4. Evaluate the most feasible alternatives and initiate the most cost-effective hazard-mitigation
alternative.
The sale of a build ing or land triggers another set of concern s. Fo r exampl e, real estate disclosure
laws can be developed th at require sellers of rea l property to di sclose known defects and
deficiencies in the property, including earthqu ake weaknesses and hazards, to prospective
purchasers. Correcting deficiencies can be expensive and time consuming, but their existence can
prevent the sale ofthe bui lding. Conditions of a sa le regarding the deficiencies and th e price of
the building can be negotiated between a buyer and seller.
136
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Conducting an Analysis
Benefit/cost analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis are important tools in evaluating whether to
implement a mitigation activity. A framework for evaluating alternati ve mitigation activities is
outlined below:
1. Identify the alternatives: Alternatives for reducing risk from natural hazards can include
structural projects to enhance disaster resistance, ed ucation a nd outreach, and acquisition or
demoliti on of exposed properties, among others. Different m itigation proj ects can assist in
minimizing risk to natural hazards, but do so at varying economic costs.
2. Calculate the costs a nd benefits: Choosing economic criteria is essential to systematically
calc ulating costs and benefits of mitigation projects and selecting the most appropriate
alternative. Potential economic criteria to evaluate alternatives include the foll owing:
Determine the project cost. T hi s may include initial project-development costs, and repair
and operating costs of maintai nin g projects over time.
• Estimate the benefits. Projecting the benefits, or cash flow resulting from a project, can be
difficult. Expected future returns from the mitigatio n effort depend on the correct
spec ifi cation ofthe risk and the effectiveness of the project, whi ch may not be well known.
Expected future costs depend on the physical durabi lity and potential economic obsolescence
of the investment. This is d ifficult to project. These considerations will a lso provide guidance
in selecting an appropriate salvage value. Future tax structures and rates must be projected.
Financing alte rn atives must be researched, and they may include retained earnings, bond and
stock issues, and commercial loans.
• Consider costs and benefits to society and the environment. These are not easily
measured, but can be assessed through a variety of economic tools including existence-value
or contingent-value theories. These theories provid e quantitative data on the value people
attribute to physical or socia l envi ronme nts. Even without hard data, however, impacts of
structural projects to the physical environment or to society sho uld be considered when
implementing mitigation projects.
Determine the correct discount rate. Determination of the discount rate can just be the
risk-free cost of capital, but it may in clude the decision maker's tim e preference and also a
ri sk premium. Inflation should also be considered for inc lusion.
3. A nalyze and rank tbe alternatives: Once costs and benefits have been quantified,
economic-analysis tools can rank the altern atives. Two methods for determining the best
a lternative g iven varying costs and bene fits inc lude net present value and internal rate of
return.
Net present value. Net present value is the value of the expected futu re returns of an
investment minus the value of expected futu re cost expressed in today's dollars. lfthe net
present value is greater than the project costs, the project may be determined to be feasible
137
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
"
f o r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n . S e l e c t i n g t h e d i s c o u n t r a t e , a n d i d e n t i f y i n g t h e p r e s e n t a n d f u t u r e c o s t s
a n d b e n e f i t s o f t h e p r o j e c t c a l c u l a t e s t h e n e t p r e s e n t v a l u e o f p r o j e c t s .
I n t e r n a l r a t e o f r e t u r n . U s i n g t h e i n t e r n a l - r a t e - o f - r e t u r n m e t h o d t o e v a l u a t e m i t i g a t i o n
p r o j e c t s p r o v i d e s t h e i n t e r e s t - r a t e e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e d o l l a r r e t u r n s e x p e c t e d f r o m t h e p r o j e c t .
O n c e t h e r a t e h a s b e e n c a l c u l a t e d , i t c a n b e c o m p a r e d t o r a t e s e a r n e d b y i n v e s t i n g i n
a l t e r n a t i v e p r o j e c t s . P r o j e c t s m a y b e f e a s i b l e t o i m p l e m e n t w h e n t h e i n t e r n a l r a t e o f r e t u r n i s
g r e a t e r t h a n t h e t o t a l c o s t s o f t h e p r o j e c t .
O n c e m i t i g a t i o n p r o j e c t s a r e r a n k e d o n t h e b a s i s o f e c o n o m i c c r i t e r i a . d e c i s i o n m a k e r s c a n
c o n s i d e r o t h e r f a c t o r s , s u c h a s r i s k � p r o j e c t e f f e c t i v e n e s s ; a n d e c o n o m i c , e n v i r o n m e n t a l , a n d
s o c i a l r e t u r n s i n c h o o s i n g t h e a p p r o p r i a t e p r o j e c t f o r i m p l e m e n t a t i o n .
E c o n o m i c R e t u r n s o f H a z a 1 � d M i t i g a t i o n
T h e e s t i m a t i o n o f e c o n o m i c r e t u r n s t h a t a c c r u e t o b u i ! d i n g s o r l a n d o w n e r s a s a r e s u l t o f n a t u r a l -
h a z a r d m i t i g a t i o n i s d i f f i c u l t . O w n e r s e v a l u a t i n g t h e e c o n o m i c f e a s i b i l i t y o f m i t i g a t i o n s h o u l d
c o n s i d e r r e d u c t i o n s i n p h y s i c a l d a m a g e s a n d f i n a n c i a l l o s s e s . A p a r t i a l I i s t f o l l o w s :
B u i l d i n g d a m a g e s a v o i d e d
C o n t e n t d a m a g e s a v o i d e d
I n v e n t o r y d a m a g e s a v o i d e d
R e n t a l - i n c o m e l o s s e s a v o i d e d
R e l o c a t i o n a n d d i s r u p t i o n e x p e n s e s a v o i d e d
P r o p r i e t o r ' s i n c o m e l o s s e s a v o i d e d
T h e s e p a r a m e t e r s c a n b e e s t i m a t e d u s i n g o b s e r v e d p r i c e s , c o s t s , a n d e n g i n e e r i n g d a t a . T h e
d i f f i c u l t p a r t i s t o c o r r e c t l y d e t e r m i n e t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e h a z a r d - m i t i g a t i o n p r o j e c t a n d t h e
r e s u l t i n g r e d u c t i o n i n d a m a g e s a n d l o s s e s . E q u a l l y a s d i f f i c u l t i s a s s e s s i n g t h e p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t a n
e v e n t w i l l o c c u r . T h e d a m a g e s a n d l o s s e s s h o u l d o n l y i n c l u d e t h o s e t h a t w i l l b e b o r n e b y t h e
o w n e r . T h e s a l v a g e v a l u e o f t h e i n v e s t m e n t c a n b e i m p o r t a n t i n d e t e r m i n i n g e c o n o m i c
f e a s i b i l i t y . S a l v a g e v a l u e b e c o m e s m o r e i m p o r t a n t a s t h e t i m e h o r i z o n o f t h e o w n e r d e c l i n e s .
T h i s i s i m p o r t a n t b e c a u s e m o s t b u s i n e s s e s d e p r e c i a t e a s s e t s o v e r a p e r i o d o f t i m e .
R e l a t e d C o s t s f r o m N a t u r a l H a z a r d s
P r o p e r t y o w n e r s s h o u l d a l s o a s s e s s c h a n g e s i n a b r o a d e r s e t o f f a c t o r s t h a t c a n c h a n g e a s a r e s u l t
o f a l a r g e n a t u r a l d i s a s t e r . T h e s e a r e u s u a l l y t e r m e d � ' i n d i r e c t " e f f e c t s , b u t t h e y c a n h a v e a v e r y
d i r e c t e f f e c t o n t h e e c o n o m i c v a l u e o f t h e o w n e r ' s b u i l d i n g o r l a n d . T h e y c a n b e p o s i t i v e o r
n e g a t i v e , a n d i n c l u d e c h a n g e s i n t h e f o l l o w i n g :
C o m m o d i t y a n d r e s o u r c e p r i c e s
A v a i l a b i I i t y o f r e s o u r c e s u p p l i e s
C o m m o d i t y - a n d r e s o u r c e - d e m a n d c h a n g e s
B u i l d i n g a n d l a n d v a l u e s
C a p i t a l a v a i l a b i l i t y a n d i n t e r e s t r a t e s
A v a i l a b i l i t y o f l a b o r
E c o n o m i c s t r u c t u r e
I n f r a s t r u c t u r e
R e g i o n a l e x p o r t s a n d i m p o r t s
L o c a l , s t a t e , a n d n a t i o n a l r e g u l a t i o n s a n d p o l i c i e s
C i t y o f T e m p l e C i t y M u l t i - H a z a r d M i t i g a t i o n P l a n
1 3 8
Insurance availability and rates
Changes in the resources and industri es listed above are more difficul t to estimate and requ ire
models that are structured to estimate total economi c impacts. Total economic impacts are the
sum of direct and ind irect economic impacts. Total-economic-im pact models are u ually not
combined \ ith econom ic-feasibility model s. Many model s ex ist to estimate total economic
impacts of changes in an economy.
