HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-17-23 F&A Committee Packet 1
OTAY WATER DISTRICT
FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION
COMMITTEE MEETING
and
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD
SPRING VALLEY, CALIFORNIA
BOARDROOM
WEDNESDAY
May 17, 2023
12:00 P.M.
This is a District Committee meeting. This meeting is being posted as a special meeting
in order to comply with the Brown Act (Government Code Section §54954.2) in the event that
a quorum of the Board is present. Items will be deliberated, however, no formal board actions
will be taken at this meeting. The committee makes recommendations
to the full board for its consideration and formal action.
AGENDA
1. ROLL CALL
2. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION – OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO
SPEAK TO THE BOARD ON ANY SUBJECT MATTER WITHIN THE BOARD’S JU-
RISDICTION INCLUDING AN ITEM ON TODAY’S AGENDA
DISCUSSION ITEMS
3. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4431 TO CONTINUE WATER AND SEWER
AVAILABILITY CHARGES FOR DISTRICT CUSTOMERS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023-
2024 TO BE COLLECTED THROUGH PROPERTY TAX BILLS (CAREY) [5 minutes]
4. AUTHORIZE THE GENERAL MANAGER TO NEGOTIATE AND ENTER INTO A 5-
YEAR AGREEMENT, (THREE [3] YEARS WITH TWO [2] ADDITIONAL YEARS AT
THE DISTRICT’S OPTION), WITH KEENAN & ASSOCIATES (KEENAN) FOR
BENEFITS CONSULTING AND BROKER SERVICES AND IDENTIFYING KEENAN
AS THE DISTRICT’S BENEFITS BROKER OF RECORD FOR A TOTAL AMOUNT
NOT-TO-EXCEED $136,500 (LAWSON) [5 minutes]
5. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 4432 TO APPROVE THE 2023 OTAY WATER
DISTRICT’S ANNEX, WHICH WILL BE PART OF THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO’S
MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN AS A PLANNING PARTNER
IN COORDINATION WITH OTHER LOCAL JURISDICTIONS, INCLUDING
MUNICIPALITIES AND SPECIAL DISTRICTS (ZUNIGA) [5 minutes]
6. ADJOURNMENT
2
BOARD MEMBERS ATTENDING:
Tim Smith, Chair
Ryan Keyes
All items appearing on this agenda, whether or not expressly listed for action, may be delib-
erated and may be subject to action by the Board.
The agenda, and any attachments containing written information, are available at the Dis-
trict’s website at www.otaywater.gov. Written changes to any items to be considered at the
open meeting, or to any attachments, will be posted on the District’s website. Copies of the
agenda and attachments are also available by contacting the District Secretary at (619) 670-
2253.
If you have any disability which would require accommodations to enable you to participate in
this meeting, please call the District Secretary at 670-2253 at least 24 hours prior to the
meeting.
Certification of Posting
I certify that on May 12, 2023, I posted a copy of the foregoing agenda near the regu-
lar meeting place of the Board of Directors of Otay Water District, said time being at least 24
hours in advance of the meeting of the Board of Directors (Government Code Section
§54954.2).
Executed at Spring Valley, California on May 12, 2023.
/s/ Tita Ramos-Krogman, District Secretary
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: June 7, 2023
SUBMITTED BY: Andrea Carey,
Customer Service Manager
PROJECT: DIV. NO.All
APPROVED BY: Joseph R. Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
Jose Martinez, General Manager
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 4431 to Continue Water and Sewer
Availability Charges for District Customers for Fiscal Year
2023-2024 to be Collected Through Property Tax Bills
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board adopt Resolution No. 4431 to continue water and sewer
availability charges for District customers for fiscal year 2023-2024
to be collected through property tax bills.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
See Attachment A.
PURPOSE:
That the Board consider the adoption of Resolution No. 4431 to
continue water and sewer availability charges for District customers
for the fiscal year 2023-2024 to be collected through property tax
bills.
ANALYSIS:
The District levies availability charges each year on property in
both developed and undeveloped areas. State Water Code Section 71630-
71637 authorizes the District to assess such availability charges. To
place these charges on the tax roll, the County of San Diego (the
AGENDA ITEM 3
2
County) requires the District to provide a resolution authorizing the
charges. In late July of each year, the District provides a
resolution along with the listing of charges by parcel to the
County’s property tax services department.
For a parcel to be assessed a sewer availability charge, it must be
annexed into the District’s sewer Improvement District No. 18. Sewer
availability charges are either a fixed fee of $10 for parcels one
acre or less or $30 per acre for parcels greater than one acre.
Unlike sewer, water availability charges are assessed on all parcels
within the District’s boundaries and do not require annexation into
an improvement district. For most parcels, water availability charges
are the same as those shown for sewer availability above; however,
there are exceptions. Parcels greater than one mile from a District
pipeline, identified as an agricultural preserve, in a floodplain, or
have a 30% slope are charged $3 per acre. Parcels identified as open
space are charged 50% of the normal assessment fees ($5 for those one
acre or less or $15 per acre for those greater than an acre).
Current legislation provides that any amount up to $10 per parcel
(one acre or less) is for general use and any amount over $10 per
parcel ($30 per acre for parcels over one acre) is restricted, to be
expended in and for that improvement district. The District uses
amounts over $10 per parcel to develop water and sewer systems within
the improvement districts where the funds are collected. In
accordance with legislation, the District places amounts up to $10
per parcel in the General Fund.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joseph R. Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The availability charges, as budgeted, will generate approximately
$1.2 million in revenue.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
This revenue source will help the District meet its fiscal
responsibility to its ratepayers.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
Attachments:
Attachment A – Committee Action
Attachment B – Resolution No. 4431
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 4431 to Continue Water and Sewer
Availability Charges for District Customers for Fiscal Year
2023-2024 to be Collected Through Property Tax Bills
COMMITTEE ACTION:
1
RESOLUTION NO. 4431
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
OTAY WATER DISTRICT CONTINUING PREVIOUSLY
ESTABLISHED WATER AND SEWER AVAILABILITY
CHARGES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023-2024; REQUESTING
THE COUNTY TO COLLECT SUCH AVAILABILITY
CHARGES ON THE 2023-2024 SECURED TAX ROLL AND
TAKING OTHER RELATED ACTIONS
WHEREAS, the Otay Water District (herein "District") is a
member of the San Diego County Water Authority and the
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California and, as a
member, the District is entitled to purchase water for
distribution within the District and water so purchased is
available to property in the District that is also within the San
Diego County Water Authority and the Metropolitan Water District
of Southern California, without further need for annexation to any
agency; and
WHEREAS, Improvement District No. 18 has been formed within
the Otay Water District (herein "District") and sanitary sewers
have been constructed and sewer service is available to land
within the said District; and
WHEREAS, in consideration of the benefit that water
availability confers upon property within the District, and in
further consideration of the need for revenue to pay the cost of
water storage and transmission facilities which directly and
specifically benefit property within the District, the District
has previously determined that water availability charges be fixed
and established under applicable provisions of law; and
Attachment B
2
WHEREAS, in consideration of the benefit which sewer
availability confers upon property within Improvement District No.
18, and in further consideration of the need to pay the cost of
sanitary sewers which directly and specifically benefit those
properties, the District has previously determined that sewer
availability charges be fixed and established for Improvement
District No. 18 as provided under applicable provisions of law;
and
WHEREAS, the District desires to continue the collection of
such water and sewer availability charges without increases or
revisions in methodology or application.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Otay Water
District resolves, determines and orders as follows:
1.SCHEDULE OF WATER CHARGES
(A)The water availability charges previously fixed and
established are hereby continued for Fiscal Year 2023-2024 at the
existing rates, as follows:
(1)In Improvement District No. 22 the charge shall be
$30.00 per acre of land and $10.00 per parcel of land
less than one acre.
(2)For land located outside an improvement district and
within one mile of a District water line, the charge
shall be $10.00 per acre of land and $10.00 for each
parcel less than one acre.
(3)For land located outside an improvement district and
greater than one mile from District facilities, the
3
charge shall be $3.00 per acre of land and $3.00 for
each parcel less than one acre.
(B)Modifications The charges provided for in subparagraphs
(1) through (3) in (A) above shall be modified upon petition by
the property owner where the property does not receive water from
the District as follows:
(1)where a parcel of land or a portion thereof is within
an open space easement approved by San Diego County,
the charge for such parcel or portion thereof shall
be fifty percent (50%) of the charge determined
pursuant to paragraph (A), provided the owner files
with the District proof, satisfactory to the
District, that said parcel of land or portion thereof
is within such a designated permanent open space
area;
(2)where a parcel of land or portion thereof is in an
agricultural reserve under a Land Conservation
Contract with the County of San Diego, pursuant to
the Land Conservation Act of 1965 as amended, the
charge for such parcel shall be $3.00 per acre,
provided the owner files with the District proof,
satisfactory to the District, that said parcel of
land or portion thereof is within such an
agricultural preserve;
(3)where a parcel of land or a portion thereof is within
an area designated as a floodplain by the County of
San Diego, the charge for such a parcel or portion
4
thereof shall be $3.00 per acre, provided the owner
files with the District proof, satisfactory to the
District, that said parcel of land or portion thereof
is within such designated floodplain; and
(4)where a parcel of land or portion thereof exceeds a
30% slope, and where such is not within a legal
subdivision, lot-split or planned residential
development, the charge for the slope portion shall
be $3.00 per acre, or if such a parcel is less than
one acre and more than one-half of the area exceeds
30% slope, $3.00 for the parcel, provided the owner
files with the District proof, satisfactory to the
District, that said parcel of land or portion thereof
meets or exceeds the slope.
(C) Exceptions The charges provided for in (A) and (B)
above shall not apply, upon petition by the property owner, to the
following:
(1)land located within an area designated as a floodway
by the County of San Diego;
(2)land designated as a vernal pool area by a govern-
mental agency authorized to make such a designation
and which designation prohibits use of such area for
any purpose;
(3)land owned by non-profit, tax-exempt conservation
organizations specializing in identifying and
protecting the natural habitat of rare species; or
5
(4)land that is located within the boundaries of the
Otay Water District but not within the boundaries of
the Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California and the San Diego County Water Authority.
2.SCHEDULE OF SEWER CHARGES
(A)Sewer standby assessment or availability charges are
hereby fixed and established for Fiscal Year 2023-2024 as follows:
(1)In Improvement District No. 18 the charges shall be
$30.00 per acre of land and $10.00 per parcel of land
less than one acre. The preceding charges shall not
apply, upon petition by the property owner, to the
following:
(a)any portion of a parcel which is undeveloped
and maintained in its natural state within an
Open Space Area as a requirement under the San
Diego County General Plan, provided the owner
of such parcel files proof, satisfactory to
the District, of such designed Open Space
Area;
(b)any portion of a parcel located within an area
designated by the County of San Diego as a
floodway or floodplain; or
(c)any portion of a parcel of land which exceeds
a slope of 30% and which is not within a legal
subdivision, lot split or planned lot split or
planned residential development.
6
3.DEFERRALS
(A) Deferral of Charge, Purpose Situations may arise when
an owner of a parcel of land does not use and has no present
intention of using water and/or sewer provided by the District on
a parcel of land, as defined in Section 4. The purpose of this
section is to permit an evaluation by the District, on a case-by-
case basis, of the circumstances which pertain to such situations
to determine whether a deferral of charges should be approved
according to the terms and conditions herein provided.
Any owner of a parcel of land who believes that the amount of
the water and/or sewer availability charges fixed against such
parcel should be deferred may file an application with the
District for deferral of the charge, as follows:
(1) Application The application shall include a
statement describing the circumstances and factual
elements which support the request for deferral.
(2)The General Manager shall consider the request within
sixty (60) days after the filing of a completed
application. If the application for deferral meets
the established criteria, the General Manager may
decide whether to approve the request and order the
charge deferred accordingly. If the request is
denied, the applicant shall be notified in writing
stating the reasons for the denial.
(B) Appeal to Board of Directors If the General Manager
denies a request, the owner may file an appeal with the Board of
Directors within sixty (60) days after such denial. No new
7
application for deferral need be considered by the General Manager
until expiration of twelve (12) months from the date of a denial,
unless differently directed by the Board of Directors.
(C) Deferred Charges on Restricted Parcels, Criteria The
levy of the charge may be deferred annually as to any parcel of
land which meets each of the following criteria:
(1)The owner of such parcel makes a timely application
requesting deferral of the charge.
(2)The parcel, which is the subject of the request, will
become subject to enforceable restrictions which
prohibits the connection to the District sewer system
or use of water on the parcel, except by means of
natural precipitation or runoff; provided, however,
if considered appropriate by the General Manager,
local water may be used for limited domestic stock
watering and irrigation uses.
(3)The owner executed a recordable agreement which
includes provisions that:
(a)set forth the enforceable restrictions
pertinent to the subject parcel;
(b)the agreement may be terminated upon written
request by the owner and payment of all
deferred water and/or sewer availability
charges, plus interest thereon, compounded
annually, and accruing at the legal rate from
the date such charges would have been
otherwise due and payable;
8
(c)no water and/or sewer service from the
District shall be provided to such parcel for
a period of ten (10) years after the total
amount due for the charges deferred, plus
annually compounded interest, is paid in full
to the District, unless a surcharge penalty as
described below is paid to the District prior
to connection of any water and/or sewer
service;
(d)if the surcharge is not paid, during the ten
(10) year period, while water and/or sewer
service is not available to the subject land,
the owner shall pay all annual water or
availability charges as fixed; and
(e)contains such other provisions considered by
the General Manager to be appropriate.
(D) Surcharge Upon termination of the deferral agreement,
an owner may elect to receive water and/or sewer service prior to
the expiration of the ten (10) year penalty period upon payment of
a surcharge. The surcharge shall be equal to the amount of the
annual water and/or sewer availability charges fixed for the
parcel(s) of land in the year of election to receive water and/or
sewer service multiplied by the number of years remaining of the
ten (10) year penalty period. This surcharge shall also apply if
a property owner develops a parcel that is subject to a deferral
agreement without termination of said agreement.
9
(E) Enforcement Procedures In order to insure that terms
and conditions of the recordable agreement are being met, the
General Manager shall:
(1)Maintain a record of all parcels approved for
deferral of the water assessments or availability
charges.
(2)Report to the Board of Directors any instances where
the terms of the agreement are being violated.
(3)Take such other actions or procedures considered
appropriate.
4. DEFINITION OF PARCEL The term "parcel" as used herein shall
mean a parcel of land as shown on the assessment rolls of the
County Assessor of San Diego County as of March, 2023.
5.NOTICE AND REQUEST TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND AUDITOR
As provided in Sections 71634 to 71637, on or before the third
Monday in August, 2023, the Secretary of this District shall
furnish, in writing to the Board of Supervisors of San Diego
County and to the County Auditor, a description of the land within
the District upon which availability charges are to be levied and
collected for Fiscal Year 2023-2024 together with the amount of
the assessments or charges. At the time and in the manner
required by law for the levying of taxes for county purposes, the
Board of Supervisors of San Diego County shall levy, in addition
to taxes it levies, water and/or sewer availability charges in the
amounts fixed by this Resolution for the respective parcels of
land described in Section 1 of this Resolution. All county
officers charged with the duty of collecting taxes shall collect
10
the charges with the regular property tax payments in the same
form and manner as county taxes are collected. Such availability
charges are a lien on the property with respect to which they are
fixed. Collection of the charges may be enforced by the same
means as provided for the enforcement of liens for state and
county taxes.
6. CERTIFICATION TO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The District
certifies that this Resolution complies with the provisions of
Article XIIID of the California Constitution in that the
availability charges are existing charges first set by the Board
of Directors of the District prior to November 6, 1996. At the
time the availability charges were initially established, the
District followed the applicable provisions of law then in effect,
and the District has continued to comply with such provisions,
including any requirements for notices or hearings, as from time
to time in effect. Therefore, pursuant to Section 71632 and
Section 71638 of the California Water Code, as currently in
effect, the District may continue the availability charges in
successive years at the same rate. The District further certifies
that the charge is not increased hereby and the methodology for
the rate is the same as in previous years. The charge is imposed
exclusively to finance the capital costs, maintenance, and
operating expenses of the water or sewer system of the District,
as applicable.
7. CERTIFIED COPIES The Secretary of this District shall
deliver certified copies of this Resolution to the Board of
11
Supervisors and to the Auditor of San Diego County with the list
of charges described in Section 4 above.
8. CORRECTIONS; OTHER ACTIONS The General Manager of the
District is hereby authorized to correct any clerical error made
in any assessment or charge pursuant to this Resolution and to
make an appropriate adjustment in any assessment or charge made in
error. Furthermore, the General Manager and the Secretary of this
District are hereby directed to take any further actions and
deliver such documents and certificates as necessary to carry out
the purpose of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of the
Otay Water District at a regular meeting duly held this 7th day of
June, 2023.
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
President
ATTEST:
Secretary
12
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 4431 was duly
adopted by the BOARD OF DIRECTORS of the OTAY WATER DISTRICT at a
regular meeting thereof held on the 7th day of June, 2023 by the
following vote:
Ayes:
Noes:
Abstain:
Absent:
District Secretary
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: June 7, 2023
SUBMITTED BY: Suzie Lawson
Human Resources Manager
PROJECT: Various DIV. NO.ALL
APPROVED BY: Adolfo Segura, Chief, Administrative Services
Jose Martinez, General Manager
SUBJECT: APPROVE THE SELECTION OF KEENAN & ASSOCIATES FOR BENEFITS
CONSULTING SERVICES AND AS THE DISTRICT’S BENEFITS BROKER OF
RECORD
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board authorize the General Manager to negotiate and enter
into a 5-year agreement, (three [3] years with two [2] additional years
at the District’s option), with Keenan & Associates (Keenan) for
benefits consulting and broker services and identifying Keenan as the
District’s Benefits Broker of Record for a total amount not-to-exceed
$136,500.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see “Attachment A”.
PURPOSE:
To authorize the General Manager to negotiate and enter into a 5-year
agreement, (three [3] years with two [2] additional years at the
District’s option), with Keenan for benefits consulting and broker
services and identifying Keenan as the District’s Benefits Broker of
Record for a total amount not-to-exceed $136,500.
ANALYSIS:
The District uses a benefits consultant to perform a full range of
services related to the design, bidding, implementation, maintenance,
renewal, communication, as well as the improvement of the District’s
AGENDA ITEM 4
group health, dental, vision, life, short-term and long-term disability
programs, and flexible benefits program.
In 2012, the District issued a Request-for-Proposal (RFP) for the
District’s Benefits Consulting and Brokerage Service. As a result of
that 2012 competitive process, staff recommended moving from Willis
Insurance Services of California (Willis) to Alliant Insurance Services
(Alliant).
In 2016, the District issued another RFP resulting in staff
recommendation and Board approval to continue with Alliant as the
District’s Benefits Consultant. Since that time, the parties mutually
agreed on contract extensions. The most recent extension agreement will
expire on June 30, 2023.
In an effort to continue with best practices and to validate that the
District is receiving the best available benefits consulting service at
a competitive price, the District solicited bids once again for Benefits
Consultant Service in March 2023.
The District issued a public RFP through its online solicitation portal,
Periscope, and received responses from the following three (3) firms:
Benefits Consulting and
Brokerage Firms
Total Proposed Cost
(3 years with 2 option years)
Alliant Insurance Services $169,000
Keenan & Associates $136,500
Newfront Insurance $316,260
A four-person panel rated and reviewed the written proposals. The
proposal review included an evaluation of the following topics:
•Completeness, addressed requested information, and readability of
proposal.
•Perceived ability of Consultant to negotiate a benefits program
that meets the needs of the District.
•Qualifications, background, and experience of consultant and
staff, and support team composition.
•Consultant’s ability to provide proactive support to the
District’s Human Resources function including dissemination of
current general and legal updates as well as time-sensitive
insurance carrier information.
•Consultant’s and other assigned staff’s availability and
accessibility including the location of the office and/or ability
to meet remotely to effectively service our account.
•Proposed fees.
The firms with written proposals receiving the two highest scores,
Alliant and Keenan, proceeded to the oral interview phase of the
process. The same four raters evaluated the interview responses based
on the following factors:
•Consultant’s ability to provide creative or unique solutions to
clients.
•Strength of the account manager in leading and managing the
interview process, demonstrating their ability to succeed in that
role.
•Communication skills of the team, including organization, time
management, and rapport developed with the Evaluation panel.
•Quality of responses to interview questions, including the ability
to answer questions articulately, completely, and insightfully.
Once the interview responses were evaluated, the initial proposed fees
were revealed and rated; the score summary report is attached
(Attachment B). Keenan received the highest interview score as well as
the highest overall score by all four raters. Keenan’s initial proposed
fee was $144,000. Nearing a final decision, staff reached out to the
top two firms for their best and final offers at which point Keenan
reduced their proposed fee by $7,500 to $136,500. Alliant’s best and
final offer remained the same as their original proposed fee.
Based on the overall evaluation score, which combined the ratings of
written proposals, oral interviews, and fees, staff recommends that the
District enter into a contract with Keenan. While all consultants
considered are capable of providing the benefit consulting services
requested, the following factors were considered when making a final
recommendation: Keenan received the highest overall score and offered
the most competitive fee which, for the five-year total, was $32,500
less than the next lowest fee. Keenan has 50 years of experience
consulting with cities, counties, and special districts, and provides
services to more than 1,100 public sector clients. The Core Account
Service Team designated to service the District has extensive experience
working for public agencies in HR and benefits. The interview responses
indicated a very proactive approach to services. All reference checks,
including a local water district, were extremely positive with no areas
of concern. Keenan also has their own legal department, and an
underwriting/actuarial department consisting of 15 subject matter
experts, and a host of other value-added services that the District can
further evaluate.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
The annual cost of the agreement is listed below and will not exceed
$136,500 over five (5) years.
Keenan’s best & final fee proposal follows:
Term Year Proposed Fees
Initial Term FY24 (7/1/23 – 6/30/24) $26,500
Initial Term FY25 (7/1/24 – 6/30/25) $26,500
Initial Term FY26 (7/1/25 – 6/30/26) $26,500
Optional Renewal Term FY27 (7/1/26 – 6/30/27) $28,500
Optional Renewal Term FY28 (7/1/27 – 6/30/28) $28,500
5-Year Maximum Total Fee $136,500
This change in benefits consultant is expected to save the District
approximately $6,500 annually with a total savings of approximately
$32,500 over the five (5) years of the agreement, while still
maintaining the excellent quality of benefit consulting services on an
on-going basis. The proposed FY24 operating budget is sufficient to
cover these costs.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
Maintain a long-range financing plan that sets forth the long-term
funding needs of the District.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – Committee Action Report
Attachment B – Benefits Broker Score Summary Report
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT: APPROVE THE SELECTION OF KEENAN & ASSOCIATES FOR BENEFIT
CONSULTING SERVICES AND AS THE DISTRICT’S BROKER OF RECORD
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance & Administration Committee reviewed this item at a meeting
held on May 17, 2023. The Committee supports presentation to the full
Board.
NOTE:
The “Committee Action” is written in anticipation of the Committee moving
the item forward for Board approval. This report will be sent to the
Board as a committee approved item or modified to reflect any discussion
or changes as directed by the committee prior to presentation to the
full Board.
1. Completeness,
readability…
2. Perceived ability
of Consultant to
negotiate…
3. Qualifications,
background, and
experience…
4. Consultant’s
ability to provide
proactive
support…
5. Consultant’s
availability and
accessibility...
Individual
Subtotal
Written
Score
1. Ability to provide
creative or unique
solutions
2. Strength of
account manager
3. Communication
skills
4. Quality of
response to
interview questions
Individual
Subtotal
Oral
Score
Fee
Score
Total
Score
Firm Maximum Points 10 25 25 20 10 90 90 15 15 10 10 50 50 10 150
Evaluator 1 9 20 22.5 17.5 8.5 77.5 12 12 7 8 39.00 130.38
Evaluator 2 9 22 23 19 9 82 11 11 7 7 36.00
Evaluator 3 9 24 23 19 10 85 11 14 7 7 39.00
Evaluator 4 10 24 24 19 10 87 12 13 8 7 40.00 $169,000
Evaluator 1 8.5 19 22.5 18 8 76 13 13 9 9 44.00
Evaluator 2 9 22 21 18 9 79 15 14 10 10 49.00
Evaluator 3 9 23 22 18 9 81 12 14 9 9 44.00
Evaluator 4 10 23 23 19 9 84 14 14 9 9 46.00 $144,000
Evaluator 1 7.5 21 19.5 17.5 7.5 73
Evaluator 2 9 22 23 19 8 81
Evaluator 3 9 22 21 18 8 78
Evaluator 4 8 20 20 18 8 74 $316,260
Full descriptions of evaluation criteria
1 77.50
Summary of Proposal Scores
RFP #FY24-2200-016 - Benefit Brokerage
& Consulting Services
Alliant Insurance
Services
(HQ Irvine, CA)
82.88 9
Keenan & Associates
(HQ Torrance, CA)
80.00
Newfront Insurance
(HQ San Mateo, CA)
10 135.75
38.50
45.75
NOT INTERVIEWED
Written Score Oral Score
76.50
1. Completeness, addressed requested information, readability of proposal.
2. Perceived ability of Consultant to negotiate a benefits program that meets the needs of the District.
3. Qualifications, background, and experience of Consultant, staff and team composition.
4. Consultant’s ability to provide proactive support to the District’s Human Resources function including dissemination of
current general and legal updates as well as time-sensitive insurance carrier information.
5. Consultant’s and other assigned staff’s availability and accessibility including the location of the office and/or ability to
meet remotely that will be servicing the District’s account.
ATTACHMENT B
STAFF REPORT
TYPE MEETING: Regular Board MEETING DATE: June 7, 2023
PROJECT: Various DIV. NO.ALL
SUBMITTED BY: Emilyn Zuniga
Safety & Security Specialist
APPROVED BY: Adolfo Segura, Chief, Administrative Services
Jose Martinez, General Manager
SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION #4432 TO APPROVE THE DISTRICT’S ANNEX TO THE
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO’S MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION
PLAN
GENERAL MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION:
That the Board adopt Resolution #4432 to approve the 2023 Otay Water
District’s Annex, which will be part of the County of San Diego’s Multi-
Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan as a planning partner in
coordination with other local jurisdictions, including municipalities
and special districts.
COMMITTEE ACTION:
Please see “Attachment A.”
PURPOSE:
To request that the Board adopt Resolution #4432 to approve the 2023
Otay Water District’s (District) Annex, which will be part of the County
of San Diego’s Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP).
This is consistent with the District’s goal of engaging in interagency
coordination efforts to address public safety, comprehensive planning,
and customer service.
AGENDA ITEM 5
2
ANALYSIS:
In November 2021, the District participated in the County of San Diego
Office of Emergency Services (County OES) five-year Multi-
Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJMHP) update. The process
included input from public agencies, special districts, California
Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES), and the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA).
The process validated the District’s mitigation practice of our day-
to-day decision-making regarding land use planning, watershed
management, reservoir retrofits, site design, and other functions.
To reiterate, the benefits of mitigation planning include the following:
• Protecting public safety and preventing loss of life and injury.
• Reducing damage to existing and future development.
• Avoiding damage to our current environmental assets.
• Minimizing downtime, accelerating recovery, and reducing financial
costs.
• Helping accomplish other District objectives, such as capital
improvements, infrastructure protection, open space preservation,
and economic resiliency.
• Ensuring FEMA and Cal OES grants eligibility.
The local planning process and annex development consisted of an
internal planning committee, which included representatives from
Engineering, Finance, Operations, Communications, and Administrative
Services. The internal development also resulted in approximately
$75,000 of consultant savings. The development process included the
following activities:
1. Identification of potential partners and resources and
participation in the process within the planning area.
2. Identification of local natural and human-caused hazards such as
flooding, drought, wildfire, landslides, severe weather,
terrorism, cyber threats, pandemic, and the impact of climate
change.
3. Development of actions to mitigate the risk and a plan to implement
the measures over the next five years.
3
4. Review and approval of the Annex by Cal OES and FEMA.
Lastly, other local water agency participation includes San Diego County
Water Authority, Sweetwater Authority, Vista Irrigation District, and
Rainbow Municipal Water District.
FISCAL IMPACT: Joe Beachem, Chief Financial Officer
This is consistent with the District’s goal of providing services to
its stakeholders and customers. There is no fiscal impact on the approval
of the MJHMP. At this time, implementation will only require District
staff resources. Future funding requests, if needed, will come before
the Board for consideration as part of the budget process or on a case-
by-case basis.
STRATEGIC GOAL:
The Annex supports the District’s Strategic Planning Perspective,
Financial, as it serves as a critical tool to access FEMA pre- and post-
disaster mitigation funding. Accessing this funding can allow the
District to leverage dollars spent on reducing risk and “building back
better” after disasters. The Annex also supports the Strategic Planning
Perspective, Internal Business Process, by monitoring and modifying the
Water Shortage Contingency Plan, identifying, evaluating, and
implementing new efficiencies for recycled water, and advancing the
District’s Asset Management Program and Cyber and Physical Security.
LEGAL IMPACT:
None.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – Committee Action Report
Attachment B – Resolution #4432
Attachment C – Otay Water District’s Hazard Mitigation Plan Annex
Attachment D – Letter from FEMA regarding San Diego County’s Hazard
Mitigation Plan Amendment Notice
Attachment E – San Diego County’s Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard
Mitigation Plan
ATTACHMENT A
SUBJECT/PROJECT:
ADOPT RESOLUTION #4432 TO APPROVE THE DISTRICT’S ANNEX TO
THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO’S MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD
MITIGATION PLAN
COMMITTEE ACTION:
The Finance & Administration Committee met on May 17, 2023, to review
this item. The Committee supports presentation to the full Board for
their consideration.
NOTE:
The “Committee Action” is written in anticipation of the Committee moving
the item forward for Board approval. This report will be sent to the
Board as a committee approved item or modified to reflect any discussion
or changes as directed by the committee prior to presentation to the
full Board.
1
RESOLUTION NO. 4432
RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT TO ADOPT THE
DISTRICT’S ANNEX TO THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO’S
MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of Otay Water District have
established policies, procedures, ordinances, and resolutions
for the efficient operation of the District; and WHEREAS, it is
the policy of the District to establish procedures to review
policies, procedures, ordinances, and resolutions periodically
to ensure they are current and relevant; and
WHEREAS, the Otay Water District will be part of the County
of San Diego’s Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan as a
planning partner in coordination with other local
jurisdictions, including municipalities and special districts.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors
of the Otay Water District adopt the District’s Annex to the
County of San Diego’s Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation
Plan in the form presented to the Board at this meeting.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Directors of
the Otay Water District at a regular meeting held this 7th of
June 2023.
__________________________
Board President
ATTEST:
___________________________
District Secretary
ATTACHMENT B
Multi-Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan:
Otay Water District Annex
San Diego County, California
June 2023
ATTACHMENT C
i
This page is intentionally left blank.
SECTION 1 | Planning Area and Resources
2
SECTION 1: Planning Area and Resources
1.1. Planning Area: Otay Water District
The Otay Water District (District) is a potable water, recycled water, and sewer services provider.
The State Legislature authorized the establishment of the Otay Water District in 1956 as a
California Special District under the provisions of the Municipal Water District Law of 1911,
Division 20 (commencing with Section 71000) of the Water Code of the State of California. As a
California Special District under the provisions of the Municipal Water District Law of 1911,
Division 20 (commencing with Section 71000) of the Water Code of the State of California. Otay
Water District is a "revenue neutral" public agency where each end-user pays only their fair share
of the District's costs of acquiring, treating, transporting, or the operation and maintenance of the
public water, recycled water, or sewer facilities.
The District provides safe, reliable water service to a population of more than 226,000 within
approximately 125 square miles of southeastern San Diego County, including the communities of
eastern Chula Vista Bonita, Jamul, Spring Valley, Rancho San Diego, unincorporated areas of El
Cajon and La Mesa, and eastern Otay Mesa along the international border with Mexico. The
District's service area boundaries are nearly bounded on the northeast by the Padre Dam Municipal
Water District, on the northwest by the Helix Water District, the west by the Sweetwater
Authority/South Bay Irrigation District, and southwest by the City of San Diego. The southern
boundary of the District is the international border with Mexico.
The District provides potable water service to residential, commercial, industrial, and agricultural
customers, and for environmental and fire protection uses. The potable water delivered by the
District is purchased from the San Diego County Water Authority or the Helix Water District.
Imported water is a mix of waters from the Colorado River and Northern California. Most of the
water is purchased from the region's primary importer, the Metropolitan Water District of Southern
California.
The District owns and operates a wastewater collection system providing public sewer service to
homes and businesses within the Jamacha drainage basin. The District also owns and operates the
Ralph W. Chapman Water Reclamation Facility (RWCWRF), which produces up to 1.1 million
gallons per day (MGD) of recycled water. The District has an additional recycled water source that
can be purchased from the City of San Diego's South Bay Water Reclamation Plant (SBWRP). The
District delivers recycled water to customers through a dedicated distribution system used to irrigate
golf courses, playing fields, public parks, roadside landscapes, and open spaces in eastern Chula
Vista.
SECTION 1 | Planning Area and Resources
3
1.2. Community Rating System Requirements
The Community Rating System (CRS) is a FEMA program that rewards communities beyond the
minimum standards for floodplain management under the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP). Communities can potentially improve their Community Rating System and lower NFIP
premiums by developing a CRS Plan.
For more information on the National Flood Insurance Program, see
http://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program.
Community Rating System (CRS) Local Mitigation Planning Handbook Tasks
Planning Steps (44 CFR Part 201)
Step 1. Organize
Task 1: Determine the Planning Area and Resources
Task 2: Build the Planning Team
44 CFR 201.6(c)(1)
Step 2. Involve the public Task 3: Create an Outreach Strategy
44 CFR 201.6(b)(1)
Step 3. Coordinate Task 4: Review Community Capabilities
44 CFR 201.6(b)(2) & (3)
Step 4. Assess the hazard Task 5: Conduct a Risk Assessment
44 CFR 201.6(c)(2)(i)
44 CFR 201.6(c)(2)(ii) & (iii)
Step 5. Assess the problem
Step 6. Set goals
Task 6: Develop a Mitigation Strategy
44 CFR 201.6(c)(3)(i)
44 CFR 201.6(c)(3)(ii)
44 CFR 201.6(c)(3)(iii)
Step 7. Review possible activities
Step 8. Draft an action plan
Step 9. Adopt the Plan Task 8: Review and Adopt the Plan
44 CFR 201.6(c)(5)
Step 10. Implement, evaluate, revise
Task 7: Keep the Plan Current
Task 9: Create a Safe and Resilient Community
44 CFR 201.6(c)(4)
TABLE 1: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDB OOK WORKSHEET 1.1 DESCRIBES THE CRS REQUIREMENTS
MET BY THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLA N.
Any jurisdiction or special District may participate in the hazard mitigation planning process.
However, to request FEMA approval, each of the local jurisdictions must meet all requirements of
44 CFR §201.6. In addition to the requirement for participation in the process, the Federal
regulation specifies the following criteria for multi-jurisdictional plans:
• The risk assessment must assess each jurisdiction's risk, which they may vary from the risks
facing the entire planning area. (44 CFR §201.6(c)(2)(iii))
• There must be identifiable action items specific to the jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval
or credit of the Plan. (44 CFR §201.6(c)(3)(iv))
SECTION 1 | Planning Area and Resources
4
• Each jurisdiction requesting approval of the Plan must document that it has been formally
adopted. (44 CFR §201.6(c)(5))
The hazard mitigation plan must clearly list the jurisdictions that participated in the Plan and
seek plan approval. The San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan
(MJHMP) and annexes (Annex) meet all requirements.
SECTION 2 | Planning Team
5
SECTION 2: Planning Team
2.1 Planning Participants
In October 2021, the District expressed interest with the San Diego County Water Authority in
developing its new plan through the County of San Diego’s Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation
Plan Five-Year Update process. The District’s hazard mitigation planning team was formed in
November 2021. Representatives of the OWD attended regular planning meetings as indicated in the
County’s base plan.
In keeping with the recommended approaches by FEMA and the County of San Diego, the
development of this Plan was overseen by the District's Hazard Mitigation Planning Team, made up
of representatives from different departments in the District and other stakeholder agencies. The
following members comprised the Planning Team:
•Adolfo Segura, OWD, Administrative Services
•Andrew Jackson, OWD, Water Operations
•Charles Mederos, OWD, Water Operations
•Dominique Fonseca, County of San Diego, Office of Emergency Services
•Eid, Fakhouri, OWD, Finance
•Eileen Salmeron, OWD, Communications
•Jake Vaclavek, OWD, Water Operations
•Joe Beachem, OWD, Finance
•Kent Payne, OWD, Administrative Services
•Kevin Koeppen, OWD, Finance
•Lisa Coburn-Boyd, OWD, Engineering
•Michael Kerr, OWD, Administrative Services
•Nicholas, Zubel, County of San Diego, Office of Emergency Services
•Rod Posada, OWD, Engineering
•Tenille Otero, OWD, Communications
2.2 Planning Process
The effort to develop the District's Annex and mitigation strategies was also accomplished through
Microsoft Teams meetings, emails, and phone discussions. The District Planning Team members
identified the Plan's objectives, discussed, and prioritized the relevant hazards to the District, conducted
a review and incorporation of existing information, and prepared and reviewed mitigation strategies to
address vulnerabilities.
Five formal meetings were held on the following dates:
SECTION 2 | Planning Team
6
•MJHMP Annex Meeting #1, November 10, 2021
•MJHMP Annex Meeting #2, December 8, 2021
•MJHMP Annex Meeting #3, January 27, 2021
•MJHMP Annex Meeting #4, February 8, 2022
•MJHMP Annex Meeting #5, April 19, 2022
The specific discussion topics are given in Table 1.5.
The information to create the District's Annex was collected by feedback from the staff who
participated in the review and mitigation priority setting process. Subject matter experts (SMEs)
reviewed the information and provided specific input on sections pertaining to their expertise.
Table 1.5
Meeting Meeting Date Discussion Topics
Annex Meeting 1 November 10, 2021
Project goals and objectives, requirements for
the Plan, structure, and function of the Planning Team,
review, update, and incorporate existing data, public
outreach strategies, critical facilities,
and relevant hazards.
Annex Meeting 2 December 8, 2021
Details of each hazard (location and extent, past
occurrences, risk of future events, and
climate change considerations), hazard mapping,
hazard prioritization.
Annex Meeting 3 January 27, 2022
The meeting focused on discussing hazard mitigation
actions and determining potential relative cost,
responsible department, and action priority.
Annex Meeting 4 February 8, 2022 Review final draft of mitigation action items.
Annex Meeting 5 April 19, 2022 Review the final draft of the Annex.
Incorporate changes and finalize.
The Plan will be monitored over the next five years to ensure the project maintains alignment
and coordination with other District internal objectives, including the Capital Improvement Plan,
the Water Facilities Master Plan, the Integrated Resources Plan, OWD Strategic Plan, and other
District Plan Documents.
See the San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan's Section Two for details
about the county-wide Planning Process.
7
SECTION 3 | Outreach Strategy
SECTION 3: Outreach Strategy
See the San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan's Section Three for details
about the county-wide outreach strategy.
3.1 Existing Plans or Studies Reviewed
During the planning process, the Planning Team reviewed documents, emergency services
documents, County and local plans, local codes and ordinances, and other similar documents.
These included:
• Various Local Codes and Ordinances
• FEMA Local Mitigation Handbook March 2013
• FEMA Mitigation Ideas January 2013
• Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
• Otay Water District Urban Water Management Plan
• Otay Water District Water Facilities Master Plan 2015
• Otay Water District Water Shortage Contingency Plan
• Otay Water District's Emergency Response Plan
• Otay Water District AWIA Risk and Resiliency Assessment 2018
8
SECTION 4 | Community Capabilities
SECTION 4: Community Capabilities
Local mitigation capabilities are existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources that reduce
hazard impacts or could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities and must be included in a
hazard mitigation plan by the planning team.
The Planning Team also may identify additional types of capabilities relevant to mitigation
planning.
4.1 Capability Assessment
The primary types of capabilities for reducing long-term vulnerability through mitigation planning
are:
• Planning and regulatory
• Administrative and technical
• Financial
• Education and outreach
4.2 Planning and Regulatory
Planning and regulatory capabilities are the plans, policies, codes, and ordinances that prevent and
reduce the impacts of hazards. The District identified the programs within its jurisdiction which can
be used to address risks, identify projects and used to implement mitigation actions:
Does the plan address hazards?
Yes/No Does the Plan identify projects to include
Plans in the mitigation strategy?
Year
Can the Plan be used to
implement mitigation actions?
Comprehensive/Master Plan
Yes
Yes. The Potable Plan identifies projects and
can be used to implement mitigation action items.
Capital Improvements Plan
Yes
It identifies projects for mitigation and can be
used to implement mitigation actions.
Economic Development Plan
N/A
Local Emergency
Operations Plan
Yes
Based on the AWIA Risk and Resiliency
Assessment, the District updated its Emergency
Response Plan (ERP), which can be
used to implement mitigation actions.
9
SECTION 4 | Community Capabilities
Plans
Yes/No
Year
Does the plan address hazards?
Does the Plan identify projects to include
in the mitigation strategy?
Can the Plan be used to
implement mitigation actions?
Continuity of Operations Plan
No
Transportation Plan
N/A
Stormwater Management Plan
Yes
The District follows the County's
Stormwater Management Plan.
Community Wildfire Protection
Plan
Yes
The District's ERP – specific hazard response plan
for wildland fire can be used to implement
mitigation action items.
M. Real estate disclosure
requirements
N/A
Other unique plans (e.g.,
brownfields redevelopment,
disaster recovery, coastal zone
management, climate change
adaptation)
N/A
TABLE 2: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.1 DATA.
4.3 Administrative and Technical
Administrative and technical capabilities include staff and their skills and tools for mitigation
planning and implementing specific mitigation actions. As a Special District, public resources in
the City or County may provide technical assistance and also indicated below:
Describe capability. Administration Yes/No Is coordination effective?
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with knowledge
of land development and land
management practices
Yes
The District has its own Engineering Department, which
includes Water Resources, Planning, Design,
Environmental, Public Services, Survey,
Inspection and Recycled Water Program.
Engineer(s) or professional(s) trained
in construction practices related
to buildings and/or infrastructure
Yes
The District has its own Engineering Department,
including Water Resources, Planning, Design,
Environmental, Public Services, and Inspection.
Planners or Engineer(s) with an understanding
of natural and/or manmade hazards
Yes
The District has its own Engineering Department,
including Water Resources, Planning, Design,
Environmental, Public Services, and Inspection.
10
SECTION 4 | Community Capabilities
Mitigation Planning Committee
Yes
Yes, through our Engineering Department with other
Departments.
Maintenance programs to reduce risk (e.g.,
tree trimming, clearing drainage systems)
Yes
Our Facility Maintenance Operations coordinates
mitigation actions with other Departments.
Mutual aid agreements
Yes.
This is coordinated through the
General Manager's Office, District Departments,
and three partnering water agencies.
Is staffing adequate to enforce regulations?
Staff Yes/No Is staff trained on hazards and mitigation? FT/PT1
Is coordination between agencies and staff
effective?
Chief Building Official
N/A
Floodplain Administrator
N/A
Emergency Manager
N/A
The Safety & Security Specialist coordinates internal
staff collaboration with the SDCWA-Water Emergency
Water Agency Collaborative Group, San Diego
Chapter InfraGard, County of San Diego
Office of Emergency Services.
Surveyors
Yes
Yes, through our Engineering Survey Group.
Staff with education or expertise to assess the
community's vulnerability to hazards
Yes
Representatives from each operation participated in the
AWIA Risk and Resilience Assessment.
Community Planner
N/A
Scientists familiar with the hazards
of the community
N/A
However, the District coordinates its staff with Cal Fire,
the San Miguel Fire Department, and the
City of Chula Vista Emergency Services.
Civil Engineer
Yes
Yes, internal staff regularly meet to discuss regulations,
hazards, and mitigation actions during pre-design,
planning, and construction meetings.
Personnel skilled in GIS and/or HAZUS
Yes
This is conducted through our GIS Group,
including our GIS Manager.
Grant writers
No
However, the District retains contracted grant writers to
apply for eligible grant funds.
Other
TABLE 3:FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.1 DATA
CONTINUED.
11
SECTION 4 | Community Capabilities
4.4 Financial
The Planning Team has identified where the District has access to or is eligible to use the following
funding resources for hazard mitigation:
Has the funding resource been used in past
Access/ and for what type of activities?
Funding Resource Eligibility
(Yes/No) Could the resource be used to fund
future mitigation actions?
Community Development Block Grants
(CDBG)
No
Capital improvements project funding
Yes
It was used for infrastructure.
It could be used to fund future mitigation actions.
Authority to levy taxes
for specific purposes
Yes
It was used for infrastructure projects.
It could be used to fund future mitigation actions.
Fees for water, sewer, gas,
or electric service
Yes
It was used for infrastructure projects.
It could be used to fund future mitigation actions.
Impact fees for homebuyers or
developers for new developments/homes
Yes
It was used for infrastructure projects.
It could be used to fund future mitigation actions.
Incur debt through general
obligation bonds
Yes
It was used for infrastructure projects.
It could be used to fund future mitigation actions.
Incur debt through special tax
and revenue bonds
Yes
It was used for infrastructure projects.
It could be used to fund future mitigation actions.
Incur debt through private activity bonds
No
Community Development Block Grants
(CDBG)
No
Capital improvements project funding
Yes
It was used for infrastructure projects.
It could be used to fund future mitigation actions.
Authority to levy taxes
for specific purposes
Yes
It was used for infrastructure projects.
It could be used to fund future mitigation actions.
How can these capabilities be expanded and improved to reduce risk?
Mitigation grant funding can help the District expand and improve to reduce risks in our service areas.
TABLE 4: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.1 DATA
CONTINUED.
12
SECTION 4 | Community Capabilities
4.5 Education and Outreach
The Planning Team has identified education and outreach programs and methods already in place
that could be used to implement mitigation activities, communicate hazard-related information and
capabilities that can be expanded and improved to reduce risk:
Describe the program/organization and how it relates
to disaster resilience and mitigation.
Program/Organization Yes/No
Could the program/organization help implement
future mitigation activities?
Local citizen groups or non-profit
organizations focused on environmental
protection, emergency preparedness, access,
functional needs populations, etc.
Yes
The District's Communications staff works with citizen
groups and non-profits; meets with the Chamber of
Commerce and Community Planning Groups
Yes.
Ongoing public education or information
program (e.g., responsible water use, fire
safety, household preparedness,
environmental education)
Yes
Water Conservation Programs, Fire Scaping
(Defensible space) to prevent wildfire hazards.
Yes.
Natural disaster or safety-related school
programs
Yes
The District collaborates with the City of Chula Vista
Emergency Services Group, the County of San Diego,
and other organizations/municipalities/special districts to
supplement disaster preparedness information. The state
requires the District to conduct water testing, for
example, after an earthquake, during droughts, or to
evaluate lead levels.
StormReady certification N/A
Firewise Communities certification N/A
Public-private partnership initiatives
addressing disaster-related issues
Yes
Developers (Engineering, Public Services) irrigation
meters must follow a process.
Cell towers – lease space at reservoirs to AT&T,
T-Mobile: creating a partnership in case of an
emergency explore using these companies
for assistance or communication/outreach.
HOA meetings, SDG&E (PSPS)
Other
The District has crisis communication with response
agencies such as Cal Fire.
RAVE has been implemented to facilitate
mass employee and public communication.
Internal text capability for customers is facilitated
by our Information Technology (IT) staff.
Email and out dial (similar to reverse 911). It was also
used during the COVID-19 pandemic event to provide
water quality messaging. This was facilitated by our
Customer Service, IT, and Communications staff.
13
SECTION 4 | Community Capabilities
How can these capabilities be expanded and improved to reduce risk?
Explore renewable energy equipment such as solar power. The District will continue to work with our
energy provider and receive timely info regarding the Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS)
to avoid significant disruption with customers' water service.
TABLE 5: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.1 DATA
CONTINUED.
4.6 Safe Growth Audit
Various growth guidance instruments and improvement plans have been evaluated to reduce
vulnerability to future development. As a Special District, public resources in the City or County
may provide guidance and have been referenced below:
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Land Use Yes No
1.Does the future land-use map clearly identify natural hazard areas?N/A
The District defers to the County of San Diego and City of Chula Vista's comprehensive plans as it falls in their
jurisdictions.
2.Do the land-use policies discourage development or redevelopment within natural
hazard areas?N/A
3.Does the Plan provide adequate space for expected future growth in areas located
outside natural hazard areas?N/A
Transportation Yes No
1.Does the transportation plan limit access to hazard areas?N/A
2.Is transportation policy used to guide growth to safe locations?N/A
3.Are movement systems designed to function under disaster conditions (e.g.,
evacuation)?N/A
TABLE 6: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.2 DATA.
14
SECTION 4 | Community Capabilities
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (continued)
Environmental Management Yes No
1.Are environmental systems that protect development from hazards identified and
mapped?X
The District has an Engineering/Environmental Group which manages the plans. The District also defers to the
County of San Diego and City of Chula Vista's environmental management plans when they fall in their
jurisdictions.
2.Do environmental policies maintain and restore protective ecosystems?X
3.Do environmental policies provide incentives to development located outside
protective ecosystems?X
Public Safety Yes No
1.Are the goals and policies of the comprehensive Plan related to those of the FEMA
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan?N/A
The District does not have a public safety operation.
2.Is safety explicitly included in the Plan's growth and development policies?N/A
3.Does the monitoring and implementation section of the Plan cover safe growth
objectives?N/A
TABLE 7: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.2 DATA
CONTINUED.
15
SECTION 4 | Community Capabilities
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (continued)
Zoning Ordinance Yes No
1.Does the zoning ordinance conform to the comprehensive Plan to discourage
development or redevelopment within natural hazard areas?N/A
The District defers to the County of San Diego and the City of Chula Vista's zoning ordinance plans.
2.Does the ordinance contain natural hazard overlay zones that set conditions for
land use within such zones?N/A
3.Do rezoning procedures recognize natural hazard areas as limits on zoning
changes that allow greater intensity or density of use?N/A
4.Does the ordinance prohibit development within, or filling of, wetlands, floodways,
and floodplains?N/A
Subdivision Regulations Yes No
1.Do the subdivision regulations restrict the subdivision of land within or adjacent
to natural hazard areas?N/A
The District defers to the County of San Diego and the City of Chula Vista subdivision regulations as it falls
under their jurisdictions.
2.Do the regulations provide for conservation subdivisions or cluster subdivisions in
order to conserve environmental resources?N/A
3.Do the regulations allow density transfers where hazard areas exist?N/A
TABLE 8: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.2 DATA
CONTINUED.
16
SECTION 4 | Community Capabilities
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN (continued)
Capital Improvement Program and Infrastructure Policies Yes No
1.Does the capital improvement program limit expenditures on projects that would
encourage development in areas vulnerable to natural hazards?X
2.Do infrastructure policies limit extension of existing facilities and services that would
encourage development in areas vulnerable to natural hazards?X
3.Does the capital improvement program provide funding for hazard mitigation
projects identified in the FEMA Mitigation Plan?X
Other Yes No
1.Do small area or corridor plans recognize the need to avoid or mitigation natural
hazards?N/A
2.Does the building code contain provisions to strengthen or elevate construction to
withstand hazard forces?N/A
3.Do economic development or redevelopment strategies include provisions for
mitigation natural hazards?N/A
4.Is there an adopted evacuation and shelter plan to deal with emergencies from
natural hazards?N/A
The District coordinates with the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, and the SDCWA
on its evaluation and shelter plans.
TABLE 9: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 4.2 DATA
CONTINUED.
Questions were adapted from Godschalk, David R. Practice Safe Growth Audits, Zoning Practice, Issue Number 10, October 2009, American
Planning Association.
17
SECTION 4 | Community Capabilities
4.7 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
The District is not a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) as it was not
identified to be a requirement under the Association of California Water Agencies (ACWA) Joint
Power Insurance Authority (JPIA). ACWA JPIA provides the District's comprehensive and
economical property coverage.
18
SECTION 5 | Risk Assessment
SECTION 5: Risk Assessment
The Planning Team conducted a risk assessment to determine the potential impacts of hazards to
the community's people, economy, and built and natural environments. The risk assessment
provided the foundation for the rest of the mitigation planning process, which is focused on
identifying and prioritizing actions to reduce the risk of hazards.
In addition to informing the mitigation strategy, the risk assessment also can be used to establish
emergency preparedness and response priorities, for land use and comprehensive planning, and for
decision making by elected officials, city and county departments, businesses, and organizations
in the community.
5.1 Hazards Summary
The Planning Team evaluated the list of natural hazards that could impact the planning area and
then identified the dangers that present a great concern. The process incorporated a review of state
and local hazard planning documents and local, state, and federal information on the frequency,
magnitude, and costs associated with threats that have impacted or could impact the planning area.
Anecdotal information regarding natural hazards and the perceived vulnerability of the planning
area's assets to them was also used. Based on the review, the Team evaluated the following dangers
of concern:
Maximum Probable
Hazard Location (Geographic Extent Probability of Overall Significance Area Affected) (Magnitude/Strength) Future Events Ranking
Avalanche N/A N/A N/A N/A
Dam Failure
Limited
Weak
Unlikely
Low
Drought Extensive Extensive Likely High
Earthquake
Extensive
Extensive
Likely
High
Erosion
Negligible
Weak
Likely
Low
Expansive Soils
Negligible
Weak
Unlikely
Low
Extreme Cold N/A N/A N/A N/A
Extreme Heat
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Flood
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Hail N/A N/A N/A N/A
Hurricane N/A N/A N/A N/A
19
SECTION 5 | Risk Assessment
Hazard Location (Geographic
Area Affected)
Maximum Probable
Extent
(Magnitude/Strength)
Probability of
Future Events
Overall Significance
Ranking
Landslide N/A N/A N/A N/A
Lightning Limited Weak Likely Low
Sea Level Rise N/A N/A N/A N/A
Severe Wind Extensive Weak Likely Medium
Severe Winter
Weather Extensive Weak Likely Medium
Storm Surge N/A N/A N/A N/A
Subsidence N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tornado N/A N/A N/A N/A
Tsunami N/A N/A N/A N/A
Wildfire Significant Significant Significant Significant
TABLE 10: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 5.1 DATA.
Definitions for Classifications
Location (Geographic Area Affected)
•Negligible: Less than 10 percent of planning area or isolated single-point occurrences
•Limited: 10 to 25 percent of the planning area or little single-point occurrences
•Significant: 25 to 75 percent of planning area or frequent single-point occurrences
•Extensive: 75 to 100 percent of planning area or consistent single-point occurrences
Maximum Probable Extent (Magnitude/Strength based on historic events or future
probability)
•Weak: Limited classification on scientific scale, slow speed of onset or short duration of
event, resulting in little to no damage
•Moderate: Moderate classification on scientific scale, moderate speed of onset or
moderate duration of event, resulting in some damage and loss of services for days
•Severe: Severe classification on scientific scale, fast speed of onset or long duration of
event, resulting in devastating damage and loss of services for weeks or months
•Extreme: Extreme classification on scientific scale, immediate onset or extended duration
of event, resulting in catastrophic damage and uninhabitable conditions
20
SECTION 5 | Risk Assessment
Hazard Scale / Index Weak Moderate Severe Extreme
Drought Palmer Drought Severity Index3 -1.99 to
+1.99
-2.00 to
-2.99
-3.00 to
-3.99
-4.00 and
below
Earthquake Modified Mercalli Scale4 I to IV V to VII VII IX to XII
Richter Magnitude5 2, 3 4, 5 6 7, 8
Hurricane Wind Saffir-Simpson Hurricane
Wind Scale6 1 2 3 4, 5
Tornado Fujita Tornado Damage Scale7 F0 F1, F2 F3 F4, F5
Probability of Future Events
•Unlikely: Less than 1 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence
interval of greater than every 100 years.
•Occasional: 1 to 10 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence
interval of 11 to 100 years.
•Likely: 10 to 90 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval
of 1 to 10 years
•Highly Likely: 90 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence
interval of less than 1 year.
Overall Significance
•Low: Two or more criteria fall in lower classifications, or the event has a minimal impact
on the planning area. This rating is sometimes used for hazards with a minimal or unknown
record of occurrences or for hazards with minimal mitigation potential.
•Medium: The criteria fall mostly in the middle ranges of classifications and the event's
impacts on the planning area are noticeable but not devastating. This rating is sometimes
used for hazards with a high extent rating but very low probability rating.
•High: The criteria consistently fall in the high classifications and the event is likely/highly
likely to occur with severe strength over a significant to extensive portion of the planning
area.
o Cumulative meteorological drought and wet conditions: http://ncdc.noaa.gov/
o Earthquake intensity and effect on population and structures: http://earthquake.usgs.gov
o Earthquake magnitude as a logarithmic scale, measured by a seismograph: http://earthquake.usgs.gov
o Hurricane rating based on sustained wind speed: http://nhc.noaa.gov
o Tornado rating based on wind speed and associated damage: http://spc.noaa.gov
21
SECTION 6 | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
SECTION 6: Mitigation Strategy
The mitigation strategy serves as the long-term blueprint for reducing potential losses identified in
the risk assessment. The mitigation strategy describes how the District will accomplish the overall
purpose, or mission, of the planning process.
The mitigation strategy is made up of three main required components: mitigation goals, mitigation
actions, and an action plan for implementation. These provide the framework to identify, prioritize,
and implement actions to reduce risk to hazards.
Mitigation goals are general guidelines that explain what the community wants to achieve with
the Plan They are usually broad policy-type statements that are long-term, and they represent
visions for reducing or avoiding losses from the identified hazards
Mitigation actions are specific projects and activities that help achieve the goals.
The action plan describes how the mitigation actions will be implemented, including how those
actions will be prioritized, administered, and incorporated into the community's existing planning
mechanisms. In a multi-jurisdictional plan, each jurisdiction must have an action plan specific to
that jurisdiction and its vulnerabilities.
The District choose to develop objectives to help define or organize mitigation actions. Objectives
are broader than specific actions, but are measurable, unlike goals. Objectives connect goals with
the actual mitigation actions.
The following goals were set for this hazard mitigation plan:
1. Protect life and property.
2. Maintain continuity of essential water and sewer services.
3. Increase public awareness of the risks of loss of water/sewer service.
4. Facilitate partnerships with recognized stakeholders within the Otay Water District
and implement a coordination plan between the stakeholders
5. Protect local water supply sources.
6. Protect against environmental consequences caused by water and sewer system failure
initiated by natural hazards.
SECTION 6 | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
22
6.1 Mitigation Action Evaluation
The District used the FEMA Worksheet 6.1 to help evaluate and prioritize each mitigation action
being considered by the planning team. For each action, the Team evaluated the potential benefits
and/or likelihood of successful implementation for the criteria defined below.
Rank each of the criteria with a -1, 0 or 1 using the following scale:
•1 = Highly effective or feasible
•0 = Neutral
•-1 = Ineffective or not feasible
Example Evaluation Criteria:
•Life Safety – How effective will the action be at protecting lives and preventing injuries?
•Property Protection – How significant will the action be at eliminating or reducing
damage to structures and infrastructure?
•Technical – Is the mitigation action technically feasible? Is it a long-term solution?
Eliminate actions that, from a technical standpoint, will not meet the goals.
•Political – Is there overall public support for the mitigation action? Is there the political
will to support it?
•Legal – Does the community have the authority to implement the action?
•Environmental – What are the potential environmental impacts of the action? Will it
comply with environmental regulations?
•Social – Will the proposed action adversely affect one segment of the population? Will the
action disrupt established neighborhoods, break up voting districts, or cause the relocation
of lower income people?
•Administrative – Does the community have the personnel and administrative capabilities
to implement the action and maintain it or will outside help be necessary?
•Local Champion – Is there a strong advocate for the action or project among local
departments and agencies that will support the action's implementation?
•Other Community Objectives – Does the action advance other community objectives,
such as capital improvements, economic development, environmental quality, or open space
preservation? Does it support the policies of the comprehensive Plan?
SECTION 6 | Develop a Mitigation Strategy
23
Other
Mitigation Action Life Property Technical Political Legal Environ Social Admini Local Community Total Safety Protection mental strative Champion Objectives Score
Local Plans and Regulations
OWD Climate Action Plan 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9
Enhance recycled water use in
the District. 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 8
Structure and Infrastructure Projects
Seismic retrofits for District
infrastructure 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 9
Wildfire Mitigation - Ensuring
adequate defensible space
around existing infrastructure 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 8
Natural Systems Protection
Dam Failure - Flash Flood
Control and Prevention 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10
Education and Awareness Programs
Enhance drought awareness
and water conservation
programs 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10
Develop awareness program
for San Miguel HMA to discourage vandalism 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 5
TABLE 11: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 6.1 DATA.
6.2 Mitigation Action Implementation
A mitigation action is a specific action, project, activity, or process taken to reduce or eliminate
long-term risk from hazards and their impacts on people and property. Implementing mitigation
actions helps achieve the Plan's mission and goals. The efforts to reduce vulnerability to threats
and risks form the core of the Plan and are a vital outcome of the planning process. This Annex
details the following mitigation action implementations:
The Planning Committee selected actions in a hazard mitigation action plan based on the risk
assessment of identified hazards of concern and the defined hazard mitigation goals and objectives.
Table 6.3 lists the recommended hazard mitigation actions that make up the action plan.
24
SECTION 6 I Develop a Mitigation Strategy
6.3 Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
The timeframe indicated in the table is defined as follows:
•Short-term = Completion within 5 years
•Long-term = Completion within 10 years
Table 6.3 – Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Applies to New or
Existing Assets Priority Lead
Agency Support Agency Estimated
Cost Sources of Funding Timeline
Action #1 – Increase recycled water use within the service area
Hazards Mitigated: Water shortage during drought periods
New High OWD
City of San Diego,
RWQCB, and
Sweetwater Authority
Low
($75,000)
FEMA HMA
Grants, District
Funds
Short Term
Action #2 – Educate residents on water-saving techniques
Hazards Mitigated: Water shortage during drought periods
New High OWD
SDCWA, MWDSC,
DWR, CCEDC,
HOAs, County of SD,
Schools, Local
Municipalities,
Businesses, and
Developers
Low
($250,000)
FEMA HMA
Grants, District
Funds
Short Term
Action #3 – Conduct a seismic evaluation of existing critical facilities and develop an inventory of buildings that may be particularly
vulnerable to earthquake damage. Prioritize the list of essential facilities to be seismically upgraded or retrofitted.
Hazards Mitigated: Human and Property Loss
New High OWD N/A Low
($75,000)
FEMA HMA
Grants, District
Funds
Short Term
Action #4 – Conduct seismic retrofitting for critical facilities most at risk of earthquakes
Hazards Mitigated: Human and Property Loss
New Medium OWD N/A Medium
($500,000)
FEMA HMA
Grants, District
Funds
Long Term
Action #5 – Upgrade the access road at the La Presa Potable Pump Station 10-04
Hazards Mitigated: Wildfire and Heavy Rainstorms
New Medium OWD N/A Medium
($750,000)
FEMA HMA
Grants, District
Funds
Short Term
Action #6 – Upgrade the access road at the Regulatory Pump Station 832-1 and 832-2
Hazards Mitigated: Wildfire and Heavy Rainstorms
New Medium OWD Cal Fire Medium
($1,500,000)
FEMA HMA
Grants, District
Funds
Short Term
25
SECTION 6 I Develop a Mitigation Strategy
Table 6.3 – Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Applies to New or
Existing Assets Priority Lead
Agency Support Agency Estimated
Cost Sources of Funding Timeline
Action #7 – Develop dam failure flood preparedness, response, and communications plan.
Hazards Mitigated: Flood
New Medium OWD N/A Low
($75,000)
FEMA HMA
Grants, District
Funds
Short Term
Action #8 – Create defensible space around critical structures and infrastructure
Hazards Mitigated: Wildfire
New Medium OWD
Cal Fire, US Fish &
Wildlife, CA Dept
Fish& Wildlife
Low
($200,000)
FEMA HMA
Grants, District
Funds
Short Term
Action #9 – Develop the District’s Climate Action Plan (CAP).
Hazards Mitigated: Flood, Wildfire, Extreme Heat, and Heavy Rainstorms
New Medium OWD N/A Medium
($290,000)
FEMA HMA
Grants, District
Funds
Short Term
Action #10 – Implement security protection for the San Miguel Habitat Management Area.
Hazards Mitigated: Trespassing and vandalism
New Medium OWD USFWS, CDFW
CA Conservation Corp
Low
($80,000)
FEMA HMA
Grants, District
Funds
Short Term
26
SECTION 7 | Keep the Plan Current
SECTION 7: Keep the Plan Current
Hazard Mitigation Plan (Annex) maintenance is the process the planning team establishes to track
the Plan's implementation progress and to inform the plan update. The Plan must include a
description of the method and a monitoring schedule, evaluating and updating it within a 5-year
cycle. These procedures help to:
•Ensure that the mitigation strategy is implemented according to the Plan.
•Provide the foundation for an ongoing mitigation program in your community.
•Standardize long-term monitoring of hazard-related activities.
•Integrate mitigation principles into community officials' daily job responsibilities and
department roles.
•Maintain momentum through continued engagement and accountability in the Plan's
progress.
Hazard Mitigation Plan updates provide the opportunity to consider how well the procedures
established in the previously approved Plan worked and revise them as needed. This Annex is part
of the most recent San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan update. The
Plan was last updated in 2018. See the San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation
Plan for more information.
7.1 Mitigation Action Progress
Plan monitoring means tracking the implementation of the Plan over time. The Plan must identify
how, when, and by whom the plan will be monitored.
The District will track the mitigation actions for the next five-year cycle.
The Planning Team will meet at least annually to monitor implementation progress and integration of
mitigation actions into other documents. As part of this evaluation process, members of the Team
ZLOO UHIHUHQFH $SSHQGL[ $ 5HJLRQ ,; /RFDO +D]DUG 0LWLJDLWRQ 3ODQ 5HYLHZ 7RRO DQG should
review the following:
•Any hazard events that occurred within the District's boundaries in the past year, including
the scale of impact.
•Mitigation activities in the Plan have been implemented and are achieving success.
•The timeline for implementing mitigation activities and whether the timeline should be
amended.
•Any mitigation activities prioritized for the past year have not been completed, and why.
•The need for any new or revised mitigation actions.
•Any changes or potential for changes in funding options for mitigation activities.
•Any new scientific data or mapping that informs the information in the Plan.
SECTION 8 | Appendices
SECTION 8: Appendices
27
FEMA Region IX Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Tool 1
APPENDIX A
REGION IX LOCAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW TOOL
Updated 12/4/2019
The Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Tool demonstrates how the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan meets
the regulation in 44 CFR §201.6 and offers State and FEMA Mitigation Planners an opportunity to provide
feedback to the community.
•The Regulation Checklist provides a summary of FEMA’s evaluation of whether the plan has
addressed all requirements.
•The Plan Assessment identifies the plan’s strengths as well as documents areas for future
improvement. This section also includes a list of resources for implementation of the plan.
•The Multi-Jurisdiction Summary Sheet is a mandatory worksheet for multi-jurisdictional plans
that is used to document which jurisdictions are eligible to adopt the plan.
•The Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Matrix is a tool for plan reviewers to identify if all
components of Element B are met.
Jurisdiction:
County of San Diego
Title of Plan:
MJHMP OWD Annex 2023
Date of Plan:
June 2023
Local Point of Contact: Emilyn B. Zuniga Address:
2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd
Spring Valley, CA 91978 Title: Safety and Security Specialist
Agency: Otay Water District
Phone Number: 619-670-2295 E-Mail:ezuniga@otaywater.gov
State Reviewer: Title: Date:
Date Received at State Agency
Date Sent to FEMA
FEMA Reviewer: Title: Date:
Date Received in FEMA Region IX
Date Not Approved
Date Approvable Pending Adoption
Date Approved
2 FEMA Region IX Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
SECTION 1: REGULATION CHECKLIST
INSTRUCTIONS: The Regulation Checklist must be completed by FEMA. The purpose of the
Checklist is to identify the location of relevant or applicable content in the plan by element/sub-
element and to determine if each requirement has been ‘Met’ or ‘Not Met.’ The ‘Required
Revisions’ summary at the bottom of each element must be completed by FEMA to provide a
clear explanation of the revisions that are required for plan approval. Required revisions must
be explained for each plan sub-element that is ‘Not Met.’ Sub-elements should be referenced in
each summary by using the appropriate numbers (A1, B3, etc.), where applicable. Requirements
for each Element and sub-element are described in detail in the Local Plan Review Guide in Section
4, Regulation Checklist.
1. REGULATION CHECKLIST
Regulation (44 CFR 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans)
Location in
Plan (section
and/or
page number)
Met
Not
Met
ELEMENT A. PLANNING PROCESS
A1. Does the plan document the planning
process, including how it was prepared
and who was involved in the process for
each jurisdiction? (Requirement
§201.6(c)(1))
a. Does the plan provide
documentation of how the plan was
prepared? This documentation must
include the schedule or timeframe and
activities that made up the plan’s
development as well as who was
involved.
b. Does the plan list the jurisdiction(s)
participating in the plan that are
seeking approval?
c. Does the plan identify who
represented each jurisdiction?
(At a minimum, it must identify the
jurisdiction represented and the
person’s position or title and agency
within the jurisdiction.)
A2. Does the plan document an
opportunity for neighboring
communities, local and regional agencies
involved in hazard mitigation activities,
agencies that have the authority to
regulate development as well as other
interests to be involved in the planning
process? (Requirement §201.6(b)(2))
a. Does the plan document an
opportunity for neighboring
communities, local, and regional
agencies involved in hazard mitigation
activities, agencies that have the
authority to regulate development, as
well as other interested parties to be
involved in the planning process?
b. Does the plan identify how the
stakeholders were invited to
participate in the process?
A3. Does the plan document how the
public was involved in the planning
a. Does the plan document how the
public was given the opportunity to be
involved in the planning process?
1.REGULATION CHECKLIST
Regulation (44 CFR 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans)
Location in
Plan (section
and/or
page number)
Met Not
Met
process during the drafting stage?
(Requirement §201.6(b)(1))
b.Does the plan document how the
public’s feedback was incorporated
into the plan?
A4. Does the plan describe the review and incorporation of existing plans, studies,
reports, and technical information? (Requirement §201.6(b)(3))
A5. Is there discussion of how the community(ies) will continue public participation
in the plan maintenance process? (Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(iii))
A6. Is there a description of the method
and schedule for keeping the plan
current (monitoring, evaluating and
updating the mitigation plan within a 5-
year cycle)? (Requirement
§201.6(c)(4)(i))
a. Does the plan identify how, when,
and by whom the plan will be
monitored (how will implementation
be tracked) over time?
b.Does the plan identify how, when,
and by whom the plan will be
evaluated (assessing the effectiveness
of the plan at achieving stated purpose
and goals) over time?
c.Does the plan identify how, when,
and by whom the plan will be updated
during the 5-year cycle?
ELEMENT A: REQUIRED REVISIONS
ELEMENT B. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT
(Reviewer: See Section 4 for assistance with Element B)
B1. Does the plan include a description of
the type, location, and extent of all
natural hazards that can affect each
jurisdiction(s)? (Requirement
§201.6(c)(2)(i))
a. Does the plan include a general
description of all natural hazards that
can affect each jurisdiction?
b.Does the plan provide rationale for
the omission of any natural hazards
that are commonly recognized to
affect the jurisdiction(s) in the planning
area?
c.Does the plan include a description
of the type of all natural hazards that
can affect each jurisdiction?
d.Does the plan include a description
of the location for all natural hazards
that can affect each jurisdiction?
e. Does the plan include a description
of the extent for all natural hazards
that can affect each jurisdiction?
B2. Does the plan include information on
previous occurrences of hazard events
and on the probability of future hazard
a. Does the plan include information
on previous occurrences of hazard
events for each jurisdiction?
FEMA Region IX Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Tool 3
1. REGULATION CHECKLIST
Regulation (44 CFR 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans)
Location in
Plan (section
and/or
page number)
Met
Not
Met
events for each jurisdiction?
(Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i))
b. Does the plan include information
on the probability of future hazard
events for each jurisdiction?
B3. Is there a description of each
identified hazard’s impact on the
community as well as an overall
summary of the community’s
vulnerability for each jurisdiction?
(Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii))
a. Is there a description of each
hazard’s impacts on each jurisdiction
(what happens to structures,
infrastructure, people, environment,
etc.)?
b. Is there a description of each
identified hazard’s overall vulnerability
(structures, systems, populations, or
other community assets defined by the
community that are identified as being
susceptible to damage and loss from
hazard events) for each jurisdiction?
B4. Does the plan address NFIP insured structures within the jurisdiction that have
been repetitively damaged by floods? (Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii))
ELEMENT B: REQUIRED REVISIONS
ELEMENT C. MITIGATION STRATEGY
C1. Does the plan document each
jurisdiction’s existing authorities,
policies, programs and resources and its
ability to expand on and improve these
existing policies and programs?
(Requirement §201.6(c)(3))
a. Does the plan document each
jurisdiction’s existing authorities,
policies, programs and resources?
b. Does the plan document each
jurisdiction’s ability to expand on and
improve these existing policies and
programs?
C2. Does the plan address each jurisdiction’s participation in the NFIP and
continued compliance with NFIP requirements, as appropriate? (Requirement
§201.6(c)(3)(ii))
C3. Does the plan include goals to reduce/avoid long-term vulnerabilities to the
identified hazards? (Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(i))
C4. Does the plan identify and analyze a
comprehensive range of specific
mitigation actions and projects for each
jurisdiction being considered to reduce
the effects of hazards, with emphasis on
new and existing buildings and
infrastructure? (Requirement
§201.6(c)(3)(ii))
a. Does the plan identify and analyze a
comprehensive range of specific
mitigation actions and projects to
reduce the impacts from hazards?
b. Does the plan identify mitigation
actions for every hazard posing a
threat to each participating
jurisdiction?
4 FEMA Region IX Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
1.REGULATION CHECKLIST
Regulation (44 CFR 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans)
Location in
Plan (section
and/or
page number)
Met Not
Met
c.Do the identified mitigation actions
and projects have an emphasis on new
and existing buildings and
infrastructure?
C5. Does the plan contain an action plan
that describes how the actions identified
will be prioritized (including cost benefit
review), implemented, and administered
by each jurisdiction? (Requirement
§201.6(c)(3)(iv)); (Requirement
§201.6(c)(3)(iii))
a. Does the plan explain how the
mitigation actions will be prioritized
(including cost benefit review)?
b.Does the plan identify the position,
office, department, or agency
responsible for implementing and
administering the action, potential
funding sources and expected
timeframes for completion?
C6. Does the plan describe a process by
which local governments will integrate
the requirements of the mitigation plan
into other planning mechanisms, such as
comprehensive or capital improvement
plans, when appropriate? (Requirement
§201.6(c)(4)(ii))
a. Does the plan identify the local
planning mechanisms where hazard
mitigation information and/or actions
may be incorporated?
b.Does the plan describe each
community’s process to integrate the
data, information, and hazard
mitigation goals and actions into other
planning mechanisms?
c.The updated plan must explain how
the jurisdiction(s) incorporated the
mitigation plan, when appropriate,
into other planning mechanisms as a
demonstration of progress in local
hazard mitigation efforts.
ELEMENT C: REQUIRED REVISIONS
ELEMENT D. PLAN REVIEW, EVALUATION, AND IMPLEMENTATION
(Applicable to plan updates only)
D1. Was the plan revised to reflect changes in development? (Requirement
§201.6(d)(3))
D2. Was the plan revised to reflect progress in local mitigation efforts?
(Requirement §201.6(d)(3))
D3. Was the plan revised to reflect changes in priorities? (Requirement
§201.6(d)(3))
ELEMENT D: REQUIRED REVISIONS
ELEMENT E. PLAN ADOPTION
FEMA Region IX Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Tool 5
1.REGULATION CHECKLIST
Regulation (44 CFR 201.6 Local Mitigation Plans)
Location in
Plan (section
and/or
page number)
Met Not
Met
E1. Does the plan include documentation that the plan has been formally adopted
by the governing body of the jurisdiction requesting approval? (Requirement
§201.6(c)(5))
E2. For multi-jurisdictional plans, has each jurisdiction requesting approval of the
plan documented formal plan adoption? (Requirement §201.6(c)(5))
ELEMENT E: REQUIRED REVISIONS
OPTIONAL: HIGH HAZARD POTENTIAL DAM RISKS (Applicable to jurisdictions interested in becoming
sub applicants to FEMA’s Rehabilitation of High Hazard Potential Dams (HHPD) Grant Program only)
HHPD1. Did Element A4 (planning process) describe the incorporation of existing
plans, studies, reports, and technical information for high hazard potential dams?
HHPD2. Did Element B3 (risk assessment) address HHPDs?
HHPD3. Did Element C3 (mitigation goals) include mitigation goals to reduce long-
term vulnerabilities from high hazard potential dams that pose an unacceptable
risk to the public?
HHPD4. Did Element C4-C5 (mitigation actions) address HHPDs prioritize mitigation
actions to reduce vulnerabilities from high hazard potential dams that pose an
unacceptable risk to the public?
REQUIRED REVISIONS
ELEMENT F. ADDITIONAL STATE REQUIREMENTS
(Optional for State Reviewers only; not to be completed by FEMA)
F1.
F2.
ELEMENT F: REQUIRED REVISIONS
6 FEMA Region IX Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
FEMA Region IX Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Tool 7
SECTION 2: PLAN ASSESSMENT
INSTRUCTIONS: The purpose of the Plan Assessment is to offer the local community more
comprehensive feedback to the community on the quality and utility of the plan in a narrative
format. The audience for the Plan Assessment is not only the plan developer/local
community planner, but also elected officials, local departments and agencies, and others
involved in implementing the Local Mitigation Plan. The Plan Assessment must be completed
by FEMA. The Assessment is an opportunity for FEMA to provide feedback and information
to the community on: 1) suggested improvements to the Plan; 2) specific sections in the Plan
where the community has gone above and beyond minimum requirements; 3)
recommendations for plan implementation; and 4) ongoing partnership(s) and information
on other FEMA programs, specifically RiskMAP and Hazard Mitigation Assistance programs.
The Plan Assessment is divided into two sections:
1.Plan Strengths and Opportunities for Improvement
2.Resources for Implementing Your Approved Plan
Plan Strengths and Opportunities for Improvement is organized according to the plan
Elements listed in the Regulation Checklist. Each Element includes a series of italicized
bulleted items that are suggested topics for consideration while evaluating plans, but it is not
intended to be a comprehensive list. FEMA Mitigation Planners are not required to answer
each bullet item and should use them as a guide to paraphrase their own written assessment
(2-3 sentences) of each Element.
The Plan Assessment must not reiterate the required revisions from the Regulation Checklist
or be regulatory in nature and should be open-ended and to provide the community with
suggestions for improvements or recommended revisions. The recommended revisions are
suggestions for improvement and are not required to be made for the Plan to meet Federal
regulatory requirements. The italicized text should be deleted once FEMA has added
comments regarding strengths of the plan and potential improvements for future plan
revisions. It is recommended that the Plan Assessment be a short synopsis of the overall
strengths and weaknesses of the Plan (no longer than two pages), rather than a complete
recap section by section.
Resources for Implementing Your Approved Plan provides a place for FEMA to offer
information, data sources and general suggestions on the plan implementation and
maintenance process. Information on other possible sources of assistance including, but not
limited to, existing publications, grant funding or training opportunities, can be provided.
States may add state and local resources, if available.
8 FEMA Region IX Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
A.Plan Strengths and Opportunities for Improvement
This section provides a discussion of the strengths of the plan document and identifies areas
where these could be improved beyond minimum requirements.
Element A: Planning Process
How does the Plan go above and beyond minimum requirements to document the planning
process with respect to:
•Involvement of stakeholders (elected officials/decision makers, plan implementers,
business owners, academic institutions, utility companies, water/sanitation districts, etc.);
•Involvement of Planning, Emergency Management, Public Works Departments or other
planning agencies (i.e., regional planning councils);
•Diverse methods of participation (meetings, surveys, online, etc.); and
•Reflective of an open and inclusive public involvement process.
Element B: Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment
In addition to the requirements listed in the Regulation Checklist, 44 CFR 201.6 Local
Mitigation Plans identifies additional elements that should be included as part of a plan’s risk
assessment. The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of:
1)A general description of land uses and future development trends within the community
so that mitigation options can be considered in future land use decisions;
2)The types and numbers of existing and future buildings, infrastructure, and critical
facilities located in the identified hazard areas; and
3)A description of potential dollar losses to vulnerable structures, and a description of the
methodology used to prepare the estimate.
How does the Plan go above and beyond minimum requirements to document the Hazard
Identification and Risk Assessment with respect to:
•Use of best available data (flood maps, HAZUS, flood studies) to describe significant
hazards;
•Communication of risk on people, property, and infrastructure to the public (through
tables, charts, maps, photos, etc.);
•Incorporation of techniques and methodologies to estimate dollar losses to vulnerable
structures;
•Incorporation of Risk MAP products (i.e., depth grids, Flood Risk Report, Changes Since
Last FIRM, Areas of Mitigation Interest, etc.); and
•Identification of any data gaps that can be filled as new data became available.
FEMA Region IX Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Tool 9
Element C: Mitigation Strategy
How does the Plan go above and beyond minimum requirements to document the Mitigation
Strategy with respect to:
•Key problems identified in, and linkages to, the vulnerability assessment;
•Serving as a blueprint for reducing potential losses identified in the Hazard Identification
and Risk Assessment;
•Plan content flow from the risk assessment (problem identification) to goal setting to
mitigation action development;
•An understanding of mitigation principles (diversity of actions that include structural
projects, preventative measures, outreach activities, property protection measures, post-
disaster actions, etc);
•Specific mitigation actions for each participating jurisdiction that reflects their unique risks
and capabilities;
•Integration of mitigation actions with existing local authorities, policies, programs, and
resources; and
•Discussion of existing programs (including the NFIP), plans, and policies that could be used
to implement mitigation, as well as document past projects.
Element D: Plan Update, Evaluation, and Implementation (Plan Updates Only)
How does the Plan go above and beyond minimum requirements to document the 5-year
Evaluation and Implementation measures with respect to:
•Status of previously recommended mitigation actions;
•Identification of barriers or obstacles to successful implementation or completion of
mitigation actions, along with possible solutions for overcoming risk;
•Documentation of annual reviews and committee involvement;
•Identification of a lead person to take ownership of, and champion the Plan;
•Reducing risks from natural hazards and serving as a guide for decisions makers as they
commit resources to reducing the effects of natural hazards;
•An approach to evaluating future conditions (i.e. socio-economic, environmental,
demographic, change in built environment etc.);
•Discussion of how changing conditions and opportunities could impact community
resilience in the long term; and
•Discussion of how the mitigation goals and actions support the long-term community
vision for increased resilience.
10 FEMA Region IX Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
B. Resources for Implementing and Updating Your Approved Plan
This resource section is organized into three categories:
1) Guidance and Resources
2) Training Topics and Courses
3) Funding Sources
Guidance and Resources
Local Mitigation Planning Handbook
https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/31598
Beyond the Basics
http://mitigationguide.org/
Mitigation Ideas
https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/30627
Plan Integration: Linking Local Planning Efforts
https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/108893
Integrating Disaster Data into Hazard Mitigation Planning
https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/103486
Integrating Historic Property and Cultural Resource Considerations into Hazard Mitigation
Planning
https://www.fema.gov/ar/media-library/assets/documents/4317
Community Rating System User Manual
https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/8768
U.S. Climate Resilient Toolkit
https://toolkit.climate.gov/
2014 National Climate Assessment
http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/
Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation
http://ipcc-wg2.gov/SREX/images/uploads/SREX-All_FINAL.pdf
FY15 Hazard Mitigation Assistance Unified Guidance
https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/103279
Climate Resilient Mitigation Activities for Hazard Mitigation Assistance
https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/110202
Training
More information at https://training.fema.gov/emi.aspx or through your State Training
Officer
Mitigation Planning
IS-318 Mitigation Planning for Local and Tribal Communities
https://training.fema.gov/is/courseoverview.aspx?code=is-318
IS-393 Introduction to Hazard Mitigation
https://training.fema.gov/is/courseoverview.aspx?code=is-393.a
G-318 Preparing and Reviewing Local Plans
G-393 Mitigation for Emergency Managers
FEMA Region IX Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Review Tool 11
Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) Grant Programs
IS-212.b Introduction to Unified HMA
http://www.training.fema.gov/is/courseoverview.aspx?code=IS-212.b
IS-277 Benefit Cost Analysis Entry Level
http://www.training.fema.gov/is/courseoverview.aspx?code=IS-277
E-212 HMA: Developing Quality Application Elements
E-213 HMA: Application Review and Evaluation
E-214 HMA: Project Implementation and Programmatic Closeout
E-276 Benefit-Cost Analysis Entry Level
GIS and Hazus-MH
IS-922 Application of GIS for Emergency Management
http://www.training.fema.gov/is/courseoverview.aspx?code=IS-922
E-190 ArcGIS for Emergency Managers
E-296 Application of Hazus-MH for Risk Assessment
E-313 Basic Hazus-MH
Floodplain Management
E-273 Managing Floodplain Development through the NFIP
E-278 National Flood Insurance Program/ Community Rating System
Potential Funding Sources
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
POC: FEMA Region IX and State Hazard Mitigation Officer
Website: https://www.fema.gov/hazard-mitigation-grant-program
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant Program
POC: FEMA Region IX and State Hazard Mitigation Officer
Website: https://www.fema.gov/pre-disaster-mitigation-grant-program
Flood Mitigation Assistance Grant Program
POC: FEMA Region IX and State Hazard Mitigation Officer
Website: https://www.fema.gov/flood-mitigation-assistance-grant-program
Emergency Management Performance Grant Program
POC: FEMA Region IX
Website: https://www.fema.gov/emergency-management-performance-grant-program
SECTION 3:
MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL SUMMARY SHEET
INSTRUCTIONS: For multi-jurisdictional plans, this summary sheet must be completed by listing each participating jurisdiction that is
eligible to adopt the plan.
