PDM Planning Milestones

Transcription

1 PDM Planning Milestones 1. Form Planning Committee 2. Kickoff Meeting 3. Form Steering Committee 4. Update Critical Facilities, Hazards, and Risk Assessment 5. Update Mitigation Strategy 6. GEMA / FEMA Review and Approval 7. Adoption by Resolution

2 Timetable Plan schedule Accelerated: 9 months, complete December 2012 Standard: 18 months, complete August

3 Responsibilities Greene County Steering Committee Attend committee meetings Homework & participation Regularly complete & submit timesheets Government action as required (e.g. pass adopting resolution) Regional Commission Meeting coordination and facilitation Data analysis and mapping Planning process Labor match documentation Plan development Plan submission/revisions

4 Document all hours spent Use provided form Labor Match Will be available through NEGRC website Meeting attendance, homework, and research should be included Use one form per work session Bring completed forms to meetings

5 Homework Create steering committee (if desired) Identify regular meeting schedule Review critical facilities (to be ed)

6 NEGRC Contact Information Taylor Baxter - Planner tbaxter@negrc.org (706)

7 February 15, 2012 Kickoff Meeting - Brian Laughlin gave presentation on Hazard Mitigation - T B NEGRC - Determined 18-month planning timeline with monthly meetings March 21, Overview of Critical Facilities - Began review of Critical Facilities list - Committee Decided to divide CF list by facility type - Discussed in groups which facilities should be removed or edited April 25, Reviewed Critical Facilities definitions - Continued to overhaul Critical Facilities in groups - As a full committee, discussed potential CF additions July 25, Discussed list of hazards from current plan - Discussed the necessity of including earthquakes. Committee decided that even though risk was minimal, it was best to keep as a hazard. - Discussed combining thunderstorms and tornados. Committee decided that risks, goals, and mitigation strategies were likely to be similar enough to consider as a single hazard. - Discussed separating droughts and wildfires. Committee decided that risks, goals, and mitigation strategies were likely to be distinct enough to consider separately. - Final group discussion of Critical Facilities list August 22, Presentation on plan structure: Hazard Risk Assessment, Goals, Objectives, and Mitigation Strategies - C C - B - Presentation on possibilities for simplification, clarification, and improvement of goals and objectives September 26, Continued revision of goals and objectives for each hazard through group discussion - B R A A S - Determined which Action Steps were complete, abandoned, postponed, or in progress (and why)

8 - Began group discussion of which should be carried over to the plan update and in what form October 24, In- A I - Presentation on suggestions for more measureable, clearer, and more applicable Action Steps going forward - Group discussion on potential new Action Steps/Mitigation Strategies November 28, Continued review of Chapter 4 of current plan to determine what should be carried over to the plan update - Committee worked as a single group to review Mitigation Strategies sections for three hazards in plan update January 23, Continued review of Chapter 4 of current plan to determine what should be carried over to the plan update - Committee worked as a single group to review Mitigation Strategies sections for remaining hazards in plan update - February 27, Committee completed review of Chapter 4 of current plan and began review of Chapter 5 - Completed update of Mitigation Strategies for natural hazards March 27, Committee completed review of Chapter 5 of the current plan - Committee completed update of Mitigation Strategies for technological hazards - Committee worked as a single group to complete STAPLEE analysis and prioritization of natural hazard Action Items - Committee completed review of Chapters 6 and 7 of the draft plan update - Discussed meeting dates for 2 nd public hearing

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32 3

33 Correspondence with Gerald Silvey, Woodville VFP Subject: Woodville Hazard Mitigation Plan Review From: Gerald Silvey Sent: Tuesday, July 02, :53 PM To: Taylor Baxter Subject: Re: Greene County Hazard Mitigation Plan Good morning. I would be glad to offer my assistance. In saying that, some of the things we try to prepare for are; natural gas pipeline breech, wild fires, natural disasters causing road closures because of trees falling and trying to prepare for a plane crash because we are in the flight path for the local air port. Gerald Silvey Chief, WVFD From: Gerald Silvey [mailto:gerald.silvey@hortonhomes.com] Sent: Friday, July 12, :49 AM To: Taylor Baxter Subject: Re: Greene County Hazard Mitigation Plan Good morning. I read over most of the report and especially the chapters 4 and 5. Nothing else looks needed from Woodville side. Gerald Woodville VFD