Decision makers should understand the total economic impacts of natura l disasters in order to
ca lculate the benefits of a mitigation acti vity. This suggests that understanding the local economy
is an important first step in being ab le to und erstand the potential im pacts of a di a te r, and the
benefits of mit igation activities.
Additional Considerations
Conducting an economic analysis for potential mitigati on activities can ass ist decision makers in
choosing the most appropri ate strategy fo r thei r community to reduce risk and prevent loss from
natural hazards. Economic analysis can also save time and resources from being pent on
inappropriate or unfeasible proj ects. everal resources and models are li ted on the foiiO\\ing
page that can assist in conducting an economi c analysis for natural-hazard-mitiga tion activities.
Benefit/cost analysis is compli cated, and the num bers may divett attention from other important
issues. It is important to consid er the qualitative factors of a project associated with mitigation
th at cannot be evaluated economicall y. There are alternative approaches to implementing
mitigation projects.
Many communities are looking tO\ ard developing multi-objective projects. The mu lti -objective
strategy can integrate natural-hazard mitigation ' ith projects related to\ atersheds.
envi ronmental planning, community economic deve lopment, and small-business development.
among others. Incorporating natural-hazard mitigation with other community projects can
increase the viability of project implementation.
139
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
STAPLEE Worksheets
The City Staff and stakeholder members discussed prioritizati on of the mitigati on action items
using the STAPL EE worksheets. These action items will be forwarded to the City department
heads for inclusion in the 20 14 fiscal budget and as funds become avai !able. The various
departments assigned to oversee the individual action items will be asked to include the funds
necessary for oversight in their 20 14 budgets.
Goals: City of Temple City
Objectives: General Hazard Mitigation Action Items
s T A p l E E
STAPLEE (Social) (Technical) (Administrative) (Political) (le&all (Economic) (E1111itom1ental) Criteria
~ M .::: M ..
j .. ,. ., .. .::: ~ ~ ,. > 0 .. ~ "' '5 ~ ~ c:
Considentions c: g .§ c .::: -5 !l a. ~ ~.::: ~ ., l5 .. c: i "' E :; .. :l I! s c: ~ ~ "" .. 0 IT .. i 7 Q. ... ~ 5 .. .. .. 0 5 .. ... ~ .. ~ ., E e> Q. Q. 'ii. "" "' ~ ~ 0 '15 .5 .. .2 Q. Q. Q. C5 c u < 13 ~ ..... ..... 8;; < "' c: 0 :J E Q. "" ~ ., .. =c 1: .. = < ..... "' 6 ~ 5 ;; ;; 0 c c: .. ""E .. ... ~ ~ ~ "' .. ... '0 .3 :; .0:: .. f E ;; .a " .. .. :li! c .9 .. = 0 s § ., :I! J E ~ " u .... ~ N .. ~ ~ "' .5 .. E ;; .a ~ .. 8 ... c: c E ~ :J ~ ., c: ~ .. " M ... for ~ :J . .. t: X E " .. ~ ... ... .. ~ .. .l: .. (1. .5 "' ~ " ... 5 :3! .. ~ .!ii ~ Alternative ~ ~ .. .... "' .. i 5 :; t: ... .. .:: g ~ ~ ... t: :I! ... 0 .. u Actions .. :: .. :: ... :1:
.j, ... ...
+ + + + + . . . + . + + + . + . + . + ~ ~ • -e -e -e
STMH11
+ + + . . . . . + . + + + . . + • " • • + -e -e -e 1
STM .. 2
+ + + + + . ' ' + . + + + . + + ~ '! ~ '!
,.
'!
,.
'!
STM .. 3
+ + + + + + + + + . + + + • • • • . + + . ....... ....... ....... ....... c c c c
LTMHil
• • • + + + + + + + + + + + + . + + . ....... ....... ....... + c c c
LTMHIZ
+ + + + + . + . + + + + + . + • • ....... ....... + c c
LTMHI3
• • + + + + + . . . + . + + + . + . + . + ....... ....... + c c
LT~
140
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
~ ;; ; ., :
ii 'i
1: .. .!ii ~
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Goals: City ofTemple City
Objectives: Earthquake Action Items
s T A
ST APLEE Oiteria (Social} (Tedmical) (Administrative)
Considerations .
-+ I! 0 i c • f. t! .J) .,
l ! ...... for ~ c ,e ~ • I! • I ~ ..... Jl r ~ 1!..,
Alternative "'~ .! l!i (; f l f c 0.. il ~ ft Actions !8. i • to 1! fO 0 "' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .9 0 u
STEARTH #1 + + + + + . . .
LTEARTH #1 + + + + + + + +
LTEARTH #2 + + + + + . . •
LTEARTH#3 + + + + + . • '
p
(Political)
~ c ~ l Jl 8. r ~ 0.. ~ il u .1! .... "i "' 1 .9 e. 0..
+ . +
+ . +
• . +
. + +
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mit igation Plan
l E E
(legal) (Economic) (Environmental)
.f ~ i ! ., .i ~ 1 . .l! c I! ~ I! ., f }~ Jl c ~ .. ~ .J) 0 ·r .r
.l! ~ oll ~1 c. . -i si 1! ij jt !! f ~
~ e ~,! ~:; :! .9 0 0 j~ :aj .5 ~ 0 ~ .. 1 .~ ! c ~ .. ~ . ~ 0 I • e. 0 ou.i dl u i 0 i i .. ; u ~ ! .: 0 X ~ 0 u u
+ + • . + . + to to --+ + c c
+ ~ to to to + . + + . ---+ c c c c
+ + . • + • + + + + +
+ + . . + . + + + + +
-·---
141
Goals: City of Temple City
Objectives: Flood Acti on Items
s T
ST APLE.E Criteria (Social) (Technical)
Considerations • ~ ~ 0 E c ll [ E ... ;!! j l for . ~ c • ! ~ ..... Jl I. Alternative Jl ~ ~ ~ f c 0. "ii a Actions O/l ~ • 1' j ..: t> a + ! ~ l .!1 0 u
STFlOOD#l + + + + +
STFlOOD#2 + + + + +
STFlOOD#3 + + + + +
LTFlOOD#l + + + + +
LTFLOOD#2 + + + + +
A p
(Administrative) (Pofrtical)
, " c I ...... 8. ... " Ji • ! 0. 0. 8. ~ ~ ... E 0. ~ <l 1!1! "' .2 ~ l "' :f fs. "ii u ... ... "ii ~ ] fO !! .9 ll 0.
I I + + I +
I I I I + +
I I I I + +
I I + + I +
I I + + I +
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
L E E
(lqal) (Economic) (Environmental)
€ ... I E l , j .. .
€ .2 c e ~ I ~ri , ~~ ... c 0 L "' .!
.2 ~ i ... .!1 1', c • i 1' ..: s-: ~ I 1'~ j! H ~ "ii : e I .9 .a,s 0 0 ~& ij .!1 E_2 .. ~l .. e ~ J •u i c
f ll 0 ~ ! ~ ~ -~ ~~-~ • .. u ~ ~ ..
! 0 ~ u l !
0 .3 u
+ + I + + I + "' "' --+ + c c
+ + I I + I + + + + +
+ + I I + I + + + + "T
+ + + + "' "' I + I -...... + + c c
"' "' + + I + + I + --+ + c c
142
Goals: City ofTemple City
Objectives: Windstorm Action Items
s T A
STAPLEE Criteria (Social) (Technical) (Administrativt!)