MULTI-JURISDICTION SUMMARY SHEET
# Jurisdiction Name Jurisdiction Type
Eligible to
Adopt the
Plan?
Plan POC Email
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
12 FEMA RIX Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
SECTION 4: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT MATRIX (OPTIONAL)
INSTRUCTIONS: This matrix can be used by the plan reviewer to help identify if all of the components of Element B have been met.
List out natural hazard names that are identified in the plan in the column labeled “Hazards” and put a “Y” or “N” for each component
of Element B.
HAZARD IDENTIFICATION AND RISK ASSESSMENT MATRIX
Requirement Met? (Y/N)
Hazard Type Location Extent Previous
Occurrences Probability Impacts Vulnerability Mitigation
Action
13 FEMA RIX Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
FEMA Region IX
1111 Broadway, Suite 1200
Oakland, CA 94607-4052
www.fema.gov
April 24, 2023
Nicholas Zubel
Senior Emergency Services Coordinator
County of San Diego Office of Emergency Services
5580 Overland Ave, Ste. 100
San Diego, CA 92123
Dear Nicholas Zubel:
The San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan has been amended to
include the following jurisdictions as official planning participants:
City of Coronado
City of Del Mar
City of El Cajon
City of Escondido
City of Encinitas
City of Imperial Beach
City of Poway
City of San Diego
City of Santee
City of Lemon Grove
Otay Water District
Padre Dam Municipal Water District
San Diego Unified Port District
Sweetwater Authority
These new jurisdictions must submit an adoption resolution to FEMA in order to be considered
fully approved.
FEMA’s approval of the San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan remains
for a period of five years from the original approval date of March 31, 2023 for all approved
participants. An updated list of the status of current participating jurisdictions is enclosed with
this letter.
ATTACHMENT D
San Diego County Hazard Mitigation Plan Amendment Notice
April 24, 2023
Page 2 of 3
If you have any questions regarding the planning or review processes, please contact the FEMA
Region 9 Hazard Mitigation Planning Team at fema-r9-mitigation-planning@fema.dhs.gov.
Sincerely,
Alison Kearns
Planning and Implementation Branch Chief
Mitigation Division
FEMA Region 9
Enclosures (2)
San Diego County Amended Plan Review Tool, dated April 24, 2023
Status of Participating Jurisdictions, dated April 24, 2023
cc: Ron Miller, Mitigation Quality Assurance Division Chief, California Governor’s Office
of Emergency Services
Robyn Fennig, Planning Division Chief, California Governor’s Office of Emergency
Services
Victoria LaMar-Haas, Hazard Mitigation Planning Chief, California Governor’s Office of
Emergency Services
San Diego County Hazard Mitigation Plan Amendment Notice
April 24, 2023
Page 3 of 3
Status of Participating Jurisdictions as of April 24, 2023
Jurisdictions – Adopted and Approved
# Jurisdiction Date of Adoption
1 San Diego County February 7, 2023
2 City of National City March 21, 2023
3 San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) March 23, 2023
Jurisdictions – Approvable Pending Adoption
# Jurisdiction
1 City of Coronado
2 City of Del Mar
3 City of El Cajon
4 City of Encinitas
5 City of Escondido
6 City of Imperial Beach
7 City of La Mesa
8 City of Lemon Grove
9 City of Poway
10 City of San Diego
11 City of Santee
12 Otay Water District
13 Padre Dam Municipal Water District
14 San Diego Unified Port District
15 Sweetwater Authority
16 Vista Irrigation District
SECTION
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
1 San Diego County, California
2023
Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan
Decorative Image
ATTACHMENT E
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................................. I
INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 1
1. SECTION ONE: DETERMINE THE PLANNING AREA AND RESOURCES ....................................................... 5
1.1. PLANNING AREA: SAN DIEGO COUNTY ............................................................................................... 5
1.2. COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................ 22
2. SECTION TWO: BUILD THE PLANNING TEAM ........................................................................................ 26
2.1. PLANNING PARTICIPANTS ................................................................................................................. 27
2.2. PLANNING PROCESS ......................................................................................................................... 33
3. SECTION THREE: CREATE AN OUTREACH STRATEGY ............................................................................. 48
3.1. WHOLE COMMUNITY APPROACH ..................................................................................................... 48
3.2. COMMUNITY OUTREACH STRATEGY ................................................................................................. 51
4. SECTION FOUR: REVIEW COMMUNITY CAPABILITIES ........................................................................... 54
4.1. CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................. 54
4.2. NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP) ............................................................................. 68
5. SECTION FIVE: CONDUCT A RISK ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................... 76
5.1. HAZARD ASSESSMENT SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 77
5.2. ALL HAZARD PROFILES ...................................................................................................................... 86
5.3. VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT ......................................................................................................... 159
6. SECTION SIX: DEVELOP A MITIGATION STRATEGY .............................................................................. 266
6.1. MITIGATION ACTION EVALUATION ................................................................................................. 266
6.2. MITIGATION GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS IMPLEMENTATION ............................................. 270
7. SECTION SEVEN: KEEP THE PLAN CURRENT ........................................................................................ 288
7.1. MITIGATION ACTION PROGRESS ..................................................................................................... 288
7.2. PLAN UPDATE EVALUATION ............................................................................................................ 297
7.3. PLAN MAINTENANCE, MONITORING, EVALUATION, & UPDATES .................................................... 298
APPENDIX 1. BASE DATA SOURCES 2021 ............................................................................................... 305
APPENDIX 2. HAZARD DATA SOURCES 2021 .......................................................................................... 308
APPENDIX 3. OTHER SOURCES/REFERENCES .......................................................................................... 309
APPENDIX 4. SCRIPPS INSTITUTION OF OCEANOGRAPHY REFERENCES, UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO ..... 311
APPENDIX 5. SURVEY RESULTS FOR SD MULTIJURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN REVISION . 318
APPENDIX 6. MEETINGS ......................................................................................................................... 326
ii
THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
INTRODUCTION 1
INTRODUCTION
PLAN DESCRIPTION
Across the United States, natural and human-caused disasters lead to increasing levels of
death, injury, property damage, and interruption of business and government services. The
impact on families and individuals can be immense, and damages to businesses can result in
regional economic consequences. The time, money, and effort to respond to and recover
from these disasters divert public resources and attention from other important programs and
situations.
With experience in presidential disaster declarations, gubernatorial proclamations, and local
emergency proclamations, San Diego County, California recognizes the consequences of
disasters, the need to reduce impacts of natural and human-caused hazards, and the
importance of increasing regional resiliency.
Elected and appointed County officials also know that carefully selected mitigation actions (in
the forms of projects and programs) can become long-term, cost-effective means for
reducing natural and human-caused hazard impacts.
This San Diego County, California, Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (The/This Plan)
was prepared with input from:
• County public
• County of San Diego Groups, Agencies and Departments
• Eighteen Incorporated Cities
• The Port of San Diego
• Water Districts
• Fire Protection Districts
• Air Pollution Control District
• The National Weather Service
• Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California San Diego
• California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES)
• Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
This plan update included over three years of coordination with planning participants and will
help guide the region toward greater disaster resilience in harmony with the community
layout and needs.
PLAN PURPOSE
Federal legislation has historically provided funding for disaster relief, recovery, and some
hazard mitigation planning. The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) is the most
current legislation to improve this planning process (Public Law 106-390). The legislation
reinforces the importance of mitigation planning and emphasizes planning for disasters
before they occur. As such, DMA 2000 establishes a pre-disaster hazard mitigation program
and requirements for the national post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP).
INTRODUCTION 2
Section 322 of DMA 2000 specifically addresses mitigation planning at state and local levels.
It identifies new requirements that allow HMGP funds to be used for planning activities, and
increases the amount of HMGP funds available to states that have developed a
comprehensive, enhanced mitigation plan prior to a disaster. States and communities must
have an approved mitigation plan in place prior to receiving post-disaster HMGP funds. Local
and Tribal Hazard Mitigation Plans must demonstrate their proposed mitigation measures are
based on a sound planning process that account for the risk to and the capabilities of the
individual communities.
State governments have certain responsibilities for implementing Section 322, including:
• Preparing and submitting a standard or enhanced state mitigation plan
• Reviewing and updating the state mitigation plan every three years
• Providing technical assistance and training to local governments to assist them in
applying for HMGP grants and in developing local mitigation plans
• Reviewing and approving local plans if the state is designated a managing state and has
an approved enhanced plan.
The intent of DMA 2000 is to facilitate cooperation and collaboration between state and local
authorities, which encourages and rewards local and state pre-disaster planning and
promotes sustainability as disaster resilience strategy. This enhanced planning network is
intended to enable local and state governments to articulate accurate needs for mitigation—
resulting in faster allocation of funding and more effective risk reduction projects.
FEMA prepared an Interim Final Rule, published in the Federal Register on February 26,
2002 (44 CFR Parts 201 and 206), which establishes planning and funding criteria for states
and local communities.
This plan was prepared to meet state and federal statutes and requirements, thus making the
County and all participating jurisdictions and special districts eligible for funding and technical
assistance from state and federal hazard mitigation programs.
EXISTING AUTHORITIES
In the early 1960s, the incorporated cities and the County of San Diego formed a Joint
Powers Agreement which established the Unified San Diego County Emergency Services
Organization (USDCESO) and the Unified Disaster Council (UDC) as the policy making
group. This Plan is intended to serve many purposes, including:
• Enhance Public Awareness and Understanding– to help the public better understand the
natural and human-caused hazards that threaten public health, safety, and welfare;
economic vitality; and the operational capability of important institutions.
• Create a Decision Tool for Management – to provide information that managers and
leaders of local government, business and industry, community associations, and other
key institutions and organizations need to take action to address vulnerabilities to future
disasters.
• Promote Compliance with State and Federal Program Requirements– to ensure San
Diego County and its incorporated cities can take full advantage of state and federal
grant programs, policies, and regulations that encourage or mandate that local
governments develop comprehensive hazard mitigation plans.
INTRODUCTION 3
• Enhance Local Policies for Hazard Mitigation Capability– to provide the policy basis for
mitigation actions that should be promulgated by participating jurisdictions to create a
more disaster-resistant future, and to document each jurisdiction’s ability to expand on
and improve existing policies and programs.
• Provide Inter-Jurisdictional Coordination of Mitigation-Related Programming – to ensure
proposals for mitigation initiatives are reviewed and coordinated among the participating
jurisdictions within the County.
• Achieve Regulatory Compliance – To qualify for certain forms of federal aid for pre- and
post-disaster funding, local jurisdictions must comply with the federal DMA 2000 and its
implementing regulations (44 CFR Section 201.6). DMA 2000 intends for hazard
mitigation plans to remain relevant and current. Therefore, it requires State Hazard
Mitigation Plans are updated every three years and local plans, including this San Diego
County Plan, every five years. This means San Diego’s Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard
Mitigation Plan uses a five-year planning cycle, which is designed to coordinate the
region’s edits of data, assumptions, goals, objectives, and actions/projects before the
plan is submitted for re-approval to Cal OES and FEMA.
The UDC, the San Diego County Board of Supervisors, City Councils, and governing Boards
for each participating municipality or special district will adopt the Plan (according to their
existing authorities) once the State of California and FEMA have granted provisional plan
approval in the form of an “Approved Pending Adoption” Letter.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 4
SECTION ONE: Determining the Planning Area and Resources
San Diego County, California
2023
Decorative Image CAL FIRE San Diego Communications Bureau
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 5
1. SECTION ONE: DETERMINE THE PLANNING AREA AND RESOURCES
Overall, San Diego County is comprised of 18 incorporated cities and a vast number of
unincorporated communities. The county’s total population in 2020 was approximately 3.3
million—making San Diego County the second most populous county in the state.0F0F0F
1
1.1. PLANNING AREA: SAN DIEGO COUNTY
San Diego County, one of 58 counties in the state of California, was established on February
18, 1850, just after California became the 31st state. The County stretches 65 miles from
north to south, and 86 miles from east to west, covering 4,261 square miles.1F1F1F
2 Elevation
ranges from sea level to about 6,500 feet. Orange and Riverside Counties border the north,
the agricultural communities of Imperial County border the east, the Pacific Ocean lies west,
and the State of Baja California, Mexico borders the south.
1.1.1. UNINCORPORATED COMMUNITIES (POPULATION: 505,675)2F2F2F
3
The Unincorporated County consists of approximately 34 Community Planning and Sub-
regional Areas. Many of the communities in the Unincorporated County jurisdiction are in the
mountains, desert, North County, or on the border of Mexico. Rancho Santa Fe, an affluent
residential and resort community, is one of the exceptions, located within the urban core
area. The community of Julian is in the central mountains, along a principal travel route
between the desert and Metropolitan San Diego, and is a common tourist destination. Alpine
is located east of El Cajon on Interstate 8 and is considered a gateway to San Diego
County’s wilderness areas of mountains, forests, and deserts.
The Sub-regional Planning Areas are Central Mountain, County Islands, Mountain Empire,
North County Metro, and North Mountain. Communities within the Central Mountain Sub-
region are Cuyamaca, Descanso, Guatay, Pine Valley, and Mount Laguna. The County
Islands Community Plan area consists of Mira Mesa, Greenwood, and Lincoln Acres. The
North Mountain Sub-region is mostly rural and includes Santa Ysabel, Warner Springs,
Palomar Mountain, Mesa Grande, Sunshine Summit, Ranchita and Oak Grove. The
Mountain Empire Sub-region contains Tecate, Potrero, Boulevard, Campo, Jacumba, and the
remainder of the plan area.
The Community Planning Areas are Alpine, Bonsall, Borrego Springs, Boulevard,
Crest/Dehesa/Granite Hills/Harbison Canyon, Cuyamaca, Descanso, Desert, Fallbrook,
Hidden Meadows, Jacumba, Jamul/Dulzura, Julian, Lake Morena/Campo, Lakeside/Pepper
Drive-Bostonia, Otay, Pala-Pauma, Palomar/North Mountain, Pendleton/Deluz, Pine Valley,
Portrero, Rainbow, Ramona, San Dieguito (Rancho Santa Fe), Spring Valley, Sweetwater,
Tecate, Twin Oaks, Valle De Oro, and Valley Center.
The following subsections provide County of San Diego Economy, Physical Features,
Infrastructure, and Jurisdictional summaries, with data and research provided within the
1 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/auditor/pdf/adoptedplan_21-23.pdf
2 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/auditor/pdf/adoptedplan_21-23.pdf
3 2020 Jurisdiction Population Estimate from SANDAG: https://datasurfer.sandag.org/dataoverview
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 6
County of San Diego’s existing “Adopted Operational Plan Fiscal Years 2021-2022 and 2022-
2023”:
1.1.2. ECONOMY
San Diego offers a vibrant and diverse economy, along with a strong and committed
partnership of local government and businesses dedicated to the creation and retention of
quality jobs. The San Diego County business climate continues to thrive due to the
diversification of valuable assets, such as world class research institutions; proximity to
Mexico and the Pacific Rim; a well-educated, highly productive work force; and an
unmatched entrepreneurial spirit.
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) can be an indicator of the nation’s economic health, and its
growth is driven by multiple sectors, including net exports of goods and services, government
consumption expenditures, and gross investment. According to the U.S. Bureau of Economic
Analysis (BEA), calendar year 2020 saw a decrease in real GDP, as the national economy
was impacted by the response to the global COVID-19 pandemic.
The economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic prompted federal fiscal stimulus efforts,
which provided support to economic activity in 2020 and potentially in 2021 (COVID-19
pandemic economic impacts are regularly assessed). As the State of California economically
recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic, experts predict consumers will resume pre-pandemic
behaviors like spending money on clothing, cars, housing, and furniture. In 2019, San Diego
County accounted for more than $222.3 billion (7.9%) of California’s GDP and 8.4 percent of
the State’s population (based on U.S. Census data).
San Diego’s abundant and diverse supply of labor at competitive rates is one of the area’s
greatest assets. A 2019 study using 2019 data found that 23% of San Diego County’s
workforce is either in the retail or hospitality sectors. San Diego County also includes the
largest concentration of U.S. military in the world, which is an important contributor to the
region’s economy.3F3F3F
4
1.1.3. EMPLOYMENT
According to the California Employment Development Department, low and middle San
Diego County wage workers made more than the state average, however, high wage earners
made less than the state average. In 2019, the median household income for San Diego
County was nearly $79,000, but other factors, like inflation, could have reduced spending
availability. 4F4F4F
5
The COVID-19 pandemic also affected jobs that relied on tourism. A study using 2019 data
found that 23% of San Diego County’s workforce were employed in the retail or leisure &
hospitality sectors. Therefore, unemployment numbers increased during the COVID-19
Pandemic.5F5F5F
6
Unemployment rates rose to 15.9% by the end of April 2020, dropped to 6.8% by November
2020, and fell again to 6.3% by May 2021. This unemployment rate was slightly higher than
4 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/auditor/pdf/adoptedplan_21-23.pdf
5 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/auditor/pdf/adoptedplan_21-23.pdf
6 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/auditor/pdf/adoptedplan_21-23.pdf
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 7
the national average of 5.5%, but also significantly lower than the state’s rate of 7.5%.6F6F6F
7 7F7F7F
8
Overall, the region's job and unemployment numbers are improving, and labor supply is still
strong.
There are several reasons for the strong labor supply in San Diego. The area’s appealing
climate and renowned quality of life are two main factors that attract a quality workforce. The
excellent quality of life continues to be an important advantage for San Diego companies in
attracting and retaining workers. In addition, local colleges and universities augment the
region’s steady influx of qualified labor.8F8F8F
9
1.1.4. PHYSICAL FEATURES
The physical, social, and economic development of the region has been influenced by its
unique geography, which encompasses over 70 miles of coastline, broad valleys, lakes,
forested mountains, and the desert. The county can be divided into three basic geographic
areas, all generally running in the north-south direction. The coastal plain extends from the
ocean to inland areas for 20 to 25 miles. The foothills and mountains, rising in elevation to
6,500 feet, comprise the middle section of the county. The third area is the desert, extending
from the mountains into Imperial County, 80 miles east of the coast. San Diegans can live in
the mountains, work near the ocean, and take recreational day trips to the desert.
One of San Diego’s greatest assets is its climate, with mild winters, pleasant summers, and
an abundance of sunshine and light rainfall. 9F9F9F
10 San Diego County experiences climatic
diversity due to its varied topography. Traveling inland, temperatures tend to be warmer in the
summer and cooler in the winter. In the local mountains, the average daily highs are 70
degrees and lows are about 55 degrees.
10F10F10F
11 The local mountains also get a light snowfall
several times a year. East of the mountains is the Anza Borrego Desert—where rainfall is
minimal, and summers are hot.
The dry, mild climate of San Diego County is conducive to productivity. Outdoor work and
recreational activities are possible almost year-round. In addition, storage and indoor work
can be handled with minimum investment in heating and air conditioning, although extreme
heat events have recently increased in both frequency and severity.
1.1.5. INFRASTRUCTURE
According to FEMA’s Local Mitigation Planning Handbook, infrastructure systems are critical
for life safety and economic viability, and include transportation, power, and water systems.
Many critical facilities depend on infrastructure to function. For example, hospitals need
electricity and water to continue treating patients. As with critical facilities, the continued
operations of infrastructure systems during and after a disaster are key factors in the severity
of regional impacts and the speed of recovery.11F11F11F
12
7 https://www.bea.gov/data/gdp/gdp-county-metro-and-other-areas
8 https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/
9 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/auditor/pdf/adoptedplan_21-23.pdf
10 https://usafacts.org/issues/climate/state/california/county/san-diego-county?endDate=2022-06-06&startDate=2018-02-
01#climate
11 https://www.weather.gov/wrh/climate?wfo=sgx
12 https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020-06/fema-local-mitigation-planning-handbook_03-2013.pdf
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 8
TRANSPORTATION
San Diego has a well-developed road system. There are freeways and state highways
maintained by Caltrans, private roads maintained by property owners, and other public roads
like those within incorporated cities (not within the County Maintained System). 12F12F12F
13
All urbanized areas in the region and some rural areas are served by public transit. The San
Diego region is divided into two transit development boards: the San Diego Metropolitan
Transit Development Board (MTDB), and the North County Transit Development Board
(NCTD).
The Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) operates transit service under MTDB and owns
assets of San Diego Trolley, Inc. (SDTI), San Diego Transit Corporation (SDTC), and the San
Diego & Arizona Eastern (SD&AE) Railway Company (which owns 108 miles of track and
right-of-way). Pre-COVID-19 Pandemic, MTS served approximately 3 million people in San
Diego County, generated 88 million annual passenger trips (300,000 trips each workday),
and responded to demand by scheduling 7,000 trips each workday. MTS licenses and
regulates taxicabs, jitneys, and other private for-hire passenger transportation services by
contract with the cities of San Diego, Chula Vista, El Cajon, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon
Grove, National City, Poway, Santee, and portions of San Diego County’s unincorporated
areas. Routes also connect with other regional operators’ routes, and San Diego Trolley
operates the light rail transit system under MTDB.
13F13F13F
14
Alternatively, the North County Transit District (NCTD) is governed by Board of Directors with
voting members from Carlsbad, Del Mar, Encinitas, Escondido, Oceanside, Solana Beach,
San Marcos, Vista, and San Diego County, and one non-voting member from the City of San
Diego. NCTD operates within a geographical area of approximately 1,020 square miles, and
primarily carries passengers in North San Diego County (from the Pacific Ocean east to
Ramona, and from the Orange County border south to Del Mar, with connections extending
to downtown San Diego). NCTD provides about 10.3 million passenger trips per year, and its
bus system has 30 routes.
In addition, NCTD runs special Express Buses for certain sporting and special events in San
Diego. Other services include SPRINTER hybrid rail, COASTER commuter trains, FLEX
demand response, and LIFT ADA paratransit service. NCTD shares the use of its tracks with
rail partners: Amtrak, Metrolink, BNSF, and Pacific Sun Railroad. Amtrak and Metrolink
operate more than 264 commuter trains on our tracks every week, while BNSF and Pacific
Sun move more than 9.6 million pounds of freight. 14F14F14F
15 15F15F15F
16
GAS & ELECTRICITY (POWER)
San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) is a public utility company that provides natural gas and
electric service to 3.7 million consumers through 1.4 million electric meters and 873,000
natural gas meters in San Diego County and South Orange County.16F16F16F
17 Overall, SDG&E’s
service area encompasses 4,100 square miles, two counties, and 25 communities. SDG&E is
a subsidiary of Sempra Energy, a Fortune 500 energy services holding company based in
13 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/dpw/roads/maintroad.html
14 https://www.sdmts.com/about/about-mts
15 NCTD-At-A-Glance-Fact-Sheet-February-2022.pdf (gonctd.com)
16 Facts Sheets | North County Transit District (gonctd.com)
17 About Us | San Diego Gas & Electric (sdge.com)
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 9
San Diego. All petroleum products in the region are delivered via a pipeline system operated
by Kinder Morgan Energy Partners. 17F17F17F
18 18F18F18F
19
WATER
The San Diego County Water Authority (Water Authority) is a public agency serving the San
Diego region as a wholesale supplier of water. Water Authority works through its 24 member
agencies to provide a safe, reliable water supply to support the region’s $240 billion economy
and the quality of life of 3.3 million public members.19F19F19F
20 The 24 member agencies are
comprised of six cities, three public utility districts, three irrigation districts, eleven municipal
water districts, and one federal agency (military base) and cover a service area of 934,778
acres.20F20F20F
21
In 2020, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California supplied 18% of San Diego
County Water Authority’s water, while 82% came from local and other supplies. Metropolitan
Water District imports the water from two sources: the Colorado River and the State Water
Project (Bay-Delta) in Northern California.21F21F21F
22 22F22F22F
23 Traveling hundreds of miles over aqueduct
systems (including pump stations, treatment plants and reservoirs), water is transported
through the Water Authority’s five primary pipelines, then distributed to the member agencies
for delivery to the public.
In 2020, 127 gallons of water per person, per day, were used in San Diego County.23F23F23F
24
1.1.6. PLANNING AREA: LOCAL JURISDICTIONS
The planning area for this document also includes local jurisdictions, such as the eighteen
incorporated cities and special districts. More details are provided in participating
jurisdictions’ respective annexes.
Carlsbad (Population: 114,746)
Carlsbad is a coastal community located 35 miles north of Downtown San Diego. It is
bordered by Encinitas to the south, Vista and San Marcos to the east, and Oceanside to the
north. Carlsbad is home to world-class resorts, such as the La Costa Resort and Spa and the
Four Seasons Resort at Aviara (offering championship-level golf and tennis facilities).
Carlsbad’s commercial/recreational landscape also includes Legoland, which opened in
spring 1999.
The City of Carlsbad has a strong economy, much of which has come from industrial
development. For example, Callaway Golf, Cobra Golf, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, and Immune
Response are a few of the local companies located in Carlsbad.24F24F24F
25 25F25F25F
26
18 https://www.sdge.com/more-information/our-company
19 https://www.sdge.com/more-information/our-company/about-
us#:~:text=3.7%20million%20consumers,Diego%20and%20southern%20Orange%20counties.
20 https://www.sdcwa.org/about-us/
21 https://www.sdcwa.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/overview-fs.pdf
22 https://www.mwdh2o.com/media/12208/2022-annual-achievement-report-full.pdf
23 https://www.sdcwa.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/overview-fs.pdf
24 Ibid
25 https://ir.ionispharma.com/news-releases/news-release-details/isis-pharmaceuticals-changes-name-ionis-pharmaceuticals
26 https://ir.callawaygolf.com/corporate-governance/contact-the-board County OES Decorative Image
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 10
The City of Carlsbad has four high performing school districts (Carlsbad Unified, Encinitas
Union, San Dieguito Union & San Marcos Unified). Distinguished private and parochial
schools also serve Carlsbad (including the internationally renowned Army & Navy Academy),
which offer specialties in STEM/STEAM, the arts, International Baccalaureate, and other
curricula.26F26F26F
27 27F27F27F
28
Chula Vista (Population: 275,487)
The City of Chula Vista is located at the center of one of the richest cultural, economic, and
environmentally diverse zones in the United States. It is the second-largest city in San Diego
County and boasts more than 52 square miles of coastal landscape, canyons, rolling hills,
mountains, quality parks, and trails. Chula Vista is a leader in conservation and renewable
energy and has outstanding public schools.
Established neighborhoods, contemporary communities, start-up firms, corporations,
nationally recognized entertainment venues, the nation’s only warm weather athlete training
center (the Chula Vista Elite Athlete Training Center), an award-winning nature center, and a
historic downtown all contribute to Chula Vista’s attraction for both families and businesses.28F28F28F
29
A range of educational opportunities, from preschool to college are available in Chula Vista.
Chula Vista Elementary School District (CVESD) is the largest K-6 district in California with
over 28,500 students and 46 campuses. The CVESD is a high-performing and frequently
honored district for student academic achievement, The city is also home to the Sweetwater
Union High School District (SUHSD), the largest secondary school 7-12 district in California.
The district encompasses 41,000 students, and 24,000 adult students on 32 campuses.29F29F29F
30
Coronado (Population: 20,192)
The City of Coronado is a small, 13.5 square mile beach community, with an island feel. The
military bases of the Naval Air Station North Island and Naval Amphibious Base occupy 5.3
square miles, and Coronado is connected to San Diego by a 2.3-mile bridge and to Imperial
Beach (its neighbor to the south) by a six-mile scenic highway (the Silver Strand).30F30F30F
31
It is primarily a bedroom community for San Diego and an internationally renowned tourist
destination. This vibrant community welcomes more than two million visitors annually to soak
up the sun and the sand, while enjoying the lush surroundings and village appeal of
Coronado. The city contains world-class resorts, including the Hotel Del Coronado, and
highly acclaimed restaurants.
Coronado Unified School District serves local students and includes eight schools.31F31F31F
32
Del Mar (Population: 4,268)
Incorporated in 1959, the City of Del Mar is a quaint, seaside village located 20 miles north of
San Diego. Del Mar is the smallest city in the County, covers just 2.2 square miles, and is
known for its vibrant small-town atmosphere. Del Mar attracts locals and upwards of 2 million
27 https://www.carlsbadca.gov/residents/schools
28 https://www.armyandnavyacademy.org/
29 https://trainatchulavista.com/about-olympic-athlete-training-site/
30 chulavistaca.gov/residents/education
31 https://www.coronado.ca.us/210/About-Coronado
32 https://coronadousd.net/Our-District/index.html
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 11
visitors annually from all over the world, who come to enjoy the beautiful dog-friendly
beaches, hiking trails, scenic views, and the many shops and dining opportunities located
within the Del Mar Village.
The community is primarily comprised of single-family residential neighborhoods, with retail
uses and restaurants in the downtown, a small commercial area, and several hotels. Located
27 miles north of Downtown San Diego, this coastal community is known for its affluence and
comfortable standard of living. It is a beautiful, wooded hillside area overlooking the ocean
and has a resort-like atmosphere. The Del Mar Racetrack and Thoroughbred Club serve as
Del Mar’s most noted landmark. This racetrack is also the location for the annual San Diego
County Fair. The City of Del Mar’s shoreline includes the Del Mar City Beach and the Torrey
Pines State Beach.
The city provides law enforcement services through a contract with the San Diego County
Sheriff’s Department, and fire administration is provided through a mutual agreement
between the cities of Del Mar, Encinitas, and Solana Beach.32F32F32F
33
El Cajon (Population: 106,215)
El Cajon is located 15 miles east of the City of San Diego. El Cajon is an inland valley
surrounded by rolling hills and mountains. As one of the most eastern cities in the County, El
Cajon has a warm and dry climate. El Cajon is a diverse residential, commercial, and
industrial area, and serves as the main commerce center for several surrounding
communities.
Gillespie Field, a general aviation airport, is a major contributing factor to the city’s vibrant
industrial development. There are three School Districts that serve El Cajon: Cajon Valley
Unified School District, La Mesa-Spring Valley Unified School District, and Grossmont Union
High School District. There are also several charter schools within the city.33F33F33F
34
Encinitas (Population: 62,780)
Encinitas is located along six miles of Pacific coastline in the northern half of San Diego
County. Approximately 21 square miles, Encinitas is characterized by coastal beaches, cliffs,
flat-topped coastal areas, steep mesa bluffs, and rolling hills. Incorporated in 1986, the city
encompasses the communities of Old Encinitas, New Encinitas, Olivenhain, Leucadia, and
Cardiff-By-The-Sea. Encinitas is bordered by Carlsbad to the north, Solana Beach to the
south and the community of Rancho Santa Fe to the east.
The Los Angeles/San Diego (LOSSAN) rail passes through the city, and other transit
corridors traversing the city include El Camino Real and Coast Highway 101. The San Elijo
Lagoon Reserve boasts the largest coastal wetland in San Diego County and is home to
nearly 300 different bird species throughout the year. The century-old Downtown 101 coastal
shopping district features historic architecture, quaint shops, sidewalk cafes, specialty retail
stores and upscale restaurants.
The city is served by the Encinitas Union School and San Dieguito Union High School
Districts.34F34F34F
35
33 https://www.delmar.ca.us/764/About-Del-Mar
34 https://www.elcajon.gov/resident-services/living-in-el-cajon/el-cajon-schools
35 https://coronavirus.encinitasca.gov/public-schools
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 12
Escondido (Population: 151,038)
Escondido is located 30 miles north of San Diego and is approximately 18 miles inland from
the coast. In 1994, the people of Escondido conceived a vision of cultural excellence.35F35F35F
36
Today, the $73.4 million California Center for the Arts stands as a product of this vision.
Inland North San Diego County, of which Escondido is at the core, is emerging as a regional
economic leader at the forefront of job development and new industries. Escondido has a
comprehensive mix of successful businesses—supplying a diverse job base and high quality
of life.36F36F36F
37
There is a unique mix of agriculture, industrial firms, high-tech firms, recreational centers,
parks, and residential areas in the city. The area’s largest shopping mall, the North County
Fair, houses major retail and smaller stores. California State University, San Marcos and
Palomar Community College are located within minutes of Escondido.
Escondido is served by two public school districts—Escondido Union and San Pasqual
Union.37F37F37F
38
Imperial Beach (Population: 26,137)
Imperial Beach claims the distinction of being the “Most Southwesterly City – in the
continental United States.” The city is in the Southwest corner of San Diego County, only five
miles from the Mexican Border and 15 miles from downtown San Diego. With a population of
26,137, Imperial Beach occupies an area of 4.4 square miles. Imperial Beach offers some of
the least expensive housing west of Interstate 5. It is primarily a resort/recreation community
with a vast beach area, as well as a 12,000-foot pier for fishing. Looking south, just across
from the international border, Tijuana’s famous “Bullring by the Sea,” the Plaza De
Monumental can be seen.
The city is served by two school districts—South Bay Union and Sweetwater Union.38F38F38F
39
La Mesa (Population: 61,121)
La Mesa is centrally located 12 miles east of Downtown San Diego, and is a suburban
residential community as well as a commercial and trade center. The area is characterized by
rolling hills and has many hilltop home sites that take advantage of the beautiful views.
La Mesa offers affordable housing within a wide range of prices, as well as high-end luxury
homes atop Mount Helix. La Mesa has an abundance of mixed-use condominiums for those
who prefer a downtown village atmosphere. There is balance between single-family housing
and multi-family housing within La Mesa’s city limits. One of the region’s major retail facilities,
Grossmont Center, is in the heart of the city and adjacent to another major activity center—
Grossmont Hospital.
The La Mesa-Spring Valley Elementary School District provides elementary and junior high
schools. There are two high schools in the area and Grossmont College, a two-year
community college, is also located in La Mesa.39F39F39F
40
36 https://artcenter.org/about/history/
37 https://escondido.org/employment-in-escondido
38 https://escondido.org/escondido-schools
39 https://www.imperialbeachca.gov/community
40 https://www.guhsd.net/
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 13
Lemon Grove (Population: 27,627)
Lemon Grove lies about nine miles east of Downtown San Diego and has the charm of small-
town living with the conveniences of big city proximity. Initially the site of expansive lemon
orchards, the city remains a small town with a rural ambiance.40F40F40F
41
The Sheriff’s Department Lemon Grove Substation has provided contract law enforcement
services to the City of Lemon Grove and unincorporated communities of Spring Valley,
Rancho San Diego, Jamul, Mt. Helix, Casa De Oro, La Mesa, and El Cajon since 1977.41F41F41F
42
The city is also served by two school districts—Lemon Grove School and Grossmont Union
High School Districts, which include six elementary schools, one middle school, and three
high schools.42F42F42F
43
National City (Population: 56,173)
Incorporated in 1887, National City is one of the county’s oldest incorporated areas. Just five
miles south of the City of San Diego, National City is the South Bay’s center of industrial
activity and has a rich history. The city embodies a proud tradition of commerce, urban
agriculture, production, and transportation.43F43F43F
44
There are a great number of historical sites in National City and homes in the area are
usually 50 years or older. Stately Victorians reflect the early part of the century when shipping
and import/export magnates lived there. Additionally, the San Diego Naval Station overlaps
both Cities of San Diego and National City and is the largest naval facility in the country.
Served by National Elementary and Sweetwater High School districts, National City also
offers several private schools for all grade levels. National City is best known for its Mile of
Cars; the title describing its abundant auto dealerships. Two large shopping malls, Plaza
Bonita, and South Bay Plaza are also located in National City.
Oceanside (Population: 174,068)
Oceanside is centrally located between San Diego and Los Angeles. Located just 36 miles
north of Downtown San Diego, Oceanside is bordered by Camp Pendleton to the north,
Carlsbad to the south, Vista to the east and the Pacific Ocean to the west. The current
population of makes Oceanside the largest coastal community.
Industrial real estate rates tend to be lower than the county average, and housing tends to be
more affordable than in other areas of Southern California coastal cities. With a near-perfect
year-round climate and recognition as one of the most livable places in the nation, Oceanside
offers both an incomparable lifestyle and abundant economic opportunity. Its extensive
recreational facilities include 3.5 miles of sandy beaches, Oceanside Harbor, and Oceanside
Lagoon. 44F44F44F
45
41 https://www.lemongrove.ca.gov/community
42 https://www.lemongrove.ca.gov/city-hall/law-enforcement
43 https://www.lemongrove.ca.gov/community/local-schools
44 https://www.nationalcityca.gov/government/city-manager/economic-development
45 https://visitoceanside.org/
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 14
The city is served by the Oceanside Unified School District with 15 elementary, six middle,
and three high school options.45F45F45F
46
Port of San Diego
The Port was established in 1962 under the Port Act and is charged with implementing
the Tidelands Trust Doctrine.46F46F46F
47 47F47F47F
48 The Port of San Diego manages San Diego Bay and 34
miles of its natural waterfront for the people of California.
For over 50 years, the Port's five member cities (Chula Vista, Coronado, Imperial Beach,
National City, and San Diego) have worked together to develop and promote commerce,
navigation, recreation, and fisheries on and around San Diego Bay.
Self-funded, The Port contributes billions annually to San Diego’s economy, benefiting the
community, local businesses, and employees. Businesses at The Port provide thousands of
well-paying jobs, supporting individuals and families throughout the region. The Port is
governed by a seven-member Board of Port Commissioners representing five cities and
provides leadership that transcends local boundaries. The Port’s daily operations are carried
out by a workforce of over 550 dedicated employees.48F48F48F
49
The Port of San Diego is the fourth largest of the eleven ports in California, and it has
invested hundreds of millions of dollars in public improvements within its five member cities.
The Port oversees two maritime cargo terminals, two cruise ship terminals, 22 public parks,
the Harbor Police Department, and the leases of hundreds of tenant and subtenant
businesses around San Diego Bay. These include 17 hotels, 74 restaurants, three specialty
retail centers and numerous other attractions including museums and bay tours. 49F49F49F
50
Each year, millions of people enjoy a remarkable way of life offered by San Diego Bay and its
waterfront communities. 50F50F50F
51
Poway (Population: 48,841)
Poway is located 23 miles northeast of the City of San Diego, within the well-populated I-15
corridor. Poway is distinct because it is set into the foothills. Poway’s main recreational facility
is the 350-acre Lake Poway Park. This lake also serves as a reservoir for the water supplied
to San Diego by the Colorado River Aqueduct. The area has many recreational facilities,
providing complete park sites, trails, and fishing opportunities.
Poway is also home to the Blue Sky Ecological Reserve—700 acres of natural habitat with
hiking, horseback riding and interpretive trails. The Poway Center for the Performing Arts is
an 809-seat professional theater that also provides local entertainment.51F51F51F
52
The Poway Unified School District (PUSD) is excellent and has consistently been rated as
top tier. PUSD operates 25 elementary schools (K-5), one elementary & middle school
combination (TK-8th), six middle schools (6-8), one continuation high school, five
46 https://www.oside.us/
47 https://pantheonstorage.blob.core.windows.net/administration/San-Diego-Unified-Port-District-Act.pdf
48 https://pantheonstorage.blob.core.windows.net/administration/California-Public-Trust-Doctrine.pdf
49 https://www.portofsandiego.org/people
50 https://www.portofsandiego.org/about-port-san-diego/history
51 https://www.portofsandiego.org/about-port-san-diego
52 https://www.powaycenter.com/156/Technical-Information
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 15
comprehensive high schools (9-12), and one adult school. Twenty-six schools are in the City
of San Diego and twelve schools are in Poway. The district serves over 36,000 students and
is the third largest school district in the county.52F52F52F
53
San Diego (Population: 1,386,932)
The City of San Diego is the largest city in San Diego County and is the second largest city in
the state. San Diego is renowned for its idyllic climate, 70 miles of pristine beaches and a
dazzling array of world-class family attractions. Popular attractions include the world-famous
San Diego Zoo, San Diego Zoo Safari Park, SeaWorld San Diego, LEGOLAND California,
Cabrillo National Monument, and Old Town State Historic Park.
San Diego's arts and culture and culinary arts are also booming. New culinary arts talents
prepare award-winning meals throughout the region's 6,400 eating establishments, and
Balboa Park (the largest urban cultural park in the U.S.) is home to 15 museums, numerous
art galleries, beautiful gardens, and the Tony Award-winning Old Globe Theatre.53F53F53F
54 54F54F54F
55
The city is served by the San Diego Unified School District for elementary, middle, and high
school options.55F55F55F
56
San Marcos (Population: 94,833)
San Marcos is located between Vista and Escondido, approximately 35 miles north of
Downtown San Diego. San Marcos is known for its resort climate, rural setting, central
location, and affordable housing prices. Although San Marcos has experienced rapid growth
over the last decade, it continues to maintain the small-town atmosphere that initially
attracted many new community members.56F56F56F
57
It is also home to two of the region’s major educational facilities, Palomar College and
California State University, San Marcos.57F57F57F
58 The city is served by the San Marcos Unified
School District, which is the seventh largest district in San Diego with 19 schools—10
elementary schools, two K-8 schools, three middles schools, three high schools, and one
independent study school.58F58F58F
59 59F59F59F
60
Santee (Population: 60,037)
“Sunny climate, good schools, small-town friendliness”—Santee prides itself on having a lean
government that responds to its community’s concerns. Collectively, these are among the key
attributes of the city. Santee is ideally located between the Pacific Ocean and the mountains
of the Cleveland National Forest. While Santee is considered part of the East County Region,
the city is only 18 freeway miles from San Diego’s premier beaches. Santee is connected to
the coastline by State Route 52, a six-lane freeway that connects Interstate 5 in La Jolla to
State Route 67. State Route 125 also intersects with State Route 52, forming a transportation
hub in the heart of Santee. Since the expansion of the San Diego Trolley, Santee community
53 https://www.powayusd.com/en-US/District/About-Us
54 https://www.sandiego.org/articles/about-san-diego-ca.aspx
55 https://www.balboapark.org/performing-arts/the-old-globe
56 https://www.sandiegounified.org/schools/all_schools
57 https://www.san-marcos.net/live/about-us
58 https://www.san-marcos.net/live/about-us
59 https://www.smusd.org/about_us
60 https://drive.google.com/file/d/15YZn-2ZnVwoAxEy-UTf1ETQvK9oVy7m9/view
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 16
members can ride the Trolley to Mission Valley, Downtown San Diego and as far as the
U.S./Mexico Border.
Santee lies 18 miles northeast of Downtown San Diego and is bordered on the east and west
by slopes and rugged mountains. The San Diego River runs through this community, which
was once a dairy farming area. It is now a residential area that has experienced phenomenal
growth since the 1970’s.
Water services are provided by Padre Dam Municipal Water District. The Santee School
District and Grossmont Union High School District oversee K-12 education. Elementary and
middle school students attend one of the nine available schools, while high school students
attend Santana or West Hills High School. Nearby higher education facilities include San
Diego State University and Grossmont Community College. 60F60F60F
61 61F61F61F
62
Solana Beach (Population: 12,941)
Solana Beach was incorporated in 1986 and is a four square-mile city regarded as one of the
county’s most attractive coastal communities. Solana Beach is known for its small-town
atmosphere and pristine beaches, and has one of the highest median income levels in the
County—as well as an outstanding school system (recognized with state and national awards
of excellence).
The Pacific Ocean is to the west, the City of Encinitas to the north, and the City of Del Mar to
the south. The unincorporated village of Rancho Santa Fe is located on the east side.
Property values in this upscale community have appreciated significantly since incorporation.
The business community has equally enjoyed the prosperity of a healthy economy, as Solana
Beach is home for many artisans, high-tech businesses, and professionals.
The elementary school district is composed of five elementary schools, two of which are
within the city limits. The middle school is under the administration of the San Dieguito Union
High School District. High school students in the area attend Torrey Pines High School
located to the southeast of Solana Beach. Additionally, there are several private and
parochial schools in Solana Beach.62F62F62F
63
Lomas Santa Fe, located east of the freeway, is a master planned community, which features
shopping, homes, and condominiums, two golf courses and the family-oriented Lomas Santa
Fe Country Club.
Vista (Population: 98,381)63F63F63F
64
Vista is a thriving community that continues to grow and develop many new activities and
attractions. The Moonlight Amphitheatre, AVO Playhouse, and the Wave Waterpark are just
some of the many cultural activities the offered in Vista. Vista's Business Park is home to
over 800 companies, with many global businesses relocating their headquarters,
manufacturing, distribution, and marketing facilities to this business park. In addition, Vista
61 https://www.cityofsanteeca.gov/our-city/about-santee-new
62 https://www.santeesd.net/schools/district_school_sites
63 https://www.ci.solana-beach.ca.us/index.asp?SEC=6BACDB03-96AC-47CC-9F5C-57082740FDAF&Type=B_BASIC
64 https://datasurfer.sandag.org/dataoverview
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 17
Village has brought revitalization to the downtown area with dining, entertainment, shopping,
and public amenities.64F64F64F
65
The City of Vista is approximately 19 square miles and contracts with Vista Irrigation District
for its water services. The city operates its own fire department and contracts with the San
Diego Sheriff’s Department for law enforcement services. 65F65F65F
66
There are 17 elementary and magnet schools, six middle schools, and seven high schools
and magnet schools.66F66F66F
67
Tribal Communities
Indigenous Americans have lived in the region for thousands of years. The four tribal
groupings that make up the indigenous American Indians of San Diego County are the
Kumeyaay (also referred to as Diegueño or Mission Indians), the Luiseño, the Cupeño, and
the Cahuilla.
San Diego County has the largest number (18) of Indian reservations of any county in the
United States.
The reservations include total land holdings of an estimated 193 square miles.67F67F67F
68
Tribes can develop a Tribal Mitigation Plan independently or participate in a Multi-
Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, either with other Tribes or with one or more local
governments.68F68F68F
69
Special Districts
A Special District is an independent unit of local government set up to perform a specific
function or a restricted number of related functions, such as street lighting or waterworks. A
special district might be composed of cities, townships, counties, or any part or combination.
The 61 Special Districts in San Diego County are separate legal entities (governed by the
Board of Supervisors) that provide for specialized public improvements and services deemed
to benefit properties and community members, and financed by specific taxes and
assessments.
The Special Districts provide authorized services including sanitation, flood control, road,
park, lighting maintenance, fire protection, or ambulance service to specific areas in the
county.69F69F69F
70 Therefore, Special Districts have the option to either create their own Local Hazard
Mitigation Plan or partner with a local government to create a plan annex.70F70F70F
71
65 https://www.moonlightstage.com/about-us/rentals/avo-playhouse
66 https://www.cityofvista.com/residents/about-vista
67 https://www.vistausd.org/our_schools
68 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/auditor/pdf/adoptedplan_21-23.pdf
69 https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020-06/fema-tribal-planning-handbook_05-2019.pdf
70 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/auditor/pdf/adoptedplan_21-23.pdf.
71 https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020-06/fema-local-mitigation-planning-handbook_03-2013.pdf
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 18
1.1.7. DEVELOPMENT OVER TIME
The San Diego County General Plan (which informs and is informed by this plan) applies to
the unincorporated area of the county and is the County’s long-term blueprint for the vision of
the future. It reflects an environmentally sustainable approach to planning that balances the
need for adequate infrastructure, housing, and economic vitality while maintaining and
preserving existing communities, agricultural areas, and open spaces.
San Diego County is approximately 2.9 million acres of which 2.3 million acres are
unincorporated areas. Within the unincorporated area, the County’s land-use jurisdiction is
limited by Tribal lands, and State and Federally owned lands, and military installations
including Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton. As a result, the County has land use
jurisdiction over 772,239 acres or 35 percent of the unincorporated area.71F71F71F
72
Wildfire and flooding are the chief vulnerabilities affecting development in San Diego
County. When areas that were previously wildlands subject to periodic wildfires and
flooding are developed, combustible structures and densified populations are
necessarily introduced, and there may be changes to the threat potential for life and
property. These vulnerabilities cannot be entirely eliminated but are significantly mitigated by
development standards that require adherence to fire-resistant building codes; the creation
and maintenance of defensible space; the avoidance of over-densification; the provision of
safe and adequate population egress routes and the creation of buffer zones with low
combustibility open spaces.
County staff have updated long range planning documents including the General Plan Safety
Element in 2022 to include new evacuation route data, analysis, and policies in response to
state law. Additionally, a Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Report was added to the
Safety Element, which identifies how climate change is forecast to impact the county's
unincorporated areas and summarizes climate adaptation plans and programs already in
place. This Vulnerability Assessment also evaluates anticipated climate change impacts to
the people and physical assets in the county’s unincorporated areas and assesses the
capacity to adapt to these impacts.
When reviewing proposed land development projects, from discretionary reviews through
building permit plan check, staff ensure all local and state requirements are applied to
projects. Plan check of discretionary projects includes a General Plan conformance review to
ensure compliance with documents such as the newly adopted Safety Element, as well as an
environmental review, to examine potential project specific impacts and risks through the lens
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), working to lessen potential impacts such
as wildfire and egress through analysis and mitigation efforts, to address potential
vulnerability. This analysis includes close collaboration with local fire and emergency
response entities to work towards projects that are designed and constructed safely. The
County of San Diego has local building code requirements that go above and beyond the
requirements of the California Building Code, to further provide homes and developments the
opportunity to be built safely to protect communities and address vulnerability.
The County of San Diego routinely enhances its approach to analyzing and planning for
development that may be in hazard prone areas. This is done through regular updates to
documents such as the County General Plan, County Building Code, Consolidated Fire
72 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/pds/generalplan.html
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 19
Code, and Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance, among other planning documents. These
updates enhance the safety of future development by evaluating impacts and incorporating
mitigation efforts prior to construction. Local changes that enhance mitigation measures
include the County of San Diego review of development in fire severity zones. The County of
San Diego applies the same building code requirements to areas in moderate fire severity
zones as it does to development in high and very high fire severity zones. The result is
enhanced design and construction for moderately zoned fire severity locations in new homes
and structures built today. In 2020, the County of San Diego further expanded wildfire
protections by requiring more restrictive attic ventilation requirements to reduce the risk of
embers entering homes. Mitigation efforts to protect against flood include building code
requiring all new construction in flood-prone areas must provide raised finish floor elevation 1’
above freeboard elevation.
For the period between 2018-2022, single family residences made up approximately 43
percent of the development activity in the unincorporated areas, while mobile homes and
tracts of land comprised an additional 56 percent of the development activity. Permits for
commercial development constituted 1 percent of the development activity. For a more detail
description of development trends, see the 2021 General Plan Annual Progress Report
available here:
https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/pds/advance/GeneralPlan/2021%20Gener
al%20Plan%20Annual%20Progress%20Report.pdf
The table below summarizes development trends in the unincorporated County in the period
since the preparation of the previous (2018) Hazard Mitigation Plan update, as well as
expected future development trends:
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 20
TABLE 1: RECENT AND EXPECTED FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TRENDS
Criterion Response
Has your jurisdiction
annexed any land
since the preparation
of the previous
hazard mitigation
plan?
• If yes, give
the estimated
area annexed
and estimated
number of
parcels or
structures.
No
Is your jurisdiction
expected to annex
any areas during the
performance period
of this plan?
• If yes, describe
land areas and
dominant areas.
• If yes, who
currently has
permitting
authority over
these areas?
No
How many permits
for new construction
were issued in your
jurisdiction since the
preparation of the
previous hazard
mitigation plan?
2018 2019 2020 2021
2022 as
of
10/31/22
2022
Annualized
Single
Family 531 528 446 631 598 652
Tract 581 509 462 626 505 551
Mobile Home 235 211 145 156 107 117
Multi-Family
(Commercial) 3 7 17 17 45 49
Total 1,350 1,255 1,070 1,430 1,255 1,369
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 21
Criterion Response
Describe the level of
buildout in the
jurisdiction, based
on your jurisdiction’s
buildable lands
inventory. If no such
inventory exists,
provide a qualitative
description.
Dwelling unit capacity is an estimate of how much new development
could occur theoretically over an unlimited time period. It represents
the difference between the amount of development on the land today
and the likely amount that could be built under the current land use.
The remaining dwelling unit capacity for the unincorporated area is
60,748 units.
Construction of these units may or may not happen and depends on
obtaining approvals from the County. Infrastructure such as roads,
sewers, storm drains, and water connections may be needed. Also,
site-specific conditions may limit the number of units constructed such
as animal habitats, steep slopes, and flood areas; and demand for
new homes.
For a more detailed description of dwelling unit capacity in the County,
see the 2020 Housing Production & Capacity Portal Summary Report
available here:
PortalSummaryReport.pdf (sandiegocounty.gov)
While this development over time does not appear to be significant on it’s own, the County’s
population growth associated with this development does appear significant.
The County of San Diego grew from the third to the second most populous County in
California since the last update of this plan with the addition of 100,000 population members.
This increase is population was accounted for throughout the update of this plan to help
ensure vulnerabilities to hazards did not increase as well.
Therefore, development and growth over time were incorporated into the Local Planning
Group’s (LPG’s) priorities as this plan’s Goals, Objectives, and Actions/Priority Actions were
updated.
Over the next five years and beyond, the County of San Diego Office of Emergency Services
(County OES) will continue to collaborate with other County Department partners, such as
the County Department of Planning & Development Services (the authors of the County’s
General Plan and related Progress Reports) to remain briefed on development short-term
and long-term trends and potential changes in hazard vulnerabilities, and collaborate on
hazard mitigation solutions. These briefings will also help County OES and the Hazard
Mitigation Planning Group (HMPG) determine if priorities within this plan and it’s projects
need to be reevaluated and/or updated.
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 22
1.2. COMMUNITY RATING SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
Flooding is a hazard that affects San Diego County. Meeting National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP) requirements is the most cost-effective way to reduce the flood risk to new
buildings and infrastructure.72F72F72F
73 The County of San Diego currently participates in NFIP.
The Community Rating System (CRS) is a FEMA program and rewards communities that go
beyond the minimum standards for floodplain management under the NFIP. Communities can
potentially improve their Community Rating System and lower NFIP premiums by developing
a CRS Plan.
For more information on the National Flood Insurance Program, see
http://www.fema.gov/national-flood-insurance-program.
The following table compares CRS and Hazard Mitigation Plan requirements/tasks:
TABLE 2: FEMA LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING HANDBOOK WORKSHEET 1.1
DESCRIBES THE CRS REQUIREMENTS MET BY THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY MULTI-
JURISDICTIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN.
Community Rating System
(CRS) Planning Steps
Local Mitigation Planning Handbook Tasks
(44 CFR Part 201)
Step 1. Organize Task 1: Determine the Planning Area and Resources
Task 2: Build the Planning Team 44 CFR 201.6(c)(1)
Step 2. Involve the public Task 3: Create an Outreach Strategy
44 CFR 201.6(b)(1)
Step 3. Coordinate Task 4: Review Community Capabilities
44 CFR 201.6(b)(2) & (3)
Step 4. Assess the hazard Task 5: Conduct a Risk Assessment 44 CFR
201.6(c)(2)(i)
44 CFR 201.6(c)(2)(ii) & (iii) Step 5. Assess the problem
Step 6. Set goals Task 6: Develop a Mitigation Strategy 44 CFR
201.6(c)(3)(i)
44 CFR 201.6(c)(3)(ii)
44 CFR 201.6(c)(3)(iii)
Step 7. Review possible
activities
Step 8. Draft an action plan
Step 9. Adopt the plan Task 8: Review and Adopt the Plan
44 CFR 201.6(c)(5)
Step 10. Implement, evaluate,
revise
Task 7: Keep the Plan Current
Task 9: Create a Safe and Resilient Community 44 CFR
201.6(c)(4)
Two planning partners currently participate in the CRS program. The following table summarizes
the CRS status of each. Many of the mitigation actions identified in this plan are creditable
activities under the CRS program. Therefore, successful implementation of this plan offers the
potential to enhance the CRS classification.
73 https://www.fema.gov/floodplain-management/manage-risk
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 23
TABLE 3: CRS STATUS OF PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS.
Jurisdiction NFIP
Community #
CRS Entry
Date
Current CRS
Classification
Premium Discount
SFHA Non-SFHA
Oceanside 060294 10/1/1991 8 10 5
San Diego
County 060284 10/1/1994 7 15 5
Any jurisdiction or special district may participate in the hazard mitigation planning process.
However, to request FEMA approval, each of the local jurisdictions must meet all
requirements of 44 CFR §201.6. In addition to the requirement for participation in the
process, the federal regulation specifies the following requirements for multi-jurisdictional
plans:
• The risk assessment must assess each jurisdiction’s risk where they may vary from the
risks facing the entire planning area. (44 CFR §201.6(c)(2)(iii))
• There must be identifiable action items specific to the jurisdiction requesting FEMA
approval or credit of the plan. (44 CFR §201.6(c)(3)(iv))
• Each jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan must document that is has been
formally adopted. (44 CFR §201.6(c)(5))
A hazard mitigation plan must clearly list the jurisdictions that participated in the plan and are
seeking plan approval. The San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan
meets all requirements, including CRS requirements.
More information about this topic is discussed in Section 4 and 6 of this plan.
1.2.1. CATEGORIES OF FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
Floodplain management is a community-based effort to prevent or reduce the risk of flooding,
resulting in a more resilient community. Multiple groups with a stake in protecting their
communities from flooding conduct floodplain management functions like zoning, building
codes, enforcement, education, and other tasks.
While FEMA has minimum floodplain management standards for communities participating in
the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), adopting higher local standards will lead to
safer, stronger, more resilient communities.73F73F73F
74
The different categories of floodplain management activities are detailed within this section.
Related community capabilities and potential local projects (to be completed at future dates)
are described respectively in Section 4 and Section 6 of this plan:
1. Preventive activities keep flood problems from getting worse. The use and
development of flood-prone areas is limited through planning, land acquisition, or
regulation. They are usually administered by building, zoning, planning, and/or code
enforcement offices.
• Floodplain mapping and data
• Planning and zoning
• Open space preservation
74 Floodplain Management | FEMA.gov
• Stormwater management
• Floodplain regulations
• Drainage system maintenance
SECTION ONE | Determine the Planning Area and Resources 24
• Erosion setbacks • Building codes
2. Property protection activities are usually undertaken by property owners on a
building-by- building or parcel basis.
• Relocation
• Retrofitting
• Acquisition
• Sewer backup protection
• Building elevation
• Insurance
3. Natural resource protection activities preserve or restore natural areas or the natural
functions of floodplain and watershed areas. They are implemented by a variety of
agencies, primarily parks, recreation, or conservation agencies or organizations.
• Wetlands protection
• Water quality improvement
• Erosion and sediment control
• Coastal barrier protection
• Natural area preservation
• Environmental corridors
• Natural area restoration
• Natural functions protection
4. Emergency services measures are taken during an emergency to minimize its
impact. These measures are usually the responsibility of city or county emergency
management staff and the owners or operators of major or critical facilities.
• Hazard threat recognition
• Critical facilities protection
• Hazard warning
• Health and safety maintenance
• Hazard response operations
• Post-disaster mitigation actions
5. Structural projects keep flood waters away from an area with a levee, reservoir, or
other flood control measure. They are usually designed by engineers and managed or
maintained by public works staff.
• Reservoirs
• Channel modifications
• Levees/floodwalls
• Storm drain improvements
• Diversions
6. Public information activities advise property owners, potential property owners, and
visitors about the hazards, ways to protect people and property from the hazards, and
the natural and beneficial functions of local floodplains. They are usually implemented
by a public information office.
• Map information
• Library
• Outreach projects
• Technical assistance
• Real estate disclosure
• Environmental education
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
25
SECTION TWO: Build the Planning Team
San Diego County, California
2023
Decorative Image CAL FIRE San Diego Communications Bureau
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 26
2. SECTION TWO: BUILD THE PLANNING TEAM
This San Diego County, California Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (The Plan) was
prepared with input from:
• County public
• County of San Diego Groups, Agencies and Departments
• Eighteen Incorporated Cities
• The Port of San Diego
• Water Districts
• Fire Protection Districts
• Air Pollution Control District
• The National Weather Service/ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
• Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California San Diego
• California Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES)
• Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
County public participation will be discussed in Section 3 of this plan.
Feedback and approval of this plan is provided by Cal OES and FEMA. County Board of
Supervisors’ approval then follows.
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 27
2.1. PLANNING PARTICIPANTS
Below is a detailed list of all other planning participant names, positions/titles, and
agencies—All below listed jurisdictions sought local, state, and federal approval as
Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Annexes:
TABLE 4: COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO GROUPS, AGENCIES AND DEPARTMENTS:
Name Title Department
Jeff Toney Director Office of Emergency
Services
Stephen Rea Assistant Director Office of Emergency
Services
Daniel Vasquez Group Program Manager Office of Emergency
Services
Dominique D. Fonseca Program Coordinator Office of Emergency
Services
Nick Zubel Senior Emergency
Services Coordinator
Office of Emergency
Services
Rob Andolina Emergency Services
Coordinator
Office of Emergency
Services
Shannon Nuzzo Emergency Services
Coordinator
Office of Emergency
Services
Michael Robles Senior Geographic
Information Systems
Analyst
Office of Emergency
Services
Laura Caracciolo Emergency Services
Coordinator
Office of Emergency
Services
Cody Gallagher Emergency Services
Coordinator
Office of Emergency
Services
Tracy Dahlkamp Student Worker
(Graduate/Tech)
Office of Emergency
Services
Ryan DeHart Senior Emergency
Services Coordinator
Office of Emergency
Services (Fmr.)
Garrett Cooper Deputy Director Agriculture, Weights &
Measures
Jesus Amial Administrative Analyst Agriculture, Weights &
Measures
Austin Shepherd Deputy
Commissioner/Sealer
Agriculture, Weights &
Measures
Vince Acosta IT/GIS Coordinator Agriculture, Weights &
Measures
Brian Christison Emergency Medical
Services Coordinator
Emergency Medical
Services
Todd Burton Environmental Health
Specialist III
Environmental Health &
Quality
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 28
Name Title Department
Brad Long Supervising
Environmental Health
Specialist
Environmental Health &
Quality
Amy Harbert Director Environmental Health &
Quality
Dave Nissen Deputy Chief Fire
Ryan Silva Battalion Chief CAL FIRE/Fire
Jessica A. Martinez Community Risk
Reduction Program
Coordinator
Fire
Ashley Risueno Administrative Analyst Fire (Fmr.)
Jo Ann Julien Health Planning and
Program Specialist
Health & Human
Service Agency
Sandi Hazlewood Chief, Departmental
Operations
Parks & Recreation
Judy Tjiong-Pietrezak Senior Park Project
Manager
Parks & Recreation
Chelsea Jander Senior Park Project
Manager
Parks & Recreation
Marco Mares Region Manager Parks & Recreation
Jason Hemmens Deputy Director Parks & Recreation
Tyler Farmer Group Program Manager Planning &
Development Services
Mike Madrid Land Use/Environmental
Planner-Long Range
Planning
Planning &
Development Services
Robert Efird Program Manager-Long
Range Planning
Planning &
Development Services
(Fmr,)
Vince Nicoletti Deputy Director Planning &
Development Services
Shannon Ackerman GIS Analyst-Quartic
Solutions
Planning &
Development Services
(GIS)
Jason Batchelor GIS Coordinator Planning &
Development Services
(GIS)
Ian Dawes Senior GIS Analyst Planning &
Development Services
(GIS)
Donna Johnson Senior Emergency
Services Coordinator
Public Health Services /
Emergency Medical
Services (Fmr.)
Derek Gade Assistant Director Public Works
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 29
Name Title Department
Mehdi Khalili Civil Engineer Public Works (Flood
Control)
Matthew Schmid Senior Civil Engineer Public Works (Roads)
Greg Carlton Senior Civil Engineer Public Works (Roads)
Leann Carmichael Senior Hydrologist Public Works
(Sustainability Planning
Division)
Rene Vidales Program Coordinator Public Works
Richard Chin Project Manager Public Works (Roads)
EIGHTEEN INCORPORATED CITIES:
Name City Title
Don Rawson Carlsbad Emergency Services
Coordinator
Kim Young Carlsbad Assistant Director of
Emergency Services
David Harrison Carlsbad Assistant Director of
Emergency Services (Fmr.)
Marie Jones-Kirk Carlsbad Program Manager
Marlon King Chula Vista Program Manager
Jayson Summers Coronado Division Chief
Jeff Terwilliger Coronado Emergency Management
Coordinator (Fmr.)
Clem Brown Del Mar Environmental Sustainability
& Special Projects Manager
Corina Jimenez Encinitas Senior Management Analyst
Lois Yum Encinitas Management Analyst
Jeff Murdock Escondido Emergency Preparedness
Manager
Andy McKellar Heartland (El Cajon, La
Mesa, Lemon Grove)
Emergency Preparedness
Coordinator
John French Imperial Beach Fire Chief
Walter Amedee National City Management Analyst III
David Parsons Oceanside Division Chief
Pete Lawrence Oceanside Division Chief
Katelynn Rise Oceanside Emergency Services
Assistant (Fmr.)
Russ Cunningham Oceanside Principal Planner
Brian Mitchell Poway Deputy Fire Chief
Susy Turnbull Poway Disaster Preparedness
Coordinator (Fmr.)
James Holmes San Diego Program Coordinator
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 30
Name City Title
Jennifer Dymicki San Diego Advanced Planning
Eugene Ruzzini San Diego Provisional Program
Manager
Tiffany Allen San Diego Senior Homeland Security
Coordinator (Fmr.)
Hannah Chasteene San Diego Senior Homeland Security
Coordinator
Jamie Smith San Marcos Emergency Manager
Dave Pender San Marcos Fire Battalion Chief
Justin Matsushita Santee Deputy Fire Chief
Dustyn Garhartt Santee Fire Captain
DeVerna Rogers Santee Recreation Supervisor
Patricia Letts Solana Beach Administrative Assistant III
Rigma Viskanta Solana Beach Senior Management Analyst
Ned Vanderpol Vista Fire Chief
Edward Kramer Vista Emergency Manager
Jamie Smith Vista Emergency Management
Coordinator (Fmr.)
PORT OF SAN DIEGO
Name Jurisdiction Title
Dave Foster Port of San Diego Homeland Security Program
Manager
Cid Tesoro Port of San Diego Vice President, Facilities &
Engineering
WATER AND IRRIGATION DISTRICTS:
Name District Title
Lisa Coburn-Boyd Otay Water District Environmental
Compliance Specialist
Emilyn Zuniga Otay Water District Safety and Security
Specialist
Larry Costello Padre Dam Municipal Water
District
Safety and Risk
Manager
Charmaine Esnard Rainbow Municipal Water
District
Risk Management
Officer
Lisa Prus San Diego County Water
Authority
Supervising
Management Analyst
Eric Rubalcava San Diego County Water
Authority
Principal Asset
Management Specialist
Anjuli Corcovelos San Diego County Water
Authority
Senior Water
Resources Specialist
Clay Clifton Sweetwater Authority Program Specialist
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 31
Name District Title
Frank Wolinski Vista Irrigation District Director of Operations
& Field Services
Alisa Nichols Vista Irrigation District Management Analyst
(Fmr.)
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICTS:
Name District Title
Jason McBroom Alpine Fire Protection
District
Fire Marshal
Dave McQuead Rancho Santa Fe Fire
Protection District
Fire Chief
Gehrig Browning San Miguel Fire
Protection District
Division Chief
Andrew Lawler San Miguel Fire
Protection District
Division Chief
W. Brent Napier San Miguel Fire
Protection District
Deputy Fire Marshal
Colton Israels San Miguel Fire
Protection District
Fire Inspector
*AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT:
Name District Title
David Sodeman Air Pollution Control
District
Chief, Department Operations
Domingo Vigil Air Pollution Control
District
Deputy Director
*THE NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE (NWS)/ NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC
ADMINISTRATION (NOAA):
Name Organization Title
Alex Tardy NWS/NOAA Warning Coordination
Meteorologist, Manager
*SCRIPPS INSTITUTION OF OCEANOGRAPHY, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN
DIEGO:
Name Institute Association (Titles N/A)
Dan Cayan Scripps Institution of
Oceanography, UC San
Diego
California Nevada
Applications Program
Alexander
Gershunov
Scripps Institution of
Oceanography, UC San
Diego
California Nevada
Applications Program
Laura Engeman Scripps Institution of
Oceanography, UC San
Center for Climate Change
Impacts and Adaptations
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 32
Name Institute Association (Titles N/A)
Diego
Julie Kalansky Scripps Institution of
Oceanography, UC San
Diego
California Nevada
Applications Program
*These three organizations are not seeking Annex approval.
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 33
2.2. PLANNING PROCESS
The overall planning process for The Plan was led by the County of San Diego Office of
Emergency Services (County OES), who established a Hazard Mitigation Planning Group
(HMPG) to coordinate development of the Plan. Representatives from each listed
incorporated city, special district and the unincorporated county were designated by their
jurisdiction as the HMPG member.
Each HMPG member identified a Local (internal) Mitigation Planning Team for their
department, jurisdiction, special district, and other organizations that included decision-
makers from police, fire, emergency services, community development/planning,
transportation, economic development, public works, and emergency response/services
personnel, as appropriate.
The Local Mitigation Planning Team assisted in identifying the specific hazards/risks that are
of concern to each jurisdiction and to prioritize hazard mitigation measures. The HMPG
members brought this information to HMPG meetings— held regularly to provide jurisdiction-
specific input to the multi-jurisdictional planning effort and to assure that all aspects of each
jurisdiction’s concerns were addressed. A list of the lead contacts for each participating
jurisdiction is included above, in Section 2.
All HMPG members were provided an overview and training of hazard mitigation planning
elements at the HMPG meetings. The HMPG training was designed after FEMA's "Local
Mitigation Planning Handbook" worksheets, which led the HMPG members through the
process of defining the jurisdiction’s assets, vulnerabilities, capabilities, goals, objectives, and
actions. The HMPG members were also given additional action items at each meeting to be
completed by their Local Mitigation Planning Team.
HMPG members also participated in workshops to present the risk assessment, preliminary
goals, objectives, and actions. In addition, several HMPG members met with OES staff
specifically to discuss hazard-related goals, objectives, and actions. Preliminary goals,
objectives and actions developed by jurisdiction staff were then reviewed with necessary
partners for approval.
Throughout the planning process, the HMPG members were given maps of the profiled
hazards as well as detailed jurisdiction-level maps that illustrated the profiled hazards and
critical infrastructure. These maps were created using data sources listed in references.
These data sources contain the most recent data available for the San Diego region. A large
portion of this data was supplied by the regional GIS agency, SanGIS.
The SanGIS data is updated periodically with the new data being provided by the local
agencies and jurisdictions. This ensured the data used was the most recent available for
each participating jurisdiction. The HMPG members reviewed these maps and were provided
the opportunity to communicate updates or changes to the critical facilities/assets or hazard
layers to County OES in November 2021. Data received from HMPG members were added
to the hazard database and used in the modeling process described in the Risk Assessment
portion of the Plan (Section 5). The data used in this plan revision is considered more
accurate than the original plan.
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 34
2.2.1. EXISTING POLICIES, PLANS, PROGRAMS, & RESOURCES
Hazard Mitigation Planning Group (HMPG) members and their corresponding Local
Mitigation Planning Teams prior to and during the planning process reviewed and
incorporated several existing policies, plans, studies, guides, programs, and other resources
to inform the Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) and its processes. These
items included FEMA documents, emergency services documents as well as county and
local general plans, community plans, local codes and ordinances, and other similar
documents. The documents included, but were not limited to:
• San Diego County’s/Cities’ General Plans & Safety Element
o In 2021, the Board of Supervisors adopted the update to the San Diego County
General Plan's Safety Element. The County proactively addresses hazards
through the General Plan Safety Element and has many references to the
MJHMP. Representatives from the General Plan’s planning group are also
members of the HMPG—ensuring that both plans are integrated and contain
mutually-reinforcing policies. The General Plan and the 2023 MJHMP Update
work together to achieve the goal of hazard risk reduction. Future updates of the
General Plan, including incorporation by reference of the 2023 MJHMP into the
Safety Element will continue to ensure consistency between both plans.
o This specific update of The Plan required incorporation of updates into the
County’s Safety Element (lead by Planning & Development Services) to
demonstrate progress of local hazard mitigation efforts. Plan leads (listed in
Section 2 of this plan) met as needed to collaborate on cohesive updates, then
discuss how and where to include the update within their respective plans.
• San Diego County Strategic Plan/Initiatives
o Informs all existing/new County Plans and priorities, such as new/updated
programs and projects, including this plan.
o The County’s Strategic Initiatives (Sustainability, Equity, Empower, Community,
and Justice) were all incorporated into this plan’s updated Goals, Objectives, and
Actions.74F74F74F
75
• County of San Diego Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan 2022
o Annexes inform this plan/delegation of responsibilities, and this plan also informs
the County of San Diego Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan 2022.
o A key element of the update process for the MJHMP was the review of the
County of San Diego Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan (OA EOP).
The HMPG stayed informed of major review findings of the OA EOP with the
intent to integrate with key components of the MJHMP. Future updates to the OA
EOP will coincide with the future updates of the MJHMP.
• Geographic Information System (GIS) Data & Maps
o Base map shape files used for items such as city jurisdictions, county
jurisdictions, parcels, rivers, and roads to establish critical facilities and a GIS
map for this plan.
• FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map
o 100- and 500-year floodplain data was acquired to profile flood hazard and carry
out the related vulnerability assessment.
75 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/cao/docs/stratplan.pdf
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 35
• Legislation
o Newly passed legislation is often required to be included in County plans,
including this plan, which is completed by the Planning Group every December.
o Various legislation/statutes added requirements and guidance for inclusion into
the Hazard Mitigation Plan. For example, Assembly Bill No. 1409 (Planning and
Zoning: General Plan: Safety Element) describes the need to integrate
evacuation routes and locations used for shelters (e.g. Temporary Evacuation
Points (TEPs) and more).
• Various Local Codes and Ordinances
o Local Emergency Managers, including members of the Planning Group, meet bi-
monthly to discuss plan and procedure updates (including new/updated local
codes and ordinances) that may affect the planning area and require
incorporation into plans. Examples of these local codes and ordinances include
building codes and fire codes, which help the HMPG inform this plan’s Goals,
Objectives, and Actions.
• FEMA Local Mitigation Handbook March 2013
o The Planning Group researched, trained on, and referenced this item on a weekly
basis to inform this plan and all related procedures.
• FEMA Mitigation Ideas January 25, 2013
o The Planning Group researched, trained on, and referenced this item while
completing Sections 4-6 of this plan, which also informed all related procedures.
• Integrating Hazard Mitigation and Climate Adaptation Planning – ICLEI
o The Planning Group researched, trained on, and referenced this item while
completing Section 4-6 of this plan, which also informed all related
procedures.
o The Planning Group partnered with scientists and researchers at UCSD
Scripps Institution of Oceanography, who study and contribute work related to
Climate Change impacts and adaptation. The Planning Group provided the
Scripps team with a list of all hazards included in this plan and asked them to
provide descriptions of climate change impacts, and mitigation
recommendations. UCSD Scripps Institution of Oceanography’s work and
responses are incorporated throughout this plan and are included in this plan’s
sources and footnotes.
• Climate Change Impacts in the United States – U.S. Government Printing Office
o The Planning Group researched, trained on, and referenced this item while
completing Section 4-6 of this plan, which also informed all related
procedures.
o The Planning Group partnered with scientists and researchers at UCSD
Scripps Institution of Oceanography, who study and contribute work related to
Climate Change impacts and adaptation. The Planning Group provided the
Scripps team with a list of all hazards included in this plan and asked them to
provide descriptions of climate change impacts, and mitigation
recommendations. UCSD Scripps Institution of Oceanography’s work and
responses are incorporated throughout this plan and are included in this plan’s
sources and footnotes.
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 36
• Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool 2019
o The Planning Group researched, trained on, and referenced this item on a
weekly basis to inform this plan and all related procedures.
• California State Hazard Mitigation Plan 2018
o The Planning Group researched and referenced this item on a monthly basis
to inform this plan and all related procedures. The HMPG reviewed hazard
profiles, hazard assessment data to ensure consistency with the information
contained within this plan.
o The California State Hazard Mitigation Plan 2018 was also used to inform this
plan’s layout, hazard inclusion/omission rationale, and the risk
assessment/consequence analysis, which is included within Section 5 of this
plan.
Task Four of the FEMA Local Mitigation Handbook, Sections 1, 4, and 7 of this plan,
and jurisdiction-specific annexes describe the process by which local governments
will integrate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms,
such as comprehensive or capital improvement plans. The County of San Diego
specifically meets with all necessary partners to collaborate on planning
mechanisms/updates, conducts an approval process through the public, department
leadership, Unified Disaster Council (UDC) voting/approval, then Board of Supervisor
and other elected official approval. All listed steps were conducted on necessary and
required bases.
This specific update of The Plan required incorporation of updates into the County’s Safety
Element (lead by Planning & Development Services) and Emergency Operations Plan (lead
by County OES) to demonstrate progress of local hazard mitigation efforts. Plan leads (listed
in Section 2 of this plan) met as needed to collaborate on cohesive updates, then discuss
how and where to include the update within their respective plans.
Additionally, listed below is a summary of existing departments in the County and their
responsibilities related to hazard mitigation planning and implementation, as well as existing
planning documents and policies/regulations related to mitigation efforts within the
community. The administrative and technical capabilities of the County, as discussed below,
and in Section 4 of this plan, provide an identification of the staff, personnel, and department
resources available to implement the actions identified in Section 6 of this plan.
Specific resources reviewed include those involving technical personnel such as
planners/engineers with knowledge of land development and land management practices,
engineers trained in construction practices related to building and infrastructure, planners,
and engineers with an understanding of natural or human-caused hazards, floodplain
managers, surveyors, personnel with GIS skills and scientists familiar with hazards in the
community:
• San Diego County Planning Development Services
The goals of these departments are to maintain and protect public health, safety, and
well-being, and preserve and enhance the quality of life for County community
members by maintaining a comprehensive general plan and zoning ordinance,
implementing habitat conservation programs, ensuring regulatory conformance, and
performing comprehensive community outreach. This Department is comprised of
the following six divisions:
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 37
o Long Range Planning Division: Implements the long-range vision planning for
the unincorporated portion of San Diego County. This division is responsible for
maintaining the zoning ordinance and County's General Plan, a document that
provides the framework for future growth and development in the County. Long
Range Planning processes regular updates to other land development policies
and ordinances and manages a variety of ongoing activities that derive from
federal, state, and local mandates
o Sustainability Planning Division: Composed of the Sustainability Team, the
Conservation Team, and the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA)
Team. The Sustainability Team manages implementation of the County’s 2018
Climate Action Plan (CAP), which contains a series of measures to reduce
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions over the next 30 years; along with the CAP
Update, which will culminate in the adoption of a plan that will exceed State GHG
emissions reductions of 40% below the 1990 level by 2030 and meet a goal of
reducing emissions to net zero between 2035-2045. The Conservation Team
develops and implements programs that contribute to the conservation of
biological, environmental, and agricultural resources in the unincorporated area.
The SGMA Team oversees County implementation of SGMA, which provides a
framework to regulate groundwater in certain basins in California.
o Building Division: Reviews site and building plans for compliance with all
applicable codes, issues land use and building permits, and enforces building and
zoning regulations.
o Code Compliance Division: Enforces building, grading, zoning, brushing and
clearing, junk, graffiti, signs, abandoned vehicle complaints and noise control.
o Land Development Division: Provides engineering and review services for
construction and development projects throughout the unincorporated areas of
San Diego County.
o Project Planning Division: reviews “discretionary” projects—projects that
builders and homeowners cannot do “by right,” but which may be approved by
PDS’s director, the Zoning Administrator, the Planning Commission, or the Board
of Supervisors if the projects meet certain conditions. Discretionary projects
include lot splits, major subdivisions and conditionally permitted uses. They also
process applicants' requests for General Plan Amendments and Zoning changes.
• San Diego County Department of Public Works
Preserve, enhance, and promote quality of life and public safety through the
responsible development of reliable and sustainable infrastructure and services.
o Land Development Division: Provides engineering and review services for
construction and development projects throughout the unincorporated areas of
San Diego County. Services such as Stormwater, Flood Control, Map
Processing, Cartography, Surveys, the Geographic and Land Information
Systems and dealing with land development issues are the daily job of this
division. The division processes more than 5,000 permits each year.
o Transportation Division: Roads Section is the most visible part of DPW,
responding to requests for services ranging from pothole repair to tree trimming.
Traffic Engineering provides traffic management and determines the need for
stop signs and traffic lights. Route Locations updates the County’s General Plan
Circulation Element, provides transportation planning support and more. County
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 38
Airports include eight unique facilities scattered throughout the area. McClellan-
Palomar Airport provides commercial service to Los Angeles and Phoenix;
Ramona Airport is home to the busiest aerial firefighting base in the USA; and,
the County Sheriff's aerial support unit, ASTREA, is based at Gillespie Field.
o Engineering Services Division: The division includes Wastewater, Flood
Control, Design Engineering, Environmental Services, Construction Engineering,
Materials Lab, Project Management and Flood Control Engineering and
Hydrology. The Director of Public Works has assigned the Deputy Director of
Engineering Services as the County Engineer and Flood Control Commissioner.
o Management Services Division: This division provides a variety of services to
department employees and the public. It includes Personnel, Financial Services,
Communications, Recycling, Inactive Landfills and Management Support. Special
Districts serve small areas in unincorporated areas providing a variety of services
to community members in rural areas.
• San Diego County Housing & Community Development
Improve the quality of life in our communities—helping families find safe and
affordable housing, and partnering with property owners to increase the supply and
availability of affordable housing. This department provides many valuable services
to both property owners and tenants, and strives to create more livable
neighborhoods that community members are proud to call home.
Key service programs include improving neighborhoods by assisting community
members who have low incomes, increasing the supply of affordable, safe housing,
and rehabilitating both business and residential properties in San Diego County.
They serve the communities of: Chula Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon,
Escondido, Imperial Beach, Lemon Grove, Poway, San Marcos, Santee, Solana
Beach, Vista, and the unincorporated areas of San Diego County.
The Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) provides funding to
agencies or businesses that provide a benefit to persons with low- and moderate-
income, prevent or eliminate slums and blight, or meet needs having a particular
urgency.
In addition to funding housing and shelter programs, the County also allocates grant
funds toward various community improvements in the Urban County area. These
include Developer Incentive programs, Housing Opportunity for Persons with
Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS), and the Emergency Solutions Grant
Program. Participating cities, community members, nonprofit organizations and other
county departments may submit grant proposals.
• County of San Diego Emergency Medical Services (EMS)
The mission of this department is to ensure all community members and visitors to
San Diego County receive timely and high-quality emergency medical services,
specialty care, prevention services, disaster preparedness and response.
Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is a department within the Public Safety Group.
• County of San Diego Office of Emergency Services
The Office of Emergency Services (OES) coordinates the overall county response to
disasters. OES is responsible for alerting and notifying appropriate agencies when
disaster strikes, coordinating all agencies that respond, ensuring resources are
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 39
available and mobilized in times of disaster, developing plans and procedures for
response to and recovery from disasters, and developing and providing
preparedness materials for the public.
This department’s function is to protect life and property within the San Diego County
Operational Area in the event of a major emergency or disaster by:
1. Alerting and notifying appropriate agencies when disaster strikes
2. Coordinating all Agencies that respond
3. Ensuring resources are available and mobilized in times of disaster
4. Developing plans and procedures for response to and recovery from disasters
5. Developing and providing preparedness materials for the public.
• County of San Diego Sheriff’s Department
The San Diego County Sheriff's Department is the chief law enforcement agency in
San Diego County. The department is comprised of approximately 4,000 employees,
both sworn officers and professional support staff. The department provides general
law enforcement, detention, and court services for the people of San Diego County in
a service area of approximately 4,200 square miles. In addition, the department
provides specialized regional services to the entire county, including the incorporated
cities and the unincorporated areas of the county.
The San Diego County Sheriff's Department provides contract law enforcement
services for the cities of Del Mar, Encinitas, Imperial Beach, Lemon Grove, Poway,
San Marcos, Santee, Solana Beach, and Vista. In these cities the Sheriff's
Department serves as their police department, providing a full range of law
enforcement services including patrol, traffic, and investigative services.
In the unincorporated (non-city) areas, the Sheriff's Department provides generalized
patrol and investigative services. The California Highway Patrol has the primary
jurisdiction for traffic services in unincorporated areas.