Considt!rlltions ~ 7 '!I ~ c: e ! t: .II 1 li 5 1!. .....
for ~ u ; '& § J ~ l!! .r I!-!! Altt!rnativt! 0::-§ o! < E ~ "' li f C:"-li • . II .r Actions Oil. 1 .. c: io " tl r ! "' ~ "5 ~ {! 8
STWIND #1 + + + + + + + +
+ + + + + I I I
STWIND#2
+ LTWIND #1 + + + + I I +
LTWIND #2 + + + + + + I I
p
(Porrtical)
t: c: B. .II t:
!t e B. g. .. .l! .. :a u I B ~
+ + +
I + +
+ I +
+ I +
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
l E E
(legal) (Economic) (Environmt!ntal)
~ ~ -e 2 2 jj 1! .i ... .. c: .r 'f~ ... f i .II c: !! ! ~ .. o! .2 5 s~ ~ ~ ~ ... c:JI < 1! 1H 0 ~ !! i! "' 5 ~ 't; ll"" ... ~ ~! 11 < :i.!l 't; 8 !! WI!. ~ I l!.J! ... i" . .,. c: I! .!I Jl '! a ;g • g .. ~u !I"' 0 wi 1!1 l Jl .. ,g tl tl .. "' i! 0 ~ ~ i 8 .. ...
!! !; l!! 8 8
10 10 + + I + + I + ........ ........ + + c c
+ + I I + I + + + + +
10 10 + + I + + I + ........ c ........ c + +
.; 10 10 111 + + I I + + ........ ........ ........ + c c c c
143
CJ ~-
~
~ ~ .._
(I)
CJ ~·
~ ::: ~ 1\1 c ~
~
~·
cs· :::;
~ .._ c :::;
.j:>.
~
s:: > ~ V> ..... -< > V> ...
+
+
+
+
+
-
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
+
+
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
+
, ~ > z ,.,
"'"' ,., V> ... -< 0 -< s:: ,., .... ...
+ +
+ +
+ +
+ +
+ +
--
- -
--
+ +
- -
+ +
+ +
+ +
- -
+ +
--
+ +
+ +
n/a n/a
n/a n/a
n/a n/a
n/a n/a
+ +
l!o b'
+-f ~ ~ iil
"'if Ol ~· f•
Community Acceptance
Effect on seament of Populiltion
Technical Feasibility
Lore-term Solution
Secondary Impacts
Sllltflnc
Fundinc: Allocated
Malntena""/ Ope~tions
Political Support
Loul 0\ampion
Public Suppol't
State Authority
blstl"' Lout Authority
Potential Le1al Challcna:e
Benefit of Action
Con of Action
Contributes to Economic Goals
ouulde Fundlnc Requir.d
Effect on Land/Water
Effect on Endolncered Species
Effect on HAZMAT/Wast• Sites
Consistent wtth Community
EnvlronmenU:I G~l.s
Consistent with Federal Laws
Q ~ ~~ ~ m
I
~ [
Q =
j
~ ~ ~ .!!-
j
!
~
r £
[
I i! =
~
...
,.
...
~
m
m
OC')
~0 ·~ n> -(') <I> -.. <" () n> -· <I> ...... •• '< ::r:o s:: ......,
3 ~ § 3
_,~ ::r (l)
Cil ()
til -· vr-<
)>
~
0 :::1
~ 3 Vl
Resources
CUREe Kaj ima Project, Methodologies For Evaluating The Socio-Economic Consequences Of
Large Earthquakes, Task 7.2 Eco nomic Im pact Analysis, Prepared by University of Cal iforn ia.
Berkeley Team, Robert A. Olson, VSP Associates, Team Leader; John M. Eid inger, G&E
Engineering Systems; Kenneth A. Goettel, Goettel and Associates Inc.; and Gerald L. Horner,
Hazard Mitigation Economics Inc .. I 997.
Federal Emergency Man agement Agency, Benefit/Cost Analysis of Hazard Mitigation Projects.
Riverin e Flood, Version 1.05. Hazard Mitigation Economics Inc ., 1996.
Federal Emergency Man agement Agency Report on Costs and Benefits of Natural Hazard
Miti gation. Publication 33 1, 1996.
Goettel & Horn er Inc., Ea rthquake Risk Analysis Volum e I II : The Economic Feasibi lity of
Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings in The City of Portland, Submitted to the Bureau of
Buildings. City of Portland, August 30, 1995.
Goettel & Horner Inc., Benefit/Cost Analysis of Hazard Mitigation Projects Volume V.
Earthquakes, Prepared for FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Branch, October 25, 1995.
Horner, Gerald, Benefit/Cost Methodologies for Use in Evaluating the Cost Effectiveness of
Proposed Hazard Mitigation Measures, Robert Olson Associates, Prepared for Oregon State
Police, Office of Emergency Management, Jul y 1999.
Interagency Hazards Mitigation Team, State Hazard Mitigation Plan, (Oregon State Poli ce-
Office of Emergency Management, 2000).
Risk Management Solu tions, In c., Development of a tandardi zed Ea rthquake Loss Estimation
Methodology, ational Institute of Building Sciences, Volume I and II, 1994.
VSP Associates, Inc., A Benefi t/Cost Model for the Seismic Rehabi litation ofB uildings,
Volumes L & 2, Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, Publication Numbers 227 and
228, 199 L.
VSP Associates, Inc., Benefit/Cost Analysis of Hazard Mitigation Projects: Section 404 Hazard
Mitigation Program and Section 406 Public Assistance Program, Volume 3: Seismic Hazard
Mitigation Projects, 1993.
VSP Associates, Inc., Sei smic Rehabilitation of Federal Buildings : A Benefit/Cost Model,
Vo lume I, Federa l Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, Publication Number 255. L 994
City o.fTemp!e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
L45
APPENDIX B: Public Outreach
Community Stakeholde rs
On 9/25/12 the general and specifi c mitigati on action items initially developed by City staff were
introduced to the group of stakeholders who comprise the City of Temple City Emergency
Work ing Group. (These action items we re previously di scussed by the department heads of the
City of Temple City.) The purpose of the worki ng group is plann ing and preparations for joint
ope rations durin g a major disaster. Thi s group includes the Los Angeles County heri frs
Department Temple Station. Los Angeles County Fire Department Battalion I 0, the Red Cross,
Temple City Uni fied School District, local fai th -based orga nizations and Temple City service
groups. The City of Rosemead was inc luded because it borde rs the City ofTemple City and
shares the same contract services v ith the County of Los Angeles. Please note that all
stakeholders. including the City of Rosemead, were invited to participate via telephone. All
in vited stakeholders attended the meeting.
The group di cussed the specific haza rd s, th e action items, and reviewed the cost benefit analys is
using the FEMA STAPLEE system. The group discussed the challenges of prioritizing action
items given the current budget constraints.
146
City ofTemple City Multi-Ha::ard Mitigation Plan
Present
Temple City Emergency Working Group
Minutes 9/25/12
Bryan Ariizumi, Public Safety Supervisor, City of Temple City
Gary McGuire, Curriculu m Administrator, Temple City Unified Schools
Mandy Wong, Pub lic Safety Coordi nator, City of Rosemead
Grady Murphy, Analyst/Field Representative, American Red Cross
Rick Adams, Deputy, Temple City Team, Los Ange les County Sheriffs Department
Robert Alvarez, Deputy, Temple City Team, Los Angeles County Sheri ff's Department
Magg ie Valdivia, Community Services Representat ive, Los Angeles County Fire Depa rtment
Excused
Dav id Palmer Temple City Clergy Council
Southern California Edison representative
Temple City Chamber of Commerce representative
Introduction
Bryan Ariizum i discussed the purpose of the meeting, which was to review the initial mitigation
ac tion items under consideration by the City staff. Bryan explained that the working group would
review the proposed items, offer their own suggestions for add itional items, and evaluate all the
items using the FEMA STAPLEE worksheet.
Action Items
The group reviewed the proposed items. There was di scussion about how many items could be
supported by available funds. rt was determined that the in itial list of items was rea listic due to
limitations in staffin g and budgeting to work on them. The issue of seeking possible mitigation
grants to fu nd additional items was discussed. Bryan explained some of the challenges of
accepting these grants and the staff hours needed to support them.
STAPLEE Wo rksheets
T he mitigation action item s were reviewed usin g the STAPLEE worksheets. Notes were taken
regardin g the comments on each item.
147
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Community Meeting
A joint community/City Council meeting was held on I 0/16/12. This forum was se lected because
the meetin g was televised on the loca l public access cable station and accessible to nearl y every
residence in Temple City. The date was selected to coincide wi th the Great Shakeout Week
which is the statewide, week long, earthquake preparedness information and exercise program.
The meeting agenda was posted 73 hours pri or on the Civic Center bulletin board and on the City
website. faxed to the loca l medi a. and posted at the LA County Library adjacent to the Civic
Center.
The hazard mitigation plan was discussed with speci al attention paid to the specific hazards an d
th e proposed mitigation action items. Public comments were discussed and questions answered
durin g the meeting. For residents watching from home a City ofTemple. a direct email contact
was provided so they could make com ments. Residents were asked to contact the City if they had
comments or suggestions. There was no response to this opportun ity for feedback.
148
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
APPENDIX C: Funding
• Below 01'1! Wmt! UM/ul resourefi for addmona/gront funding that th~ city might want to ronsidu applying for in achieving its
mitigation goals and obj~ctives:
GRANTNANE AGENCY PfJRPOSE CONTAO'
Pr~-Disas!~r u.s. ~partmenrof To prolllde tundirc for s~ and communiti6 tor cost-FEMA
Mirigarjon Program Homeland Security, ~e hazard mitication aaivities which complement SOO C. Street, SW
(POM} Federlll Emert:encv a comprehensive hazard mitiption prcgn~m and reduce Washireton. OC 20472
Management At:ency injuries, loss of life, and damill:e and deconstruction of Phone: (202)646-4621
(fEMA) pr~l't'f-www.fema,gQv
Hazard Mit1900on u.s. ~panment o1 To pr~em future losses of lives and property due to FEMA
Grant Progrom Homeland Security, disasters; to implement State and local hazard SOO C. Street, SW
Federlll EmerEencv mitigation plans; to enable nvtiption measur-es to be Washireton, OC 204 72
Managemem At:encv Implemented durirc irnrnedi<ne recfNeiY from disasters; Phone: (202)646-4621
(FEMA) and to provide tundine for previously identified www.fema.gov
mitigation measures ro bene1it the disaster area.
Flood Mid!JO(ion u.s. ~panmem of To help stares and communities plan and cany out FEMA
Assisranc~ Program Homeland Security, actMtie:s des~ed to reduce the risk of flood damat:e to SOO C. Street, SW
(RK} Federal Eme!iencv structUres Insurable~ NfiP. Washireton. oc 20472
Management At:encv Phone: (202)646-4621
(FEMA) WWW.f!:!!!!!~
R~~~ Flood claims U.S. ~panment of To assist States and communities and reduce flood FEMA
Program (RFC} Homeland Security, dama&es to insured pr~rties that have had one or soo c. Street, sw
federal Eme!iencv more claims to NFIP. Washireton. OC 20472
Managemem At:encv Phone: (202)646-4621
(FEMA) www.tema,g,rrv
~~ RtfK(i!Nt Loss u.s. ~panment of To prOYide funding to ~dute or efiminate the long-term fEMA
(SRLJ Program Homeland Security, risk o1 flood d!lllla&e to ~er-e repetitive lou structures SOO C. Street, SW
federal Emert:encv Insured under the NFIP. Washircton. OC 20472
Management At:encv Phone: (202)646-4621
(FEMA) wwwJema~
Em~rgmcy U.S. ~artment of To encourage the developrnem of comprehensive FEMA
Manogemtnt Homeland Security, eme-&encv manat:ernent at the State and local l~el and SOO C. Street, SW
P6formonce Gronts Federal EmerEencv to iTiprove emergency manaeement planning, Washircton, OC 20472
(fMPG} Management At:encv preparedness, mitigation. response and recovery Phone: (202)646-4621
(FEMA) apabilities. www.femaZS!:t.
Commllliry U.S. ~artment of To ~elop viable lrilan communities by providirc HUD
~lopmmt Grant Housirc and Urban decent housirc and a suitable rJYioi elllllronment. 451 ..,. Street, sw
Program (CDBG] ~elopment Principally for low-tiHTIOder.lt~ incom~ individuals.. Washinefon, OC 2041D-7000
Phone: (202) 708--3587
www.hud fl2l!
Public Assistance U.S. ~artmert[ of To provide supplemental assistance to States,local FEMA
Program (PA} Homeland Security, pe.-rvnems, and certain nonprofit organizations to SOO C. Street, SW
Federal Emercencv allev~ate sufferin& and hardship resultirc from major Washircton. OC 20472
Management At:encv cisasters or emert:endes declar~d by the President. Phone: (202)64&4621
(ffMA) Under Section 406, P\.tllic Assistanc~ fir>ds may be used wwwfema.gov
to mitigate the impact of future disaste.~
Flood control U.S. ~artmentof To assist in the ~pairs and restoration of public worts USACE
Worlcs/fmtrgtncy 05ense, AAily Corps ot dama&ed by flood. extraordinary wind, wave or water 20 Massadlu5etts~. NW
Rthobiitotian Engineers action. Was~on. OC 20314
Phone: (202)76Hl001
www.usace.arm:t.mi
Emergmcy waurshtd U.S. ~partment of To provide emer~:encv tect-nical and financial assistance NRCS
Prot«tion A&Jiwlture, Natun!l to install or repair stnJctu"es that reduce runoff and P08ox2890
Resource ConseMJtion prevent soil erosion to safquard life and property. Washircton. OC 20013
Service Phone: (202) 72D-3527
www.rvu...usda.~
149
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Watt>tWd Prott'CtiOtl u.s. OepiY1merlt of To provide tt'dlnical and financial assistara 1n pia~ NRCS
and Rood Prrvtnrion AcOOAturt>. Nanni and executing wOfts of inprovement to prott'Cf. POBox2ll90
Resoun:~ Const'rv.nion ~. andu~olland and ~rr~ In small w~.DC20013
St'rvic~ -~ Phone: (202) 72()-3527
www.nrCS.usdiLCQl!
Land and waur U.S. Oepiii"1JMllt of rM To acquire and develop outdoor reaution arus and NPS
Const'rvorian Fund Interior, National Pn fadities for the ceneral p!Jllic, to~ current and POBox37217
Grants St'rvlc~ runre~. Wastqton, DC 20013-7127
Phone: (202) 565-1200
IHWW.IIP5.J'.OY
Dis<lsru Mitigation us Department of To help Stat~ and loGaliti6 to~ and/or EDA
and T«hnicol commerce, Emoomic impl~t a v~ of~ mitiption stratqil5. Herbert c. Hoov~ Buildirc
Assistance Grants Developrrent Washif"Cton, DC 20230
Administration Phone: (800) 345-1222
www.~J:.<N
Pre-Disosru US Small Busin65 To make low-inter6(, ~ rau loans elliJble for small SBA
Mitigation Loan Administration ~ for the purpose of impl~ntini mitigation lUO Vermont Avenue, NW, ~
Program mus~ to protea business pr~rty from damaie Aoor
!hilt may be caused by tutur~ disasters. Waslqton, DC 20005
Phone: (202) 606-4000
't!!tt!J!.~!!ill:!ll!
WaretWd SullleyS U.S. Oepartme~W of To provide planninc assistancr to ~raJ, statt' and NRCS
and Planning A&riCU!ure.Natlnl local ~ tor the delletopiTll'IU or coordination at POBox2ll90
Resoun:e Const'rvation Willer and related land resou"US and procrams in Washircton, DC 20013
St'rvice Wiltenheds and mer basins. Phone: (202) 72()-3527
www nrnusdiLI!Q!!