The San Diego County Sheriff's Department operates seven detention facilities. Male
arrestees are booked at the San Diego Central Jail and Vista Detention Facility, while
female arrestees are booked at the Las Colinas and Vista Detention Facilities. The
remaining jails house inmates in the care of the Sheriff.
• County Public Health Preparedness and Response
Public Health Preparedness and Response coordinates with Emergency Medical
Services, Office of Emergency Services, community organizations, medical providers,
prehospital provider agencies (Fire/EMS), hospitals, clinics, skilled nursing facilities,
businesses, and other partners in developing public health and disaster preparedness by
dissemination of risk assessments, trainings, and public health guidance.
• County Department of Environmental Health and Quality's (DEHQ)
This department’s mission is to protect the environment and public health. It
accomplishes this through the work of its four divisions:
o Food and Housing (FHD) Division: Conducts retail food facility inspections and
issues the appropriate A-B-C grade card. The division is also responsible for
inspecting swimming pools, body art facilities, apartments, hotels and motels in
contracted cities and the unincorporated area, organized camps and detention
facilities. FHD responds to public health threats and environmental hazards
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 40
associated with these regulated facilities, including illness investigations, fires,
food recalls and boil water orders, all in the interest of promoting safe
communities.
o Land and Water Quality Division: Conducts water quality testing of beaches
and bays and posts the results for residents and visitors; reviews plans for and
inspects onsite wastewater treatment systems, recycled water systems, water
wells, monitoring wells, and mobile home parks in the unincorporated county; is
the Local Enforcement Agency for solid waste facilities; and conducts collection
of household hazardous materials in the unincorporated county. In addition, this
division oversees cleanup of contaminated property, including from clandestine
drug laboratories, and enforces state solid waste laws and regulations at landfills
and composting facilities throughout the county, with the exception of the City of
San Diego.
o Community Health Division: Coordinates the county's asbestos and lead
programs, operates the radiological health program, and runs the vector control
program to keep the region safe from diseases such as West Nile virus,
hantavirus, Lyme disease, and others. It was also instrumental in the new
countywide program to control eye gnats.
o Hazardous Materials Division: Regulates more than 13,000 businesses to
ensure that hazardous materials, and hazardous and medical wastes are
properly catalogued, stored, and managed. The Hazardous Incident Response
Team (HIRT) responds to spills and works with various other agencies in
cleanup operations. Public outreach and educational programs range from
schools to newsletters and web sites.
• California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
CAL FIRE is an emergency response and resource protection department that
responds to wildland fires that burn across the state. In addition, department
personnel respond to other emergency calls, including structure fires, automobile
accidents, medical aid, swift water rescues, civil disturbance, search and rescue,
floods, and earthquakes.
CAL FIRE is the State’s largest fire protection organization, whose fire protection
team includes extensive ground forces, supported by a variety of fire-fighting
equipment. CAL FIRE has joined with Federal and local agencies to form a statewide
mutual aid system. This system ensures a rapid response of emergency equipment
by being able to draw on all available resources regardless of jurisdiction. CAL FIRE
is responsible for wildland fire protection within the District’s State Responsibility
Areas, even though the Fire District is the first responder to an incident.
2.2.2. INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE
The San Diego County Operational Area consists of the County of San Diego and the
eighteen incorporated cities located within the county’s borders. Planning for emergencies,
training and exercises are all conducted on a regional basis. In 1961 the County and the
cities formed a Joint Powers Agency (JPA) to facilitate regional planning, training, exercises,
and responses. This JPA is known as the Unified San Diego County Emergency Services
Organization (USDCESO). Its governing body is the Unified Disaster Council (UDC) (as
described in Section 1 of this plan).
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 41
The membership of the UDC is defined in the JPA. Each city and the County have one
representative. Representatives from the cities can be an elected official, the City Manager or
from the municipal law enforcement or fire agency. The County is represented by the
Chairperson of the County Board of Supervisors, who also serves as Chair of the UDC.
In addition, there are 26 fire protection districts and 17 water districts within the San Diego
Region. Each were offered the opportunity to participate in the development of this plan.
The original development of the Hazard Mitigation Plan, as well as this current revision, were
conducted under the auspices of the UDC. At the direction of the UDC, the San Diego
County Office of Emergency Services (County OES) acted as the lead agency in the revision
of this plan. San Diego County OES requested input from each jurisdiction in the county.
Each municipality, special district, and neighboring jurisdictions were formally invited to
attend a meeting to develop an approach to the planning process and to form the Hazard
Mitigation Planning Group (HMPG). These invitations were in the form of an email to each
jurisdiction. At the August 29, 2019 UDC meeting, it was announced that the plan was
reaching the five-year mark and required updating.75F75F75F
76
Each jurisdiction/participating party (documented within Section 2 of this plan) later confirmed
their participation in the HMPG. In addition to the eighteen incorporated cities, County OES
provided an opportunity for neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved in
hazard mitigation activities, agencies that have the authority to regulate development, as well
as business, academia and other private or non-profit organizations interested in the
involvement of the planning process.
The HMPG formed to undertake the planning process and meeting dates were set for all
members to attend. Each participating jurisdiction then formed their own Local Hazard
Mitigation Planning Team. Details on the membership of those teams can be found in each
jurisdiction’s annex. Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Teams met either before or after the
overall HMPG met to discuss regional meeting topics and assignments.
The UDC received briefings regularly on the progress of the planning process. UDC meetings
are open to the public, with agendas and notices posted according to California’s Brown Act,
with emailed invitations and reminders sent out one to two weeks prior to the meetings.
Included on that email list are representatives from the following agencies:
• American Red Cross
• Chamber of Commerce
• Federal Agencies (USN, USMC, USCG, DHS)
• Hospitals
• Port of San Diego
• State Agencies (Cal OES, DMV, Caltrans)
• School Districts
• Universities and colleges
76 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/oes/docs/UDC_Documents/2019/October/04.%20August%20UDC%20Minutes_
2019.pdf.
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 42
• Utilities (Power- SDG&E, Water – San Diego County Water Authority and Water
Districts, Cable, telephone, and internet – Cox Communications)
Tribal Communities were also invited to participate in this plan update and/or discuss Tribal
Hazard Mitigation Plans on April 26, 2022.
2.2.3. HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING GROUP MEETINGS
The Hazard Mitigation Planning Group (HMPG) met regularly, as did the County of San
Diego Local (County-specific) Hazard Mitigation Planning Group. The following is a list of
meeting dates and objectives:
1. Initial HMPG and County Planning Meetings:
September 2019—Kickoff meetings and Formation of HMPG
2. HMPG Meeting 1:
October 8, 2019—Overview of Planning Process/Assessing Risks, Identify
Partners, and Review Due Dates
3. County Local Planning Meeting 1:
November 1, 2019—2018 Plan Version Capabilities Review, Assignment of
Review, Review Objectives and Due Dates
4. HMPG Meeting 2:
December 3, 2019—Review Schedule and Process, Review/Complete FEMA
Task 4 (Review Community Capabilities)
5. County Local Planning Meeting 2:
January 21, 2020—Review Objectives/Due Dates and Discuss Subject Matter
Experts for each project, Assignment of County Departments for FEMA
worksheet Tasks, Discuss Community Assets
6. FEMA Meeting:
November 13, 2020—Meeting with federal and state partners to review the
current plan update process
7. HMPG Refresher Meeting:
January 11, 2021—Review updated planning calendar/schedule and allowed time
for questions-and-answer session with state and federal partners
8. Refresher County Planning Meeting:
January 18, 2021—Review updated planning calendar/schedule and allowed
time for questions-and-answer session with state and federal partners
9. County Local Planning Meeting 3:
March 1, 2021—Discussion from Subject Matter Experts about
assignments/projects and update on progress/completion of FEMA Tasks 1-4
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 43
10. County Local Planning Meeting 4:
March 15, 2021—Discussion from Subject Matter Experts about
assignments/projects and update on progress/completion of FEMA Tasks 1-4
11. County Local Planning Meeting 5:
April 12, 2021—Discussion from Subject Matter Experts about
assignments/projects and update on progress/completion of FEMA Tasks 1-4
12. HMPG Meeting 3:
April 26, 2021—Review Risk Assessment/Development of Mitigation Plan, GIS
roles, Hazard Identification/Risk Assessment Processes, due dates, and
Review/Complete FEMA Tasks 1-4
13. Hazards Workshops/Seminars:
May-July 2021 (Tuesdays and Thursdays) —Subject Matter Experts present
about different operational area hazards and suggest mitigation actions. Panel
discussions and opportunity for planning group questions
14. County Local Planning Meeting 6:
July 22, 2021—Review supplemental data associated with the risks, Discuss Risk
Assessment Process and county mitigation strategies with Subject Matter Expert
guidance
15. County Local Planning Meeting 7:
October 20, 2021—Discuss assignment turnover to new project manager,
Review/Complete FEMA Task 5 (Conduct a Risk Assessment)
16. HMPG Meeting 4:
October 26, 2021—Review updated schedule/due dates, Hazard Identification
Process, Risk Assessment Process, Hazard Profiling and Loss Estimation,
Review/Complete FEMA Task 5 (Conduct a Risk Assessment)
17. Cal OES 2021 HMGP Webinar
November 18, 2021—Discussion of HMGP sub-application instructions and
requirements
18. Cal OES Grant Program Notice of Interest (NOI) Webinar:
December 14, 2021
19. County Local Planning Meeting 8:
January 19, 2022—Review/Complete FEMA Task 6 (Develop a Mitigation
Strategy)
20. HMPG Meeting 5:
February 1, 2022—Finalize FEMA Planning Worksheets for Task 6, Discuss
Public Survey and Forum, Start FEMA Worksheets for Task 7, Discuss deadlines
21. County Local Planning Meeting 9:
February 11, 2022—Review/Complete FEMA Task 7 (Keep the Plan Current)
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 44
22. Cal OES Sub-Application Development Series:
February 2022—Discussion of HMGP sub-application instructions and
requirements for various hazards
23. HMPG Meeting 6:
March 7, 2022—Finalize FEMA Task 7 Worksheets, Discuss Cal OES/FEMA
Funding and Training Opportunities, Discuss action items and deadlines
24. Whole Community Outreach Survey:
April 1, 2022—Release was communicated with and shared by planning partners
25. HMPG Individual Meeting Series:
March-April 2022—Check in meetings with all planning participants to ensure
deadlines are met and final question were answered
26. Plan Peer Review:
April 28-29, 2022—County Office of Emergency Services peers compared
existing plan draft to FEMA grading requirements (2019 Local Plan Review Tool)
and provided feedback
27. Public Forum:
May 28, 2022—All planning participants and the public were invited to review key
survey results and provided resources for further input
Work drafts, products, and the final plan were shared electronically. Additional meetings not
included on the above list were impromptu requests for one-on-one guidance and virtual/in-
person meetings with planning partners.
Not all partners were able to attend all meetings. Follow-up phone calls, question-and-
answer sessions, and in-person meetings were conducted with those not able to attend to
ensure they were kept current on the process, assignments, and deadlines.
Follow-up meetings with planning partners continued until final draft submission to Cal OES
and FEMA (June 2022).
2.2.4. HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING GROUP MILESTONES
The approach taken by the Hazard Mitigation Planning Group (HMPG) relied on sound
planning concepts and a methodical process to identify County vulnerabilities and to propose
the mitigation actions necessary to avoid or reduce those vulnerabilities. Each step in the
planning process was built upon the previous—providing a high level of assurance that the
mitigation actions proposed by the participants and the priorities of implementation are valid.
Specific milestones in the process included:
Planning Group Meetings (September 2019 – June 2022):
As listed in the previous section, a series of HMPG meetings were held in which the HMPG
considered the probability of a hazard occurring in an area and its impact on public health
and safety, property, the economy, and the environment, and the mitigation actions that
would be necessary to minimize impacts from the identified hazards. These meetings were
held every month or two (depending on the progress made), September 2019 through June
2022. The meetings evolved as the planning process progressed and were designed to aid
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 45
the jurisdictions in completing FEMA worksheets that helped define hazards within their
jurisdictions, their existing capabilities and mitigation goals and action items for the Hazard
Mitigation Plan.
Hazards Workshops/Seminars (June 2021-July 2021):
A series of workshops discussed the impact of all hazards impacting the operational area to
educate local planners and community members. Topics discussed included, but were not
limited to, climate change, sea level rise, drought, changes to precipitation patterns and
extreme weather, wildfire, terrorism, and potential future impacts. The information presented
in these workshops were incorporated into the risk assessment process as well in the
development of mitigation goals, objectives, and actions.
Risk Assessment (June 2021 – January 2022):
The HMPG used the list of hazards from the 2018 Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan
to determine if they were still applicable to the region and if there were any new threats
identified that should be added to the plan. Specific geographic areas subject to the impacts
of the identified hazards were mapped using a Geographic Information System (GIS). The
HMPG had access to updated information and resources regarding hazard identification and
risk estimation. This included hazard specific maps, such as floodplain delineation maps,
earthquake shake potential maps, and wildfire threat maps; GIS-based analyses of hazard
areas; the locations of infrastructure, critical facilities, and other properties located within
each jurisdiction and participating special district; and an estimate of potential losses or
exposure to losses from each hazard.
The HMPG also conducted a methodical, qualitative examination of the vulnerability of
important facilities, systems, and neighborhoods to the impacts of future disasters. GIS data
and modeling results were used to identify specific vulnerabilities that could be addressed by
specific mitigation actions. The HMPG also reviewed the history of disasters in the County
and assessed the need for specific mitigation actions based on the type and location of
damage caused by past events. The process used during the completion of the initial plan
and first update was utilized for this update.
Finally, the assessment of community vulnerabilities included a review of current codes,
plans, policies, programs, and regulations used by local jurisdictions to determine whether
existing provisions and requirements adequately address the hazards that pose the greatest
risk to the community. This was a similar process to that used in the original plan and first
update.
Goals, Objectives, and Alternative Mitigation Actions (January 2022- February 2022)
Based on this understanding of the hazards faced by the County, the goals, objectives, and
actions identified in the 2018 plan were reviewed to see what had been completed and could
be removed and which were not able to be completed due to funding or other challenges.
HMPG members then added updated priorities in the form of listed goals, objectives, and
actions, as required for the completion of the update. This was done by the members working
with their local planning groups and in a series of one-on-one meetings with County Office of
Emergency Services staff. Additionally, plan compatibility with existing plans and regulations
was considered and accounted for.
Mitigation Plan and Implementation Strategy (January 2022- February 2022):
Each jurisdiction reviewed their priorities for action from among their goals, objectives, and
actions, developing a specific implementation strategy including details about the
CAL FIRE San Diego Communications Bureau Decorative Image
SECTION TWO | Build the Planning Team 46
organizations responsible for carrying out the actions, their estimated cost, possible funding
sources, and timelines for implementation.
Mitigation Action Progress Report (February 2022- June 2022)
If applicable, jurisdictions completed a progress report for their previous 2018 plan. All HMPG
members were also asked to complete a FEMA Plan Evaluation (Section 7 of this plan) as a
resource to help keep this plan current.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
47
SECTION THREE: Create an Outreach Strategy
Decorative Image Photo by Kevin Pack CAL FIRE San Diego Communications Bureau
San Diego County, California
2023
SECTION THREE | Create an Outreach Strategy 48
3. SECTION THREE: CREATE AN OUTREACH STRATEGY
The County of San Diego’s Hazard Mitigation Outreach Strategy is based on the Federal
Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA’s) Whole Community Approach and governed by
existing department, local, state, and federal plans, regulations, and budgets.
The Whole Community Approach supports inclusive management practices, and it’s three
principles help guide the County of San Diego’s Hazard Mitigation Outreach Strategy.
3.1. WHOLE COMMUNITY APPROACH
The County of San Diego/the Operational Area develop and update emergency plans in
accordance with local, state, and federal policies and guidance. The Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) provides a strategic framework to guide all members of the
emergency management community as they determine how to integrate the Whole
Community Approach and related concepts into their daily practices. FEMA’s guidance and
this plan are not intended to be all-encompassing or offer specific actions that require
adoption of certain protocols.
Instead, the Whole Community Approach is acknowledged as a general process by which the
public, emergency management representatives, organizational and community leaders,
tribal partners, and government officials can understand and assess the needs of their
respective communities, then determine the best ways to organize and strengthen resources,
capacities, and interests. The Whole Community Approach, overall, is intended to increase
individual preparedness, prompt engagement with vital community partners, and enhance
community resiliency and security. More information about this approach and other concepts
can be located on FEMA’s website (www.FEMA.gov).
Community resilience within emergency management consists of three key factors:
1. The ability of first responder agencies (e.g., fire, law, emergency medical services) to divert
from their day-to-day operations to the emergency effectively and efficiently.
2. The strength and inclusivity of the emergency management system and organizations within
the region to include the Emergency Operations Center (EOC), mass notification systems,
emergency public information systems, etc.
3. The civil preparedness of the region’s people, businesses, and community organizations.
Enhancing all three of these factors constantly focuses the Operational Area on improving
the region’s resiliency. Emergency response effectiveness also largely depends on the
preparedness and resiliency of the collective communities within a region. Different types of
communities exist including, but not limited to, communities of place, interests, beliefs, and
circumstances, which can exist geographically and virtually (e.g., online gatherings/forums,
etc.). While multiple factors can contribute to community resilience and effective emergency
management resources and outcomes, FEMA recommends three principles to establish a
Whole Community Approach:
1. Understand and meet the actual needs of the whole community
2. Engage and empower all parts of the community
3. Strengthen what works well in communities
SECTION THREE | Create an Outreach Strategy 49
A deep understanding of the unique and diverse needs of a population (including
demographics, values, norms, community structures, networks, relationships, and
experiences) is crucial for emergency managers to best ascertain the population’s real-life
safety needs and motivation to participate in preparation and mitigation activities prior to an
emergency event.
A Whole Community Approach towards building community resilience requires finding ways
to support and strengthen the relationships, institutions, structures, assets, and networks that
already exist, work well in communities, and address issues that are important to community
members. Engaging the whole community and empowering local action in this manner will
best position all stakeholders to plan for/meet the actual needs of a community and
strengthen local capacity/resilience to recover from threats and hazards.76F76F76F
77
This plan was developed in alignment with the Whole Community Approach through
collaboration with and guidance from representatives of the California Governor’s Office of
Emergency Services (Cal OES), Cal OES’ Office of Access and Functional Needs (OAFN),
County departments/agencies/groups, special districts, OA City departments, law
enforcement, fire services, emergency management, people with access and functional
needs, tribal community liaisons, business and industry partners, and various other public
and private stakeholders.
3.1.1. INCLUSIVE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
The County of San Diego and the County Office of Emergency Services (County OES) are
committed to achieving and fostering a Whole Community emergency management system
that is fully inclusive of all individuals. Individual differences include, but are not limited to,
ability, access and functional needs, age, life experience, military/veteran status, race,
ethnicity, socio-economic class, marital status, parental status, gender/gender expression,
sexual orientation, national origin, and religion.
Through the integration of community-based organizations, service providers, government
programs, individuals with disabilities, and individuals with access and functional needs into
the planning process, meaningful partnerships are developed and leveraged.
These partnerships help enable the region to support community in the San Diego
Operational Area, and all programs, services, and activities provided to people during
emergency events, to the maximum extent feasible, will be inclusive of all individuals. The
following items are examples of inclusive service delivery and support:
• Accessible transportation
• Assistance animals
• Dietary restrictions and needs
• Assistive equipment and services
• Accessible public messaging
• Evacuation assistance
• Restoration of essential services
• Language translation and interpretation services
77 https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/whole_community_dec2011__2.pdf
SECTION THREE | Create an Outreach Strategy 50
• Service delivery site Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) compliance
The County of San Diego partners with a broad network of trusted community organizations
and agencies (e.g., churches, non-profit organizations, refugee resettlement organizations)
called the “Partner Relay” to accomplish inclusive practices through sharing emergency
information with communities that may have limited English proficiency.
In addition to observing inclusive preparation, mitigation, and response practices, the County
of San Diego also incorporates existing and new local, state, and federal laws that govern
emergency planning and response efforts. Examples of the County of San Diego’s
compliance with federal laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability within
emergency management programs include this plan’s incorporation of:
• Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
• Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act of 1988
• Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1975
• Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006
• Rehabilitation Act of 1973
• Fair Housing Act Amendments of 1988
• Architectural Barriers Act of 1968
• Twenty-First Century Communications and Video Accessibility Act of 2010
• Telecommunications Act of 1996
Additionally, the County of San Diego complies with California Government Code § 8593.3,
which requires government agencies to integrate planning for the needs of individuals with
access and functional needs into emergency operations plans. Code § 8593.3 compliance
also includes planning for individuals who have:
• Developmental or intellectual disabilities
• Physical disabilities
• Chronic conditions
• Injuries
• Limited English proficiency or people who do not speak English
• Low-income,
and individuals who are:
• Older adults
• Children
• Pregnant
• Living in institutionalized settings,
and individuals who are experiencing:
• Homelessness
• Transportation disadvantages, including, but not limited to, people who are dependent
on public transit.
SECTION THREE | Create an Outreach Strategy 51
For further details on County OES’ Whole Community Approach to emergency management
and the integration of inclusive emergency management practices, refer to the County of San
Diego’s Emergency Operations Plan: Basic Plan.77F77F77F
78
3.2. COMMUNITY OUTREACH STRATEGY
The County Office of Emergency Services (County OES) recognized the importance of public
feedback throughout the plan update process to account for community hazard concerns and
to gauge community preparedness and education needs. Therefore, County OES’
Community Outreach Strategy provided multiple ways and opportunities for the public to
provide input:
• Webpage and Email Address
• Telephone availability
• Survey
• Public Forum
3.2.1. WEBPAGE AND EMAIL ADDRESS
A Hazard Mitigation Plan webpage, as part of the San Diego County Office of Emergency
Services’ (County OES’) website, was developed and published years ago to provide the
public with information and methods to provide feedback—such as the dedicated hazard
mitigation email address that is checked daily by County OES staff for any public questions
and/or feedback.
Other Items posted on the webpage include the current plan and jurisdiction annexes.78F78F78F
79
3.2.2. TELEPHONE, MAIL, & FAX AVAILABILITY
The San Diego County Office of Emergency Services’ home website provides the public with
contact information to ask questions and/or provide feedback via telephone, mail and/or
fax.79F79F79F
80
3.2.3. SURVEY
A detailed community engagement survey (for both this plan and the County’s Emergency
Operations Plan) was developed by the County Office of Emergency Services’ (County OES’)
Planning Participants, translated into six total languages, published on County OES’ website
for public response, shared via all County OES social media accounts, then advertised via a
County News Center article.80F80F80F
81
The survey was also shared with all regional Planning Participants and other partners (such
as the Partner Relay, Unified Disaster Council (UDC) members, Emergency Managers, the
County Committee for Persons with Disabilities, County Employee Resource Groups and
78 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/oes/emergency_management/oes_jl_oparea.html
79 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/oes/emergency_management/oes_jl_mitplan.html.
80 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/oes.html.
81 https://www.countynewscenter.com/help-the-county-update-emergency-plans/.
SECTION THREE | Create an Outreach Strategy 52
County policy aides), with the request for these partners to share the survey with their
community networks.
The survey sought public input about top hazard concerns and gauged the public's hazard
education and readiness so future hazard mitigation projects/action items (detailed in Section
6 of this plan) can incorporate this feedback and enhance community preparedness before a
disaster occurs. Survey respondents were also asked to provide their email address if they
were interested in attending County OES’ Community Engagement Public Forum, described
in the next section.
The community engagement survey was active from April 1, 2022 to May 9, 2022 and
received 500 total responses.
The survey results, and related public forum recording, were posted to County OES’ Hazard
Mitigation Plan webpage for 30 days.81F81F81F
82
3.2.4. PUBLIC FORUM
The County Office of Emergency Services’ (County OES’) contacted the survey recipients
who requested a Public Forum invitation on May 16, 2022 to provide Public Forum details,
instructions, and to offer language translation services upon request. County OES then
hosted the recorded Community Engagement Public Forum on Monday, May 23, 2022, at 10
AM, via a virtual collaboration platform. The forum presenters discussed the community
engagement survey results and shared methods to: receive personal disaster plans, hazard
preparation and mitigation resources, ask more hazard mitigation questions and/or provide
additional feedback.
The public forum recording, and related survey results, were posted to County OES’ Hazard
Mitigation Plan webpage for a minimum of 30 days. 82F82F82F
83
3.2.5. FEEDBACK INCORPORATION
Public involvement was valuable in the development of this plan update. The areas of
concern provided via all outreach methods were used by each jurisdiction while developing
and/or updating mitigation goals, objectives, and actions. Additionally, public feedback was
also used, in conjunction with hazard data, to determine the top hazards of concern for the
region profiled in Section 5 of this plan.
The public can continue public participation in the plan maintenance process by emailing the
hazard mitigation email address, calling the County Office of Emergency Services’ (County
OES) during business hours and/or providing feedback during future outreach opportunities
that will be advertised on our website, social media platforms and shared with regional
partners.
City-, special district-, or other organization-specific feedback should be provided directly to
those parties via their advertised methods.
82 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/oes/emergency_management/oes_jl_mitplan.html
83 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/oes/emergency_management/oes_jl_mitplan.html
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
53
SECTION FOUR: Review Community Capabilities
Decorative Image Photo by Jeff Hall
CAL FIRE San Diego Communications Bureau
San Diego County, California
2023
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 54
4. SECTION FOUR: REVIEW COMMUNITY CAPABILITIES
Local mitigation capabilities are existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources that
reduce hazard impacts or that could be used to implement hazard mitigation activities and
must be included in a hazard mitigation plan by the Planning Group.
The Planning Group may also identify additional types of capabilities relevant to mitigation
planning.
4.1. CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
The primary types of capabilities for reducing long-term vulnerability through mitigation
planning are:
• Planning and Regulatory
• Administrative and Technical
• Financial
• Education and Outreach
4.1.1. PLANNING AND REGULATORY
Planning and Regulatory Capabilities are the plans, policies, codes, and ordinances that
prevent and reduce the impacts of hazards.
Overall, this jurisdiction can expand upon these capabilities by creating and applying an
updated five-year Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Cycle, Work Plan, and Charter
to:
• identify plans that need incorporation into the next update of this plan
• identify plans that will need to be informed by this plan
• outline the next five-year cycle of this plan’s update with the addition of planning partner
expectations, assignments/deliverables, tentative deadlines, resources available, in-
person workshops/training dates/agendas, vulnerability assessment needs, and planning
meeting dates.
The following table summarizes the jurisdiction’s planning and regulatory capabilities:
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 55
TABLE 5: PLANNING AND REGULATORY CAPABILITIES
Plans Yes/No
Year
Does the plan address hazards?
Does the plan identify projects to include in the mitigation
strategy?
Can the plan be used to implement mitigation actions?
Comprehensive
/
Master Plan
Yes,
2021
The County of San Diego General Plan, which includes the
Safety Element and references back to the Hazard Mitigation
Plan, outlines projects and strategies that could be
implemented in the areas of conservation, housing, noise and
land-use. Per the Plan:
This document is the first comprehensive update of the San
Diego County General Plan since 1978 and is the result of the
collective efforts of elected and appointed officials, community
groups, individuals, and agencies who spent countless hours
developing a framework for the future growth and
development of the unincorporated areas of the County. This
document replaces the previous General Plan and is based on
a set of guiding principles designed to protect the County’s
unique and diverse natural resources and maintain the
character of its rural and semi-rural communities. It reflects an
environmentally sustainable approach to planning that
balances the need for adequate infrastructure, housing, and
economic vitality, while maintaining and preserving each
unique community within the County, agricultural areas, and
extensive open space.
Safety Element: Establishes policies and programs to protect
the community from risks associated with seismic, geologic,
flood, and wildfire hazards.
Capital
Improvements
Plan
Yes,
2021
The Capital Improvement Program consists of improvements
to roads and bridges; facilities at the eight County-owned and
operated airports and airstrips; flood control facilities in
unincorporated developed areas; and wastewater facilities
owned and operated by the County. These services keep our
roads and related infrastructure up to date to promote safe,
viable and livable communities and make it easier for
community members to lead healthy lives.
The Department of Public Works project management team is
responsible for overall management and coordination of
planning, budget, design, environmental clearance and
permitting, right-of-way acquisition and utility coordination for
County roads. Funds are approved by the Board of
Supervisors though a yearly Detailed Work Program. In a
typical fiscal year, approximately 30 projects are in
construction with about 70 other projects in the development
stages. The Capital Improvement Program anticipated budget
for Fiscal Year 2020-21 is over $122 million.
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 56
Plans Yes/No
Year
Does the plan address hazards?
Does the plan identify projects to include in the mitigation
strategy?
Can the plan be used to implement mitigation actions?
Local
Emergency
Operations
Plan (EOP)
Yes,
2018
The Operational Area EOP is developed to be inclusive of
multiple hazards, with a regional focus and template versions
of the plan that local municipalities can develop into their own
EOP. The County EOP includes annexes in the following
relevant categories:
• Emergency Management
• Fire and Law Mutual Aid
• Multi-Causality Operations
• Public Health Operations
• Terrorism
Continuity of
Operations
Plan
Yes,
Update
d
Annuall
y
The San Diego County Continuity of Operation plan (COOP) /
Program is guided by the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO)
COOP Policy of 2013 and identifies and tests redundant and
inoperable systems for maintaining critical functions during
disasters. There is a separate and specific annex of each plan
for Pandemic.
On an annual basis, each agency is required to submit and
updated COOP and Site Evacuation Plan (SEP) to the County
COOP Coordinator (OES Position) and this is submitted to a
repository where each plan can be accessed by leadership
within the county. Each plan is required to be tested every two
years.
Transportation
Plan
Yes,
2018 • Bicycle Transportation Plan
• Pedestrian Area Transportation Plan
• Active Transportation Plan
Stormwater
Management
Plan
Yes,
2018
On May 8, 2013, the San Diego Regional Water Quality
Control Board (Regional Board) adopted a new Municipal
Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4/Stormwater) Permit
(National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit, No.
R9-2013-0001) that covered the San Diego County
Copermittees. Order No. R9-2015-0001 was adopted on
February 11, 2015, amending the Regional MS4 Permit to
extend coverage to the Orange County Copermittees. Order
No. R9-2015-0100 was adopted on November 18, 2015,
amending the Regional MS4 Permit to extend coverage to the
Riverside County Copermittees and make minor revisions.
This Permit mandates that the County of San Diego develop
new and updated Runoff Management Plans and Programs,
including Water Quality Improvement Plans and a
Jurisdictional Runoff Management Program. These
documents were submitted to the Regional Board on June 26,
2015. Permit requirements are generally implemented in the
unincorporated County under authority of the Watershed
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 57
Plans Yes/No
Year
Does the plan address hazards?
Does the plan identify projects to include in the mitigation
strategy?
Can the plan be used to implement mitigation actions?
Protection, Stormwater Management, and Discharge Control
Ordinance (WPO).
The amended MS4 Permit, like all previous iterations, requires
the County to establish and maintain adequate legal authority
to implement all updated MS4 Permit provisions. The WPO
has been amended to ensure that it is current with the
minimum requirements of the recently amended MS4 Permit.
The amendments include updating terminology and definitions
related to land development priority development projects
(PDPs), removal of outdated sections, minor updates to
discharge prohibitions, and the incorporation of an optional
program to allow development projects to satisfy some of its
stormwater compliance obligations at off-site locations.
On January 27, 2016, the County Board of Supervisor’s
adopted the Watershed Protection, Stormwater Management,
and Discharge Control Ordinance (WPO). The WPO became
effective February 26, 2016.
Community
Wildfire
Protection
Plan (CWPP)
Community
Wildfire
Protection
Plan (CWPP),
continued
Yes,
2016-
2020
Thirty-three communities have CWPP approved and in place:
• Alpine
• Crest
• Camp & Lake Morena
• Deer Springs
• Descanso
• Dulzura / Barrett
• El Capitian
• Eucalyptus Hills
• Fallbrook
• Greater Sunshine Summit
• Harrison Park
• Julian
• Kensington X
• Los Tules at Warner Springs
• Mt. Laguna
• Outer Jamul
• Palomar Mountain
• Pine Valley
• Potrero – Tecate
• Ramona
• Rancho Penasquitos
• Rancho Santa Fe
• Real East County
• Resource Conservation District of Greater San Diego
County of San Diego
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 58
Plans Yes/No
Year
Does the plan address hazards?
Does the plan identify projects to include in the mitigation
strategy?
Can the plan be used to implement mitigation actions?
• San Diego County Northeast
• San Diego County Southwest
• Scripps Ranch
• Stoneridge at Warner Springs Estates
• Talmadge
• Valley Center
• Vista Wynola Estates
The International Fire Chiefs Association released their guide
to help develop and implement a Community Wildfire
Preparedness Plan in communities and across the country. It
has a local community level approach to include code,
development review, ordinances and local authority, and is
used by leaders in the Fire Service, including subject matter
experts, and local, state, and federal officials.
Other special
plans (e.g.,
brownfields
redevelopment,
disaster
recovery,
coastal zone
management,
climate change
adaptation)
Yes • Disaster Recovery Plan
• Climate Adaptation Plan
• Wildfire Resiliency Strategy
Building Code,
Permitting, and
Inspections
Yes/
N Are codes adequately enforced?
Building Code Yes Yes
Site plan review requirements Yes Projects on lots that touch County or FEMA
floodplain or floodways are routed to County
Flood Control for review to ensure compliance
with the County Flood Damage Prevention
Ordinance which was last revised on
11/29/2019.
Land Use Planning and
Ordinances
Yes/N
Is the ordinance an effective measure for
reducing hazard impacts?
Is the ordinance adequately administered
and enforced?
Zoning ordinance Yes Yes
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 59
Subdivision ordinance Yes Yes
Special purpose ordinances
(floodplain management,
storm water management,
hillside or steep slope
ordinances, wildfire
ordinances, hazard setback
requirements)
Yes Projects on lots that touch County or FEMA
floodplains or floodways are routed to County
Flood Control for review to ensure compliance
with the County Flood Damage Prevention
Ordinance (FDPO) which was last revised on
11/29/2019.
FDPO is an effective measure for reducing flood
hazard impacts; and it is adequately
administered and enforced.
Flood insurance rate maps Yes County’s FDPO uses County floodplain and
floodway maps available through SanGIS and
FEMA FIRMs available through FEMA Map
Service Center to effectively reduce flood
hazard impacts. It is adequately administered
and enforced.
4.1.2. ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL
Administrative and Technical Capabilities include staff, their skills, and tools that can be used
for mitigation planning and to implement specific mitigation actions.
For smaller jurisdictions without local staff resources, if there are public resources at the next
higher-level government that can provide technical assistance, this may be indicated within
the comments
Overall, this jurisdiction can expand upon these capabilities by seeking additional
funding opportunities for applicable staff, research, projects, and applicable
resources/expenses. This jurisdiction can also improve these capabilities by keeping
an updated planning participant contact list to account for staff turnover and ensure
the inclusion of staff belonging to diverse departments and with varied tools and skills
to accomplish a comprehensive plan.
The following table summarizes the jurisdiction’s administrative and technical capabilities:
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 60
TABLE 6: ADMINISTRATIVE AND TECHNICAL CAPABILITIES
Administration Yes/No Describe capability
Is coordination effective?
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with
knowledge of land development
and land management practices
Yes Planning & Development Services (PDS)/ Lead
Planner; County Fire CRR Battalion Chief
Engineer(s) or professional(s)
trained in construction practices
related to buildings and/or
infrastructure
Yes PDS/Building Inspectors; Fire Prevention Specialist I &
II
Planners or Engineer(s) with an
understanding of natural and/or
human-caused hazards
Yes County Fire Pre-Fire Division Chief
Mitigation Planning Committee Yes San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard
Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) Planning Team
Maintenance programs to
reduce risk (e.g., tree trimming,
clearing drainage systems)
Yes County drainage crews inspect and maintain public
drainage facilities annually and perform maintenance
as necessary to ensure optimal conveyance.
Defer to Department of Public Works (DPW)
Transportation for Roads right-of-way maintenance.
Mutual aid agreements Yes Mutual aid agreements with CPFD
Region I and VI Mutual Aid Agreement are in place.
This agreement extends the MHOAC program’s mutual
aid response from Region VI to include all of Region I.
If the County of San Diego faces an issue that our
Operational Area cannot get the necessary resources
within our county or within Region VI, then all the
resources within Region I will be made available for
our operational area in accordance with the mutual aid
agreement.
Staff Yes/No
FT/PT1
Is staffing adequate to enforce regulations? Is staff
trained on hazards and mitigation?
Is coordination between agencies and staff
effective?
Floodplain Administrator Yes Staffing is adequate to enforce regulations. Staff are
trained on hazards and mitigation. Staff are certified as
Certified Floodplain Managers and regularly participate
in continuing education provided by FEMA, ASFPM,
FMA, etc. There is effective coordination between
agencies and staff.
Emergency Manager
Emergency Manager
Yes
Yes
The Office of Emergency Services employed 8
Emergency Services Coordinators / Senior Emergency
Services Coordinators, as well as Temporary Admin
Analyst Positions to Assist. County Fire coordinates
with County Fire Incident Management Teams.
Emergency Medical Services Coordinator and (2)
Emergency Medical Services Specialists, Senior
Emergency Services Coordinator, PH/BT Quality
Assurance Specialists are employed out of Health and
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 61
Human Services. All the existing staff listed above are
trained on local hazards and mitigation plans and have
developed the relationships with outside agencies to
have successful collaboration and support when
needed.
Staff with education or expertise
to assess the community’s
vulnerability to hazards
Yes Public Health Services (PHS) has Health Planning and
Program Specialists and Epidemiologists with technical
assistance from the California Department of Public
Health, Office of Health Equity, and other partners and
subject matter experts to assess the community’s
vulnerability to hazards; The State has created
assessments and health profiles for the various
counties on vulnerability to the public health impacts of
climate change. Staff referenced here do not enforce
regulations. Staff referenced here are trained on the
public health impacts of climate change and some also
receive various levels of training in NIMS/ICS. More
training is planned to occur in the coming years. There
is good coordination and communication between the
individuals and organizations referenced here. County
Fire oversees the County Science Advisory Board;
County Fire Environmental Scientists. The Hazard
Incident Response Team are experts in Hazardous
Waste spills / releases. Staff at the Office of
Emergency Services are experts in all hazards and
oversee the production of Concept of Operations
(response plans and procedures) for a multitude of
natural and human-caused disasters.
Community Planner Yes The following county departments recorded having
Community planners on staff:
• OES
• PHS
• DPW
• PDS
Scientists familiar with the
hazards of the community
Yes The following county departments recorded having
Scientists on staff:
• OES
• PHS
• DPW
• PDS
Personnel skilled in GIS and/or
HAZUS
Yes The following county departments recorded having GIS
Personnel on staff:
• OES
• PHS
• DPW
• PDS
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 62
Grant writers Yes The following county departments recorded having
Grant Writers on Staff:
• OES
• PHS
• DPW
• PDS
Technical Yes/
No
Describe capability
Has capability been used to assess/mitigate risk in the past?
Warning systems/services
(Reverse 911, outdoor warning
signals)
Yes The County and individual municipalities have
multiple notification systems and protocols used
during emergency events. AlertSanDiego is the opt-
in notification system, WEA (Wireless Emergency
Alert) is coordinated and used, as well as the
SDEmergency App and website.
• Flood Warning
Flood Warning uses a network of automated
rain, stream, reservoir and weather stations
known as the ALERT Flood Warning
System. Weather changes are reported in
real-time to our Kearny Mesa office. ALERT
systems are used around the world to
provide real-time flood warning to local
communities at risk from flooding threat.
ALERT is an acronym that stands for
Automatic Local Evaluation in Real-Time.
• San Diego Flood Warning System
The San Diego County Flood Warning
System is made up of 120 rain gages,
stream gages, weather stations, and lake
level stations that report data in real time to
the Flood Control Weather Center in Kearny
Mesa. The system is internet-based and
each of its sensors has defined alarms, that
when activated, are used by the flood
warning system to automatically assemble a
warning message and send it out to the
appropriate emergency managers by email
or cell phone. The website has numerous
links that allow the user to view and
download the sensor data, view updating
graphs and maps, and access other
weather-related resources.
• OES and PHS collaborate on Partner Relay
to ensure messages are getting to
community members with limited English
proficiency. Additionally, Partner Relay hosts
3 workshops per year to warn community
members and organizations serving
populations without homes, refugees and
other community-based organizations about
emergency preparedness topics. Yes, this
capability has been used to assess/mitigate
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 63
risk in the past (e.g., during the Lilac Fire)
and in between emergencies with the
workshops for CBOs.
Hazard data and information Yes Hazard Data is used for both this plan, and the
Counties Emergency Operations Plan. County OES
also uses this data for our Concept of Operations
and in assistance of hazard specific plans for other
departments.
HHSA and PHS have health statistics, and data
about the social determinants of health (e.g., Live
Well indicators). The Live Well Team and Community
Health Statistics Unit maintain this data and
information. Yes, this work has been used to assess
and mitigate risk in the past both for the County and
its partners by making this information widely and
publicly available and promoting awareness of it
(e.g., through workshops on the public health
impacts of climate change, presentations on the
Community Health Assessment data).
Grant writing Yes Mitigation grants (HMA / HMGP) Grants are applied
for by multiple departments within the county (Flood
Authority / OES / PDS). All of which have grant
writing experience.
Hazus analysis Yes HAZUS Analysis is utilized for the Hazard Mitigation
Plan.
4.1.3. FINANCIAL
Overall, this jurisdiction can expand upon this capability by researching, tracking, and
applying for grant/funding opportunities that can enhance this jurisdiction’s Hazard
Mitigation Program and execution of Prioritized Actions outlined in Section 6 of this
plan. This jurisdiction can also enhance this capability by dedicating staff and/or
collaborating with existing finance staff to further develop this capability.
This jurisdiction has access to or is eligible to use the following funding resources for hazard
mitigation:
County OES
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 64
TABLE 7: FUNDING RESOURCES
Funding Resource
Access/
Eligibility
(Yes/No)
Has the funding resource been used in past
and for what type of activities?
Could the resource be used to fund future
mitigation actions?
Community Development Block
Grants (CDBG)
Yes
Capital improvements project
funding
Yes Yes
Authority to levy taxes for specific
purposes
Potentially San Diego Flood Control District Act provides
potential, but Prop 218 requires a vote by
property owners.
Fees for water, sewer, gas, or
electric service
No
Impact fees for homebuyers or
developers for new
developments/homes
Yes Special Drainage Area Developer Fees provided
to Flood Control District
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 65
4.1.4. EDUCATION AND OUTREACH
Overall, this jurisdiction can expand upon these capabilities by researching, tracking,
and applying for grants/addition funding opportunities for applicable staff, research,
education and outreach programs/projects/supplies/technology, and applicable
resources/expenses. This jurisdiction can also enhance this capability by furthering
it’s creative use of outreach methods, such as leveraging the Partner Relay
(comprised of community leaders), and expanding partnerships.
The table below Identifies education and outreach programs and methods already in place
that could be used to implement mitigation activities and communicate hazard-related
information:
TABLE 8: EDUCATION AND OUTREACH PROGRAMS
Program/Organization
Yes/No
Describe program/organization and how
relates to disaster resilience and
mitigation.
Could the program/organization help
implement future mitigation activities?
Local citizen groups or non-
profit organizations focused on
environmental protection,
emergency preparedness,
access and functional needs
populations, etc.
Yes Department of Environmental Health &
Quality (DEHQ) does educational outreach to
permitted business on regulations only.
Public Health Services (PHS) works with the
following departments or groups for disaster
resilience and mitigation: County OES,
Community Action Partnership (Resident
Leadership Academy, CinA, WalkNRoll,
Exchange) & Office of Refugee Coordination,
HHSA Regions, Integrative Services, Live
Well San Diego team/CHWs, Partner Relay
efforts with various community-based
organizations serving refugees, populations
without homes, and community groups with
limited English proficiency. OES has a
working group on access and functional
needs, the County also has an Employee
Resource Group called Diverse Abilities which
takes an active interest in access and
functional needs (AFN) populations and
emergency preparedness. PHS also
collaborates with a number of partners and
community-based organizations on various
activities (e.g., Vista Community Clinic). PHS
has the ability to collaborate with any of the
groups listed above to help implement future
mitigation activities.
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 66
Ongoing public education or
information program (e.g.,
responsible water use, fire
safety, household
preparedness, environmental
education)
Yes Department of Environmental Health &
Quality (DEHQ) does educational outreach to
public schools on environmental education.
Public Health Services (PHS) works with the
following departments or groups on public
information/education programs: County OES,
CAP (RLA, CinA, Exchange) & Office of
Refugee Coordination, HHSA Regions, DPW
(Recycling and stormwater), DEH, AWM as
well. Live Well San Diego team/Community
Health Workers (CHW), Partner Relay
(messages during and in between
emergencies plus 3 educational workshops
per year on emergency preparedness topics).
Resident Leadership Academy (RLA) Network
workshops on public health impacts of climate
change. El Cajon Collaborative, East County,
and all HHSA Regions to receive workshop
on public health impacts of climate change
(2021). PHS has the ability to collaborate with
any of the groups listed above to help
implement future mitigation activities.
Natural disaster or safety
related school programs
Yes Public Health Services (PHS) works with the
following departments or groups on natural
disaster programs: County OES, CAP
(potentially O’Farrell, RLA, NCRC), Live Well
San Diego team/CHWs. PHS has the ability to
collaborate with any of the groups listed
above to help implement future mitigation
activities for natural disasters.
StormReady certification Yes Department of Environmental Health &
Quality (DEHQ) does educational outreach to
public schools on environmental education.
Firewise Communities
certification
Yes
The National Weather Service Storm Ready
Program was created to help communities
develop disaster mitigation plans and prepare
for extreme weather events. The National
Weather Service has outlined five
requirements to receive a storm ready
certification (StormReady):
Establish a 24-hour warning point and
emergency operations center.
Have more than one way to receive severe
weather warnings and forecasts and to alert
the public.
Create a system that monitors weather
conditions locally.
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 67
Firewise Communities
certification
Yes Promote the importance of public readiness
through community seminars.
Develop a formal hazardous weather plan,
which includes training severe weather
spotters and holding emergency exercises.
San Diego County Flood Control District's
(SDCFCD) applied for a Storm Ready
certification in 2018 and received it shortly
afterward. SDCFCD's ALERT flood warning
system has over 450 sensors continuously
monitoring and transmitting hydrologic and
weather information to the base station at the
Kearny Mesa Weather Center. If any of the
parameters exceed predetermined thresholds,
alarm notifications are sent to emergency
officials and flood control staff. This allows
field crews and emergency staff to know
where to concentrate storm cleanup or storm
mitigation efforts. During precipitation events,
Flood Control staff monitor weather conditions
and ensure flood warning system integrity
24/7.
Could the program/organization help
implement future mitigation activities?
The program's framework ensures
communities frequently create or modify
disaster mitigation plans to prepare for the
increasing vulnerability of natural hazards.
Flood Control holds and participates in
exercises with partners to improve existing
technology, ensure we utilize best
communication practices, and make certain
mitigation plans are relevant for current and
future risks and hazards.
Public-private partnership
initiatives addressing disaster-
related issues
Yes Public Health Services (PHS) works with the
following departments or groups on public-
private partnership initiatives: County OES,
HHSA Regions, CAP & Office of Refugee
Coordination, Live Well San Diego
team/CHWs.
Disaster Medical Surge Plan, San Diego
Healthcare Disaster Coalition. PHS has the
ability to collaborate with any of the groups
listed above to help implement future
mitigation activities to address disaster-
related issues.
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 68
4.2. NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP)
As a participant in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) (discussed previously in
Section 1 of this plan), a community develops capabilities for conducting flood mitigation
activities. The hazard mitigation plan must describe each jurisdiction’s participation in the
NFIP.
Participating communities must describe their continued compliance with NFIP requirements.
The mitigation plan must do more than state that the community will continue to comply with
the NFIP. Each jurisdiction must describe their floodplain management program and address
how they will continue to comply with the NFIP requirements. The local floodplain
administrator is often the primary source for this information.
Jurisdictions where FEMA has issued a floodplain map but are currently not participating in
the NFIP may meet this requirement by describing the reasons why the community does not
participate. Plan updates must meet the same requirements and document any change in
floodplain management programs.
The County of San Diego participates in the NFIP. The following table shows the NFIP
participation status of the County of San Diego and its jurisdictions:
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 69
TABLE 9: NFIP STATUS OF PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS.
Jurisdiction Participating Not Participating Not Eligible
1. Alpine Fire
Protection
District X
2. Carlsbad X
3. Chula Vista X
4. Coronado X
5. County of San
Diego X
6. Del Mar X
7. El Cajon X
8. Encinitas X
9. Escondido X
10. Imperial Beach X
11. La Mesa X
12. Lemon Grove X
13. National City X
14. Oceanside X
15. Otay Water
District X
16. Padre Dam
Municipal
Water District X
17. Poway X
18. Port of San
Diego X
19. Rainbow
Municipal Water
District X
20. Rancho Santa
Fe Fire
Protection
District
X
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 70
Jurisdiction Participating Not Participating Not Eligible
21. San Diego
(City) X
22. San Marcos X
23. San Diego
County
Water Authority X
24. San Miguel Fire
Protection
District X
25. Santee X
26. Solana Beach X
27. Sweetwater
Authority X
28. Vista X
29. Vista Irrigation
District X
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 71
The information listed below details this community’s participation in and continued
compliance with the NFIP and identified areas for improvement that could be potential
mitigation actions (listed in Section 6 of this plan):
TABLE 10: LOCAL MITIGATION
NFIP Topic Source of Information Comments
Insurance Summary
How many NFIP policies are in the
community? What is the total premium
and coverage?
State NFIP Coordinator or FEMA
NFIP Specialist
1,119 policies
$994,070 total premium
$318,933,500 total
coverage
How many claims have been paid in the
community? What is the total amount of
paid claims? How many of the claims
were for substantial damage?
FEMA NFIP or Insurance
Specialist
578 claims paid
$5,510,145 total amount
of paid claims
NFIP does not track NFIP
does not track
substantial damage
claims. San Diego County
does not have any current
records of substantial
damage inspections
and/or claims.
How many structures are exposed to
flood risk within the community?
Community Floodplain
Administrator (FPA)
There are approximately
2,268 insurable residential
and non-residential
structures within the
mapped SFHA.
Describe any areas of flood risk with
limited NFIP policy coverage.
Community FPA and FEMA
Insurance Specialist
Additional time and
resources would be
needed to confirm or
identify areas within the
County where limited
NFIP policy coverage may
exist. For example,
developed areas older
than 30 years, areas that
may be primary rental
properties, and areas
within the community that
may represent low
socioeconomic status.
Staff Resources
Is the Community FPA or NFIP
Coordinator certified?
Community FPA No
Is floodplain management an auxiliary
function? Community FPA Yes
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 72
NFIP Topic Source of Information Comments
Provide an explanation of NFIP
administration services (e.g., permit
review, GIS, education or outreach,
inspections, engineering capability).
Community FPA The FPA administers the
enforcement of adopted
codes and regulations
including NFIP
compliance, stormwater,
and floodplain
management. The FPA is
responsible for the
management of FEMA’s
Community Rating System
program and the
administration of daily
FPA duties: LOMC
procedures, records of
services provided to the
public, outreach projects,
SFHA permitting review,
and review and
maintenance of all
documents associated
with floodplain
development. GIS
mapping is a daily
resource utilized by the
FPA.
What are the barriers to running an
effective NFIP program in the
community, if any?
Community FPA Funding opportunities to
study and implement flood
risk reduction projects
and/or mitigation projects
such as buyout/acquisition
and demolition.
Compliance History
Is the community in good standing with
the NFIP?
State NFIP Coordinator, FEMA
NFIP Specialist, community
records
Yes, the community is in
good standing with the
NFIP.
Regulation
When did the community enter the
NFIP?
Community Status Book
http://www.fema.gov/ national-
flood-insurance-
program/national-flood-
insurance-program- community-
status-book
6/15/1984
Are the FIRMs digital or paper? Community FPA
Both. Current digital
FIRMS are effective
3/22/2022.
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 73
NFIP Topic Source of Information Comments
Do floodplain development regulations
meet or exceed FEMA or State
minimum requirements? If so, in what
ways?
Community FPA The State of California
adopted and enforced
statewide building codes
in combination with the
local floodplain
regulations, exceed
minimum NFIP
requirements:
• Minimum 1’ freeboard
including mechanic and
equipment enforced for
residential and non-
residential development
• Positive drainage from
the foundation wall is
enforced by the adopted
building codes
• New buildings on fill
within the SFHA are
required to be properly
designed and on
compacted fill per the
adopted building codes
Provide an explanation of the permitting
process.
Community FPA, State, FEMA
NFIP
Flood Insurance Manual
http://www.fema.gov/ flood-
insurance-manual
Community FPA, FEMA CRS
Coordinator, ISO representative
When a permit application
is received, it is entered
into Accela and identified
to be within the floodplain
by parcel data. During the
review process, the FPA is
involved in the plan review
and permitting
procedures. This includes
plan review comments,
discussions with the
application and design
professionals including the
requirement of a finished
construction elevation
certificate prior to a
certificate of occupancy
being issued. The FPA
works directly with
Planning, Engineering,
Public Works, and
Building Inspections to
ensure floodplain
regulations are addressed
during plan review and
implemented/enforced up
to the close of the building
permit.
SECTION FOUR | Review Community Capabilities 74
NFIP Topic Source of Information Comments
Provide an explanation of the permitting
process.
Community FPA, State, FEMA
NFIP
Flood Insurance Manual
http://www.fema.gov/ flood-
insurance-manual
Community FPA, FEMA CRS
Coordinator, ISO representative
All SFHA projects are
reviewed and permitted
under current regulations
including State-enforced,
local regulations, and
NFIP compliance as
addressed in the
floodplain management
regulations.
Community Rating System (CRS)
Does the community participate in
CRS?
Community FPA, State, FEMA
NFIP Yes
What is the community’s CRS Class
Ranking?
Flood Insurance Manual
http://www.fema.gov/ flood-
insurance-manual
CRS Class 7, May 2023
publication
CRS Class 6, October
2023 publication
Does the plan include CRS planning
requirements
Community FPA, FEMA CRS
Coordinator, ISO representative Yes
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
75
SECTION FIVE: Risk Assessment
Decorative Image Photo by County OES, Rob Andolina
San Diego County, California
2023
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 76
5. SECTION FIVE: CONDUCT A RISK ASSESSMENT
The Hazard Mitigation Planning Group (HMPG) conducts a risk assessment to determine the potential
impacts of hazards to the people, economy, and built and natural environments of the community. The risk
assessment provides the foundation for the rest of the mitigation planning process, which is focused on
identifying and prioritizing actions to reduce risk to hazards.
In addition to informing the mitigation strategy, the risk assessment also can be used to establish
emergency preparedness and response priorities, for land use and comprehensive planning, and for
decision making by elected officials, city and county departments, businesses, and organizations in the
community.
Risk Assessment requires the collection and analysis of hazard-related data to enable local jurisdictions to
identify and prioritize appropriate mitigation actions that will reduce losses from potential hazards.
When the plan revision process began in 2019, a complete review of the hazards identified in the original
plan and first update was conducted to determine if they were still valid and should be kept as a target for
mitigation measures or removed from the list. The HMPG also reassessed hazards that were not considered
for mitigation actions in 2018 to determine if that decision was still applicable or if they should be moved to
the active list. Finally, the HMPG examined potential or emerging hazards, including climate change, to see
if any should be included on the active list.
The data used was the most recent data available from SanGIS and the participating jurisdictions. This data
changed the model results; in some cases, raising the risks and reducing it in others. The overall result was
a more accurate picture of the risks facing the region.
While many of the mitigation measures listed in the original plan and revision were accomplished, the risk of
the hazard did not significantly diminish. This is easily seen in both the wildfire and earthquake hazards.
While mitigation measures have been put in place (such as the update of the fire code and vegetation
management measures), wildfire remains, and will continue to be, the greatest hazard risk to the San Diego
region. The HMPG reviewed all events since 2018 (wildfires, etc.) and all were profiled accurately in the
original plan.
The review of other hazards showed the updated data was consistent with previous growth in the region.
Any significant changes to the hazard profiles were the result of the incorporation of climate change into this
plan.
Risk Assessment is the process of identifying the potential impacts of hazards that threaten an area,
including both natural and human-caused events. A natural event causes a hazard when it harms people or
property. Such events would include floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, tsunami, coastal storms, landslides,
and wildfires that strike populated areas. Human-caused hazard events are caused by human activity and
include technological hazards and terrorism.
Technological hazards are generally accidental and/or have unintended consequences (for example, an
accidental hazardous materials release). Terrorism is defined by the Code of Federal Regulations as
“…unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the
civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”
Natural hazards that have harmed the County in the past are likely to happen in the future. Consequently,
the process of risk assessment includes determining whether the hazard has occurred previously.
Approaches to collecting historical hazard data include researching newspapers and other records,
conducting a planning document and report literature review in all relevant hazard subject areas, gathering
hazard-related GIS data, and engaging in conversation with relevant experts from the community.
In addition, a variety of sources were used to determine the full range of all potential hazards within San
Diego County. Even though a particular hazard may not have occurred in recent history in San Diego
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 77
County, it is important during the hazard identification stage to consider all hazards that may potentially
affect the study area.
Hazard profiling entails describing the physical characteristics of hazards such as their magnitude, duration,
past occurrences, and probability. This stage of the hazard mitigation planning process involves creating
base maps of the study area, then collecting and mapping hazard event profile information obtained from
various federal, state, and local government agencies.
Building upon the original hazard profiles, The County Office of Emergency Services (County OES) used the
existing hazard data tables (created for the original Hazard Mitigation Plan and revision) and updated them
using current data. The revised hazard data was mapped to determine the geographic extent of the hazards
in each jurisdiction in the County.
The level of risk associated with each hazard in each jurisdiction was also estimated and assigned a risk
level of high, medium, or low depending on several factors unique to that hazard. The hazards assessed
were both natural and human-caused.
Probability of future events are described in the plan as:
• Highly Likely – Occurs at intervals of 1 – 10 years
• Likely - Occurs at intervals of 10 - 50 years
• Somewhat Likely - Occurs at intervals greater than every 50 years
Analyzing risk involves evaluating vulnerable assets, describing potential impacts, and estimating losses for
each hazard. Vulnerability describes the degree to which an asset is susceptible to damage from a hazard.
Vulnerability also depends 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. Often, indirect effects can be much more widespread and damaging than direct effects. Risk
analysis predicts the extent of injury and damage that may result from a hazard event of a given intensity
within an area. It identifies the effects of natural and human-caused hazard events by estimating the relative
exposure of existing and future population, land development, and infrastructure to hazardous conditions.
The analysis helps set mitigation priorities by allowing local jurisdictions to focus attention on areas most
likely to be damaged or most likely to require early emergency response during a hazard event.
Disaster records were reviewed for repetitive losses. No repetitive losses were found for coastal storms,
erosion, tsunamis, dam failures, earthquakes, landslides, wildfire, or liquefaction. Repetitive loss due to
flooding is covered in the respective hazard profile of this plan.
Exposure analysis identifies the existing and future assets located in an identified hazard area. It can
quantify the number, type and value of structures, critical facilities, and infrastructure located in those areas,
as well as assets exposed to multiple hazards. It can also be used to quantify the number of future
structures and infrastructure possible in hazard prone areas based on zoning and building codes.
5.1. HAZARD ASSESSMENT SUMMARY
The Hazard Mitigation Planning Group (HMPG) reviewed the hazards identified in the original Hazard
Mitigation Plan and evaluated each to see if they still posed a risk to the region. In addition, the hazards
listed in the FEMA Local Mitigation Planning Handbook were also reviewed to determine if they should be
added to the list of hazards to include in the plan revision.83F83F83F
84
All hazards identified by FEMA included: avalanche, coastal storm, coastal erosion, dam failure,
drought/water supply, earthquake, expansive soils, extreme heat, flooding, hailstorm, house/building fire,
84 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook (fema.gov).
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 78
land subsidence, landslide, liquefaction, severe winter storm, tornado, tsunami, wildfire, windstorm, and
volcano.
Although not required by the FEMA Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, human-caused hazards, such as
hazardous materials release, nuclear materials release, and terrorism, were also reviewed by the HMPG.
Climate change was reviewed and discussed as an individual hazard. However, the HMPG determined the
impact of climate change on the identified hazards should instead be included in hazard evaluations and
their impacts.
Hazard identification is the process of identifying all hazards that threaten an area, including both natural
and human-caused events. In the hazard identification stage, The HMPG determined hazards that
potentially threaten San Diego County.
The hazard screening process involved narrowing the all-inclusive list of hazards to those most threatening
to the San Diego region. The screening effort required extensive input from a variety of HMPG members,
including representatives from City governments, County agencies, special districts, fire agencies and law
enforcement agencies, the California Office of Emergency Services, local businesses, community groups,
the 2020 Unified San Diego County Emergency Services Organization Operational Area Emergency Plan,
and the public.
The County Office of Emergency Services (County OES), with assistance of Geographic Information
Systems (GIS) experts from the County of San Diego’s Planning and Development Services, used
information from FEMA and other nationally and locally available databases to map the County’s hazards,
infrastructure, critical facilities, and land uses. This mapping effort was utilized in the hazard screening
process to determine which hazards would present the greatest risk to the County of San Diego and to each
jurisdiction within the County.
It was also determined that the coastal storm, erosion, and tsunami hazards should be profiled together
because the same communities in the County have the potential to be affected by all three hazards. In the
development of the initial plan, the HMPG indicated that, because the majority of the development in San
Diego is relatively recent (within the last 60 years), an urban-type fire that destroys multiple city blocks is not
likely to occur alone, without a wildfire in the urban/wild-land interface occurring first.
Therefore, it was determined that structure fire and wildfire should be addressed as one hazard category in
the plan. This current revised plan continues to discuss structure fire and wildfire together.
Similarly, the original plan and first revision addressed earthquake and liquefaction as one category because
liquefaction does not occur unless an adequate level of ground shaking from an earthquake occurs first.
With the decommissioning of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, it was also decided to incorporate
nuclear materials release (resulting from an accident) under hazardous materials release.
The table below is the HMPG’s summary of hazard description information and identification of hazards are
most significant to the planning area:
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 79
TABLE 11: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION
Hazard
Location
(Geographic
Area Affected)
Maximum Probable
Extent
(Magnitude/Strength)
Probability of
Future Events
Overall
Significance
Ranking
Avalanche Negligible Weak Unlikely Low
Dam Failure Significant Severe Unlikely Medium
Drought Significant Severe Highly Likely High
Earthquake/
Liquefaction Significant Extreme Likely High
Erosion Limited Moderate Likely High
Expansive
Soils
Limited Weak Likely Medium
Extreme Heat Extensive Severe Highly Likely High
Flood Significant Severe Highly Likely High
Hail Limited Weak Unlikely Low
Hurricane Limited Weak Unlikely Low
Rain-Induced
Landslide
Extensive Severe Unlikely Medium
Lightning Significant Weak Unlikely Low
Sea Level
Rise/Coastal
Storms
Negligible Weak Likely High
Severe Wind Extensive Weak Highly Likely Medium
Severe Winter
Weather
Significant Moderate Highly Likely Medium
Subsidence Negligible Weak Unlikely Low
Tornado Negligible Weak Unlikely Low
Tsunami Negligible Weak Unlikely Medium
Wildfire Extensive Extreme Highly Likely High
Climate
Change
Extensive Extreme Highly Likely High
Terrorism /
Cyber
Terrorism
(Human-
Caused)
Extensive Extreme Likely High
CBRNE
Threats
Limited
Moderate Occasional Low
Pandemic
Disease
Extensive Extreme Occasional High
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 80
Definitions for Classifications Location (Geographic Area Affected)
• Negligible: Less than 10 percent of planning area or isolated single-point occurrences
• Limited: 10 to 25 percent of the planning area or limited single-point occurrences
• Significant: 25 to 75 percent of planning area or frequent single-point occurrences
• Extensive: 75 to 100 percent of planning area or consistent single-point occurrences
Maximum Probable Extent (Magnitude/Strength based on historic events or future probability)
• Weak: Limited classification on scientific scale, slow speed of onset or short duration of event, resulting
in little to no damage
• Moderate: Moderate classification on scientific scale, moderate speed of onset or moderate duration of
event, resulting in some damage and loss of services for days
• Severe: Severe classification on scientific scale, fast speed of onset or long duration of event, resulting
in devastating damage and loss of services for weeks or months
• Extreme: Extreme classification on scientific scale, immediate onset, or extended duration of event,
resulting in catastrophic damage and uninhabitable conditions Ft
TABLE 12: HAZARD SEVERITY
Hazard Scale / Index Weak Moderate Severe Extreme
Drought84F84F84F
85 Palmer Drought Severity
Index3
-1.99 to
+1.99
-2.00 to
-2.99
-3.00 to
-3.99
-4.00 and
below
Earthquake85F85F85F
86
86F86F86F
87
Modified Mercalli Scale 4 I to IV V to VII VII IX to XII
Richter Magnitude Scale 5 2, 3 4, 5 6 7, 8
Hurricane
Wind87F87F87F
88
Saffir-Simpson Hurricane
Wind Scale 6
1 2 3 4, 5
Tornado 88F88F88F
89 Fujita Tornado Damage
Scale7
F0 F1, F2 F3 F4, F5
Probability of Future Events
• Unlikely: Less than 1 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of
greater than every 100 years.
• Occasional: 1 to 10 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 11 to
100 years.
• Likely: 10 to 90 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 1 to 10
years
• Highly Likely: 90 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of
less than 1 year.
Overall Significance
85 Cumulative meteorological drought and wet conditions: http://ncdc.noaa.gov/
86 Earthquake intensity and effect on population and structures: http://earthquake.usgs.gov
87 Earthquake magnitude as a logarithmic scale, measured by a seismograph: http://earthquake.usgs.gov
88 Hurricane rating based on sustained wind speed: http://nhc.noaa.gov
89 Tornado rating based on wind speed and associated damage: http://spc.noaa.gov
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 81
• Low: Two or more criteria fall in lower classifications, or the event has a minimal impact on the planning
area. This rating is sometimes used for hazards with a minimal or unknown record of occurrences or for
hazards with minimal mitigation potential.
• Medium: The criteria fall mostly in the middle ranges of classifications and the event’s impacts on the
planning area are noticeable but not devastating. This rating is sometimes used for hazards with a high
extent rating but very low probability rating.
• High: The criteria consistently fall in the high classifications and the event is likely/highly likely to occur
with severe strength over a significant to extensive portion of the planning area.
Based on this FEMA Standardized evaluation, in accordance with information covered within the HAZUS
Data Evaluations, Vulnerability Assessments, Hazard Seminar Series, and input from Subject Matter
Experts and the public, the County of San Diego has prioritized the following hazards into High, Medium,
and Low rankings (in no order of prioritization within individual categories):
High Medium Low
• Drought • Dam Failure • Avalanche
• Extreme Heat • Expansive Soils • Hail
• Flood • Landslide • Hurricane
• Sea Level Rise/Coastal
Storms
• Severe Winter
Weather
• Subsidence
• Tornado
• Erosion • Tsunami • CBRNE Threats
• Wildfire • Severe Wind • Lightning
• Climate Change
• Terrorism/Cyber-
Terrorism
• Pandemic Disease
• Earthquake/Liquefaction
A High ranking indicates the hazard has a “Highly Likely” probability of occurrence and/or a severe impact
on the community. The Medium ranking indicated a “Likely” or “Occasional” potential for occurrence or
impact. Hazards with a low probability of occurrence but with a potentially high impact were also ranked as
Medium. The Low ranking indicates that the potential for the event to occur is "Unlikely” (remote and/or the
impact of the event is minimal to the community).
Many of these hazards were ranked differently by individual jurisdictions. For example, tsunamis received a
relatively High ranking among coastal jurisdictions, while inland jurisdictions did not consider them for
mitigation action. Additionally, all jurisdictions rated wildfire High. The hazards selected by each jurisdiction
and related mitigation goals and actions are included in Section 5 and 6 of their annexes.
The final list of twelve prioritized hazards for San Diego County were hazards with High or Medium
Overall Significance. This list of prioritized hazards was determined by the HMPG using HAZUS Data
Evaluations, Vulnerability Assessments, Hazard Seminar Series, and input from Subject Matter
Experts and the public (appearing below in alphabetical order):
• Climate Change
o Probability of Future Events Highly Likely: 90 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the
next year or a recurrence interval of less than 1 year.
o Overall Significance High: The criteria consistently fall in the high classifications and the event is
likely/highly likely to occur with severe strength over a significant to extensive portion of the
planning area.
• Dam Failure
o Probability of Future Events Unlikely: Less than 1 percent probability of occurrence in the next
year or a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years.
Decorative Image
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 82
o Overall Significance Medium: The criteria fall mostly in the middle ranges of classifications and
the event’s impacts on the planning area are noticeable but not devastating. This rating is
sometimes used for hazards with a high extent rating but very low probability rating.
o Rationale for Inclusion: Determined to require inclusion by the HMPG using HAZUS Data
Evaluations, Vulnerability Assessments, Hazard Seminar Series, and input from Subject
Matter Experts and the public
• Drought
o Probability of Future Events Highly Likely: 90 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the
next year or a recurrence interval of less than 1 year.
o Overall Significance High: The criteria consistently fall in the high classifications and the event is
likely/highly likely to occur with severe strength over a significant to extensive portion of the
planning area.
• Earthquake/Liquefaction
o Probability of Future Events Likely: 10 to 90 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or
a recurrence interval of 1 to 10 years
o Overall Significance High: The criteria consistently fall in the high classifications and the event is
likely/highly likely to occur with severe strength over a significant to extensive portion of the
planning area.
• Extreme Heat
o Probability of Future Events Highly Likely: 90 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the
next year or a recurrence interval of less than 1 year.
o Overall Significance High: The criteria consistently fall in the high classifications and the event is
likely/highly likely to occur with severe strength over a significant to extensive portion of the
planning area.
• Flood
o Probability of Future Events Highly Likely: 90 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the
next year or a recurrence interval of less than 1 year.
o Overall Significance High: The criteria consistently fall in the high classifications and the event is
likely/highly likely to occur with severe strength over a significant to extensive portion of the
planning area.
• Human-Caused Hazards (Terrorism & Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE Threats))
o Probability of Future Events Likely: 10 to 90 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or
a recurrence interval of 1 to 10 years
o Overall Significance High: The criteria consistently fall in the high classifications and the event is
likely/highly likely to occur with severe strength over a significant to extensive portion of the
planning area.
• Rain-Induced Landslide
o Probability of Future Events Unlikely: Less than 1 percent probability of occurrence in the next
year or a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years.
o Overall Significance Medium: The criteria fall mostly in the middle ranges of classifications and
the event’s impacts on the planning area are noticeable but not devastating. This rating is
sometimes used for hazards with a high extent rating but very low probability rating.
o Rationale for Inclusion: Determined to require inclusion by the HMPG using HAZUS Data,
Evaluations, Vulnerability Assessments, Hazard Seminar Series, and input from Subject
Matter Experts and the public
• Sea Level Rise/Coastal Storms/Erosion
o Probability of Future Events Likely: 10 to 90 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or
a recurrence interval of 1 to 10 years
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 83
o Overall Significance High: The criteria fall mostly in the middle ranges of classifications and the
event’s impacts on the planning area are noticeable but not devastating. This rating is sometimes
used for hazards with a high extent rating but very low probability rating.
• Severe Winter Weather
o Probability of Future Events Highly Likely: 90 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the
next year or a recurrence interval of less than 1 year.
o Overall Significance Medium: The criteria fall mostly in the middle ranges of classifications and
the event’s impacts on the planning area are noticeable but not devastating. This rating is
sometimes used for hazards with a high extent rating but very low probability rating.
• Tsunami
o Probability of Future Events Unlikely: Less than 1 percent probability of occurrence in the next
year or a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years.
o Overall Significance Medium: The criteria fall mostly in the middle ranges of classifications and
the event’s impacts on the planning area are noticeable but not devastating. This rating is
sometimes used for hazards with a high extent rating but very low probability rating.
o Rationale for Inclusion: Determined to require inclusion by the HMPG using HAZUS Data
Evaluations, Vulnerability Assessments, Hazard Seminar Series, and input from Subject
Matter Experts and the public
• Wildfire/Structure Fire
o Probability of Future Events Highly Likely: 90 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the
next year or a recurrence interval of less than 1 year.
o Overall Significance High: The criteria consistently fall in the high classifications and the event is
likely/highly likely to occur with severe strength over a significant to extensive portion of the
planning area.
Climate Change will be addressed throughout this plan as both a hazard and a factor that could affect the
location, extent, probability of occurrence, and magnitude of climate-related hazards listed above.
Though Pandemic Disease received a “High” Overall Significance rating (The criteria consistently fall in the
high classifications and the event is likely/highly likely to occur with severe strength over a significant to
extensive portion of the planning area.), the HMPG determined this hazard’s “Occasional” Probability of
Future Events rating (1 to 10 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 11
to 100 years.), and input from HAZUS Data Evaluations, Vulnerability Assessments, Hazard Seminar
Series, Subject Matter Experts and the public did not necessitate this hazard to be included in this plan’s
final list of prioritized hazards.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
84
5.1.1. HAZARD OMISSION RATIONALE
During the initial evaluation, the Hazard Mitigation Planning Group (HMPG) determined certain hazards
were not included in the original plan’s profiling step because they were not prevalent hazards within San
Diego County, were found to pose only minor or very minor threats to San Diego County compared to the
other hazards (status had not changed), and would, therefore, not be included in this revision.
Only hazards that received a High or Medium ranking in Section 5.1 (other than CBRNE threats due to their
potentially serious impacts) were considered in this mitigation planning process.
Though Pandemic Disease received a “High” Overall Significance rating (The criteria consistently fall in the
high classifications and the event is likely/highly likely to occur with severe strength over a significant to
extensive portion of the planning area.), the HMPG determined this hazard’s “Occasional” Probability of
Future Events rating (1 to 10 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 11
to 100 years.), and input from HAZUS Data Evaluations, Vulnerability Assessments, Hazard Seminar
Series, Subject Matter Experts and the public did not necessitate this hazard to be included in this plan’s
final list of prioritized hazards.
The table below gives a brief description of remaining, omitted hazards and the reason for their exclusion:
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
85
TABLE 13: HAZARD OMISSION
Hazard Description Reason for Exclusion
Avalanche A mass of snow moving down a slope.
There are two basic elements to a slide;
a steep, snow-covered slope and a
trigger
Snowfall in County mountains
not significant; poses very
minor threat compared to
other hazards
Expansive Soils Expansive soils shrink when dry and
swell when wet. This movement can
exert enough pressure to crack
sidewalks, driveways, basement floors,
pipelines and even foundations
Presents a minor threat to
limited portions of the County
Hail Can occur during thunderstorms that
bring heavy rains, strong winds, hail,
lightning, and tornadoes
Occurs during severe
thunderstorms; most likely to
occur in the central and
southern states; no historical
record of this hazard in the
region.
Subsidence Occurs when large amounts of ground
water have been withdrawn from certain
types of rocks, such as fine-grained
sediments. The rock compacts because
the water is partly responsible for
holding the ground up. When the water
is withdrawn, the rocks fall in on
themselves.
Soils in the County are
mostly granitic. Presents a
minor threat to limited parts
of the county. No historical
record of this hazard in the
region.
Lightning Lightning is defined
by the NWS as any and all of the
various forms of visible electrical
discharge caused by thunderstorms.
The US National Centers for
Environmental Information
reports that the County
averages only three days of
lightning a year, making it a
minor threat compared to
other hazards.
Tornado A tornado is a violent windstorm
characterized by a twisting, funnel-
shaped cloud. It is spawned by a
thunderstorm (or sometimes because of
a hurricane) and produced when cool air
overrides a layer of warm air, forcing the
warm air to rise rapidly. The damage
from a tornado is a result of the high
wind velocity and wind-blown debris.
Less than one tornado event
occurs in the entire State of
California in any given year;
poses very minor threat
compared to other hazards.
No historical record of this
hazard in the region.
Hurricane Hurricanes, tropical storms, nor’easters
and typhoons, also classified as
cyclones, include any closed circulation
developing around a low-pressure
center in which the winds rotate counter-
clockwise in the northern hemisphere
(or clockwise in the Southern
Hemisphere) and whose diameter
averages 10 to 30 miles across. A
tropical cyclone refers to any such
Prevailing winds take
hurricane tracks westward off
of Northern Baja and the few
that may drift further north
dissipate in the colder
offshore waters and become
rainmakers rather than
causing destructive winds.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 86
Hazard Description Reason for Exclusion
circulation that develops over tropical
waters.
Volcano A volcano is a mountain that is built up
by an accumulation of lava, ash flows,
and airborne ash and dust. When
pressure from gases and the molten
rock within the volcano becomes strong
enough to cause an explosion, eruptions
occur
No active volcanoes in San
Diego County. No historical
record of this hazard in the
region.
Severe Wind Severe wind is commonly associated
with severe thunderstorm winds, severe
winter storms (exceeding 58 mph) and
tornadoes.
Maximum sustained wind
speed recorded in the region
is less than 60 miles per hour
and would not be expected to
cause major damage or
injury.
5.1.2. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION SOURCES
Once the hazards of concern for San Diego County were determined, the available data was collected,
using sources including the internet, direct communication with various agencies, discussions with in-house
experts, and historical records. Specific sources included the United States Geological Survey (USGS),
California Geological Survey (CGS), Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) HAZUS, FEMA
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM), United States Forest Service (USFS), California Department of
Forestry – Fire and Resource Assessment Program (CDF-FRAP), National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), San Diego Geographic Information Source (SanGIS), San Diego Association of
Governments (SANDAG), San Diego County Flood Control District, Southern California Earthquake Data
Center (SCEDC), California Seismic Safety Commission (CSSC), California Integrated Seismic Network
(CISN), California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), Drought Outlook websites, and input gathered
from local jurisdictions districts and agencies.
When necessary, agencies were contacted to ensure the most updated data was obtained and used.
Historical landmark locations throughout the County were obtained from the National Register and from the
San Diego Historical Resources Board.
5.2. ALL HAZARD PROFILES
A hazard profile is a description of the physical characteristics of a hazard and a determination of various
hazard descriptors, including magnitude, duration, frequency, probability, and extent. The hazard data that
was collected in the hazard identification process were mapped to determine the geographic extent of the
hazards in each jurisdiction in the County and the level of risk associated with each hazard.
Because Nuclear Materials Release, Hazardous Materials Release, and Terrorism hazards are sensitive
issues and release of information could pose further unnecessary threat, the HMPG decided that each of
these hazards would be further profiled and assessed in a separate, “For Official Use Only” Appendix and
would be exempt from public distribution and disclosure by Section 6254 (99) of the California Government
Code (Planning Partners, see separate FOUO Attachment A).
Most hazards were given a risk level of high, medium, or low depending on several factors unique to the
hazard. The hazards identified and profiled for San Diego County, as well as the data used to profile each
hazard are presented in this section. The hazards are presented in alphabetical order; and this does not
signify level of importance to the HMPG.
The final list of prioritized hazards to be profiled for San Diego County was determined as Climate Change,
Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake/Liquefaction, Extreme Heat, Flood, Human Caused Hazards (Terrorism
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 87
& Hazardous Material Incidents (CBRNE Threats)), Rain-Induced Landslide, Sea Level Rise/ Coastal
Storms/Erosion, Tsunami, and Wildfire.
A comprehensive list of hazards that are possible in San Diego County is detailed in the next subsection (in
alphabetical order). Planning Partners should refer to the existing, For Official Use Only (FOUO) Threat and
Hazard Identification Risk Assessment (THIRA) for hazard ranking information.
TABLE 14: HAZARD PROFILES
Hazard Data Collected for Hazard
Identification Justification for Inclusion
Climate Change • National Climate Assessment
• Scripps Institution of
Oceanography
• California Environmental
Protection Agency and Office
of Environmental Health
Hazard Assessment
• Sea levels measured at a station in
La Jolla have risen at a rate of 6
inches over the last century
• In north San Diego County, there
have been a number of significant
cliff failures in recent years
Dam Failure • FEMA-HAZUS
• Dam Inundation Data
(SanGIS)
• San Diego County Water
Authority (SDCWA)
(Olivenhain Dam)
• FEMA FIRM maps
• Topography (SANDAG)
• FEMA Hazards website
• Dam failure
• 58 dams exist throughout San
Diego County
• Many dams over 30 years old
• Increased downstream
development
Drought • California Department of
Water Resources
• San Diego County Water
Authority
• Statewide multiple year droughts
have occurred numerous times
since 1976
Earthquake
• USGS
• CGS
• URS
• CISN
• SanGIS
• SANDAG
• FEMA-HAZUS 99
• FEMA Hazards website
• Several active fault zones pass
through San Diego County
Liquefaction • Soil-Slip Susceptibility
(USGS)
• FEMA-HAZUS MH
• FEMA Hazards website
• Steep slopes or alluvial deposit
soils in low-lying areas are
susceptible to liquefaction during
earthquakes or heavy rains. San
Diego County terrain has both of
these characteristics and lies within
several active earthquake zones.
Extreme Heat • Spatial Hazard Events and
Losses Database for the
United States
• There have been 52 heat events in
San Diego County since 2013
Flood • FEMA FIRM Maps
• Topography
• Base flood elevations (FEMA)
• Historical flood records
• Much of San Diego County is
located within the 100-year
floodplain
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 88
Hazard Data Collected for Hazard
Identification Justification for Inclusion
• San Diego County Water
Authority
• San Diego County Dept. of
Sanitation and Flood Control
• FEMA Hazards website
• Flash floods and other flood events
occur regularly during rainstorms
due to terrain and hydrology of San
Diego County
• There have been multiple
Proclaimed States of Emergency
between 1950-2019 for floods in
San Diego County
Human-Caused
Hazards:
(Hazardous
Materials Release)
• County of San Diego Dept. of
Environmental Health,
Hazardous Materials Division
• San Diego County has several
facilities that handle or process
hazardous materials
• Heightened security concerns since
September 2001
Human-Caused
Hazards: (Nuclear
Materials
Release/CBRNE
Threats)
• San Onofre Nuclear
Generating Station (SONGS)
and Department of Defense
• The potential exists for an
accidental release of radioactive
material stored at San Onofre or
from nuclear ships in San Diego
Bay
• Heightened security concerns since
September 2001
Human-Caused
Hazards:
(Terrorism/Cyber-
Terrorism)
• County of San Diego
Environmental Health
Department Hazardous
Materials Division
• The federal and state governments
have advised every jurisdiction to
consider the terrorism hazard
• Heightened security concerns since
September 2001
Rain-Induced
Landslide
• USGS
• CGS
• Tan Map Series
• Steep slope data (SANDAG)
• Soil Series Data (SANDAG)
• FEMA-HAZUS
• FEMA Hazards website
• NEH
• Steep slopes within earthquake
zones characterize San Diego
County, which creates landslide
risk.
• There have been two Proclaimed
States of Emergency for landslides
in San Diego County
Sea Level
Rise/Coastal
Storms/Erosion
• Historical Coastlines (NOAA)
• Shoreline Erosion
Assessment (SANDAG)
• FEMA FIRM Maps
• FEMA Hazards website
• Coastal Zone Boundary
(CALTRANS)
• National Research Council’s
Report on Sea Level Rise in
California, Oregon, and
Washington: Past, Present
and Future
• Sea Level Rise Adaptation
Strategy for the San Diego
Bay
• Sea levels measured at a station in
La Jolla have risen at a rate of 6
inches over the last century
• Coastline stabilization measures
have been implemented at various
times in the past (erosion)
• Extensive development along the
coast
Severe Winter
Weather
• NOAA National Centers for
Environmental Information
Storm Events Database
• Severe winter storms have caused
damage in the County and can lead
to immobility and loss of utilities.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 89
Hazard Data Collected for Hazard
Identification Justification for Inclusion
Heavy rain can have significant
impacts, including flash flooding
and mudslides.
Tsunami
• Historical Coastlines (NOAA)
• Shoreline Erosion
Assessment (SANDAG)
• Maximum Tsunami Run up
Projections (USCA OES)
• FEMA FIRM Maps
• FEMA Hazards website
• Coastal Zone Boundary
(CALTRANS)
• Tsunamis and their
Occurrence along the San
Diego County Coast (report,
Westinghouse Ocean
Research Laboratory)
• Tsunami (article, Scientific
American)
• National Research Council’s
Report on Sea Level Rise in
California, Oregon and
Washington: Past, Present
and Future
• Sea Level Rise Adaptation
Strategy for the San Diego
Bay
• Sea levels measured at a station in
La Jolla have risen at a rate of 6
inches over the last century
• Coastline stabilization measures
have been implemented at various
times in the past (erosion)
• Extensive development along the
coast
Wildfire
• CDF-FRAP
• USFS
• CDFG
• Topography
• Local Fire Agencies
• Historical fire records
• FEMA Hazards website
• San Diego County experiences
wildfires on a regular basis
• Twelve States of Emergency were
declared for wildfires between
1950-2020
• Terrain and climate of San Diego
• Santa Ana Winds
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
90
5.2.1. CLIMATE CHANGE
Nature of Hazard
Climate change is not a hazard in and of itself, but rather is a factor that could affect the location, extent,
probability of occurrence, and magnitude of climate-related hazards.