QmnWotuAa US EllVifonmanl To ~t 0001IOint sosce procrams, lndudirc EPA
Section 31.9 Grunts Protection Aceocv SllppOrt for rM llOIHUUCtl.l'lll -tershed resotne Ariel Rlos Building
~tion activiti~. 1200P~iaAvmue, NW
Washif"Cton, DC 20460
Phone: (202) 272-()167
www.e!E!.g<N
National fanhquofct' U.S. Oepartm61t of To rnificate urthq\JUe ~ that can occur in many FEMA
Hazards Rnluclion Homeland St'curity, pam ot rM nation, providire earth sdence data and 500 C. Str~. SW
Program (N£H£RP) Federal~ asse.ssrnt'nts essential for warning of irTvrinent Washif"Cton, DC 20472
Manag~nt Acenq damaeirc ~allhqtsaRs, lanckM plannirc, engineer-ire Phone: (202)646-4621
(FEMA) ~and emeJiency preparedness~ www.fema~
Assistance to U.S. Oepartmel'll of Com~ely awarded project ~nts to provide direct FEMA
Fire{HJhtus Grant Homeland St'curity, assistance, on a competitive basis, to fire departm~ts 500 C. Street, SW
Federal EmetEei>q for w purpose of protectif"C w health and safety of Washircton. DC 20472
Management Acenq the public and firefiehtine pef5()flllt'l apinst fir!! and Phone: (202)646-4621
(FEMA) firl!-f'elated hazards. www.f~ma,gov
Fire Monogernmr U.S. Oepartmenl of To provide project crams and the priMsion of fEMA
Assistance Grants Homdand St'curity, spedalizl!d servi~ for w mitiption, manag~nt, and 500 c. Str«t, sw
Federal EmefEerq rontrol of ti~ that Wl!a~ StJCtt destruction as wo\Ad WasNrcton. DC 20472
Manag~nt Jlienq CDnStitut~ a major disaster. Phone: (202)646-4621
(FEMA) www.fema,gov
fmef[lency U.S. Oepartmel'll of To pr~~t erosion damac~ to public facilitks by w 1.JSACf
Stri!OIIIbonk and Defense, Army Corps of emergerq construction or r~if ot str91Tlbank and 20 Massadlusetts A~ue. NW
Shore6ne Protection fnejneers shoreline prot«tion worts.. WasNrcton. DC 20314
Phone: (202) 76Hl001
www.usace.a!!!Tl.mil
Small Flood Control u.s. Oeplll1m~nl of To reduce flood damaees throuefl small flood control USACE
Projects Defense, Army Co<-ps of projects not spedf"olly authorized by Caner=. 20 MM5lldlusetts Avenul!, NW
En(ineers Was~on. DC 20314
Phone: (202) 76Hl001
www.usace.armv.mil
150
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Rural Hrr Assirnma Fish and Wllclife To ~t the National fir~ Plan by inaeasirc US Department of Health and
(RFA_ Senic~ ~Rfictlll!r saf~ty and ~nhandrc the l<nowled&~ and fir~ lt.Jman Services
protection capability at nn1 and volt.m~~ 2.00 I~ Avenue,SW
depirtrnaltS by pr~ basiC wild land firefietnine Washircton, DC 20201
supplies and ~prnenL HHH Builc:Jin& Grants.eov
WWW.£!3!!!U:!!!!
FY 12 ESAR-VHP US Department of To lntqrn~ Medial, Pl.tllic H~alttt, Preparedness and US Department of ~alth and
Continuation ~alth and lt.Jman Response tnllnine with repsmtion of Volt.ntecr Health lt.Jman Services
~Nic:es Pr~ Offic~ of the Assistant Secrtt«V
for Prt4par~ and
Response
395 E.St.,SW
Suite 1075
Washircton, DC 20201
Phone: (202)24~1
FY 2012 Dhastu Rdief Econolric: Development The EAA pro&rJITI prOVIdes reopoents With ftexibl~ tools ~at!le Rqional Office
Opportunity Admiristnltion to delldop and Implement rqionally based lore tenn Jadtson Fedenll Buitdine
~ dl!vdoprnent stntqies in response to major 915 Second Avenue, Room 1890
Fedenllly dKiared dstitm. ThrOtJih this proeJam, EOA Seat!le, WA 98174
can support the dellelopment of disaster recomy Phone: (206) 22(). 7699
stmqies and reaNery ~tlltion. indtdnc
lnfrlstruc:ture mprovernenu and by usq reiiOfvine loan
fl.rlds.
-Good Proc:tkts" us Department of The omcr at Foreicn Oisastl!r Assistance has a mandat~ US Department of H91th and
Monuol Protliding H91th and lt.Jman to S<tYe lives, allevlat~ sufferine and reduc~ the social lt.Jman Services
Guidon« for Reducing ~Nic:es Aeencv for and emnornic mpaas of cisastm. Whil~ the disaste~ Offic~ of the Assistant SecrtlatY
IM Risk of Flood1 International 1Nt ORlA r~ to resdl from a ~of causes, for Prt4paredness and
Using Natural-Dev~nt floodne is the most ~t hazard eicitrc a response Response
~e~ from OftlA In an avence yelllf. ~to nannl 39SE.St.,SW
Techniques dlsasten Is OftlA's primary role, but ORlA also provides St.oite 1075
support to vulom~bl~ communities In developine Washineton DC 20201
~lies to mitipte th~ eff«U of rKUTent natural Phone: (202) 24~1
digstl!fS.
Cxrt:nsion lnlnjrafed N.nionallnstitule of To support research on pen manac~ wher~ Phone: (202) 401-5048
~ monogmlt:m Food and AeJio.ltwe faditles and prac:tic.es safe&uan:l and prevent
Coordination ond (USDA) environmental Impacts. Rcutine re-ovation, www.rVfa usda.!:!!!!
Suppon rdlabWtation, or revmtlizaoon of physical taanies,
lndudlnc the KqUisltion and Installation of ~pment.
wt1ue such aaivity is lmited in scope and Intensity.
Pos ible Pre-Disaster Mitigati on Grants:
Until the loca l hazard mitigation plan is approved by FEMA, the City cannot apply fo r federal
Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) grants. The approval tim ing will impact the items that can be
immediately funded depending on\ here this occurs in the local budgetary planning cycle. The
county economic forecasts influence the ab ili ty of the City ofTemple City to fu nd new projects.
Currentl y, FEMA provides approximately 1.2 rn iII ion dollars of Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM)
grants fo r each of the fifty states and fi ve territories. There are 536 cities and counties in the
tate of California. In 20 14 ten cities and counties received PDM grant awards worth
approximately 1.2 milli on dollars. This means the remaining California cities and counties have
less than a one in fifty chance of receiving one ofthese grants.
Further complicating the possibl y of applying for a 20 16 Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant are the
program selection priorities which include impoveri hed communities. aquifer storage and
recovery projects, floodp lain restoration, flood diversion, and post-wildfire mitigation. The City
ofTemple City does not qualify as impoverished and is not in an urban wildfire zone. All
projects involving aq ui fer storage. floodp lain restoration, and flood diversion in or near the City
ofTemple City are the responsibility of the Los Angeles County Flood Control Di trict.
15 1
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Opportunities for Private Funding:
External grant fund ing is problematic. Corporate givers and foundation grant-makers have been
adversely affected by the economic downturn that began in 2008. While giving has flattened out
or slightly risen sin ce the sharp initial drop in 2008. it has not yet recovered to pre-recess ion
levels. Th is general trend applies on a national level and also describes gra nt-making by
found ations based in Los Angeles County.
The Uni versity of Southern Cal ifo rnia's Center for Ph ilanthropy and Public Policy issued a
report in 20 I 0: "Prospects for Foundation Philanthropy in Los Angeles during Uncertain Times."
Authors James Ferris, Jeff Glenn, an d Lia Moore wrote, ·'While there have been recessions in the
past that have caused foundati ons and donors to pause and , in some instances, make adjustments
... the current downturn is unlike recent ones, best evidenced by the decline in pri vate giving
from all sources fo r the last two years."
Another issue impacting private fund ing is the fli gh t of corporations from Califo rn ia and Los
Angeles County. In a 20 I 0 study by researchers from UC Berkeley and Cornell Uni versity, th e
connection between corporate fl ight and local giving were addressed. The study, 'T he
Geography of Giving: The Effect of Corporate Headquarters on Local Charities," was conducted
by David Card Kev in Hallock, and Enri co Moretti . The authors determined that the presence of
corporate headquarters in a community can positively impact the opportunities for private giving
to public projects. The report noted that the Los Angeles metropoli tan area has ·'experienced a
relatively large decline in the number of headquarters."
The decline in corporate and foundation giving. combined with corporate fl ight. makes the
possibil ity of relying on private fu nding for miti gati on-related projects a difficult proposition .
Currently there do not appear to be private grant fund ing sources fo r any of the cities within Los
Angeles County.
Prioritizing Items and Project Fund in g:
The Temple City Hazard Mitigation Advisory Co mm ittee and the comm unity stakeholders
rev iewed the va rious mitigation acti on items for prioritization. The committee and stakeholders
identifi ed four determ in ing factors in the pri oritization process: approval of the local mi tigation
plan by FEMA. the approval timing related to the annu al bud geting process, available general
funds, and the local economic fo recasts at the time the acti on items are consid ered.
The City of Temple City wil l foc us on using local resources, community support, and the general
fund for loca l mitigation projects. Local bud geting follows an annual cycle. Availab ility of funds
wi ll be impacted by where they are requ ested. Thi s effort will be moni tored by the Hazard
Mitigation Advisory Committee under the direction of the City Council.