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), warming of the climate system is
unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increased global average air and ocean temperatures,
widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level.89F89F89F
90 The overwhelming majority of
climate scientists agree that human activities, especially burning of fossil fuels, are responsible for most of
the global warming observed.90F90F90F
91
The Scripps Institution of Oceanography planning partners define Climate Change as any systematic
change in the long-term statistics of climate elements and weather events (such as temperature, pressure,
or winds) sustained over several decades or longer.91F91F91F
92 Climate change refers to a change in the state of the
climate that can be identified (e.g., by using statistical tests) by changes in the mean and/or the variability of
its properties and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer.
Climate change may be due to natural internal processes or external forcings such as modulations of the
solar cycles, volcanic eruptions, and persistent anthropogenic changes in the composition of the
atmosphere or in land use.92F92F92F
93
Disaster History
More historical information, provided by Scripps Institution of Oceanography (University of
California, San Diego), is detailed in the respective Vulnerability Assessment section of this plan.
Climate change impacts are already impacting the region especially as it relates to temperature and
extreme heat. Recent weather and climate impacts provide a fingerprint of climate change impacts in San
Diego County. These include terrestrial floods, coast sea level extremes, erosion and wave damage, heat
waves, and wildfires, such as the 2003 and 2007 conflagrations. Compound extremes should be
considered, such as the wildfire-followed-by flood and debris flow event that occurred in Montecito/Santa
Barbara County in 2017.
Hazard Impacts
The most vulnerable populations to impacts from extreme events are those who inhabit locations with
greatest or most unusual physical effects, those who lack resources, who are uninsured, who are socially
isolated, or have already compromised health. Coastal regions are vulnerable to oceanic flooding and the
increasing occurrence of heat waves, whose temperatures are likely lower than in inland regions but rarely
occurred historically. However, the health impacts of less intense heat waves on those living in the coastal
zone may be more severe than elsewhere in the county because the population is less acclimated to the
heat. Neighborhoods with less access to air conditioning and natural shading from vegetation are more
susceptible to extreme heat.
90 IPCC, 2013: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of
Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
[Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
91 Ibid
92 https://glossary.ametsoc.org/wiki/Climate_change
93 https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/glossary/
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 91
Implementing appropriate warnings and communication or extremes such as heatwaves and/or smoke from
wildfires, and developing responses to prepare for these extremes is critically important, especially in the
most vulnerable communities. To move forward, the region can assess current measures, such as cooling
centers to take refuge from extreme heat, urban greening, residential and commercial structure fire
resistance and community fire mitigation and escape routes.
Other ways to prevent and mitigate further impacts include:
• Testing and monitoring adaptation strategies. Such efforts include the Cardiff Dunes to mitigate coastal
flooding.
• Identifying thresholds to determine when it may be necessary to relocate or redesign infrastructure.
• Continual improvement of extreme forecasts to allow longer lead times to prepare for the extremes.
The climate is projected to continue to change over this century and beyond.93F93F93F
94 The climate change factor is
increasing risk for some natural hazards, and this assessment includes information about how risk will
change into the future.
By assessing ongoing changes in risk—in addition to the traditional practice of risk assessment based on
observed hazard events—this plan’s hazard mitigation strategies can better reduce risk from hazards
expected going forward. In general, to prepare and mitigate impacts of climate change, develop integrated
multi-agency, multi-jurisdiction approach that uses best information, best practices, and considers the needs
of under-resourced, disadvantaged communities and individuals.
Location & Extent/Probability of Occurrence & Magnitude
According to the Scripps Institution of Oceanography planning partners, Climate Change effects such as
heat waves, wildfire, and floods will occur unevenly across San Diego County.
Climate change will occur throughout San Diego County, but the expression of climate change will differ
across the complex landscape of the region depending on the type of event, e.g., heat, flooding, drought, or
wildfire. Heat waves and wildfire will likely have greatest magnitude over inland regions, and runoff from
heavy rainfall will be concentrated in stream channels.
Greenhouse gas mitigation remains important as observations, modeling, and physical principles show
conclusively that the accumulation of anthropogenic greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere has driven the
rapid warming observed globally over several decades (the last two decades in particular). Because:
• greenhouse gasses such as CO2 have long, several decade lifetimes
• the earth system is still not equilibrated (still warming) to the increased greenhouse gasses already resident in
the atmosphere
• global society’s fossil fuel (burns carbon, releases CO2) economy is difficult to replace so further
accumulation of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere is inevitable, the Earth’s atmosphere, ocean, land,
and ice will warm further.
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is thus a critical immediate and long-range mitigation action (e.g.,
Franco et al., 2018).
The probability of Climate Change occurrence in the entire planning area is “Highly Likely”, meaning
90 to 100 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of less than 1
year. Climate change is virtually certain to continue without immediate and effective global action.
According to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the past eight years have
collectively been the warmest years since modern recordkeeping began in 1880. Without significant
94 Walsh, J., D. Wuebbles, K. Hayhoe, J. Kossin, K. Kunkel, G. Stephens, P. Thorne, R. Vose, M. Wehner, J. Willis, D. Anderson, S. Doney, R. Feely, P.
Hennon, V. Kharin, T. Knutson, F. Landerer, T. Lenton, J. Kennedy, and R. Somerville, 2014: Ch. 2: Our Changing Climate. Climate Change Impacts in
the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change Research
Program, 19-67. doi:10.7930/J0KW5CXT.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 92
global action to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the IPCC concludes in its Fifth
Assessment Synthesis Report (2014) that average global temperatures are likely to exceed 1.5°C by
the end of the 21st century, with consequences for people, assets, economies and ecosystems
(including risks from heat stress, storms and extreme precipitation, inland and coastal flooding,
landslides, air pollution, drought, water scarcity, sea level rise and storm surges).94F94F94F
95
5.2.2. DAM FAILURE
Nature of Hazard
Dam failures can result in severe flood events. When a dam fails, a large quantity of water is suddenly
released with a great potential to cause human casualties, economic loss, lifeline disruption, and
environmental damage. A dam failure is usually the result of age, poor design, or structural damage caused
by a major event such as an earthquake or flood.
Disaster History
Two major dam failures, during a single event, have been recorded in San Diego County. The Hatfield Flood
of 1916 caused the failure of both the Sweetwater Main and Lower Otay Dams; resulting in 22 deaths. Most
of those deaths were attributed to the failure of Lower Otay Dam (County of San Diego Sanitation and Flood
Control, 2002).
At the time of this plan’s publication, there were not any reported dam failures in the planning area within the
past five years.
Hazard Impacts
Water released by a failed dam generates tremendous energy and can cause a flood that is catastrophic to
life and property. A catastrophic dam failure could challenge local response capabilities and require
evacuations to save lives. Impacts to life safety will depend on the warning time and the resources available
to notify and evacuate the public. Major loss of life could result as well as potentially catastrophic effects to
roads, bridges, and homes. Electric generating facilities and transmission lines could also be damaged and
affect life support systems in communities outside the immediate hazard area. Associated water supply,
water quality and health concerns could also be an issue. Factors that influence the potential severity of a
full or partial dam failure are the amount of water impounded; the density, type, and value of development
and infrastructure located downstream; and the speed of failure.
A major dam failure could have a devastating impact on the San Diego County Planning Area. Dam failure
flooding presents a threat to life and property, including buildings, their contents, and their use. Large flood
events can affect crops and livestock as well as lifeline critical utilities (e.g., water, sewerage, and power),
transportation, jobs, tourism, the environment, and the local and regional economies.
Flooding, including that from dam failure, causes many impacts to agricultural production, including water
contamination, damage to crops, loss of livestock, increased susceptibility of livestock to disease, flooded
farm machinery, and environmental damage to and from agricultural chemicals.
Location & Extent/Probability of Occurrence & Magnitude
The figure below displays the locations and extent of dam failure hazard areas for the County of San Diego.
Dam failures are rated as one of the major “low-probability, high-loss” events:
95 https://resources.ca.gov/Initiatives/Building-Climate-Resilience/2021-State-Adaptation-Strategy-Update
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
93
FIGURE 1: MAP OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY DAM INUNDATION AREAS FIGURE 1: MAP OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY DAM INUNDATION AREAS
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
94
Dam inundation map data was used to profile dam failure risk levels. These maps were created by agencies
that own and operate dams. The County Office of Emergency Services (County OES) obtained this data
from SanGIS, a local GIS data repository. The dam inundation map layers show areas that would be flooded
in the event of a dam failure. If an area lies within a dam inundation zone, it was considered at high risk. A
dam is characterized as high hazard if it stores more than 1,000 acre-feet of water, is higher than 150 feet
tall, has potential for downstream property damage, and potential for downstream evacuation. Ratings are
set by FEMA and confirmed with site visits by engineers. A simple way to define high risk of dam failure is if
failure of the dam is likely to result in loss of human life. Most dams in the County are greater than 50 years
old and are characterized by increased hazard potential due to downstream development and increased risk
due to structural deterioration in inadequate spillway capacity (Unified San Diego County Emergency
Services Organization Operational Area Emergency Plan, 2014).
The County remains at risk to dam failures from numerous dams under a variety of ownership and
control and of varying ages and conditions. Given the number, age and types of dams in San Diego
County and the history of past uncontrolled releases of water from dams, the potential exists for
future dam issues in the planning area. Though the probability of future occurrence of dam failure at
mapped dam locations above is “Likely” to “Unlikely” (Less than 1 percent probability of
occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years), the HAZUS
Data Evaluations, Vulnerability Assessments, Hazard Seminar Series, and input from Subject Matter
Experts and the public determined this hazard’s Overall Significance rating is “Medium”, meaning
the criteria falls mostly in the middle ranges of classifications and the event’s impacts on the
planning area are noticeable but not devastating. This rating is sometimes used for hazards with a
high extent rating but very low probability rating.
Climate Change Considerations
The most extreme events are going to become more extreme regarding climate change effects. These
events are primarily atmospheric rivers and will become more so in the future based on global climate
models (Gershunov et al., 2019). The increase in extreme precipitation will increase the risk of dam failure.
The highest priority mitigation actions to reduce Climate Change impacts on this hazard should include
conducting dam safety and emergency spill operations.
5.2.3. DROUGHT
Nature of the Hazard
Drought is a slow-onset hazard that can last for months or years. As a hazard, it has the potential to impact
many aspects of life, including drinking water and food. Because of the long duration of droughts, the
impacts last for years and can ripple through a community over time. Severe droughts are projected for the
coming decades and may increase incidences of other events, like wildfires. Drought will affect the viability
of communities and the economy across the nation.95F95F95F
96
Warming temperatures statewide could result in reduced water supply for the San Diego region. The State
Water Project and Colorado River provide 75% to 95% of the water supply for the San Diego region,
depending on the year.96F96F96F
97 Both of these water supplies originate in mountain snowpack. Over the past 50
years across most of the Southwest, there has been less late-winter precipitation falling as snow, earlier
96 https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020-06/drought-planning-fact-sheet_10-4-16.pdf
97 Ibid.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 95
snowmelt, and earlier arrival of most of the year’s streamflow.97F97F97F
98 Projections of further warming will result in
reduced snowpack, which could translate into reduced water supply for the San Diego region’s cities,
agriculture, and ecosystems.98F98F98F
99 In fact, studies indicate that San Diego’s sources of water could shrink by 20
percent or more by 2050.99F99F99F
100 An additional threat to water supply is the vulnerability of the levees protecting
the California Delta, which feeds the State Water Project.100F100F100F
101 According to the California Adaptation Planning
Guide, jurisdictions in the San Diego region must carefully consider the vulnerability of their water supply.101F101F101F
102
Local water managers also report that higher temperatures could lead to increased demand for water for
irrigation. Water shortages could become more frequent and more severe in the future, straining the local
economy. The potential for drought in San Diego is highly likely.
Disaster History
The depression era drought of 1929-1934 was the worst drought in California’s history. Its impact was felt
statewide. At that time, San Diego was self-sufficient, relying on local water supplies. The region would not
begin to import water until 1947.
The drought of 1987-1992 was extremely severe and resulted in the Metropolitan Water District ordered a
50% reduction in water use. The San Diego County Water Authority considered banning outdoor water use.
The rains of “Miracle March” in 1991 replenished rivers, reservoirs, and the Sierra snowpack.
A drought occurred in 2007 and lasted until 2011. Then, another drought began in 2012 just ended in 2017,
following a series of winter storms that brought heavy rainfall to the state. The proclamation was extended
again on July 8, 2021, amid deepening drought and record-breaking temperatures. The Governor requested
Californians to voluntarily reduce water use by 15% to protect water reserves if drought conditions continue.
On April 21, 2021, California Governor Newsom, proclaimed a drought emergency, which enables state
response to water supply shortfalls where conditions are extremely dry. This drought emergency
proclamation was expanded to include new counties on May 10, 2021. By October 19, 2021, the Governor
expanded the drought emergency proclamation to include San Diego County and seven other counties,
which were the last of the 58 California counties to be included in the drought emergency proclamation.
On March 28, 2022, the Governor prompted local water suppliers, at the local level, to move to Level 2 of
their Water Shortage Contingency Plans, which “requires locally appropriate actions that will conserve water
across all sectors, and he directed the State Water Resources Control Board to consider a ban decorative
watering at businesses and institutions.102F102F102F
103 Although key improvements have been made since 2016,
California is still experiencing drought conditions.
Hazard Impacts
As extreme drought periods become more frequent, the increase in slow, or chronic drought periods can
cause long term and indirect health effects on people. Potential health effects include “compromised
quantity and quality of drinking water, increased recreational risks, effects on air quality, diminished living
conditions related to energy, air quality, and sanitation and hygiene, mental health effects related to
economic and job losses, compromised food and nutrition and increased incidence of illness and disease”
(Centers for Disease Control, 2022).
98 Garfin, G., G. Franco, H. Blanco, A. Comrie, P. Gonzalez, T. Piechota, R. Smyth, and R. Waskom, 2014: Ch. 20: Southwest. Climate Change Impacts
in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change
Research Program, 462-486. doi:10.7930/J08G8HMN.
99 California Adaptation Planning Guide, Understanding Regional Characteristics (2012)
100 San Diego’s Changing Climate: A Regional Wake-Up Call. A Summary of the Focus 2050 Study Presented by The San Diego Foundation.
101 California Adaptation Planning Guide, Understanding Regional Characteristics (2012)
102 Ibid.
103 https://drought.ca.gov/state-drought-response/
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 96
103F103F103F
Severe droughts are projected for the coming decades and may increase incidences of other events like
wildfires, which are threats to people, structures, and other community assets.
Areas in unincorporated San Diego County that are dependent on groundwater resources for potable and
non-potable water supplies often receive water from small water systems or domestic wells. While these
areas are located outside of San Diego County Water Authority’s service area and do not have access to
imported water, there is still the potential risk of drought and water shortage resulting in reduced capacity
and/or dry wells.
To facilitate drought and water shortage preparedness for state small water systems and domestic wells,
County Planning & Development Services in collaboration with County Department of Environmental Health
and Quality provides an opportunity for communicating and maintains a list of resources to assist residents
and communities facing a risk of water shortage. Drought resources can be found at:
https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/pds/SGMA.html.
Location & Extent/Probability of Occurrence & Magnitude
In an arid region such as San Diego County, the probability of recurring droughts with severity is
“Highly Likely”.
Historical drought data for the County Planning Area and San Diego County indicate there have
been five significant multi-year droughts over the last 93 years. This equates to a multi-year drought
every 18.6 years on average, or a 5.4% chance of a drought in any given year. Based on this data,
droughts will likely affect the Planning Area. Given the historical occurrence of severe drought
impacts throughout San Diego County and across the State, drought is expected to continue to
pose a high degree of risk to the entire Planning Area, potentially impacting crops, livestock, water
resources, the natural environment at large, buildings and infrastructure (from cascading or
compound hazards), and local economies.
A U.S. Drought Monitor, using the Palmer Drought Severity Index, can be found below and at
http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/:
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
97
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
98
Climate Change Considerations
Although there is a lot of variability, projections indicate that there will be longer and more frequent drought
that will be punctuated by extreme precipitation. The evaporative demand (atmospheric thirst) is an
important component in driving the extent of future droughts (McEvoy et al, 2020).
Drought can increase wildfire risk and lead to fine fuel regrowth after a fire. This type of vegetation is more
susceptible to fires, creating a feedback cycle.
Extreme drought has the potential to intensify and change community composition and structure of
ecosystems. Drought has severe consequences because it operates at spatial scales larger than other
disturbances such as fire (Jennings et al., 2018).
The highest priority mitigation actions to reduce Climate Change impacts on this hazard should include
water supply reliability that originates from a diversity of water supplies and conservation planning that
addresses the impacts of drought on ecosystems.
5.2.4. EARTHQUAKE
Nature of the Hazard
An earthquake is a sudden motion or trembling that is caused by a release of strain accumulated within or
along the edge of the Earth's tectonic plates. The effects of an earthquake can be felt far beyond the site of
its occurrence. They usually occur without warning and, after just a few seconds, can cause massive
damage and extensive casualties. Common effects of earthquakes are ground motion and shaking, surface
fault ruptures, and ground failure. Ground motion is the vibration or shaking of the ground during an
earthquake.
When a fault ruptures, seismic waves radiate, causing the ground to vibrate. The severity of the vibration
increases with the amount of energy released and decreases with distance from the causative fault or
epicenter. Soft soils can further amplify ground motions. The severity of these effects is dependent on the
amount of energy released from the fault or epicenter. One way to express an earthquake's severity is to
compare its acceleration to the normal acceleration due to gravity. The acceleration due to gravity is often
called "g". A 100% g earthquake is very severe.
More damage tends to occur from earthquakes when ground acceleration is rapid. Peak ground
acceleration (PGA) is a measure of the strength of ground movement. PGA measures the rate in change of
motion relative to the established rate of acceleration due to gravity (980 cm/sec/sec). PGA is used to
project the risk of damage from future earthquakes by showing earthquake ground motions that have a
specified probability (10%, 5%, or 2%) of being exceeded in 50 years. These ground motion values are used
for reference in construction design for earthquake resistance. The ground motion values can also be used
to assess relative hazard between sites, when making economic and safety decisions.
Another tool used to describe earthquake intensity is the Richter scale. The Richter scale was devised as a
means of rating earthquake strength and is an indirect measure of seismic energy released. The scale is
logarithmic with each one-point increase corresponding to a 10-fold increase in the amplitude of the seismic
shock waves generated by the earthquake. In terms of actual energy released, however, each one-point
increase on the Richter scale corresponds to about a 32-fold increase in energy released. Therefore, a
magnitude (M) 7 earthquake is 100 times (10 X 10) more powerful than a M5 earthquake and releases
1,024 times (32 X 32) the energy. An earthquake generates different types of seismic shock waves that
travel outward from the focus or point of rupture on a fault. Seismic waves that travel through the earth's
crust are called body waves and are divided into primary (P) and secondary (S) waves. Because P waves
move faster (1.7 times) than S waves they arrive at the seismograph first. By measuring the time delay
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 99
between arrival of the P and S waves and knowing the distance to the epicenter, seismologists can compute
the Richter scale magnitude for the earthquake.
The Modified Mercalli Scale (MMI) is another means for rating earthquakes, but one that attempts to
quantify intensity of ground shaking. Intensity under this scale is a function of distance from the epicenter
(the closer to the epicenter the greater the intensity), ground acceleration, duration of ground shaking, and
degree of structural damage. This rates the level of severity of an earthquake by the amount of damage and
perceived shaking, as displayed in the table below:
TABLE 15: MODIFIED MERCALLI SCALE
MMI
Value
Description
of Shaking
Severity
Summary
Damage
Description
Used on 1995
Maps
Full Description
I. Not felt
II. Felt by persons at rest, on upper floors, or
favorably placed.
III. Felt indoors. Hanging objects swing. Vibration
like passing of light trucks. Duration estimated.
May not be recognized as an earthquake.
IV. Hanging objects swing. Vibration like passing of
heavy trucks; or sensation of a jolt like a heavy
ball striking the walls. Standing motorcars rock.
Windows, dishes, doors rattle. In the upper
range of IV, wooden walls and frame creak.
V. Light Pictures Move Felt outdoors; direction estimated. Sleepers
wakened. Liquids disturbed, some spilled. Small
unstable objects displaced or upset. Doors
swing, close, open. Shutters, pictures move.
Pendulum clock stop, start, change rate.
VI. Moderate Objects Fall Felt by all. Many frightened and run outdoors.
Persons walk unsteadily. Windows, dishes,
glassware broken. Knickknacks, books, etc., off
shelves. Pictures off walls. Furniture moved or
overturned. Weak plaster and masonry D
cracked.
VII. Strong Nonstructural
Damage
Difficult to stand. Noticed by drivers of
motorcars. Hanging objects quiver. Furniture
broken. Damage to masonry D, including cracks.
Weak chimneys broken at roofline. Fall of
plaster, loose bricks, stones, tiles, cornices.
Some cracks in masonry C. Small slides and
caving in along sand or gravel banks. Concrete
irrigation ditches damaged.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 100
MMI
Value
Description
of Shaking
Severity
Summary
Damage
Description
Used on 1995
Maps
Full Description
VIII. Very Strong Moderate
Damage
Steering of motorcars affected. Damage to
masonry C, partial collapse. Some damage to
masonry B; none to masonry A. Fall of stucco
and some masonry walls. Twisting, fall of
chimneys, factory stacks, monuments, towers,
and elevated tanks. Frame houses moved on
foundations if not bolted down; loose panel walls
thrown out. Cracks in wet ground and on steep
slopes.
IX. Very Violent Extreme
Damage
Most masonry and frame structures destroyed
with their foundations. Some well-built wooden
structures and bridges destroyed. Serious
damage to dams, dikes, embankments. Large
landslides. Water thrown on banks of canals,
rivers, lakes, etc. Sand and mud shifted
horizontally on beaches and flat land.
X. Rails bent greatly. Underground pipelines
completely out of services.
XI. Damage nearly total. Large rock masses
displaced. Lines of sight and level distorted.
Objects thrown into air.
Several major active faults exist in San Diego County, including the Rose Canyon, La Nacion, Elsinore, San
Jacinto, Coronado Bank and San Clemente Fault Zones. The Rose Canyon Fault Zone is part of the
Newport-Inglewood fault zone, which originates to the north in Los Angeles, and the Vallecitos and San
Miguel Fault Systems to the south in Baja California.
The Rose Canyon Fault extends inland from La Jolla Cove, south through Rose Canyon, along the east
side of Mission Bay, and out into San Diego Bay. The Rose Canyon Fault is considered the greatest
potential threat to San Diego as a region, due to its proximity to areas of high population. The La Nacion
Fault Zone is located near National City and Chula Vista. The Elsinore Fault Zone is a branch of the San
Andreas Fault System. It originates near downtown Los Angeles and enters San Diego County through the
communities of Rainbow and Pala; it then travels in a southeasterly direction through Lake Henshaw, Santa
Ysabel, Julian; then down into Anza-Borrego Desert State Park at Agua Caliente Springs, ending at Ocotillo,
approximately 40 miles east of downtown.
The San Jacinto Fault is also a branch of the San Andreas Fault System. This fault branches off from the
major fault as it passes through the San Bernardino Mountains. Traveling southeasterly, the fault passes
through Clark Valley, Borrego Springs, Ocotillo Wells, and then east toward El Centro in Imperial County.
This fault is the most active large fault within County of San Diego. The Coronado Bank fault is located
about 10 miles offshore. The San Clemente Fault lies about 40 miles off La Jolla and is the largest offshore
fault at 110 miles or more in length (Unified San Diego County Emergency Services Organization
Operational Area Emergency Plan, 2014).
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 101
Disaster History
Historic documents record a very strong earthquake struck San Diego on May 27, 1862; damaging buildings
in Old Town and opening cracks in the earth near the San Diego River mouth. This destructive earthquake
was centered on either the Rose Canyon or Coronado Bank faults and descriptions of damage suggest that
it had a magnitude of about 6.0 (M6).
The strongest recently recorded earthquake in San Diego County was a M5.3 earthquake that occurred on
July 13,1986 on the Coronado Bank Fault, 25 miles west of Solana Beach. In recent years there have been
several moderate earthquakes recorded within the Rose Canyon Fault Zone as it passes beneath the City
of San Diego. Three temblors shook the city on 17 June 1985 (M3.9, 4.0, 3.9) and a stronger quake
occurred on 28 October 1986 (M4.7) (Demere, SDNHM website 2003). The most recent significant
earthquake activity occurred on June 15, 2004 with a M5.3 on the San Diego Trough Fault Zone
approximately 50 miles SW of San Diego. It was reported as an IV on the MMI (Southern California Seismic
Network).
At the time of this plan’s publication, there were not any significant earthquakes in the planning area within
the past five years.
Hazard Impacts
The effects of an earthquake can be felt far beyond the site of its occurrence. They usually occur without
warning and, after just a few seconds, can cause massive damage and extensive casualties. After a major
seismic event it is possible that San Diego County could experience damage to transportation infrastructure,
that would disrupt the flow of goods and services. A majority of the community members within the County
are potentially exposed to the direct and indirect impacts of a major earthquake. Indirect impacts can
include but are not limited to, business interruptions, road closures, loss of utilities, and transportation
disruptions. Direct impacts can include, but are not limited to, minor or major structure damage, downed
trees, and injury or loss of life.
Environmental problems can result as a secondary hazard after a major earthquake. Earthquake induced
landslides could cause damage to the surrounding habitat, and water quality can be affected if moving earth
comes in contact with a water source. Facilities holding hazardous materials are of particular concern.
During a major earthquake, structures storing these materials could rupture and leak into the surrounding
area or an adjacent waterway, having a disastrous effect on the environment.
Location & Extent/Probability of Occurrence & Magnitude
The figures below display the location and extent of the profiled earthquake hazard areas for San Diego
County:
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
102
FIGURE 2: MAP OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY SAN JACINTO FAULT EARTHQUAKE SCENARIO
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
103
FIGURE 3: MAP OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY ELSINORE FAULT EARTHQUAKE SCENARIO
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
104
Figure 2: Map Of San Diego County Rose Canyon Fault Earthquake Scenario FIGURE 4: MAP OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY ROSE CANYON FAULT EARTHQUAKE SCENARIO
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 105
This is based on a United States Geological Survey (USGS) earthquake model that shows probabilistic
peak ground acceleration for every location in San Diego County. Since 1984, earthquake activity in San
Diego County has increased twofold over the preceding 50 years (Demere, SDNHM website 2003). All
buildings that have been built in recent decades must adhere to building codes that require them to be able
to withstand earthquake magnitudes that create a PGA of 0.4 or greater. Ongoing field and laboratory
studies suggest the following maximum likely magnitudes for local faults: San Jacinto (M6.4 to 7.3), Elsinore
(M6.5 to 7.3), Rose Canyon (M6.2 to 7.0), La Nacion (M6.2 to 6.6), Coronado Bank (M6.0 to 7.7), and San
Clemente (M6.6 to 7.7) (Demere, SDNHM website 2003).
Data used to profile earthquake hazard included probabilistic PGA data from USGS and a Scenario
Earthquake Shake map for Rose Canyon from the California Integrated Seismic Network (CISN). From
these data, the Hazard Mitigation Planning Group (HMPG) determined that risk level for earthquake is
determined to be high if an area lies within a 0.3 or greater PGA designation. Earthquakes were modeled
using HAZUS-MH, which uses base information to derive probabilistic peak ground accelerations much like
the PGA map from USGS that was used for the profiling process.
It is estimated that major earthquakes (ranging from a magnitude of 7 to 7.9) occur in California one
out of every 10 years. However, strong earthquakes (from magnitudes 6 to 6.9) strike the State about
once every two to three years. A strong earthquake can cause major damage depending on the
epicenter’s location with regards to populated areas, and can lead to billions of dollars in disasters,
deaths, injuries, and disruptions in services and communities’ way of life. The United States
Geological Survey estimates a 75% probability of one or more magnitude 7.0 earthquakes striking
Southern California over a 30-year period. The probability of an earthquake in the San Diego region
is considered somewhat “Likely”, meaning 10 to 90 percent probability of occurrence in the next
year or a recurrence interval of 1 to 10 years.
Climate Change Considerations
Not applicable.
5.2.5. EXTREME HEAT
Nature of the Hazard
In most of the United States, including the entire planning area, extreme heat is a long period (2 to 3 days)
of high heat and humidity with temperatures above 90 degrees.104F104F104F
105 Although extreme heat does not cause
structural damage like floods, fires, and earthquakes, heat waves claim many lives due to heat exhaustion
and heat stroke. According to a California Energy Commission Study, from 1994 to 2009, heat waves have
claimed more lives in California than all declared disaster events combined.105F105F105F
106
Despite this history, not a single heat emergency was formally proclaimed at the state level or as a federal
disaster between 1960 and 2008. The author of an account of a heat wave which killed 739 people in
Chicago in July 1995 suggests that the hidden nature of social vulnerability combined with the
inconspicuous nature of heat events (unlike floods, fires, and earthquakes) prevent them from being
declared as legitimate disasters.106F106F106F
107 However, the California State Hazard Mitigation Plan considers extreme
heat a legitimate disaster type.107F107F107F
108
105 https://community.fema.gov/ProtectiveActions/s/article/Extreme-Heat
106 Messner, Steven, Sandra C. Miranda, Karen Green, Charles Phillips, Joseph Dudley, Dan Cayan, Emily Young. Climate Change Related Impacts in
the San Diego Region by 2050. PIER Research Report, CEC‐
500‐2009‐027‐D, Sacramento, CA: California Energy Commission. 2009.
107 Klinenberg, Eric. Heat Wave: A Social Autopsy of Disaster in Chicago, The University of Chicago, 2002
108 Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (2013) California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 106
Disaster History
Following the events of 2006, when there was a prolonged period of extreme heat across the state of
California, San Diego County developed an Excessive Heat Preparedness and Response Plan.108F108F108F
109
According to weather.gov’s “A History of Significant Weather Events in Southern California Organized by
Weather Type”, there have been nine Extreme Heat events between October 2017 and September 2022.110
During the first week of September 2020 “a major heat wave struck the region that in some ways and for
some areas was unprecedented... Climate stations in El Cajon, Alpine and Escondido achieved their all-time
highest temperatures on record for any day on 9.6”.111
According to NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI), Storm Events Database,
between October 2017 and December 2022, Excessive Heat events occurred over a total of 36 days and
resulted in 52 injuries and 2 deaths.112
According to the County of San Diego Health and Human Services Agency, Public Health Services, “2021
Excessive Heat Response Plan Summary”, over the past nine years, the combined number of heat
advisories and excessive heat warnings has generally increased, from 2013 through 2021. The highest
numbers of Heat Alerts were issued in 2020 (20 [events]) and 2021 (16 [events]).113
Hazard Impacts
Extreme heat is exacerbated by the “urban heat island effect”, whereby impervious surfaces, such as
concrete and asphalt, absorb heat and result in greater warming in urban areas compared to rural areas.
Urban heat islands exacerbate the public health impacts that heat waves have upon the more vulnerable
populations. San Diego County has among the highest percentages of impervious surfaces in the states,
109 Messner, Steven, Sandra C. Miranda, Karen Green, Charles Phillips, Joseph Dudley, Dan Cayan, Emily Young. Climate Change Related Impacts in
the San Diego Region by 2050. PIER Research Report, CEC‐500‐2009‐027‐D, Sacramento, CA: California Energy Commission. 2009.
110 https://www.weather.gov/media/sgx/documents/weatherhistory.pdf
111 https://www.weather.gov/media/sgx/documents/weatherhistory.pdf
112 https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/listevents.jsp?eventType=%28Z%29+Excessive+Heat&beginDate_mm=10&beginDate_dd=01&beginDate_yyy
y=2017&endDate_mm=11&endDate_dd=30&endDate_yyyy=2022&county=SAN%2BDIEGO%3A73&hailfilter=0.00&tornfilter=0&windfilter=000&sort=D
T&submitbutton=Search&statefips=6%2CCALIFORNIA
113 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/hhsa/programs/phs/ExtremeHeat/2021%20Annual%20Excessive%20Heat%20Report%20-
%20FINAL.pdf
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 107
increasing the potential impacts of heat islands. In fact, Southern California’s urban centers are warming
more rapidly than other parts of the state.
Extreme heat events put vulnerable populations (such as older adults, children, people who are chronically
ill, and people who work outside) at risk of heat-related illnesses and even death. Extreme heat events
highlight the importance of thoughtful social vulnerability analysis. For example, socially isolated older
adults are especially vulnerable. People who live in urban areas with high impervious surface coverage and
no access to air conditioning are also especially vulnerable.
Extreme heat also has secondary impacts, such as power outages and poor air quality. Heat events, and
the increased use of air conditioning, can lead to power outages, which makes the events even more
dangerous. Hotter temperatures may also lead to poorer air quality because ozone formation, a component
of smog, increases with higher temperatures.
The National Weather Service uses the heat index to illustrate what temperature feels like to the human
body when relative humidity is combined with the air temperature, which is important for the human body’s
comfort level:
There is direct relationship between the air temperature and relative humidity and the heat index, meaning
as the air temperature and relative humidity increase (decrease), the heat index increases (decreases). to
determine the heat index using the chart above, you need to know the air temperature and the relative
humidity. For example, if the air temperature is 100°F and the relative humidity is 55%, the heat index will
be 124°F. When the relative humidity is low, the apparent temperature can actually be lower than the air
temperature. It is important to note the heat index values in the chart above are for shady locations. If a
person is exposed to direct sunlight, the heat index value can be increased by up to 15°F. As shown in the
table below, heat indices meeting or exceeding 103°F can lead to dangerous heat disorders with prolonged
exposure and/or physical activity in the heat:114
114 https://www.weather.gov/ama/heatindex
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 108
Classification Heat Index Effect on the body
Caution 80°F - 90°F Fatigue possible with
prolonged exposure and/or
physical activity
Extreme Caution 90°F - 103°F Heat stroke, heat cramps, or
heat exhaustion possible
with prolonged exposure
and/or physical activity
Danger 103°F - 124°F Heat cramps or heat
exhaustion likely, and heat
stroke possible with
prolonged exposure and/or
physical activity
Extreme Danger 125°F or higher Heat stroke highly likely
Location & Extent/Probability of Occurrence & Magnitude
The entire planning area is facing an increase in the frequency, duration, and strength of heat waves in the
coming decades. While greater warming is expected in inland areas, community members of coastal areas
are vulnerable when the temperature spikes, because they are less accustomed to the heat, and they are
less likely to have air conditioning.
Research also indicates that heat waves are likely to become more humid in the future and with nighttime
temperatures staying high, further stressing public health.109F109F109F
115 Extreme warm temperatures in the San Diego
region mostly occur in July and August, but as climate warming takes hold, the occurrences of these events
will likely begin in June and could continue to take place into September.110F110F110F
116
Over the past 15 years, the region has seen increasing temperatures, evidenced by an increased
number of excessive Heat Alerts, which are initiated based on heat advisory and excessive heat
warnings. Heat Alerts generally occur from May to September. From 2013 to 2021, 98 Heat Alerts
were issued in the County of San Diego. This means that there is a 3% chance on any given day of
an excessive Heat Alert occurring over the course of a year, which ranks future event of this hazard
as “Highly Likely” to occur. The highest numbers of Heat Alerts were issued in 2020 (20) and 2021
(16). In 2021, the County of San Diego had 8 heat events, ranging from 2 to 8 days long, lasting a
total of 36 days.
National data on extreme heat can be found through Climate Data Online (CDO) at
https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/cdo-web/.
Climate Change Considerations
An increase in the intensity, frequency and duration of extreme heat events is expected in the context of
climate change. Furthermore, observations have shown, and projections indicate, that the flavor of extreme
115 Gershunov, A., and K. Guirguis (2012), California heat waves in the present and future, Geophysical Research Letters., 39, L18710
116 Messner, Steven, Sandra C. Miranda, Karen Green, Charles Phillips, Joseph Dudley, Dan Cayan, Emily Young. Climate Change Related Impacts in
the San Diego Region by 2050. PIER Research Report, CEC‐500‐2009‐027‐D, Sacramento, CA: California Energy Commission. 2009.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 109
heat events have and will continue to change with more and more humid heat events (that drive nighttime
heat events) (Gershunov et al., 2009, Gershunov et al., 2012).
The highest priority mitigation actions to reduce Climate Change impacts on this hazard should include
preparation, with strong attention to weather forecasts and ready social services, infrastructure (e.g. Cooling
Centers), and programs to support installation of air conditioning units in communities lacking access.
5.2.6. FLOOD
Nature of the Hazard
A flood occurs when excess water from snowmelt, rainfall, or storm surge accumulates and overflows onto a
river’s bank or to adjacent floodplains. Floodplains are lowlands adjacent to rivers, lakes, and oceans that
are subject to recurring floods. Most injuries and deaths from flood occur when people are swept away by
flood currents, and property damage typically occurs as a result of inundation by sediment-filled water.
Several factors determine the severity of floods, including rainfall intensity and duration. A large amount of
rainfall over a short time span can result in flash flood conditions. A sudden thunderstorm or heavy rain, dam
failure, or sudden spills can cause flash flooding. The National Weather Service’s definition of a flash flood
is a flood occurring in a watershed where the time of travel of the peak of flow from one end of the
watershed to the other is less than six hours.
There are no watersheds in San Diego County that have a longer response time than six hours. In this
county, flash floods range from the stereotypical wall of water to a gradually rising stream. The central and
eastern portions of San Diego County are most susceptible to flash floods where mountain canyons, dry
creek beds, and high deserts are the prevailing terrain.
Disaster History
From 1770 until 1952, 29 floods were recorded in San Diego County. Between 1950 and 1997, flooding
prompted 10 Proclaimed States of Emergency in the County of San Diego. Several very large floods have
caused significant damage in the County of San Diego in the past. The Hatfield Flood of 1916 destroyed the
Sweetwater and Lower Otay Dams and caused 22 deaths and $4.5 million in damages.
The flood of 1927 caused $117,000 in damages and washed out the Old Town railroad bridge (Bainbridge,
1997). The floods of 1937 and 1938 caused approximately $600,000 in damages. (County of San Diego
Sanitation and Flood Control, 1996). In the 1980 floods, the San Diego River at Mission Valley peaked at
27,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) and caused $120 million in damage (Bainbridge, 1997).
The table below displays a history of flooding in San Diego County, as well as loss associated with each
flood event:
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 110
TABLE 16: HISTORY RECORDS OF LARGE FLOODS IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY
Date Loss Estimation Source of Estimate Comments
1862 Not available County of San Diego
Sanitation and Flood Control 6 weeks of rain
1891 Not available County of San Diego
Sanitation and Flood Control 33 inches in 60 hours
1916 $4.5 million County of San Diego
Sanitation and Flood Control
Destroyed
2 dams, 22 deaths
1927 $117,000 County of San Diego
Sanitation and Flood Control
Washed out railroad
bridge Old Town
1937 &
1938 $600,000 County of San Diego
Sanitation and Flood Control N/A
1965 Not available San Diego Union 6 killed
1969 Not available San Diego Union All of State declared
disaster area
1979 $2,766,268 County OES
Cities of La Mesa,
Lemon Grove,
National City, San
Marcos, San Diego
and unincorporated
areas
1980 $120 million
County of San Diego
Sanitation
and Flood Control; Earth
Times
San Diego river
topped out in Mission
Valley
1987 $640,500 State OES N/A
1995 $Tens of Millions County OES
San Diego County
Declared Disaster
Area
2003 Not Available County OES
Storm floods areas
impacted by the 2003
firestorm.
Sept 2004 Not Available San Diego Union-Tribune
Series of storms
caused localized
flooding
Oct 2004 Not Available San Diego Union-Tribune Flash-flood in
Borrego Springs
Jan-Mar
2005 Not Available Cal EMA (formerly State OES)
San Diego County
Declared Disaster
Area
Jan 2017 $14.5 million
(estimated) County OES
San Diego County
Declared Disaster
Area
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 111
Date Loss Estimation Source of Estimate Comments
Dec 2018 $75,000
(estimated)
NOAA’s National Centers for
Environmental Information
(NCEI), Storm Events
Database
Heavy rain resulted
in flooding near the
Shoppes at Carlsbad.
Five businesses
reported flooding
damage. A roof
collapsed at a
childcare center in
the shopping center.
The Alpha Project
Bridge Shelter in
East Village San
Diego closed for a
week due to flooding
from the heavy rain.
Feb 2019 $340,000
(estimated)
NOAA’s National Centers for
Environmental Information
(NCEI), Storm Events
Database
Flooding occurred in
Ramona with up to 2
feet of standing
water. Severe
damage to portions
of highway 78 and 79
along the shoulder of
the road.
Extensive flooding on
San Diego River in
Mission Valley
including Fashion
Valley mall. San
Diego River reached
12.1 feet which is
above flood stage.
A total of 5 to 10
inches of rain
occurred on the
Palomar mountain
coastal slopes in 12
hours. This lead to
flash flooding in Pala
with road damage
and swift water
rescues.
Intestate 8 was
closed for 12 hours
due to snow covered
and icy roads.
Numerous accidents
including at Willows
road at 2,600 feet.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 112
Date Loss Estimation Source of Estimate Comments
Nov – Dec
2019
$125,000
(Estimated)
NOAA’s National Centers for
Environmental Information
(NCEI), Storm Events
Database
12 San Diego State
University dorm
rooms flooded.
Numerous cars piled
up in an RV park in
La Mesa due to flash
flooding.
April 2020 $2,420,000
(Estimated)
NOAA’s National Centers for
Environmental Information
(NCEI), Storm Events
Database
Interstate 8 landslide
and debris on
highway caused
closure.
City of Oceanside
had significant
damage to the
wastewater treatment
plant. Estimated up
to 2 million gallons
spilled as the plant
was inundated by the
flash flooding of
Buena Vista Creek.
Twenty persons
evacuated from a
nursing home.
As of 12/31/2022 there have been no additional significant flooding events in the planning area.
Hazard Impacts
The principal factors affecting flood damage are flood depth and velocity. The deeper and faster flood flows
become, the more damage they can cause. Shallow flooding with high velocities can cause as much
damage as deep flooding with slow velocity. This is especially true when a channel migrates over a broad
floodplain, redirecting high velocity flows and transporting debris and sediment.
Although jurisdictions can implement mitigation and take preventative actions to significantly reduce the
severity and threat of flood events, some type of risk will always exist (i.e., risk of a hazard event occurring
despite mitigation measures applied to reduce/prevent it). Threats associated with flood risk include failure
of a reservoir, a dam breach, or other infrastructure failure, or a severe flood event that exceeds flood
design standards or drainage capacity.
Location & Extent/Probability of Occurrence & Magnitude
In regions, such as San Diego, without extended periods of below-freezing temperatures, floods usually
occur during the season of highest precipitations or during heavy rainfalls after long dry spells. The areas
surrounding the river valleys in all of San Diego County are susceptible to flooding because of the wide, flat
floodplains surrounding the riverbeds, and the numerous structures that are built in the floodplains.
One unusual characteristic of San Diego’s hydrology is that it has a high level of variability in its runoff. The
western watershed of the County of San Diego extends about 80 miles north from the Mexican border and
approximately 45 miles east of the Pacific Ocean. From west to east, there are about 10 miles of rolling,
broken coastal plain, 10 to 15 miles of foothill ranges with elevations of 600 to 1,700 feet; and approximately
20 miles of mountain country where elevations range from 3,000 to 6,000 feet. This western watershed
constitutes about 75% of the County, with the remaining 25% mainly desert country.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 113
There are over 3,600 miles of rivers and streams which threaten community members and over 200,000
acres of flood-prone property. Seven principal streams originate or traverse through the unincorporated
area. From north to south, they are the Santa Margarita, San Luis Rey, San Dieguito, San Diego,
Sweetwater, Otay, and Tijuana Rivers (Unified San Diego County Emergency Services Organization
Operational Area Emergency Plan, 2006).
FEMA FIRM data was used to determine hazard risk for floods in the County of San Diego. FEMA defines
flood risk primarily by a 100-year flood zone, which is applied to those areas with a 1% chance, on average,
of flooding in any given year. Any area that lies within the FEMA-designated 100-year floodplain is
designated as high risk. Any area found in the 500-year floodplain is designated at low risk. Base flood
elevations (BFE) were also used in the HAZUS-MH modeling process. A BFE is the elevation of the water
surface resulting from a flood that has a 1% chance of occurring in any given year (i.e. the height of the
base flood).
The figure below displays the location and extent of flood hazard areas for the County of San Diego:
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
114
Figure 5: Map Of San Diego County 100-Year And 500-Year Floodplains
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
115
As shown, high hazard (100-year floodway) zones in San Diego County are generally concentrated within the
coastal areas, including bays, coastal inlets, and estuaries. Major watershed areas connecting the local
mountain range to the coastal region, where flash floods are more common, show several 100-year flood
hazard areas.
A repetitive loss property is defined by FEMA as an NFIP-insured property that has experienced any of the
following since 1978, regardless of any changes in ownership:
• Four or more paid losses more than $1,000
• Two paid losses more than $1,000 within any rolling 10-year period
• Three or more paid losses that equal or exceed the current value of the insured property.
The government has instituted programs encouraging communities to identify and mitigate the causes of
repetitive losses. Studies have found that many of these properties are outside any mapped 1 percent
annual chance floodplain. The key identifiers for repetitive loss properties are the existence of NFIP
insurance policies and claims paid by the policies.
FEMA further designates as severe repetitive loss any NFIP-insured single-family or multi-family residential
building for which either of the following is true:
• The building has incurred flood-related damage for which four or more separate claims payments
have been made, with the amount of each claim (including building and contents payments)
exceeding $5,000, and with the cumulative amount of such claims payments exceeding $20,000
• At least two separate claims payments (building payments only) have been made under NFIP
coverage, with the cumulative amount of claims exceeding the market value of the building.
To quality as a severe repetitive loss property, at least two of the claims must be within 10 years of each
other, and claims made within 10 days of each other are counted as one claim. In determining SRL status,
FEMA considers the loss history since 1978, or from the building’s construction if it was built after 1978,
regardless of any changes in the ownership of the building.
FEMA-sponsored programs, such as the Community Rating System (CRS), require participating
communities to identify repetitive loss areas. A repetitive loss area is the portion of a floodplain holding
structures that FEMA has identified as meeting the definition of repetitive loss. Identifying repetitive loss
areas helps to identify structures that area at risk but are not on FEMA’s list of repetitive loss structures
because no flood insurance policy was in force at the time of loss.
Based on the 2022 FEMA Repetitive Loss Summary Report, there have been numerous repetitive and
severe repetitive losses in San Diego County. These losses are provided in the table below:
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 116
TABLE 17: REPETITIVE LOSS PROPERTIES DUE TO FLOODS IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY
Jurisdiction
Repetitive
Loss
Properties
Structure
Type
Severe
Repetitive
Loss
Properties
Structure
Type
Total
Number
Mitigated
Carlsbad 1 Nonresidential 0 --- 0
Del Mar 15 Residential 0 --- 0
Escondido 4 Residential 1 Residential 0
Lemon Grove 0 --- 0 --- 0
Poway 9 Residential 2 Residential 1
Santee 1 Nonresidential 0 --- 0
County of San
Diego 20
Nonresidential
(4)
3
Residential (2)
7 Residential
(15) Commercial
(1) Commercial (1)
Chula Vista 1 Residential 0 --- 0
El Cajon 4 Residential 1 Residential 0
Imperial Beach 4 Residential 0 --- 0
National City 3
Nonresidential
(2) 0 --- 0
Commercial (1)
San Diego 47
Nonresidential
(11)
4
Nonresidential
(1)
0 Residential (27) Residential (1)
Commercial (9) Commercial
(2)
Solana Beach 7 Residential 3 Residential 0
Coronado 1 Residential 0 --- 0
Encinitas 2 Residential 0 --- 0
La Mesa 2 Residential 0 --- 0
Oceanside 13
Nonresidential
(5) 0 --- 6 Residential (6)
Commercial (2)
San Marcos 1 Residential 0 --- 0
Vista 3
Nonresidential
(1) 1 Residential 0 Residential
(2)
Total 138 --- 15 --- 14
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 117
Due to the history of past flooding events and the natural drainage pattern of the Planning Area,
flooding in the County of San Diego is “Highly Likely” to continue to occur. According to the NCEI
Storm Events Database, there have been 144 flood events recorded for the County of San Diego
between 1997 and 2021. This means there is a 2% chance on any given day of a flood event
occurring over the course of a year. The County of San Diego has experienced at least one flooding
event every year since 2010. Over the past decade, major floods have occurred in Mission Valley, El
Cajon, Ramona, and Borrego Springs. In addition to these major flood events, flooding has been
known to occur in localized areas of the County during average seasonal rainstorms.
Climate Change Considerations
The most extreme events are going to become more extreme regarding climate change effects. These
events are primarily atmospheric rivers and will become more so in the future based on global climate
models (Gershunov et al., 2019). In addition, the increase in sea level increases the potential for severe
flooding caused by the occurrence of coastal and inland flooding. Coastal flooding can cause pollution of
coastal waters (Aguilera et al., 2019).
The highest priority mitigation actions to reduce Climate Change impacts on this hazard should include
preparation, with strong attention to weather forecasts, assessing infrastructure flooding vulnerability, and
developing plans to mitigate flood severity and frequency.
5.2.7. HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS (TERRORISM & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENTS
(CBRNE THREATS))
Nature of the Hazard
Human-caused hazards are distinct from natural hazards because they result directly from the actions of
people. Two types of human-caused hazards can be identified as technological hazards and terrorism.
Technological hazards refer to incidents that can arise from human activities such as the manufacture,
storage, transport, and use of hazardous materials, which include toxic chemicals, radioactive materials,
and infectious substances. Technological hazards are assumed to be accidental and their consequences
unintended.
Terrorism, on the other hand, encompasses intentional, criminal, and malicious acts involving weapons of
mass destruction (WMDs) or conventional weapons. WMDs can involve the deployment of chemical,
biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosive (CBRNE) weapons. Conventional weapons and techniques
include the use of arson, incendiary explosives, armed attacks, intentional hazardous materials release, and
cyber-terrorism (attack via computer).
Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE Threats)
Technological hazards involving hazardous material releases can occur at facilities (fixed site) or along
transportation routes (off-site). They can occur because of human carelessness, technological failure,
intentional acts, and natural hazards. When caused by natural hazards, these incidents are known as
secondary hazards, whereas intentional acts are terrorism. Hazardous materials releases, depending on the
substance involved and type of release, can directly cause injuries and death and contaminate air, water,
and soils. While the probability of a major release at any facility or at any point along a known transportation
corridor is relatively low, the consequences of releases of these materials can be very serious.
Some hazardous materials present a radiation risk. Radiation is any form of energy propagated as rays,
waves or energetic particles that travel through the air or a material medium. Radioactive materials are
composed of atoms that are unstable. An unstable atom gives off its excess energy until it becomes stable.
The energy emitted is radiation. The process by which an atom changes from an unstable state to a more
stable state by emitting radiation is called radioactive decay or radioactivity.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 118
Radiological materials have many uses in San Diego County including:
• by doctors to detect and treat serious diseases,
• by educational institutions and companies for research,
• by the military to power large ships and submarines.
With the decommissioning of San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS), radiological materials are
no longer used to generate commercial electric power within San Diego County. However, the stored spent
fuel that remains on site does pose a hazard.
Radioactive materials, if handled improperly, or radiation accidentally released into the environment, can be
dangerous because of the harmful effects of certain types of radiation on the body. The longer a person is
exposed to radiation and the closer the person is to the radiation, the greater the risk. Although radiation
cannot be detected by the senses (sight, smell, etc.), it is easily detected by scientists with sophisticated
instruments that can detect even the smallest levels of radiation. Under extreme circumstances an accident
or intentional explosion involving radiological materials can cause very serious problems. Consequences
may include death, severe health risks to the public, damage to the environment, and extraordinary loss of,
or damage to, property.
Terrorism
Following serious international and domestic terrorist incidents during the 1990’s and early 2000’s, people
across the United States have paid increased attention to the potential for deliberate, harmful terrorist
actions by individuals or groups with political, social, cultural, and religious motives. There is no single,
universally accepted definition of terrorism, and it can be interpreted in a variety of ways. However, terrorism
is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as “…the unlawful use of force and violence against persons
or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in
furtherance of political or social objectives” (28 CFR, Section 0.85). The Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI) further characterizes terrorism as either domestic or international, depending on the origin, base, and
objectives of the terrorist organization. However, the origin of the terrorist or person causing the hazard is
far less relevant to mitigation planning than the hazard itself and its consequences. Terrorists utilize a wide
variety of agents and delivery systems.
Disaster History
Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE Threats)
Hazardous materials can include toxic chemicals, radioactive materials, infectious substances, and
hazardous wastes. The State of California defines a hazardous material as a substance that is toxic,
ignitable, or flammable, or reactive and/or corrosive. An extremely hazardous material is defined as a
substance that shows high acute or chronic toxicity, carcinogenicity, bio-accumulative properties,
persistence in the environment, or is water reactive (California Code of Regulations, Title 22). “Hazardous
waste,” a subset of hazardous materials, is material that is to be abandoned, discarded, or recycled, and
includes chemical, radioactive, and biohazardous waste (including medical waste). An accidental hazardous
material release can occur wherever hazardous materials are manufactured, stored, transported, or used.
Such releases can affect nearby populations and contaminate critical or sensitive environmental areas.
Numerous facilities in San Diego County generate hazardous wastes, in addition to storing and using large
numbers of hazardous materials. There are thousands of sites with permits to store and maintain chemical,
biological and radiological agents, and explosives in the County. Although the scale is usually small,
emergencies involving the release of these substances can occur daily at both these fixed sites and on the
County’s streets and roadways.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 119
Facilities that use, manufacture, or store hazardous materials in California must comply with several state
and federal regulations. The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA Title III), which was
enacted in 1986 as a legislative response to airborne releases of methylisocyanate at Union Carbide plants
in Bhopal, India and in Institute, West Virginia. SARA Title III, also known as the Emergency Planning and
Community-Right-To -Know Act (EPCRA), directs businesses that handle, store, or manufacture hazardous
materials in specified amounts to develop emergency response plans and report releases of toxic
chemicals. Additionally, Section 312 of Title III requires businesses to submit an annual inventory report of
hazardous materials to a state-administering agency.
The California legislature passed Assembly Bill 2185 in 1987, incorporating the provisions of SARA Title III
into a state program. The community right-to-know requirements keep communities abreast of the presence
and release of hazardous wastes at individual facilities.
A table within Attachment A shows a breakdown by jurisdiction of facilities in the County with permits to store
and maintain chemical, biological and radiological agents, and explosives. Facilities with EPA ID Numbers
are facilities that generate hazardous waste.
Hazardous materials spills and releases in San Diego County have occurred as a result of clandestine drug
manufacturing; spills from commercial, military and recreational vessels on the region’s waterways; traffic
accidents; sewer breaks and overflows; and various accidents/incidents related to the manufacture, use,
and storage of hazardous materials by County industrial, commercial and government facilities. Although
the emergency response history for San Diego County detailed in Attachment A chronicles various
hazardous materials releases, the incidents do not necessarily indicate the degree of exposure to the public.
There has not been significant exposure to the San Diego County public due to human-caused releases of
chemical or biological agents, although there have been several smaller-scale incidents. Chemical spills and
releases from transportation and industrial accidents have resulted in short-term chemical exposure to
individuals in the vicinity of the release. San Diego beaches are routinely closed because of sewage spills
and storm run-off. Bacterial levels can increase significantly in ocean and bay waters, especially near storm
drain, river, and lagoon outlets, during and after rainstorms. Elevated bacterial levels may continue for a
period of up to 3 days depending upon the intensity of rainfall and volume of runoff. Waters contaminated by
urban runoff may contain human pathogens (bacteria, viruses, or protozoa) that can cause illnesses.
San Diego experienced its first significant E. coli bacteria outbreak in 10 years after patrons ate tainted food
at local area restaurants in 2003. In 1992 and 1993 a similar outbreak occurred in San Diego County, which
resulted in the death of a child after he ate tainted food from a Carlsbad fast-food restaurant. Additionally, in
the early 1980s a hepatitis outbreak associated with poor food handling techniques resulting in the closure
of a major restaurant in Mission Valley and the implementation of a food-handler certification program by the
San Diego County Health Department.
The only known release of radiological agents in the County was the result of an accident at San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS). In 1981, an accidental "ignition" of hydrogen gases in a holding tank
of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) caused an explosion - which bent the bolts of an
inspection hatch on the tank, allowing radioactive gases in the tank to escape into a radioactive waste room.
From there, the radioactive material was released into the atmosphere. The plant was shut down for several
weeks following the event (W.I.S.E. Vol.3 No.4 p.18). This incident occurred during the plant’s operation of
its Unit 1 generator, which has since been decommissioned. No serious injuries occurred.
On February 3, 2001, another accident occurred at SONGS when a circuit breaker fault caused a fire that
resulted in a loss of offsite power. Published reports suggest that rolling blackouts during the same week in
California were partially due to the shutdown of the SONGS reactors in response to the 3-hour fire. Although
no radiation was released and no nuclear safety issues were involved, the federal Nuclear Regulatory
Commission sent a Special Inspection Team to the plant site to investigate the accident.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 120
Terrorism
While San Diego County has not experienced any high-profile attacks by groups or individuals associated
with international terrorist organizations, the region has been the site of several incidents with domestic
origins. Most notable is the August 1, 2003 arson attack on a mixed-use housing and office development
under construction in the University City neighborhood. The blaze, which officials estimate caused around
$50 million in damage, was allegedly set by the Earth Liberation Front, a radical environmentalist group.
San Diego has been linked to the 9/11 attacks in New York City and on the Pentagon; two of the confirmed
hijackers of the commercial aircraft used in the attacks took flight school lessons while living in San Diego.
San Diego County has received numerous bomb threats to schools, government buildings, religious sites,
and commercial facilities over the years. While most bomb threats are hoaxes, authorities have been
required to mobilize resources and activate emergency procedures on a regular basis in response.
Other Human-Caused Disasters
On September 25th, 1978, San Diego was the scene of one of the worst air disasters in the United States. A
mid-air collision between a Cessna 172 and a Pacific Southwest Airlines (PSA) Boeing 727 caused both
planes to crash into the North Park neighborhood below. A total of 144 lives were lost including 7 people on
the ground. More than 20 residences were damaged or destroyed.
In 1984, a shooter opened fire in a San Ysidro McDonald’s restaurant, killing 21 people. This event was not
considered an act of terrorism as no political or social objectives were associated with this event.
In 2019, a shooter opened fire at the Chabad of Poway Synagogue, which killed one person and injured
three other people. The same shooter was also linked to a 2019 fire set to the Dar-ul-Arqam Mosque (also
known as the Islamic Center of Escondido) in Escondido.111F111F111F
117 The shooter pleaded guilty on July 20, 2021, to
murder and multiple charges of attempted murder, with added hate crime classifications in connection with
the Chabad of Poway Synagogue shooting and pleaded guilty to a charge of arson in connection with Dar-
ul-Arqam Mosque in Escondido. 112F112F112F
118
Hazard Impacts
This hazard’s impacts vary according to type, magnitude, location, availability of resources and many other
factors that are situationally dependent. Overall, hazard impacts may include, but are not limited to injury,
death, environmental/resource impacts, and structure/asset losses.
Location & Extent/Probability of Occurrence & Magnitude
Information related to the probability and magnitude of human-caused hazards is considered
sensitive homeland security related information. As a result, this information is provided in a
separate confidential document (Planning Partners, see Attachment A).
The probability of occurrence for an active threat can be difficult to quantify, largely due to different
definitions of what constitutes an active threat. However, the fact that the planning area has
experienced such incidents suggests the effective probability of any human-caused hazard is
“Likely”, meaning 10 to 90 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval
of 1 to 10 years.
Climate Change Considerations
Not applicable.
117 https://www.cbs8.com/article/news/crime/accused-chabad-of-poway-synagogue-shooter-pleads-guilty/509-4c8b3421-71e5-45e4-b1da-eac4dfe24f55.
118 https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/poway-synagogue-shooter-to-be-sentenced-in-state-court/2731560/.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 121
5.2.8. LIQUEFACTION
Nature of the Hazard
This hazard is profiled independently in this section but is otherwise grouped with “Earthquake”
hazard throughout this plan, particularly the prioritized hazard list and the Vulnerability Assessment
sections of this plan. Therefore, there is no Hazard Assessment ranking for this hazard in Section
5.1’s table.
Liquefaction is the phenomenon that occurs when ground shaking causes loose soils to lose strength and
act like viscous fluid. Liquefaction causes two types of ground failure: lateral spread and loss of bearing
strength. Lateral spreads develop on gentle slopes and entails the sidelong movement of large masses of
soil as an underlying layer liquefies. Loss of bearing strength results when the soil supporting structures
liquefies and causes structures to collapse.
Disaster History
Liquefaction is not known to have occurred historically in San Diego County, although liquefaction has
occurred in the Imperial Valley in response to large earthquakes (Magnitude 6 or greater) originating in that
area. Although San Diego is one of several major California cities in seismically active regions, ground
failures or damage to structures have not occurred because of liquefaction.
Historically, seismic shaking levels have not been sufficient to trigger liquefaction. Paleoseismic indicators of
liquefaction have been recognized locally, and several pre-instrumental (prior to common use of
seismographs) earthquakes could have been severe enough to cause at least some liquefaction.
Hazard Impacts
A study published in the Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, Limitations of Surface
Liquefaction Manifestation Severity Index Models Used in Conjunction with Simplified Stress-Based
Triggering Models, March 2022, Upadhyaya et al. outlines the factors that are used to determine liquefaction
impact severity. Based on the model data the severity of surface manifestation of liquefaction is commonly
used to represent liquefaction damage potential and the inclusion of an improved manifestation severity
index (MSI) can better account for surficial liquefaction damage potential. This severity index assigns
liquefaction zones a Liquefaction Severity Number (LSN) which is determined by various soil depths, the
number of soil layers and their consistency, and surface weight contributions. San Diego County has not
experienced liquefaction in the past. Given the location of the Rose Canyon and Elsinore zoned earthquake
faults in the San Diego County with potential magnitudes of up to 6.9 and the various liquefaction zones
outlined in Figure 6, there is the potential for extensive impacts. These impacts include building and road
foundations that may sink into what was previously solid ground. Additionally, there is a threat to life and
property, including buildings, their contents, electric generating facilities and transmission lines that could
also be damaged and affect life support systems in communities outside the immediate hazard area.
Location & Extent/Probability of Occurrence & Magnitude
Recognizing active faults in the region, and the presence of geologically young, unconsolidated sediments
and hydraulic fills, the potential for liquefaction to occur has been long recognized in the San Diego area.
The regions of San Diego Bay and vicinity are thought to be especially vulnerable. The potential exists in
areas of loose soils and/or shallow groundwater in earthquake fault zones throughout the County. The figure
below displays the locations and extent of areas with a risk of liquefaction:
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
122
FIGURE 6: MAP OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY LIQUEFACTION RISK AREAS
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
123
Data used to profile liquefaction hazard included probabilistic PGA data from the United States Geological
Survey (USGS) and a Scenario Earthquake Shake map for Rose Canyon from the California Integrated
Seismic Network (CISN), along with existing liquefaction hazard areas from local maps.
Liquefaction hazards were modeled as collateral damages of earthquakes using HAZUS-MH, which uses
base information and NEHRP soils data to derive probabilistic peak ground accelerations much like the PGA
map from USGS. Soils were considered because liquefaction risk may be amplified depending on the type
of soil found in a given area. The National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) rates soils
from hard to soft, and give the soils ratings from Type A through Type E, with the hardest soils being Type A,
and the softest soils rated at Type E.
Liquefaction risk was considered high if there were soft soils (Types D or E) present within an active fault
zone. Liquefaction risk was considered low if the PGA risk value was less than 0.3, and hard soils were
present (Types A-C). For example, an area may lie in a PGA zone of 0.2, which would be a low liquefaction
risk in hard soils identified by the NEHRP. However, if that same PGA value is found within a soft soil such
as Type D or E, a PGA of 0.2, when multiplied by 1.4 or 1.7 (amplification values for type D and E soil,
shown below), would become a PGA value of at least 0.28 to 0.3. This would increase the liquefaction risk
to high.
TABLE 18: PGA LIQUIFACTION RISK
PGA Soil Type
A B C D E
0.1 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.60 2.50
0.2 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.70
0.3 0.80 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.20
0.4 0.80 1.00 1.00 1.10 0.90
0.5 0.80 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.80
Areas where soil types D or E are located are illustrated in the figure below.
This hazard is profiled independently in this section but is otherwise grouped with “Earthquake”
hazard throughout this plan, particularly the prioritized hazard list and the Vulnerability Assessment
sections of this plan. Therefore, there is no Hazard Assessment ranking for this hazard in Section
5.1’s table. However, using the same scientific scale as the other hazards, probability of liquefaction
in San Diego County is considered somewhat “Likely”, meaning 10 to 90 percent probability of
occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 1 to 10 years.
Climate Change Considerations
Not applicable.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 124
5.2.9. RAIN-INDUCED LANDSLIDE
Nature of the Hazard
Landslides occur when masses of rock, earth, or debris move down a slope, including rock falls, deep
failure of slopes, and shallow debris flows. Landslides are influenced by human activity (mining and
construction of buildings, railroads, and highways) and natural factors (geology, precipitation, and
topography). Frequently they accompany other natural hazards such as floods, earthquakes, and volcanic
eruptions. Although landslides sometimes occur during earthquake activity, earthquakes are rarely their
primary cause.
The most common cause of a landslide is an increase in the down slope gravitational stress applied to slope
materials (oversteepening). This may be produced either by natural processes or by man’s activities.
Undercutting of a valley wall by stream erosion or of a sea cliff by wave erosion are ways in which slopes
may be naturally oversteepened.
Other ways include excessive rainfall or irrigation on a cliff or slope. Another type of soil failure is slope
wash, the erosion of slopes by surface-water runoff. The intensity of slope wash is dependent on the
discharge and velocity of surface runoff and on the resistance of surface materials to erosion. Surface runoff
and velocity is greatly increased in urban and suburban areas due to the presence of roads, parking lots,
and buildings, which have zero filtration capacities and provide generally smooth surfaces that do not slow
down runoff.
Mudflows are another type of soil failure and are defined as flows or rivers of liquid mud down a hillside.
They occur when water accumulates under the ground, usually following long and heavy rainfalls. If there is
no brush, tree, or ground cover to hold the soil, mud will form and flow down-slope.
Disaster History
Landslides and landslide-prone sedimentary formations are present throughout the coastal plain of western
San Diego County. Landslides also occur in the granitic mountains of East San Diego County, although they
are less prevalent. Ancient landslides are those with subdued topographic expressions that suggest
movements at least several hundred and possibly several thousands of years before present. Many of these
landslides are thought to have occurred under much wetter climatic conditions than at present. Recent
landslides are those with fresh or sharp geomorphic expressions suggestive of active (ongoing) movement
or movement within the past several decades. Reactivations of existing landslides can be triggered by
disturbances such as heavy rainfall, seismic shaking and/or grading. Many recent landslides are thought to
be reactivations of ancient landslides.
Past Significant Landslide Occurrences:
• Mt. Soledad in La Jolla (12/15/1961) 113F113F113F
119
• Oceanside (1/19/2005)114F114F114F
120
• east side of Point Loma (4/15/2009)115F115F115F
121
• western Camp Pendleton (2/28/2017).116F116F116F
122
Some of the most recent, significant coastal bluff landslides have occurred:
• in Torrey Pines (8/31/2019)
• in Del Mar (11/19/2019)
• along north La Jolla, Black’s Beach (5/2/2020)
119 https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/150-years/sd-me-150-years-december-15-htmlstory.html
120 https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-landslide-undercuts-eight-homes-in-oceanside-2005jan19-story.html
121 https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-bn15slide13057-2009apr15-story.html
122 https://patch.com/california/oceanside-camppendleton/road-closed-due-landslide-camp-pendleton
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 125
• in Encinitas (8/2/2019, 4/10/2020).117F117F117F
123
Landslides tend to be more widespread in these areas where the underlying sedimentary formations contain
weak claystone beds that are more susceptible to sliding.
Remedial grading and other mitigation measures have stabilized many but not all landslides in urban areas
and other developments within San Diego County. Published geologic maps and other sources of
information pertaining to landslide occurrence may not differentiate between known or suspected landslides.
Moreover, published landslide maps (such as those used to compile the landslide areas for this effort) are
not always updated or revised to reflect landslides that have been stabilized, or in some cases completely
removed.
The landslide maps for this study have been compiled for planning and emergency responses
preparedness, and the compilation sources may not reflect current or existing conditions.
Hazard Impacts
Impacts from landslides in the San Diego County can vary greatly. In unpopulated areas, landslides have
little effect except to the extent they fill in waterways and create flooding issues, water conveyance, and
introduce contaminants. However, if landslides occur in populated areas, damages can be sustained to
buildings, critical facilities, infrastructure, and injuries, and in extreme cases deaths, can occur. Landslides
can affect ingress and egress routes. Many locations in the County have limited ingress and egress routes.
Cutting off one of these routes can cause multiple issues such as limiting emergency response to hazards.
Location & Extent/Probability of Occurrence & Magnitude
Data used to determine landslide risk were steep slope (greater than 25%), soil series data (SANDAG,
based on USGS 1970s series), and soil-slip susceptibility from USGS. Because landslide data in GIS format
was not available for the entire county, a model was run using USGS soils and steep slope data to
determine landslide risk areas for the entire County. Tan Landslide Susceptibility Maps that depict steep
slope areas, landslide formations, and landslide susceptible areas based on a combination of slope, soils
and geologic instability were also used in the analysis.
As shown in the figure below, the location and extent of landslide hazard areas are generally concentrated
along canyons near the coastal areas with steep slopes:
123 https://cadoc.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=bc48ad40e3504134a1fc8f3909659041
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
126
FIGURE 7: MAP OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY RAIN-INDUCED LANDSLIDE SUSCEPTIBILITIES
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
127
The western portion of the county shows the soil-slip susceptibility data, while the eastern portion of the
county shows the results of the model used to determine landslide risk for areas that were not included in
the soil-slip susceptibility model. Housing development on marginal lands and in unstable but highly
desirable coastal areas has increased the threat from landslides throughout San Diego County.
Based on historical occurrences, the probability of a rain-induced landslide is considered
“Unlikely”. However, HAZUS Data Evaluations, Vulnerability Assessments, Hazard Seminar Series,
and input from Subject Matter Experts and the public determined the Overall Significance rating of
this hazard to be “Medium”, meaning the criteria falls mostly in the middle ranges of classifications
and the event’s impacts on the planning area are noticeable but not devastating. This rating is
sometimes used for hazards with a high extent rating but very low probability rating.
In San Diego County, rain-induced landslides typically occur during and after severe storms, so the potential
for landslides largely coincides with the potential for sequential severe storms that saturate steep,
vulnerable soils. The FEMA National Risk Index estimates that the annualized frequency of landslide events
in San Diego County is 0.1 distinct events per year. In general San Diego County can expect to experience
significant rain-induced landslide events during strong El Niño years or large atmospheric rivers. In areas
recently burned by wildfires, landslides may occur more frequently and are possible during annual rain
events.
Climate Change Considerations
Post-fire debris flows require high intensity precipitation. Global Climate models do not project hourly rates
of precipitation. One study that dynamically downscaled climate projection suggested that hourly
precipitation rates in the mountainous area increased in Central and Northern California (Huang et al, 2020),
but it did show results over San Diego.
The highest priority mitigation actions to reduce Climate Change impacts on this hazard should include
evaluation of vulnerable landscapes, monitoring and educating partners and the public, paying attention to
weather forecasts of heavy and prolonged rainfall, especially in conditions when landscape is already
soaked, consulting with experts in landslides/debris flows.
5.2.10. SEA LEVEL RISE/COASTAL STORMS/EROSION
Nature of the Hazard
These three hazards were mapped and profiled as a group because many of the factors and risks
involved are similar and limited to the coastal areas.
Rising and falling water levels, breaking waves, and shifting sands are common to life along the coast.
These normal coastal features become hazardous when they strengthen in intensity — usually during a
storm event — and pose an immediate threat to the lives and livelihoods of coastal populations.118F118F118F
124 These
coastal storms can cause increases in tidal elevations (called storm surge), wind speed, and erosion.
The most dangerous and damaging feature of a coastal storm is storm surge. Storm surges are large waves
of ocean water that sweep across coastlines where a storm makes landfall. Storm surges can inundate
coastal areas, wash out dunes, and cause backwater flooding. If a storm surge occurs at the same time as
high tide, the water height will be even greater.
124 https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_coastal-glossary.pdf
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 128
Sea Level Rise is an increase in sea level caused by a change in the volume of the world’s oceans and
changes in local ground elevations. Sea level rise leads to increased frequency and depth of flooding in
coastal areas.119F119F119F
125
With up to two feet of sea level rise projected by 2050, low-lying areas could become inundated more
frequently and with increasingly higher water levels. In addition, storm related flooding may reach further
inland and occur more often120F120F120F
126. Beaches and cliffs could also see increased erosion as they are exposed to
more hours of high sea levels and wave action.121F121F121F
127 The NOAA Sea Level Rise Viewer allows for planers to
predict the impact of sea level rise over the next several decades. It can be found at
https://coast.noaa.gov/slr/.
According to the Sea Level Rise Adaptation Strategy for the San Diego Bay, the sectors that are most
vulnerable to sea level rise are storm water, wastewater, shoreline parks, transportation facilities,
commercial buildings, and ecosystems. Low-lying communities, such as Imperial Beach, Coronado, Mission
Beach, and parts of La Jolla Shores, Del Mar, and Oceanside may be particularly vulnerable to sea level
rise.122F122F122F
128 In addition, some of San Diego’s military installations and the region controlled by the Port of San
Diego may also be affected.123F123F123F
129 However, sea level rise is considered (on a scale of low, medium, high, very
high) a low hazard for the region.
Coastal erosion is the wearing of coastal land. It is commonly used to describe the horizontal retreat of the
shoreline along the ocean and is considered a function of larger processes of shoreline change, which
include erosion and accretion. Erosion results when more sediment is lost along a particular shoreline than
is deposited by the water body and is measured as a rate with respect to either a linear retreat or volumetric
loss. Erosion rates are not uniform and vary over time at any single location. Various locations along the
Coast of San Diego County are highly susceptible to erosion. Erosion prevention and repair measures such
as installation of seawalls and reinforcement of cliffs have been required in different locations along the San
Diego coast in the past. The risk/probability of coastal erosion in San Diego County is considered “Likely”.
Disaster History
Since 2000, sea level has been increasing as the wind systems relaxed once again (Bromirski et al., 2011,
2012; Hamlington et al., 2016). For the San Diego region, sea-level rise models project similar ranges in
elevated sea-levels until 2050 (approximately 0.6 to 1.3 feet). In the second half of the century, sea-level
rise is expected to accelerate significantly, but there is greater uncertainty as to how extreme this rise will be
at the end of the century (0.9 to 4 feet) with the possibility that it is much higher (Griggs et al., 2017). This is
related to unknown global greenhouse gas emission reductions and uncertainties about how rapid ocean
warming will impact ice sheet melting (Griggs et al., 2017; Kalansky et al., 2018).
In January and February 1983, the strongest-ever El Nino-driven coastal storms caused over 116 million
dollars in beach and coastal damage. Thirty-three homes were destroyed, and 3,900 homes and businesses
were damaged. Other coastal storms that caused notable damage were during the El Nino winters of 1977-
1978 and 1997-1998 and 2003-2004. Other Proclamations occurred in December 2010. July 2015, and
February 2017. The City of San Diego proclaimed for winter storms in 2013.
Coastal erosion is an ongoing process that is difficult to measure but can be seen currently in various areas
along the coastline of San Diego County. Unstable cliffs at Beacon’s Beach in Encinitas caused a landslide
that killed a woman sitting on the beach in January 2000. In 1942, the Self-Realization Fellowship building
fell into the ocean because of erosion and slope failure caused by groundwater oversaturated the cliffs it
was built on.
125 https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_coastal-glossary.pdf
126 San Diego’s Changing Climate: A Regional Wake-Up Call. A Summary of the Focus 2050 Study Presented by The San Diego Foundation
127 Ibid.
128 Ibid.
129 Ibid.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 129
Two rounds of large long period northwest swell arrived at the beaches between the 16th and 20th of
January 2018. This brought high surf to west and northwest facing beaches with peak sets occurring in
southern San Diego County. Significant beach erosion was reported along with isolated coastal flooding. A
year later in January of 2019, high tides and surf brought large waves and coastal flooding to Southern
California. Areas of the San Diego County coastline observed sets as high as 15 feet and significant coastal
flooding due to the King Tides. There were many water rescues due to the high surf and rip currents, and
extensive damage to the Ocean Beach Pier in San Diego County.
Southern California watched as Baja California prepared for the Category 2 force winds and storm surge of
Hurricane Kay in September 2022. The storm weakened and made landfall in San Diego as a Tropical
Storm producing 5.6 inches of rain in the San Diego Mountains and wind gusts registering up to 109 mph.
Although no major damage was seen locally other than fallen trees, the tropical storm caused severe debris
flows in San Bernardino County causing a Proclaimed Local Emergency and the loss of life. The storm also
caused over $13 million in railroad damages along the coast in Orange County.
Hazard Impacts
Tens of millions of people in the U.S. and hundreds of millions globally live in areas that are at risk of coastal
flooding. Sea level rise does not act alone — rising sea levels, along with sinking lands, will combine with
other coastal flood factors like storm surge, wave effects, river flows, and heavy rains to significantly
increase the exposure to coastal communities, ecosystems, and economies. Sea level rise potentially
threatens infrastructure necessary for local jobs, regional industries, and public safety, such as roads,
subways, drinking water supplies, power plants, oil and gas wells, and sewage treatment systems.
Long-term sea level rise will affect the extent, frequency, and duration of coastal flooding events. High-tide
flooding events that occur only a few times a year now may occur once a month, or once a week in the
coming decades. These same water level changes may also increase coastal erosion and groundwater
levels. Elevated groundwater levels can lead to increased rainfall runoff and compromised underground
infrastructure, such as public utilities, septic systems, and structural foundations. Higher water levels also
mean deadly and destructive storm surges, wave impacts, and rainwater are unable to drain away from
homes and businesses.
Location & Extent/Probability of Occurrence & Magnitude
The figures in the next, “Tsunami” section display the locations and extent of tsunami, coastal
storm, erosion, and sea level rise hazard areas for the County of San Diego. These hazards were
mapped together due to Vulnerability Assessment results and subject matter expert feedback. As
shown in those figures, the highest risk zones in San Diego County are located within the coastal zone of
San Diego County. Coastal storm hazards are most likely during El Nino events.
Maximum wind speeds along the coast are not expected to exceed 60 miles per hour, resulting in only minor
wind-speed related damage. Coastal erosion risk is highest where geologically unstable cliffs become over-
saturated by irrigation or rainwater. The greatest type of tsunami risk is material damage to small watercraft,
harbors, and some waterfront structures (Joy 1968), with flooding along the coast, as shown in the run-up
projections on the figure below.
The risk of damage from sea level rise is considered somewhat “Likely” with the risk of damage from coastal
erosion considered to be “Likely” and tsunami “Highly Likely”.
Data used to profile this group of hazards included the digitized flood zones from the FEMA FIRM Flood
maps, NOAA historical shoreline data, and Caltrans’ coastal zone boundary for the coastal storm/erosion
hazard. Maximum tsunami run up projections modeled by the University of Southern California and
distributed by the California Office of Emergency Services were used for identifying tsunami hazard. The
tsunami model was the result of a combination of inundation modeling and onsite surveys and shows
maximum projected inundation levels from tsunamis along the entire coast of San Diego County.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 130
NOAA historical tsunami effects data were also used, which showed locations where tsunami effects have
been felt, and when available, details describing size and location of earthquakes that caused the tsunamis.
The Shoreline Erosion Assessment and Atlas of the San Diego Region Volumes I and II (SANDAG, 1992)
were reviewed for the shoreline erosion category. This publication shows erosion risk levels of high,
moderate, and low for the entire coastline of San Diego County.
For modeling purposes, the VE Zone of the FEMA FIRM map series was used as the high hazard value for
coastal storms and coastal erosion. The VE Zone is defined by FEMA as the coastal area subject to a
velocity hazard (wave action). Coastal storm and erosion risk were determined to be high if areas were
found within the VE zone of the FEMA FIRM maps. Tsunami hazard risk levels were determined to be high if
an area was within the maximum projected tsunami run-up and inundation area.
According to NOAA’s 2022 Sea Level Rise Technical Report, sea-level is predicted to rise 4-8 inches
by 2030 on the West coast, which includes the San Diego County. While sea-level rise has a high
certainty rating and is already occurring, its onset is not expected to occur until closer to the end of
the century in terms of changes in areas already vulnerable to flooding or causing permanent
inundation in tidally influenced areas of San Diego County. The probability of these hazards
occurring is “Likely”, meaning 10 to 90 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a
recurrence interval of 1 to 10 years.
Climate Change Considerations
The coast is an important part of San Diego’s landscape, culture, and economy. It is also one of the more
vulnerable landscapes in San Diego as many of its beaches, cliffs, and estuaries are already experiencing
erosion and flooding, and these hazards are expected to accelerate in frequency and intensity with climate
change.
Over the last century sea level has risen about 0.6 ft over much of the Central and Southern California
coast. Global sea level provides an important indicator of the state of the warming climate, but regional sea-
level rise varies across coastal communities because processes that cause sea-level rise interact differently
and vary across coastal regions (Hamlington et al., 2020). Between 1980 and 2000, sea level along San
Diego was relatively stable, even decreasing slightly as stronger wind stress gradients over the eastern
Pacific suppressed the global rise along North America.
Since 2000, sea level has been increasing as the wind systems relaxed once again (Bromirski et al., 2011,
2012; Hamlington et al., 2016). For the San Diego region, sea-level rise models project similar ranges in
elevated sea-levels until 2050 (approximately 0.6 to 1.3 feet). In the second half of the century, sea-level
rise is expected to accelerate significantly, but there is greater uncertainty as to how extreme this rise will be
at the end of the century (0.9 to 4 feet) with the possibility that it is much higher (Griggs et al., 2017). This is
related to unknown global greenhouse gas emission reductions and uncertainties about how rapid ocean
warming will impact ice sheet melting (Griggs et al., 2017; Kalansky et al., 2018).
Given the increased rate of sea level rise, in the near term the greatest impacts from sea level rise are
mostly likely to occur during events that combine high tides, El Nino and both locally and distantly generated
wind-driven waves. For example, the generally elevated sea levels along the California coast during the
super El Nino of 1982-83 were heightened by large winter storms and high waves during high tide periods,
causing enormous coastal damage along the San Diego County shoreline (Flick, 1998).
Cliff erosion is a natural coastal process for much of northern San Diego County. In San Diego, between
1998 and 2009 the mean cliff top retreat was 0.46 ft/yr (Young, 2018). San Onofre State Beach is a cliff
erosion hot spot in San Diego County due to extensive deep-seated landslide (Adam P Young, 2015). Other
areas in north San Diego County, such as Encinitas and Del Mar, have also experienced a number of
significant cliff failures in recent years. Researchers are advancing understanding of how wave-cliff impacts
and rainfall contribute to both upper and lower coastal cliff erosion providing insight into how increasing sea
levels, and storm driven waves and rainfall may further accelerate this erosion (Young et al., 2021)
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 131
5.2.11. TSUNAMI
Nature of the Hazard
A tsunami is a series of long waves generated in the ocean by a sudden displacement of a large volume of
water. Underwater earthquakes, landslides, volcanic eruptions, meteoric impacts, or onshore slope failures
can cause this displacement. Tsunami waves can travel at speeds averaging 450 to 600 miles per hour. As
a tsunami nears the coastline, its speed diminishes, its wavelength decreases, and its height increases
greatly. After a major earthquake or other tsunami-inducing activity occurs, a tsunami could reach the shore
within a few minutes. One coastal community may experience no damaging waves while another may
experience very destructive waves. Some low-lying areas could experience severe inland inundation of
water and deposition of debris more than 3,000 feet inland. Historically the impact of Tsunamis on the San
Diego coastline has been low, but inundation maps developed by the California Office of Emergency
Services and the California Geologic Survey show the potential for moderate damage along low-lying areas.
The California Geologic Survey has developed Tsunami Inundation maps that can be found at:
http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/geologic_hazards/Tsunami/Inundation_Maps.
Disaster History
Wave heights and run-up elevations from tsunami along the San Diego Coast have historically fallen within
the normal range of the tides (Joy 1968). The largest tsunami effect recorded in San Diego since 1950 was
May 22, 1960, which had a maximum wave height 2.1 feet (NOAA, 1993). In this event, 80 meters of dock
were destroyed, and a barge sunk in Quivera Basin.