Once the mitigation plan is approved, the City departments will review each of th e mitigation
action items fo r which they are res ponsible. Each of the items will be reviewed based on existing
budget funds that can be directed to the approved items. These wi II be selected fi rst. The second
series of action items selected will be items requiring speci fie budgetary consideration in the next
budget cycle.
152
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
---------------------·-
Once the plan is approved, the items that cannot be otherwise funded by local bud geting will be
selected for the PDM grant process based on the current selecti on criterion. The Hazard
Mitigation Advisory committee will also coordinate with Los Angeles County of Emergency
Management and the Californi a Govern or's Offi ce of Emergency Services to remain aware of
grant opportu nities that may open up in the future. These will be evaluated based on the availab le
grant awards and probabi lity of receiving a grant.
153
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
APPENDIX D: Acronyms
Federal Acronyms
AASHTO
ATC
b/ca
BFE
BLM
BSSC
CDBG
CFR
CRS
EDA
EPA
ER
EWP
FAS
FEMA
FIRM
FM A
FTE
GIS
GNS
GSA
HAZUS
HMGP
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
Applied Technology Council
benefit/cost analysis
Base Flood Elevation
Bureau of Land Management
Building Seismic Safety Council
Community Development Block Grant
Code of Federal Regulations
Community Rating System
Economic Development Administration
Environmental Protection Agency
Emergency Relief
Emergency Watershed Protection (NRCS Program)
Federal Aid System
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Flood Insurance Rate Map
Flood Mitigation Assistance (FEMA Program)
Full Time Eq uiva lent
Geographic Information System
Instit ut e of Geological and Nuclear Sciences (International)
General Services Administration
Hazards U.S.
Hazard M itigation Grant Program
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
154
HMST
HUD
IBHS
ICC
IHMT
NCDC
NFIP
NFPA
NHMP
NIBS
NIFC
NMFS
NOAA
NPS
NRCS
NWS
SBA
SEAO
SHMO
TOR
UGB
URM
USACE
USBR
USDA
USFA
Hazard Mitigation Survey Team
Housing and Urban Development (United States, Department of)
Institute for Business and Home Safety
Increased Cost of Compliance
Interagency Haza rd Mitigation Team
National Climate Data Center
National Flood Insurance Program
National Fire Protection Association
Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan (also known as "409 Plan")
National Institute of Building Sciences
National Interagency Fire Center
National Marine Fisheries Service
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Park Service
Natural Resources Conservation Service
National Weather Service
Small Business Administration
Structural Engineers Association of Oregon
State Hazard Mitigation Officer
Transfer of Development Rights
Urban Growth Boundary
Unreinforced Masonry
United St ates Army Corps of Engineers
United States Bureau of Reclamation
United States Department of Agriculture
United St ates Fire Administration
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
155
USFS
USGS
WSSPC
United States Forest Service
United States Geological Survey
Western States Seismic Policy Council
California Acronyms
A&W
AA
AAR
ARC
ARP
ATC20
ATC21
BCP
BSA
CAER
CaiARP
CaiBO
CaiEPA
Cal OES
CaiREP
CALSTARS
CaiTrans
CBO
CD
CDF
CDMG
Alert and Warning
Administering Areas
After Action Report
American Red Cross
Accidental Risk Prevention
Applied Technology Council20
Applied Technology Council21
Budget Change Proposal
California Bureau of State Audits
Community Awareness & Emergency Response
California Accidental Release Prevention
California Building Officials
California Environmental Protection Agency
California Governor's Office of Emergency Services (formerly CaiEMA)
California Radiological Emergency Pla n
California State Accounting Reporting System
California Department of Transportation
Community Based Organization
Civil Defense
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
California Division of Mines and Geology
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
156
CEC
CEPEC
CESRS
CHIP
CHMIRS
CHP
CLETS
CST I
CUEA
CUPA
DAD
DFO
DGS
DHSRHB
DO
DOC
DOE
DOF
DOJ
DPA
DP IG
DR
DSA
DSR
DSW
DWR
California Energy Commission
California Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council
Ca lifornia Emergency Services Rad io System
Ca lifornia Hazardous Identification Program
Ca lifornia Hazardous Materials Incident Reporting System
Ca lifornia Highway Patrol
Ca lifornia Law Enforcement Telecommunications System
Ca lifornia Specialized Training Institute
Ca lifornia Utilities Emergency Association
Certified Unified Program Agency
Disaster Assistance Division (of Cal OES)
Disaster Field Office
Ca lifornia Department of General Services
Ca lifornia Department of Health Services, Radiological Health Branch
Duty Officer
Department Operations Center
Department of Energy (U.S.)
California Department of Finance
California Department of Justice
California Department of Personnel Administration
Disaster Preparedness Improvement Grant
Disaster Response
Division of the State Architect
Damage Survey Report
Disaster Service Worker
California Department of Water Resources
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
157
EAS
ED IS
EERI
EMA
EMI
EMMA
EMS
EOC
EOP
EPA
EPEDAT
EPI
EPIC
ESC
FAY
FDAA
FEAT
FEMA
FFY
FIR
FIRESCOPE
FMA
FSR
FY
GIS
HAZM AT
Emergency Alerting System
Emergency Digital Information System
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
Emergency Management Ass istance
Emergency Management Institute
Emergency Managers Mutual Aid
Emergency Medica l Services
Emergency Operations Center
Emergency Operations Plan
Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.)
Early Post Earthquake Damage Assessment Tool
Emergency Public Information
Emergency Public Information Counci l
Emergency Services Coordinator
Federal Award Year
Federal Disaster Assistance Administration
Governor's Flood Emergency Act ion Team
Federal Emergency Management Age ncy
Federal Fisca l Year
Final Inspection Reports
Firefighting Resources of SoCal Organized for Potential Emergencies
Flood Management Ass istance
Feasibility Study Report
Fiscal Year
Geographical Information System
Hazardous M aterials
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
158
HAZMIT
HAZUS
HAD
HEICS
HEPG
HIA
HMEP
HMGP
IDE
lA
IFG
IRG
IPA
LAN
LEMMA
LEPC
MARAC
MHID
MOU
NBC
NEMA
NEMIS
NFIP
NOAA
NPP
NSF
Hazardous Mitigation
Hazards United States (an earthquake damage assessment prediction tool)
Housing and Community Development
Hospital Emergency Incident Command System
Hospital Emergency Planning Gu idance
Hazard Identification and Analysis Unit
Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
Initial Damage Estimate
Individual Assistance
Individual & Family Grant (program)
Incident Response Geographic Information System
Information and Public Affairs (of Cal OES)
Local Area Network
Law Enforcement Master Mutual Aid
Local Emergency Planning Committee
Mutual Aid Regional Advisory Council
Multi-Hazard Identification
Memorandum of Understanding
Nuclear, Biological, Chemical
National Emergency Management Agency
National Emergency Management Information System
National Flood Insurance Program
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association
Nuclear Power Plant
National Science Foundation
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
159
NWS
OA
OASIS
occ
OCD
OEP
OES
OSHPD
OSPR
PA
PC
PDA
PIO
POST
PPA/CA
PSA
PTAB
PTR
RA
RADEF
RAMP
RAPID
RDO
RDMHC
REOC
REP I
National Weather Service
Operational Area
Operational Area Satellite Information System
Operations Coordination Center
Office of Civil Defense
Office of Emergency Planning
California Governor's Office of Emergency Services (formerly CaiEMA)
Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development
Oil Spill Prevention and Response
Publi c Assistance
Personal Computer
Preliminary Damage Assessment
Public Information Office
Police Officer Standards and Training
Performance Partnership Agreement/Cooperative Agreement (FEMA)
Public Service Announcement
Planning and Technological Assistance Branch
Project Time Report
Regional Administrator (Cal OES)
Radiologica l Defense (progra m)
Regional Assessment of M itigation Priorities
Railroad Accident Prevention & Immediate Deployment
Radiologica l Defense Officer
Regional Disaster Medical Health Coordinator
Regional Emergency Operations Center
Reserve Emergency Public Information
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
160
RES Regional Emergency Staff
RIMS Response Information Management System
RMP Risk Management Plan
RPU Radiological Preparedness Unit (Cal OES}
RRT Regional Response Team
SAM State Administrative Manual
SARA Superfund Amendments & Reauthorization Act
SAVP Safety Assessment Volunteer Program
SBA Small Business Administration
sco California State Controller's Office
SEMS Standardized Emergency Management System
SEPIC Stat e Emergency Public Information Committee
SLA State and Local Assistance
SONGS San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station
SOP Standard Operating Procedure
SWEPC Statewide Emergency Planning Committee
TEC Travel Expense Claim
TRU Transuranic
TTT Train t he Trainer
UPA Unified Program Account
UPS Uninterrupted Power Source
USAR Urban Search and Rescue
USGS United States Geological Survey
we California State Warning Center
WAN Wide Area Network
WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot Project
161
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
APPENDIX E: Glossary
Acceleration
Asset
Base Flood
Base Flood
Elevation (BFE)
Bedrock
Building
Coastal High
Hazard Area
Coastal Zones
The rate of change of velocity with respect to time. Acceleration due to gravity
at the earth's surface is 9.8 meters per second squared . That means that every
second that something falls toward the surface of the earth, its velocity
increases by 9.8 meters per second.
Any human-made or natural feature that has value, including, but not limited
to, people; buildings; infrastructure like bridges, roads, and sewer and water
systems; lifelines like electricity and communication resources; or
environmental, cultural, or recreational features like parks, dunes, wetlands, or
land marks.
Flood that has a 1% probability of being equaled or exceeded in any given year.
Also known as t he 100-year flood.
Elevation of the base flood in relation to a specified datum, such as the
National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929. The Base Flood Elevation is used as
the standard for the National Flood Insurance Program.
The solid rock that underlies loose material, such as soil, sand, clay, or gravel.
A structure that is walled and roofed, principally above ground and
permanently affixed to a site. The term includes a manufactured home on a
permanent foundation on which the wheels and axles carry no weight.
Area, usually along an open coast, bay, or inlet, that is subject to inundation by
storm surge and, in some instances, wave action caused by storms or seismic
sources.
The area along the shore where the ocean meets the land as the surface of the
land rises above t he ocean. This land/water interface includes barrier islands,
estuaries, beaches, coastal wetlands, and land areas having direct drainage to
the ocean.
Community Rating A National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP} program that provides incentives for
System (CRS) NFIP communities to complete activities that reduce flood hazard risk. When
the community completes specified activities, the insurance premiums of
policyholders in these communities are reduced.
Computer-Aided
Design And
Drafting (CADD)
A computerized system enabling quick and accurate electronic 2-D and 3-D
drawings, topographic mapping, site plans, and profile/cross-section drawings.
Contour A line of equal ground elevation on a topographic (contour) map.
162
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Critical facility
Debris
Digitize
Facilities that are critical to the health and welfare of the population and that
are especially important following hazard events. Critical facilities ·include, but
are not limited to, shelters, police and fire stations, and hospitals.
The scattered remains of assets broken or destroyed in a hazard event. Debris
caused by a wind or water hazard event can cause additional damage to other
assets.
To co nvert electronica lly points, lines, and area boundaries shown on maps into
x, y coordinates (e.g., latitude and longitude, universal transverse mercator
(UTM), or table coordinates) for use in computer applications.
Displacement Time The average time (in days) that a building's occupants typically must operate
from a temporary location while repairs are made to the original building due
to damages resulting from a hazard event.
Duration
Earthquake
Erosion
Erosion Hazard
Area
Essential facility
Extent
Extratropical
Cyclone
Fault
How long a hazard event lasts.
A sudden motion or trembling that is caused by a release of strain accumulated
in or along the edge of ea rth's tectonic plates.
Wearing away of the land surface by detachment and movement of soil and
rock fragments during a flood or storm or over a period of yea rs through the
action of wind, water, or other geologic processes.
Area anticipated to be lost to shoreline retreat over a given period of time. The
projected inland ext ent of the area is measured by multiplying the average
annual long-term recession rate by the number of years desired.
Elements that are important to ensure full recovery of a community or st ate
following a hazard eve nt. These include government functions; major
employers; banks; schools; and certain commercial establishments such as
grocery stores, hardware stores, and gas stations.
The size of an area affected by a hazard or hazard event.
Cyclonic storm events like Nor'easters and severe winter low-pressure systems.
Both West and East coasts can experience these nontropica l storms that
produce gale-force w inds and precipitation in the form of heavy rain or snow.
These cyclonic storms, commonly ca lled Nor'easters on the East Coast because
of the direction of the storm winds, ca n last for several days and can be very
large-1,000-mile wide storms are not uncommon.
A fracture in the co ntinuity of a rock formation caused by a shifting or
dislodging of the earth's crust, in which adjacent surfaces are differentially
displaced parallel to the plane of fracture.
163
City ofTemp/e City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Federal Emergency Independent agency created in 1978 to provide a single point of accountability
Management for all federal activities related to disaster mitigation and emergency
Agency (FEMA) preparedness, response, and recovery.
Fire Potential Index Developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Forest Service to assess
(FPI) and map fire-hazard potential over broad areas. Based on such geographic
information, national policymakers and on-the-ground fire managers
established priorities for prevention activities in the defined area to reduce the
risk of managed-fire and wildfire ignition and spread. Prediction of fire hazard
shortens the time between fire ignition and initial attack by enabling fire
managers to pre-allocate and stage suppression forces to high fire risk areas.
Flash Flood
Flood
Flood Depth
Flood Elevation
A flood event occurring w ith little or no warning in which water levels rise at an
extremely fast rate.
A general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of
normally dry land areas from (1) the overflow of inland or tidal waters, (2) the
unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source, or
(3) mudflows or the sudden collapse of shoreline land.
Height of the flood water surface above the ground surface.
Elevation of the water surface above an established datum (e.g., National
Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929, North American Vertical Datum of 1988), or
Mean Sea Level.
Flood Hazard Area The area shown to be inundated by a flood of a given magnitude on a map.
Flood Insurance Map of a community, prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
Rate Map (FIRM) (FEMA), that shows both the special flood-hazard areas and the risk premium
zones applicable to the communit y.
Flood Insurance
Study (FIS)
Floodplain
A study that provides an examination, evaluation, and determination of flood
ha za rds and, if appropriate, corresponding water-surface elevations in a
community or communities.
Any land area, including a watercourse, susceptible to partial or complete
inundation by water from any source.
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
164
--------
Frequency
Fujita Sca le of
Tornado Intensity
Functional
Downtime
Geographic Area
Impacted
Geographic
Information
Systems (GIS)
Ground Motion
Hazard
Hazard Event
Hazard
Identificat ion
Hazard Mitigation
Hazard Profile
A measure of how often events of a particular magnitude are expected to
occur. Frequency describes how often a hazard of a specific magnitude,
duration, and/or extent typically occurs, on average. Statistica lly, a hazard with
a 100-year recurrence int erval is expected to occur once every 100 years on
average, and would have a 1% chance-its probability-of happening in any
given year. The reliability of this information varies depending on the kind of
hazard being considered.
Rates torn adoes wit h numeric values from FO to FS (based on tornado wind-
speed and damage sustained). An FO indicates minimal damage such as broken
tree limbs or signs, while an FS indicates severe damage sustained.
Th e average time (in days) during which a funct ion (business or service) is
unable to provide its services due to a hazard event.
Th e physical area in which the effects of the hazard are experienced.
A computer software application that relates physical feat ures on the earth to a
database to be used for mapping and analysis.
Th e vibration or shaking of t he ground during an ea rthquake. When a fault
ruptures, seismic waves radiate, causing the ground to vibrat e. The severity of
the vibration increases wit h the amount of energy released and decreases with
the distance from the causative fault or epicenter, but soft soils can further
amplify ground mot ions.
A source of potential danger or adverse condition. Hazards in this series will
include naturally occurring events such as floods, earthquakes, tornadoes,
t sunami, coastal st orms, landslides, and wildfires that st rike popu lated areas. A
natural event is a haza rd w hen it has the pot ential to harm people or property.
A specific occurrence of a particular type of hazard.
The process of identifying hazards that threaten an area.
Sustained actions taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk from hazards and
their effects.
A description of the phys ical characterist ics of hazards and a determination of
various descri ptors including magnitude, duration, frequency, probability, and
extent. In most cases, a community can most easily use these descriptors when
they are reco rded and displayed as maps.
165
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
HAZUS (Hazards
U.S.)
Hurricane
Hydrology
Infrastructure
Intensity
Landslide
Lateral Spreads
Liquefaction
Lowest Floor
Magnitude
Mit igation Pla n
A GIS-based nationally standardized earthquake loss-est imation tool developed
by FEMA.