Other tsunamis felt in San Diego County occurred on November 5, 1952, with a wave height of 2.3 feet and
caused by an earthquake in Kamchatka; March 9, 1957, with a wave height of 1.5 feet; May 22, 1960, at 2.1
feet; March 27, 1964 with a wave height of 3.7 feet, February 2010 with a wave height of 0.6 meters; June,
2011 with wave height of 2 feet; and January 15, 2022 with a wave height of 1-3 feet.125F125F125F
130
It should be noted that damage does not necessarily occur in direct relationship to wave height, illustrated
by the fact that the damages caused by the 2.1-foot wave height in 1960 were worse than damages caused
by several other tsunamis with higher wave heights.
The California Tsunami Program, led by the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES)
and the California Geological Survey (CGS), is responsible for updating the State’s Tsunami Hazard Area
Maps for emergency response planning and public safety. Communities use the State tsunami maps to
develop and update their evacuation maps and plans. The State is constantly evaluating tsunami events,
sources, and analysis techniques to ensure that coastal communities are safe from tsunami hazards.
The State has updated previous 2009 Tsunami Inundation Maps by working with local emergency
management officials and Cal OES. Each County provides important considerations to CGS’ decision on the
inland boundaries of the Tsunami Hazard Area.
The State tsunami website (www.tsunami.ca.gov), includes new Tsunami Hazard Area maps/data
available to view and download using easy-to-use, interactive web applications. Find a location by typing in
an address or use a current location to pinpoint the location on the Tsunami Hazard Map. This is useful to
find out if you are in a Tsunami Hazard Area wherever you live, work, or visit. As local tsunami evacuation
brochures are developed, they will also be added to the online map interface.126F126F126F
131
Hazard Impacts
Tsunamis are a threat to life and property along the coast. From 1950 to 2007, 478 tsunamis were recorded
globally. Fifty-one of these events caused fatalities, to a total of over 308,000 coastal residents. The
130 https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/hazel/view/hazards/tsunami/runup-more-info/36305.
131 California Tsunami Program, “Tsunami Hazard Area Maps Talking Points.” 2022.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 132
overwhelming majority of these events occurred in the Pacific basin. Recent tsunamis have struck
Nicaragua, Indonesia, and Japan, killing several thousand people. Property damage due to these waves
was nearly $1 billion. Historically, tsunamis originating in the northern Pacific and along the west coast of
South America have caused more damage on the west coast of the United States than tsunamis originating
in Japan and the Southwest Pacific.
It is consensus that San Diego County could see moderate impacts from a tsunami originating in the Pacific
Ocean, specifically a far source originating in the Aleutian Islands. However, a near source tsunami event
originating from an offshore displacement of geological material, earthquake or underwater landslide can
occur any time. The resulting floodwater waves can carry damaging debris and inundate homes,
businesses, and government buildings in the coastal cities such as the cities of San Diego, National City,
Carlsbad, and the various beach communities.
Location & Extent/Probability of Occurrence & Magnitude
The figures below display the locations and extent of tsunami, coastal storm, erosion and sea level rise
hazard areas for the County of San Diego. As shown in these figures, the highest risk zones in San Diego
County are located within the coastal zone of San Diego County. Coastal storm hazards are most likely
during El Nino events:
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 133
FIGURE 8: MAP OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY COASTAL STORM/EROSION/TSUNAMI HAZARD AREAS (1 OF 5)
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 134
Figure 9: Map of San Diego County Sea Level Rise Hazard Areas (1 Of 5)
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 135
FIGURE 10: MAP OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY COASTAL STORM/EROSION/TSUNAMI HAZARD AREAS (2 OF 5)
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 136
Figure 11: Map of San Diego County Sea Level Rise Hazard Areas (2 of 5)
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 137
FIGURE 12: MAP OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY COASTAL STORM/EROSION/TSUNAMI HAZARD AREAS (3 OF 5)
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 138
Figure 13: Map of San Diego County Sea Level Rise Hazard Areas (3 of 5)
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 139
FIGURE 14: MAP OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY COASTAL STORM/EROSION/TSUNAMI HAZARD AREAS (4 OF 5)
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 140
FIGURE 15: MAP OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY SEA LEVEL RISE HAZARD AREAS (4 OF 5)
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 141
FIGURE 3: MAP OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY COASTAL STORM/EROSION/TSUNAMI HAZARD AREAS (5 OF 5)
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 142
FIGURE 17: MAP OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY SEA LEVEL RISE HAZARD AREAS (5 OF 5)
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 143
Data used to profile this group of hazards included the digitized flood zones from the FEMA FIRM Flood
maps, NOAA historical shoreline data, and Caltrans’ coastal zone boundary for the coastal storm/erosion
hazard. Maximum tsunami run up projections modeled by the University of Southern California and
distributed by the California Office of Emergency Services were used for identifying tsunami hazard. The
tsunami model was the result of a combination of inundation modeling and onsite surveys and shows
maximum projected inundation levels from tsunamis along the entire coast of San Diego County.
NOAA historical tsunami effects data were also used, which showed locations where tsunami effects have
been felt, and when available, details describing size and location of earthquakes that caused the tsunamis.
The Shoreline Erosion Assessment and Atlas of the San Diego Region Volumes I and II (SANDAG, 1992)
were reviewed for the shoreline erosion category. This publication shows erosion risk levels of high,
moderate, and low for the entire coastline of San Diego County.
For modeling purposes, the VE Zone of the FEMA FIRM map series was used as the high hazard value for
coastal storms and coastal erosion. The VE Zone is defined by FEMA as the coastal area subject to a
velocity hazard (wave action). Coastal storm and erosion risk were determined to be high if areas were
found within the VE zone of the FEMA FIRM maps. Tsunami hazard risk levels were determined to be high if
an area was within the maximum projected tsunami run-up and inundation area.
According to University of Southern California engineers, the “likelihood of a large tsunami to strike
California would be hard to predict… small tsunamis will swell into California [which includes San
Diego County] every few years.”127F127F127F
132
128F128F
133 In addition, Cal OES and CGS are preparing a new type of
tsunami hazard map, the probabilistic tsunami hazard analysis map, which will show potential
tsunami events that have a 1000-year average return occurrence. The probability of this hazard
occurrence is “Unlikely”, meaning less than 1 percent probability of occurrence in the next year or a
recurrence interval of greater than every 100 years. However, HAZUS Data Evaluations, Vulnerability
Assessments, Hazard Seminar Series, and input from Subject Matter Experts and the public
determined this hazard’s Overall Significance rating is “Medium”, meaning the criteria falls mostly in
the middle ranges of classifications and the event’s impacts on the planning area are noticeable but
not devastating.
5.2.12. WILDFIRE/STRUCTURE FIRE
Nature of Hazard
A structure fire hazard is one where there is a risk of a fire starting in an urban setting and spreading
uncontrollably from one building to another across several city blocks, or within high-rise buildings.
A wildfire is an uncontrolled fire spreading through vegetative fuels and exposing or possibly consuming
structures. They often begin unnoticed and spread quickly. Naturally occurring and non-native species of
grasses, brush, and trees fuel wildfires.
A wildfire is in a wildland area in which development is essentially nonexistent—except for roads, railroads,
power lines and similar facilities. An Urban-Wildland/Urban Interface fire is a wildfire in a geographical area
where structures and other human development meet or intermingle with wildland or vegetative fuels.
Significant development in San Diego County is located along canyon ridges at the wildland/urban interface.
Areas that have experienced prolonged droughts or are excessively dry are at risk of wildfires.
People start more than 80 percent of wildfires, usually as debris burns, arson, or carelessness. Lightning
strikes are the next leading cause of wildfires. Wildfire behavior is based on three primary factors: fuel,
topography, and weather. The type, and amount of fuel, as well as its burning qualities and level of moisture
affect wildfire potential and behavior.
132 https://news.usc.edu/6031/A-Tsunami-50-Feet-High-Could-Hit-Southern-California/
133 https://news.usc.edu/6031/A-Tsunami-50-Feet-High-Could-Hit-Southern-California/
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 144
The continuity of fuels, expressed in both horizontal and vertical components is also a determinant of
wildfire potential and behavior. Topography is important because it affects the movement of air (and thus the
fire) over the ground surface. The slope and shape of terrain can change the speed at which the fire travels,
and the ability of firefighters to reach and extinguish the fire. Weather affects the probability of wildfire and
has a significant effect on its behavior. Temperature, humidity, and wind (both short and long term) affect the
severity and duration of wildfires.
San Diego County’s topography consists of a semi-arid coastal plain and rolling highlands which, when
fueled by shrub overgrowth, occasional Santa Ana winds and high temperatures, creates an ever-present
threat of wildland fire. Extreme weather conditions such as high temperature, low humidity, and/or winds of
extraordinary force may cause an ordinary fire to expand into one of massive proportions.
Large fires would have several indirect effects beyond those that a smaller, more localized fire would create.
These may include air quality and health issues, road closures, business closures, and others that increase
the potential losses that can occur from this hazard. Modeling for a larger type of fire would be difficult, but
the consequences of the three largest San Diego fires this century (October, 2003, October 2007 and May
2014) should be used as a guide for fire planning and mitigation.
Disaster History
San Diego County’s third worst wildfire in history, known as the Laguna Fire, destroyed thousands of acres
in the backcountry in September of 1970. The fire resulted in the loss or destruction of 383 homes and
1,200 other structures.
In October 2003, the second-worse wild-land fire in the history of San Diego County destroyed 332,766
acres of land, 3,239 structures and 17 deaths at a cost of approximately $450M.
San Diego County’s worst wildfire occurred in October 2007. At the height of the firestorm there were seven
fires burning within the County. The fires destroyed 369,000 acres (13% of the County), 2,670 structures,
239 vehicles, and two commercial properties. There were 10 civilian deaths, 23 civilian injuries and 10
firefighter injuries. The cost of fire exceeded $1.5 billion.
Wildland fires prompted seven (7) Proclaimed States of Emergency, and Urban/Intermix Fires prompted four
(4) Proclaimed States of Emergency in the County of San Diego between 1950-2020. The table below lists
the most recent major wildfires in San Diego County.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 145
TABLE 19: MAJOR WILDFIRES IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY LARGER THAN 5,000 ACRES OR
RESULTING IN SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURE LOSS
Fire Date Acres
Burned
Structures
Destroyed
Structures
Damaged Deaths
Conejos Fire July 1950 62,000 Not
Available
Not
Available
0
Laguna Fire October 1970 190,000 382 Not
Available
5
Harmony Fire
(Carlsbad, Elfin Forest,
San Marcos)
October 1996 8,600 122 142 1
Viejas Fire January 2001 10,353 23 6 0
Gavilan Fire (Fallbrook) February
2002
6,000 43 13 0
Pines Fire (Julian,
Ranchita)
July 2002 61,690 45 121 0
Cedar Fire October 2003 280,278 5,171 63 14
Paradise Fire October 2003 57,000 415 15 2
Otay Fire October 2003 46,291 6 0 0
Roblar (Pendleton) October 2003 8,592 0 0 0
Mataguay Fire* July 2004 8,867 2 0 0
Horse Fire* July 2006 16,681 Not
Available
Not
Available
0
Witch Creek Fire* October 2007 197,990 1,125 77 2
Harris Fire* October 2007 90,440 255 12 5
Poomacha Fire* October 2007 49,410 139 Not
Available
0
Ammo Fire* October 2007 21,004 Not
Available
Not
Available
0
Rice Fire* October 2007 9,472 208 Not
Available
0
May 2014 San Diego
County Wildfires
May 2014 26,000 65 19 0
Border Fire June 2016 7,609 18 4 2
Lilac Fire December
2017
4,100 157 64 0
West Fire July 2018 504 48 Not
Available
0
Valley Fire September
2020
16,390 66 Not
Available
0
Southern Fire May 2021 5,366 5 Not
Available
0
Border 32 Fire September
2022
4,456 14 Not
Available
0
* Information gathered from the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection website
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 146
As of 12/31/2022 there have been no additional significant wildfire events in the planning area.
Hazard Impacts
Hazard impacts can include but are not limited to increased flooding risk over burn scar areas,
environmental impacts/damage, air quality impacts, loss of resources such as utilities, asset/structure
damage and/or total loss, injury, and death.
Location & Extent/Probability of Occurrence & Magnitude
The wildfire maps use the CAL Fire Resource Assessment Program data for Fire Hazard Severity Zones.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
147
FIGURE 18: CAL FIRE FIRE HAZARD SEVERITY ZONES (HIGH AND VERY HIGH)
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
148
Under current climate conditions, the wildfire threat to property, lives, and ecosystems in the San Diego
region is very high. With hotter temperatures and possibly fewer rainy days in the coming decades,
vegetation could become drier. As a result, it is likely that San Diego region will see an increase in the
frequency and intensity of fires, making the region more vulnerable to devastating fires like the ones seen in
2003 and 2007.128F129F129F
134 The fire season could also become longer and less predictable, making firefighting
efforts more costly.129F130F130F
135
Building density is also a factor in potential building loss during a wildfire. A recent study in the Ecological
Society of America’s publication Ecological Applications130F131F131F
136 indicates that the area of the building clusters,
the number of buildings in the cluster and building dispersion all contribute to the potential for building loss.
While all three factors had a positive influence on the number of structures lost, larger building structures
were most strongly associated with building loss. The most likely reason being that more buildings are
exposed. Two other top factors were the number of buildings in the cluster and the distance to the nearest
building. In the Mediterranean California model the closer the buildings were to each other the less likely
they were to be affected.
An increase in wildfire also impacts public health. Fire-related injuries and death are likely to increase as
wildfires occur more frequently.131F132F132F
137 Wildfires can also be a significant contributor to air pollution. Wildfire
smoke contains numerous toxic and hazardous pollutants that are dangerous to breath and can worsen
lung disease and other respiratory conditions.132F133F133F
138
From May to October of each year, San Diego County faces a severe wildfire threat. Fires will
continue to occur on an almost annual basis in the San Diego County Area. The threat of wildfire
and potential losses consistently increase as human development and population increase in the
wildland urban interface area in the County. According to the Cal Fire Redbook, there have been
1,113 wildfires recorded for San Diego County between 2015 and 2021. Based on climate and
weather in San Diego County and the fuels, topography, past fire history, and the Cal Fire Redbook
which indicates an average of 159 wildfires per year, the probability of future wildfire events are
considered “Highly Likely”.
5.2.13. SEVERE WINTER WEATHER
Nature of Hazard
According to the National Weather Service (NWS), a winter storm is a life-threatening combination of heavy
snow, blowing snow and/or dangerous wind chills. However, most severe winter storms in the County of San
Diego consist of heavy rain events, sometimes accompanied by thunderstorms, high winds, dense fog, hail,
and freeze events. Heavy rain refers to events where the amount of rain exceeds normal levels. The amount
of precipitation needed to qualify as heavy rain varies with location and season.
The County of San Diego’s weather is influenced by the Pacific Ocean and routine climate patterns such as
El Niño. El Niño is the warm phase of the El Niño-Southern Oscillation cycle, a pattern found in the tropical
Pacific when there are fluctuations in temperatures between the ocean and atmosphere. During El Niño, the
surface winds across the entire tropical Pacific are weaker than normal and the ocean surface is at above-
average temperatures in the central and eastern tropical Pacific Ocean. El Niño typically develops over
North America during the winter season causing the severe winter storms experienced by the County. This
134 San Diego’s Changing Climate: A Regional Wake-Up Call. A Summary of the Focus 2050 Study Presented by The San Diego Foundation.
135 Ibid.
136 Alexander, Patricia M., et. al. (2016). Factors related to Building Loss Due to Wildfires in the Conterminous United States. Ecological Applications,
0(0), 1-16.
137 Ibid.
138 Ibid.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 149
climate pattern occurs every few years and brings with it above-average rain and snow across the southern
region of United States, especially in California.
A relatively common weather pattern that brings southwest winds and heavy rain to California is often
referred to as an atmospheric river. Atmospheric rivers are long, narrow regions in the atmosphere that
transport most of the water vapor carried away from the tropics. These columns of vapor move with the
weather, carrying large amounts of water vapor and strong winds. When the atmospheric rivers make
landfall, they often release this water vapor in the form of rain or snow, causing flooding and mudslides
Extreme cold often accompanies a winter storm or is left in its wake. A freeze refers to a particularly cold
spell of weather where the temperature drops below 32 degrees, most typically in the early morning hours.
Rainfall during these periods may result in snowfall in the higher elevations of the County. Prolonged
exposure to cold can be life-threatening, particularly to infants and the elderly. Freezing temperatures can
cause significant damage to the agricultural industry.
Disaster History
A review of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Centers for
Environmental Information (NCEI), Storm Events Database show one extreme cold/wind chill event, two
winter storm events, and three winter weather events were reported for San Diego County from October 1,
2017 through December 31, 2022. The following narrative from the NCEI and other sources summarizes
each event:
January 20, 2018 - A weak trough and associate cold front brought light showers and breezy winds. A light
coating of snow caused issues in the mountains. A quick burst of snow produced snow covered roads in
Cuyamaca, at Mt. Laguna and along Sunrise Hwy and State Route 79.
February 5, 2019 - A cold front moved through Southern California and brought widespread rain, a few
inches of snow, and frost to the region. Total rainfall amounts ranged from 1 to 2 inches, locally 4 inches in
the San Diego County Mountains. Hourly rainfall thresholds for the Holy burn scar were exceeded in a
couple of canyons, with the highest threshold of 0.71 per hour in Horsethief Canyon. Widespread frost
occurred on February 7th, and reached the coastal areas of San Diego and Orange Counties. Icy roads on
I-8 resulted in traffic accidents and two fatalities.
February 22, 2019 - A cold upper-level low moved into Southern California on February 21st and brought
heavy snow, rain and hail. Julian received 8-12 inches of snow. Snow levels went down went down to 2,000
ft in the San Diego County Mountains. Reports of small hail in the coastal and valley areas. Intestate 8 was
closed for 12 hours due to snow covered and icy roads.
March 10, 2019 - A weak atmospheric river moved over Southern California between March 6-11, bringing
light to moderate rain, significant lightning and snow between 5,000 and 7,000 ft. Significant lightning from
warm frontal lift and instability occurred throughout most of the region, with 500 cloud flashes and 330
cloud-to-ground strikes. Palomar Mountain received 3 inches of snow.
November 7, 2020 - An upper-level trough brought notable lower elevation rain and mountain snow across
Southern California from November 7th - 9th. The cold nature of the system also brought chilly temperatures
to the region, especially in areas of the High Desert. Portions of the mountains in San Diego County
received significant snowfall. Mount Laguna measured a total of 7 inches, while Palomar Mountain
measured 4 inches of snow.
February 23, 2022 - A potent trough of low pressure from the Pacific brought cold weather across the
region. The region also saw some lower elevation snowfall with higher elevations receiving over one foot of
snow. Record cold temperatures and highway closures were the main impacts as this system swept through
the region from February 21st to 23rd. Many areas saw temperatures lowering into the 20s and 30s.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 150
Julian dropped to 18 degrees on the 24th and Lake Cuyamaca broke a daily record low of 12 degrees on
the 25th.
The Storm Events Database collects information on each event from a variety of sources, including but not
limited to, county, state, and federal emergency management officials, newspaper clipping services, and the
insurance industry. A review of the Storm Events Database for events in San Diego County also showed 212
records related to heavy snow, heavy rain, frost/freeze, and high wind. The following table summarizes the
events recorded in the NCEI database.
TABLE 20: NCEI SEVERE WINTER WEATHER EVENTS REPORTED FOR SAN DIEGO COUNTY,
OCTOBER 1, 2017 – DECEMBER 31, 2022
Event Type Location # of
Events
Property
Damage ($) Deaths
Heavy Snow San Diego County
Mountains 13 $100,000 0
San Diego County
Valleys 1 0 0
Heavy Rain San Diego County 68 0 0
Frost/Freeze
San Diego County
Valleys 5 0 0
San Diego County
Deserts 1 0 0
San Diego County
Coastal Areas 1 0 0
High Wind
San Diego County
Mountains 97 $31,000 0
San Diego County
Valleys 19 $30,000 0
San Diego County
Deserts 5 0 0
San Diego County
Coastal Areas 2 0 0
Total 212 $161,000 0
Source: NCEI, Storm Events Database
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 151
Hazard Impacts
The most common problems associated with severe winter storms are immobility and loss of utilities.
Fatalities are uncommon but can occur. Roads may become impassable due to flooding, downed trees, or a
landslide. Power lines may be downed due to high winds, and services such as water or phone may not be
able to operate without power. Heavy rain can have significant impacts, including flash flooding and
landslides. Stormwater runoff from heavy rains can also impair water quality by washing pollutants into
water bodies. During winter storms, transboundary flows of raw sewage and urban runoff increase at the
Tijuana River along the U.S-Mexico border, which results in beach advisories and closures along San
Diego’s coastal beaches due to unsafe bacteria levels that may cause illnesses.
Late or early freeze events can have a devastating effect on agriculture of the region. Crops can be
damaged by below-freezing temperatures. Prolonged exposure to cold can cause frostbite or hypothermia
and can be life-threatening. Infants and the elderly are most susceptible. Of significant concern is the impact
to populations with special needs and those requiring the use of medical equipment. The residents of
nursing homes and elder care facilities are especially vulnerable to extreme temperature events. In addition
to vulnerable populations, pets and livestock are at risk to freeze and cold. Pipes may freeze and burst in
homes or buildings that are poorly insulated or without heat.
Location & Extent/Probability of Occurrence & Magnitude
A marked feature of San Diego’s climate is the wide variation in temperature within short distances. In
nearby valleys, nights are noticeably cooler in the winter, and freezing occurs much more frequently
compared to urban areas of the County. Although records show unusually small daily temperature ranges,
only about 15 degrees between the highest and lowest readings, a few miles inland these ranges increase
to 30 degrees or more.
The seasonal rainfall is about 10 inches in coastal areas but increases with elevation and distance from the
coast. In the mountains to the north and east, the average rainfall is between 20 and 40 inches, depending
on slope and elevation. Most of the precipitation falls in winter, except in the mountains where there is an
occasional thunderstorm. Eighty-five percent of the rainfall occurs from November through March, but wide
variations take place in monthly and seasonal totals.
Due to the County of San Diego’s history of severe winter weather events, severe winter weather in
the County of San Diego is “Highly Likely” to continue to occur, meaning 90 to 100 percent
probability of occurrence in the next year or a recurrence interval of 1 to 10 years. According to the
NCEI Weather Database, there have been 14 heavy snow events, 68 heavy rain events, 7 frost freeze
events, and 123 high wind events, which total up to 212 severe winter weather events in the County
of San Diego’s Valleys, Deserts, and Coastal Areas between October 1, 2017 and December 31, 2022.
This means there is a 11% chance on any given day of a severe winter weather event occurring over
the course of a year.
Climate Change Considerations
Severe winter weather events are going to become more extreme regarding climate change effects. These
events are primarily atmospheric rivers and will become more so in the future based on global climate
models (Gershunov et al., 2019).
The highest priority mitigation actions to reduce climate change impacts on this hazard should include
preparation, with strong attention to weather forecasts and available social services, infrastructure (e.g.,
Warming Centers), and programs to support installation of backup power supplies to address power failure
during times of extreme cold and freeze.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 152
5.2.14. ALL-HAZARD EVACUATIONS
Evacuation is a process by which people must move from a place where there is immediate or anticipated
danger, to a place of safety, and offered appropriate and accessible temporary shelter facilities. A decision to
evacuate areas will be made through Unified Command. Law enforcement agencies are the primary lead for
evacuation activities, with other agencies playing supporting roles. The overarching goal of evacuation
planning in San Diego County is to maximize the preservation of life while reducing the number of people
that must evacuate and the distance they must travel to seek refuge.
The County of San Diego Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan’s (OA EOP’s) Annex Q (Evacuation
Annex) is written in coordination with this plan, and describes how emergency personnel will cooperate,
decide, and implement responses to a disaster that requires an evacuation of people and their pets. The OA
EOP Evacuation Annex aims to lessen the impact a large-scale evacuation can have on the host
communities by providing estimates for the number of people who may require sheltering or transportation
assistance and the estimated number of pets that may need to be evacuated.133F134F134F
139
Legal Considerations
It is important to note evacuation strategies, routes, and locations may vary due to the type, severity,
movement, and other unique features of a hazard. For example, the maps below can be used to evacuate
during a Tsunami hazard:
139 San Diego County Emergency Operations Plan
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 153
FIGURE 19: COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, TSUNAMI EVACUATION MAP 1
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 154
FIGURE 20: COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, TSUNAMI EVACUATION MAP 2
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 155
The EOP Evacuation Annex provides hazard specific considerations, general evacuation transportation
routes and capacities, evacuation resources available locally and through mutual aid, and disability and
access and functional needs considerations. 134F135F135F
140
Evacuation orders should be issued when there is a clear and immediate threat to the health and safety of
the population, and it is determined that evacuation is the best option for protection. The State of California,
San Diego County, and the jurisdictions within, through the Unified Disaster Council, have agreed to use the
language below, as described in FireScope, to communicate evacuations:
Evacuation Warning: The alerting of people in an affected area(s) of potential threat to life and property. An
Evacuation Warning considers the probability that an area will be affected within a given time frame and
prepares people for a potential evacuation order. Evacuation Warnings are particularly necessary when
dealing with a variety of issues such as special needs populations and large animals.
Evacuation Order: Requires the immediate movement of people out of an affected area due to an
imminent threat to life.
Shelter-In-Place: Advises people to stay secure at their current location. This tactic shall only be used if an
evacuation will cause a higher potential for loss of life. Consideration should be given to assigning incident
personnel to monitor the safety of those remaining in place. The concept of shelter-in-place is an available
option in those instances where physical evacuation is impractical. This procedure may be effective for
residential dwellings in the immediately impacted areas, or for large facilities that house a high percentage
of non-ambulatory persons (e.g., hospitals and convalescent homes). Sheltering-in-place attempts to
provide a safe haven within the impacted area.
In 2005, the Chief Legal Counsel for the San Diego Sheriff’s Department maintained an opinion based on
case law that Penal Code Section 409.5 does not authorize forcible or mandatory evacuations. The Chief
Legal Counsel stated, “without a specific legislative amendment to Penal Code Section 409.5, it would be
improper to infer statutory authority to forcibly evacuate people who do not wish to be evacuated, unless
their presence in the closed area, resulted from an entry made after the area was closed pursuant to
409.5(a) or 409.5(b).” See Attachment 4 for Penal Code 409.5.
Emergency responders shall make every effort to inform people that failure to evacuate may result in
serious physical injury or death and that future opportunities to evacuate may not exist. Law enforcement
will document the location of individuals that refuse to evacuate. Once, Unified Command orders an
evacuation, it is critical that public information dissemination, sheltering resources, and security and
protection of private property are provided to a level where the public feels evacuation is more desirable
than staying behind.
This plan specifically provides a condensed version of potential evacuation routes and temporary
evacuation locations to be used under a range of emergency scenarios. However, during a true hazard,
please be advised Unified Command and law enforcement instructions are subject to change depending on
hazard types and conditions.
140 San Diego County Emergency Operations Plan
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 156
Evacuation Routes:
Evacuations that must be conducted during the standard working commuting hours will severely impact
evacuation routes. If possible, alternate routes should be used or contraflow methods should be explored.
The following maps show the major highways within the San Diego OA and the most congested segments
of those highways during the morning and evening commutes.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 157
FIGURE 21: SAN DIEGO COUNTY 2021 TOP 10 MORNING CONGESTED SEGMENTS
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 158
FIGURE 22: SAN DIEGO COUNTY 2021 TOP 10 AFTERNOON CONGESTED SEGMENTS
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 159
Temporary Evacuation Points & Sheltering
When law enforcement implements an evacuation order, they will coordinate with the Unified Command to
decide on a location to use as a Temporary Evacuation Point (TEP). A TEP is a site with limited resources
and staffing, as its primary purpose is to provide evacuees with a safe and protected place to congregate
temporarily until people can return home or relocate to another facility. TEP location choices are situationally
dependent, but can be places like a school, community center, or church.
The Operational Area Emergency Operations Center (OA EOC), along with the OA EOC Care & Shelter
Branch, will coordinate the locations to be used as emergency shelters if necessary. The OA EOC staff may
assist, as requested, in the coordination of an evacuation in an incorporated city. The San Diego Sheriff’s
Department Dispatch Center, in conjunction with the OA EOC and Joint Information Center (JIC), will utilize
the AlertSanDiego system, social media, radio, television, IPAWS, etc. to direct evacuees to the established
TEP or shelter. Local jurisdictions all have access to the same alert and warning tools as the OA and should
follow their internal protocols for sharing information with the public.
TEPs will serve as temporary safe zones for evacuees, but they generally do not provide any services, such
as food, water, restrooms, etc. Emergency shelters are opened when at least one overnight stay is
necessary. Basic services are provided at emergency shelters, which includes meals, accessible shower
facilities, dormitory management, health, and behavioral health services. Some temporary evacuation points
may be suitable to be converted into an emergency shelter location, if necessary and available.
When overnight sheltering is required, Annex G: Care and Shelter Operations of the County of San Diego
Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan (OA EOP) will be activated. 135F136F136F
141
5.3. VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
Vulnerability describes how exposed or susceptible to damage an asset is, and depends on an asset’s
construction, contents, and the economic value of its functions. This vulnerability analysis predicts the extent
of injury and damage that may result from a hazard event of a given intensity in each area on the existing
and future built environment. Like indirect damages, the vulnerability of one element of the community is
often related to the vulnerability of another. Indirect effects can be much more widespread and damaging
than direct effects. For example, damage to a major utility line could result in significant inconveniences and
business disruption that would far exceed the cost of repairing the utility line.
The vulnerability assessment for this plan was conducted by the County of San Diego Land Use and
Environment Group’s Geographic Information Systems staff (listed in Section 2).
All planning participants were requested by County OES to provide feedback on assessment data and attest
to respective jurisdictional accuracy on November 10, 2021 via electronic communication.
5.3.1. ASSET INVENTORY
Hazards that occur in San Diego County can impact critical facilities located in the County. A critical facility is
defined as a facility in either the public or private sector that provides essential products and services to the
public, is otherwise necessary to preserve the welfare and quality of life in the County, or fulfills important
public safety, emergency response, and/or disaster recovery functions.
141 Ibid
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 160
The figure in the next subsection shows the critical facilities identified for the County. The critical facilities
identified in San Diego County include:
• hospitals and other health care facilities
• emergency operations facilities
• fire stations
• police stations
• schools
• hazardous material sites
• transportation systems that include airport facilities, bridges, bus and rail facilities
• marinas and port facilities
• highways
• utility systems that include electric power facilities, natural gas facilities, crude and refined oil facilities,
potable and wastewater facilities, and communications facilities and utilities
• dams
• government office/civic centers, jails, prisons, military facilities, religious facilities, and post offices.
GIS, HAZUS-MH, and other modeling tools were used to map the critical facilities in the county and to
determine which would most likely be affected by each of the profiled hazards. San Diego County covers
4,261 square miles with several different climate patterns and types of terrain, which allows for several
hazards to affect several different parts of the county and several jurisdictions at once or separately.136F137F137F
142 The
hazards addressed are described in the previous section.
5.3.2. ESTIMATING POTENTIAL EXPOSURE & LOSSES AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
TRENDS
GIS modeling was used to estimate exposure to population, critical facilities, infrastructure, and
residential/commercial properties, from:
• Coastal storms/erosion
• Tsunami
• Wildfire/Structure fire
• Dam failure
• Landslide
• Human-caused hazards
The specific methods and results of all analyses are presented below. The results are shown as potential
exposure in thousands of dollars, and as the worst-case scenario.
For infrastructure, which has been identified as highways, railways and energy pipelines, the length of
exposure/impact is given in kilometers. Exposure characterizes the value of structures within the hazard
zone, and is shown as estimated exposure based on the overlay of the hazard on the critical facilities,
infrastructure, and other structures, which are given an assumed cost of replacement for each type of
structure exposed.
These replacement costs are estimated using a building square footage inventory purchased from Dun and
Bradstreet. The square footage information was classified based on Standard Industrial Code (SIC) and
provided at a 2002 census-tract resolution.
142 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/auditor/pdf/adoptedplan_21-23.pdf
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 161
The loss or exposure value is then determined with the assumption that the given structure is totally
destroyed (worst case scenario), which is not always the case in hazard events. This assumption was
valuable in the planning process, so that the total potential damage value was identified when determining
capabilities and mitigation measures for each jurisdiction.
The table below provides abbreviations and average replacement costs used for critical facilities and
infrastructure listed in all subsequent exposure/loss tables. The table provides the total inventory and
exposure estimates for the critical facilities and infrastructure by jurisdiction and shows the estimated
exposure inventory for infrastructure by jurisdiction. The table also provides an inventory of the maximum
population and building exposure by jurisdiction.
Loss was also estimated for earthquake and flood hazards in the County, in addition to exposure. Loss is
that portion of the exposure that is expected to be lost to a hazard and is estimated by referencing
frequency and severity of previous hazards. Hazard risk assessment methodologies embedded in HAZUS,
FEMA’s loss estimation software, were applied to earthquake and flood hazards in San Diego County.
HAZUS (a loss estimation software) integrates with GIS to provide estimates for the potential impact of
earthquake and flood hazards by using a common, systematic framework for evaluation.
This software contains economic and structural data on infrastructure and critical facilities, including
replacement value costs with square footage and valuation parameters to use in loss estimation
assumptions. This approach provides estimates for the potential impact by using a common, systematic
framework for evaluation. The HAZUS risk assessment methodology is parametric, in that distinct hazard
and inventory parameters (e.g. ground shaking and building types) were modeled to determine the impact
(damages and losses) on the built environment. The HAZUS-MH models were used to estimate losses from
earthquake and flood hazards to critical facilities, infrastructure, and residential/commercial properties, as
well as economic losses on several return period events and annualized levels. Loss estimates used
available data, and the methodologies applied resulted in an approximation of risk.
The economic loss results are presented as the Annualized Loss (AL) for the earthquake hazard. AL
addresses the two key components of risk: the probability of the hazard occurring in the study area and the
consequences of the hazard, largely a function of building construction type and quality, and of the intensity
of the hazard event. By annualizing estimated exposure values, the AL takes into account historic patterns
of frequent smaller events with infrequent but larger events to provide a balanced presentation of the risk.
These estimates should be used to understand relative risk from hazards and potential losses. Uncertainties
are inherent in any loss estimation methodology, arising in part from incomplete scientific knowledge
concerning natural hazards and their effects on the built environment. Uncertainties also result from
approximations and simplifications that are necessary for a comprehensive analysis (such as incomplete
inventories, demographics, or economic parameters).
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 162
TABLE 21: ABBREVIATIONS AND COSTS USED FOR CRITICAL FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
Abr. Name
Building Type
(where
applicable)
Average
Replacement
Cost
AIR Airport facilities - large s1l $14,416,100
BRDG Highway Bridges n/a $6,670,000
BUS Bus facilities c1l $1,830,000
COM Communication facilities c1l $4,000,000
ELEC Electric Power facility c1l $875,000,000
EMER Emergency Centers, Fire Stations and
Police Stations c1l $3,048,000
GOVT Government Office/Civic Center c1l $3,048,000
HOSP Medical Care facilities s1m $16,629,250
INFR
Kilometers of Infrastructure. Includes:
Oil/Gas Pipelines (OG) n/a $683,000
Railroad Tracks (RR) n/a $1,500,000
Highway (HWY) n/a $6,668,000
PORT Port facilities c1l 20,000,000
POT Potable and Wastewater facilities c1l $193,611,700
RAIL Rail facilities c1l $3,000,000
SCH Schools rm1l $74,400 /
Student
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
163
Jurisdiction Data (x1000) AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
Alpine FPD Number 0 37 0 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 5 48
Exposure 0 246,790 0 0 47,000 6,096 9,144 0 0 0 133,644 442,674
Carlsbad
Number 1 46 0 0 7 10 11 0 0 5 21 101
Exposure 4,377,391 26,162,610 0 0 100,173,00
0 1,520,952 33,528 0 0 1,884,447 1,274,946 135,426,874
Chula Vista Number 0 66 4 0 8 16 18 2 0 1 70 185
Exposure 0 25,905,350 7,320 0 98,705,000 1,530,096 54,864 33,259 0 30,000 156,709,430 282,975,319
Coronado Number 0 2 0 1 3 3 5 1 0 0 4 19
Exposure 0 13,340 0 4,000 141,000 1,304,544 15,240 16,629 0 0 225,996 1,720,749
Del Mar Number 0 6 0 0 0 3 4 0 0 0 0 13
Exposure 0 25,484,190 0 0 0 234,696 12,192 0 0 0 0 25,731,078
El Cajon Number 1 59 3 0 8 12 17 0 0 0 34 134
Exposure 4,368,696 393,530 5,490 0 97,378,000 1,539,240 51,816 0 0 0 153,980,088 257,716,860
Encinitas Number 0 17 0 0 1 7 10 1 0 1 12 49
Exposure 0 111,490 0 0 47,000 21,336 30,480 16,629 0 163,612 579,494 27,204,413
Escondido Number 0 78 0 1 11 12 17 1 0 2 35 157
Exposure 0 24,980,140 0 4,000 96,004,000 1,539,240 51,816 16,629 0 2,151,670 2,129,942 126,877,437
Imperial Beach Number 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 0 5 12
Exposure 0 0 0 0 0 1,252,728 15,240 0 0 0 289,784 1,557,752
La Mesa Number 0 44 2 0 2 5 6 1 0 0 14 74
Exposure 0 23,734,770 3,660 0 90,302,000 1,548,384 18,288 16,629 0 0 668,146 116,291,877
Lemon Grove Number 0 15 0 0 1 3 5 0 0 0 5 29
Exposure 0 23,460,350 0 0 47,000 1,548,384 15,240 0 0 0 208,236 25,279,210
National City Number 0 65 0 0 6 5 7 1 0 0 15 99
Exposure 0 23,407,010 0 0 282,000 1,548,384 21,336 16,629 0 0 919,450 26,194,809
Oceanside Number 1 46 1 2 4 16 19 1 0 2 37 129
Exposure 3,501,640 23,054,470 1,830 8,000 89,897,000 1,554,480 57,912 16,629 0 327,223 149,017,722 267,436,906
Otay Water
District
Number 0 85 1 15 16 20 15 1 0 2 65 220
Exposure 0 566,950 1,830 60,000 4,892,000 60,960 45,720 16,629 0 193,612 10,820,428 16,658,129
Poway
Number 0 51 0 0 4 4 4 1 0 8 10 82
Exposure 0 340,170 0 0 188,000 1,219,200 12,192 16,629 0 1,290,000 666,962 3,733,153
TABLE 22: INVENTORY OF CRITICAL FACILITIES AND EXPOSURE VALUE BY JURISDICTION
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 164
Jurisdiction Data (x1000) AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
Number 1 145 0 0 3 11 11 0 0 1 28 200
Exposure 263,077 967,150 0 0 141,000 33,528 33,528 0 0 163,612 8,060,450 9,662,345
Port of San
Diego
Number 1 3 0 0 3 7 4 0 1 0 0 19
Exposure 300,604 19,060 0 0 969,000 21,336 12,192 0 719,793 0 0 2,041,985
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
Number 0 43 0 1 3 4 2 0 0 2 4 59
Exposure 0 286,810 0 4,000 1,797,000 12,192 6,096 0 0 60,000 150,590 2,316,688
Rancho Santa
Fe FPD
Number 0 26 0 0 5 4 5 0 0 8 6 54
Exposure 0 173,420 0 0 1,063,000 12,192 15,240 0 0 1,008,059 310,874 2,582,785
San Diego (City) Number 3 625 12 34 82 108 150 9 2 9 309 1,343
Exposure 4,330,939 20,479,000 21,960 716,000 83,721,000 1,767,840 457,200 149,663 726,492 5,579,457 150,957,410 268,906,961
San Diego
County Water
Authority
Number 6 1,592 24 70 182 285 346 18 2 52 722 3,299
Exposure 1,540,729 10,541,690 43,920 280,000 44,986,000 868,680 1,054,608 299,327 726,493 4,900,293 92,015,670 157,257,409
San Marcos Number 0 24 1 2 2 10 8 0 0 0 30 77
Exposure 0 6,945,810 1,830 360,000 36,879,000 1,969,008 24,384 0 0 0 103,068,310 149,248,342
San Miguel FPD Number 0 100 0 0 4 10 10 0 0 3 30 157
Exposure 0 667,000 0 0 188,000 30,480 30,480 0 0 193,612 4,125,426 5,234,998
Santee Number 0 50 0 1 1 3 7 0 0 1 11 74
Exposure 0 333,500 0 4,000 47,000 914,400 21,336 0 0 163,612 682,576 2,166,424
Solana Beach Number 0 4 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 4 13
Exposure 0 26,680 0 0 0 3,048 12,192 0 0 0 113,146 155,066
Sweetwater
Authority
Number 0 124 3 0 13 14 24 2 0 2 49 231
Exposure 0 816,630 5,490 0 2,267,000 42,672 73,152 33,259 0 60,000 2,687,162 5,985,365
Unincorporated Number 1 567 0 37 73 85 78 1 0 32 115 989
Exposure 4,232,543 5,091,690 0 644,000 35,841,000 938,784 237,744 16,629 0 11,853,925 97,291,574 156,147,889
Vista Number 0 15 1 0 2 13 9 0 0 0 22 62
Exposure 0 1,285,990 1,830 0 94,000 2,054,352 27,432 0 0 0 1,124,726 4,588,330
Vista Irrigation
District
Number 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6
Exposure 0 25,730 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 91,464 117,194
Total Number 16 3,993 53 176 451 684 819 40 5 137 1,705 8,079
Total Exposure
(x $1,000) 22,915,61
9
245,521,32
0 95,1605 2,084,000 786,096,00
0 25,097,232 2,450,592 665,169 2,172,7
78 30,023,134 938,303,646 2,081,659,021
TABLE 22: INVENTORY OF CRITICAL FACILITIES AND EXPOSURE VALUE BY JURISDICTION
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
165
TABLE 23: INVENTORY OF EXPOSURE FOR INFRASTRUCTURE
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Alpine FPD
Total KMs 17 4 0 21
Exposure
(x$1,000) 113,472 2,733 0 116,205
Carlsbad
Total KMs 174 86 29 289
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,163,163 58,835 43,115 1,265,113
Chula Vista
Number 317 51 33 401
Exposure
(x$1,000) 2,110,623 35,026 49,150,878 51,296,527
Coronado
Number 21 16 0 37
Exposure
(x$1,000) 137,016 10,978 0 147,994
Del Mar
Number 5 9 7 21
Exposure
(x$1,000) 30,511 6,004 10,641 47,156
El Cajon
Number 159 17 31 207
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,057,030 11,600 46,337 1,114,967
Encinitas
Number 86 43 19 148
Exposure
(x$1,000) 571,714 29,244 28,656 629,614
Escondido
Number 180 28 11 219
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,198,940 19,042 16,686 1,234,668
Imperial Beach
Number 5 4 0 9
Exposure
(x$1,000) 32,259 2,743 0 35,002
La Mesa
Number 123 15 32 170
Exposure
(x$1,000) 817,200 10,472 48,176 875,848
Lemon Grove
Number 46 6 14 66
Exposure
(x$1,000) 303,500 3,813 20,338 327,651
National City
Number 125 12 52 189
Exposure
(x$1,000) 833,696 8,201 77,996 919,893
Oceanside
Number 182 48 43 273
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,210,567 32,856 65,118 1,308,541
Otay Water
District
Number 180 75 0 255
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,197,512 50,910 0 1,248,422
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 166
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Padre Dam
Municipal
Water Distrct
Number 89 36 2 127
Exposure
(x1000) 595,562 24,590 2,980 623,132
Port of San
Diego
Number 17 10 23 50
Exposure
(x1000) 112,487 6,870 34,301 153,658
Poway
Number 58 9 0 67
Exposure
(x$1,000) 385,406 6,350 0 391,756
Rainbow
Municipal
Water District
Number 98 0 0 98
Exposure
(x1000) 653,187 0 0 653,187
Rancho Santa
Fe FPD
Number 10 0 0 10
Exposure
(x1000) 67,412 0 0 67,412
San Diego
(City)
Number 1,388 352 336 2,076
Exposure
(x$1,000) 9,256,954 240,237 504,158 10,001,349
San Diego
County Water
Authority
Number 1,980 1,013 262 3,255
Exposure
(x1000) 13,205,512 691,636 392,470 14,289,618
San Marcos
Number 127 15 32 174
Exposure
(x$1,000) 845,959 10,039 47,874 903,872
San Miguel
FPD
Number 64 40 0 104
Exposure
(x$1,000) 425,562 27,448 0 453,010
Santee
Number 101 14 2 117
Exposure
(x$1,000) 671,014 9,565 2,948 683,527
Solana Beach
Number 26 14 7 47
Exposure
(x$1,000) 175,461 9,854 9,903 195,218
Sweetwater
Authority
Number 139 14 22 175
Exposure
(x$1,000) 924,810 9,817 33,488 968,115
Unincorporated
Number 1,895 269 197 2,361
Exposure
(x$1,000) 12,634,636 183,503 295,114 13,113,253
Vista
Number 91 23 18 132
Exposure
(x$1,000) 603,560 15,475 26,710 645,745
Vista Irrigation
District
Number 9 3 1 13
Exposure
(x$1,000) 60,170 1,744 1,207 63,121
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 167
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Total Number 7712 2,226 1,173 11,111
Total
Exposure (x
$1,000)
51,394,895 1,519,585 50,859,094 103,773,574
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 168
TABLE 24: INVENTORY OF THE MAXIMUM POPULATION AND BUILDING EXPOSURE BY
JURISDICTION
Residential Buildings at
Risk
Commercial
Buildings at Risk
Jurisdiction Exposed
Population
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Alpine FPD 14,696 5,901 2,292,539 494 149,361
Carlsbad 114,253 46,289 17,983,277 3,486 1,053,992
Chula Vista 268,920 82,581 32,082,719 4,967 1,501,772
Coronado 23,639 8,832 3,431,232 857 259,114
Del Mar 4,331 2,561 994,949 546 165,083
El Cajon 103,186 35,721 13,877,609 3,122 943,937
Encinitas 62,780 26,199 10,178,312 3,254 983,847
Escondido 151,300 49,864 19,372,164 2,903 877,722
Imperial Beach 27,315 9,677 3,759,515 421 127,289
La Mesa 59,556 25,248 9,808,848 2,048 619,213
Lemon Grove 26,802 9,454 3,672,879 606 183,224
National City 61,121 16,881 6,558,269 1,413 427,221
Oceanside 175,622 66,456 25,818,156 3,068 927,610
Otay Water District 226,413 67,755 26,322,818 2,841 858,976
Padre Dam Municipal
Water District 103,846 38,130 14,813,505 2,830 855,651
Port of San Diego 22,191 8,297 3,223,385 485 146,640
Poway 49,701 16,881 6,558,269 1,590 480,737
Rainbow Municipal Water
District 19,267 9,166 3,560,991 459 138,779
Rancho Santa Fe FPD 35,914 11,716 4,551,666 685 207,110
San Diego (city) 1,386,932 504,438 195,974,163 40,485 12,240,640
San Diego County Water
Authority 3,201,964 1,123,341 436,417,979 84,686 25,604,812
San Marcos 95,355 29,930 11,627,805 1,869 565,092
San Miguel FPD 138,766 42,518 16,518,243 2,238 676,659
Santee 57,797 20,954 8,140,629 1,404 424,499
Solana Beach 13,356 6,196 2,407,146 1,229 371,588
Sweetwater Authority 194,873 58,293 22,646,831 5,263 1,591,268
Unincorporated 504,330 164,538 63,923,013 11,027 3,334,013
Vista 100,686 33,343 12,953,756 2,802 847,185
Vista Irrigation District 71,634 6,038 2,345,763 469 141,802
Total 7,316,546 2,527,198 981,816,430 187,547 56,704,835
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 169
5.3.3. COASTAL STORM/EROSION
FEMA FIRM flood hazard data compiled and digitized was used to profile the coastal storm/erosion hazard.
Specifically, the FEMA FIRM VE zone was used in the hazard modeling process in HAZUS-MH. As
discussed earlier, the VE Zone is defined by FEMA as the coastal area subject to a velocity hazard (wave
action). The identified vulnerable assets were superimposed on the identified hazard areas, resulting in
three risk/exposure estimates:
1. The aggregated exposure and building count (both dollar exposure and population) at the census block
level for residential and commercial occupancies
2. Lifeline infrastructure
3. The critical infrastructure at risk (schools, hospitals, airports, bridges, and other facilities of critical
nature). These results were then aggregated and presented by hazard risk level per jurisdiction.
The table below provides a breakdown of potential coastal storm/coastal erosion exposure by jurisdiction.
No losses to critical facilities and infrastructure are expected from these hazards.
Approximately 59,196 people may be at risk from coastal storm/coastal erosion hazards in San Diego
County:
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 170
TABLE 25: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE FROM COASTAL STORM/EROSION HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Residential Buildings at
Risk
Commercial Buildings at
Risk
Jurisdiction Exposed
Population
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Carlsbad 341 16 6,218 0 0
Chula Vista 0 0 0 0 0
Coronado 3,506 0 0 2 605
Del Mar 70 5 1,943 0 0
El Cajon 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas 958 *108 *35,367 *4 *1,310
Escondido 0 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach 1,570 50 19,430 1 302
La Mesa 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove 0 0 0 0 0
National City 10,038 0 0 0 0
Oceanside 662 5 1,943 2 605
Port of San Diego 7,667 0 0 1 302
Poway 0 0 0 0 0
San Diego (City) 9,322 4 1,554 3 907
San Diego County Water
Authority 23,659 30 11,658 5 1,512
San Marcos 0 0 0 0 0
Santee 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach 1,260 0 0 0 0
Unincorporated 143 0 0 0 0
Vista 0 0 0 0 0
Total 59,196 110 42,746 14 4,233
*Coastal Storm Data consistent with the Encinitas – Solana Beach Coastal Storm Damage Reduction Project
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 171
TABLE 26: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM COASTAL STORM/EROSION
HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
Alpine Fire
Protection
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Alpine Union
School District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chula Vista
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Coronado
Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $6,670 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $6,670
Del Mar
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
El Cajon
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Escondido
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
National City
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oceanside
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Otay Water
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Padre Dam
Municipal
Water District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Port of San
Diego
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $719,793 0 0 $719,793
Poway
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow
Municipal
Water District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rancho Santa
Fed Fire
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 172
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
Protection
District
San Diego
(City)
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $719,793 0 0 $719,793
San Diego County Water
Authority
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
San Marcos
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
San Miguel
Fire Protection
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Santee
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater
Authority
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Unincorporated
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Valley Center
Municipal
Water District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Vista
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Vista Irrigation
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Number
Total Exposure (x$1,000) 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3
0 $6,670 0 0 0 0 0 0 $1,439,586 0 0 $1,446,256
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 173
TABLE 27: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO INFRASTRUCTURE FROM COASTAL STORM/EROSION
HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Carlsbad Total KMs 1 1 0 2
Exposure (x$1,000) 4,860 22 0 4,882
Chula Vista Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Coronado Total KMs 2 3 0 5
Exposure (x$1,000) 11,014 1,948 0 12,962
Del Mar Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
El Cajon Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Encinitas Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Escondido Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
La Mesa Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
National City Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Oceanside Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Port of San Diego Total KMs 1 0 1 2
Exposure (x1000) 9,263 0 89 9,352
Poway Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
San Diego (City) Total KMs 0 0 1 1
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 89 89
San Diego County
Water Authority
Total KMs 1 1 1 3
Exposure (x1000) 4,860 22 89 4,971
San Marcos Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Santee Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Unincorporated Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Vista Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Total Number 5 5 3 13
Total Exposure (x $1,000) 29,997 1,992 267 32,256
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 174
5.3.4. SEA LEVEL RISE
TABLE 28: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE FROM SEA LEVEL RISE (COASTAL FLOODING) HAZARD BY
JURISDICTION
Residential Buildings at Risk Commercial Buildings at Risk
Jurisdiction Exposed
Population
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Alpine Fire Protection
District 0 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad 622 21 $8,161 4 $1,209
Chula Vista 116 0 0 0 0
Coronado 1,750 112 $43,523 6 $1,814
Del Mar 790 52 $20,207 9 $2,721
El Cajon 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas 316 1 $389 3 $907
Escondido 0 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach 2,629 51 $19,819 11 $3,326
La Mesa 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove 0 0 0 0 0
National City 0 0 0 0 0
Oceanside 261 358 $139,119 51 $15,420
Otay Water District 0 0 0 0 0
Padre Dam Municipal
Water District 0 0 0 0 0
Port of San Diego 2,207 0 0 8 $2,419
Poway 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow Municipal Water
District 0 0 0 0 0
Rancho Santa Fe Fire
Protection District 0 0 0 0 0
San Diego (City) 5,490 108 $41,969 85 $25,700
San Diego County Water
Authority 9,452 540 $209,844 153 $46,260
San Marcos 0 0 0 0 0
San Miguel Fire Protection
District 0 0 0 0 0
Santee 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach 470 0 0 0 0
Unincorporated 0 0 0 1 302
Vista 0 0 0 0 0
Vista Irrigation District 0 0 0 0 0
Total 24,103 1,243 $483,030 331 $100,078
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 175
TABLE 29: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM SEA LEVEL RISE
(COASTAL FLOODING) HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
Alpine Fire
Protection
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad
Number 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $63,850 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $63,850
Chula Vista
Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $6,670 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $6,670
Coronado
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Del Mar
Number 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $25,730 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $25,730
El Cajon
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas
Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $6,670 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $6,670
Escondido
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
National City
Number 0 7 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $43,840 0 0 $47,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 $90,840
Oceanside
Number 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $11,440 0 0 0 $3,048 0 0 0 0 0 $14,488
Otay Water
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Port of San
Diego
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $719,793 0 0 $719,793
Poway
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rancho Santa
Fed Fire
Protection
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
San Diego (City)
Number 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 7
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 $37,170 0 0 0 0 0 0 $719,793 0 0 $756,963
San Diego
County Water Authority
Number 0 35 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 37
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $218,250 0 0 $47,000 $3,048 0 0 0 0 0 $268,298
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 176
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
San Marcos
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
San Miguel Fire
Protection
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Santee
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater Authority
Number 0 8 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $50,510 0 0 $47,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 $97,510
Unincorporated
Number 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $22,880 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $22,880
Vista
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Vista Irrigation
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Number
Total Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 78 0 0 3 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 85
0 $487,010 0 0 $141,000 $6,096 0 0 $1,439,586 0 0 $2,073,692
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 177
TABLE 30: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO INFRASTRUCTURE FROM SEA LEVEL RISE (COASTAL
FLOODING) HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Alpine Fire
Protection
District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad
Total KMs 14 3 1 18
Exposure
(x$1,000) $94,146 $2,136 $832 $97,114
Chula Vista
Total KMs 2 1 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) $12,246 $314 0 $12,560
Coronado
Total KMs 16 2 0 18
Exposure
(x$1,000) $107,332 $1,637 0 $108,969
Del Mar
Total KMs 3 2 1 6
Exposure
(x$1,000) $16,696 $1,308 $1,635 $19,639
El Cajon
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Encinitas
Total KMs 6 3 1 10
Exposure
(x$1,000) $37,359 $1,712 $690 $39,761
Escondido
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach
Total KMs 0 0.2 0 0.2
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $145 0 $145
La Mesa
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
National City
Total KMs 6 0.2 3 9.2
Exposure
(x$1,000) $43,304 $143 $5,131 $48,578
Oceanside
Total KMs 2 1 1 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) $12,316 $398 $1,650 $14,184
Otay Water
District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Padre Dam
Municipal
Water District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Port of San
Diego
Total KMs 4 0.4 4 8.4
Exposure
(x1000) $23,476 $276 $6,670 $30,422
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 178
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Poway
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Rainbow Municipal
Water District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Rancho Santa Fe
Fire
Protection District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
San Diego (City)
Total KMs 19 6 12 37
Exposure
(x$1,000) $123,974 $3,786 $18,165 $145,925
San Diego County
Water Authority
Total KMs 55 15 22 92
Exposure
(x1000) $365,016 $10,363 $32,501 $407,880
San Marcos
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
San Miguel Fire
Protection District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Santee
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater
Authority
Total KMs 8 1 3 12
Exposure
(x$1,000) $55,550 $457 $5,131 $61,138
Unincorporated
Total KMs 4 1 3 8
Exposure
(x$1,000) $24,975 $565 $4,398 $29,938
Vista
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Vista Irrigation
District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Total Number 140 36 51 226
Total Exposure (x $1,000) $916,390 $23,240 $76,854 $1,016,253
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 179
TABLE 31: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE FROM SEA LEVEL RISE (MEAN HIGHER HIGH WATER) HAZARD
BY JURISDICTION
Residential Buildings at
Risk
Commercial Buildings
at Risk
Jurisdiction
Exposed
Populatio
n
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Alpine Fire Protection
District 0 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad 70 1 $389 0 0
Chula Vista 0 0 0 0 0
Coronado 0 0 0 1 $302
Del Mar 0 0 0 0 0
El Cajon 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas 0 1 $389 0 0
Escondido 0 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach 0 0 0 1 $302
La Mesa 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove 0 0 0 0 0
National City 5,019 0 0 0 0
Oceanside 39 0 0 19 $5,745
Otay Water District 0 0 0 0 0
Padre Dam Municipal
Water District 0 0 0 0 0
Port of San Diego 11,560 0 0 4 $1,209
Poway 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow Municipal
Water District 0 0 0 0 0
Rancho Santa Fe Fire
Protection District 0 0 0 0 0
San Diego (City) 6,565 414 $160,880 83 $25,095
San Diego County
Water Authority 12,250 416 $161,658 102 $30,840
San Marcos 0 0 0 0 0
San Miguel Fire
Protection District 0 0 0 0 0
Santee 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach 0 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater Authority 0 0 0 0 0
Unincorporated 0 0 0 0 0
Vista 0 0 0 0 0
Vista Irrigation District 0 0 0 0 0
Total 35,503 832 $323,316 210 $64,493
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 180
TABLE 32: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM SEA LEVEL RISE (MEAN
HIGHER HIGH WATER) HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT PO
T
SC
H TOTAL
Alpine Fire
Protection
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad
Number 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $24,780 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $24,780
Chula Vista
Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $6,670 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $6,670
Coronado
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Del Mar
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
El Cajon
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Escondido
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
National City
Number 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $31,450 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $31,450
Oceanside
Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $5,720 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $5,720
Otay Water
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Port of San
Diego
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $719,793 0 0 $719,793
Poway
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 181
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT PO
T
SC
H TOTAL
Rancho Santa
Fed Fire
Protection District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
San Diego (City)
Number 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 14
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $82,910 0 0 0 0 0 0 $719,793 0 0 $802,703
San Diego
County Water
Authority
Number 0 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $162,970 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $162,970
San Marcos
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
San Miguel Fire
Protection
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Santee
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater
Authority
Number 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 $38,120 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $38,120
Unincorporated
Number 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $11,440 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $11,440
Vista Irrigation
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Number 0 58 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 60
Total Exposure (x$1,000) 0 $364,060 0 0 0 0 0 0 $1,439,586 0 0 $1,803,646
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 182
TABLE 33: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO INFRASTRUCTURE FROM SEA LEVEL RISE (MEAN HIGHER
HIGH WATER) HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Alpine Fire
Protection District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad
Total KMs 1 2 0.1 3.1
Exposure
(x$1,000) $5,223 $1,400 $161 $6,784
Chula Vista
Total KMs 1 0.2 0 1.2
Exposure
(x$1,000) $5,230 $133 0 5,363
Coronado
Total KMs 4 0.4 0 4.4
Exposure
(x$1,000) $29,021 $244 0 $29,265
Del Mar
Total KMs 0 0.9 0.05 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $581 $69 $650.00
El Cajon
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Encinitas
Total KMs 1 2 0.002 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) $7,777 $1,171 $3 $8,951
Escondido
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach
Total KMs 0 0.1 0 0.1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 $91 0 $91
La Mesa
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
National City
Total KMs 2 0.2 0.6 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) $12,791 $131 $993 $13,915
Oceanside
Total KMs 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.7
Exposure
(x$1,000) $1,399 $246 $174 $1,819
Otay Water
District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 183
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Port of San Diego
Total KMs 10 2 0.4 12.4
Exposure
(x1000) $64,513 $1,277 $543 $66,333
Poway
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Rancho Santa Fe
Fire Protection
District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
San Diego (City)
Total KMs 23 5 1.3 29.3
Exposure
(x$1,000) $155,836 $3,744 $2,047 $161,627
San Diego
County Water
Authority
Total KMs 29 11 2.3 42.3
Exposure
(x1000) $193,145 $7,495 $3,948 $204,588
San Marcos
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
San Miguel Fire
Protection District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Santee
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater
Authority
Total KMs 3 0.4 0.7 4.1
Exposure
(x$1,000) $18,021 $265 $993 $19,279
Unincorporated
Total KMs 0.7 0.1 0.3 1.1
Exposure
(x$1,000) $4,890 $89 $503 $5,482
Vista
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Vista Irrigation
District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 184
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Total Number 75 25 6 106
Total Exposure (x $1,000) $497,846 $16,867 $9,434 $524,147
5.3.5. TSUNAMI
Tsunami maximum run-up projections (second-generation) were modeled for the entire San Diego County
coastline by the University of Southern California, and distributed by the CA Office of Emergency Services in
2009. The model was a result of a combination of inundation modeling and onsite surveys to show
maximum predicted inundation levels due to tsunami. This was a scenario model, which uses a given
earthquake intensity and location to determine resulting tsunami effects. The identified vulnerable assets
were superimposed on top of this information, resulting in three risk/exposure estimates:
1. The aggregated exposure and building count (both dollar exposure and population) at the census block
level for residential and commercial occupancies
2. The aggregated population at risk at the census block level
3. The critical infrastructure at risk (schools, hospitals, airports, bridges, and other facilities of critical
nature). These results were then aggregated and presented by hazard risk level per jurisdiction.
The first table below provides a breakdown of potential exposure by jurisdiction, and the second table below
provides a breakdown of potential exposure to infrastructure and critical facility by jurisdiction. It is important
to note the California Geological Survey (CGS) and the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services
(Cal OES) are in the process of generating the third generation of statewide tsunami inundation maps for
evacuation planning.137F138F138F
143
Approximately 169,606 people may be at risk from the tsunami hazard in San Diego County:
143 https://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/Documents/Tsunami/Tsunami-inundation-map-methodology-2019.pdf
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 185
TABLE 34: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE FROM TSUNAMI HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Residential Buildings at
Risk
Commercial Buildings at
Risk
Jurisdiction Exposed
Population
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Carlsbad 4,259 114 44,300 1 302
Chula Vista 228 0 0 0 0
Coronado 24,603 3,043 1,182,509 103 311,420
Del Mar 1,173 532 206,735 25 75,587
El Cajon 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas 2,536 3 1,165 10 3,023
Escondido 0 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach 8,019 2,068 803,624 94 284,209
La Mesa 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove 0 0 0 0 0
National City 10,156 0 0 0 0
Oceanside 3,599 1,401 544,428 53 160,245
Port of San
Diego 13,917 0 0 3694 1,191,259
Poway 0 0 0 0 0
San Diego
(City) 34,592 5,749 2,234,061 875 2,645,562
San Diego
County Water
Authority
58,040 7,799 3,030,691 956 2,890,466
San Marcos 0 0 0 0 0
Santee 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach 1,411 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater
Authority 5,078 0 0 0 0
Unincorporated 1,965 0 0 1 3,023
Vista 0 0 0
Vista Irrigation
District 0 0 0 0 0
Total 169,606 20,709 8,047,517 2,503 7,567,820
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 186
TABLE 35: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM TSUNAMI HAZARD BY
JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BU
S COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT PO
T SCH TOTAL
Alpine FPD Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0
Carlsbad Number 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
Exposure (x$1,000) 77,190 77,190
Chula Vista Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Coronado Number 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 5
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 6,670 0 2,000 0 3,048 3,048 0 0 0 26,640 41,406
Del Mar Number 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 5
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 19,060 0 0 0 6,096 0 0 0 0 0 25,156
El Cajon Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas Number 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 12,390 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12,390
Escondido Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
National City Number 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 38,120 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38,120
Oceanside Number 0 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 6
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 32,400 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 0 0 35,448
Otay Water
Distrct
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
Distrct
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Port of San
Diego
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 2
Exposure (x1000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,048 0 719,793 0 0 722,841
Poway Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow Municipal Water
Distrct
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rancho Santa
Fe FPD
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
San Diego (City)
Number 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 13
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 78,140 0 0 0 0 0 0 719,793 0 0 797,933
San Diego
County Water
Authority
Number 0 44 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 48
Exposure (x1000) 0 280,180 0 0 0 9,144 0 0 719,793 0 0 1,009,117
San Marcos
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
San Miguel FPD Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Santee Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Number 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 187
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BU
S COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT PO
T SCH TOTAL
Sweetwater
Authority Exposure (x$1,000) 0 38120 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38,120
Unincorporated
Number 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 22,880 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22,880
Vista
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Vista Irrigation
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Number 0 95 0 1 0 7 2 0 3 0 1 109
Total Exposure
(x $1,000) 0 605,150 0 2,000 0 21,336 6,096 0 2,159,3
79 0 26,640 2,782,481
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 188
TABLE 36: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO INFRASTRUCTURE FROM TSUNAMI HAZARD BY
JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Carlsbad Total KMs 8 3 1 12
Exposure (x$1,000) 52,405 1,848 1,291 55,544
Chula Vista Total KMs 1 0 0 1
Exposure (x$1,000) 2,324 0 0 2,324
Coronado Total KMs 45 9 0 54
Exposure (x$1,000) 298,630 6,325 0 304,955
Del Mar Total KMs 3 2 1 6
Exposure (x$1,000) 20,014 1,590 1,707 23,311
El Cajon Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Encinitas Total KMs 6 2 1 9
Exposure (x$1,000) 39,063 1,045 1,642 41,750
Escondido Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach Total KMs 1 1 0 2
Exposure (x$1,000) 7,824 424 0 8,248
La Mesa Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
National City Total KMs 3 0 1 4
Exposure (x$1,000) 18,753 0 435 19,188
Oceanside Total KMs 2 1 1 4
Exposure (x$1,000) 15,911 466 974 17,351
Port of San Diego Total KMs 2 1 0 3
Exposure (x1000) 9,759 322 0 10,081
Poway Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
San Diego (City) Total KMs 25 8 1 34
Exposure (x$1,000) 165,169 5,570 1,237 171,976
San Diego County Water
Authority
Total KMs 49 16 6 71
Exposure (x1000) 326,623 10,685 9,859 347,167
San Marcos Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Santee Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach Total KMs 0 0 1 1
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 122 122
Sweetwater Water
Authority
Total KMs 3 0 1 4
Exposure (x$1,000) 21,077 0 435 21,512
Unincorporated Total KMs 2 1 2 5
Exposure (x$1,000) 12,983 165 2,452 15,600
Vista Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Total Number 150 44 16 210
Total Exposure (x $1,000) 990,535 28,440 20,154 1,039,129
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 189
5.3.6. DAM FAILURE
Dam inundation zones, compiled by FEMA or the National Inventory of Dams throughout San Diego County,
and purchased through SanGIS, show areas that would be flooded if each dam failed. The identified
vulnerable assets were superimposed on top of this information, resulting in three risk/exposure estimates:
1. The aggregated exposure and building count (both dollar exposure and population) at the census block
level for residential and commercial occupancies
2. The aggregated population at risk at the census block level
3. The critical infrastructure at risk (schools, hospitals, airports, bridges, and other facilities of critical
nature). These results were then aggregated and presented by hazard risk level per jurisdiction.
The first table below provides a breakdown of potential exposure by jurisdiction, and the second table
provides a breakdown of potential exposure to infrastructure and critical facility by jurisdiction.
Approximately 538,132 people are at risk from a dam failure hazard.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 190
TABLE 37: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE FROM DAM FAILURE HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Residential Buildings at
Risk
Commercial Buildings at
Risk
Jurisdiction Exposed
Population
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Alpine FPD 90 4 1,554 0 0
Carlsbad 1,258 523 203,238 24 7,256
Chula Vista 15,822 2,297 892,614 628 189,876
Coronado 2,275 392 152,331 5 1,512
Del mar 1,260 556 216,062 31 9,373
El Cajon 70 0 0 24 7,256
Encinitas 1,026 309 120,077 106 32,049
Escondido 34,783 11,624 4,517,086 969 292,977
Imperial beach 4,341 795 308,937 24 7,256
La Mesa 129 7 2,720 1 302
Lemon Grove 0 0 0 0 0
National City 7,603 275 106,865 148 44,748
Oceanside 25,060 8,449 3,283,281 318 96,147
Otay Water
District 3,839 761 295,725 173 52,307
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
28,878 10,803 4,198,046 1191 360,099
Port of San Diego 7,034 0 0 48 14,513
Poway 0 7 2,720 3 907
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
2,418 827 321,372 46 13,908
Rancho Santa Fe
FPD 2,988
821
319,041 82 24,793
San Diego 89,183 32,128 12,484,941 4597 1,389,903
San Diego
County Water
Authority
234,032 76,679 29,797,459 8983 2,716,010
San Marco 660 119 46,243 4 1,209
San Miguel FPD 1,590 583 226,554 149 45,050
Santee 24,193 10,034 3,899,212 1084 327,747
Solana Beach 206 332 129,015 13 3,931
Sweetwater
Authority 9,995 3,350 1,301,810 993 300,234
Unincorporated 36,492 10,189 3,959,445 1076 325,329
Vista 0 0 0 0 0
Vista Irrigation
District 33 0 0 0 0
Total 535,258 171,864 66,786,348 20,720 6,264,692
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 191
TABLE 38: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM DAM FAILURE HAZARD BY
JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
Carlsbad
Number 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 26,680 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 0 0 29,728
Chula Vista
Number 0 20 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 1 0 25
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 130,550 0 0 969,000 0 9,144 0 0 30,000 0 1,138,694
Coronado
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Del Mar
Number 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 19,060 0 0 0 6,096 0 0 0 0 0 25,156
El Cajon
Number 1 8 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 10
Exposure
(x$1,000) 257,356 53,360 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 0 0 313,764
Encinitas
Number 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 32,400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32,400
Escondido
Number 0 38 0 0 4 4 14 0 0 1 4 65
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 251,560 0 0 1,016,000 12,192 42,672 0 0 163,612 302,882 1,788,918
Imperial
Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39,220 39,220
La Mesa
Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 6,670 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,670
Lemon Grove
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
National City
Number 0 41 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 45
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 268,720 0 0 0 0 9,144 0 0 0 31,376 309,240
Oceanside
Number 1 13 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 1 4 25
Exposure
(x$1,000) 86,701 85,760 0 0 0 12,192 6,096 0 0 163,612 185,666 540,027
Otay Water
District
Number 0 11 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 3 18
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 73,370 0 0 47,000 3,048 3,048 0 0 163,612 355,200 645,278
Padre Dam
Municipal
Water District
Number 1 68 0 0 1 4 6 0 0 0 7 87
Exposure
(x$1,000) 257,356 453,560 0 0 47,000 12,192 18,288 0 0 0 440,004 1,228,400
Port of San
Diego
Number 1 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 281,772 0 0 0 0 12,192 0 0 0 0 0 293,964
Poway
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow
Municipal
Water District
Number 0 23 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 25
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 153,410 0 0 0 3,048 3,048 0 0 0 0 159,506
Rancho Santa
Fe FPD
Number 0 12 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 3 1 19
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 80,040 0 0 922,000 3,048 0 0 0 550,835 22,496 1,578,419
Number 1 211 1 1 11 18 21 1 0 1 13 279
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 192
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
San Diego
(City)
Exposure
(x$1,000) 271,772 1,394,07
0 1,830 2,000 1,345,000 54,864 64,008 16,629 0 163,612 682,650 3,996,435
San Diego
County Water
Authority
Number 2 483 1 4 24 41 57 1 0 11 41 665
Exposure
(x$1,000) 615,829 3,195,01
0 1,830 8,000 4,440,000 124,96
8
173,73
6 16,629 0 1,265,28
2
2,416,98
8
12,258,27
2
San Marcos
Number 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 47,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 47,000
San Miguel
FPD
Number 0 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 8
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 40,020 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 163,612 0 206,680
Santee
Number 0 48 0 0 1 3 6 0 0 0 6 64
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 320,160 0 0 47,000 9,144 18,288 0 0 0 392,718 787,310
Sweetwater
Authority
Number 0 74 0 0 2 2 7 0 0 1 3 89
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 472,640 0 0 922,000 6,096 21,336 0 0 30,000 96,866 1,548,938
Solana Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unincorporate
d
Number 0 119 0 3 6 7 8 0 0 11 13 167
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 792,780 0 6,000 1,938,000 21,336 24,384 0 0 864,447 821,696 4,468,643
Vista
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total
Number 7 1,192 2 8 57 95 127 2 0 32 97 1,619
Total
Exposure (x
$1,000)
1,770,78
6
7,849,82
0 3,660 16,000 11,740,00
0
289,56
0
393,19
2 33,258 0 3,558,62
4
5,787,76
2
31,442,66
2
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 193
TABLE 39: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO INFRASTRUCTURE FROM DAM FAILURE HAZARD BY
JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Carlsbad
Total KMs 23 2 0 25
Exposure
(x$1,000) 156,286 1,172 0 157,458
Chula Vista
Total KMs 114 5 2 121
Exposure
(x$1,000) 760,393 3,343 2,916 766,652
Coronado
Total KMs 1 1 0 2
Exposure
(x$1,000) 5,992 273 0 6,265
Del Mar
Total KMs 6 3 1 10
Exposure
(x$1,000) 36,707 1,861 2,057 40,625
El Cajon
Total KMs 3 1 3 7
Exposure
(x$1,000) 17,455 446 4,602 22,503
Encinitas
Total KMs 17 5 1 23
Exposure
(x$1,000) 113,082 3,596 1,677 118,355
Escondido
Total KMs 88 2 6 96
Exposure
(x$1,000) 589,607 1,548 9,310 600,465
Imperial Beach
Total KMs 1 1 0 2
Exposure
(x$1,000) 5,498 861 0 6,359
La Mesa
Total KMs 6 1 1 8
Exposure
(x$1,000) 36,776 148 1,091 38,015
Lemon Grove
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
National City
Total KMs 76 1 7 84
Exposure
(x$1,000) 508,719 920 12,952 522,591
Oceanside
Total KMs 55 8 1 64
Exposure
(x$1,000) 365,206 5,322 328 370,856
Otay Water District
Total KMs 60 2 0 62
Exposure
(x1000) 400,397 1,311 0 401,708
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
Total KMs 131 13 5 149
Exposure
(x1000) 875,831 8,735 6,871 891,437
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 194
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Port of San Diego
Total KMs 21 5 4 30
Exposure
(x1000) 138,956 3,467 5,662 148,085
Poway
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
Total KMs 54 1 0 55
Exposure
(x$1,000) 359,258 183 0 359,441
Rancho Santa Fe
FPD
Total KMs 2 1 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 13,612 293 0 13,905
San Diego (City)
Total KMs 821 61 51 933
Exposure
(x$1,000) 5,476,180 41,921 76,049 5,594,150
San Diego County
Water Authority
Total KMs 1,511 115 77 1,703
Exposure
(x1000) 10,072,703 78,214 116,118 10,267,035
San Marcos
Total KMs 1 1 0 2
Exposure
(x$1,000) 2,883 92 0 2,975
San Miguel FPD
Total KMs 32 1 0 33
Exposure
(x$1,000) 211,370 291 0 211,661
Santee
Total KMs 121 12 2 135
Exposure
(x$1,000) 810,110 8,192 2,269 820,571
Solana Beach
Total KMs 0 0 1 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 311 311
Sweetwater
Authority
Total KMs 188 8 11 207
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,253,333 5,640 15,868 1,274,841
Unincorporated
Total KMs 239 16 2 257
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,595,903 11,014 2,556 1,609,473
Vista
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Total Number 3,571 266 175 4,012
Total Exposure (x $1,000) 23,806,257 178,843 260,637 24,245,737
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 195
5.3.7. EARTHQUAKE/LIQUEFACTION
There was no FEMA HAZUS data available nor enough of any other data sources regarding
liquefaction to enable the Planning Group’s creation of a comprehensive liquefaction vulnerability
assessment by deadline. However, liquefaction was still considered by the Planning Group as a
potential effect of earthquakes with the possibility of causing impacts such as loss of life and
property/assets. Therefore, liquefaction was still considered and researched within this vulnerability
assessment section.
The data used in the earthquake hazard assessment were: 100-, 250-, 500-, 750-, 1000-, 1500-, 2000-, and
2500- year return period USGS probabilistic hazards. Soil conditions for San Diego County as developed by
USGS were also used, which allowed for a better reflection of amplification of ground shaking that may
occur. The HAZUS software model, which was developed for FEMA by the National Institute of Building
Services as a tool to determine earthquake loss estimates, was used to model earthquake and flood for this
assessment.
This software program integrates with a GIS to facilitate the manipulation of data on building stock,
population, and the regional economy with hazard models. PBS&J updated this model in 2003 to HAZUS-
MH (Multiple Hazard), which can model earthquake and flood, along with collateral issues associated with
each model, such as liquefaction and landslide with earthquakes. This software was not released prior to
the beginning of the planning process; however, PBS&J performed vulnerability and loss estimation models
for earthquakes and flood for this project using the newer model.
Additionally, the earthquake risk assessment explored the potential for collateral hazards such as
liquefaction and earthquake-induced landslides. Three cases were examined, one case with shaking only, a
second case with liquefaction potential, and a third with earthquake-induced landslides. Once the model
was complete, the identified vulnerable assets were superimposed on top of this information, resulting in
three risk/loss estimates:
1. The aggregated exposure and building count (both dollar exposure and population) at the census block
level for residential and commercial occupancies
2. The aggregated population at risk at the census block level
3. The critical infrastructure at risk (schools, hospitals, airports, bridges, and other facilities of critical
nature).
These results were then aggregated and presented by hazard risk level per jurisdiction. Results for
residential and commercial properties were generated as annualized losses, which average all eight of the
modeled return periods (100-year through 2500-year events). For critical facility losses it was helpful to look
at 100- and 500-year return periods to plan for an event that is more likely to occur in the near-term.
In the near term, a 500-year earthquake would cause increased shaking, liquefaction and landslide, which
would be expected to increase loss numbers. Exposure for annualized earthquake included buildings and
population in the entire county because a severe or worst-case scenario earthquake could affect any
structure in the County.
Furthermore, the annualized earthquake loss table also shows potential collateral exposure and losses from
liquefaction and landslide separately; this is the additional loss from earthquake due to liquefaction or
landslide caused by earthquakes and should be added to the shaking-only loss values to get the correct
value. (The collateral liquefaction and landslide loss results for critical facilities were included with
earthquake in the tables below, to plan for an event that is more likely to occur in the near-term as
discussed above).
The first table provides a breakdown of potential exposure and losses due to annualized earthquake events
by jurisdiction. The second and third tables below provide a breakdown of infrastructure and critical facility
losses from 100-year and 500-year earthquakes, respectively.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 196
Approximately 81,590 people may be at risk from the annualized earthquake and earthquake-induced
liquefaction hazards:
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 197
TABLE 40: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE AND LOSSES FROM ANNUALIZED EARTHQUAKE HAZARD BY
JURISDICTION
Residential Buildings at Risk Commercial buildings at Risk
Jurisdiction
Exposed
Populatio
n
Buildin
g Count
Potential Loss
from
Shaking
(x$1,000
)
Potential
Additional
Loss from
Liquefactio
n (x$1,000)
Potential
Addition
al Loss
from
Landslid
e
(x$1,000)
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Buildin
g Count
Potential Loss
from
Shaking
(x$1,000
)
Potential
Additional
Loss from
Liquefactio
n (x$1,000)
Potential
Addition
al Loss
from
Landslid
e
(x$1,000)
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Alpine Fire Protection
District 0 32 26 0 10 26,569 20 12 0 4 10,824
Carlsbad 1,067 6,314 1,535 0 78 3,079,694 377 51 0 119 165,506
Chula Vista 3,170 3,342 1,688 18 115 2,005,905 342 66 2 130 163,269
Coronado 1,275 2,419 281 47 33 1,079,930 201 16 39 14 81,574
Del Mar 471 351 185 0 10 212,056 104 17 0 8 39,064
El Cajon 216 528 889 93 101 625,750 391 52 4 97 164,599
Encinitas 854 378 77 0 25 186,434 237 32 0 39 93,124
Escondido 57 696 142 0 193 400,637 436 53 0 153 194,230
Imperial Beach 1,458 198 28 57 38 124,830 148 13 7 32 60,410
La Mesa 211 243 49 0 48 132,056 163 29 0 20 64,189
Lemon Grove 284 224 29 0 20 105,992 98 8 0 13 35,859
National City 2,348 491 61 0 81 245,761 407 35 0 40 145,642
Oceanside 811 113 178 38 194 203,012 508 60 13 160 224,102
Otay Water District 1,443 259 183 0 56 193,636 94 54 0 94 73,199
Padre Dam Municipal
Water District 183 268 129 53 91 210,007 318 74 2 161 167,714
Port Of San Diego 3,788 532 62 36 103 284,895 767 70 32 64 282,002
Poway 57 176 60 0 18 98,602 52 22 0 30 31,535
Rainbow Municipal Water
District 39 421 86 27 32 219,737 156 22 1 80 78,248
Rancho Santa Fe FPD 612 616 147 0 49 315,563 313 57 0 93 139,928
San Diego 20,362 4,394 797 393 797 2,478,831 3,163 416 32 429 1,221,524
San Diego County Water
Authority 32,161 15,665 3,214 1,685 2,677 9,029,249 9,631 1,345 92 2,632 4,142,044
San Marcos 254 743 153 0 130 398,683 474 58 0 204 222,469
San Miguel FPD 467 520 146 45 84 308,956 332 64 2 105 151,961
Santee 106 116 48 4 34 78,341 92 22 0 54 50,916
Solana Beach 353 136 19 0 9 63,607 109 12 0 8 38,852
Sweetwater Authority 4,987 984 193 18 196 540,326 719 84 2 156 290,468
Unincorporated 2,782 4,738 1,332 718 745 2,926,513 2,359 454 36 1,165 1,213,603
Vista 405 1,600 264 334 249 950,806 850 98 17 322 389,094
Vista Irrigation District 212 1,319 218 169 245 757,788 680 80 7 199 291,949
Total 80,433 47,816 12,219 3,735 6,461 27,284,16
6 23,541 3,376 288 6,625 10,227,89
8
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 198
TABLE 41: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE AND LOSSES TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM ANNUALIZED
EARTHQUAKE HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRD
G BUS COM ELEC EME
R GOV
T HOSP POR
T POT SCH TOTA
L
Alpine Fire
Protection District Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad Number 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 1 6
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 $87,5
00 $3,04
8 0 0 0 $62,7
22 $5,00
0 158,27
0
Chula Vista Number 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 $87,5
00 0 0 0 0 $33,9
04 $6,09
6 127,50
0
Coronado Number 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 8 10
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 $91,5
00 $10,0
48 0 0 0 0 $29,0
00 130,54
8
Del Mar Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
El Cajon Number 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 2 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 $175,
000 $7,56
8 0 0 0 $10,0
48 0 192,61
6
Encinitas Number 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 6 9
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 $8,48
0 0 0 0 $36,5
04 $20,7
86 65,770
Escondido Number 0 0 0 1 5 1 0 2 0 4 9 22
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 $7,32
1 $437,
500 $3,04
8 0 $40,2
97 0 65,44
5 $32,6
41 586,25
2
Imperial Beach Number 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 7 8
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 $13,9
24 0 0 0 0 $24,1
24 38,048
La Mesa Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $35,0
00 35,000
Lemon Grove Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $5,00
0 5,000
National City Number 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 8 11
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 $90,2
50 $4,52
3 0 $24,6
62 0 0 $27,7
43 147,17
8
Oceanside Number 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 1 0 2 3 10
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 $8,76
4 $6,34
6 0 0 $17,1
91 0 $32,7
22 $9,42
4 74,447
Otay Water Distrct Number 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 $26,2
50 0 0 0 0 0 0 26,250
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
Distrct
Number 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 $3,70
0 0 0 0 0 0 $5,57
2 0 9,272
Port of San Diego Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2
Exposure (x1000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $32,722 0 32,722
Poway Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow Municipal
Water Distrct Number 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 6
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 $5,51
7 $91,7
34 0 0 0 0 0 $12,2
49 109,50
0
Rancho Santa Fe
FPD Number 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 3
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 $87,734 0 0 0 0 0 $9,766 97,500
San Diego (City) Number 0 0 0 8 8 1 0 1 0 3 8 29
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 $35,5
89 $193,
456 $26,1
16 0 $31,1
32 0 $199,
084 $24,3
84 509,76
1
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 199
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRD
G BUS COM ELEC EME
R GOV
T HOSP POR
T POT SCH TOTA
L
San Diego County
Water Authority Number 0 0 0 8 6 7 0 8 0 12 19 60
Exposure (x1000) 0 0 0 $37,420 $525,000 $26,676 0 $133,034 0 $293,199 $59,572 1,074,901
San Marcos Number 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 1 0 0 3 8
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 $4,00
0 0 $10,4
30 0 $16,6
29 0 0 $11,7
14 42,773
San Miguel FPD Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Santee Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater
Authority Number 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 2 7
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 $176,
444 $3,04
8 0 $16,6
29 0 $32,4
60 $6,09
6 234,67
7
Unincorporated Number 0 0 0 4 2 3 0 1 0 5 7 22
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 $20,0
22 $205,
054 $14,2
34 0 $21,6
39 0 $81,8
06 $21,3
36 364,09
1
Vista Number 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 3 6
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 $9,95
2 0 $16,6
29 0 0 $11,1
44 37,725
Vista Irrigation District Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $5,00
0 5,000
Total Number 0 0 0 28 36 24 0 17 0 39 101 245
Total Exposure (x
$1,000) 0 0 0 122,3
33
2,281,
268
141,0
95
0 317,8
42
0 886,1
88
356,0
75
4,104,
801
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 200
TABLE 42: POTENTIAL INFRASTRUCTURE EXPOSURE AND LOSSES FROM ANNUALIZED
EARTHQUAKE HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Alpine FPD
Total KMs 1 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 6,121 0 0 6,121
Carlsbad
Total KMs 3 0 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 17,303 0 0 17,303
Chula Vista
Number 3 0 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 21,124 0 0 21,124
Coronado
Number 11 0 0 11
Exposure
(x$1,000) 74,336 0 0 74,336
Del Mar
Number 1 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 3,701 0 0 3,701
El Cajon
Number 2 0 0 2
Exposure
(x$1,000) 15,503 0 0 15,503
Encinitas
Number 1 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 6,081 0 0 6,081
Escondido
Number 4 0 0 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) 25,252 0 0 25,252
Imperial Beach
Number 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Number 5 0 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 34,013 0 0 34,013
Lemon Grove
Number 3 0 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 19,771 0 0 19,771
National City
Number 7 0 0 7
Exposure
(x$1,000) 43,409 0 0 43,409
Oceanside
Number 5 0 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 33,950 0 0 33,950
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 201
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Otay Water District
Number 6 0 0 6
Exposure
(x$1,000) 36,954 0 0 36,954
Padre Dam Municipal
Water Distrct
Number 7 0 0 7
Exposure (x1000) 44,309 0 0 44,309
Port of San Diego Number 4 0 0 4
Exposure (x1000) 29,618 0 0 29,618
Poway
Number 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 2,447 0 0 2,447
Rainbow Municipal
Water District
Number 12 0 0 12
Exposure (x1000) 77,724 0 0 77,724
Rancho Santa Fe
FPD
Number 1 0 0 1
Exposure (x1000) 3,194 0 0 3,194
San Diego (City)
Number 73 0 0 73
Exposure
(x$1,000) 487,978 0 0 487,978
San Diego County
Water Authority
Number 155 0 0 155
Exposure (x1000) 1,031,356 0 0 1,031,356
San Marcos
Number 1 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 6,875 0 0 6,875
San Miguel FPD
Number 3 0 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 22,018 0 0 22,018
Santee
Number 5 0 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 34,354 0 0 34,354
Solana Beach
Number 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater Authority
Number 10 0 0 10
Exposure
(x$1,000) 64,360 0 0 64,360
Unincorporated
Number 113 0 5 118
Exposure
(x$1,000) 756,449 0 7,954 764,403
Vista
Number 1 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 5,401 0 0 5,401
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 202
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Vista Irrigation District
Number 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Total Number 437 0 5 449
Total Exposure (x
$1,000) 2,903,601 0 7,954 2,960,937
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 203
TABLE 43: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE AND LOSSES FROM 100-YEAR EARTHQUAKE HAZARD BY
JURISDICTION
Residential
Buildings at Risk
Commercial
Buildings at Risk
Jurisdiction Exposed
Population
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Alpine Fire Protection District 0 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad 0 0 0 0 0
Chula Vista 0 0 0 0 0
Coronado 0 0 0 0 0
Del mar 0 0 0 0 0
El Cajon 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas 0 0 0 0 0
Escondido 0 0 0 0 0
Imperial beach 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove 0 0 0 0 0
National City 0 0 0 0 0
Oceanside 0 0 0 0 0
Otay Water District 0 0 0 0 0
Padre Dam Municipal Water District 0 0 0 0 0
Port of San Diego 0 0 0 0 0
Poway 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow Municipal Water District 0 0 0 0 0
Rancho Santa Fe Fire Protection District 0 0 0 0 0
San Diego 0 0 0 0 0
San Diego County Water Authority 0 0 0 0 0
San Marco 0 0 0 0 0
San Miguel Fire Protection District 0 0 0 0 0
Santee 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach 0 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater Authority 0 0 0 0 0
Unincorporated 4,440 2,982 $1,158,507 77 $23,281
Vista 0 0 0 0 0
Vista Irrigation District 0 0 0 0 0
Total 4,440 2,982 $1,158,507 77 $23,281
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 204
TABLE 44: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM 100-YEAR EARTHQUAKE
HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
Alpine Fire
Protection
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chula Vista
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Coronado
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Del Mar
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
El Cajon
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Escondido
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Imperial
Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
National City
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oceanside
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Otay Water
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Padre Dam
Municipal Water District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Port of San
Diego
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Poway
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow
Municipal
Water District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rancho Santa
Fed Fire Protection
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
San Diego
(City)
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 205
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
San Diego
County Water
Authority
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
San Marcos
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Santee
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
San Miguel
Fire Protection
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater
Authority
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unincorporate
d
Number 3 11 0 4 6 3 4 0 0 0 3 34
Exposure
(x$1,000)
$176,37
6 $62,920 0 $8,000 $1,938,0
00 $9,144 $12,192 0 0 0 $27,602 $2,234,2
34
Vista
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Vista Irrigation
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total
Exposure (x
$1,000)
$176,37
6 $62,920 0 $8,000 $1,938,0
00 $9,144 $12,192 0 0 0 $27,602 $2,234,2
34
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 206
TABLE 45: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO INFRASTRUCTURE FROM 100- YEAR EARTHQUAKE
HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Alpine Fire Protection
District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Chula Vista
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Coronado
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Del Mar
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
El Cajon
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Encinitas
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Escondido
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
National City
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Oceanside
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Otay Water District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 207
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Padre Dam Municipal
Water District
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Port of San Diego
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x1000) 0 0 0 0
Poway
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Rainbow Municipal
Water
District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Rancho Santa Fe Fire
Protection District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
San Diego (City)
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
San Diego County
Water
Authority
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x1000) 0 0 0 0
San Marcos
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
San Miguel Fire
Protection
District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Santee
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater Authority
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Unincorporated
Total KMs 183 0 29 212
Exposure
(x$1,000) $43,215 0 $1,219,888 $1,263,013
Vista
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Vista Irrigation District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Total Number 183 0 29 212
Total Exposure (x $1,000) $43,215 0 $1,219,888 $1,263,013
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 208
TABLE 46: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM 500-YEAR EARTHQUAKE
HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Residential Buildings
at Risk
Commercial
Buildings at Risk
Jurisdiction Exposed
Population
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Alpine Fire Protection District 0 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad 19,092 4,538 $1,763,467 352 $106,427
Chula Vista 0 0 0 0 0
Coronado 0 0 0 0 0
Del mar 0 0 0 0 0
El Cajon 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas 0 0 0 0 0
Escondido 96,129 21,857 $8,493,630 974 $294,489
Imperial beach 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove 0 0 0 0 0
National City 0 0 0 0 0
Oceanside 130,943 40,592 $15,774,051 1,492 $451,106
Otay Water District 0 0 0 0 0
Padre Dam Municipal Water District 0 0 0 0 0
Port of San Diego 0 0 0 0 0
Poway 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow Municipal Water District 0 8,313 $3,230,432 54 $16,327
Rancho Santa Fe Fire Protection District 0 0 0 0 0
San Diego 504 0 0 2 $604,700
San Diego County Water Authority 501,096 138,019 $53,634,183 8,341 $2,521,901
San Marcos 55,473 13,312 $5,173,043 1,148 $347,098
San Miguel Fire Protection District 0 0 0 0 0
Santee 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach 0 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater Authority 0 0 0 0 0
Unincorporated 193,801 46,242 $17,969,641 3,272 $989,289
Vista 90,570 21,763 $8,457,102 1,041 $423,592
Vista Irrigation District 33,787 1,262 $490,413 61 $18,443
Total 1,121,395 295,898 $114,985,962 16,737 $5,773,372
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 209
TABLE 47: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM 500-YEAR EARTHQUAKE
HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
Carlsbad
0
Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 5,720 0 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 134,384 143,152
Chula Vista
0
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Coronado
0
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Del Mar
0
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
El Cajon
0
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas
0
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Escondido
0
Number 0 22 0 0 3 2 11 1 0 1 17 57
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 146,740 0 0 969,000 6,096 33,528 16,629 0 30,000 996,780 2,198,773
Imperial Beach
0
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
0
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
National City
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oceanside
Number 1 27 1 1 1 8 9 1 0 2 17 68
Exposure
(x$1,000) 86,701 175,340 1,830 2,000 47,000 30,480 27,432 16,629 0 327,223 775,594 1,490,229
Poway
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
Number 0 41 0 1 2 3 2 0 0 1 4 54
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 273,470 0 2,000 1,797,000 9,144 6,096 0 0 0 0 2,087,710
San Diego (City)
Number 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 13,340 0 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 41,736 58,124
San Diego County
Water Authority
Number 2 159 3 2 20 45 47 3 0 11 83 375
Exposure
(x$1,000) 167,681 1,051,980 5,490 4,000 7,564,000 137,160 143,256 49,888 0 1,131,670 4,277,866 14,532,991
San Marcos
Number 0 16 1 0 1 5 6 0 0 0 11 40
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 104,820 1,830 0 47,000 15,240 18,288 0 0 0 593,776 780,954
Santee
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 210
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
Unincorporated
Number 3 211 0 7 35 43 42 1 0 13 40 395
Exposure
(x$1,000) 271,772 1,383,620 0 14,000 11,581,000 131,064 128,016 16,629 0 924,447 1,280,792 15,731,340
Vista
Number 0 8 1 0 1 8 3 0 0 0 15 36
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 52,410 1,830 0 47,000 24,384 9,144 0 0 0 692,122 826,890
Vista Irrigation
District
Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 6,670 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41,070 47,740
Total Number 6 488 6 11 63 114 122 6 0 28 191 1,035
Total Exposure
(x $1,000) 526,154 3,214,110 10,980 22,000 22,052,000 353,568 371,856 99,775 0 2,413,340 8,834,120 37,897,903
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 211
TABLE 48: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO INFRASTRUCTURE FROM 500- YEAR EARTHQUAKE
HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Carlsbad
Total
KMs 42 3 2 47
Exposure
(x$1,000) 277,290 1,768 2,702 281,760
Chula Vista
Total
KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Coronado
Total
KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Del Mar
Total
KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
El Cajon
Total
KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Encinitas
Total
KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Escondido
Total
KMs 113 15 0 128
Exposure
(x$1,000) 751,643 9,996 0 761,639
Imperial Beach
Total
KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Total
KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Total
KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
National City
Total
KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Oceanside
Total
KMs 197 21 21 239
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,315,268 14,640 32,248 1,362,156
Port of San
Diego
Total
KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x1000) 0 0 0 0
Poway
Total
KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 212
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
Total
KMs 308 25 0 333
Exposure
(x$1,000) 2,053,961 16,929 0 2,070,890
San Diego
(City)
Total
KMs 8 0 0 8
Exposure
(x$1,000) 53,990 0 0 53,990
San Diego
County Water
Authority
Total
KMs 1,251 129 44 1,424
Exposure
(x1000) 8,342,432 88,164 65,329 8,495,925
San Marcos
Total
KMs 140 11 13 164
Exposure
(x$1,000) 933,731 16,937 8,600 959,268
Santee
Total
KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach
Total
KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Unincorporated
Total
KMs 1,846 69 93 2,008
Exposure
(x$1,000) 12,306,924 46,921 139,012 12,492,857
Vista
Total
KMs 116 12 8 136
Exposure
(x$1,000) 772,613 8,252 12,359 793,224
Vista Irrigation
District
Total
KMs 7 1 1 9
Exposure
(x$1,000) 47,718 835 980 49,533
Total Number 4,028 286 182 4,496
Total Exposure (x $1,000) 26,855,570 204,442 265,723 27,321,242
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 213
TABLE 49: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE AND LOSSES FROM ROSE CANYON SCENARIO EARTHQUAKE
HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Residential Buildings at Risk Commercial Buildings at Risk
Jurisdiction Exposed
Population
Building
Count
Potential Exposure
(x$1,000)
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Alpine Fpd 0 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad 114,187 36,605 14,221,043 3,474 1,050,364
Chula Vista 210,011 46,508 18,068,358 4,483 1,355,435
Coronado 19,375 7,211 2,801,474 857 259,114
Del Mar 3,965 2,001 777,389 546 165,083
El Cajon 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas 59,322 19,547 7,594,010 3,192 965,101
Escondido 0 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach 27,161 5,698 2,213,673 421 127,289
La Mesa 25,203 5,473 2,126,261 604 182,619
Lemon Grove 26,480 6,522 2,533,797 594 179,596
National City 61,014 8,648 3,359,748 1,413 427,221
Oceanside 104,063 28,369 11,021,357 2,281 689,660
Otay Water
District 126,387 28,869 11,215,607 1,267 383,077
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
0 0 0 0 0
Port Of San
Diego 14,710 0 0 485 146,640
Poway 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
0 0 0 0 0
Rancho Santa
Fe Fpd 19,844 4,259 1,654,622 329 99,473
San Diego 1,184,880 280,311 108,900,824 36,762 11,114,991
San Diego
County Water
Authority
1,926,720 454,167 176,443,880 55,724 16,848,151
San Marcos 378 117 45,455 5 1,512
San Miguel Fpd 29,048 5,303 2,060,216 416 125,778
Santee 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach 13,214 5,113 1,986,401 1,229 371,588
Sweetwater
Authority 113,119 33,847 13,149,560 5,152 1,557,707
Unincorporated 94,666 13,228 5,139,078 945 285,721
Vista 8,730 1,804 700,854 202 61,075
Vista Irrigation
District 0 0 0 0 0
Total 4,182,477 993,600 386,013,599 120,381 36,397,195
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 214
TABLE 50: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM ROSE CANYON SCENARIO
EARTHQUAKE HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP POT SCH TOTAL
Alpine FPD
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad
Number 1 44 0 0 7 10 11 0 5 20 98
Exposure
(x$1,000) 182,097 289,680 0 0 1,985,000 30,480 33,528 0 684,447 1,139,748 4,344,980
Chula Vista
Number 0 54 4 0 8 12 16 2 1 56 153
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 356,380 7,320 0 2,032,000 36,576 48,768 33,259 30,000 6,077,768 8,622,071
Coronado
Number 0 1 0 1 3 3 5 1 0 4 18
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 6,670 0 4,000 141,000 9,144 15,240 16,629 0 225,996 418,679
Del Mar
Number 0 6 0 0 0 3 4 0 0 0 13
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 39,070 0 0 0 9,144 12,192 0 0 0 60,406
El Cajon
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas
Number 0 15 0 0 1 6 9 1 1 12 45
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 98,150 0 0 47,000 18,288 27,432 16,629 163,612 579,494 950,605
Escondido
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 5 12
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 6,096 15,240 0 0 289,784 311,120
La Mesa
Number 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 9
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 32,400 1,830 0 0 0 0 0 0 117,438 151,668
Lemon Grove
Number 0 12 0 0 1 3 5 0 0 5 26
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 79,090 0 0 47,000 9,144 15,240 0 0 208,236 358,710
National City
Number 0 65 0 0 6 5 7 1 0 15 99
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 426,900 0 0 282,000 15,240 21,336 16,629 0 919,450 1,681,555
Oceanside
Number 1 37 0 1 3 12 18 1 1 20 94
Exposure
(x$1,000) 86,701 243,940 0 4,000 969,000 36,576 54,864 16,629 163,612 3,317,050 4,892,372
Otay Water
District
Number 0 38 1 0 4 7 4 1 0 31 86
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 253,460 1,830 0 1,844,000 21,336 12,192 16,629 0 4,623,446 6,772,893
Padre Dam
Municipal Water District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Port of San
Diego
Number 3 3 0 0 3 7 4 0 0 0 20
Exposure
(x$1,000) 300,604 19,060 0 0 969,000 21,336 12,192 0 0 0 1,322,192
Poway
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rancho Santa
Fe FPD
Number 0 15 0 0 1 2 4 0 4 3 29
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 100,050 0 0 47,000 6,096 12,192 0 520,835 64,010 750,183
San Diego (City) Number 3 550 11 32 65 94 138 9 5 263 1,170
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 215
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP POT SCH TOTAL
Exposure
(x$1,000) 745,778 3,637,150 20,130 128,000 13,819,000 286,512 420,624 149,663 684,447 28,292,272 48,183,576
San Diego
County Water
Authority
Number 4 859 16 33 96 154 220 14 17 410 1,823
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,014,575 5,676,330 29,280 132,000 21,072,000 469,392 670,560 232,809 2,246,952 41,331,960 72,875,858
San Marcos
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
San Miguel FPD
Number 0 36 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 6 46
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 240,120 0 0 0 6,096 3,048 0 30,000 284,752 564,016
Santee
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach
Number 0 4 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 4 13
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 26,680 0 0 0 3,048 12,192 0 0 113,146 155,066
Sweetwater
Authority
Number 0 119 3 0 13 14 23 2 2 48 224
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 783,280 5,490 0 2,267,000 42,672 70,104 33,259 60,000 2,654,158 5,915,963
Unincorporated
Number 0 79 0 0 4 7 8 0 5 11 114
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 526,930 0 0 1,844,000 21,336 24,384 0 550,835 414,252 3,381,737
Vista
Number 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 6,670 0 0 47,000 3,048 0 0 0 163,106 219,824
Vista Irrigation
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Number 9 1,923 35 67 212 335 477 32 42 909 4,041
Total Exposure
(x $1,000) 2,029,150 12,711,460 64,050 268,000 46,396,000 1,021,080 1,453,896 532,135 5,134,740 90,490,392 160,100,903
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 216
TABLE 51: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO INFRASTRUCTURE FROM ROSE CANYON SCENARIO
EARTHQUAKE HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Alpine FPD
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad
Total KMs 175 86 19 280
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,166,948 58,397 29,139 1,254,484
Chula Vista
Total KMs 313 43 16 372
Exposure
(x$1,000) 2,088,358 29,225 23,583 2,141,166
Coronado
Total KMs 17 16 0 33
Exposure
(x$1,000) 115,663 10,875 0 126,538
Del Mar
Total KMs 3 8 6 17
Exposure
(x$1,000) 20,658 5,734 8,561 34,953
El Cajon
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Encinitas
Total KMs 84 43 12 139
Exposure
(x$1,000) 560,387 29,238 18,293 607,918
Escondido
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach
Total KMs 3 4 0 7
Exposure
(x$1,000) 16,720 2,743 0 19,463
La Mesa
Total KMs 57 3 4 64
Exposure
(x$1,000) 379,149 1,806 6,699 387,654
Lemon Grove
Total KMs 41 6 9 56
Exposure
(x$1,000) 270,926 3,781 12,751 287,458
National City
Total KMs 105 12 28 145
Exposure
(x$1,000) 703,183 8,240 42,451 753,874
Oceanside
Total KMs 183 39 22 244
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,221,266 26,798 32,077 1,280,141
Total KMs 139 22 0 161
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 217
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Otay Water
District
Exposure
(x1000) 930,061 15,258 0 945,319
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
Total KMs 0 0 0 45
Exposure
(x1000) 0 0 0 139,152
Port of San
Diego
Total KMs 15 9 21 45
Exposure
(x1000) 101,430 6,267 31,455 139,152
Poway
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x1000) 0 0 0 0
Rancho Santa
Fe FPD
Total KMs 3 5 0 8
Exposure
(x$1,000) 19,405 3,355 0 22,760
San Diego
(City)
Total KMs 1,145 303 213 1,661
Exposure
(x$1,000) 7,633,100 207,096 319,623 8,159,819
San Diego
County Water
Authority
Total KMs 1,233 580 257 2,070
Exposure
(x1000) 8,222,970 396,449 386,060 9,005,479
San Marcos
Total KMs 3 0 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 17,139 0 0 17,139
San Miguel FPD
Total KMs 49 9 0 58
Exposure
(x$1,000) 327,067 6,148 0 333,215
Santee
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach
Total KMs 22 14 5 41
Exposure
(x$1,000) 149,284 9,776 6,752 165,812
Sweetwater
Authority
Total KMs 80 5 38 123
Exposure
(x$1,000) 531,071 3,375 57,035 591,481
Unincorporated
Total KMs 153 22 1 176
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,019,835 15,237 130 1,035,202
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 218
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL GAS RR TOTAL
Vista
Total KMs 22 1 0 23
Exposure
(x$1,000) 143,694 908 0 144,602
Vista Irrigation
District
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Total Number 3,845 1,230 651 5,726
Total Exposure (x $1,000) 25,638,314 840,706 974,609 27,453,629
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 219
5.3.8. FLOOD
Digitized 100-year and 500-year flood maps with base flood elevation (BFE) from the FEMA FIRM program
for most of the areas were used for this project. Census blocks with non-zero population and non-zero dollar
exposure that intersect with these polygons were used in the analysis. For the areas that did not include
BFE information, a base flood elevation was estimated for the final purpose of computing the flood depth at
different locations of the region as follows:
• Transect lines across the flood polygon (perpendicular to the flow direction) were created using an
approximation method for Zone A flood polygons. Zone A is the FEMA FIRM Zone that is defined as the
100-year base flood.
• A point file was extracted from the line (Begin node, End node and center point). The Zonal operation in
the GIS tool Spatial Analyst (with the point file and a digital elevation model [DEM]) was used to
estimate the ground elevation in the intersection of the line with the flood polygon borders. The average
value of the End and Begin point of the line was calculated. This value was assumed as the base flood
elevation for each transect.
A surface model (triangulated irregular network, or TIN) was derived from the original transect with the
derived BFE value and the flood polygon. This TIN file approximated a continuous and variable flood
elevation along the flood polygon. A grid file was then derived from the TIN file with the same extent and
pixel resolution of the DEM (30-meter resolution). The difference of the flood elevation grid file and the DEM
was calculated to produce an approximate flood depth for the whole study area. HAZUS-MH based damage
functions, in a raster format, were created for each of the occupancies present in the census blocks.
A customized Visual Basic (VBA) script was written to assign the ratio of damage expected (function of
computed flood depth) for each type of occupancy based on the HAZUS-MH damage functions. HAZUS-MH
exposure values ($) in raster format were created using Spatial Analyst. Since not all areas in the census
blocks are completely within the flood area, the exposure at risk was weighted and estimated accordingly
based on the number of pixels in flood area. Losses were then estimated through multiplication of damage
ratio with the exposure at risk for each block. Losses were then approximated based on 100- and 500-year
losses (high and low hazards).
The first table below provides a breakdown of potential exposure and losses by jurisdiction for 100-year
flood, and the second table provides a breakdown of infrastructure and critical facility losses for 100-year
flood by jurisdiction. The third table provides a breakdown of potential exposure and losses by jurisdiction
from 500-year flood, and the fourth table provides a breakdown of potential infrastructure and critical facility
losses by jurisdiction. The loss tables also provide a breakdown of loss ratios for commercial and residential
properties by jurisdiction.
These loss ratios are determined by dividing the loss values by the exposure values for each jurisdiction,
and give a perspective of the potential losses for each jurisdiction for this hazard. For example, a loss ratio
value of 0.4 in El Cajon would mean that 40% of the exposed buildings in El Cajon would be lost due to a
100- or 500-year flood.
Approximately 270,263 people may be at risk from the 100-year flood hazard.
Approximately 585,882 people are at risk from the 500-year flood hazard.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 220
TABLE 52: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE AND LOSSES FROM 100-YEAR FLOOD HAZARD BY
JURISDICTION
Residential Buildings at
Risk
Commercial Buildings at
Risk
Jurisdiction Exposed
Population
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Building Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Alpine Fire Protection
District 268 23 $8,938 1 $302
Carlsbad 2,497 619 $240,543 15 $4,535
Chula Vista 1,741 633 $245,984 169 $51,097
Coronado 4,022 0 $0 2 $605
Del Mar 1,123 384 $149,222 29 $8,768
El Cajon 5,427 80 $31,088 30 $9,071
Encinitas 661 32 $12,435 6 $1,814
Escondido 7,380 1,625 $631,475 209 $63,191
Imperial Beach 2,702 55 $21,373 1 $302
La Mesa 73 1 $389 3 $907
Lemon Grove 0 3 $1,166 4 $1,209
National City 10,693 149 $57,901 139 $42,027
Oceanside 13,323 4,540 $1,764,244 448 $135,453
Otay Water District 2,623 51 $19,819 16 $4,838
Padre Dam Municipal
Water District 5,330 613 $238,212 75 $22,676
Port of San Diego 17,614 0 $0 2 $605
Poway 656 343 $133,290 64 $19,350
Rainbow Municipal Water
District 1,124 105 $40,803 25 $7,559
Rancho Santa Fe Fire
Protection District 1,252 23 $8,938 7 $2,116
San Diego (City) 35,523 4,976 $1,933,674 733 $221,623
San Diego County Water
Authority 101,369 16,590 $6,446,874 2,397 $724,733
San Marcos 4,150 279 $108,419 106 $32,049
San Miguel Fire Protection
District 3,575 524 $203,626 59 $17,839
Santee 1,279 40 $15,544 13 $3,931
Solana Beach 656 313 $121,632 11 $3,326
Sweetwater Authority 13,338 1,195 $464,377 486 $146,942
Unincorporated: 17,979 4,151 $1,613,079 530 $160,246
Vista 889 455 $176,813 38 $11,489
Vista Irrigation District 481 35 $13,601 7 $2,116
Total 257,748 37,837 14,703,459 5,625 1,700,719
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 221
TABLE 53: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM 100-YEAR FLOOD HAZARD BY
JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
Alpine Fire Protection
District
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad
Number 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 123,880 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 123,880
Chula Vista
Number 0 14 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 16
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 91,480 0 0 922,000 3,048 3,048 0 0 0 0 1,019,576
Coronado
Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 6,670 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,670
Del Mar
Number 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 19,060 0 0 0 6,096 0 0 0 0 0 25,156
El Cajon
Number 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 20,010 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 230,806 250,816
Encinitas
Number 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 32,400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32,400
Escondido
Number 0 8 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 3 14
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 53,360 0 0 0 3,048 6,096 0 0 0 200,836 263,340
Imperial Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
National City
Number 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 64,800 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 64,800
Oceanside
Number 1 21 0 0 0 3 4 0 0 0 2 31
Exposure
(x$1,000) 86,701 134,370 0 0 0 9,144 12,192 0 0 0 88,356 330,763
Otay Water District
Number 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 100,050 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100,050
Padre Dam Municipal
Water District
Number 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31
Exposure
(x$1,000) 206,770 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 206,770
Port of San Diego
Number 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2
Exposure
(x$1,000) 6,670 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 719,793 0 0 726,463
Poway
Number 0 12 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 13
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 80,040 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 0 0 83,088
Rainbow Municipal
Water District
Number 0 17 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 19
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 113,390 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 0 14,430 130,868
Rancho Santa Fe
FPD
Number 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 9
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 53,360 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 163,612 0 216,972
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 222
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
San Diego (City)
Number 0 138 0 3 2 2 2 0 1 0 1 149
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 903,360 0 6,000 94,000 6,096 6,096 0 719,793 0 43,068 1,778,413
San Diego County
Water Authority
Number 1 360 0 6 4 11 11 0 1 1 11 406
Exposure
(x$1,000) 86,701 2,364,150 0 12,000 1,016,000 33,528 33,528 0 719,793 163,612 364,476 4,793,788
San Marcos
Number 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 63,850 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 63,850
San Miguel FPD
Number 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 166,750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 166,750
Santee
Number 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 80,040 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 80,040
Solana Beach
Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 6,670 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,670
Sweetwater Authority
Number 0 24 0 0 2 1 2 0 0 0 1 30
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 156,280 0 0 922,000 3,048 6,096 0 0 0 22,126 1,109,550
Unincorporated
Number 1 124 0 7 4 4 4 0 0 2 6 152
Exposure
(x$1,000) 80,980 824,230 0 14,000 1,844,000 12,192 12,192 0 0 193,612 99,012 3,080,218
Vista
Number 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 19,060 0 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 0 22,108
Vista Irrigation District
Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 5,720 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,720
Total Number 35 834 0 16 14 27 27 0 3 4 27 985
Total Exposure (x
$1,000) 467,822 5,482,980 0 32,000 4,798,000 82,296 82,296 0 2,159,379 520,836 1,063,110 14,688,719
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 223
TABLE 54: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO INFRASTRUCTURE FROM 100-YEAR FLOOD HAZARD BY
JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Carlsbad
Total KMs 13 7 1 21
Exposure
(x$1,000) 83,715 4,631 342 88,688
Chula Vista
Total KMs 32 3 1 36
Exposure
(x$1,000) 210,783 2,373 194 213,350
Coronado
Total KMs 2 3 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 11,014 1,984 0 12,998
Del Mar
Total KMs 6 3 2 11
Exposure
(x$1,000) 37,125 1,804 2,515 41,444
El Cajon
Total KMs 3 1 1 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 17,924 84 98 18,106
Encinitas
Total KMs 5 4 1 10
Exposure
(x$1,000) 32,741 2,541 119 35,401
Escondido
Total KMs 26 2 0 28
Exposure
(x$1,000) 172,723 1,651 0 174,374
Imperial Beach
Total KMs 0 1 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 543 0 543
La Mesa
Total KMs 1 1 1 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 3,158 225 180 3,563
Lemon Grove
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
National City
Total KMs 14 1 1 16
Exposure
(x$1,000) 95,654 233 384 96,271
Oceanside
Total KMs 54 10 10 74
Exposure
(x$1,000) 362,336 6,755 14,077 383,168
Otay Water District
Total KMs 26 3 0 29
Exposure
(x1000) 170,295 2,057 0 172,352
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 224
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Padre Dam Municipal Water
District
Total KMs 7 2 1 10
Exposure
(x1000) 48,638 1,591 98 50,327
Port of San Diego
Total KMs 5 2 6 13
Exposure
(x1000) 31,645 1,210 8,353 41,208
Poway
Total KMs 2 1 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 11,352 114 0 11,466
Rainbow Municipal Water
District
Total KMs 22 1 0 23
Exposure
(x$1,000) 147,114 844 0 147,958
San Diego (City)
Total KMs 141 22 38 201
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,141,289 15,261 57,503 1,214,053
San Diego County Water
Authority
Total KMs 426 63 53 542
Exposure
(x1000) 2,842,718 43,267 79,247 2,965,232
San Marcos
Total KMs 19 2 2 23
Exposure
(x$1,000) 128,671 1,238 2,565 132,474
San Miguel FPD
Total KMs 2 1 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 14,886 704 0 15,590
Santee
Total KMs 5 2 0 7
Exposure
(x$1,000) 35,785 1,394 0 37,179
Solana Beach
Total KMs 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0
Sweetwater Authority
Total KMs 47 3 1 51
Exposure
(x$1,000) 310,550 2,059 577 313,186
Unincorporated
Total KMs 104 8 1 113
Exposure
(x$1,000) 694,666 5,505 1,032 701,203
Vista
Total KMs 9 1 1 11
Exposure
(x$1,000) 57,799 369 928 59,096
Vista Irrigation District
Total KMs 2 0 1 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 13,618 0 37 13,655
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 225
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Total Number 973 147 122 1,242
Total Exposure (x $1,000) 6,676,199 98,437 168,249 6,942,885
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 226
TABLE 55: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE AND LOSSES FROM 500-YEAR FLOOD HAZARD BY
JURISDICTION
Residential Buildings at
Risk
Commercial Buildings at
Risk
Jurisdiction Exposed
Population
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Alpine Fpd 268 23 8,938 1 302
Carlsbad 2,497 619 240,543 15 4,535
Chula Vista 14,651 3,628 1,409,841 556 168,107
Coronado 4,022 0 0 2 605
Del Mar 1,228 475 184,585 36 10,885
El Cajon 20,560 6,231 2,421,367 867 262,137
Encinitas 681 44 17,098 10 3,024
Escondido 31,005 10,048 3,904,653 545 164,781
Imperial Beach 2,702 55 21,373 3 907
La Mesa 105 1 389 3 907
Lemon Grove 0 3 1,166 4 1,209
National City 12,868 909 353,237 200 60,470
Oceanside 33,750 12,611 4,900,635 659 199,249
Otay Water District 4,976 632 245,595 116 35,073
Padre Dam Municipal
Water District 7,573 1,447 562,304 298 90,100
Port Of San Diego 17,736 0 0 18 5,442
Poway 3,107 1,090 423,574 134 40,515
Rainbow Municipal
Water District 3,137 773 300,388 45 13,606
Rancho Santa Fe
Fpd 1,262 36 13,990 7 2,116
San Diego 68,368 14,269 5,544,933 1,706 515,809
San Diego County
Water Authority 221,421 56,606 21,997,092 5,880 1,777,818
San Marcos 4,230 503 195,466 178 53,818
San Miguel Fpd 5,417 700 272,020 86 26,002
Santee 2,846 751 291,839 217 65,610
Solana Beach 1,022 509 197,797 57 17,234
Sweetwater Authority 30,746 4,378 1,701,291 857 259,114
Unincorporated 26,802 5,967 2,318,776 618 186,852
Vista 3,135 1,096 425,906 230 69,541
Vista Irrigation
District 818 48 18,653 14 4,233
Total 526,933 123,452 47,973,449 13,362 4,040,001
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 227
TABLE 56: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM 500-YEAR FLOOD HAZARD BY
JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
Carlsbad
Number 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 123,880 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 123,880
Chula Vista
Number 0 19 1 0 4 2 1 0 0 0 1 28
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 124,830 1,830 0 1,844,000 6,096 3,048 0 0 0 119,880 2,099,684
Coronado
Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 6,670 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,670
Del Mar
Number 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 19,060 0 0 0 6,096 0 0 0 0 0 25,156
El Cajon
Number 0 25 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 5 35
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 166,750 1,830 0 0 6,096 6,096 0 0 0 368,594 549,366
Encinitas
Number 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 32,400 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32,400
Escondido
Number 0 34 0 0 3 3 9 0 0 1 8 58
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 224,880 0 0 969,000 9,144 27,432 0 0 163,612 420,246 1,814,314
Imperial Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
National City
Number 0 12 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 14
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 78,140 0 0 0 0 6,096 0 0 0 0 84,236
Oceanside
Number 1 23 0 1 0 6 6 0 0 0 5 42
Exposure
(x$1,000) 20,137 147,710 0 2,000 0 18,288 18,288 0 0 0 199,578 406,001
Otay Water
District
Number 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 17
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 106,720 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 163,612 0 270,332
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
Number 0 43 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 45
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 286,810 0 0 0 3,048 3,048 0 0 0 0 292,906
Port of San Diego
Number 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 6,670 0 0 922,000 3,048 0 0 719,793 0 0 1,651,511
Poway
Number 0 18 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 19
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 120,060 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 0 0 123,108
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
Number 0 19 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 21
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 126,730 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 0 14,430 144,208
Rancho Santa Fe
FPD
Number 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 9
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 53,360 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 163,612 0 216,972
San Diego (City)
Number 0 184 1 3 4 4 8 0 1 1 3 209
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 1,208,280 5,490 6,000 1,016,000 12,192 24,384 0 719,793 163,612 138,602 3,294,353
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 228
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
San Diego County
Water Authority
Number 1 486 6 7 11 24 34 0 1 4 29 603
Exposure
(x$1,000) 20,137 3,200,770 10,980 14,000 3,829,000 73,152 103,632 0 719,793 654,447 1,395,270 10,021,181
San Marcos
Number 0 13 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 17
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 83,860 1,830 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 13,912 102,650
San Miguel FPD
Number 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 26
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 166,750 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 163,612 0 330,362
Santee
Number 0 17 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 18
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 113,390 0 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 0 116,438
Solana Beach
Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 6,670 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,670
Sweetwater
Authority
Number 0 30 1 0 4 2 4 0 0 0 2 43
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 196,300 1,830 0 1,844,000 6,096 12,192 0 0 0 142,006 2,202,424
Unincorporated
Number 1 133 0 7 4 4 5 0 0 3 7 164
Exposure
(x$1,000) 14,416 884,260 0 14,000 1,844,000 12,192 15,240 0 0 357,223 114,626 3,255,957
Vista
Number 0 5 0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 2 13
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 32,400 0 0 0 9,144 9,144 0 0 0 63,048 113,736
Vista Irrigation
District
Number 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 25,730 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25,730
Total Number 3 1,144 11 18 32 56 77 0 3 12 65 1,421
Total Exposure
(x $1,000) 54,690 7,543,080 23,790 36,000 12,268,000 170,688 234,696 0 2,159,379 1,829,730 2,990,192 27,310,245
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 229
TABLE 57: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO INFRASTRUCTURE FROM 500-YEAR FLOOD HAZARD BY
JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Carlsbad
Total KMs 13 7 1 21
Exposure
(x$1,000) 83,915 4,681 342 88,938
Chula Vista
Total KMs 68 8 5 81
Exposure
(x$1,000) 454,289 5,173 7,439 466,901
Coronado
Total KMs 2 3 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 11,014 1,984 0 12,998
Del Mar
Total KMs 6 3 2 11
Exposure
(x$1,000) 38,837 1,972 2,965 43,774
El Cajon
Total KMs 49 3 4 56
Exposure
(x$1,000) 326,126 2,043 5,268 333,437
Encinitas
Total KMs 5 4 0 9
Exposure
(x$1,000) 32,741 2,620 0 35,361
Escondido
Total KMs 65 6 1 72
Exposure
(x$1,000) 431,452 4,162 752 436,366
Imperial Beach
Total KMs 1 1 0 2
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,097 543 0 1,640
La Mesa
Total KMs 1 1 1 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 3,158 281 180 3,619
Lemon Grove
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
National City
Total KMs 28 1 1 30
Exposure
(x$1,000) 188,912 405 414 189,731
Oceanside
Total KMs 94 12 11 117
Exposure
(x$1,000) 624,041 8,133 16,729 648,903
Otay Water District
Total KMs 38 4 0 42
Exposure
(x1000) 256,525 2,418 0 258,943
Padre Dam Municipal
Water District
Total KMs 28 4 3 35
Exposure
(x1000) 184,247 2,915 5,218 192,380
Port of San Diego
Total KMs 9 2 9 20
Exposure
(x1000) 28,995 1,211 13,073 43,279
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 230
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Poway
Total KMs 4 1 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 23,390 198 0 23,588
Rainbow Municipal
Water District
Total KMs 32 1 0 33
Exposure
(x$1,000) 212,499 844 0 213,343
San Diego (City)
Total KMs 367 3 67 437
Exposure
(x$1,000) 2,448,289 22,199 100,606 2,571,094
San Diego County
Water Authority
Total KMs 859 89 94 1,042
Exposure
(x1000) 5,730,566 61,124 140,601 5,932,291
San Marcos
Total KMs 26 2 2 30
Exposure
(x$1,000) 172,749 1,393 3,617 177,759
San Miguel FPD
Total KMs 4 1 0 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 24,494 759 0 25,253
Santee
Total KMs 25 4 1 30
Exposure
(x$1,000) 166,448 2,574 303 169,325
Solana Beach
Total KMs 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0
Sweetwater Authority
Total KMs 86 7 5 98
Exposure
(x$1,000) 574,882 4,765 7,853 587,500
Unincorporated
Total KMs 124 9 1 134
Exposure
(x$1,000) 823,809 5,942 1,070 830,821
Vista
Total KMs 25 1 1 27
Exposure
(x$1,000) 167,522 560 1,486 169,568
Vista Irrigation District
Total KMs 3 0 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 20,253 0 0 20,253
Total Number 1,962 177 209 2,348
Total Exposure (x $1,000) 13,030,250 138,899 307,916 13,477,065
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 231
5.3.9. RAIN-INDUCED LANDSLIDE
Steep slope and soils data from SANDAG, as well as data from the State of California, U.S. Geological
Survey and HAZUS for all of San Diego County were combined and modeled to determine areas
susceptible to rain-induced landslides. Soils that are prone to movement were determined from the
database, and combined with areas that have greater than 25% slope, which are prone to sliding. The
combination of these two factors gives a general idea of landslide susceptibility.
Localized hard copy maps developed by TAN were also reviewed. The TAN landslide susceptibility modeling
takes into account more information, such as past landslides, landslide-prone formations, and steep slope.
The identified vulnerable assets were superimposed on top of this information, resulting in three
risk/exposure estimates:
1. The aggregated exposure and building count (both dollar exposure and population) at the census block
level for residential and commercial occupancies
2. The aggregated population at risk at the census block level
3. The critical infrastructure at risk (schools, hospitals, airports, bridges, and other facilities of critical
nature).
These results were then aggregated and presented by hazard risk level per jurisdiction.
The first table below provides a breakdown of potential exposure for high-risk rain-induced landslide hazard
by jurisdiction, and the second table below provides a breakdown of infrastructure and critical facility
exposure for high risk. The third table provides a breakdown of potential exposure for moderate risk rain-
induced landslide by jurisdiction, and the fourth table below provides a breakdown of potential infrastructure
and critical facility exposure for moderate risk.
Approximately 181,501 people may be at risk from a rain-induced landslide hazard:
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 232
TABLE 58: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE FROM RAIN-INDUCED LANDSLIDE HAZARD (HIGH RISK) BY
JURISDICTION
Residential Buildings at
Risk Commercial Buildings at Risk
Jurisdiction
Exposed
Populatio
n
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Building
Count
Potential Exposure
(x$1,000)
Alpine Fpd 292 2 777 0 0
Carlsbad 2,163 24 9,324 1 302,350
Chula Vista 865 0 0 0 0
Coronado 0 0 0 0 0
Del Mar 0 0 0 0 0
El Cajon 1,337 11 4,273 0 0
Encinitas 158 4 1,554 0 0
Escondido 4,372 76 29,526 3 907,050
Imperial Beach 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove 0 0 0 0 0
National City 0 0 0 0 0
Oceanside 0 0 0 0 0
Otay Water District 5,522 32 12,432 0 0
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
846 30 11,655 0 0
Port Of San Diego 0 0 0 0 0
Poway 574 0 0 0 0
Rainbow Municipal
Water District 1,968 84 32,634 8 2,418,800
Rancho Santa Fe
Fpd 10,853 3,285 1,276,223 226 68,331,100
San Diego 1,222 9 3,497 0 0
San Diego County
Water Authority 68,465 5,076 1,972,026 270 81,634,500
San Marcos 8,693 943 366,356 12 3,628,200
San Miguel Fpd 1,773 48 18,648 0 0
Santee 8 11 4,274 1 302,350
Solana Beach 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater
Authority 2,592 89 34,577 2 604,700
Unincorporated 51,594 4,300 1,670,550 259 78,308,650
Vista 2,782 21 8,159 1 302,350
Vista Irrigation
District 1,733 68 26,418 2 604,700
Total 167,812 14,113 5,482,903 785 237,344,750
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 233
TABLE 59: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM RAIN-INDUCED LANDSLIDE
HAZARD (HIGH RISK) BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP INFR PORT POT RAIL SCH TOTAL
Carlsbad
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chula Vista
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Coronado
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Del Mar
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
El Cajon
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Escondido
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Imperial
Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon
Grove
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
National City
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oceanside
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Otay Water
District
Number 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 47,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47,000
Padre Dam
Municipal
Water
District
Number 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 2,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,000
Poway
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rancho
Santa Fe
FPD
Number 0 2 0 0 2 1 4 0 0 0 1 0 4 14
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 13,340 0 0 94,000 3,048 12,192 0 0 0 163,612 0 218,078 504,270
San Diego
County
Water
Authority
Number 0 2 0 4 3 2 4 0 0 0 1 0 4 20
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 13,340 0 8,000 141,000 6,096 12,192 0 0 0 163,612 0 218,078 562,318
San Marcos
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 234
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP INFR PORT POT RAIL SCH TOTAL
Santee
Number 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 2,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,000
Solana
Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unincorporat
ed
Number 0 2 0 3 3 1 4 0 0 0 1 0 4 18
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 13,340 0 6,000 141,000 3,048 12,192 0 0 0 163,612 0 218,078 557,270
Vista
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Number 0 6 0 9 9 4 12 0 0 0 3 0 12 55
Total Exposure (x $1,000) 0 40,020 0 18,000 423,000 2,192 36,576 0 0 0 490,836 0 654,234 1,674,858
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 235
TABLE 60: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO INFRASTRUCTURE FROM RAIN-INDUCED LANDSLIDE
HAZARD (HIGH RISK) BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Carlsbad
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Chula Vista
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Coronado
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Del Mar
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
El Cajon
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Encinitas
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Escondido
Total KMs 0 1 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 246 0 246
Imperial Beach
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
National City
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Otay Water District
Total KMs 3 1 0 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) 17,437 635 0 18,072
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 236
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Oceanside
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Padre Dam Municipal Water
District
Total KMs 1 1
Exposure (x1000) 726 726
Port of San Diego Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure (x1000) 0 0 0 0
Poway
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Rainbow Municipal Water
District
Total KMs 2 1 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 14,962 887 0 15,849
Rancho Santa Fe FPD
Total KMs 15 1 0 16
Exposure
(x$1,000) 98,127 742 0 98,869
San Diego (City)
Total KMs 1 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 2,823 0 0 2,823
San Diego County Water
Authority
Total KMs 37 6 0 43
Exposure (x1000) 248,125 4,231 0 252,356
San Marcos
Total KMs 8 0 0 8
Exposure
(x$1,000) 55,696 0 0 55,696
San Miguel FPD
Total KMs 0 1 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 600 0 600
Santee
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater Authority
Total KMs 0 1 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 139 0 139
Unincorporated
Total KMs 47 6 2 55
Exposure
(x$1,000) 311,472 3,962 2,442 317,876
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 237
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Vista
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Vista Irrigation District
Total KMs 1 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 2,020 0 0 2,020
Total Number 114 19 2 135
Total Exposure (x $1,000) 750,662 12,168 2,442 765,272
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 238
TABLE 61: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO RAIN-INDUCED LANDSLIDE HAZARD (MODERATE RISK) BY
JURISDICTION
Residential Buildings at Risk Commercial Buildings at
Risk
Jurisdiction Exposed
Population
Building
Count
Potential Exposure
(x$1,000)
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Alpine Fpd 0 0 0 0 0
Carlsbad 0 0 0 0 0
Chula Vista 0 0 0 0 0
Coronado 0 0 0 0 0
Del Mar 0 0 0 0 0
El Cajon 177 57 22,145 2 605
Encinitas 60 4 1,554 0 0
Escondido 558 494 191,919 26 7,861
Imperial Beach 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa 0 2 777 0 0
Lemon Grove 0 0 0 0 0
National City 0 64 24,864 1 302
Oceanside 0 0 0 0 0
Otay Water
District 9,569 20,175 7,837,988 1,071 323,817
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
3,972 6,051 2,350,814 427 129,103
Port Of San
Diego 0 0 0 0 0
Poway 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
2,837 1,351 524,864 57 17,234
Rancho Santa
Fe Fpd 16,246 11,707 4,548,170 684 206,807
San Diego 560 4 1,554 0 0
San Diego
County Water
Authority
115,920 103,190 40,089,315 6,267 1,894,827
San Marcos 258 150 58,275 5 1,512
San Miguel Fpd 23,999 41,324 16,054,374 2,186 660,937
Santee 0 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach 0 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater
Authority 4,265 5,316 2,065,266 301 91,007
Unincorporated 115,732 102,862 39,961,887 6,279 1,898,456
Vista 0 66 25,641 2 605
Vista Irrigation
District 4,182 5,802 2,254,077 454 137,267
Total 298,335 298,619 116,013,484 17,762 5,307,340
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 239
TABLE 62: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM RAIN-INDUCED LANDSLIDE
HAZARD (MODERATE RISK) BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
Carlsbad
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Chula Vista
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Coronado
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Del Mar
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
El Cajon
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Encinitas
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Escondido
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
National City
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oceanside
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Otay Water District
Number 0 41 0 15 9 9 9 0 0 2 19 104
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 273,470 0 30,000 2,907,000 27,432 27,432 0 0 193,612 3,621,338 7,080,284
Padre Dam Municipal
Water District
Number 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 36
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 226,780 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 114,552 341,332
Poway
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rainbow Municipal Water District
Number 0 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 6
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 20,010 0 0 875,000 3,048 0 0 0 30,000 0 928,058
Rancho Santa Fe FPD
Number 0 26 0 0 5 4 5 0 0 7 6 53
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 173,420 0 0 1,063,000 12,192 15,240 0 0 878,059 370,874 2,512,785
San Diego (City)
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
San Diego County
Water Authority
Number 0 245 0 21 28 31 28 0 0 14 56 423
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 1,629,400 0 42,000 8,768,000 94,488 85,344 0 0 1,355,282 5,323,190 17,297,704
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 240
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
San Marcos
Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 6,670 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,670
Santee
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
San Miguel FPD
Number 0 97 0 0 4 9 9 0 0 3 29 151
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 646,990 0 0 188,000 27,432 27,432 0 0 223,612 4,117,656 5,231,122
Solana Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater Authority
Number 0 32 0 0 1 1 3 0 0 1 3 41
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 213,440 0 0 47,000 3,048 9,144 0 0 30,000 98,494 401,126
Unincorporated
Number 0 250 0 21 30 31 28 0 0 15 56 431
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 1,662,750 0 42,000 9,690,000 94,488 85,344 0 0 1,385,282 5,323,190 18,283,054
Vista
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Vista Irrigation District
Number 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6
Exposure
(x$1,000)
0 25,730 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 91,464 117,194
Total Number 0 733 0 57 78 86 82 0 0 43 173 1,252
Total Exposure (x
$1,000)
0 4,878,660 0 114,000 23,538,000 262,128 249,936 0 0 4,095,847 19,060,758 52,199,329
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 241
TABLE 63: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO INFRASTRUCTURE FROM RAIN-INDUCED LANDSLIDE
HAZARD (MODERATE RISK) BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Carlsbad
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Chula Vista
Total KMs 1 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 2,941 0 0 2,941
Coronado
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Del Mar
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
El Cajon
Total KMs 2 1 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 11,578 95 0 11,673
Encinitas
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Escondido
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Imperial Beach
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
National City
Total KMs 23 0 0 23
Exposure
(x$1,000) 155,397 0 0 155,397
Oceanside
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Otay Water
District
Total KMs 166 41 0 207
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,309,054 28,206 0 1,337,260
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 242
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
Total KMs 26 3 0 29
Exposure
(x1000) 171,195 2,376 0 173,571
Port of San
Diego
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x1000) 0 0 0 0
Poway
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
Total KMs 52 2 0 54
Exposure
(x$1,000) 346,138 1,174 0 347,312
Rancho Santa Fe
FPD
Total KMs 43 5 0 48
Exposure
(x1000) 288,347 3,352 0 291,699
San Diego (City)
Total KMs 6 0 2 8
Exposure
(x$1,000) 40,763 0 2,312 43,075
San Diego County
Water Authority
Total KMs 1,033 179 58 1,270
Exposure
(x1000) 6,888,284 122,442 87,479 7,098,205
San Marcos
Total KMs 2 1 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 13,026 306 0 13,332
San Miguel FPD
Total KMs 215 49 0 264
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,430,630 33,517 0 1,464,147
Santee
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Solana Beach
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Sweetwater
Authority
Total KMs 94 7 0 101
Exposure
(x$1,000) 629,031 4,909 0 633,940
Unincorporated
Total KMs 1,113 180 58 1,351
Exposure
(x$1,000) 7,424,405 122,740 87,336 7,634,481
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 243
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Vista
Total KMs 1 0 1 2
Exposure
(x$1,000) 5,205 0 272 5,477
Vista Irrigation
District
Total KMs 40 2 3 45
Exposure
(x$1,000) 268,108 1,566 4,609 274,283
Total Number 2,817 470 122 3,409
Total Exposure (x $1,000) 18,984,102 320,683 182,008 19,486,793
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 244
5.3.10. WILDFIRE/STRUCTURE FIRE
CDF-FRAP (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection's Fire and Resource Assessment
Program) modeled wildland fire threat for the state of California in 2002. This model was used in GIS to
profile the fire hazard throughout the County and is described in detail below in the Vulnerability Assessment
portion of this document. This data was updated as requested by the Encinitas jurisdiction and is reflected in
the hazard modeling process and subsequent mapping.
It should be noted that the hazard level depicted within current data boundaries will change after the CDF
re-evaluates burned areas. After this re-evaluation is complete, it is expected that the CDF-FRAP will
remodel the fire risk and provide updated risk maps. These updated maps should be included in future
revisions of this plan. In the model, fire threat is a combination of factors including:
1. Historical fire regime and fire regime condition class
2. Existing vegetation
3. Topography.
These factors were combined to create five fire regime classes ranging from little or no threat to extreme.
The regime classes are:
Fire Regime I - 0-35 year frequency and low to mixed severity
Fire Regime II - 0-35 year frequency and high severity
Fire regime III - 35-100+ year frequency and mixed severity
Fire Regime IV - 35-100 + year frequency and high severity
Fire Regime V - 200+ year frequency and high severity
Wildfire loss estimates were determined using the CDF-FRAP Wildfire Hazard Severity Zones data. CDF-
FRAP modeled wildland fire threat for the state of California in 2008. This model was used in GIS to profile
the fire hazard throughout the County, then used in overlays to determine the loss estimates. In the model,
fire threat is a combination of two factors: 1) fire rotation, or the likelihood of a given area burning, and 2)
potential fire behavior (fuel rank). These two factors were combined to create five threat classes ranging
from little or no threat to very high. The fuel ranking methodology assigned ranks based on expected fire
behavior for unique combinations of topography and vegetative fuels under a given severe weather
condition (wind speed, humidity, temperature, and fuel moisture).
The procedure made an initial assessment of rank based on as assigned fuel model and slope, then
potentially increases ranks based on the amount of ladder and/or crown fuel present to arrive at a final fuel
rank. Fire rotation class intervals were calculated from fifty years of fire history on land areas grouped into
“strata” based on fire environment conditions. These strata are defined by climate, vegetation, and land
ownership. The fire rotation interval is the number of years it would take for past fires to burn an area
equivalent to the area of a given stratum. Fire rotation interval for a given stratum is calculated by dividing
the annual number of acres burned into the total area of the stratum. Finally, fire rotation values were
grouped into classes. The larger fire rotation values correspond to less frequent burning. CDF calculated a
numerical index of fire threat based on the combination of fuel rank and fire rotation.
A 1-3 ranking of fuel rank was summed with the 1-3 ranking from rotation class to develop a threat index
ranging from 2 to 6. This threat index was then grouped into four threat classes. Areas that do not support
wildland fuels (e.g., open water, agriculture lands, etc.) were omitted from the calculation, however areas of
very large urban centers (i.e., concrete jungles) were left in but received a moderate threat value. This data
was updated as requested by the City of Encinitas to more accurately reflect their fire risks, and is reflected
in the hazard modeling process and subsequent mapping.
The identified vulnerable assets were superimposed on top of this information, resulting in four
risk/exposure estimates: 1) the aggregated exposure and building count at the parcel level for residential
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 245
and commercial occupancies, 2) the aggregated population at risk at the census block level, 3) the critical
facilities at risk (schools, hospitals, airports, bridges, and other facilities of a critical nature), and 4) the
critical infrastructure (major roadways, railways, and oil/gas pipelines) at risk. These results were then
aggregated and presented by hazard risk level per jurisdiction.
Wildfire can create a multi-hazard effect, where areas that are burned by wildfire suddenly have greater
flooding risks because the vegetation that prevented erosion is now gone. Watershed from streams and
rivers will change and floodplain mapping may need to be updated. Also, air quality issues during a large-
scale fire would cause further economic losses than only the structural losses described below. Road
closures and business closures due to large-scale fires would also increase the economic losses shown
below.
The tables below provide a breakdown of potential greatest exposures to the San Diego region:
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 246
TABLE 64: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE FROM VERY HIGH WILDFIRE HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Residential Buildings at Risk Commercial Buildings at
Risk
Jurisdiction Exposed
Population
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Alpine FPD 14,696 4,961 1,927,845 84 25,397
Carlsbad 19,479 5,075 1,972,145 561 169,618
Chula Vista 15,354 2,583 1,003,754 64 19,350
Coronado 0 0 0 0 0
Del Mar 3,555 340 132,124 249 75,285
El Cajon 13,057 1,523 591,838 7 2,116
Encinitas 11,633 3,801 1,476,689 89 26,909
Escondido 33,762 4,639 1,802,715 148 44,748
Imperial Beach 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa 106 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove 0 0 0 0 0
National City 0 0 0 0 0
Oceanside 14,768 1,823 708,418 128 38,701
Otay Water District 25,962 6,989 2,715,925 383 115,800
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
68,029 14,780 5,743,508 802 242,485
Port Of San Diego 0 0 0 0 0
Poway 25,892 5,326 2,069,684 569 172,037
Rainbow Municipal
Water District 11,651 4,168 1,619,685 60 18,141
Rancho Santa Fe
Fpd 27,114 3,586 1,393,520 173 52,307
San Diego 341,251 123,699 48,069,431 3,517 1,063,365
San Diego County
Water Authority 791,081 203,245 78,981,007 8,821 2,667,029
San Marcos 41,364 7,043 2,736,910 355 107,334
San Miguel Fpd 21,741 4,418 1,716,835 157 47,469
Santee 17,792 4,673 1,815,928 115 34,770
Solana Beach 2,538 579 224,999 25 7,559
Sweetwater
Authority 734 0 0 78 23,583
Unincorporated 322,758 52,594 20,438,028 3,708 1,121,114
Vista 21,628 1,680 652,848 279 84,356
Vista Irrigation
District 20,066 1,497 581,734 54 16,327
Total 1,866,011 459,022 178,375,570 20,426 6,175,800
Wildfire dataset provided by City of Encinitas for Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 247
TABLE 65: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM VERY HIGH WILDFIRE HAZARD
BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
Alpine PFD
Number 0 34 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 4 42
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 226,780 0 0 47,000 0 9,144 0 0 0 114,922 397,846
Carlsbad
Number 0 7 0 0 1 4 2 0 0 1 2 17
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 46,690 0 0 47,000 12,192 6,096 0 0 163,612 108,188 383,778
Chula Vista
Number 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 47,000 3,048 0 0 0 0 0 50,048
Coronado
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Del Mar
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
El Cajon
Number 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 9
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 13,340 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 0 6,997,070 7,013,458
Encinitas
Number 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 22,880 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 163,612 51,948 78,628
Escondido
Number 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 13
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 73,370 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30,000 42,106 145,476
Imperial Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
National City
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oceanside
Number 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 5
Exposure
(x$1,000) 86,701 6,670 0 0 0 3,048 3,048 0 0 0 37,518 136,985
Otay Water
District
Number 0 16 0 15 11 4 6 0 0 2 8 62
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 106,720 0 30,000 3,001,000 12,192 18,288 0 0 193,612 474,192 3,836,004
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
Number 0 47 0 0 1 4 4 0 0 1 16 73
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 313,490 0 0 47,000 12,192 12,192 0 0 163,612 7,396,966 7,945,452
Poway
Number 0 32 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 6 3 46
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 213,440 0 0 141,000 3,048 3,048 0 0 180,000 155,918 696,454
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
Number 0 33 0 1 2 2 1 0 0 0 1 40
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 220,110 0 2,000 922,000 6,096 3,048 0 0 0 14,430 1,167,684
Rancho Santa
Fe FPD
Number 0 8 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 3 0 15
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 53,360 0 0 1,016,000 0 0 0 0 193,612 0 1,262,972
San Diego (City)
Number 1 260 2 21 34 18 14 1 0 4 70 425
Exposure
(x$1,000) 20,137 1,716,150 3,660 42,000 8,222,000 54,864 42,672 16,629 0 387,223 15,821,496 26,326,831
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 248
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
San Diego
County Water
Authority
Number 1 457 2 53 59 49 33 4 0 26 119 803
Exposure
(x$1,000) 106,837 3,026,340 3,660 106,000 13,537,000 149,352 100,584 33,259 0 1,982,505 37,210,012 56,255,550
San Marcos
Number 0 1 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 12 17
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 6,670 0 4,000 857,000 3,048 0 0 0 0 12,941,120 13,811,838
San Miguel FPD
Number 0 2 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 2 3 13
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 13,340 0 0 94,000 3,048 9,144 0 0 193,612 71,780 384,924
Santee
Number 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 6
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 13,340 0 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 163,612 152,366 332,366
Solana Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Unincorporated
Number 0 258 0 33 37 44 33 0 0 15 34 454
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 1,701,860 0 66,000 6,707,000 131,064 100,584 0 0 1,118,059 1,029,784 10,854,351
Vista
Number 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 13,340 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 0 0 16,388
Total Number 3 1,177 4 125 157 132 102 5 0 63 183 2,050
Total Exposure (x $1,000) 213,675 7,787,890 7,320 250,000 34,685,000 399,288 310,896 49,888 0 4,933,071 82,619,816 131,097,033
Wildfire dataset provided by City of Encinitas for Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 249
TABLE 66: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO INFRASTRUCTURE FROM VERY HIGH WILDFIRE HAZARD
BY JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Alpine FPD
Total KMs 65 3 0 68
Exposure
(x$1,000) 434,832 2,268 0 437,100
Carlsbad
Total KMs 61 13 0 74
Exposure
(x$1,000) 407,897 8,578 0 416,475
Chula Vista
Total KMs 41 4 0 45
Exposure
(x$1,000) 273,960 2,566 0 276,526
Coronado
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Del Mar
Total KMs 0 1 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 652 0 652
El Cajon
Total KMs 16 2 0 18
Exposure
(x$1,000) 107,171 1,079 0 108,250
Encinitas
Total KMs 21 10 0 24
Exposure
(x$1,000) 65,575 6,717 0 140,769
Escondido
Total KMs 40 9 0 49
Exposure
(x$1,000) 267,984 6,149 0 274,133
Imperial Beach
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
National City
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Oceanside
Total KMs 14 3 0 17
Exposure
(x$1,000) 90,850 2,180 0 93,030
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 250
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Otay Water District
Total KMs 216 24 0 240
Exposure
(x1000) 1,438,065 16,706 0 1,454,771
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
Total KMs 137 22 0 159
Exposure
(x1000) 911,453 14,984 0 926,437
Port of San Diego
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x1000) 0 0 0 0
Poway
Total KMs 58 4 0 62
Exposure
(x$1,000) 388,142 2,414 0 390,556
Rainbow Municipal
Water District
Total KMs 262 11 0 273
Exposure
(x1000) 1,744,280 7,763 0 1,752,043
Rancho Santa Fe
FPD
Total KMs 14 2 0 16
Exposure
(x$1,000) 93,346 1,630 0 94,976
San Diego (City)
Total KMs 1,934 126 56 2,116
Exposure
(x$1,000) 12,894,842 85,728 83,589 13,064,159
San Diego County
Water Authority
Total KMs 3,316 292 89 3,697
Exposure
(x1000) 22,108,904 199,668 133,388 22,441,960
San Marcos
Total KMs 40 2 1 43
Exposure
(x$1,000) 266,929 1,183 1,642 269,754
San Miguel FPD
Total KMs 51 21 0 72
Exposure
(x$1,000) 338,443 14,334 0 352,777
Santee
Total KMs 33 2 0 35
Exposure
(x$1,000) 223,061 1,448 0 224,509
Solana Beach
Total KMs 9 3 1 13
Exposure
(x$1,000) 61,678 1,776 254 63,708
Unincorporated
Total KMs 2,185 123 90 2,398
Exposure
(x$1,000) 14,569,105 83,698 134,264 14,787,067
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 251
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Vista
Total KMs 13 3 0 16
Exposure
(x$1,000) 87,845 1,723 0 89,568
Vista Irrigation
District
Total KMs 12 0 1 13
Exposure
(x$1,000) 79,247 0 535 79,782
Total Number 8,538 680 238 9,449
Total Exposure (x $1,000) 58,853,609 463,244 353,672 57,739,002
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 252
TABLE 67: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE FROM HIGH WILDFIRE HAZARD BY JURISDICTION
Residential Buildings at
Risk
Commercial Buildings at
Risk
Jurisdiction Exposed
Population
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Building
Count
Potential
Exposure
(x$1,000)
Alpine FPD 991 788 306,138 138 41,724
Carlsbad 24,365 8,513 3,307,301 238 71,959
Chula Vista 8,464 2,863 1,112,276 57 17,234
Coronado 0 0 0 0 0
Del Mar 940 255 99,068 8 2,419
El Cajon 1,131 168 65,268 20 6,047
Escondido 9,189 1,629 632,867 76 22,979
Imperial Beach 0 6 2,331 0 0
La Mesa 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove 0 0 0 0 0
National City 0 0 0 0 0
Oceanside 18,152 5,128 1,992,228 144 43,538
Otay Water District 15,736 4,372 1,698,522 355 107,334
Padre Dam Municipal
Water District 11,393 3,746 1,455,321 284 85,867
Port Of San Diego 0 0 0 0 0
Poway 7,010 1,974 766,899 202 61,075
Rainbow Municipal
Water District 4,867 2,021 785,159 63 19,048
Rancho Santa Fe FPD 11,976 2,456 954,156 103 31,142
San Diego 30,619 9,281 3,605,669 1,427 431,453
San Diego County Water
Authority 224,927 55,177 21,436,265 3,591 1,085,739
San Marcos 11,262 5,276 2,049,726 124 37,491
San Miguel FPD 5,147 1,672 649,572 263 79,518
Santee 7,644 2,047 795,260 75 22,676
Solana Beach 954 505 196,193 15 4,535
Sweetwater Authority 491 472 183,372 21 6,349
Unincorporated 98,697 16,146 6,272,721 1,157 349,819
Vista 15,117 999 388,112 88 26,607
Vista Irrigation District 8,960 674 261,849 36 10,885
Total 518,032 126,168 49,016,273 8,485 2,565,438
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 253
TABLE 68: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO CRITICAL FACILITIES FROM HIGH WILDFIRE HAZARD BY
JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
Alpine FPD
Number 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 6
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 20,010 0 0 0 6,096 0 0 0 0 18,722 44,828
Carlsbad
Number 0 9 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 7 19
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 60,030 0 0 0 0 6,096 0 0 163,612 452,436 682,174
Chula Vista
Number 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 6
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 20,010 1,830 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 42,550 67,438
Coronado
Number 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 6,670 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6,670
Del Mar
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
El Cajon
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Escondido
Number 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 3 7
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 2,000 1,750,000 0 0 0 0 163,612 98,346 2,013,958
Imperial Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
National City
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oceanside
Number 0 7 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 1 3 15
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 46,690 0 0 47,000 6,096 3,048 0 0 163,612 125,060 391,506
Otay Water
District
Number 0 8 1 0 2 3 1 0 0 0 2 17
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 53,360 1,830 0 922,000 9,144 3,048 0 0 0 201,428 1,190,810
Padre Dam
Municipal
Water District
Number 0 12 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 2 17
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 80,040 0 0 0 6,096 3,048 0 0 0 72,372 161,556
Poway
Number 0 7 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 10
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 46,690 0 0 47,000 0 0 0 0 60,000 0 153,690
Rainbow
Municipal
Water District
Number 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7
Exposure (x$1,000) 0 46,690 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46,690
Rancho Santa
Fe FPD
Number 0 6 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 11
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 40,020 0 0 0 6,096 0 0 0 0 246,864 292,980
San Diego
(City)
Number 2 14 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 20
Exposure
(x$1,000) 161,960 93,380 0 0 0 3,048 3,048 0 0 0 221,852 483,288
San Diego
County Water
Authority
Number 1 94 1 1 12 12 11 0 0 7 35 174
Exposure
(x$1,000) 344,057 622,230 1,830 2,000 3,876,000 36,576 33,528 0 0 878,059 2,012,874 7,807,154
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 254
Jurisdiction Data AIR BRDG BUS COM ELEC EMER GOVT HOSP PORT POT SCH TOTAL
San Marcos
Number 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 6
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 13,340 0 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 264,624 281,012
San Miguel
FPD
Number 0 7 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 11
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 46,690 0 0 47,000 3,048 3,048 0 0 0 158,878 258,664
Santee
Number 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 13,340 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53,650 66,990
Solana Beach
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24,864 24,864
Sweetwater
Authority
Number 0 6 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 8
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 40,020 0 0 0 0 3,048 0 0 0 33,004 76,072
Unincorporated
Number 1 79 0 0 12 10 6 0 0 2 16 126
Exposure
(x$1,000) 196,513 517,430 0 0 2,220,000 30,480 18,288 0 0 327,223 727,346 4,037,280
Vista
Number 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48,396 48,396
Total Number 4 267 3 2 31 35 27 0 0 14 83 466
Total Exposure (x $1,000) 702,530 1,766,640 5,490 4,000 8,909,000 106,680 82,296 0 0 1,756,118 4,803,266 19,806,356
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 255
TABLE 69: POTENTIAL EXPOSURE TO INFRASTRUCTURES FROM HIGH WILDFIRE HAZARD BY
JURISDICTION
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Alpine FPD
Total KMs 6 1 0 7
Exposure
(x$1,000) 38,043 595 0 38,638
Carlsbad
Total KMs 129 24 0 153
Exposure
(x$1,000) 861,708 16,189 0 877,897
Chula Vista
Total KMs 33 2 0 35
Exposure
(x$1,000) 218,981 1,024 0 220,005
Coronado
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Del Mar
Total KMs 1 2 1 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) 2,219 1,200 257 3,676
El Cajon
Total KMs 3 1 0 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) 23,274 438 0 23,712
Escondido
Total KMs 20 2 0 22
Exposure
(x$1,000) 135,087 1,550 0 136,637
Imperial Beach
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
La Mesa
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Lemon Grove
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
National City
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x$1,000) 0 0 0 0
Oceanside
Total KMs 50 4 0 54
Exposure
(x$1,000) 330,311 2,580 0 332,891
Otay Water
District
Total KMs 84 10 0 94
Exposure
(x1000) 559,789 6,922 0 566,711
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 256
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Padre Dam
Municipal Water
District
Total KMs 24 3 0 27
Exposure
(x1000) 161,849 2,232 0 164,081
Port of San
Diego
Total KMs 0 0 0 0
Exposure
(x1000) 0 0 0 0
Poway
Total KMs 14 1 0 15
Exposure
(x$1,000) 96,648 227 0 96,875
Rainbow
Municipal Water
District
Total KMs 35 2 0 37
Exposure
(x1000) 235,403 1,607 0 237,010
Rancho Santa Fe
FPD
Total KMs 14 1 0 15
Exposure
(x$1,000) 95,745 432 0 96,177
San Diego (City)
Total KMs 130 6 2 138
Exposure
(x$1,000) 864,555 4,184 2,817 871,556
San Diego
County Water
Authority
Total KMs 683 119 19 821
Exposure
(x1000) 4,553,847 81,510 28,331 4,663,688
San Marcos
Total KMs 40 1 3 44
Exposure
(x$1,000) 267,402 843 5,094 273,339
San Miguel FPD
Total KMs 24 2 0 26
Exposure
(x$1,000) 163,233 1,433 0 164,666
Santee
Total KMs 13 2 0 15
Exposure
(x$1,000) 87,222 1,340 0 88,562
Solana Beach
Total KMs 1 2 1 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) 1,572 1,282 701 3,555
Sweetwater
Authority
Total KMs 1 3 0 4
Exposure
(x$1,000) 6,227 2,058 0 8,285
Unincorporated
Total KMs 420 71 32 523
Exposure
(x$1,000) 2,798,149 48,323 47,473 2,893,945
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 257
Jurisdiction Data HWY OIL
GAS RR TOTAL
Vista
Total KMs 12 2 0 14
Exposure
(x$1,000) 83,218 1,463 0 84,681
Vista Irrigation
District
Total KMs 2 0 0 2
Exposure
(x$1,000) 14,101 0 0 14,101
Total Number 1,739 261 58 2,058
Total Exposure (x $1,000) 11,598,583 177,432 84,673 11,860,688
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 258
5.3.11. HUMAN-CAUSED HAZARDS
The vulnerability assessment information for human-caused hazards is considered sensitive homeland
security information and is provided in a separate, confidential document (Attachment A).
5.3.12. CLIMATE CHANGE (EXTREME HEAT, DROUGHT, COMPOUNDING EVENTS)
The following paragraphs provide an assessment summary of Climate Change impacts and threats to
people and property in the San Diego region, provided by planning partners from Scripps Institution of
Oceanography (more sources are listed in this plan’s appendices):138F139F139F
144
Scripps Institution of Oceanography Assessment Summary
Community adaptations to climate change should best be conducted with an awareness of the existing local
climate, along with spatially specific climate projections. This section summarizes and updates findings of
the San Diego Region Report (Kalansky et al., 2018) and the San Diego County Ecosystems Report
(Jennings et al., 2018) which have recently synthesized the current state of the science and understanding
of the impacts from climate variability and future climate change in the region. The section will be organized
by key climate-related phenomena: temperature, precipitation, Santa Ana winds and wildfires, coastal low
clouds, and sea level. The section concludes by discussing compounding extreme events.
Warming Temperature, Extreme Heat, and Drought
As has been projected across California (Pierce et al., 2018), models indicate that temperature in San Diego
will warm progressively through the 21st Century. By the end of the 21st Century, the projected warming
ranges from 4˚F to 9˚F, with magnitude depending greatly upon global greenhouse gas emissions. Warming
is projected to be greater in late summer and early fall than in other months of the year, and this monthly
difference is more pronounced for minimum daily temperatures and under a non-mitigated greenhouse gas
emission scenario (RCP 8.5). Because the oceans warm more slowly than land masses, temperature
increases along the coast are projected to be about 1˚F less than other locations throughout the region.
The most severe impacts of rising temperature will likely result during occurrences of weather patterns that
cause extreme heat. Heat waves have impacts on human health, ecosystems, agriculture, energy demand,
and infrastructure. By the end of the century, similar to the average temperature change, the hottest day of
the year is projected to increase by 4-9˚F depending on the greenhouse gas emission scenario. The
frequency, or the probability of a heat wave occurrence, does not necessarily follow background warming
however (Guirguis et al., 2018). For example, under 6˚F of warming, nighttime frequency of heat waves is
projected to increase by approximately 51% in the coastal zone, while that of daytime heat waves is only
projected to increase by 23% (Jennings et al., 2018). Unlike the coasts, the local mountains, such as
Cuyamaca have a similar increase (~30%) in the probability of nighttime and daytime heat waves.
This contrast is a result of differences in the number of days of extreme temperature (long warm tails).
Relative to background warming, which is projected to be stronger inland than at the coast, scientists
(Gershunov & Guirguis, 2012) have projected more intense future heat waves along the coast compared to
inland areas. In San Diego, as in the rest of California, coastal low clouds modulate temperatures by
providing a cooling effect (Iacobellis & Cayan, 2013) while their absence can boost heat waves relative to
normal temperatures (Clemesha et al., 2018). This relationship has an impact on projections of heatwaves;
however, the sensitivity of coastal low clouds to climate change is complicated and is an area of active
research at present. Moreover, winter Santa Ana wind-driven coastal heat wave activity is on the rise
(Gershunov et al. 2021) and these events are known to carry a health burden (Schwarz et al. 2020).
The San Diego Region Report highlighted that the most vulnerable populations to health impacts from
extreme events, such as heatwaves, are those who lack resources or are uninsured, are socially isolated, or
144 Higbee, Melissa, Daniel Cayan, Sam Iacobellis, Mary Tyree (2014). Report from San Diego Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Training Workshop #1:
Climate Change and Hazards in San Diego. ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability. Accessed July 7, 2014.
http://www.icleiusa.org/library/documents/training-workshop-report/view
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 259
whose health is already compromised. For example, cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses are
exacerbated by heat and air pollution (Analitis et al., 2014) and psychiatric illness has been shown to triple
the risk of death from extreme heat (Bouchama et al., 2007). Heatwaves increase morbidity and mortality as
was seen with the July 2006 heat wave in California, which exhibited unprecedented magnitude and
unusually high humidity levels (Gershunov et al., 2009). The 2006 extreme heat wave resulted in over 600
excess deaths (Ostro et al., 2009), over 1200 excess hospitalizations for cardiovascular and other diseases
(Guirguis et al., 2014), and over 16,000 excess emergency-department visits (Knowlton et al., 2009). In
addition, recent research since the San Diego report has shown heat waves in the week prior can cause
preterm birth (Ilango et al., 2020) and significant increases in renal hospital admissions for urinary tract
infection, septicemia (blood poisoning), urinary stones, and composite kidney disease (Malig et al., 2019).
Throughout California and in San Diego, the effect of high apparent temperature, a combination of hot
temperatures and high humidity, can have a greater impact in mortality (heat-related deaths) in coastal
areas than inland areas (Basu, 2009). Guirguis et al, (2018, 2014) found that higher daily rates of heat
wave-related hospitalization in coastal areas was caused by a lack of air conditioning, while community
members in inland areas more often did have air conditioning. Building on this, McElroy et al. (McElroy et
al., 2020), examined heat wave definitions (length, threshold percentiles and nighttime versus daytime
temperature) and found that community members in climatologically warmer inland and desert climate
zones in San Diego had more hospitalizations during heatwaves that had high nighttime warming, as
compared to community members in the coastal zone. Both studies underscore the need for heat warning
systems that account for differences in the climate zones throughout San Diego.
Furthermore, warming temperatures statewide could result in reduced water supply for the San Diego
region. The State Water Project and Colorado River provide 75% to 95% of the water supply for the San
Diego region, depending on the year. Both water supplies originate in mountain snowpack. Over the past 50
years across most of the Southwest, there has been less late-winter precipitation falling as snow, earlier
snowmelt, and earlier arrival of most of the year’s streamflow. Projections of further warming will result in
reduced snowpack, which could translate into reduced water supply for the San Diego region’s cities,
agriculture, and ecosystems. An additional threat to water supply is the vulnerability of the levees protecting
the California Delta, which feeds the State Water Project.
While the San Diego region’s water supply is likely to decrease, water demand is expected to also increase
approximately 29% by 2050 due to economic growth and population pressures. Local water managers also
report that higher temperatures could lead to increased demand for water for irrigation. Water shortages
could become more frequent and more severe in the future, straining the local economy.
In Southern California, high temperatures also have great impacts on energy and transportation. A study of
Los Angeles, which examined vulnerabilities of energy infrastructure at the neighborhood level, estimated
losses up to 20% of peak demand safe operating electrical system capacity during projected extreme
temperatures at the end of the century. High temperatures in neighboring San Diego County are expected to
have similar impacts. Possible adaptations identified for the Los Angeles case, including higher density
housing and reduction of sunlight absorbed (increasing albedo) are relevant for the San Diego region
(Burillo et al., 2018, 2019). Data relating to temperature impacts on transportation in Southern California is
limited, but studies elsewhere indicate that high temperatures must be included as design criteria in order to
avoid damage to roads and rail lines (Sias-Daniel et al., 2014).
Research is advancing on effective adaptations to help combat the impact of heat. As Guirguis et al. (2018)
showed, access to air conditioning can help prevent hospitalizations during extreme heat events. People
living in hotter areas within cities have suffered an overall 6% higher risk of mortality/ morbidity compared to
those in cooler areas, and those living in less vegetated areas had 5% higher risk compared to those living
in more vegetated areas (Schinasi et al., 2018). In Los Angeles, increases in roof albedo, through light-
colored reflecting roof surface treatments, reduces near-surface air temperature (Mohegh et al., 2018). With
respect to infrastructure, the increase of solar energy generation in San Diego will help to offset increased
electricity demand during hot sunny days, although this local source of energy will not help to satisfy
nighttime energy needs for air conditioning on hot nights, and will be less effective during, cloudy, hot and
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 260
often humid days. The addition of batteries can extend solar power's ability to provide energy during
nighttime and on cloudy days.
Highly Volatile Precipitation
Precipitation in Southern California has the highest year-to-year variability of any place in the continental
U.S (Dettinger et al., 2011). In the San Diego region this variability is exemplified by the unusually wet water
years of 2005, 2011, and 2017 and the droughts of 2001-2004, 2007-2010 and 2012-2016. As is the case
for Northern California (Dettinger & Cayan, 2014), the high year-to-year variability in San Diego County is
driven by extreme precipitation events, wherein days with precipitation at or exceeding the 95th percentile
account for 80% of the year-to-year variability in annual total precipitation (Jennings et al., 2018). The
heaviest events mostly occur in winter, although the region occasionally experiences high rainfall events
from tropical storms or convective rainfall patterns during late summer and early fall. Large spatial variability
adds to the complexity of the climate regime in the region. Mean annual precipitation ranges widely in San
Diego County, between approximately 8-36 inches with most differences resulting from topographic
influences - most precipitation on the west and south facing slopes and least in the rain shadow of the local
mountains.
Model projections indicate that precipitation in California will become even more variable in future decades.
While days with measurable precipitation become less frequent in Southern California (Pierce et al., 2013;
Polade et al., 2014), extreme precipitation events will intensify (Polade et al., 2017). By the end of the
century, the average wettest day every five years is projected to increase by 10-30%. Driving the
precipitation regime change are atmospheric rivers, which are transports of moisture from the tropics over
the Pacific Ocean in long, thin streams of moisture, like rivers in the sky. Precipitation from atmospheric
rivers is projected to increase in the future, while precipitation from other forms of precipitation is projected
to decrease. This tendency is particularly evident for the most extreme events — model projections suggest
the strongest increases in the wettest 1% of days, nearly all of which are found to be atmospheric rivers
(Gershunov et al., 2019).
Atmospheric rivers are projected to be associated with floods, annual maximum flow events, 8% more often
in the end of the century as compared to 1950-2000 (Cao et al., 2020). Historically atmospheric rivers have
caused the greatest flood damages to property in California and elsewhere along the West Coast as
compared to other types of storms (Corringham et al., 2019). Also, coastal runoff created by atmospheric
rivers has been shown to result in fecal pollution in coastal waters (Aguilera et al., 2019). In future decades,
projected increases in precipitation from atmospheric rivers will likely increase both the flood damages and
water pollution as a result of the extreme precipitation.
The average of several climate models project that Southern California will be drier in the future. However,
the models project a range of changes in annual precipitation, due to differences in the representation of
atmospheric circulation changes across different global climate models, and to the highly variable nature of
the San Diego precipitation (Gershunov et al., 2019). Drought, both interannual and annual, impacts
ecosystems and enhances wildfire risk. The recent 2012-2016 drought may be an early form of future
droughts in California, not only having diminished annual precipitation amounts, but also featuring
temperatures exceeding historical levels.
This combination of warming and drying results in greater evaporative demand from plants and the land
surface, which exacerbates the drought (McEvoy et al., 2020; Williams et al., 2015). While reductions of
annual precipitation are somewhat uncertain, the increase in temperature is baked into the future because
of greenhouse gas accumulation in the atmosphere. The strong likelihood of warming continuing through
future decades would indicate that enhanced evapotranspiration and landscape drying are quite certain.
Because of this, future projections of drought that incorporate the evapotranspiration as well as precipitation
project more multi-year droughts relative to projections of drought that only include precipitation (Kalansky
et al. 2018; McEvoy et al., 2020).
Ecosystems have adapted to the high variability of San Diego’s hydroclimate, but this variability is projected
to increase. The recent 2012-2016 drought showed that certain species were more susceptible to multi-year
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 261
droughts than others (Venturas et al., 2016). Meanwhile, recurrent drying, along with persistent warming
since 1999 has pushed the Southwest toward “mega drought” (Williams et al., 2020). Extreme drought has
the potential to intensify and change community composition and structure of ecosystems. Drought has
severe consequences because it operates at spatial scales larger than other disturbances such as fire
(Jennings et al., 2018).
Adding to impacts caused by interannual drought, the seasonal drought that is characteristic of the
Mediterranean climate is projected to become longer with reduced precipitation in the shoulder seasons,
spring, and fall. Such a shift toward a narrower precipitation season would stress some plant communities
because spring features the largest increases in biomass for many plants due to the availability of moisture
as well as the longer daylight hours (Parker et al., 2016). Thus, the projected spring drying has the potential
to limit the growth of plants during their primary growing season. The largest impact of fall drying might likely
be the increased occurrence of dry live and dry fuels during the season when Santa Ana winds occur, which
would intensify the fall wildfire season.
Growing Threats of Wildfire from Warmer Climate and Santa Ana Winds
Santa Ana conditions erase the presence of the North Pacific air mass that usually blankets San Diego
County. Santa Ana events typically last a few days and often carry strong and gusty winds from east or
northeast directions that produce extreme dryness. Santa Ana Winds bring some of the highest winds
experienced by many parts of San Diego County. Peaking in early winter, Santa Ana winds originate in the
elevated Great Basin as cool air masses and are pushed southwestward by a synoptic pressure gradient
creating offshore winds throughout San Diego (Hughes & Hall, 2010).
Clear skies are typically associated with Santa Ana wind events as the offshore winds blow air pollution
offshore (Aguilera et al., 2020a). Some Santa Anas are quite cool, owing to their origins from cold dry Great
Basin air masses, but the majority of Santa Anas are warm. In fact, hot, dry Santa wind events have
accounted for many of the extremely warm (99th percentile) days within the September through May period:
90% of the warm extremes in winter, 30% in fall and 40% in spring. These non-summer heatwaves increase
hospitalizations for dehydration, renal failure and stroke (McElroy et al., 2020).
San Diego’s highest wildfire risk occurs during Santa Ana winds. In recent years, the region suffered some
of California’s largest conflagrations, including the September 1970 Laguna fire (175,425 acres burned), the
October 2003 Cedar fire (273,246 acres burned) and the October 2007 Witch (197,990 acres burned) and
Harris (90,440 acres burned) fires, all fanned by Santa Ana winds. The Santa Ana season typically
commences in October, when vegetation is driest. An ignition of parched vegetation under this strong, gusty,
dry wind causes wildfires that are extremely difficult if not impossible to control. This explains the timing of
the peak of the traditional southern California wildfire season — October — when the Santa Ana season
starts and before the first rainstorms of winter. During fires under Santa Ana conditions, air pollution
(particulate matter under 2.5 microns - PM2.5) increases throughout San Diego and PM2.5 from wildfire is
up to 10 times more harmful than air pollution from other sources (Aguilera et al., 2020b).
In addition to the personal safety, infrastructure and public health hazards posed by wildfires, San Diego
ecosystems are also sensitive to too frequent fires. A growing risk in a warmer, fire-prone climate is the
conversion of woody chaparral and coastal sage shrublands to grasses and other weedy herbaceous
vegetation (Syphard et al., 2018), or the conversion from native coniferous forests to shrublands or exotic
grasslands (Franklin, 2010).
Climate model projections of Santa Ana winds indicate that their activity could decrease in the warmer
future. In the second half of the century under a non-reduction of greenhouse gas emission scenario (RCP
8.5) Santa Ana wind frequency is projected to decrease by between 8-20% and winds speeds between 5-
10% relative to a historical period of 1950-1999. Further, the Santa Ana activity is projected to decrease
mainly in the shoulder seasons, fall and spring, relative to winter (Guzman-Morales & Gershunov, 2019).
The decrease in Santa Ana wind activity in the fall may help mitigate future wildfire risk resulting from drier
autumns and more frequent multi-year droughts.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 262
On the other hand, projected delays in the wet season (Pierce et al., 2013) would extend the presence of
dry vegetation into the December peak of Santa Ana wind activity (Guzman-Morales et al., 2016) which will
always see more frequent Santa Ana winds than October ever did (Guzman-Morales & Gershunov, 2019).
December fires could occasionally be fanned by back-to-back Santa Ana wind events and have the potential
to grow to unprecedented proportions. These were the antecedent conditions that led to the Lilac Fire in San
Diego and one of the largest fires in California history, the Thomas Fire, which burned in Ventura and Santa
Barbara. The Thomas Fire continued to burn throughout most of December 2017 and into January 2018,
when its smoldering remains were finally put out by the first significant rain of the season — an atmospheric
river, which caused deadly debris flows.
A later start of the wet season is already apparent in the observations, while a decrease in Santa Ana wind
activity has not yet emerged from the natural variability (Williams et al., 2019). Moreover, there are hot and
cold flavors of the Santa Ana (Gershunov et al. 2021), of which the hot SAWs spread the largest wildfires.
Research yet needs to be carried out to understand the possibly differential impact of climate change on the
two flavors of SAWs.
Variable Marine Layer Clouds
Coastal low stratus clouds, also referred to by scientists as Marine Layer Clouds (MLC) or by locals in
Southern California as “May gray” and “June gloom,” are a defining and highly variable aspect of coastal
California summer climate. MLC in San Diego are common in late spring and early summer when cool moist
air near the ocean surface and sinking warm air above cause a temperature inversion which traps low level
moisture and creates optimal conditions for these blanketlike stratiform clouds. When present, MLC shield
the coast from summertime heat and are an important weather pattern to the coastal ecosystems in San
Diego (Jennings et al., 2018) and as important modulators of coastal expressions of summertime heat
waves (Clemesha et al., 2018).
The stability of the lower atmosphere and ocean temperatures are important in the development of MLC, but
there are additional drivers that interact on various spatial and temporal scales (Clemesha et al., 2016,
2017; Schwartz, 2015). Because global climate models are coarse-grid calculations and only poorly resolve
the high gradient atmosphere-ocean structure along the California coast, and because the controls that
govern the presence of coastal stratus are a balance of competing large and smaller scale processes, MLC
appear to be poorly predicted. These factors and interactions need to be better understood to provide
credible predictions of any future changes in MLC along San Diego County’s coastal zone under future
climate change.
Sea-Level Rise, Coastal Storms, and Erosion
The coast is an important part of San Diego’s landscape, culture, and economy. It is also one of the more
vulnerable landscapes in San Diego as many of its beaches, cliffs, and estuaries are already experiencing
erosion and flooding, and these hazards are expected to accelerate in frequency and intensity with climate
change.
Over the last century sea level has risen about 0.6 ft over much of the Central and Southern California
coast. Global sea level provides an important indicator of the state of the warming climate, but regional sea-
level rise varies across coastal communities because processes that cause sea-level rise interact differently
and vary across coastal regions (Hamlington et al., 2020). Between 1980 and 2000, sea level along San
Diego was relatively stable, even decreasing slightly as stronger wind stress gradients over the eastern
Pacific suppressed the global rise along North America.
Since 2000, sea level has been increasing as the wind systems relaxed once again (Bromirski et al., 2011,
2012; Hamlington et al., 2016). For the San Diego region, sea-level rise models project similar ranges in
elevated sea-levels until 2050 (approximately 0.6 to 1.3 feet). In the second half of the century, sea-level
rise is expected to accelerate significantly, but there is greater uncertainty as to how extreme this rise will be
at the end of the century (0.9 to 4 feet) with the possibility that it is much higher (Griggs et al., 2017). This is
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 263
related to unknown global greenhouse gas emission reductions and uncertainties about how rapid ocean
warming will impact ice sheet melting (Griggs et al., 2017; Kalansky et al., 2018)
Given the increased rate of sea level rise, in the near term the greatest impacts from sea level rise are
mostly likely to occur during events that combine high tides, El Nino and both locally and distantly generated
wind-driven waves. For example, the generally elevated sea levels along the California coast during the
super El Nino of 1982-83 were heightened by large winter storms and high waves during high tide periods,
causing enormous coastal damage along the San Diego County shoreline (Flick, 1998).
The next period of unusually high tides will occur in 2021 from 16.8 and 4.4-year lunar tidal cycles, and will
produce peak monthly tides about 0.5 ft higher than years in between cycle peaks (Cayan et al., 2008;
Zetler & Flick, 1985). Hazardous coastal storm events are expected to become more severe as global sea
level rises. San Diego’s long history of coastal monitoring and research are now being used more to
advance our understanding of how extreme events as repetitive stressors are increasing San Diego’s
coastal vulnerabilities. Recent improvements in coastal wave forecasting (Crosby et al., 2016, 2017)
coupled with enhanced wave runup modeling are improving coastal flood forecasting capabilities for San
Diego communities by defining the incident wave conditions and tide levels that result in site-specific
flooding (Fiedler et al., 2018, 2020).
A long history of coastal monitoring and analysis by San Diego researchers (Ludka et al., 2019) has led to
improved wave forecasts, improved understanding of sediment processes, including beach nourishment
(addition of sand to the beaches) and cliff erosion, and improved understanding of local estuarine dynamics
and ecosystems. Beach processes and sediment budgets are typically characterized within a particular
littoral cell, a series of sand sources (such as rivers, streams, and eroding coastal bluffs) that provide sand
to the shoreline, sand sinks (such as coastal dunes and submarine canyons) where sand is lost from the
shoreline, and alongshore transport that moves sand along the shoreline.
Over the years, human activity, such as damming rivers, has limited the amount of sand that enters the
littoral cell. For example, 60% (40% dammed and 20% urbanized and not dammed) of the Oceanside
Littoral Cell watershed no longer generates beach sand (Young et al., 2010). Beach sand levels and waves
have been monitored at selected San Diego beaches for as long as 17 years (Torrey Pines, Imperial Beach,
Solana Beach, and Cardiff Beach) including two energetic El Nino winters that showed significant beach
degradation (Ludka et al., 2019). These observations have led to a better understanding of seasonal beach
sand level changes, areas of chronic erosion (Doria et al., 2016; Yates et al., 2009, 2011) and coastal
impacts associated with El Niño events (Barnard et al., 2017; Doria et al., 2016; Ludka et al., 2015, 2016,
2018; Young, 2018).
Cliff erosion is a natural coastal process for much of northern San Diego County. In San Diego, between
1998 and 2009 the mean cliff top retreat was 0.46 ft/yr (Young, 2018). San Onofre State Beach is a cliff
erosion hot spot in San Diego County due to extensive deep-seated landslide (Adam P Young, 2015). Other
areas in north San Diego County, such as Encinitas and Del Mar, have also experienced a number of
significant cliff failures in recent years. Researchers are advancing understanding of how wave-cliff impacts
and rainfall contribute to both upper and lower coastal cliff erosion providing insight into how increasing sea
levels, and storm driven waves and rainfall may further accelerate this erosion (Young et al., 2021)
Additionally, beach nourishment, or the addition of sand, is an important part of the sediment supply to
beaches throughout the San Diego region, beginning at the end of World War II. SANDAG spent $44 million
in 2001 and 2012 on non-opportunistic nourishment by placing 3.5 million cubic yards of sand on beaches
throughout the County and north San Diego County has developed a 50-year, $160 million plan for beach
nourishment (Diehl, 2015). The impacts of beach nourishment are complex as there are several physical
processes that interact to determine the impacts on flooding, erosion, and ecosystems. Successive beach
monitoring during the nourishments provides insight into how site-specific sediment transport processes,
sand grain size, timing of the nourishment and the intensity and frequency of storm-driven wave energy can
affect the success of a nourishment (Ludka et al., 2016, 2018, 2019).
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment 264
Compounding Extreme Events
One concern, both historically and in the future is a sequence of hazards, or “compounding extreme
events.” For example, the largest fire in California history, the Thomas Fire, and subsequent Montecito
debris flows, unleashed from the barren landscape that was burned off by the Thomas Fire, is an example
of a devastating sequence of climate related events. The December 2017 Thomas fire burned 281,893
acres occurred several months after a very wet winter (more than 22 inches November through May as an
average over the South Coast Climate Division) and immediately following an extremely dry September
through November that delivered only about 0.3 inches of precipitation.
When a strong Santa Ana wind event occurred in early December, the dry landscape provided the fuel for a
devastating wildfire that was fanned by strong and back-to-back Santa Ana Wind events common in
December. The conditions allowed the Thomas fire to grow to the largest wildfire in Southern California’s
modern history. The first measurable rainfall occurred on January 8. During the storm, high intensity rainfall
resulted in devastating post-fire debris flows in Montecito and Carpinteria resulting in 23 deaths, 246
structures destroyed, and 167 damaged. This sequence of devastating events has the potential to become
more frequent given the projections of a drier fall, extending the annual seasonal drought into the main
Santa Ana season, increasing the likelihood that a strong Santa Ana wind event occurs over a dry
landscape that can provide fuel for the fire. Further extreme precipitation is projected to become more
extreme, leading to the increased possibility of post-fire debris flows.
Other relevant compound co-occurring extremes for the San Diego area include public health impact form
waves, wildfires, droughts, extreme precipitation, as well as coastal and inland flooding. A frequent
compounder of wildfire and smoke impacts on public health (Aguilera et al. 2020, 2021a, 2021b) is the
coastal heat that is often produced by Santa Ana winds (Gershunov et al. 2021), also known to impact
health in the fall, winter, and spring (Schwarz et al. 2020). Another possible compounding event that could
heighten the potential for increased frequency and severity of impacts in the future is the combination of a
storm causing both terrestrial and coastal flooding. As sea level rises, and extreme precipitation becomes
more extreme, the combination of coastal and storm water flooding has the potential to have devastating
impacts on property, infrastructure, and water quality.
SECTION FIVE | Risk Assessment
265
SECTION SIX: Develop a Mitigation Strategy
Decorative Image Photo by
CAL FIRE San Diego Communications Bureau
San Diego County, California
2023
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 266
6. SECTION SIX: DEVELOP A MITIGATION STRATEGY
After each participating jurisdiction reviewed the Risk Assessment (Section 5), jurisdictional
leads met with their individual Local Planning Groups (LPG) to identify appropriate
jurisdictional-level goals, objectives, and mitigation action items. This section of the Plan
incorporates:
1. Mitigation goals and objectives
2. Mitigation actions/priorities
3. An action plan/implementation strategy
The mitigation strategy serves as the long-term blueprint for reducing potential losses
identified in the risk assessment. The mitigation strategy describes how the community will
accomplish the overall purpose, or mission, of the planning process.
The mitigation strategy is made up of three main required components: mitigation goals,
mitigation actions, and an action plan for implementation. These provide the framework to
identify, prioritize, and implement actions to reduce risk to hazards.
Mitigation goals are general guidelines that explain what the community wants to achieve
with the plan They are usually broad policy-type statements that are long-term, and they
represent visions for reducing or avoiding losses from the identified hazards
Mitigation actions are specific projects and activities that help achieve the goals.
The action plan describes how the mitigation actions will be implemented, including how
those actions will be prioritized, administered, and incorporated into the community’s existing
planning mechanisms. In a multi-jurisdictional plan, each jurisdiction must have an action
plan specific to that jurisdiction and its vulnerabilities.
Although not required, some communities choose to develop objectives to help define or
organize mitigation actions. Objectives are broader than specific actions, but are measurable,
unlike goals. Objectives connect goals with the actual mitigation actions.
Each jurisdiction reviewed hazard profile and loss estimation information presented in
Section 5 and used this as a basis for developing mitigation goals and objectives. Other
important inputs to the development of jurisdiction-level goals and objectives include
performing reviews of existing local plans, policy documents, and regulations for consistency
and complementary goals, as well as soliciting input from the public.
6.1. MITIGATION ACTION EVALUATION
Mitigation actions that address the goals and objectives developed in the previous step were
identified, evaluated, and prioritized. These actions form the core of the mitigation plan.
Jurisdictions conducted a capabilities assessment, reviewed and incorporated existing local
plans, policies, and regulations for any other capabilities relevant to hazard mitigation
planning.
An analysis of their capability to carry out these implementation measures regarding hazard
and loss prevention was conducted. The capabilities assessment required an inventory of
each jurisdiction’s legal, administrative, fiscal, and technical capacities to support hazard
mitigation planning.
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 267
After completion of the capabilities assessment, each jurisdiction evaluated and prioritized
their proposed mitigations. As part of this process, each jurisdiction reviewed the actions
detailed in the 2018 plan to see if they were completed, had been dropped due to issues
such as lack of political support or lack of funding, or were on-going and should be continued
in the new plan. The status of each jurisdiction’s action items is detailed in Section 7 of this
Plan and jurisdiction-specific Annexes, if applicable. In all cases, the mitigation actions
selected are prioritized based on the benefit of the action compared to the cost (in terms of
funding, staff time, time to complete) of conducting that action.
Also considered were cost-benefit reviews, changes in development, safe growth audits,
mitigation efforts, mitigation potential improvement, and current/updated priorities. Each
participant used their local planning group to evaluate alternative mitigation actions by
considering the implications of each action item. One potential method available to the cities
to accomplish this was the STAPLEE method. The STAPLEE criteria is a tool used to assist
communities in deciding which actions to include in their implementation strategy.
The table below shows the evaluation and prioritization of each mitigation action being
considered by the Planning Team. For each action, evaluate the potential benefits and/or
likelihood of successful implementation for the criteria defined below.
Rank each of the criteria with a -1, 0 or 1 using the following scale:
• 1 = Highly effective or feasible
• 0 = Neutral
• -1 = Ineffective or not feasible
STAPLEE Evaluation Criteria:
• Life Safety – How effective will the action be at protecting lives and preventing injuries?
• Property Protection – How significant will the action be at eliminating or reducing
damage to structures and infrastructure?
• Technical – Is the mitigation action technically feasible? Is it a long-term solution?
Eliminate actions that, from a technical standpoint, will not meet the goals.
• Political – Is there overall public support for the mitigation action? Is there the political
will to support it?
• Legal – Does the community have the authority to implement the action?
• Environmental – What are the potential environmental impacts of the action? Will it
comply with environmental regulations?
• Social – Will the proposed action adversely affect one segment of the population? Will
the action disrupt established neighborhoods, break up voting districts, or cause the
relocation of lower income people?
• Administrative – Does the community have the personnel and administrative
capabilities to implement the action and maintain it or will outside help be necessary?
• Local Champion – Is there a strong advocate for the action or project among local
departments and agencies that will support the action’s implementation?
• Other Community Objectives – Does the action advance other community objectives,
such as capital improvements, economic development, environmental quality, or open
space preservation? Does it support the policies of the comprehensive plan?
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 268
Letters preceding Mitigation Action titles correspond with Section 6.2’s “Prioritized Actions”
sections.
TABLE 70: MITIGATION ACTIONS
Mitigation Action Life
Safety
Property
Protection Technical Political Legal Environ
mental Social Admini
strative
Local
Champio
n
Other
Community
Objectives
Total
Score
Local Plans and Regulations
D. Climate Change
Planning - - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
G. Building Codes - - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
H. Hazard
Mitigation Action
Adoption
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10
I. MSCP Open
Space Acquisitions
Efforts
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10
K. Agricultural/Live
stock Pass
Program:
- - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
L. Operational
Area Emergency
Operations Plan
(OA
EOP)/Associated
Annexes, Regional
Emergency Plans,
Concept of
Operations
(ConOps),
Standard
Operating
Procedures
(SOPs),
Emergency
Operations Center
(EOC)
Planning/Training,
Work Plans and
Charters
- - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
M. Excessive Heat
Awareness
Promotion,
Resilience,
Adaptation and
Mitigation
1 - - - - - - - - - 1
N. Regional
Planning Efforts - - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 269
Mitigation Action Life
Safety
Property
Protection Technical Political Legal Environ
mental Social Admini
strative
Local
Champio
n
Other
Community
Objectives
Total
Score
Structure and Infrastructure Projects
A. Limit
Development in
Floodplains and
Other Hazardous
Areas
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10
E. Expansion of
Automatic Local
Evaluation in Real-
Time (ALERT) to
Vulnerable and
Underserved
Communities:
- - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
F. Community
Rating System
(CRS)
Implementation
and Improvement
- - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
Natural Systems Protection
B. Forest
Management 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10
C. Invasive and
Noxious Weed
Control
(Vegetation
Management)
- - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
J. Wetland
Protection and
Restoration Efforts
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10
Education and Awareness Programs
M. Excessive Heat
Awareness
Promotion,
Resilience,
Adaptation and
Mitigation:
1 - - - - - - - - - 1
O. Training and
Exercises - - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
P. Public
Education and
Outreach
Programs:
- - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
Q. Sustainable
Department Goals 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10
R. Three-Day
Preparedness Kits - - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 270
S. San Diego
County Fire
Community
Emergency
Response Team’s
Community
Emergency
Preparedness
Outreach Program
- - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
T. Free Residential
Knox Box Program - - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
U. Free Wildland
Urban Interface
(WUI)
Classes/Training
for Communities
- - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
V. The California
Wildfire Mitigation
Program - Home-
Hardening
Initiative
- - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
W. Support
Symposiums - - - - - - - - - - Not
rated
Mitigation Actions marked as “Not rated” in the table above are often considered existing
County/Department priorities.
6.2. MITIGATION GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS IMPLEMENTATION
This version of the Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan was revised over the past five
years to reflect changes in development, progress in local mitigation efforts, and changes in
priorities. Generally, hazard priorities remained unchanged, though some hazards’ (such as
Climate Change, Drought, and Extreme Heat) prevalence and/or probability of occurrence
increased and, therefore, needed an updated Vulnerability Assessment.
All Hazard Profiles were researched for more modern content, data, and details.
This plan’s Goals, Objectives, and Actions were updated from the last version to
reflect current priorities within existing plans such as the County Strategic
Plan/Initiatives and the County General Plan’s Safety Element.
Local Mitigation Planning Groups (LMPGs) are comprised of individuals from various
departments bringing their experience and knowledge of the region, the jurisdiction, and local
constraints to assist in the evaluation of the hazards and the development of mitigations
strategies, goals, objectives, and actions. Individual local planning group membership and
decisions are discussed in each jurisdictions’ annex.
There were four goals established by the County of San Diego’s LMPG. They are listed in
order of importance and do not differ significantly from 2018 goals. Instead, these updated
goals reflect consolidated versions of 2018 repetitive sentences and were rewritten to use
FEMA and existing County/Regional plans’ terminology. Once developed, County staff
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 271
submitted the plan to Governor’s Office of Emergency Services and FEMA for approval.
Once approved, the Plan will be submitted to the Unified Disaster Council, then to the San
Diego County Board of Supervisors for adoption.
The goals and objectives were developed by considering the risk assessment findings,
localized hazard identification and loss/exposure estimates, and an analysis of the
jurisdiction’s current capabilities assessment. These preliminary goals, objectives, and
actions were developed to represent a vision of long-term hazard reduction or enhancement
of capabilities.
To help further development of these goals and objectives, the LMPG compiled and reviewed
current jurisdictional sources including the County’s planning documents, codes, and
ordinances. In addition, County representatives met with County OES to specifically discuss
these hazard-related goals, objectives, and actions as they related to the plan.
For each goal, one or more objectives were identified that provide strategies to attain the
goal. Where appropriate, the County has identified a range of specific actions to achieve the
objective and goal. A mitigation action is a specific action, project, activity, or process taken to
reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from hazards and their impacts.
Implementing mitigation actions helps achieve the plan’s mission and goals. The actions to
reduce vulnerability to threats and hazards form the core of the plan and are a key outcome
of the planning process.
Mitigation actions that will provide the most benefits in the least amount of time with available
resources were selected as the highest priorities. This does not mean other actions are not
considered important. It merely indicates that the LMPG set out to complete actions with
current resources. The other actions will be completed as additional resources become
available.
Below is a broad, general list of the County of San Diego’s hazard-related Goals,
Objectives, and Actions as prepared by the LMPG, and in conjunction with the Hazard
Mitigation Planning Group (HMPG), locally elected officials, and the public.
The County of San Diego developed the broad list of Goals, Objectives, and Actions to
assist in the implementation and achieving of the four identified hazard mitigation
goals. For each Goal and Objective, specific Actions were developed that would foster
implementation.
A smaller list of prioritized actions, and discussion of the prioritization and
implementation of the action items is provided in Section 6.1. of this plan. That smaller
list of Prioritized Actions will require progress reports during the next plan update.
“Grants and Local funds,” “Potential Grant Funding,” “Grants,” “FEMA HMA Grants,”
and “State Grant Funding” named in the Base Plan and within the Annexes refers to
FEMA funding available through the Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) grant
programs: the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP); the Building Resilient
Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) Program; and the Flood Mitigation Assistance
(FMA) Program.
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 272
GOAL 1 FOSTER SAFE, SUSTAINABLE, AND THRIVING
ENVIRONMENTS.
Objective 1 Promote hazard-resistant future developments and enhance operational
resources.
GOAL 2 REDUCE THE POSSIBILITY OF DAMAGES AND LOSSES TO
EXISTING ASSETS (SUCH AS PEOPLE, CRITICAL
FACILITIES/INFRASTRUCTURES, AND COUNTY-OWNED
FACILITIES).
Objective 2 Develop and/or enhance comprehensive all hazard mitigation policies, plans,
technologies, and services.
GOAL 3 ENHANCE LOCAL CAPACITY AND COMMITMENT TO BECOME
LESS VULNERABLE TO ALL HAZARDS.
Objective 3 Strengthen all hazard mitigation coordination and communication with local,
state, tribal and federal governments/partners.
GOAL 4 PROMOTE REGIONAL CULTURE OF HAZARD
UNDERSTANDING, SUPPORT, AND PREPAREDNESS.
Objective 4 Provide accessible and inclusive education, training, and resources to prepare
the whole community for natural and human-caused hazards.
The County of San Diego developed the following broad list of objectives and actions to
assist in the implementation and achieving of the four identified hazard mitigation goals. For
each objective, specific actions were developed that would foster implementation. A
discussion of the prioritization and implementation of the action items is provided in Section
6.1.:
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 273
TABLE 71: HAZARD MITIGATION GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND ACTIONS
Goal 1: Foster safe, sustainable, and thriving environments.
Objective 1 Promote hazard-resistant future developments and enhance operational
resources.
Action 1. A. Facilitate the review, development, adoption, updating, and consistent enforcement of
general plans, zoning ordinances and building codes by:
• Strengthening existing development regulations to discourage land uses and
activities that create or worsen hazards
• planning and zoning for open space, recreational agricultural or other low
intensity uses within floodway fringes
• reviewing and revising, as necessary, sediment and erosion control
regulations
• ensuring newly constructed and existing critical facilities are designed to
function after a major earthquake
• updating building codes to reflect current earthquake standards
• updating the County Consolidated Fire Code as necessary
• updating the General Plan and zoning regulations to reflect hazardous areas
using development patterns that should respect environmental characteristics
and are harmonious with existing topography
• developing model Weed Abatement and Fuel Modification ordinances
• continuing to protect and restore wetlands by revising development
ordinances, incorporating, and maintaining valuable wetlands in open space
preservation programs to mitigate effects of development on wetland areas
• staffing enforcement personnel to ensure compliance
• supporting coordinated permitting activities processes through developing
and coordinating permits for all agencies, developing notification procedures
for all permits that support affected agencies, continuing to streamline policies
to eliminate conflicts and duplication of efforts and continuing to exchange
resources and work with local/regional partners
• continuing to utilize multi-agency permitting and enforcement team
• continuing to enforce trespassing regulations in high-risk areas
• continuing forest and open space management efforts
Action 1. B. Protect existing assets and limit future development in hazardous areas by:
• continuing to identify high hazard areas, identify hazard-prone structures/assets,
inventory wildlife vegetative communities by type and vegetation age class, and
develop/update data sets necessary to test hazard scenarios and mitigation tools
using GIS (Geographic Information Systems)
• managing wildland vegetative communities to promote less hazardous conditions
through defining target class ranges, developing partnerships within communities
to fix age class ranges, and promoting cooperative vegetation management
programs that incorporate hazard mitigation
• continuing to construct barriers around hazard-prone structures
• continuing to assess countywide utility infrastructures with regard to earthquake
risk
• continuing to review and compare existing flood control standards, zoning and
building requirements
• acquiring properties, when feasible, on floodway to prevent development
• encouraging and conducting structural retrofitting to strengthen resistance to
damage
• encouraging clustering
• continuing to gain public acceptance for avoidance policies in high-hazard areas
• adopting policies that discourage growth in flood-prone areas
• assuring adequate funding to restore damaged facilities to 100-year flood design
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 274
• updating storm water system plans and improving storm water facilities in high-
risk areas
• limiting development in areas of known geologic hazards
• creating demand for hazard-resistant construction and site planning
• increasing public understanding, support, and demand for new developments’
hazard mitigation
• supporting transfer of development rights in hazard-prone areas.
To protect lives and property, development in floodplains shall be appropriate and
limited, and high fire hazard areas shall have adequate access for emergency vehicles.
Responsible
Department(s)
• Fire
• Land Use & Environment Group
• Department of Public Works
• Planning & Development Services
• Parks & Recreation
• Office of Emergency Services
• Department of Agriculture, Weights & Measures
Prioritized Actions A. Limit Development in Floodplains and Other Hazardous Areas: County
Department of Public Works will continue to limit development of park structures
and facilities in floodplains and other hazardous areas.
B. Forest Management: County Parks & Recreation will continue to conduct brush
and vegetation management in preserves to reduce fire and flooding risks.
C. Invasive and Noxious Weed Control (Vegetation Management): The County
Department of Agriculture, Weights & Measures will continue to promote
cooperative vegetation management programs that promote hazard mitigation will
be critical in continue to mitigate wildfire risks from vegetation.
D. Climate Change Planning: The County Department of Public Works’ Flood Control
District will lead efforts related to downscale modeling, stress testing Flood Control
facilities during higher flows, updating County Special Drainage Area (SDA)
Master Plans, update of County Hydrology Manual and Hydraulic Design Manual
to account for climate change impacts.
E. Expansion of Automatic Local Evaluation in Real-Time (ALERT) to Vulnerable and
Underserved Communities: The County Department of Public Works’ Flood
Control District will lead these efforts.
F. Community Rating System (CRS) Implementation and Improvement: The County
Department of Public Works’ Flood Control District will lead these efforts.
G. Building Codes: County Planning & Development Services (PDS: Building
Division) will review building codes to reflect current earthquake, fire, and wind
standards annually and adopt as necessary to ensure structures are built to
withstand hazard events. County staff will attend conferences and industry
meetings to better understand changes to codes and after-event support efforts.
H. Hazard Mitigation Action Adoption: County Planning & Development Services
(PDS), County Fire, County Technology Office (CTO), County Communications
Office (CCO) and County Office of Emergency Services (OES) will publicize and
encourage the adoption of appropriate hazard mitigation actions throughout the
region.
I. MSCP Open Space Acquisitions Efforts: County Department of Parks &
Recreation will continue open space acquisition efforts, such as purchasing land
that could be preserved/protect natural resources and undeveloped land in high
hazard areas.
J. Wetland Protection and Restoration Efforts: The County Department of Parks &
Recreation will continue wetland protection and restoration efforts.
K. Agricultural/Livestock Pass Program: The County Department of Agriculture,
Weights & Measures will help the County of San Diego establish a county-based
program that grants agriculturalists special access to their farms or ranches during
disaster.
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 275
Potential Funding
Source(s)
General Fund, federal and/or state grants
Timeline January 2023 – January 2028
Goal 2: Reduce the possibility of damages and losses to existing assets (such as people, critical
facilities/infrastructures and County-owned facilities).
Objective 2 Develop and/or enhance comprehensive all hazard mitigation policies, plans,
technologies, and services.
Action 2.A. Protect existing assets with the highest relative vulnerability to hazard effects by:
• protecting vulnerable populations from the effects of hazards
• identifying projects related to all hazards for pre-disaster mitigation funding
• including safety considerations in the planning and decision-making process
by establishing policies related to future development that will minimize the
risk of personal injury, loss of life, property damage, and environmental
damage associated with natural and human-caused hazards.
Action 2.B. Create, update and/or improve existing hazard/hazard mitigation policies, Concept of
Operations (ConOps), Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), plans, projects,
technologies, and services with partners related, but not limited, to:
• Avalanche
• Dam Failure
o by updating dam inundation plans every ten years, at minimum
o by coordinating with partners and supporting existing efforts to mitigate
dam failures (e.g., U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation and California Department of Water Resources)
• Drought
o by encouraging the public to adopt drought tolerant landscaping or
xeriscape practices
o by promoting use of reclaimed water for all landscaping efforts, where
available and feasible.
o support groundwater recycling efforts
• Earthquake
o by continuing to study ground motion, landslide ad liquefaction
o by continuing to implement an ongoing seismic risk assessment program
o by developing and implementing an incentive program for seismic retrofits
o by studying ground motion, landslide and liquefaction
• Erosion
o by continuing to coordinate with coastal cities to develop comprehensive
plans
• Expansive Soils
• Extreme Cold
• Extreme Heat
o by supporting regional efforts to prepare for excessive heat events,
participating in “Excessive Heat Emergency Awareness” events and
exercising heat emergency plans as established by the County Health &
Human Services Agency (HHSA), Aging & Independence Services (AIS),
Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and Public Health Services (PHS)
o by continuing to provide “Cool Zones” during excessive heat events
• Flood
o by developing a flood control strategy that ensures coordination with
local, state, and federal agencies/partners
o by minimize repetitive losses caused by flooding
o by increasing participation and improving compliance with the National
Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 276
• Hail
• Hurricane
• Landslide
o by studying and improving storm drains for landslide-prone areas
• Lightning
• Sea Level Rise
• Severe Wind
• Severe Winter Weather
• Subsidence
• Tornado
• Tsunami
o coordinate with coastal cities to develop comprehensive plans
• Wildfire/Structure Fire
o by coordinating and supporting existing and new efforts to mitigate
structural and vegetation fires
o by continuing to develop partnerships for a countywide vegetation
management program
o by enforcing Defensible Space Clearance distances
o by working with community-based groups to pilot chipping programs
o by continuing to research options to provide low-cost insurance to cover
landowners who allow prescribed burning on their lands
o by establishing and continuing wildland fire technical working group
o by continuing to develop partnerships for a countywide vegetation
management program
o by reporting annually to the Board of Supervisors on the progress of fire
mitigation strategies
• Climate Change
o by raising awareness of the climate change links to public health
o by reducing the public health impacts of climate change
o by mitigating potential hazards caused by climate related events
• Terrorism / Cyber Terrorism
o Attachment A contains Terrorism/Cyber Terrorism Goals, Objectives,
and Actions, is categorized as For Official Use Only, and is only available
to official partners.
• Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, Explosion (CBRNE) Threats
o Attachment A contains Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear,
Explosion (CBRNE) threats’ goals, objectives, and actions, is
categorized as For Official Use Only, and is only available to official
partners.
• Pandemic Disease
Responsible
Department(s) • Sheriff’s Department
• Fire
• Public Safety Group
• Office of Emergency Services
• Department of Public Works
• Planning & Development Services
• Land Use and Environmental Group/GIS
• Health & Human Services Agency
• Emergency Medical Services
• Public Health Preparedness & Response
• Public Health Services
• Department of Environmental Health & Quality/ Hazardous Incident Response
Team
Prioritized Actions L. Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan (OA EOP)/Associated Annexes,
Regional Emergency Plans, Concept of Operations (ConOps), Standard
Operating Procedures (SOPs), Emergency Operations Center (EOC)
Planning/Training, Work Plans and Charters, and Safety Element (of the County
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 277
General Plan): The County Office of Emergency Services (OES) will work with the
eighteen incorporated cities and participating county departments, special districts
and partners to revise, update and complete these plans, projects, technologies
and services annually and/or as needed.
M. Excessive Heat Awareness Promotion, Resilience, Adaptation and Mitigation: The
County of San Diego, Public Health Services and the Health & Human Services
Agency are undertaking initiatives over the next several years to raise awareness
around excessive heat and climate change.
Potential Funding
Source(s)
General Fund, federal and/or state grants
Timeline January 2023 - January 2028
Goal 3: Enhance local capacity and commitment to become less vulnerable to all hazards.
Objective 3 Strengthen all hazard mitigation coordination and communication with local,
state, tribal and federal governments/partners.
Action 3.A. Increase awareness and knowledge of hazard mitigation principles and practice
among partners by:
• continuously demonstrating the importance of pre-disaster mitigation planning
to the Board of Supervisors and other public officials
• conducting meetings with key elected officials to determine local issues and
concerns
• leveraging the County Communications Office/County News Center and the
Partner Relay to promote mitigation actions
Action 3.B. Encourage other partners/organizations to incorporate hazard mitigation activities by:
• continuing to streamline policies to eliminate conflicts and duplication of
efforts
• continuing to encourage tribal governments to become part of the Hazardous
Incident Response Team (HIRT) Joint Powers Agreement (JPA).
Action 3.C. Establish, maintain, and improve close and lasting working relationships with partners
by:
• supporting the County Fire Safe Council
• continuing and maintaining multi-jurisdictional/multi-functional training and
exercises to enhance hazard mitigation
• leveraging resources and expertise that will further hazard mitigation efforts
• inviting/encouraging participation of tribal governments and special districts in
Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan updates.
Action 3.D. Improve the County’s capability and efficiency at administering pre- and post-disaster
mitigation by:
• collaborating with partners to identify, prioritize and implement mitigation
actions
• continuing to establish a requirement that all hazard mitigation projects
submitted to the State must be reviewed by the County
• continuing to improve coordination with the State Hazard Mitigation
Department about local issues
• maintaining consistency with the State in administering recovery programs
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 278
• coordinating recovery activities while restoring and maintaining public
services through maintenance of two damage assessment teams and their
activation/reporting procedures.
Responsible
Department(s)
• Fire
• Office of Emergency Services
• Public Safety Group
• Department of Environmental Health & Quality/Hazardous Incident Response
Team
Prioritized Actions N. Regional Planning Efforts: The County Office of Emergency Services (OES) and
participating County departments will streamline policies to eliminate conflicts and
duplication of efforts in regional planning efforts (i.e. Hazard Mitigation Plan
updates, etc.) by coordinating emergency management activities with regional
stakeholders and facilitating meetings on a regular basis with regional emergency
managers/the eighteen incorporated cities, healthcare agencies, campus
emergency managers, Department of Defense (DOD)/local military partners,
Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster (VOAD) and faith-based partners.
O. Training and Exercises: The County Office of Emergency Services (OES) and
participating county departments will collaborate with the eighteen incorporated
cities and private sector agencies to maintain multi-jurisdictional/multi-functional
training and annual exercises.
Potential Funding
Source(s)
General Fund, federal and/or state grants
Timeline January 2023 - January 2028
Goal 4: Promote regional culture of hazard understanding, support, and preparedness.
Objective 4 Provide accessible and inclusive education, training, and resources to prepare
the whole community for natural and human-caused hazards.
Action 4.A. Improve the County’s ability to manage pre- and post-disaster scenarios and respond
effectively during an event by:
• attracting, recruiting, and retaining qualified, professional, and experienced
staff
• training staff for appropriate positions/assignments within the Operational Area
Emergency Operations Center (OA EOC).
Action 4.B.
Increase and improve public education and awareness of hazards and mitigation action
opportunities using a whole community approach by:
• continuing to identify hazard-specific issues and needs and identifying
communities that have recurring losses
• publicizing and encouraging the adoption of appropriate hazard mitigation
actions
• providing hazard information on County websites and leveraging the County
Communications Office/County News Center
• continuing to encourage the public to prepare and maintain a three-day
preparedness kit for home and work
• promoting the County’s “Know Your Hazards” and “SD Emergency”
applications.
• coordinating production of brochures, informational packets, and other
handouts
• delivering presentations as requested/needed
• implementing hazard awareness program
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 279
• improving hazard warnings and response planning
• implementing public education program to address fire dangers and corrective
measures
• continuing to develop, plan and publish evacuation procedures to the public
• continuing to participate in community awareness meetings
• continuing to collaborate with local, state and federal agencies’ on mapping
efforts
• continuing to support public and private sector symposiums
• developing and maintaining hazard mitigation partnerships with the media.
Action 4.C. Monitor and publicize the effectiveness of hazard mitigation actions implemented
countywide by:
• continuing to use County websites to publicize mitigation actions
• continuing to establish budgets and identifying funding resources for mitigation
outreach
• continuing to determine mitigation messages to convey and create marketing
campaigns
• continuing to develop and distribute hazard brochures, CDs and other
publications.
Action 4.D. Promote hazard mitigation in the business community by:
• increasing knowledge and awareness of hazard mitigation principles and
practices
• encouraging and empowering businesses to identify and address hazard-
specific issues and needs
• encouraging businesses to develop and implement hazard mitigation actions.
Responsible
Department(s)
• Office of Emergency Services
• Public Safety Group
• Fire
Prioritized Actions P. Public Education and Outreach Programs: The County Office of Emergency
Services (OES) and County Communication Office (CCO) will develop and
maintain hazard mitigation-related public education and outreach programs (i.e.
annual defensible space education/outreach, terrorism prevention, erosion control,
etc.)
Q. Sustainable Department Goals: The County Office of Emergency Services (OES)
will continue to research ways to sustainably retain a trained workforce, particularly
related to Emergency Operations Center positions. County OES will also continue
to research economically sustainable efforts, technologies, equipment, vehicles,
and other necessities to reduce the department’s carbon footprint.
R. Three-Day Preparedness Kits: The County Office of Emergency Services (OES),
County Communications Office (CCO), and the County Technology Office (CTO)
will encourage the public to prepare and maintain a three-day preparedness kit for
home and work through outreach events, social media, paid media and earned
media.
S. San Diego County Fire Community Emergency Response Team’s Community
Emergency Preparedness Outreach Program: Utilize County Fire’s Community
Emergency Response Team (trained and background checked volunteers) to
conduct in-person outreach training, events and activities bringing emergency
preparedness information to underserved populations in their rural communities.
T. Free Residential Knox Box Program: County Fire will integrate the Knox Box
Program through outreach efforts with CAL FIRE, participating County
departments, Fire Safe Council of San Diego County, and other various
stakeholders.
U. Free Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) Classes/Training for Communities: County
Fire can integrate with partner agencies to offer the WUI course throughout San
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 280
Diego County. Participating agencies could include CAL FIRE, Bureau of Land
Management, US Forest Service, and local Fire Safe Councils.
V. The California Wildfire Mitigation Program - Home-Hardening Initiative: County Fire
is currently working with the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services to
pilot the California Wildfire Mitigation Program (CWMP) Home-Hardening Initiative.
The CWMP Home Hardening Initiative aims to perform defensible space and retrofit
measures on existing residential homesites to mitigate against wildfire losses. This
program targets high social-vulnerability communities and provides financial
assistance to qualifying low-and moderate-income (LMI) households. This pilot
program will be implemented in three high-risk areas within San Diego County:
Dulzura, Potrero, and Campo.
W. Support Symposiums: The County Office of Emergency Services (OES) and
participating county departments will collaborate with the eighteen incorporated
cities and the private sector to support public and private sector hazard mitigation
planning symposiums.
Potential Funding
Source(s)
General Fund, federal and/or state grants
Timeline January 2023 - January 2028
Once the comprehensive list of jurisdictional goals, objectives, and action items listed
above was developed, the proposed mitigation actions were prioritized using FEMA’s
STAPLEE criteria. This step resulted in a list of acceptable and realistic actions that
address the hazards identified in each jurisdiction. This prioritized list of action items
was formed by the LPG.
The Prioritized Actions below reflect progress in local mitigation efforts as well as
changes in development. The Disaster Mitigation Action of 2000 (at 44 CFR Parts 201
and 206) requires the development of an action plan that not only includes prioritized
actions but one that includes information on how the prioritized actions will be
implemented. Implementation consists of identifying who is responsible for which
action, what kind of funding mechanisms and other resources are available or will be
pursued, and when the action will be completed.
The top 23 Prioritized Actions, as well as an implementation strategy for each (i.e., will
need a progress report during the next plan update cycle, according to current FEMA
requirements), are:
A. Prioritized Action: Limit Development in Floodplains and Other Hazardous Areas: County
Department of Public Works will continue to limit development of park structures and
facilities in floodplains and other hazardous areas.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Department of Public Works
• Potential Funding Source: Flood Control District Fund, General Fund, grants
• Implementation Timeline: Current- 2028
• Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
B. Prioritized Action: Forest Management: County Parks & Recreation will continue to
conduct brush and vegetation management in preserves to reduce fire and flooding risks.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Department of Parks & Recreation
• Potential Funding Source: General Fund and grants
• Implementation Timeline: Current- 2028
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 281
• Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire/Structure Fire, Flood
C. Prioritized Action: Invasive and Noxious Weed Control (Vegetation Management): The
County Department of Agriculture, Weights & Measures will continue to promote
cooperative vegetation management programs that promote hazard mitigation will be
critical in continue to mitigate wildfire risks from vegetation.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Department of Agriculture, Weights &
Measures
• Potential Funding Source: Current cost is funded with California Department of Food
and Agriculture invasive weed grants, and internal agreements with DPR and DPW
• Implementation Timeline: Current- 2028
• Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire/Structure Fire, Flood
D. Prioritized Action: Climate Change Planning: The County Department of Public Works’
Flood Control District will lead efforts related to downscale modeling, stress testing Flood
Control facilities during higher flows, updating County Special Drainage Area (SDA)
Master Plans, update of County Hydrology Manual and Hydraulic Design Manual to
account for climate change impacts.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Department of Public Works’ Flood
Control District
• Potential Funding Source: Grants and local funds
• Implementation Timeline: 2023-2028
• Hazard(s) Addressed: Climate Change, Flood, Rain-Induced Landslide, Sea Level
Rise/Coastal Storms/Erosion
E. Prioritized Action: Expansion of Automatic Local Evaluation in Real-Time (ALERT) to
Vulnerable and Underserved Communities: The County Department of Public Works’ Flood
Control District will lead these efforts.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Department of Public Works’ Flood
Control District
• Potential Funding Source: Grants and local funds
• Implementation Timeline: 2023-2028
• Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood, Dam Failure
F. Prioritized Action: Community Rating System (CRS) Implementation and Improvement:
The County Department of Public Works’ Flood Control District will lead these efforts.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Department of Public Works’ Flood
Control District
• Potential Funding Source: Grants and local funds
• Implementation Timeline: 2023-2028
• Hazard(s) Addressed: Flood
G. Prioritized Action: Building Codes: County Planning & Development Services (PDS:
Building Division) will review building codes to reflect current earthquake, fire, and wind
standards annually and adopt as necessary to ensure structures are built to withstand
hazard events. County staff will attend conferences and industry meetings to better
understand changes to codes and after-event support efforts.
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 282
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Planning & Development Services
(Building Division)
• Potential Funding Source: Unknown, potential future grants
• Implementation Timeline: Annually
• Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire/Structure Fire, Flood, Earthquake/Liquefaction
H. Prioritized Action: Hazard Mitigation Action Adoption: County Planning & Development
Services (PDS), County Fire, County Technology Office (CTO), County Communications
Office (CCO) and County Office of Emergency Services (OES) will publicize and encourage
the adoption of appropriate hazard mitigation actions throughout the region.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Planning & Development Services
(PDS), County Fire, County Technology Office (CTO), County Communications Office
(CCO) and County Office of Emergency Services (OES)
• Potential Funding Source: General Fund, federal and/or state grants
• Implementation Timeline: 2023-2028
• Hazard(s) Addressed: All Hazards including, but not limited to, Climate Change, Dam
Failure, Drought, Earthquake/Liquefaction, Extreme Heat, Flood, Human-Caused
Hazards (Terrorism & Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE threats)), Rain-Induced
Landslide, Sea Level Rise/Coastal Storms/Erosion, Tsunami, Wildfire/Structure Fire
I. Prioritized Action: MSCP Open Space Acquisitions Efforts: County Department of Parks &
Recreation will continue open space acquisition efforts, such as purchasing land that could
be preserved/protect natural resources and undeveloped land in high hazard areas.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Department of Parks & Recreation
• Potential Funding Source: General Fund, grants, endowments, etc.
• Implementation Timeline: Each Fiscal Year
• Hazard(s) Addressed: All Hazards including, but not limited to, Climate Change, Dam
Failure, Drought, Earthquake/Liquefaction, Extreme Heat, Flood, Human-Caused
Hazards (Terrorism & Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE threats)), Rain-Induced
Landslide, Sea Level Rise/Coastal Storms/Erosion, Tsunami, Wildfire/Structure Fire
J. Prioritized Action: Wetland Protection and Restoration Efforts: The County Department of
Parks & Recreation will continue wetland protection and restoration efforts.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Department of Parks & Recreation
• Potential Funding Source: General Fund and grants
• Implementation Timeline: Current-2028
• Hazard(s) Addressed: Climate Change, Drought, Extreme Heat, Flood, Human-
Caused Hazards (Terrorism & Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE threats)),
Tsunami
K. Prioritized Action: Agricultural/Livestock Pass Program: The County Department of
Agriculture, Weights & Measures will help the County of San Diego establish a county-
based program that grants agriculturalists special access to their farms or ranches during
disaster.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Department of Agriculture, Weights &
Measures
• Potential Funding Source: General Fund, Potential future grants
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 283
• Implementation Timeline: Feasibility Analysis 3/2022-6/2022, Program Development
7/2022-12/2022, and Program Implementation 1/2023
• Hazard(s) Addressed: All Hazards including, but not limited to, Climate Change, Dam
Failure, Drought, Earthquake/Liquefaction, Extreme Heat, Flood, Human-Caused
Hazards (Terrorism & Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE threats)), Rain-Induced
Landslide, Sea Level Rise/Coastal Storms/Erosion, Tsunami, Wildfire/Structure Fire
L. Prioritized Action: Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan (OA EOP)/Associated
Annexes, Regional Emergency Plans, Concept of Operations (ConOps), Standard
Operating Procedures (SOPs), Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Planning/Training,
Work Plans and Charters, and Safety Element (of the County General Plan): The County
Office of Emergency Services (OES) will work with the eighteen incorporated cities and
participating county departments, special districts and partners to revise, update and
complete these plans, projects, technologies and services annually and/or as needed.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Office of Emergency Services and
Planning & Development Services (for the Safety Element of the County General Plan)
• Potential Funding Source: General Fund, federal and/or state grants
• Implementation Timeline: 2023-2028
• Hazard(s) Addressed: All Hazards including, but not limited to, Climate Change,
Severe Winter Weather, Dam Failure, Drought, Earthquake/Liquefaction, Extreme Heat,
Flood, Human-Caused Hazards (Terrorism & Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE
threats)), Rain-Induced Landslide, Sea Level Rise/Coastal Storms/Erosion, Tsunami,
Wildfire/Structure Fire
M. Prioritized Action: Excessive Heat Awareness Promotion, Resilience, Adaptation and
Mitigation: The County of San Diego, Public Health Services and the Health & Human
Services Agency are undertaking initiatives over the next several years to raise awareness
around excessive heat and climate change.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County of San Diego, Public Health Services,
and the Health & Human Services Agency
• Potential Funding Source: To be determined
• Implementation Timeline: 2-5 years based on timeline for implementation
• Hazard(s) Addressed: Climate Change, Extreme Heat, Drought
N. Prioritized Action: Regional Planning Efforts: The County Office of Emergency Services
(OES) and participating County departments will streamline policies to eliminate conflicts
and duplication of efforts in regional planning efforts (i.e. Hazard Mitigation Plan updates,
etc.) by coordinating emergency management activities with regional stakeholders and
facilitating meetings on a regular basis with regional emergency managers/the eighteen
incorporated cities, healthcare agencies, campus emergency managers, Department of
Defense (DOD)/local military partners, Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster (VOAD)
and faith-based partners.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Office of Emergency Services and
participating County departments
• Potential Funding Source: General Fund, federal and/or state grants
• Implementation Timeline: 2023-2028
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 284
• Hazard(s) Addressed: All Hazards including, but not limited to, Climate Change, Dam
Failure, Drought, Earthquake/Liquefaction, Extreme Heat, Flood, Human-Caused
Hazards (Terrorism & Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE threats)), Rain-Induced
Landslide, Sea Level Rise/Coastal Storms/Erosion, Tsunami, Wildfire/Structure Fire
O. Prioritized Action: Training and Exercises: The County Office of Emergency Services
(OES) and participating county departments will collaborate with the eighteen incorporated
cities and private sector agencies to maintain multi-jurisdictional/multi-functional training and
annual exercises.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: The County Office of Emergency Services and
participating county departments
• Potential Funding Source: General Fund, federal and/or state grants
• Implementation Timeline: 2023-2028
• Hazard(s) Addressed: All Hazards including, but not limited to, Climate Change, Dam
Failure, Drought, Earthquake/Liquefaction, Extreme Heat, Flood, Human-Caused
Hazards (Terrorism & Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE threats)), Rain-Induced
Landslide, Sea Level Rise/Coastal Storms/Erosion, Tsunami, Wildfire/Structure Fire
P. Prioritized Action: Public Education and Outreach Programs: The County Office of
Emergency Services (OES) and County Communication Office (CCO) will develop and
maintain hazard mitigation-related public education and outreach programs (i.e. annual
defensible space education/outreach, terrorism prevention, erosion control, etc.)
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Office of Emergency Services and
County Communication Office
• Potential Funding Source: General Fund, federal and/or state grants
• Implementation Timeline: 2023-2028
• Hazard(s) Addressed: All Hazards including, but not limited to, Climate Change, Dam
Failure, Drought, Earthquake/Liquefaction, Extreme Heat, Flood, Human-Caused
Hazards (Terrorism & Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE threats)), Rain-Induced
Landslide, Sea Level Rise/Coastal Storms/Erosion, Tsunami, Wildfire/Structure Fire
Q. Prioritized Action: Sustainable Department Goals: The County Office of Emergency
Services (OES) will continue to research ways to sustainably retain a trained workforce,
particularly related to Emergency Operations Center positions. County OES will also
continue to research economically sustainable efforts, technologies, equipment, vehicles,
and other necessities to reduce the department’s carbon footprint.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Office of Emergency Services
• Potential Funding Source: General fund as grants as available
• Implementation Timeline: 2023-2028
• Hazard(s) Addressed: All Hazards including, but not limited to, Climate Change, Dam
Failure, Drought, Earthquake/Liquefaction, Extreme Heat, Flood, Human-Caused
Hazards (Terrorism & Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE threats)), Rain-Induced
Landslide, Sea Level Rise/Coastal Storms/Erosion, Tsunami, Wildfire/Structure Fire
R. Prioritized Action: Three-Day Preparedness Kits: The County Office of Emergency
Services (OES), County Communications Office (CCO), and the County Technology Office
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 285
(CTO) will encourage the public to prepare and maintain a three-day preparedness kit for
home and work through outreach events, social media, paid media and earned media.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Office of Emergency Services, County
Communications Office, and the County Technology Office
• Potential Funding Source: General Fund, federal and/or state grants
• Implementation Timeline: 2023-2028
• Hazard(s) Addressed: All Hazards including, but not limited to, Climate Change, Dam
Failure, Drought, Earthquake/Liquefaction, Extreme Heat, Flood, Human-Caused
Hazards (Terrorism & Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE threats)), Rain-Induced
Landslide, Sea Level Rise/Coastal Storms/Erosion, Tsunami, Wildfire/Structure Fire
S. Prioritized Action: San Diego County Fire Community Emergency Response Team’s
Community Emergency Preparedness Outreach Program: Utilize County Fire’s Community
Emergency Response Team (trained and background checked volunteers) to conduct in-
person outreach training, events and activities bringing emergency preparedness
information to underserved populations in their rural communities.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Fire
• Potential Funding Source: Grant funds available to Community Emergency Response
Teams through San Diego Gas and Electric, the Governor’s California Office of
Emergency Services and other one-time grant opportunities.
• Implementation Timeline: 2023-2028 and annual Community Emergency
Preparedness Outreach.
• Hazard Addressed: All Hazards including, but not limited to, Climate Change, Dam
Failure, Drought, Earthquake/Liquefaction, Extreme Heat, Flood, Human-Caused
Hazards (Terrorism & Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE threats)), Rain-Induced
Landslide, Sea Level Rise/Coastal Storms/Erosion, Tsunami, Wildfire/Structure Fire
T. Prioritized Action: Free Residential Knox Box Program: County Fire will integrate the Knox
Box Program through outreach efforts with CAL FIRE, participating County departments,
Fire Safe Council of San Diego County, and other various stakeholders.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Fire
• Potential Funding Source: General Fund, federal and/or state grants
• Implementation Timeline: 2023-2028
• Hazard(s) Addressed: All Hazards including, but not limited to, Climate Change, Dam
Failure, Drought, Earthquake/Liquefaction, Extreme Heat, Flood, Human-Caused
Hazards (Terrorism & Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE threats)), Rain-Induced
Landslide, Sea Level Rise/Coastal Storms/Erosion, Tsunami, Wildfire/Structure Fire
U. Prioritized Action: Free Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) Classes/Training for Communities:
County Fire can integrate with partner agencies to offer the WUI course throughout San
Diego County. Participating agencies could include CAL FIRE, Bureau of Land
Management, US Forest Service, and local Fire Safe Councils.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Fire
• Potential Funding Source: General Fund, federal and/or state grants
• Implementation Timeline: 2023-2028
• Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire/Structure Fire
SECTION SIX | Develop a Mitigation Strategy 286
V. Prioritized Action: The California Wildfire Mitigation Program - Home-Hardening Initiative:
County Fire is currently working with the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services
to pilot the California Wildfire Mitigation Program (CWMP) Home-Hardening Initiative. The
CWMP Home Hardening Initiative aims to perform defensible space and retrofit measures
on existing residential homesites to mitigate against wildfire losses. This program targets
high social-vulnerability communities and provides financial assistance to qualifying low-and
moderate-income (LMI) households. This pilot program will be implemented in three high-
risk areas within San Diego County: Dulzura, Potrero, and Campo.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: County Fire
• Potential Funding Source: Federal and state grants
• Implementation Timeline: 3-year program (2022-2025); potentially longer subject to
the availability of additional funding.
• Hazard(s) Addressed: Wildfire/Structure Fire
W. Prioritized Action: Support Symposiums: The County Office of Emergency Services (OES)
and participating county departments will collaborate with the eighteen incorporated cities
and the private sector to support public and private sector hazard mitigation planning
symposiums.
• Coordinating Individual/Department: The County Office of Emergency Services
• Potential Funding Source: General Fund, federal and/or state grants
• Implementation Timeline: 2023-2028
• Hazard(s) Addressed: All Hazards including, but not limited to, Climate Change, Dam
Failure, Drought, Earthquake/Liquefaction, Extreme Heat, Flood, Human-Caused
Hazards (Terrorism & Hazardous Materials Incidents (CBRNE threats)), Rain-Induced
Landslide, Sea Level Rise/Coastal Storms/Erosion, Tsunami, Wildfire/Structure Fire
See respective annexes for other jurisdictions’/planning participants’ hazard mitigation Goals,
Objectives, Actions/Prioritized Actions, and implementation strategies.
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 287
SECTION SEVEN: Keep the Plan Current
Decorative Image Photo by County OES
San Diego County, California
2023
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 288
7. SECTION SEVEN: KEEP THE PLAN CURRENT
Hazard Mitigation Plan updates provide the opportunity to consider how well the procedures
established in the previously approved plan worked and revise them as needed. This plan
was last updated in 2018.
This section of the 2023 Plan describes the formal process that will ensure The Plan remains
an active and relevant document. The plan maintenance process includes a schedule for
monitoring and evaluating the Plan annually and producing a plan revision every five years.
This section describes how the jurisdiction will integrate public participation throughout the
plan maintenance process.
7.1. MITIGATION ACTION PROGRESS
This version of the Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan was revised over the past five
years to reflect changes in development, progress in local mitigation efforts, and changes in
priorities. Generally, hazard priorities remained unchanged, though some hazards’ (such as
Climate Change, Drought, and Extreme Heat) prevalence and/or probability of occurrence
increased and, therefore, needed an updated Vulnerability Assessment.
All Hazard Profiles were researched for more modern content, data, and details.
This plan’s Goals, Objectives, and Actions were updated from the last version to reflect
current priorities within existing plans such as the County Strategic Plan/Initiatives and the
County General Plan’s Safety Element.
The 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic negatively affected overall progress on the 2018 plan and
actions’ progress, but did not negatively impact the community’s vulnerability because the
plan was created in tandem with existing local plans/procedures and thus aided in local
government responses and actions to keep communities and assets safe.
Below are progress reports for the eleven priority mitigation actions listed in the 2018 Plan:
1. Action/Project Title: Update Operational Area Emergency Operational Plan (OA EOP)
and associated Annexes
Progress Report Period: January 2019 to January 2020
Responsible Agency: The County Office of Emergency Services (County OES)
worked with the 18 incorporated cities and participating special districts to revise and
update the OA EOP/Annexes.
Project Status: Project delayed
Explain: Project was delayed due to COVID-19 Pandemic needs/priorities and OES
staff/Project Manager turnover.
Summary: During the reporting period, the previous County OES project manager(s)
conducted meetings to discuss the OA EOP Basic Plan and annex revision
suggestions/updates with county departments and partners from the eighteen
incorporated cities and special districts. The project is a priority for County OES, but
is a large project requiring many staff hours, and collaboration is contingent on the
availability of participating project partners.
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 289
This project was managed, at minimum, by three different County OES staff
members who left the department, so staff turnover caused deadline obstacles and
time delays. Furthermore, County OES was initially responsible for coordinating
response and resources for the COVID-19 Pandemic once County OES’ Emergency
Operations Center was activated. Therefore, this project, and many others, could no
longer be considered a departmental priority, as County OES instead needed to
focus on ensuring the safety and well-being of San Diego County community
members.
This project is still considered relevant, and revision/update is ongoing. The mention
of this project within the updated Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan
(MJHMP) will be revised to reflect elements eligible for hazard mitigation grant
funding, such as (but not limited to), incorporation of passed legislation, cohesive
integration with the MJHMP and other existing county/department plans, Emergency
Operations Center training, equipment, etc. This project is estimated to be complete
by June 30, 2022.
2. Action/Project Title: Develop and maintain public education and outreach programs
related to actions community members can take to mitigate hazards they may face.
(Annual defensible space education/outreach; terrorism prevention; erosion control, etc.)
Progress Report Period: January 2018 to January 2023
Responsible Agency: County Office of Emergency Services (County OES) and
County Communications Office (CCO)
Project Status: Completed and Ongoing (but delayed)
Explain: Action/Project has been completed and is also an ongoing effort/action.
Project delayed because priorities shifted due to COVID-19 pandemic. There were
also staffing changes.
Summary: There have been staffing changes which limit the ability to report on the
full scope of accomplishments for the reporting period. Awareness of
accomplishments during this period include developing and posting protective
actions community members can take to prepare themselves for emergencies and
natural disasters from 2018 and thereon on County OES social media platforms in
English and in Spanish, the dissemination of the updated Personal Disaster Plans
translated into 12 languages, printing of flyers AlertSanDiego, and the SD
Emergency app disseminating these flyers at community events and presentations.
Community members have been encouraged to take appropriate hazard mitigation
actions through alert and warning postings and press releases posted to the Ready
San Diego website, AlertSanDiego, the SD Emergency app, County News Center
articles. Campaigns were also conducted to increase the number of community
members registered for AlertSanDiego Lyft (2018). Hazard mitigation messages
have been developed, written, and promoted through television interviews in English
and Spanish. These messages have also been provided to the Partner Relay
network (a group with over 700 individuals) which is made of trusted community
organizations who serve San Diego’s diverse, underserved communities, as well as
community members with limited English proficiency through emails and trainings
provided to the organizations. They can share these messages with the clients they
serve. Numerous of these messages have also been translated into Spanish. The
goal is to continue these efforts for the next few months leading through 2023.
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 290
The project is typically a priority for County OES, but is a large project requiring
many staff hours, and collaboration is contingent on the outreach resources,
implemented contracts, translation staff/resources, and funding. This project was
managed, at minimum, by two different County OES staff members. One staff
member left the department, so staff turnover caused deadline obstacles and time
delays.
Furthermore, County OES was initially responsible for coordinating response and
resources for the COVID-19 Pandemic once County OES’ Emergency Operations
Center was activated. Therefore, this project, and many others, could no longer be
considered a departmental priority, as County OES instead needed to focus on
ensuring the safety and well-being of San Diego County community members.
Public education, information, outreach and community engagement efforts will
continue through January 2023 and include attending presentations on
preparedness, supporting staff with documentation and writing of internal documents,
materials design & inventory, communications, review of current and past
communications messages, draft updated templates with preparedness/hazard
mitigation messages, post preparedness messages on social media platforms,
preparedness interviews on television, create a Partner Relay capacity plan, Partner
Relay Content Creation, Partner Relay train EOC liaisons, conduct countywide
preparedness survey, outreach campaigns including on AlertSanDiego, SD
Emergency app, and translations of documents from English to Spanish.
3. Action/Project Title: Review the County Consolidated Fire Code annually and update
as necessary
Progress Report Period: January 2018 to January 2023
Responsible Agency: County Planning & Development Services and County Fire
Project Status: Completed
Summary: The County of San Diego Consolidated Fire Code has been updated
twice during the reporting period, with the most recent update taking place in March
2020. This is an ongoing project that is still relevant for inclusion in the San Diego
County Hazard Mitigation Plan. San Diego County Fire, in coordination with the
County Planning & Development Services Department, will continue reviewing the
Consolidated Fire Code on an annual basis and will make updates to the code as
needed, or at minimum, will update it once every three years.
4. Action/Project Title: Streamline policies to eliminate conflicts and duplication of effort in
regional planning efforts by coordinating emergency management activities with regional
stakeholders by facilitating meetings on a regular basis with regional emergency
managers, campus emergency managers, DOD partners, Voluntary Agencies Active in
Disaster, and faith-based partners.
Progress Report Period: January 2019 to January 2023
Responsible Agency: County Office of Emergency Services (County OES), County
Departments, local military, healthcare agencies and the 18 incorporated cities
Project Status: Ongoing
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 291
Summary: The County OES’ Volunteer Coordinator, participates in the San Diego
VOAD (Volunteer Organizations Active in Disasters) General Meeting on a monthly
basis. There, each organization, including the County OES’ representative, give
updates on efforts provided within the Operational Area. There are also talks
surrounding coordination for efforts needed. Participants of this meeting are made up
of local, state, and federal organizations, as well as non-governmental organizations,
to include faithed based partners.
The County OES’ Volunteer Coordinator also holds a meeting with non-governmental
organizations that make up the County’s Feeding Taskforce every two months. This
meeting is designed to discuss organizations’ roles, resources, and capabilities as it
pertains to ensuring food security within the region, should the American Red Cross’
feeding operations become overwhelmed.
The County OES Ops Coordinator hosts bimonthly Emergency Managers’ meetings
to leverage access to, planning with, and partnership development with the 18 cities,
special districts, and other key Emergency Managers.
The County OES Ops Coordinator is managing the deployment of the regional Full
Scale Exercise project that will occur in January 2023. Monthly planning meetings
started in February 2022, and meetings have attracted and leveraged access to
more than 85 key stakeholders at all levels of government and nonprofit agencies
working together for a common goal.
The COVID-19 Pandemic caused a lapse in the meetings of these groups, and it has
been challenging to gain traction with these meetings. However, this project is still
relevant and ongoing. Interactions with these groups play a vital role in County OES’
operations during an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) activation.
5. Action/Project Title: Publicize and encourage the adoption of appropriate hazard
mitigation actions throughout the region
Progress Report Period: January 2018 to January 2023
Responsible Agency: County Office of Emergency Services (County OES), County
Planning & Development Services, County Fire, County Communications Office,
County Technology Office
Project Status: Delayed and Ongoing
Explain: Priorities shifted due to COVID-19 pandemic. There were also staffing
changes.
Summary: There have been staffing changes, which limit the ability to report on the
full scope of accomplishments for the reporting period. Awareness of
accomplishments during this period include developing and posting protective
actions community members can take to prepare themselves for emergencies and
natural disasters from 2018 and thereon on County OES social media platforms in
English and in Spanish, the dissemination of the updated Personal Disaster Plans
translated into 12 languages, printing of flyers AlertSanDiego, and the SD
Emergency app disseminating these flyers at community events and presentations.
Community members have been encouraged to take appropriate hazard mitigation
actions through alert and warning postings and press releases posted to the Ready
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 292
San Diego website, AlertSanDiego, the SD Emergency app, county news center
articles. Campaigns were also conducted to increase the number of community
members registered for AlertSanDiego Lyft (2018). Hazard mitigation messages
have been developed, written, and promoted through television interviews in English
and Spanish.
These messages have also been provided to the Partner Relay network (a group
with over 700 individuals) which is made of trusted community organizations who
serve San Diego’s diverse and underserved neighborhoods, as well as community
members with limited English proficiency, through emails and trainings provided to
the organizations. They can share these messages with the clients they serve.
Numerous of these messages have also been translated into Spanish. The goal is to
continue these efforts for the next few months leading through 2023.
Obstacles, problems, or delays include shift in priorities due to COVID-19 pandemic,
staffing changes/staff turnover, completing trainings, the learning curve, competing
priority projects, project also requires many staff hours, and collaboration is in part
contingent on resources, others, invitations, creating opportunities to share the
information with others and potentially funding for incentives to create additional
opportunities to share the information with the public.
The project is still relevant and ongoing since the County is still at risk for
emergencies and natural disasters and not all community members are informed on
the County’s resources, nor on what actions to take to prepare for emergencies and
natural disasters before, during and after they occur. Public education, information,
outreach and community engagement efforts will continue through January, 2023
and include attending presentations on preparedness, supporting staff with
documentation and writing of internal documents, materials design & inventory,
communications, review of current and past communications messages, draft
updated templates with preparedness/hazard mitigation messages, post
preparedness messages on social media platforms, preparedness interviews on
television, create a Partner Relay capacity plan, Partner Relay Content Creation,
Partner Relay train EOC liaisons, conduct countywide preparedness survey,
outreach campaigns including on AlertSanDiego, SD Emergency app, and
translations of documents from English to Spanish.
6. Action/Project Title: Building Codes
Progress Report Period: January 1, 2020 to March 30, 2022
Responsible Agency: County of San Diego, County Planning & Development
Services (Building Division), and County Fire
Project Status: Completed
Summary: Building codes were reviewed to reflect current earthquake standards
annually and update as necessary. County Staff attended jurisdictional conferences
related code changes or updates related to seismic and other natural disasters.
Groups included International Code Counsel, County Building Officials Association of
California (CBOAC), California Building Officials (Calbo).
This is an ongoing effort, and project is still relevant. Department suggests adding a
review of fire and wind standards annually to include the most relevant natural
disasters that effect our community.
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 293
7. Action/Project Title: Support public and private sector symposiums that emphasize
hazard mitigation planning
Progress Report Period: January 2018 to January 2023
Responsible Agency: County Office of Emergency Services (County OES), County
Departments, Cities, and private sector partners
Project Status: Completed and Ongoing
Summary: County OES maintains a support posture of public and private sector
symposiums with an emphasis on hazard mitigation. In September 2021, County
OES participated with the Air Protection Control District (APCD) and the California Air
Resource Board in a symposium tailored around air-quality. County OES also
participates quarterly with San Diego Gas & Electric’s (SDG&E’s) Access and
Functional Needs team to discuss ways the public can be best prepared for Public
Safety Power Shutoffs.
Obstacles, problems, or delays include shift in priorities due to COVID-19 pandemic
and staffing changes/staff turnover. The department suggests this project should
outline key deliverables and note specifically what is to be accomplished through
supporting symposiums.
8. Action/Project Title: Maintain multi-jurisdictional/multi-functional training and annual
exercises to enhance hazard mitigation
Progress Report Period: January 2018 to January 2023
Responsible Agency: County Office of Emergency Services (County OES), County
Departments, All 18 Cities/appropriate Private Sector Agencies
Project Status: Ongoing
Summary: From Fall 2017 to Summer 2018, County OES staff planned and
deployed a San Diego Regional Tabletop Exercise (TTX) conducted on June 18,
2018, completing the process with a published AAR/IP (After Action Report /
Improvement Plan.) This was the result of a UASI grant proposal from OES.
From Spring 2019 to October 2019, County OES’ team planned a November 6, 2019
San Diego Regional Full Scale Exercise (FSE) across regional agencies at all levels
of government and the private sector, in response to priorities of the San Diego
MyTEP (Multi-Year Training and Exercise Plan – San Diego Urban Area, 2019-2022.
They completed the process with a published AAR/IP. This was the result of a UASI
grant proposal from OES.
From Fall 2020 to July 2021, County OES’ staff also planned a July 27, 2021 San
Diego Regional TTX for government and nonprofit agencies across San Diego, with
AAR After Action Report improvements in response to priorities of the San Diego
MyTEP (Multi-Year Training and Exercise Plan – San Diego Urban Area, 2019-2022.
They completed the process with a published AAR/IP. This was the result of a UASI
grant proposal from County OES.
To meet the priorities of San Diego MyTEPs for 2019-2022 and 2022-2025, OES’s
team kicked off planning for a January2023 regional FSE (Full Scale Exercise) in
December 2021 and are currently hosting monthly planning meetings with large
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 294
regional stakeholder groups, attracting approximately 85 stakeholder agency
members. A FSE planning team of about 30 members is now meeting, including all
18 City Emergency managers, and a variety of special districts such as water
agencies, airport and ports, USAR (Urban Search and Rescue) team, as well as
public safety partners. This exercise prioritizes testing core capabilities testing
identified in the MyTEPs and testing regional response plans such as OA EOP, local
EOPs and response plans.
The OA and local agency EOC response will be tested for a catastrophic natural and
human caused hazard scenario. This FSE will also testing Emergency Public
Information through a regional JIC response, EOC activation and response
procedures across agencies and jurisdictions, recovery operations and Initial
Damage Assessment, alert and warning, regional coordination and communication,
terrorism response and infrastructure systems, such as water agency response in
emergencies.
County OES staff from 2021 to April 2022, OES planned, developed, and deployed a
6-month long training program for new and existing OES Staffs for the all-hazards
response Staff Duty Officer (SDO) program; with subsequent Qualification Board
testing for all SDO Under Instruction candidates in April 2022, to certify and deploy
them as SDOs for emergency response. Staff had a 100% pass rate through this
intensive oral Qual Board and practical hands-on technical test.
From November 2021 to present, the County OES training officer promoted UASI
and CSTI training courses to County OES staff, EOC responders and EOC partner
agencies, to bolster training for local important courses such as EOC positions
Specific training – Planning, management, operations and Finance/Admin, Public
Information Officer course, Mass Care courses and Recovery Operations, among
others and booked a local EOC Operations and Planning course in the San Diego IA
EOC for November 2022.
On April 10, 2022, The County OES Ops Coordinator completed a County OES
training program needs assessment to identify areas for improvement, as presented
to County OES leadership, and plans are underway to continue to expand training in
FY 2022-23.
To meet the priorities of the San Diego MyTEP (Multi-Year Training and Exercise
Plan) – San Diego Urban Area, 2019-2022 and 2022-2025, County OES staff
planned and conducted the following EOC exercises:
o Hot Wash on Two Coastal Incidents – Tongan Tsunami and Orange / San Diego
County Oil Spill and generated After Action Lessons Learned for approximately
25 regional agencies at all levels of government.
o EOC Planning P, EOC Action Plan, Battle Rhythm and EOC Planning TTX
2/23/22
o EOC Operations functional training exercise 3/2/22
o Tongan Tsunami Advisory for San Diego FSE 1/18/22
Projects obstacles, problems and delays Coordinators were hired October 2021;
departure of key staffs that managed projects, causing significant delays in
initiatives, including Training & Exercises Lead departing.
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 295
Obstacles can arise any time such as when County OES staffs the EOC in
emergencies and the two-year long COVID emergency activation caused competing
priorities. The COVID emergency activation also delayed access to many training
and exercise opportunities nationwide 2020 to 2022, due to social distancing health
safety considerations. Other significant EOC activations that also tapped out staffs
and changed priorities - wildfire season response, west coast oil spill, west coast
tsunami advisory and other emergency EOC activations.
Regional FSE is an Ops Plan goal for fiscal include extensive staff turnover at
County OES – five new Emergency Services year 2022, July 1, 2022 – June 30,
2023. Training and Exercise Planning remains a high priority for County OES.
9. Action/Project Title: Review and update annually regional emergency plans, Concept
of Operation plans, protocols, and standard operating procedures
Progress Report Period: January 2018 to January 2023
Responsible Agency: County Office of Emergency Services (County OES),
appropriate county Departments, and all 18 Cities/Special Districts
Project Status: Delayed and Ongoing
Explain: Project was delayed due to OES staff turnover.
Summary: County OES created a Plan Revision Schedule which includes an annual
cycle where Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), Concept of Operations
(ConOps), Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP), Site Evacuation Plan (SEP),
Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), and Checklists are reviewed, updated, tested,
validated, approved, and trained.
This project is a priority for County OES and is contingent on collaboration with
County OES staff members. County OES staff turnover caused deadline obstacles
and time delays. This project is still considered relevant, and revisions/updates to
regional emergency plans, ConOps, protocols, and SOPs are ongoing. County OES
is updating the SOP Library document to include a revision, training, and testing
schedule; review and approval process; review checklist; version control measures
and storage location; handling confidential information process; and training, testing
and validation process.
10. Action/Project Title: Encourage the public to prepare and maintain a 3-day
preparedness kit for home and work through outreach events, social media, paid media
and earned media.
Progress Report Period: January 2018 to January 2023
Responsible Agency: County Office of Emergency Services (County OES), County
Communications Office, and County Technology Office
Project Status: Delayed and Ongoing
Explain: The department is not aware of what would constitute the project as
complete. The project could be considered ongoing. Since the potential for
emergencies and natural disasters continues, the project still has relevancy. The
project could stay the same or potentially be modified to recommend community
members ideally prepare a kit with food, water to last at least three days, but three
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 296
days could also be a challenge with current inflation and perhaps that should be
considered as well.
Summary: There have been staffing changes which limit the ability to report on the
full scope of accomplishments for the reporting period. Awareness of
accomplishments during this period include the vast number of files, emails,
PowerPoint presentations, and documents left from the previous Public Outreach
Specialist would indicate a high-level work ethic to achieve the Office of Emergency
Services vision and the essential functions of the position. It should also be noted
PowerPoint presentations created prior to the recent staffing changes indicate a
recommendation to build a kit to last for 3 to 5 days.
Efforts to achieve this goal are visible in the recently updated Personal Disaster
Plans. Page 40 of the plan encourages readers to prepare a home kit to service for
at least three days without water or electricity. Additionally, these plans were made to
consider individuals with access and functional needs. These disaster plans were
translated and available in 12 languages. They are available for free to download
from the OES website and are also regularly mailed out to community members who
request a hard copy. The PowerPoint was used for a presentation at La Jolla Country
Day on November 18, 2021, where the recommendation was made for those in
attendance to build a preparedness kit to last 3-5 days. This project could be
considered ongoing and be included in current and future public education,
information, outreach, and community engagement efforts (These messages can
continue to be shared with the public and included in future outreach programming
through January 2023).
Obstacles, problems, or delays include shift in priorities due to COVID-19 pandemic,
staffing changes/staff turnover, completing trainings, the learning curve, competing
priority projects, project also requires many staff hours, and collaboration is in part
contingent on resources, others, invitations, creating opportunities to share the
information with others and potentially funding for incentives to create additional
opportunities to share the information with the public.
11. Action/Project Title: Develop a Climate Action Plan
Progress Report Period: January 2018 to January 2023
Responsible Agency: Land Use & Environment Group and County Office of
Emergency Services (County OES)
Project Status: Completed
Summary: For further details, please visit the County’s Climate Action Plan
website.139F140F140F
145
145 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/sustainability/cap.html#:~:text=The%20County%20of%20San%20Diego,over%20the
%20next%2030%20years.
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 297
7.2. PLAN UPDATE EVALUATION
TABLE 72: PLANNING AND MITIGATION EVALUATION
Plan Section Considerations Explanation
Planning
Process
Should new jurisdictions and/or
districts be invited to participate in
future plan updates?
All jurisdictions within San Diego County are welcome to
participate and will continue to be invited to participate in
future plan updates.
Have any internal or external
agencies been invaluable to the
mitigation strategy?
All internal and external planning partners are invaluable
to our mitigation strategy.
Internal partners assisted most with updating the hazard
assessment, mitigation actions, strategies and providing
progress reports.
External partner assistance was most helpful related to
climate change incorporation into hazards and updating
the hazard assessment.
Can any procedures (e.g., meeting
announcements, plan updates) be
done differently or more efficiently?
County OES recommends allotting more time for all
planning partners to complete FEMA Handbook Tasks 5,
6 and 7 since these sections require greater amounts of
time and effort to collaborate with additional team
members, plan/document in-depth
goals/objectives/actions and provide supporting
documentation for previous plan accomplishments.
Has the Planning Team undertaken
any public outreach activities?
The Planning Team conducted public outreach activities
outlined in Section 3 of this plan. Some future public
outreach activities are outlined in Section 6 of this plan,
but are not inclusive of all public outreach activities.
How can public participation be
improved?
Public participation may be improved with continued
partner outreach, seminars, surveys, public education
opportunities/presentations and other methods (both
virtual and in-person) outlined in Section 6 of this plan.
Have there been any changes in
public support and/or decision- maker
priorities related to hazard mitigation?
Public feedback details are provided in Section 3 of this
plan. Updated priorities and reasoning are covered in
Section 6 and 7 of this plan.
Capability
Assessment
Have jurisdictions adopted new
policies, plans, regulations, or reports
that could be incorporated into this
plan?
Jurisdiction-specific adoptions/incorporations are covered
in individual annexes to this plan.
Are there different or additional
administrative, human, technical, and
financial resources available for
mitigation planning?
Not currently. The Planning Team will continue to monitor.
Are there different or new education
and outreach programs and resources
available for mitigation activities?
The Planning Team will continue to monitor and seek
opportunities to facilitate new education and outreach
programs/resources, especially for priority actions outlined
in Section 6 of this plan.
Has NFIP participation changed in the
participating jurisdictions?
For NFIP participation, see Sections 1 and 7 of this plan
for the County of San Diego and associated plan annexes
for all other participating jurisdictions.
Risk
Assessment
Has a natural and/or technical or
human-caused disaster occurred?
Disasters, such as, but not limited to, pandemic disease
and wildfires, have occurred during the planning stages of
this plan.
Should the list of hazards addressed
in the plan be modified?
Not currently. The Planning Team will continue to monitor,
assess, and update as needed.
Are there new data sources and/or
additional maps and studies
Not currently. The Planning Team will continue to monitor,
assess, and update as needed.
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 298
Plan Section Considerations Explanation
Risk
Assessment
available? If so, what are they and
what have they revealed?
Should the information be
incorporated into future plan
updates?
Do any new critical facilities or
infrastructure need to be added to the
asset lists?
Not currently. The Planning Team will continue to monitor,
assess, and update as needed.
Have any changes in development
trends occurred that could create
additional risks?
See the Development Section of this plan and the 2021
County of San Diego Vulnerability Assessment and
Adaptation Report for a list of policies to minimize new
residential development in very-high and high fire hazard
severity zones, and increase resilience of existing
development in high-risk areas.
Are there repetitive losses and/or
severe repetitive losses to
document?
According to the 2022 FEMA Repetitive Loss Summary
Report, the County of San Diego has 20 Repetitive Loss
properties, and 3 Severe Repetitive Loss properties.
Plan Section Considerations Explanation
Mitigation
Strategy
Is the mitigation strategy being
implemented as anticipated? Were
the cost and timeline estimates
accurate?
The mitigation strategy experienced delayed
implementation due to some staff/project manager
turnover and decreased time available to plan and
implement. Emergency Operations Center activation for
the 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic affected timeline estimates.
Should new mitigation actions be
added to the Action Plan? Should
existing mitigation actions be revised
or eliminated from the plan?
Not currently. The Planning Team will continue to monitor,
assess, and update as needed.
Are there new obstacles that were not
anticipated in the plan that will need to
be considered in the next plan
update?
Not currently. The Planning Team will continue to monitor,
assess, and update as needed.
Are there new funding sources to
consider?
Not currently. The Planning Team will continue to monitor,
assess, and update as needed.
Have elements of the plan been
incorporated into other planning
mechanisms?
Yes, e.g., the Emergency Operations Plan and other
County emergency plans.
Plan
Maintenance
Procedures
Was the plan monitored and
evaluated as anticipated?
The plan was monitored and evaluated as anticipated.
However, it would have been more helpful to the Planning
Team to have more time to complete Sections 5-7 of this
plan, which will be accounted for in the next planning
cycle.
What are needed improvements to
the procedures?
None currently. The Planning Team will continue to
monitor, assess, and update as needed.
7.3. PLAN MAINTENANCE, MONITORING, EVALUATION, & UPDATES
Hazard Mitigation Plan maintenance is the process the Planning Team establishes to track
the plan’s implementation progress and to inform the plan update. The plan must include a
description of the method and schedule for monitoring, evaluating, and updating it within a 5-
year cycle. These procedures help to:
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 299
• Ensure that the mitigation strategy is implemented according to the plan.
• Provide the foundation for an ongoing mitigation program in your community.
• Standardize long-term monitoring of hazard-related activities.
• Integrate mitigation principles into community officials’ daily job responsibilities and
department roles.
• Maintain momentum through continued engagement and accountability in the plan’s
progress.
7.3.1 PLAN MONITORING
Plan monitoring means tracking the implementation of the plan over time. The plan must
identify how, when, and by whom the plan will be monitored.
The Hazard Mitigation Planning Group (HMPG) participants listed in Section 2 of this plan will
be responsible for monitoring the plan annually for updates to jurisdictional goals, objectives,
and action items. If needed, these participants will coordinate through the County Office of
Emergency Services (County OES) to integrate these updates into the Plan. County OES will
be responsible for monitoring the Plan for updates on an annual basis.
Status of this plan’s Mitigation Goals, Objectives, and Actions are tracked annually by County
OES via a five-year cycle project plan and charter created by County OES. Every year,
County OES will ask planning participants named in Section 2 of this plan to report on the
status of their projects, the success of various implementation processes, difficulties
encountered, success of coordination efforts, and strategies that should be revised.
7.3.2. PLAN EVALUATION
The Plan is evaluated by the County Office of Emergency Services (County OES) and by
each participating jurisdiction annually to determine the effectiveness of programs, and to
reflect changes in land development or programs that may affect mitigation priorities. This
includes re-evaluation by Hazard Mitigation Planning Group (HMPG) leads (or their select
jurisdictional representative) based upon the initial STAPPLEE criteria used to draft goals,
objectives, and action items for each jurisdiction. County OES and city representatives also
review the goals and action items to determine their relevance to changing situations in the
county, as well as changes in State or Federal regulations and policy.
County OES and jurisdictional representatives review the risk assessment portion of the Plan
to determine if this information should be updated or modified, given any new available data.
The coordinating organizations responsible for the various action items will report on the
status of their projects, the success of various implementation processes, difficulties
encountered, success of coordination efforts, and which strategies should be revised.
Any updates or changes necessary will be forwarded by planning participants to County OES
for inclusion in further updates to the Plan. The HMPG and each Local Mitigation Planning
Team meet annually to discuss the status of this Plan.
7.3.3. PLAN UPDATES
Since this Plan’s original adoption in 2005 the Hazard Mitigation Planning Group (HMPG) has
participated in an annual review. This process was continued after the adoption of the 2010
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 300
plan. The review details all mitigation actions that were deferred, begun, continued, or
completed during that calendar year. In the past five years, there has been considerable
progress made with the successful completion of most action items developed by the
participating jurisdictions. Section 7.1 details the status of the action items from the 2018
plan.
This review process has been effective in identifying gaps and shortfalls in funding, support,
and other resources. It has also allowed for the re-prioritization of specific actions as
circumstances change. It allows each participating jurisdiction to maintain the plan as a living
document. This review process has enabled the HMPG to improve the document by
eliminating actions that have been completed, adding new actions that have been identified
since the plan’s adoption and reprioritizing other actions to reflect new priorities and/or
constraints. The negative side of this review process is that it is time consuming, pulling staff
away from their day-to-day responsibilities.
The County Office of Emergency Services (County OES) will continue to be the responsible
agency for updates to the Plan, and responsible for monitoring the Plan for updates on an
annual basis. All HMPG participants will continue to be responsible to provide County OES
with jurisdictional-level updates to the Plan annually or when/if necessary, as described
above.
Status of this plan’s Mitigation Goals, Objectives, and Actions are tracked annually by County
OES via a five-year cycle project plan and charter created by County OES. Every year,
County OES will ask planning participants named in Section 2 of this plan to report on the
status of their projects, the success of various implementation processes, difficulties
encountered, success of coordination efforts, and strategies that should be revised.
Every five years the plan will be updated and submitted to existing authorities outlined in
Section 1 of this plan and Cal OES and FEMA for review.
Below is a general five-year timeline of when and how this plan will be updated, per
FEMA guidelines and requirements outlined within FEMA’s “Local Mitigation Planning
Handbook” 146:
❖ YEAR 1 (FEBRUARY 7, 2023-DECEMBER 31, 2023):
• Complete FEMA Task 1 (“Determine the Planning Area and Resources”)
• Complete FEMA Task 2 (“Build the Planning Team”)
• Start FEMA Task 3 (“Create an Outreach Strategy)
❖ YEAR 2 (JANUARY 1, 2024-DECEMBER 31, 2024):
• Complete FEMA Task 3 (“Create an Outreach Strategy)
• Complete FEMA Task 4 (“Review Community Capabilities”)
• Start FEMA Task 5 (“Conduct a Risk Assessment”)
❖ YEAR 3 (JANUARY 1, 2025-DECEMBER 31, 2025):
• Complete FEMA Task 5 (“Conduct a Risk Assessment”)
• Start FEMA Task 6 (“Develop A Mitigation Strategy”)
❖ YEAR 4 (JANUARY 1, 2026-DECEMBER 31, 2026):
• Complete FEMA Task 6 (“Develop A Mitigation Strategy”)
146 https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/2020-06/fema-local-mitigation-planning-handbook_03-2013.pdf.
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 301
• Complete FEMA Task 7 (“Keep the Plan Current”)
❖ YEAR 5 (JANUARY 1, 2027-FEBRUARY 7, 2028)
• Complete FEMA Task 8 (“Review and Adopt the Plan”)
• Complete FEMA Task 9 (“Create a Safe and Resilient Community”)
7.3.4. IMPLEMENTATION THROUGH EXISTING PROGRAMS AND OTHER
PLANNING MECHANISMS
County and local jurisdictions have implemented most of the Priority Actions from the 2018
Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) through existing programs and
procedures. Planning participants used (and will continue to use) this plan as a baseline of
information related to priority hazards impacting their jurisdictions, to identify vulnerable
communities and critical assets, and plan for their protection. The planning participants have
also been able to refer to existing institutions, integrations, plans, policies, and ordinances
defined for each jurisdiction, which was outlined in Section 2 of this plan (e.g., General Plan).
After regional adoption of this MJHMP update, planning participants will incorporate this plan
into their General Plans and/or other comprehensive plans and procedures as those plans
require review and revisions. Some of those documents will implement and/or be
informed by this plan, which include (and are not limited to):
• San Diego County/Cities General Plans & Safety Element
o Required incorporation of this plan’s 2018 and 2023 updates, including
evacuation information and priority hazards into the County’s Safety Element
(lead by Planning & Development Services) to demonstrate progress of local
hazard mitigation efforts and ensure compliance with the California Government
Code. Plan leads (listed in Section 2 of this plan) met as needed to collaborate on
cohesive updates, then discuss how and where to include the update within their
respective plans.140F141F141F
147
• County Legislative Program
o The vulnerability assessments, priority hazards, Goals, Objectives, and
Actions/Priority Actions from this plan update helped the Office of Emergency
Services’ planning group inform the County Legislative Program’s Priority Issues
and Policy Guidelines through the addition of mitigation considerations and an all-
hazard approach to disaster planning and legislation support.141F142F142F
148
• San Diego County Evacuation and Sheltering Plans
o This plan’s priority hazards, hazard profiles, hazard mitigation actions/priority
actions, and vulnerability assessments inform evacuation and sheltering plans to
account for the safety of people and assets during all-hazard scenarios to the
furthest extent feasible. Implementation of this plan’s update ensure compliance
with existing federal and state legislation.
• San Diego County Operational Area Emergency Operations Plan 2022
o Hazard information from the MJHMP update was incorporated into the 2022
County of San Diego Operational Emergency Operations Plan (OA EOP) update.
147 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/pds/generalplan/GP-Progress-Reports.html#ProgressReports
148 https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/sdc/cao/edga.html
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 302
All high significance hazards identified in the MJHMP update were addressed in
the 2022 OA EOP update.
• State & Federal Hazard Mitigation Programs
o Members from the Office of Emergency Services’ planning group participated
in interviews with Cal OES to share planning experiences and best practices
from this plan’s update, provide feedback on the State & Federal Hazard
Mitigation Program, and provide recommendations for program and plan
improvement.
Task Four of the FEMA Local Mitigation Handbook, Sections 1, 2, 4, and 7 of this plan, and
jurisdiction-specific annexes describe the process by which local governments will integrate
the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms, such as
comprehensive or capital improvement plans. The County of San Diego specifically meets
with all necessary partners to collaborate on planning mechanisms/updates, conducts an
approval process through the public, department leadership, Unified Disaster Council (UDC)
voting/approval, then Board of Supervisor and other elected official approval. All listed steps
were conducted on necessary and required bases.
The administrative and technical capabilities of the County, as discussed in Sections 2 and 4
of this plan, provide an identification of the staff, personnel, and department resources
available to implement the actions identified in Section 6 of this plan.
Specific resources reviewed include those involving technical personnel such as
planners/engineers with knowledge of land development and land management practices,
engineers trained in construction practices related to building and infrastructure, planners,
and engineers with an understanding of natural or human-caused hazards, floodplain
managers, surveyors, personnel with GIS skills and scientists familiar with hazards in the
community.
7.3.5. RESPONSE PLANS
Several other operational or functional response plans are also influenced by information
contained in this plan. These plans include but are not limited to:
General Plan, Safety Element and Emergency Operations Plan, Annex Q – Evacuation: A
review of the vulnerability and estimated losses detailed in the hazard profiles can help
identify evacuation routes and locations, and their capacity, safety, and viability in different
emergency scenarios.
These plans inform this plan by helping the Planning Group evaluate the impacts of multiple
or cascading hazards, so that evacuees are not relocated into an area that puts them at risk
from other hazards.
7.3.6. CONTINUED PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
The 2018 plan was posted on the Hazard Mitigation page of the San Diego County Office of
Emergency Services (County OES) webpage, and the public has always been encouraged to
comment on the plan online. Once approved, this revised plan will be posted on the Hazard
Mitigation webpage of the County OES website and participating jurisdictions will have links
to the Plan on their websites.
SECTION SEVEN | Keep the Plan Current 303
The participating jurisdictions and special districts continue to be dedicated to involving the
public directly in the review process and updates of the Plan. A maintenance committee
made up of a representative from County OES and a representative from each participating
jurisdiction is responsible for monitoring, evaluating, and updating the Plan as described
above. During all phases of plan maintenance, the public will have the opportunity to provide
feedback.
In addition, hard copies of the plan are catalogued and kept by the appropriate agencies in
the county. The existence and location of these copies are also posted on the county
website. To facilitate public comments, the County OES Hazard Mitigation webpage contains
an email address for the public’s use, which is monitored daily by County OES staff. Any
questions or comments received on this website are forwarded to the appropriate member(s)
of the HMPG for their review and response. County OES also tracks public comments on this
plan.
A press release requesting public comments is also issued for each update, and after each
evaluation. County OES also uses social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) to notify the public
of any changes they should be aware of. These notifications direct people to the Hazard
Mitigation webpage, where the public can review proposed changes.
Coupled with the dedicated email address for comments, this provides the public a simple,
easily accessible manner to express concerns, opinions, or ideas about any
updates/changes that are proposed to the Plan.
County OES will continue to be responsible for publicizing any changes to the Plan and
maintaining public involvement.
APPENDICES 304
APPENDICES
Decorative Image Photo by County OES, Rob Andolina
San Diego County, California
2023
APPENDICES 305
APPENDIX 1. BASE DATA SOURCES 2021
TYPE SECTION SOURCES CREDITS HAZUS CLASSIFICATIONS EXCLUSIONS NOTES/ASSUMPTIONS
IN
F
R
A
S
T
R
U
C
T
U
R
E
OIL/GAS
PIPELINES
Homeland Infrastructure
Foundation- Level Data
(HIFLD) - NG PIPELINES
National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency (NGA)
Buried Pipelines
Homeland Infrastructure
Foundation- Level Data
(HIFLD) - PETROLEUM
PIPELINES
National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency (NGA)
Pipelines
RAILROA
D TRACKS
SDE.SANGIS.RAILROAD -
RAIL_TYPE =
'TRAIN'
San Diego Association of
Governments
(SANDAG)
Railway Tracks
Excluded defunct
freight lines
SDE.SANGIS.RAILROAD -
RAIL_TYPE =
'TROLLEY'
San Diego Association of
Governments
(SANDAG)
Light Rail Tracks
HIGHWAY California Department of
Transportation
California Department of
Transportation
Highway Roads (Major
Roads + Urban Roads)
CR
I
T
I
C
A
L
FA
C
I
L
I
T
I
E
S
AIRPORT
FACILITIE
S
SDE.SANGIS.AIR_AIRPORT
S + web SanGIS + Google, etc.
Control Towers +
Terminal Buildings
+ Parking Structures +
Fuel Facilities + Maint/Hangar Facilities
+ Runways + Other
Excluded military
and private facilities
Terminals-Large
SDE.SANGIS.AIR_AIRPORT
S + web SanGIS + Google, etc. Terminals-Small
SDE.SANGIS.AIR_AIRPORT
S + web SanGIS + Google, etc. Control Towers
SDE.SANGIS.AIR_AIRPORT
S + web SanGIS + Google, etc.
Runways: Asphalt -- includes
major
taxi-ways
SDE.SANGIS.AIR_AIRPORT
S + web SanGIS + Google, etc. Strips: Dirt, gravel, etc.
BRIDGES
Homeland Infrastructure
Foundation-
Level Data (HIFLD) - Railroad
Bridges
National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency
(NGA) By
material/design/length
and by light
rail/railroad/highway
Excluded any on
military bases, and
on reservations if
not major road or
greater
Added some highway bridges
from imagery/NBI/SDE. No
rail bridges were added as the
data showed no new ones
Homeland Infrastructure
Foundation-
Level Data (HIFLD) - National
Bridge Inventory
National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency (NGA)
SDE.SANGIS.BRIDGES SanGIS
BUS
FACILITIE
S
Homeland Infrastructure
Foundation- Level Data
(HIFLD) - Amtrak Stations
National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency (NGA) Urban Station + Fuel
Facility + Dispatch Facility + Maintenance
Facility
HAZUS + web
Federal Emergency
Management Agency
(FEMA) + Google, etc.
SDE.SANGIS.TRAN_STOPS_
SG + web SanGIS + Google, etc.
COMMUNI
CATION
FACILITIE
S/
UTILITIES
Homeland Infrastructure
Foundation- Level Data
(HIFLD) - AM Antennas +
HAZUS
National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency (NGA)
Central Offices +
Stations/Transmitters
(AM or FM, TV
stations, Weather
stations, Other)
AM Antennas from previous
analysis matched current
HSIP/HAZUS data
Homeland Infrastructure
Foundation- Level Data
(HIFLD) - FM Antennas +
HAZUS
National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency (NGA)
FM Antennas from previous
analysis matched current
HSIP/HAZUS data (two
stations on reservation land
were excluded as well)
Homeland Infrastructure Foundation- Level Data
(HIFLD) - TV Digital
Transmitters + HAZUS
National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency (NGA)
Added one digital TV
transmitter up near San
Marcos from HAZUS data-
looked it up on FCC website and is active
APPENDICES 306
Homeland Infrastructure
Foundation- Level Data
(HIFLD) - Broadband
Transmitters
National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency (NGA)
Analog transmitters are no
longer in use as of July 2021
No changes
Homeland Infrastructure
Foundation- Level Data
(HIFLD)- Weather Stations
National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency (NGA)
Added for 2021- only 1
station
ELECTRIC
POWER
FACILITIE
S
CEC - PP_SD California Energy Commission
Transmission
Substations +
Distribution Circuits +
Generation
Plants
Excluded private facilities Power plants
CEC - Substation_SD California Energy
Commission
Substations on
reservations NOT
excluded
(Campo)
Substations
TYPE SECTION SOURCES CREDITS HAZUS
CLASSIFICATIONS EXCLUSIONS NOTES/ASSUMPTIONS
CR
I
T
I
C
A
L
FA
C
I
L
I
T
I
E
S
,
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
(EMERGEN
CY
RESPONSE) EMERGENC
Y
CENTERS,
FIRE
STATIONS,
POLICE
STATIONS
Homeland Infrastructure
Foundation- Level Data
(HIFLD) -
Local_EmergencyOperations
Centers
+SDE.SANGIS.FACILITY_CRI
TICAL
National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency
(NGA) + SanGIS
Emergency Operation
Center
Includes 4 alternate locations
SDE.SANGIS.FIRE_STATION SanGIS Fire Station
Excluded military
and reservation
facilities
SDE.SANGIS.FACILITY_CRIT
ICAL + SDE.SANGIS.PLACES
+ web +
SDE.SANGIS.LAW_FACILITY
SanGIS Police Station
Excluded military
and reservation
facilities
Included Customs + Border Patrol
GOVERNMENT
OFFICE/CIV
IC CENTER
SDE.SANGIS.FACILITY_CRITI
CAL +
SDE.SANGIS.PLACES +
visual/web analysis
SanGIS + Google, etc.
HAZUS: From General
Building Stock - GOV1I
(General Services) - not
GOV2I (Emergency
Response)
Excluded military
and reservation
facilities, and any
facilities already
covered by
Emergency
Response group
HOSPITALS
/
CARE FACILITIES
SDE.SANGIS.FACILITY_CRITI
CAL +
SDE.SANGIS.PLACES +
visual/web analysis
SanGIS + Google, etc.
Hospitals
(Small/Medium/Large) +
Medical Clinics (Clinics,
Labs, Blood Banks)
Excluded hospitals
without ER facilities
PORT
FACILITIES
Homeland Infrastructure
Foundation- Level Data
(HIFLD) - Ports
National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency
(NGA)
Waterfront Structures +
Cranes/Cargo Handling
Equipment +
Warehouses + Fuel
Facilities
Excluded private
facilities/marinas
NAV_UNIT_N = '32ND ST.
NAVAL BASE' OR
NAV_UNIT_N = 'SAN DIEGO
UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT,
BROADWAY PIER' -- used
central port locations, not
separate wharf/pier locations
POTABLE
WATER
FACILITIES
HAZUS + web
Federal Emergency
Management Agency
(FEMA) + local
governments + Google,
etc.
Pumping Plants +
Wells + Water Storage
Tanks (0.5MGD to
2MGD) + Water
Treatment Plants
(Large/Med/Small)
Treatment Plants - included
Carlsbad desalination facility
(near complete)
SDE.SANGIS.HYD_LAKE SanGIS Reservoirs (without adjacent
plants)
WASTE
WATER
FACILITIES
HAZUS + web
Federal Emergency
Management Agency
(FEMA) + local
governments + Google,
etc.
Treatment Plants
(Large/Med/Small)
+ Lift Stations
(Large/Med/Small)
Treatment Plants
APPENDICES 307
RAIL
FACILITIES
Homeland Infrastructure
Foundation-
Level Data (HIFLD) -
Intermodal
Terminal Facilities
National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency
(NGA)
Railway: Urban Station
+ Fuel Facility+
Dispatch Facility +
Maintenance Facility
Light Rail: DC Substation + Dispatch
Facility + Maintenance
Facility
Terminal Facilities
Homeland Infrastructure
Foundation- Level Data
(HIFLD) - Amtrak Stations
National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency
(NGA)
Amtrak Stations
Homeland Infrastructure
Foundation-
Level Data (HIFLD) - Railroad
Yards + web
National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency
(NGA) + Google, etc.
Yard Facilities
SDE.SANGIS.TRAN_STOPS_
SG + web
San Diego Association of
Governments
(SANDAG) + Google, etc.
Sprinter Stations
Homeland Infrastructure Foundation- Level Data
(HIFLD) - Fixed-Guideway
Transit Stations +
SDE.SANGIS.TRAN_STOPS_
SG + web
National Geospatial Intelligence Agency
(NGA) + San Diego
Association of
Governments (SANDAG)
+ Google, etc.
Transit Centers
SCHOOLS
SDE.SANGIS.PARCELS_ALL SanGIS Grade Schools +
Colleges/Universities
(HAZUS data for SD is
only grade schools --
not
colleges/universities)
Excluded any on
military bases and
reservation land
Excluded
SOCtypes:
Alternative Schools
of
Choice,
Continuation High
Schools, County
removed any that had
closed- used CA dept of ed
GIS to get updated schools
and enrollments
Community Analyst Dun & Bradstreet, via Esri
Excluded private
facilities and trade
schools
Homeland Infrastructure
Foundation- Level Data
(HIFLD)- Type 1
universities/jr colleges only
TYPE SECTION SOURCES CREDITS HAZUS
CLASSIFICATIONS EXCLUSIONS NOTES/ASSUMPTIONS
PO
P
U
L
A
T
I
O
N
+
BU
I
L
D
I
N
G
S
POPULATIO
N 2019 Census U.S. Census Bureau Buried Pipelines
RESIDENTIA
L
BUILDINGS
SDE.SANGIS.PARCELS_
ALL
SanGIS
Used an overlay of
LANDUSE_SG to
find residential
parcels as ASR field
is deprecated
COMMERCIA
L BUILDINGS
Community Analyst
Dun & Bradstreet, via Esri
APPENDICES 308
APPENDIX 2. HAZARD DATA SOURCES 2021
NAME SOURCES QUERY (IF ANY) NOTES (INCL. CREDITS)
Coastal
Storm/Erosion HYD_FLOODPL FLD_ZONE = 'VE' Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA)
Dam Failure HYD_DAM_INUNDATION_DSO
D
California Office of Emergency
Services, County of San Diego,
Division of Safety of Dams
100-Year
Earthquake
HAZUS, USGS
Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA; HAZUS); soil from
U.S. Geological Survey VS30 data -
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/a
pps/vs30/custom.php
500-Year
Earthquake
HAZUS, USGS
Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA; HAZUS); soil from
U.S. Geological Survey VS30 data -
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/a
pps/vs30/custom.php
Probabilistic
Annualized
Earthquake
HAZUS, USGS
Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA; HAZUS); soil from
U.S. Geological Survey VS30 data -
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/a
pps/vs30/custom.php
Rose Canyon
M6.9 Scenario HAZUS, USGS U.S. Geological Survey- ShakeMaps
100-Year Flood HYD_FLOODPL FLOOD_PLAI = 'FP100' OR
FLOOD_PLAI = 'FW100'
Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA)
500-Year Flood HYD_FLOODPL FLOOD_PLAI = 'FP500' Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA)
Rain-Induced
Landslide (High
Risk)
GEO_LANDSLIDE_CN
soil_slip_risk = 'High' OR
state_landslide_cat = 'Most
Susceptible' OR
GABRO_SLOPE = 'YES'
State of California, U.S. Geological
Survey, Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA;
HAZUS) and County of San Diego
Rain-Induced
Landslide
(Moderate Risk)
GEO_LANDSLIDE_CN
(soil_slip_risk = 'Moderate' OR
state_landslide_cat =
'Marginally Susceptible') AND
GABRO_SLOPE = ''
State of California, U.S. Geological
Survey, Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA;
HAZUS) and County of San Diego
Wildfire Hazard
Severity Zones
FIRE_HAZARD_SEVERITY_ZON
ES
Definition qeuried to only show
high and very high fire
zones
Used composite version provided directly from CAL FIRE Fire
Resource Assessment Program
(FRAP) Team
Sea Level Rise
(Coastal
Flooding)
Areas inundated by unimpeded
Pacific coastal flooding under a
scenario of 1.4-meter (55-inch)
sea-level rise
Pacific Institute --
http://www2.pacinst.org/
Sea Level Rise
(MHHW)
Area inundated by mean higher
high water (MHHW) under 1.4-
meter (55-inch) sea-level rise
scenario
Pacific Institute --
http://www2.pacinst.org/
Tsunami HYD_TSUNAMI_INUNDATION_
AREA
California Emergency Management
Agency (CalEMA), University of
Southern California (USC) and
California Geological Survey (CGS)
APPENDICES 309
APPENDIX 3. OTHER SOURCES/REFERENCES
ABAG Dam Failure Inundation Hazards Guide,
http://www.abag.ca.gov/bayarea/eqmaps/damfailure/dfguide.html
Bainbridge, David 1997. The Flood Next Time. The San Diego Earth Times Web Page:
http://www.sdearthtimes.com/et1097/et1097s1.html
California Department of Boating and Waterways and SANDAG, 1994. Shoreline Erosion
Assessment and Atlas of the San Diego Region, Volumes I and II. Edited by Reinhard E.
Flick, PhD.
California Earthquake History 1769-Present
Earthquake.usgs.gov/regional/sca/ca_eqs.php
City of Fort Collins Dam Failure Webpage, http://www.ci.fort-collins.co.us/oem/dam-
failure.php
California Coastal Commission Draft Sea Level Rise Policy Guidance (2013)
http://www.coastal.ca.gov/climate/slr/guidance/CCC_Draft_SLR_Guidance_PR_101420
13.pdf
California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology 1990. Planning
Scenario for a Major Earthquake, San Diego-Tijuana Metropolitan Area. Special
Publication 100.
California Department of Water Resources, Dam Safety,
http://www.water.ca.gov/damsaefty/docs/fault.pdf
California Environmental Protection Agency and Office of Environmental Health Hazard
Assessment, 2013. “Indicators of Climate Change in California.”
Climate Education Partners, 2014. “San Diego, 2050 Is Calling. How Will We Answer?”
County of San Diego, Department of Sanitation and Flood Control. Storms in San Diego
County.
FEMA 2002. State and Local Mitigation Planning How-to Guide. September 2002, FEMA
386-1.
FEMA 1999. HAZUS 99 Earthquake Loss Estimation Methodology User Manual-ArcView.
Developed by FEMA through arrangements with National Institute of Building Sciences.
Frankel, Arthur, Mueller, Charles, Barnhard, Theodore, Perkins, David, Leyendecker, E.V.,
Dickman, Nancy, Hanson, Stanley, and Hopper, Margaret, 1997, Seismic-hazard maps
for the conterminous United States, Map C - Horizontal Peak Acceleration with 2%
probability of exceedance in 50 years, U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 97-131-
C.
http://geohazards.cr.usgs.gov/eq/html/data.html
Garfin, G., G. Franco, H. Blanco, A. Comrie, P. Gonzalez, T. Piechota, R. Smyth, and R.
Waskom, 2014: Ch. 20: Southwest. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The
Third National Climate Assessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and G. W.
Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change Research Program, 462-486. doi:10.7930/J08G8HMN.
Governor’s Office of Emergency Services 2003. Interim Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance
for California Local Governments. Prepared for the DRC April 21-23, 2003.
APPENDICES 310
Hawk, R.N., and Christiansen, T.P., 1991, City of San Diego Ordinances and Regulations
with Respect to Geotechnical and Geological Hazards, in Environmental Perils, San
Diego Region, Abbott, P.L., and Elliott, W.J., editors, San Diego Association of
Geologists
Higbee, Melissa, Daniel Cayan, Sam Iacobellis, Mary Tyree (2014). Report from San Diego
Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Training Workshop #1: Climate Change and Hazards in
San Diego. ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability. Accessed July 7, 2014.
http://www.icleiusa.org/library/documents/training-workshop-report/view
Institute for Business and Life Safety, Tampa FL, July 2008 Mega Fires: The Case for
Mitigation, The Witch Creek Fire, October 21-31, 2007
IPCC, 2013: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science
Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M.
Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)].
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
Leighton & Associates, 1983, Seismic Safety Study for the City of San Diego, City of San
Diego General Plan
Journal of San Diego History 2002. Dry Rivers, Dammed Rivers and Floods: An Early History
of the Struggle Between Droughts and Floods in San Diego. Winter 2002, Volume 48,
Number 1. http://www.sandiegohistory.org/journal/2002-1/hill.htm
National Association of Counties April 2009. “A Snapshot of the Impact of the Recession on
Large, Urban Counties”.
Office of Emergency Services 2014. Unified San Diego County Emergency Services
Organization Operational Area Emergency Plan.
San Diego’s Changing Climate: A Regional Wake-Up Call. A Summary of the Focus 2050
Study Presented by The San Diego Foundation
San Diego Natural History Museum Web Page 2003. Faults and Earthquakes in San Diego
County. Thomas A. Demere, Ph.D: Curator of Paleontology.
http://www.sdnhm.org/research/paleontology/sdfaults.html
Sea-Level Rise for the Coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington: Past, Present, and
Future (2012). http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13389
South Carolina Emergency Management Division. South Carolina Emergency Operations
Plan Appendix 4 South Carolina Dam Failure and Preparedness Plan. February 2009
Stroh, Robert C. editor., 2001: Coastal processes and Engineering Geology of San Diego,
California, San Diego Association of Geologists, Sunbelt Publications
U.S. Dept. of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 1993.
Tsunamis affecting the West Coast of the United States 1806-1992. KGRD 29.
Walsh, J., D. Wuebbles, K. Hayhoe, J. Kossin, K. Kunkel, G. Stephens, P. Thorne, R. Vose,
M. Wehner, J. Willis, D. Anderson, S. Doney, R. Feely, P. Hennon, V. Kharin, T.
Knutson, F. Landerer, T. Lenton, J. Kennedy, and R. Somerville, 2014: Ch. 2: Our
Changing Climate. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National
Climate Assessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S.
Global Change Research Program, 19-67. doi:10.7930/J0KW5CXT.
APPENDICES 311
APPENDIX 4. SCRIPPS INSTITUTION OF OCEANOGRAPHY REFERENCES,
UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO
Aguilera, R., Gershunov, A., & Benmarhnia, T. (2019). Atmospheric rivers impact California’s
coastal water quality via extreme precipitation. Science of The Total Environment, 671,
488–494. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.03.318
Aguilera, R., Gershunov, A., Ilango, S. D., Guzman-Morales, J., & Benmarhnia, T. (2020a).
Santa Ana Winds of Southern California Impact PM2.5 With and Without Smoke From
Wildfires. GeoHealth, 4(1), e2019GH000225.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1029/2019GH000225
Aguilera, R., Hansen, K., Gershunov, A., Ilango, S., Sheridan, P., and Benmarhnia, T. (2020).
Respiratory Hospitalizations and Wildfire Smoke: A spatio-temporal analysis of an
extreme firestorm in San Diego County, California. Environmental Epidemiology, 4, doi:
10.1097/EE9.0000000000000114.
Aguilera, R., Corringham, T., Gershunov A., and Benmarhnia, T., (2021). Wildfire smoke
impacts respiratory health much more than fine particles from other sources:
observational evidence from Southern California. Nature Communications.
12:1493, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-21708.
Aguilera, R., Corringham, T., Gershunov, A., Leibel S., and Benmarhnia, T. (2021). Fine
Particles in Wildfire Smoke and Pediatric Respiratory Health in California. Pediatrics.
147(4):e2020027128.
Analitis, A., Michelozzi, P., D’Ippoliti, D., de’Donato, F., Menne, B., Matthies, F., Atkinson, R.
W., Iñiguez, C.,
Basagaña, X., Schneider, A., Lefranc, A., Paldy, A., Bisanti, L., & Katsouyanni, K.
(2014). Effects of Heat Waves on Mortality: Effect Modification and Confounding by Air
Pollutants. Epidemiology, 25(1), 15–22. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24759018
Barnard, P. L., Hoover, D., Hubbard, D. M., Snyder, A., Ludka, B. C., Allan, J., Kaminsky, G.
M., Ruggiero, P., Gallien, T. W., Gabel, L., McCandless, D., Weiner, H. M., Cohn, N.,
Anderson, D. L., & Serafin, K. A. (2017). Extreme oceanographic forcing and coastal
response due to the 2015–2016 El Niño. Nature Communications, 8, 14365.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14365
Basu, R. (2009). High ambient temperature and mortality: a review of epidemiologic studies
from 2001 to 2008. Environmental Health, 8(1), 40. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-069X-8-
40
Bouchama, A., Dehbi, M., Mohamed, G., Matthies, F., Shoukri, M., & Menne, B. (2007).
Prognostic Factors in Heat Wave–Related Deaths: A Meta-analysis. Archives of Internal
Medicine, 167(20), 2170–2176. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.167.20.ira70009
Bromirski, P. D., Miller, A. J., & Flick, R. E. (2012). Understanding North Pacific sea level
trends. Eos, Transactions American Geophysical Union, 93(27), 249–251.
https://doi.org/doi:10.1029/2012EO270001
Bromirski, P. D., Miller, A. J., Flick, R. E., & Auad, G. (2011). Dynamical suppression of sea
level rise along the Pacific coast of North America: Indications for imminent acceleration.
Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 116(C7).
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JC006759
APPENDICES 312
Burillo, D., Chester, M., Pincetl, S., Fournier, E., Reich, K., & Hall., A. (2018). Climate
Change in Los Angeles County: Grid Vulnerability to Extreme Heat. In California’s Fourth
Climate Change Assessment.
Burillo, D., Chester, M. v, Pincetl, S., Fournier, E. D., & Reyna, J. (2019). Forecasting peak
electricity demand for Los Angeles considering higher air temperatures due to climate
change. Applied Energy, 236, 1–9.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.11.039
Cao, Q., Gershunov, A., Shulgina, T., Ralph, F. M., Sun, N., & Lettenmaier, D. P. (2020).
Floods due to Atmospheric Rivers along the U.S. West Coast: The Role of Antecedent
Soil Moisture in a Warming Climate. Journal of Hydrometeorology, 21(8), 1827– 1845.
https://doi.org/10.1175/JHM-D-19-0242.1
Cayan, D. R., Bromirski, P. D., Hayhoe, K., Tyree, M., Dettinger, M. D., & Flick, R. E. (2008).
Climate change projections of sea level extremes along the California coast. Climatic
Change, 87, S57–S73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-007-9376-7
Clemesha, R. E. S., Guirguis, K., Gershunov, A., Small, I. J., & Tardy, A. (2018a). California
heat waves: their spatial evolution, variation, and coastal modulation by low clouds.
Climate Dynamics, 50(11), 4285–4301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-017- 3875-7
Clemesha, R. E. S., Gershunov, A., Iacobellis, S. F., & Cayan, D. R. (2017). Daily variability
of California coastal low cloudiness: A balancing act between stability and subsidence.
Geophysical Research Letters. https://doi.org/10.1002/2017GL073075
Clemesha, R. E. S., Gershunov, A., Iacobellis, S. F., Williams, A., & Cayan, D. R. (2016). The
northward March of summer low cloudiness along the California coast. Geophysical
Research Letters, 43(3), 1287–1295. https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL067081
Corringham, T. W., Ralph, F. M., Gershunov, A., Cayan, D. R., & Talbot, C. A. (2019).
Atmospheric rivers drive flood damages in the western United States. Science
Advances, 5(12), eaax4631. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aax4631
Crosby, S. C., Cornuelle, B. D., O’Reilly, W. C., & Guza, R. T. (2017). Assimilating Global
Wave Model Predictions and Deep- Water Wave Observations in Nearshore Swell
Predictions. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 34(8), 1823–1836.
https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-17-0003.1
Crosby, S. C., O’Reilly, W. C., & Guza, R. T. (2016). Modeling Long-Period Swell in Southern
California: Practical Boundary Conditions from Buoy Observations and Global Wave
Model Predictions. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 33(8), 1673–1690.
https://doi.org/10.1175/JTECH-D-16-0038.1
Dettinger, M., & Cayan, D. (2014). Drought and the California Delta—A Matter of Extremes.
San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, 12(2), 6p.
https://doi.org/10.15447/sfews.2014v12iss2art4
Dettinger, M. D., Ralph, F. M., Das, T., Neiman, P. J., & Cayan, D. R. (2011). Atmospheric
Rivers, Floods and the Water Resources of California. Water, 3(4), 445–478.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w3020445
Diehl, P. (2015, October 15). Solana Beach, Encinitas OK sand replenishment. San Diego
Union Tribune. http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/environment/sdut-solana-
beach-encinitas-ok-sand-replenishment-2015oct15- story.html
Doria, A., Guza, R. T., O’Reilly, W. C., & Yates, M. L. (2016). Observations and modeling of
San Diego beaches during El Niño.
APPENDICES 313
Continental Shelf Research, 124, 153–164.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2016.05.008
Fiedler, J. W., Smit, P. B., Brodie, K. L., McNinch, J., & Guza, R. T. (2018). Numerical
modeling of wave runup on steep and mildly sloping natural beaches. Coastal
Engineering, 131, 106–113.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2017.09.004
Fiedler, J. W., Young, A. P., Ludka, B. C., O’Reilly, W. C., Henderson, C., Merrifield, M. A., &
Guza, R. T. (2020). Predicting site- specific storm wave run-up. Natural Hazards, 104(1),
493–517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-020-04178-3
Flick, R. E. (1998). Comparison of California Tides, Storm Surges, and Sea Level During the
El Niño Winters of 1982-83 and 1997-
98. Shore and Beach, 66(3), 7–11.
Franklin, J. (2010). Vegetation dynamics and exotic plant invasion following high severity
crown fire in a southern California conifer forest. Plant Ecology, 207(2), 281–295.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11258-009-9672-6
Gershunov, A., Cayan, D. R., & Iacobellis, S. F. (2009). The Great 2006 Heat Wave over
California and Nevada: Signal of an Increasing Trend. Journal of Climate, 22(23), 6181–
6203. https://doi.org/10.1175/2009JCLI2465.1
Gershunov, A., & Guirguis, K. (2012). California heat waves in the present and future.
Geophysical Research Letters, 39(18).
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL052979
Gershunov, A., Shulgina, T., Clemesha, R. E. S., Guirguis, K., Pierce, D. W., Dettinger, M.
D., Lavers, D. A., Cayan, D. R., Polade,
S. D., Kalansky, J., & Ralph, F. M. (2019). Precipitation regime change in Western North
America: The role of Atmospheric Rivers. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 9944.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-46169-w
Gershunov, A., J. Guzman Morales, B. Hatchett, R. Aguilera, T. Shulgina, K. Guirguis, J.
Abatzoglou, D. Cayan, D. Pierce, P. Williams, I. Small, R. Clemesha, L. Schwarz, T.
Benmarhnia, A. Tardy, 2021: Hot and cold flavors of southern California’s Santa Ana
winds: Their causes, trends, and links with wildfire. Climate Dynamics. DOI:
10.1007/s00382-021-05802-z.
Griggs, G., Árvai, J., Cayan, D., DeConto, R., Fox, J., Fricker, H., Kopp, R., Tebaldi, C., &
Whiteman, E. (2017). Rising Seas in California, An Update on Seal _level Rise Science.
Guirguis, K., Basu, R., Al-Delaimy, W. K., Benmarhnia, T., Clemesha, R. E. S., Corcos, I.,
Guzman-Morales, J., Hailey, B., Small, I., Tardy, A., Vashishtha, D., Zivin, J. G., &
Gershunov, A. (2018). Heat, disparities, and health outcomes in San Diego County’s
diverse climate zones. GeoHealth, 2. https://doi.org/10.1029/ 2017GH000127
Guirguis, Kristen, Gershunov, A., Cayan, D. R., & Pierce, D. W. (2018). Heat wave probability
in the changing climate of the Southwest US. Climate Dynamics, 50(9–10), 3853–3864.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-017-3850-3
Guirguis, Kristen, Gershunov, A., Tardy, A., & Basu, R. (2014). The Impact of Recent Heat
Waves on Human Health in California.
Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology, 53(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1175/JAMC-
D-13-0130.1
APPENDICES 314
Guzman-Morales, J., & Gershunov, A. (2019). Climate Change Suppresses Santa Ana
Winds of Southern California and Sharpens Their Seasonality. Geophysical Research
Letters, 46(5), 2772–2780. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GL080261
Guzman-Morales, J., Gershunov, A., Theiss, J., Li, H., & Cayan, D. (2016). Santa Ana Winds
of Southern California: Their climatology, extremes, and behavior spanning six and a half
decades. Geophysical Research Letters, 43(6), 2827–2834.
https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL067887
Hamlington, B D, Cheon, S. H., Thompson, P. R., Merrifield, M. A., Nerem, R. S., Leben, R.
R., & Kim, K. ‐Y. (2016). An ongoing shift in Pacific Ocean sea level. Journal of
Geophysical Research: Oceans, 121(7), 5084–5097.
https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JC011815
Hamlington, Benjamin D, Piecuch, C. G., Reager, J. T., Chandanpurkar, H., Frederikse, T.,
Nerem, R. S., Fasullo, J. T., & Cheon, S.-
H. (2020). Origin of interannual variability in global mean sea level. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences, 117(25), 13983.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1922190117
Hughes, M., & Hall, A. (2010). Local and synoptic mechanisms causing Southern California’s
Santa Ana winds. Climate Dynamics, 34(6), 847–857. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00382-
009-0650-4
Iacobellis, S. F., & Cayan, D. R. (2013). The variability of California summertime marine
stratus: Impacts on surface air temperatures. Journal of Geophysical Research:
Atmospheres, 118(16), 9105–9122. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrd.50652
Ilango, S. D., Weaver, M., Sheridan, P., Schwarz, L., Clemesha, R. E. S., Bruckner, T., Basu,
R., Gershunov, A., & Benmarhnia, T. (2020). Extreme heat episodes and risk of preterm
birth in California, 2005–2013. Environment International, 137, 105541.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.105541
Jennings, M. K., Cayan, D., Kalansky, J., Pairis, A. D., Lawson, D. M., Syphard, A. D.,
Abeysekera, U., Clemesha, R. E. S., Gershunov, A., Guirguis, K., Randall, J. M., Stein,
E. D., & Vanderplank, S. (2018). San Diego County Ecosystems: Ecological Impacts Of
Climate Change On A Biodiversity Hotspot. In California’s Fourth Climate Change
Assessment, California Energy Commission. California Energy Commission.
Kalansky, J., Cayan, D., Barba, K., Walsh, L., Brouwer, K., & Boudreau, D. (2018). San
Diego Summary Report. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment, Publication
number: SUM-CCCA4-2018-009.
Knowlton, K., Rotkin-Ellman, M., King, G., Margolis, H. G., Smith, D., Solomon, G., Trent, R.,
& English, P. (2009). The 2006 California Heat Wave: Impacts on Hospitalizations and
Emergency Department Visits. Environmental Health Perspectives, 117(1).
https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.11594
Ludka, B. C., Gallien, T. W., Crosby, S. C., & Guza, R. T. (2016). Mid‐El Niño erosion at
nourished and unnourished Southern California beaches. Geophysical Research Letters,
43(9), 4510–4516. https://doi.org/doi:10.1002/2016GL068612
Ludka, B. C., Guza, R. T., & O’Reilly, W. C. (2018). Nourishment evolution and impacts at
four southern California beaches: A sand volume analysis. Coastal Engineering, 136,
96–105. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2018.02.003
APPENDICES 315
Ludka, B. C., Guza, R. T., O’Reilly, W. C., Merrifield, M. A., Flick, R. E., Bak, A. S., Hesser,
T., Bucciarelli, R., Olfe, C., Woodward, B., Boyd, W., Smith, K., Okihiro, M., Grenzeback,
R., Parry, L., & Boyd, G. (2019). Sixteen years of bathymetry and waves at San Diego
beaches. Scientific Data, 6(1), 161. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-019-0167-6
Ludka, B. C., Guza, R. T., O’Reilly, W. C., & Yates, M. L. (2015). Field evidence of beach
profile evolution toward equilibrium.
Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 120(11), 7574–7597.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JC010893 Malig, B. J., Wu, X. (May),
Guirguis, K., Gershunov, A., & Basu, R. (2019). Associations between ambient
temperature and
hepatobiliary and renal hospitalizations in California, 1999 to 2009. Environmental Research,
177, 108566. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2019.108566
McElroy, S., Schwarz, L., Green, H., Corcos, I., Guirguis, K., Gershunov, A., & Benmarhnia,
T. (2020). Defining heat waves and extreme heat events using sub-regional
meteorological data to maximize benefits of early warning systems to population health.
Science of The Total Environment, 721, 137678.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137678
McEvoy, D., Pierce, D., Kalansky, J., Cayan, D., & Abatzoglou, J. (2020). Projected Changes
in Reference Evapotranspiration in California and Nevada: Implications for Drought and
Wildland Fire Danger. Earth’s Future.
Mohegh, A., Levinson, R., Taha, H., Gilbert, H., Zhang, J., Li, Y., Tang, T., & Ban-Weiss, G.
(2018). Observational Evidence of Neighborhood Scale Reductions in Air Temperature
Associated with Increases in Roof Albedo. Climate, 6(4).
https://doi.org/10.3390/cli6040098
Ostro, B. D., Roth, L. A., Green, R. S., & Basu, R. (2009). Estimating the mortality effect of
the July 2006 California heat wave.
Environmental Research, 109(5), 614–619.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2009.03.010
Parker, V. T., Pratt, R. B., & Keeley, J. E. (2016). Chaparral editors. Ecosystems of
California. . In H. Mooney & E. Zavaleta (Eds.), Ecosystems of California (Chaparral, pp.
479–507). University of California Press.
Pierce, D. W., Cayan, D. R., Das, T., Maurer, E. P., Miller, N. L., Bao, Y., Kanamitsu, M.,
Yoshimura, K., Snyder, M. A., Sloan, L. C., Franco, G., & Tyree, M. (2013). The Key
Role of Heavy Precipitation Events in Climate Model Disagreements of Future Annual
Precipitation Changes in California. Journal of Climate, 26(16), 5879–5896.
https://doi.org/10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00766.1
Pierce, D. W., Kalansky, J. F., & Cayan, D. (2018). Climate, Drought, and Sea Level Rise
Scenarios for the Fourth California Climate Assessment.
Polade, S. D., Gershunov, A., Cayan, D. R., Dettinger, M. D., & Pierce, D. W. (2017).
Precipitation in a warming world: Assessing projected hydro-climate changes in
California and other Mediterranean climate regions. Scientific Reports, 7(1), 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-11285-y
Polade, S. D., Pierce, D. W., Cayan, D. R., Gershunov, A., & Dettinger, M. D. (2014). The
key role of dry days in changing regional climate and precipitation regimes. Scientific
Reports, 4, 4364. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep04364
APPENDICES 316
Schinasi, L. H., Benmarhnia, T., & de Roos, A. J. (2018). Modification of the association
between high ambient temperature and health by urban microclimate indicators: A
systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ Res, 161, 168–180.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2017.11.004
Schwartz, R. (2015). California coastal low clouds: Variability and influences across climate
to weather and continental to local scales. University of California, San Diego.
Schwarz L., Malig, B.J., Guzman-Morales, J., Guirguis, K., Ilango, S.D., Sheridan, P.,
Gershunov, A., Basu, R., and Benmarhnia, T. (2020) The health burden of fall, winter
and spring heat waves in Southern California and contribution of Santa Ana Winds.
Environ Res Letters. 15, 054017.
Sias-Daniel, J., Jacobs, J. M., Douglas, E., Mallick, R. B., & Hayhoe, K. (2014, May 3).
Impact of Climate Change on Pavement Performance: Preliminary Lessons Learned
through the Infrastructure and Climate Network (ICNet). Climatic Effects on Pavement
and Geotech.
Syphard, A. D., Brennan, T. J., & Keeley, J. E. (2018). Chaparral Landscape Conversion in
Southern California. In E. C. Underwood,
H. D. Safford, N. A. Molinari, & J. E. Keeley (Eds.), Valuing Chaparral: Ecological, Socio-
Economic, and Management Perspectives (pp. 323–346). Springer International
Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68303-4_12
Venturas, M. D., MacKinnon, E. D., Dario, H. L., Jacobsen, A. L., Pratt, R. B., & Davis, S. D.
(2016). Chaparral shrub hydraulic traits, size, and life history types relate to species
mortality during California’s historic drought of 2014. PloS ONE, 11(7), 1–22.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159145
Williams, A. P., Abatzoglou, J. T., Gershunov, A., Guzman-Morales, J., Bishop, D. A., Balch,
J. K., & Lettenmaier, D. P. (2019).
Observed Impacts of Anthropogenic Climate Change on Wildfire in California. Earth’s Future,
7(8), 892–910. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1029/2019EF001210
Williams, A. P., Cook, E. R., Smerdon, J. E., Cook, B. I., Abatzoglou, J. T., Bolles, K., Baek,
S. H., Badger, A. M., & Livneh, B. (2020). Large contribution from anthropogenic
warming to an emerging North American megadrought. Science, 368(6488), 314.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaz9600
Williams, A. P., Seager, R., Abatzoglou, J. T., Cook, B. I., Smerdon, J. E., & Cook, E. R.
(2015). Contribution of anthropogenic warming to California drought during 2012–2014.
Geophysical Research Letters, 42(16), 6819–6828.
https://doi.org/10.1002/2015GL064924
Yates, M. L., Guza, R. T., & O’Reilly, W. C. (2009). Equilibrium shoreline response:
Observations and modeling. Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans, 114(C9).
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JC005359
Yates, M. L., Guza, R. T., O’Reilly, W. C., Hansen, J. E., & Barnard, P. L. (2011). Equilibrium
shoreline response of a high wave energy beach. Journal of Geophysical Research:
Oceans, 116(C4). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1029/2010JC006681
Young, A P, Guza, R. T., Matsumoto, H., Merrifield, M. A., O’Reilly, W. C., & Swirad, Z. M.
(2021). Three years of weekly observations of coastal cliff erosion by waves and rainfall.
Geomorphology, 375, 107545.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2020.107545
APPENDICES 317
Young, A.P. (2015). Recent deep-seated coastal landsliding at San Onofre State Beach,
California. Geomorphology, 228, 200–212.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2014.08.005
Young, A. P. (2018). Decadal-scale coastal cliff retreat in southern and central California.
Geomorphology, 300, 164–175.
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2017.10.010
Young, A. P, Raymond, J. H., Sorenson, J., Johnstone, E. A., Driscoll, N. W., Flick, R. E., &
Guza, R. T. (2010). Coarse Sediment Yields from Seacliff Erosion in the Oceanside
Littoral Cell. Journal of Coastal Research, 580–585. https://doi.org/10.2112/08- 1179.1
Zetler, B. D., & Flick, R. E. (1985). Predicted Extreme High Tides for Mixed-Tide Regimes.
Journal of Physical Oceanography, 15(3), 357–359. https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-
0485(1985)015<0357:pehtfm>2.0.co;2
APPENDICES 318
APPENDIX 5. SURVEY RESULTS FOR SD MULTIJURISDICTIONAL HAZARD
MITIGATION PLAN REVISION
There were 500 respondents for this anonymous survey. Of those respondents:
• 182 provided their e-mail address
QUESTION 1
All the 500 Respondents provided the cities or communities in which they live and work.
Although there were respondents from all areas of the county:
• 11% of respondents claimed East County residency
• 59% of respondents claimed North County residency
• 30% of respondents claimed Central and Western County residency
QUESTION 2
Would you prefer emergency messages in a language other than English?
• 7% - Yes
• 93% - No
QUESTION 3
If ordered to evacuate, how much time would you require?
• 23% - 30 minutes or less
• 39% - 30 minutes to one hour
• 27% - one hour to two hours
• 11% - greater than two hours
QUESTION 4
Have you developed a personal disaster plan?
• 17% - Yes, for myself
• 35% - Yes, for myself and others
• 48% - No
QUESTION 5
Have you ever experienced or been impacted by a disaster?
• 45% - Yes
• 55% - No
APPENDICES 319
QUESTION 6
If yes [to Question 5], please explain.
• 226 Responses
QUESTION 7
Have you taken any actions to make your home, business, or neighborhood more resistant to
hazards?
• 54% - Yes
• 46% - No
QUESTION 8
If yes [to Question 7], please explain.
• 257 Responses
QUESTION 9
Have you accessed the online “Know Your Hazards” tool to determine what types of disasters
are most likely to occur in your community?
• 24% - Yes
• 76% - No
QUESTION 10
Please select one hazard you think is the highest threat to your neighborhood.
• 49.49% - Structure/Wild Land Fires
• 23.34% - Earthquake
• 4.62% - Drought
• 5.63% - Climate change
• 2.21% - Coastal Storms/Erosion
• 0.20% - Tsunami
• 4.02% - Extreme heat
• 1.40% - Pandemic
• 0.20% - Landslide
• 0.60% - Severe Winter Storm
• 0.20% - Terrorism
• 1.40% - Extreme Wind
• 0.60% - Nuclear accident
• 0.20% - Hazardous Materials Incident
• 0.60% - Dam Failure
APPENDICES 320
• 0.80% - Flood
• 0.60% - Oil or Gas line failure
• 0.40% - Liquefaction.
• 3.21% - Other
QUESTION 11
Please select one hazard you think is the second highest threat to your neighborhood.
• 16.22% - Structure/Wild Land Fires
• 30.22% - Earthquake
• 11.56% - Drought
• 11.56% - Climate change
• 1.41% - Coastal Storms/Erosion
• 1.21% - Tsunami
• 4.26% - Extreme heat
• 3.04% - Pandemic
• 2.23% - Landslide
• 1.62% - Severe Winter Storm
• 1.62% - Terrorism
• 4.05% - Extreme Wind
• 1.41% - Nuclear accident
• 0.81% - Hazardous Materials Incident
• 0.20% - Dam Failure
• 1.62% - Flood
• 2.43% - Oil or Gas line failure
• 0.00% - Liquefaction.
• 2.83% - Other
QUESTION 12
What is the most effective way for you to receive information about how to make your home,
business, or neighborhood more resistant to hazards?
• 0.08% - Newspaper
• 44.64% - Email
• 4.24% - Television
• 3.43% - Public Workshops/Meetings
• 1.01% - Radio
• 20.40% - Internet
• 7.27% - Mail
• 11.31% - Social Media
APPENDICES 321
• 6.86% - Other
QUESTION 13
Have you hardened your home against flying embers?
• 31% - Yes
• 69% - No
QUESTION 14
Have you created defensible space around your home?
• 54% - Yes
• 25% - No
• 20% - N/A
QUESTION 15
Have you designated an emergency contact outside of your home if the family should
become separated?
• 57% - Yes
• 43% - No
QUESTION 16
Have you been trained in First Aid and CPR?
• 60% - Yes, both First Aid and CPR
• 4% - Yes, just First Aid
• 11% - Yes, just CPR
• 25% - No
QUESTION 17
Do you keep extra prescription drugs on hand in the case of an emergency?
• 57% - Yes
• 43% - No
QUESTION 18
Do you know how to protect yourself and others from being exposed to a virus?
• 96% - Yes
• 4% - No
APPENDICES 322
QUESTION 19
Are you familiar with the services offered at a Family Assistance Center following a mass
casualty incident?
• 21% - Yes
• 79% - No
QUESTION 20
How likely are you to stay in an emergency shelter following a disaster?
• 4% - Definitely
• 9% - Very Probably
• 22% - Probably
• 59% - Probably Not
• 6% - Definitely Not
QUESTION 21
Are you aware of how to safely dispose of household hazardous waste in your home? (i.e.,
used oil, old batteries, expired pesticides)
• 82% - Yes
• 18% - No
QUESTION 22
Has a Wireless Emergency Alert on your mobile phone ever made you take an emergency
action?
• 38% - Yes
• 62% - No
QUESTION 23
Have you ever contacted 9-1-1?
• 68% - Yes, by phone
• <1% - Yes, by text
• 1% - Yes, by phone and text
• 31% - No
QUESTION 24
Do you know how to shut off the gas, electricity, and water to your home following an
earthquake?
• 68% - Yes
APPENDICES 323
• 32% - No
QUESTION 25
Do you have an emergency go-kit?
• 51% - Yes
• 49% - No
QUESTION 26
Do you have enough supplies to shelter in place at home for three days without functioning
utilities?
• 80% - Yes
• 20% - No
QUESTION 27
Have you downloaded SD Emergency, the County’s disaster preparedness mobile
application?
• 49% - Yes
• 51% - No
QUESTION 28
Have you registered your mobile phone and email for AlertSanDiego, the County’s regional
mass notification system?
• 73% - Yes
• 27% - No
QUESTION 29
Do you feel prepared to cope with the aftermath of disasters?
• 59% - Yes
• 41% - No
QUESTION 30
Do you have an emergency action plan which includes details for handling pets, large
animals, and livestock?
• 36% - Yes, just for pets
• 5% - Yes, for pets, large animals, and livestock
• 1% - No, for large animals and livestock
• 21% - No
APPENDICES 324
• 37% - I do not have animals
QUESTION 31
Have you located two places where you can send or safely evacuate your pets?
• 37% - Yes
• 63% - No
QUESTION 32
Have you identified at least two places to meet in the event of an emergency: near the home
and outside the immediate area?
• 38% - Yes
• 62% - No
QUESTION 33
Do you know the difference between an “Evacuation Warning” and an “Evacuation Order”?
• 90% - Yes
• 10% - No
QUESTION 34
How likely are you to evacuate if you receive an “Evacuation Warning” which directs you to
prepare to evacuate and to evacuate early?
• 22% - Definitely
• 31% - Very Probably
• 29% - Probably
• 16% - Probably Not
• 2% - Definitely Not
QUESTION 35
How likely are you to evacuate if you receive an “Evacuation Order” which directs you to
evacuate immediately?
• 75% - Definitely
• 17% - Very Probably
• 6% - Probably
• 2% - Probably Not
• <1% - Definitely Not
APPENDICES 325
QUESTION 36
In your opinion, what are some steps your local government could take to reduce or eliminate
the risk of future hazard damages?
• 284 Respondents
QUESTION 37
Are there any other issues regarding the reduction of risk and loss associated with hazards or
disasters in the community that you think are important?
• 188 Respondents
QUESTION 38
If you are interested in receiving an invitation to a public meeting to review the results of this
survey, please provide you email below?
• 188 Respondents
APPENDICES 326
APPENDIX 6. MEETINGS
MEETING 1. HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN ORIENTATION MEETING
September 2019 / Time / Location
1. Introductions / Welcome
2. Overview of the Mitigation Plan
3. Review of Planning Process
a. Current Scheduled Meetings
b. Due Dates
4. Overview of new Mitigation Tools
a. SurveyMonkey FEMA Worksheets
b. Action Plan Assessments
c. Hazard Mitigation Action Tracker
5. City / Jurisdiction Specific Planning
6. County Resilience Program
7. Changes to be Instituted
8. Questions / Comments
9. Adjourn
MEETING 2.
NAME JURISDICTION/ AGENCY EMAIL INITIAL
Johnson, Donna PHPR Donna.Johnson3@sdcounty.ca.gov X
Nissen, Dave SD County Fire Authority Dave.Nissen@fire.ca.gov
Prus, Lisa SDCWA lprus@sdcwa.org X
Millstein, Mel LUEG Mel.Millstein@sdcounty.ca.gov
Efird, Robert PDS robert.efird@sdcounty.ca.gov
Nicoletti, Vince PDS Vince.Nicoletti@sdcounty.ca.gov
George, Richard Sheriff’s EPD Richard.George@sdsheriff.org
Willis, Cleve Sheriff’s EPD Cleve.Willis@sdsheriff.org
Files, Shannon Sheriff’s EPD Shannon.Files@sdsheriff.org
Batchelor, Jason PDS Jason.Batchelor@sdcounty.ca.gov
Dawes, Ian PDS Ian.Dawes@sdcounty.ca.gov
Burton, Todd HIRT Todd.Burton@sdcounty.ca.gov X
Agahi, Sara DPW (Flood Control) Sara.Agahi@sdcounty.ca.gov X
Isabel Corcos PHS Isabel.Corcos@sdcounty.ca.gov X
Rob Sills PHPR Robert.Sills@sdcounty.ca.gov X
Audrey Hamiliton PDS Audrey.Hamilton@sdcounty.ca.gov
Craig Shaffer SD County Fire Authority Craig.Schaffer@sdcounty.ca.gov
APPENDICES 327
MEETING 3. MULTI-JURISDICTION HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE 2018
WORKING GROUP MEETING # 4
MEETING 4.
NAME JURISDICTION/ AGENCY EMAIL INITIAL
Walter Amedee National City wamedee@nationalcityca.go
v
Marlon King Chula Vista mking@chulavistaca.gov
Susy Turnbull Poway sturnbull@poway.org X
Jamie Smith Vista jsmith@ci.vista.ca.us
Andy McKellar El Cajon, La Mesa, Lemon
Grove
amckellar@heartlandfire.net
Corina Jimenez Encinitas, Del Mar, Solana
Beach
cjimen@encinitasca.gov X
Patricia Letts Encinitas, Del Mar, Solana
Beach
pletts@cosb.org X
Lois Yum Encinitas, Del Mar, Solana
Beach
lyum@encinitasca.gov X
NAME JURISDICTION/ AGENCY TELEPHONE EMAIL
Ryan DeHart County of San Diego OES 858-565-5590 ryan.dehart@sdcounty.ca.
gov
Walter
Amedee
National City 619-207-7342 wamedee@nationalcityca.
gov
Marlon King Chula Vista 619-737-6477 mking@chulavistaca.gov
Susy Turnbull Poway 619-630-6778 sturnbull@poway.org
Jamie Mott Vista 619-672-9376 jsmith@ci.vista.ca.us
Andy McKellar El Cajon, La Mesa, Lemon
Grove
619-227-2897 amckellar@heartlandfire.n
et
Corina
Jimenez
Encinitas, Del Mar, Solana
Beach
760-519-7959 cjimen@encinitasca.gov
Sarah Gordon SD County Communications
Office
sarah.gordon@sdcopunty.
ca.gov
Dave Pender San Marcos 760-533-1634 dpender@san-marcos.net
David Harrison Carlsbad 760-484-0247 David.Harrison@carlsbadc
a.gov
John Garlow Santee 619-871-9910 Jgarlow@cityofsanteeca.g
ov
Perry Peake Coronado 619-726-7829 ppeake@coronado.ca.us
Jeff Murdock Escondido 760-703-3046 jmurdock@escondido.org
John French Imperial Beach 619-423-8225 jfrench@imperialbeachca.
gov
Neil Anderson Oceanside 760-518-1877 nanderson@ci.oceanside.c
a.us
Yvette LaDuke Tsunami
Alex Tardy Storm / Tsunami / Wildfire
APPENDICES 328
NAME JURISDICTION/ AGENCY EMAIL INITIAL
Clem Brown Encinitas, Del Mar, Solana
Beach
cbrown@delmar.ca.us X
Rimga Viskanta Encinitas, Del Mar, Solana
Beach
rviskanta@cosb.org X
Dave Pender San Marcos dpender@san-marcos.net
Don Rawson Carlsbad Don.rawson@carlsbadca.go
v X
David Harrison Carlsbad David.Harrison@carlsbadca.
gov
Justin Matsushita Santee jmatsushita@cityofsanteeca.
gov
DeVerna Rogers Santee Drogers@cityofsanteeca.gov
Hannah
Chasteene
San Diego Hchasteene@sandiego.gov X
Eugene Ruzzini San Diego Eruzzini@sandiego.gov
Jeffrey Terwilliger Coronado Jterwilliger@coronado.ca.us
Jeff Murdock Escondido jmurdock@escondido.org X
John French Imperial Beach jfrench@imperialbeachca.go
v X
David Parsons Oceanside Dparsons@oceansideca.org
Pete Lawrence Oceanside Plawrence@oceansideca.or
g
Brown, Matt Port of San Diego ctesoro@portofsandiego.org X
Croucher, Gary San Miguel FPD gcroucher@smgfire.org
Fred Cox Rancho Santa FE FPD Cox@rsf.fire.org
McBroom, Jason Alpine FPD jmcbroom@alpinefire.org X
Villarreal, Leonard San Miguel FPD lvilarreal@smgfire.org
Larry Costello Padre Dam MWD lcostello@padre.org X
Dambach, Dan Vista Irrigation District ddambach@vid-h2o.org
Levion, Diana Padre Dam MWD dlevin@padre.org
Del Bosque, Erick Sweetwater Authority edelbosque@sweetwater.org
Olson, Gabriela Valley Center MWD golson@vcmwd.org
Prus. Lisa SDCWA lprus@sdcwa.org
Sorce, Lisa Padre Dam MWD lsorce@padre.org
Williams, Dennis Valley Center MWD dwilliams@vcmwd.org
Woolslayer,
Trisha
Vallecitos WD twoolslayer@vwd.org
Pedrazzi, Ed Vallecitos WD epedrazzi@vwd.org
Newman, Richard Alpine Union School District rnewman@alpineschools.net
APPENDICES 329
MEETING 7. 1/11/2021
NAME JURISDICTION/
AGENCY EMAIL INITIAL
Ponce, Cruz CalOES Cruz.Ponce@caloes.ca.gov X
McCready-Hoover,
Karen CalOES Karen.McCready-
Hoover@CalOES.ca.gov X
LaMar-Haas,
Victoria CalOES Victoria.LaMar-Haas@CalOES.ca.gov
Landry, Carly CalOES Carly.Landry@CalOES.ca.gov
Sutkus, Adam CalOES Adam.Sutkus@caloes.ca.gov
Riley Kelly CalOES Kelly.Riley@CalOES.ca.gov
Flores, Salvador Imperial County Salvadorflores@co.imperial.ca.us
Brown, Ethan Orange County etbrown@ocsd.org
Phelps, Nikki DHS andrea.phelps@hq.dhs.gov X
Mielish, Robert DHS robert.mielish@hq.dhs.gov X
Liu, Xing FEMA Region 9 xing.liu@fema.dhs.gov
Tardy, Alex NWS / NOAA alexander.tardy@noaa.gov
Anna Lowe SANDAG Anna.Lowe@sandag.org X
Ian Clampett Scripps
Oceanography iclampett@ucsd.edu
APPENDICES 330
MEETING 11. 4/12/2021
Full Name Jurisdiction/Agency Timestamp
DeHart, Ryan County of San Diego OES 4/12/2021, 12:55:26 PM
Files, Shannon San Diego County
Sheriff’s Department 4/12/2021, 12:56:21 PM
Khalili, Mehdi San Diego County Flood
Control 4/12/2021, 12:56:31 PM
Johnson, Donna L County of San Diego PHS 4/12/2021, 12:58:15 PM
Schmid, Matthew County of San Diego DPW 4/12/2021, 12:58:36 PM
Burton, Todd San Diego County HIRT 4/12/2021, 12:58:50 PM
Schaffer, Craig
San Diego County Finance
& General Government
Group
4/12/2021, 12:59:19 PM
Agahi, Sara San Diego County Flood
Control 4/12/2021, 1:00:35 PM
Madrid, Michael County of San Diego PDS 4/12/2021, 1:01:02 PM
Prus, Lisa San Diego County Water
Authority 4/12/2021, 1:09:21 PM
Julien, Jo Ann County of San Diego PHS 4/12/2021, 1:09:36 PM
MEETING 12. 4/26/2022
NAME JURISDICTION/AGENCY EMAIL INITIAL
Walter Amedee National City wamedee@nationalcityca.gov
Marlon King Chula Vista mking@chulavistaca.gov
Susy Turnbull Poway sturnbull@poway.org
Jamie Smith Vista jsmith@ci.vista.ca.us
Andy McKellar El Cajon, La Mesa, Lemon
Grove
amckellar@heartlandfire.net
Corina Jimenez Encinitas, Del Mar, Solana Beach cjimen@encinitasca.gov X
Patricia Letts Encinitas, Del Mar, Solana Beach pletts@cosb.org X
Lois Yum Encinitas, Del Mar, Solana Beach lyum@encinitasca.gov X
Clem Brown Encinitas, Del Mar, Solana Beach cbrown@delmar.ca.us X
Rimga Viskanta Encinitas, Del Mar, Solana Beach rviskanta@cosb.org X
Dave Pender San Marcos dpender@san-marcos.net X
Don Rawson Carlsbad Don.rawson@carlsbadca.gov X
David Harrison Carlsbad David.Harrison@carlsbadca.gov
Justin Matsushita Santee jmatsushita@cityofsanteeca.gov
DeVerna Rogers Santee DRogers@cityofsanteeca.gov
Hannah Chasteene San Diego HChasteene@sandiego.gov X
Eugene Ruzzini San Diego ERuzzini@sandiego.gov
Jeffrey Terwilliger Coronado Jterwilliger@coronado.ca.us
Jeff Murdock Escondido jmurdock@escondido.org
John French Imperial Beach jfrench@imperialbeachca.gov X
Russ Cunningham Oceanside RCunningham@oceansideca.org
David Parsons Oceanside DParsons@oceansideca.org
APPENDICES 331
Pete Lawrence Oceanside PLawrence@oceansideca.org
David Foster Port of San Diego dfoster@portofsandiego.org X
Tesoro, Cid Port of San Diego ctesoro@portofsandiego.org
Croucher, Gary San Miguel FPD gcroucher@smgfire.org
Fred Cox Rancho Santa FE FPD Cox@rsf.fire.org
McBroom, Jason Alpine FPD jmcbroom@alpinefire.org X
Villarreal, Leonard San Miguel FPD lvilarreal@smgfire.org
Larry Costello Padre Dam MWD lcostello@padre.org X
Dambach, Dan Vista Irrigation District ddambach@vid-h2o.org
Levion, Diana Padre Dam MWD dlevin@padre.org
Del Bosque, Erick Sweetwater Authority edelbosque@sweetwater.org
Olson, Gabriela Valley Center MWD golson@vcmwd.org
Prus. Lisa SDCWA lprus@sdcwa.org
Sorce, Lisa Padre Dam MWD lsorce@padre.org
Williams, Dennis Valley Center MWD dwilliams@vcmwd.org
Woolslayer, Trisha Vallecitos WD twoolslayer@vwd.org
Pedrazzi, Ed Vallecitos WD epedrazzi@vwd.org
Newman, Richard Alpine Union School District rnewman@alpineschools.net
Seifts, Rena Ramona School District rseifts@ramonausd.net
APPENDICES 332
MEETING 15. CMP #7 AGENDA: 10/20/2021 @ 10 AM
INTRODUCTION
1. HAZUS DATA
2. FEMA WORK SHEET 5.1
3. COUNTY OF SD HAZMIT TRACKER
4. FEMA LOCAL PLAN REVIEW TOOL
5. PUBLIC FEEDBACK
6. UPDATED DEADLINES
7. QUESTIONS
8. ASSIGNMENT RECAP
APPENDICES 333
HAZUS DATA
• The LUEG GIS Team created an excel file showing the counts of different types of
critical facilities that fall within the boundaries of each jurisdiction:
<<Preliminary_Critical_Facilities_Counts_By_Jurisdiction_10192021.xlsx>>
• The LUEG GIS Team also created a web map that shows all the participating
jurisdictions and hazards across the county. It includes layers for:
o Wildfire
o Earthquakes
o Floods
o Coastal Erosion
o Tsunamis
o Dam Failures
o Landslides and
o Soil Liquefaction
The web map can be accessed via this link- Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Map:
https://gis-
portal.sandiegocounty.gov/arcgis/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=44d3eaf08e9d441
3832a685b721f26cc.
• Current top 5 hazards listed in the 2018 HazMit Plan are:
Fire
Hazardous Materials Release
Flood
Earthquake
Manmade Hazards (Human Caused Hazards)
Assignment: Send me your input for top 5 County-wide Hazard rankings before our next
County planning meeting (will be scheduled for the beginning of January 2022).
FEMA WORK SHEET 5.1
• Worksheet 5.1 SD County.docx
APPENDICES 334
COUNTY OF SD HAZMIT TRACKER
• This tool mirrors the Goals, Objectives and Actions listed in Section 5 of the current Plan,
and will enable us to efficiently update the Plan as a Team
• These goals are needed to get our plan approved by Cal OES and FEMA
• Assignment:
o Review the “Objectives” and determine whether your department is responsible
for an "Action"
o Then, type your name or the responsible party's name and organization in the
"Lead/Support" section. Multiple names/departments can be listed, just please to
be sure to associate the person's name with their department. This will make it
easy for OES, Cal OES or FEMA to contact someone directly if there is a
question or clarification needed during the Plan's approval or revision process.
o Last, determine then type whether the "Action" is new to the 2023 plan, existing
from the 2018 plan or can be consolidated with another "Objective" or "Action"
o Please complete this assignment by our next meeting date in January
FEMA LOCAL PLAN REVIEW TOOL
• Demonstrates how our Hazard Mitigation Plan meets regulations and enables Cal OES
and FEMA to provide us with detailed feedback
• This tool also has HazMit Training, Guidance and Resources.
• Assignment: Please review this document and get familiar with the elements by our next
meeting
PUBLIC FEEDBACK
• New format and scheduled date/time is pending.
UPDATED DEADLINES
• Planning Meeting #4 with jurisdictions is next Tuesday, 10/26 @ 9AM-10 PM.
• County Planning Meeting #8 is tentative for early January.
• Cal OES HazMit Funding Training tentative for April 11th.
• Our goal is to submit the Hazmit plan for Cal OES and FEMA approval by early June
2022.
QUESTIONS
• Any final questions?
ASSIGNMENT RECAP
• Dominique will send an email after this meeting with this agenda, attachments and other
documents we discussed so you have all the information and tentative deadlines
available.
APPENDICES 335
MEETING 16. 10/26/2021
Full Name Jurisdiction/Agency Timestamp
Fonseca, Dominique County of San Diego
OES
10/26/2021, 8:58:20 AM
Ackerman, Shannon County of San Diego
DPLU
10/26/2021, 8:58:20 AM
Jamie Smith Vista 10/26/2021, 8:58:20 AM
Katelynn Rise (Guest) Oceanside 10/26/2021, 8:58:20 AM
Corina Jimenez
Del
Mar/Encinitas/Solana
Beach
10/26/2021, 8:58:23 AM
Susy Turnbull Poway 10/26/2021, 8:58:50 AM
Zubel, Nicholas County of San Diego
OES
10/26/2021, 8:59:02 AM
Don Rawson Carlsbad 10/26/2021, 8:59:05 AM
Allen, Tiffany San Diego 10/26/2021, 8:59:26 AM
David Foster Port of San Diego 10/26/2021, 8:59:27 AM
Jeff Murdock - Escondido (Guest) Escondido 10/26/2021, 8:59:51 AM
Castellanos, Marielena County of San Diego
OES
10/26/2021, 8:59:57 AM
Clement Brown Del Mar 10/26/2021, 9:00:33 AM
Pender, David San Marcos 10/26/2021, 9:00:57 AM
Andolina, Robert County of San Diego
OES
10/26/2021, 9:01:04 AM
Walter Amedee (Guest) National City 10/26/2021, 9:01:09 AM
Russ Cunningham (Guest) Oceanside 10/26/2021, 9:01:15 AM
Andy McKellar (Guest) El Cajon/La
Mesa/Lemon Grove
10/26/2021, 9:02:11 AM
Anna Lowe SANDAG 10/26/2021, 9:02:17 AM
Cid Tesoro Port of San Diego 10/26/2021, 9:02:45 AM
Dawes, Ian County of San Diego
PDS
10/26/2021, 9:02:47 AM
Robles, Michael County of San Diego
OES
10/26/2021, 9:02:48 AM
Batchelor, Jason County of San Diego
PDS
10/26/2021, 9:02:52 AM
Ponce, Cruz@Caloes CalOES 10/26/2021, 9:02:52 AM
Prus, Lisa San Diego County
Water Authority
10/26/2021, 9:03:35 AM
Thomlison, Nicholas County of San Diego
OES
10/26/2021, 9:04:40 AM
Rimga Viskanta Encinitas/Del
Mar/Solana Beach
10/26/2021, 9:06:07 AM
Larry Costello Padre Dam MWD 10/26/2021, 9:06:33 AM
APPENDICES 336
Full Name Jurisdiction/Agency Timestamp
Lois Yum Encinitas/Del
Mar/Solana Beach
10/26/2021, 9:07:46 AM
Marie Jones-Kirk Carlsbad 10/26/2021, 9:13:54 AM
APPENDICES 337
MEETING 19. SAN DIEGO COUNTY PLANNING MEETING #8
January 19, 2022 • 2:00 PM – 3:00 PM
AGENDA
1. Welcome and Introductions
2. Survey Details
a. Current Translation Status
b. Timeline and Document Location
3. Assignments
a. SD County OES Worksheet 6.1/6.2 Guidance
b. Deadlines and Worksheet Submission
4. Funding Opportunities
a. NOI Deadlines
b. BRIC Technical Assistance Application
5. Action Items, Follow-Up Meetings, and Schedule
a. HAZMIT Planning Team Meeting Timeline
b. County OES Actions/Deadlines
6. Round Table/Questions
7. Adjourn
PARTICPANT LIST
Carl Quiram, Sweetwater Authority
Prus, Lisa, San Diego County Water Authority
Emilyn Zuniga, Otay Water District
Ed Pedrazzi, Vallecitos Water District
Jason McBroom, Alpine Fire Protection District
Lisa Coburn-Boyd, Otay Water District
Kelly, Meghan, County of San Diego Land Use & Environment Group
Schmid, Matthew, County of San Diego DPW
Susy Turnbull, City of Poway
Charmaine Esnard, Rainbow Municipal Water District
Rubalcava, Eric, San Diego County Water Authority
Herbon, Goldamer, City of Oceanside
Jason McBroom, Alpine Fire Protection District
Dan Hayes, Sweetwater Authority
Alex Tardy, NOAA NWS
Clay Clifton, Sweetwater Authority
Mares, Marco, San Diego County Parks and Recreation
APPENDICES 338
MEETING 20. SAN DIEGO COUNTY PLANNING MEETING #5
February 1, 2022 • 3:00 PM – 4:00 PM
AGENDA AND SCRIPT
1. Welcome
a. Questions or concerns before we start.
b. This meeting will be recorded.
2. Public Feedback Survey/Advertisement Update
a. Working with the County Communications Office to publish the outreach survey and
a County News article by the end of next week. I will provide you all details after I
meet with our Communications Officer.
3. Assignments
a. FEMA Worksheet 6.1/6.2 Wrap-up
i. Worksheets 6.1 and 6.2 are due by today. If you need more time, please let
me know.
ii. Any questions or concerns related to Worksheets 6.1 or 6.2.
b. FOUO Attachment A
i. Last Friday, I sent some jurisdictions an email regarding the FOUO portion of
the HazMit Plan called “Attachment.” Some folks experienced issues opening
that email so please let me know if you need me to resent the material.
ii. If you received the email regarding Attachment A, you will need to create your
own FOUO portion of your annex or consolidate the FOUO portions into your
annex in a manner that can be shared publicly. Any questions about
Attachment A assignments?
c. Start Task 7: FEMA Work Sheets 7.1/7.2
i. Task 7 will help us keep the plan current and provide an update on the 2018
Goals, Objectives and Actions/priority projects.
ii. 7.1- Mitigation Action Progress report form. Need to complete one form for each
action/project identified in the 2018 plan and annexes your department or
jurisdiction was responsible for. The bottom of the sheet has a summary that will
provide Cal OES and FEMA with the documentation they need.
iii. 7.2- only need to complete one form for your department or jurisdiction. This form
walks you and your planning team through update considerations including plan
maintenance procedures.
iv. Questions?
4. Funding and Training Opportunities
a. HMGP NOI Deadline extension (2/15/22)
b. Cal OES Sub-Application Development Series: Advanced Assistance Webinar
Dates
i. All invitation information on our SharePoint site:
https://sdcountycagov.sharepoint.com/sites/ExternalOESHub/HazardMitigation
APPENDICES 339
ii. Sub-applications due 4/8/22
c. PrepCA State Initiative
i. PrepCA Jump Start: $15 million in state funding to assist eligible socially
vulnerable and high hazard risk communities create resiliency through capacity
building, mitigation, preparedness activities, education, response / recovery
and/or future project scoping.
1. Proposals are due to Cal OES via email on 2/28/21.
ii. Prepare California Match under FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Program:
additional $255 million in federal funding for FEMA hazard mitigation activities
and projects benefiting eligible socially vulnerable and high hazard risk
communities, and reduce risk to loss of life and property from natural hazards.
1. NOIs due to Cal OES on 2/15/22.
iii. Information and additional resources are available on the Cal OES HMGP
webpage and in the Revised 2021 Notice of Funding Opportunity.pdf
iv. Prepare California Funding Opportunity Webinar on 2/3/22 at 11 AM.
1. Information posted on our SharePoint site.
5. Action Items, Follow-Up Meetings, and Schedule
a. Deadlines
i. Complete all worksheets and FOUO Attachment A (if applicable to your
jurisdiction) up to 7.1 and 7.2 by the next OA Planning Meeting
ii. Start planning methods for elected officials’ briefings – should occur after UDC
adoption of the updated plan which is anticipated on April 21st but is subject to
change.
b. Next Meetings
i. OA Planning Meeting #6: March 7th
ii. OA Planning Meeting #7: April 6th
iii. Time for both is to be determined but I will be sending you all invites this week.
iv. Final OA Planning Meeting is tentative for the end of April or beginning of May.
This will be when we should have our final draft complete and ready for final
edits.
*Download/Save the meeting attendee list – click the 3 dots at the top next to the
comment and people icons.
6. Round Table/Questions
7. Adjourn
APPENDICES 340
ATTENDANCE LIST
Full Name Jurisdiction/Agency Timestamp
Andolina, Robert County of San
Diego OES 2/1/2022, 2:51:50 PM
Khalili, Mehdi County of San
Diego DPW 2/1/2022, 2:51:50 PM
Ackerman, Shannon (DPLU) County of San
Diego DPLU 2/1/2022, 2:56:48 PM
Emilyn Zuniga Otay Water District 2/1/2022, 2:56:58 PM
Don Rawson Carlsbad 2/1/2022, 2:58:00 PM
Jeffrey Terwilliger County of San
Diego EMS 2/1/2022, 2:58:08 PM
Jeff Murdock - Escondido
(Guest) Escondido 2/1/2022, 2:58:09 PM
Alisa Nichols Vista Irrigation
District 2/1/2022, 2:58:10 PM
David Parsons Oceanside 2/1/2022, 2:58:19 PM
Zubel, Nicholas County of San
Diego OES 2/1/2022, 2:59:28 PM
Andy McKellar (Guest) El Cajon/La
Mesa/Lemon Grove 2/1/2022, 2:59:33 PM
Dan Hayes (Guest) Sweetwater
Authority 2/1/2022, 2:59:34 PM
Lois Yum
Del
Mar/Encinitas/Solan
a Beach 2/1/2022, 2:59:40 PM
(Intern) Tam,
Patricia@CalOES CalOES 2/1/2022, 2:59:48 PM
Labra, Phillip@CalOES CalOES 2/1/2022, 3:00:37 PM
Rimga Viskanta
Del
Mar/Encinitas/Solan
a Beach 2/1/2022, 3:00:42 PM
Corina Jimenez
Del
Mar/Encinitas/Solan
a Beach 2/1/2022, 3:00:45 PM
Madrid, Michael County of San
Diego PDS 2/1/2022, 3:00:45 PM
Pender, David San Marcos 2/1/2022, 3:00:55 PM
Fonseca, Dominique County of San
Diego OES 2/1/2022, 3:00:57 PM
Herbon, Goldamer San Diego County
Water Authority 2/1/2022, 3:01:05 PM
Castellanos, Marielena County of San
Diego OES 2/1/2022, 3:01:11 PM
Russ Cunningham (Guest) Oceanside 2/1/2022, 3:01:12 PM
Ayers, Barbara County of San
Diego OES 2/1/2022, 3:01:22 PM
Susy Turnbull Poway 2/1/2022, 3:01:26 PM
APPENDICES 341
Full Name Jurisdiction/Agency Timestamp
Prus, Lisa San Diego County
Water Authority 2/1/2022, 3:01:28 PM
Katelynn Rise (Guest) County of San
Diego Oceanside 2/1/2022, 3:01:28 PM
Burton, Todd County of San
Diego DEHQ 2/1/2022, 3:01:31 PM
Lubich, Marcus
County of San
Diego Parks &
Recreation 2/1/2022, 3:01:32 PM
Mares, Marco
County of San
Diego Parks &
Recreation 2/1/2022, 3:02:05 PM
Clement Brown Del Mar 2/1/2022, 3:02:12 PM
Johnson, Donna L County of San
Diego PHS 2/1/2022, 3:02:36 PM
Schmid, Matthew County of San
Diego DPW 2/1/2022, 3:03:00 PM
Thomlison, Nicholas County of San
Diego OES 2/1/2022, 3:05:13 PM
Walter Amedee (Guest) National City 2/1/2022, 3:10:13 PM
Rea, Stephen County of San
Diego OES 2/1/2022, 3:13:05 PM
David Foster Port of San Diego 2/1/2022, 3:15:52 PM
Jander, Chelsea
County of San
Diego Parks &
Recreation 2/1/2022, 3:17:44 PM
APPENDICES 342
MEETING 21. SAN DIEGO COUNTY PLANNING MEETING #9
February 11, 2022 • 10:00 AM – 11:00 AM
AGENDA
8. Welcome
9. Public Feedback Survey/Advertisement Update
10. Assignments
a. FEMA Worksheet 6.1/6.2 Wrap-up
b. Start Task 7: FEMA Work Sheets 7.1/7.2
11. Funding and Training Opportunities
a. NOI Deadline
b. BRIC Technical Assistance Application
c. PrepCA State Initiative
d. Cal OES Sub-Application Development Series: Advanced Assistance Webinar
Dates
12. Action Items, Follow-Up Meetings, and Schedule
a. Deadlines
b. Next Meeting Release
13. Round Table/Questions
14. Adjourn
APPENDICES 343
MEETING 23. SAN DIEGO OA PLANNING MEETING #6
March 7, 2022 • 1:00 PM – 2:00 PM
AGENDA
15. Welcome
16. Public Feedback Survey Results
17. Assignments
a. FEMA Work Sheets 7.1/7.2 Wrap-up/Final Questions
b. Start final FEMA Work Sheet (8.1)
c. Finalize Updated Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Draft and all Annex edits
18. Funding and Training Opportunities
a. PrepCA State Initiative
b. Cal OES Sub-Application Development Series: Advanced Assistance Webinars
19. Action Items, Follow-Up Meetings, and Schedule
c. Deadlines
d. Next Meeting
e. Next Steps
20. Round Table/Questions
21. Adjourn
ADDITIONAL PROOF OF ALL PARTICIPANT PARTICIPATION IN THE PLANNING
PROCESS WAS COMPILED AND PROVIDED TO CAL OES AND FEMA. THIS PROOF
HAS SENSITIVE CONTACT INFORMATION AND INCLUDES, BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO,
PROOF OF VIRTUAL AND/OR IN-PERSON ONE-ON-ONE
CALLS/MEETINGS/APPOINTMENTS, PARTICIPATION IN QUESTION & ANSWER
SESSIONS, AND EMAILS.