An intense tropica l cyclone, formed in the atmosphere over warm ocea n areas,
in which wind speeds reach 74-miles-per-hour or more and blow in a large
spiral around a relative ly calm center or "eye." Hurrica nes develop over the
north Atlantic Ocea n, northeast Pacific Ocean, or the south Pacific Ocean east
of 160"E longitude. Hurricane circulation is counterclockwise in the Northern
Hemisphere and clockwise in the Sout hern Hemisphere.
The science of dea ling with the waters of t he earth. A flood discharge is
developed by a hydrologic study.
Refers to the public services of a community that have a direct impact on t he
quality of life. Infrastructure includes communication technology such as phone
lines or Internet access, vital services such as public water supplies and sewer-
t reatment facilities, and includes an area's transportation system such as
airports, heliports; highways, bridges, tunnels, roadbeds, overpasses, railways,
bridges, rail yards, depots; and waterways, canals, locks, seaports, ferries,
harbors, dry-docks, piers and regional dams.
A measure of the effect s of a hazard event at a particular place.
Downward movement of a slope and materials under the force of gravity.
Lateral spreads develop on gentle slopes and entail the sidelong movement of
large masses of soil as an underlying layer liquefies in a seismic event. The
phenomenon that occurs when ground sha king causes loose soi ls to lose
strength and act like visco us fluid. Liquefaction causes two t ypes of ground
fai lure: lateral spread and loss of bearing strength.
Results when the soil supporting structures liquef ies. This can cause structures
to tip and topple.
Under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFI P), the lowest floor of the
lowest enclosed area (including the basement) of a structure.
A measure of the strength of a hazard event. The magnitude (also referred to as
severity) of a given haza rd event is usua lly determined using technical
measures specific to t he hazard.
A systematic eva luation of the nature and extent of vulnerability to the effects
of natural hazards typically present in the state and includes a description of
actions to minimize future vulnerability to hazards.
166
City of Temple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
,------------------
National Flood
Insurance Program
(NFIP)
National Geodet ic
Vertical Datum of
1929 (NGVD)
National Weather
Service (NWS)
Nor' easter
Outflow
Planimetric
Planning
Probability
Recurrence
Interval
Repetitive Loss
Property
Replacement Value
Richter Scale
Federal program created by Congress in 1968 t hat makes flood insurance
available in communit ies that enact minimum f loodplain-management
regulations in 44 CFR §60.3.
Datum established in 1929 and used in the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) as a basis for measuring flood, ground, an d structural elevations,
previous ly referred to as Sea Level Datum or Mean Sea Level. The Base Flood
Elevations shown on most of the Flood Insurance Rate Maps issued by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) are referenced to NGVD.
Prepares and issues flood, severe-weather, and coastal-storm warnings and can
provide technical assistance to federal and state entities in preparing weather
and flood-warning plans.
An extra-tropical cyclone producing gale-force winds and precipitation in the
form of heavy snow or rain.
Outflows follow water inundation creating strong currents that rip at structures
and pound them with debris, and erode beaches and coasta l structures.
Describes maps that indicate only human-made features like buildings.
The act or process of making or carrying out plans; the establishment of goals,
policies, and procedures for a social or economic unit.
A statistical measure of the likelihood that a hazard event will occur.
The time between hazard events of similar size in a given locat ion. It is based
on the probability that t he given event will be equaled or exceeded in any given
year.
A property that is currently insured for which two or more Nationa l Flood
Insurance Program (NFI P) losses (occurring more than 10 days apart) of at least
$1,000 eac h have been paid within any 10-yea r period since 1978.
The cost of rebuilding a structure. This is usually expressed in terms of cost per
square foot, and reflects t he present-day cost of labor and materials to
co nstruct a bu ilding of a particula r size, type, and qualit y.
A numerical scale of earthquake magnitude devised by seismologist C. F. Richter
in 1935.
167
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
,------------------
Risk
Riverine
Scale
Scarp
Scour
Seismicity
Special Flood
Hazard Area
(SFHA)
Stafford Act
State Hazard
Mitigation Officer
(SHMO)
Storm Surge
Structure
The estimated impact that a hazard would have on people, services, facilities,
and structures in a community; the likelihood of a hazard event resulting in an
adverse condition that causes injury or damage. Risk is often expressed in
relative terms such as a high, moderate, or low likelihood of sustaining damage
above a particular threshold due to a specific type of hazard event. It also ca n
be expressed in terms of potential monetary losses associated with the
intensity of the hazard.
Of or produced by a river.
A proportion used in determining a dimensional relationship; the ratio of the
distance between two points on a map and the actual distance between the
two points on the earth's surface.
A steep slope.
Removal of soil or fill material by the flow of flood waters. The term is
frequently used to describe storm-i nduced, loca lized conical erosion around
pilings and other fou ndation supports where the obstruction of flow increases
turbulence.
Describes the likelihood of an area being subject to earthquakes.
An area in a floodplain having a 1% or greater chance of flood occurrence in any
given year (100-year floodplain); represented on Flood Insurance Rate Maps by
darkly shaded areas with zone designations that include the letter A or V.
The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, PL 100-
107 was signed into law Nove mber 23, 1988 and amended the Disaster Relief
Act of 1974, PL 93-288. The Stafford Act is the statutory authority for most
federal disaster-response activities, especially as they pertain to the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and its programs.
The representative of state government who is the primary point of contact
with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), other state and federal
agencies, and loca l units of government in the planning and implementation of
pre-and post-disaster mitigation activities.
Rise in the water su rface above normal water level on the open coast due to
the action of wind stress and atmospheric pressure on the water surface.
Something constructed. (See also Building)
168
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Substantial
Damage
Super Typhoon
Surface Faulting
Tectonic Plate
Topographic
Tornado
Tropical cyclone
Tropical
Depression
Tropical Storm
Tsunami
Typhoon
Vulnerability
Damage of any origin sustained by a structure in a Special Flood Hazard Area
whereby the cost of restoring the structure to its before-damaged condition
would equal or exceed 50% of the market value of the structure before the
damage.
A typhoon with maximum sustained winds of 150 mph or more.
The differential movement of two sides of a fracture; in other words, the
location where the ground breaks apart. The length, width, and displacement
of the ground characterize surface fau lts.
Torsional rigid, thin segments of the earth's lithosphere that may be assumed
to move horizontally and adjoin other plates. It is the friction between plate
boundaries that cause seismic activity.
Characterizes maps that show natural features and indicate the physical shape
of the land using contour lines. These maps may also include human-made
features.
A violently rotating column of air extending from a thunderstorm to the
ground.
A generic term for a cyclonic, low-pressure system over tropical or subtropical
waters.
A tropical cyclone with maximum sustained winds of less than 39 mph.
'A tropical cyclone with maximum sustained winds greater than 39 mph and less
than 74 mph.
A great sea wave produced by submarine earth movement or volcanic eruption.
A special category of tropical cyclone peculiar to the western North Pacific
Basin, frequently affecting areas in the vicinity of Guam and the North Mariana
Islands. Typhoons with maximum sustained winds attaining or exceeding 150
mph are called super typhoons.
Describes how exposed or susceptible to damage an asset is. Vu lnerability
depen ds on an asset's construction, contents, and the economic value of its
functions. Like indirect damages, the vulnerability of one element of the
community is often related to the vulnerability of another. For example, many
businesses depend on uninterrupted electrical power. If an electric substation
is flooded, it will affect not only the substation itself, but a number of
businesses as well. Often, indirect effects can be much more widespread and
damaging than direct ones.
169
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Vulnerability
Assessment
Water
Di splacement
Wave Run-up
Wildfire
Zone
The extent of injury and damage that may result from a hazard event of a given
intensity in a given area. The vulnerability assessment should address impacts
of hazard events on the existing and future built environment.
When a large mass of earth on the ocean bottom si nks or uplifts, the column of
water directly above it is displaced, forming the tsunami wave. The rate of
displacement, motion of the ocean floor at the epicenter, the amount of
displacement of the rupture zone, and the depth of water above the rupture
zone all contribute to the intensity of the tsunami.
The height that the wave extends up to on steep shorelines, measured above a
reference level (the normal height of the sea, corrected to the state of the tide
at the time of wave arrival).
An uncontrolled fire spreading through vegetative fuels, exposing an d possibly
consuming structures.
A geographical area shown on a Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) that reflects
the severity or type of flooding in the area.
170
City ofTemple City Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan