Annex A City of Citrus Heights - Water Resources

Transcription

Annex A: CITY OF CITRUS HEIGHTS
A.1 Introduction
This Annex details the hazard mitigation planning elements specific to the City of Citrus
Heights, a participating jurisdiction to the Sacramento County LHMP Update. This annex is not
intended to be a standalone document, but appends to and supplements the information contained
in the base plan document. As such, all sections of the base plan, including the planning process
and other procedural requirements apply to and were met by the City. This annex provides
additional information specific to the City of Citrus Heights, with a focus on providing additional
details on the risk assessment and mitigation strategy for this community.
A.2 Planning Process
As described above, the City of Citrus Heights followed the planning process detailed in Section
3.0 of the base plan. In addition to providing representation on the Sacramento County Hazard
Mitigation Planning Committee (HMPC), the City formulated their own internal planning team
to support the broader planning process requirements. Internal planning participants included
staff from the following City departments:
Citrus Heights Water District
Citrus Heights Engineering
Additional details on plan participation and City representatives are included in Appendix A.
A.3 Community Profile
The community profile for the City of Citrus Heights is detailed in the following sections.
Figure A.1 displays a map and the location of the City of Citrus Heights within Sacramento
County.
Sacramento County (City of Citrus Heights)
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
September 2011
Annex A.1
Figure A.1.
The City of Citrus Heights
September 2011
Annex A.2
A.3.1 Geography and Climate
Citrus Heights is located in a relatively flat area bordered by the north Coast Ranges to the west
and the northern Sierra Nevada to the east. Air flows into the area through the Carquinez Strait,
the only breach in the western mountain barrier, and moves across the Sacramento–San Joaquin
Delta (Delta) from the San Francisco Bay area. The Mediterranean climate type of the City is
characterized by hot, dry summers and cool, rainy winters.
During the summer, daily temperatures range from 50°F to more than 100°F. The inland
location and surrounding mountains shelter the area from much of the ocean breezes that keep
the coastal regions moderate in temperature.
Most precipitation in the area results from air masses that move in from the Pacific Ocean,
usually from the west or northwest, during the winter months. More than half the total annual
precipitation falls during the winter rainy season (November through February). Average winter
temperatures are 49°F. Also characteristic of winters are periods of dense and persistent lowlevel fog, which are most prevalent between storms. The prevailing winds are moderate in speed
and vary from moisture-laden breezes from the south to dry land flows from the north.
Citrus Heights is centrally located between the region’s major freeways and highways. Interstate
80, Interstate 5, U.S. Highway 50, and U.S. Highway 99 are all located from three to 11 miles
from the city. The Sacramento International Airport is located approximately 20 miles from the
city, while rail transportation (Amtrak) is accessible in Roseville (about 10 miles from the city).
A.3.2 History
Throughout most of the Spanish-Mexican period of the growth of California (1542-1848),
settlement was limited to a narrow coastal strip along El Camino Real with only a few isolated
frontier outposts of civilization. One of these outposts was the vast estate of John Augustus
Sutter, a German-Swiss immigrant, who was granted 11-square leagues of land in the
Sacramento Valley under the condition that he settle 12 other families on the land. One of these
Mexican land sub-grants was the Ranch Del San Juan, an approximately 20,000-acre tract of rich
farm land originally granted in 1844. This sub-grant included present-day Citrus Heights.
A schoolhouse was built in 1862, spurred on by W.A. Thomas’ conviction that Citrus Heights
housed enough children to justify a school district. Mr. Thomas donated five acres of land on the
northwest corner of Sylvan corners, and deemed it Sylvan School. Once completed, it became
the educational, civic, social, and religious center of the community. Community parties and
church services were held in the small, one-room building, as well as daily classes.
Adolph Van Maren, successor to his father Peter Van Maren, played a leading role in community
development for many years. He served on the San Juan School Board, and contributed to the
development of the San Juan High School in 1915. The present site of the Citrus Heights
September 2011
Annex A.3
Community Club House on Sylvan Road is on land donated by Van Maren, while the actual
building is the old Sylvan School House moved after a new school facility was built in 1927.
In 1970, ground was broken for the giant Sunrise Mall, spurring a great deal of new growth in
the Sunrise Boulevard-Greenback Lane area. By 1975, 101 shops, anchored by four department
stores, employed 2,500 people within Sunrise Mall. Then in 1976, across Sunrise Boulevard
from the Mall, rose Birdcage Walk, a collection of shops and businesses laid out along a parklike walkway. The two shopping centers spurred the construction of hundreds of businesses in
the surrounding area.
In 1994, after agreement with the County was reached, the effort gained momentum and took on
the challenge to raise funds to pay for the mandated Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Once
accomplished, the County Board of Supervisors approved the measure for the November 1996
ballot and a full campaign was initiated. Finally, after a 12-year battle with the County of
Sacramento, the Citrus Heights residents voted on the issue. The voters approved the measure to
incorporate the City on November 5, 1996, effective January 1, 1997. The measure won handily,
with 62.5% of the votes.
A.3.3 Economy
Citrus Heights has established itself as an important suburb in the Sacramento region with its
solid base of small businesses, retail chains, and food service establishments. With an ongoing
commitment to providing high-quality, economical, responsive services to the local community,
the City is well-positioned for future commercial redevelopment, neighborhood enhancements,
and positive changes.
Top 10 Citrus Heights Employers (Alphabetical order)
City of Citrus Heights
Costco
JC Penny
Lowe’s
Macy’s
Sam’s Club
Small Business Administration –Area 4
Sears
Target
Wal-Mart
A.3.4 Population
In 2010, the total population for the City of Citrus Heights was estimated at 83,191.
September 2011
Annex A.4
A.4 Hazard Identification and Summary
This section details how the risk varies across the Sacramento County planning area. Citrus
Heights’s planning team identified the hazards that affect the City and summarized their
frequency of occurrence, spatial extent, potential magnitude, and significance specific to Citrus
Heights (see Table A.1). In the context of the plan’s planning area, there are no hazards that are
unique to Citrus Heights.
Information on past occurrences and the likelihood of future occurrences is detailed in Section 4,
Risk Assessment, of the base plan. Additional information for high and medium significant
hazards for the City is included in the Vulnerability Assessment section of this Annex.
September 2011
Annex A.5
Table A.1.
City of Citrus Heights Hazard Summary
Frequency of
Occurrence
Hazard
Spatial Extent
Potential
Magnitude
Significance
Agricultural Hazards:
Insects/Pests
Occasional
Limited
Negligible
Low
Bird Strike
Unlikely
Limited
Negligible
Low
Dam Failure
Unlikely
Limited
Limited
Low
Drought
Occasional
Extensive
Critical
Low
Earthquake
Unlikely
Extensive
Critical
Low
Earthquake: Liquefaction
Unlikely
Limited
Negligible
Low
Flood: 100/200/500-year
Unlikely
Significant
Negligible
Medium
Flood: Localized/Stormwater
Likely
Significant
Limited
Medium
Landslide
Unlikely
Limited
Negligible
Low
Levee Failure
Unlikely
Limited
Negligible
Low
River/Stream/Creek Bank
Erosion
Likely
Limited
Limited
Medium
Severe Weather: Extreme Heat
Likely
Extensive
Critical
Low
Severe Weather: Fog
Likely
Extensive
Critical
Low
Severe Weather: Freeze
Likely
Extensive
Critical
Low
Severe Weather: Heavy Rain
and Storms
Likely
Extensive
Critical
Low
Severe Weather: Tornadoes
Unlikely
Limited
Negligible
Low
Subsidence
Unlikely
Limited
Negligible
Low
Volcano
Unlikely
Limited
Negligible
Low
Wildfire
Unlikely
Limited
Negligible
Low
Guidelines for Hazard Rankings:
Frequency of Occurrence:
Highly Likely-Near 100 percent probability in next year
Likely-Between 10 and 100 percent probability in next year or at least
one chance in ten years
Occasional-Between 1 and 10 percent probability in next year or at
least one chance in next 100 years
Unlikely-Less than 1 percent probability in next 100 years
Spatial Extent:
Limited-Less than 10 percent of planning area
Significant-10-50 percent of planning area
Extensive-50-100 percent of planning area
Potential Magnitude:
Catastrophic-More than 50 percent of area
affected
Critical-25 to 50 percent
Limited-10 to 25 percent
Negligible-Less than 10 percent
Significance (subjective):
Low, Medium, High
Source: AMEC Data Collection Guide
September 2011
Annex A.6
A.5 Vulnerability Assessment
The intent of this section is to assess Citrus Heights’s vulnerability separate from that of the
planning area as a whole, which has already been assessed in Section 4.3 Vulnerability
Assessment of the base plan. This vulnerability assessment provides an inventory of the
population, property, and other assets located within the City and further analyzes those assets at
risk to identified hazards ranked of medium or high significance (as listed in Table A.1) to the
community. For more information about how hazards affect the County as a whole, see Chapter
4 Risk Assessment in the main plan.
A.5.1 Total Assets at Risk
This section identifies Citrus Heights’s total assets at risk, including values at risk, critical
facilities and infrastructure, natural resources, historic and cultural resources, and economic
assets. Growth and development trends are also presented for the community. This data is not
hazard specific, but is representative of total assets at risk within a community.
Values at Risk
The following data from the Sacramento County Assessor’s Office is based on the secured roll
data values for 2010. This data should only be used as a guideline to overall values in the City as
the information has some limitations. The most significant limitation is created by Proposition
13. Instead of adjusting property values annually, the values are not adjusted or assessed at fair
market value until a property transfer occurs. As a result, overall value information is likely low
and does not reflect current market value of properties. It is also important to note that in the
event of a disaster, it is generally the value of the infrastructure or improvements to the land that
is of concern or at risk. Generally, the land itself is not a loss. Table A.4 shows the 2010
secured roll data values (e.g., the values at risk) broken down by property type for the City of
Citrus Heights.
Table A.2.
Occupancy
Residential
2010 Roll Values for the City of Citrus Heights by Property Type
Improved
Parcel Count
Structure Value
Unimproved
Parcel Count
Total Parcel
Count
Total Land Value
23,053
$3,076,106,342
252
23,305
$1,324,941,927
Retail/
Commercial
340
$495,735,872
23
363
$309,379,131
Office
102
$117,794,558
5
107
$48,958,982
Industrial
17
$13,867,599
3
20
$9,810,166
Care / Health
38
$46,600,547
8
46
$12,759,338
Church/Welfare
35
$36,220,553
8
43
$8,437,575
Public/Utilities
0
$0
213
213
$544,959
Recreational
6
$11,627,593
0
6
$2,670,714
September 2011
Annex A.7
Improved
Parcel Count
Occupancy
Miscellaneous
Structure Value
Unimproved
Parcel Count
Total Parcel
Count
Total Land Value
0
$0
185
185
$291,460
Vacant
12
$1,666,220
279
291
$30,193,470
No Data
0
$0
16
16
$7,707
23,603
$3,799,619,284
992
24,595
$1,747,995,429
Total
Source: Sacramento County Assessor’s Secured Roll Data
Significant assets directly within the City of Citrus Heights include a range of properties and
infrastructure. These may include city-owned property, critical facilities and infrastructure,
cultural and natural resources and others. An inventory of key city assets is provided in Table
A.3. Total value of these assets exceeds $32 million.
Table A.3.
Key Assets in the City of Citrus Heights
Name of Asset
Facility Type
Police Station
Essential
Fire Station 21
Essential
Fire Station 23
Essential
Fire Station 27
Essential
Fire Station 28
Essential
Community Center - EOC
Essential
UCD Madison
Essential
Urgent Care Greenback/Fair Oaks
Essential
Schools (GP)
High Potential
Day Care (Licenses)
High Potential
Rusch Park Shelter
High Potential
Nursing Homes (Licenses)
High Potential
City Hall Campus
High Potential
Water – Well Sites
Transportation & Lifeline
SMUD Sylvan & Auburn
SMUD Sunrise & North of Arcadia
Surewest Old Auburn
Bridges – Caltrans List
SRCSD – Sewer Station at Van Maren
Replacement Value
Hazard Info
8 Million
12 Million
12.6 Million
Source: City of Citrus Heights
Critical Facilities and Infrastructure
For purposes of this plan, a critical facility is defined as:
Any facility, including without limitation, a structure, infrastructure, property,
equipment or service, that if adversely affected during a hazard event may result
September 2011
Annex A.8
in severe consequences to public health and safety or interrupt essential services
and operations for the community at any time before, during and after the hazard
event.
This definition was refined by separating out three categories of critical facilities as further
described in Section 4.3.1 of the base plan.
An inventory of critical facilities in the City of Citrus Heights from Sacramento County GIS is
provided in Table A.4 and illustrated in Figure A.2.
Table A.4.
City of Citrus Heights Critical Facilities: Summary Table
CF Definition Category
Facility Type
Count
Essential Services Facilities
Bus Terminal
1
Emergency Evacuation Shelter
9
Fire Station
4
Government Facilities
2
Medical Health Facility
6
Police
1
At Risk Population Facilities
Adult Day Care
1
Adult Education School
1
Adult Residential
16
Day Care Center
24
Group Home
9
Infant Center
2
Private Elementary School
10
Private High School
3
Private K-12 School
3
Public Continuation High School
1
Public Elementary School
10
Public High School
2
Public Middle School
1
Residential Care/Elderly
59
Social Rehabilitation Facility
1
Total
166
Source: Sacramento County GIS
September 2011
Annex A.9
Figure A.2.
City of Citrus Heights Critical Facilities
September 2011
Annex A.10
Natural Resources
The City of Citrus Heights has a variety of natural resources of value to the community. Table
A.5 and Table A.6 depict special status plant and animal species in the City. Figure A.2 shows
the location of each of the species.
Table A.5.
Special-Status Plant Species Known to Occur or Potentially Occurring in
Citrus Heights
Status
Species
1
CNPS
1, 2
USFWS
DFG
Bigscale balsam root
Balsamorhiza macrolepis var.
macrolepis
–
–
1B.2
Stinkbells
Fritillaria agrestis
–
–
4.2
Sanford’s arrowhead
Sagittaria sanfordii
–
–
1B.2
Habitat
Could occur; suitable habitat in open areas
that support California annual grassland.
The nearest known occurrence is
approximately five miles away.
Known to occur; suitable habitat in
California annual grassland habitat
Known to occur; suitable habitat in
freshwater marsh along creeks and streams
in valley foothill riparian habitat as well
slow-moving drainages and ditches.
Notes:
USFWS = US Fish and Wildlife Service, DFG = Department of Fish and Game, CNPS = California Native Plant
Society
1
CNPS Categories:
1B Plant species considered rare or endangered in
California and elsewhere (protected under CEQA, but not
legally protected under ESA or CESA)
4 Plants species of limited distribution or infrequent
throughout a broader area in California (vulnerability or
susceptibility to threat appears low). Uncommon enough
that their status should be monitored regularly
2
CNPS Extensions:
2 Fairly endangered in California (20% to 80% of
occurrences are threatened).
Source: City of Citrus Heights General Plan Environmental Impact Report
September 2011
Annex A.11
Figure A.3.
Special Status Species Location in Citrus Heights
September 2011
Annex A.12
Table A.6.
Heights
Special-Status Wildlife Species Known or Potentially Occurring in Citrus
Status
Species
1
USFWS
DFG
Habitat
T
–
Could occur; elderberry shrubs are present in valley
foothill riparian habitat along Arcade and Cripple creeks
–
CSC
Known to occur; suitable habitat is present in freshwater
marshes, rivers, streams, and irrigation ditches within
valley foothill riparian habitat.
–
FPS
Known to occur; suitable habitat is present for nesting in
trees within the valley foothill riparian and interior live
oak habitats and foraging in annual grassland habitat
–
CSC
Could occur; suitable habitat for roosting and foraging is
present in valley foothill riparian, interior live oak habitats
and annual grassland habitats.
Invertebrates
Valley elderberry longhorn beetle
Desmocerus californicus dimorphus
Reptiles
Northwestern pond turtle
Actinemys marmorata marmorata
Birds
White-tailed kite
Elanus leucrus
Mammals
Palid bat
Antrozous pallidus
Notes: DFG = California Department of Fish and Game; USFWS = U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
1
Legal Status Definitions
Federal Listing Categories (USFWS)
E Endangered
T Threatened (legally protected)
C Candidate
State Listing Categories (DFG)
E Endangered
T Threatened (legally protected)
CSC Species of Special Concern
FPS Fully Protected Species
Historic and Cultural Resources
Euro-American settlement of Citrus Heights began in the mid 19th Century with a Mexican land
grant of 11 square leagues of land in the Sacramento Valley to John Sutter, including the Rancho
Del San Juan subgrant. This subgrant area occupied 20,000 acres, including the modern-day
Citrus Heights area. The area developed as an agricultural community consisting of families
settling small farms surrounding the Sylvan Corners area, located at the present-day intersection
of Sylvan Road, Auburn Boulevard, and Old Auburn Road. The 20th Century saw a boom in
urbanization of the area, particularly after World War II, when subdivisions began springing up
to accommodate an influx of new residents to the area. The area continued to grow, in part as
the rocket manufacturing plant at Aerojet in nearby Rancho Cordova attracted employees and
their families to the region. As this new development occurred, many older structures
throughout the community were demolished and replaced by tract housing and new commercial
development to serve the booming population. As this shift occurred, Citrus Heights saw its
historical character change to a more urbanized, suburban community, losing its character as a
rural agricultural community.
September 2011
Annex A.13
Despite the urbanization of the community, several historic buildings remain intact today.
However, many have been altered in such ways as to possibly lose their historic integrity. Some
of these structures may no longer qualify for protection under historic preservation regulations.
Table A.7 shows registered federal historic sites the in the City of Citrus Heights.
Table A.7.
Registered Historic Sites in the City of Citrus Heights
Name (Landmark Plaque Number)
Rusch Home (P737)
National
Register
State
Landmark
California
Register
Point of
Interest
Date Listed
X
2/11/1991
Source: California Office of Historical Preservation
The National Park Service administers two programs that recognize the importance of historic
resources, specifically those pertaining to architecture and engineering. While inclusion in these
programs does not give these structures any sort of protection, they are valuable historic assets.
The Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) and Historic American Engineering Record
(HAER) document America’s architectural and engineering heritage. There are no HABS and
HAER structures in the City of Citrus Heights.
It should be noted that these lists may not be complete, as they may not include those currently in
the nomination process and not yet listed. Additionally, as defined by the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), any
property over 50 years of age is considered a historic resource and is potentially eligible for the
National Register. Thus, in the event that the property is to be altered, or has been altered, as the
result of a major federal action, the property must be evaluated under the guidelines set forth by
CEQA and NEPA. Structural mitigation projects are considered alterations for the purpose of
this regulation.
In addition to the registered sites, there are several assets within Citrus Heights that define the
community and represent the City’s history. Some of the historical sites of importance to Citrus
Heights are listed below and shown in Figure A.4.
14 Mile/Van Maren House
In 1851, the original 14 Mile House was constructed as a roadhouse and way station for
teamsters hauling supplies to country mining camps. It is located on Auburn Boulevard
approximately halfway between Greenback Lane and Van Maren Lane. The property is
surrounded by a modern apartment complex on three sides. The roadhouse was acquired
by the Van Maren family and renovated in 1920 to serve as a family residence. An
historic survey evaluation completed in 2002 suggests that this may be the oldest wood
frame building in Sacramento County. The house is potentially eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical Resources and in the National Register of Historic
Places for its potential to yield information as an historic archeological site. The house
itself has an information potential regarding early construction in California. The area in
September 2011
Annex A.14
the immediate vicinity of the house has potential for deposits associated with the 1850s
roadhouse.
Rusch Home
The Rusch Home, built by Citrus Heights pioneers Fred and Julia Rusch, is located in the
northwest section of Rusch Park, along Antelope Road. The existing structure was
rebuilt in 1914 following a fire that destroyed the original structure. The home and the
surrounding land was donated to the community, which led to the establishment of Rusch
Park, the City’s largest and most prominent park, and the Sunrise Recreation and Park
District offices. The home is listed with the State Office of Historic Preservation as a
California Point of Historical Interest (SAC-012).
Dekay/Sunrise Ranch Home
The Dekay/Sunrise Ranch home was constructed in 1868 as part of the Sunrise Ranch
property in the northern portion of the existing City, along current-day Sunrise
Boulevard, named after the property. The home is currently used as a private residence
and is one of the oldest residential structures in the area. However the building has been
substantially altered and is not eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical
Resources or the National Register of Historic Places due to a lack of historical integrity.
Sylvan School/Citrus Heights Community Club
The old Sylvan School, located south of Sylvan Corners, was initially constructed in
1862, and consisted of a single classroom and two small broom or hat halls. The school
was also used as a civic, social, and religious center that supported church services,
dancing parties, and local voting discussions. In 1927, the school was moved to another
located on Sylvan Road, and the building remains in use as a community meeting hall.
The building has been modified, which has resulted in a loss of historic integrity which
makes listing in the California Register questionable. However the historic resources
survey done by Rowland Nawi Associates in 2006 found that this property may be
suitable for listed as a Point of Historic Interest.
Sylvan Cemetery
Sylvan Cemetery, located along Auburn Boulevard north of Sylvan Corners, was
established on land donated in 1862, and first broke ground in 1864. The cemetery has
been expanded over the years and currently occupies 18 acres. The site is not currently
listed on the National or California Register of Historic Places, and further research
would be necessary to determine its eligibility, particularly since cemeteries must meet
special requirements for listing on the National Register.
San Juan High School
San Juan High School was the first secondary school established in Citrus Heights and
the northeast part of Sacramento County. San Juan High School is eligible for listing in
the National Register of Historic Places and the California Register of Historical
Resources as a key institution representing the growth and development of the area of
Citrus Heights and as the first high school in the northeast county. It is located at the
intersection of Greenback Lane and Mariposa Avenue.
September 2011
Annex A.15
Friends Church
The Friends Church was constructed in 1921, just east of the intersection of Sylvan Road,
Auburn Boulevard, and Old Auburn Road. It was the first church built within Citrus
Heights. The church has been remodeled twice since its construction and looks different
from its original appearance. However, both remodels took place more than 50 years
ago, so it is eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources.
12 Mile House
Like the 14 Mile House, the original 12 Mile House was also constructed in the 1800s as
a teamster way station. It was located on the south bed of Cripple Creek near present-day
DeVechi Road but was rebuilt in the 1920s to accommodate an expansion of Auburn
Road. The new 12 Mile House, located at the extreme southwest corner of the planning
area, was built and operated as a bar until 1998. The structure is one of the oldest
commercial structures in Citrus Heights, and although it has been modified since its
construction, this has not significantly compromised its architectural integrity. In
addition, the building retains its historical associations to the late 1940s and so appears to
be eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources.
September 2011
Annex A.16
Figure A.4.
Historic Resources in the City of Citrus Heights
September 2011
Annex A.17
Growth and Development Trends
Growth within the City of Citrus Heights has been strong and steady. Table A.8 shows past
growth trends since 1970.
Table A.8.
Past Growth in the City of Citrus Heights
Year
Population
Change
Percent Change
Annual Percentage
Change
Citrus Heights
1970
31,015
1980
63,848
32,833
105.9%
10.6%
1990
82,045
18,197
28.5%
2.9%
20001
85,071
3,026
3.7%
0.4%
20101
88,115
3,044
3.6%
0.4%
Source: State of California, Department of Finance, E-5 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State, 2001–2009,
with 2000 Benchmark. Sacramento, California.
Vacant Land Inventory
Currently, Citrus Heights is about 97 percent built out, meaning not much vacant land remains to
be developed. As shown in Table A.9, about three-quarters of the City’s remaining vacant land is
residential in nature.
Table A.9.
Vacant Land Inventory
Current Land Use/Zoning
Vacant Acres
Residential*
149
Commercial**
46
Total Land Area
195
Notes:
* Based on Vacant Land and Pending Development Inventory (2007), City of Citrus Heights
** Based on Sacramento County Assessor Data
Future Annexation
The City does not currently have industrial land, and is interested in pursuing annexation of land
suitable for industrial development, identified on land northwest of the City. The City also
intends to pursue annexation of a portion of the area around the Greenback Lane interchange at
Interstate 80. Annexation of this area would allow the City to have control over safety and
traffic issues associated with the interchange and would offer visibility from the Interstate 80
corridor as a prominent gateway and commercial attraction.
September 2011
Annex A.18
Housing
State law requires all local governments to prepare a Housing section that indicates how it will
meet its allocated “fair share” of regional housing needs for all income groups over a specified
period. The Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) prepared a Regional Housing
Needs Plan (RHNP) in 2007 that establishes housing needs for each jurisdiction in the region.
The “fair share” housing goals for the City are derived from projected household growth and
correction factors including vacancy and normal market removals. The City’s total housing goal
for 2006 to 2013 is 262 new housing units, divided into income groups as shown in Table A.10.
The table shows the needs for the 2006 – 2013 planning period by income category and converts
this into an annual need. By reviewing the City’s records (building permits), current
development plans under review, historical affordable housing preservation/conversion, annual
production estimates have been made. These estimates show that the City is expected to produce
more units in all income categories than the City’s projected “fair share” requirement. It is
believed that the goals, policies, and actions of the General Plan, and their continued
implementation and monitoring, will ensure that the City produces housing for all sectors of the
community.
Table A.10.
Citrus Heights Fair Share Housing Needs through 2013
Income
Category
7-year Need
Units
Annual Need
Units
Percent
Projected
Annual Units
Production
Percent
Very Low
78
11
30%
18
18%
Low
20
3
8%
18
18%
Moderate
10
1
2%
31
31%
Above Moderate
154
22
59%
32
31%
Total
262
37
100%
99
100%
Note:
Income categories are based on percentage of median income adjusted by household size:
Very Low (less than 50% of median income)
Low (51% to 80% of median income)
Moderate (81% to 120% median income)
Above Moderate (More than 120% of median income)
Sources: SACOG RHNP 2006-2013, City of Citrus Heights Planning, Building, and Redevelopment records and plans
Land Use
Figure A.5 designates land uses for the Citrus Heights Area. The land use diagram employs a
series of residential and nonresidential land use designations. The land use diagram identifies
locations of the land use designations to indicate where certain types of land uses may occur.
September 2011
Annex A.19
Figure A.5.
City of Citrus Heights Land Use
A.5.2 Priority Hazards: Vulnerability Assessment
This section provides the vulnerability assessment, including any quantifiable loss estimates, for
those hazards identified above in Table A.1 as high or medium significance hazards. Impacts of
past events and vulnerability of the City to specific hazards are further discussed below (see
Section 4.1 Hazard Identification for more detailed information about these hazards and their
impacts on the Sacramento County planning area). Methodologies for calculating loss estimates
are the same as those described in Section 4.3 of the base plan. In general, the most vulnerable
structures are those located within the floodplain or within levee and dam inundation areas,
unreinforced masonry buildings, and buildings built prior to the introduction of modern building
codes.
Flood: 100/200/500-year
The City of Citrus Heights is traversed by several stream systems and is at risk to both riverine
flooding and localized stormwater flooding. As previously described in Section 4.2.8 of the
main plan, the Sacramento County Planning Area and the City of Citrus Heights have been
subject to previous occurrences of flooding. Arcade and Cripple Creeks have relatively small
hydrologic capacity and can be quickly overwhelmed during severe storm runoff events resulting
September 2011
Annex A.20
in the overflowing of stream channel banks and the temporary inundation of floodplains and
connected low lying areas.
Values at Risk
GIS was used to determine the possible impacts of flooding within the City of Sacramento. The
methodology described in Section 4.3.7 of the base plan was followed in determining structures
and values at risk to the 1% and 0.2% annual chance flood event.
Analysis results are presented in two parts:
1) A detailed table (Table A.11) shows the count and improved value of parcels that fall in a
floodplain by flood zone and land use type.
2) A summary table (Table A.12) sorts the parcel count and value data from the first table by
the 1% and 0.2% annual chance flood event, and the total flood (1% and 0.2% annual chance
floods combined). Based on FEMA guidance, contents value is estimated at 50 percent of
the improved value. Estimated losses assume that a flood is unlikely to cause total
destruction. Losses are related to a variety of factors, including flood depth, flood velocity,
building type and construction. Using FEMA’s recommendations, average damage is
estimated to be 20 percent of the total building value.
September 2011
Annex A.21
Figure A.6.
City of Citrus Heights DFIRM
September 2011
Annex A.22
Table A.11. Count and Structure Value of Improved Parcels by Land Use in Floodplain
by Zone – Citrus Heights
Flood Zone
Land Use
Parcel Count
Residential
AE
147
$19,326,600
Retail/Commercial
6
$6,166,128
Office
1
$913,382
Church/Welfare
3
$3,832,870
261
$38,341,949
Retail/Commercial
8
$8,995,589
Office
7
$3,225,405
22,645
$3,018,437,793
326
$480,574,155
Office
94
$113,655,771
Industrial
17
$13,867,599
Care/Health
38
$46,600,547
Church/Welfare
32
$32,387,683
Residential
0.2% Annual Chance
Residential
Retail/Commercial
X
Structure Value
Recreational
Vacant
Total
6
$11,627,593
12
$1,666,220
23,603
$3,799,619,284
Source: Sacramento County Secured Roll Assessor & Parcel Data; Sacramento County DFIRM, January 2011
Table A.12.
Sacramento County Flood Loss Estimates - Citrus Heights
Flood Event
Parcel Count
Structure
Value
Estimated
Contents Value
1% Annual Chance
157
$30,238,980
$15,119,490
0.2% Annual Chance
276
$50,562,943
Total Flood
433
$80,801,923
Total Value
Loss Estimate
$45,358,470
$9,071,694
$25,281,472
$75,844,415
$15,168,883
$40,400,962
$121,202,885
$24,240,577
Source: Sacramento County Secured Roll Assessor & Parcel Data; Sacramento County DFIRM, January 2011
Population at Risk
The Sacramento County Census 2010 household factor, 2.71, was made available by the
Demographic Research Unit, State Census Data Center, CA Department of Finance. For the
purposes of assessing vulnerability to specific hazards, this factor was applied to improved
residential parcels. The centroids of those parcels were overlayed on the flood hazard zone using
GIS software. If the improved residential parcels’ centroid intersects the hazard zone, that parcel
is considered to be in the hazard zone. The household factor was then multiplied to counts of
intersecting centroids (parcels) and vulnerable population was calculated. It is important to note
that there could be more than one structure on an improved parcel (i.e. a condo complex occupies
one parcel but might have several units or structures), so population estimates may be low.
September 2011
Annex A.23
Table A.13.
Citrus Heights Population in the Floodplain
1% Annual Chance
0.2% Annual Chance
X Zone
Improved
Residential
Parcels
Population
Improved
Residential
Parcels
Population
Improved
Residential
Parcels
Population
147
398
261
707
22,645
61,368
Citrus Heights
Source: US Census Bureau
Critical Facilities at Risk
The critical facility inventory was overlayed on the DFIRM flood hazard layer using GIS.
Facility locations that intersect the hazard were selected and sorted by critical facility definition
category; the summary results of this analysis are listed in Table A.14 and shown in Figure A.7.
A detailed critical facility table is included in this plan as Appendix E; the flood hazard column
on the right-hand side of that table denotes whether a particular facility is considered to be
vulnerable to that hazard.
Table A.14.
Citrus Heights Critical Facilities in the Flood Hazard Zone
Flood Hazard
CF Category
Count
1% Annual Chance
1
1% Annual Chance
1
0.2% Annual Chance
1
0.2% Annual Chance
2
Total
5
Source: Sacramento County GIS
September 2011
Annex A.24
Figure A.7.
City of Citrus Heights Critical Facilities in the Floodplain
September 2011
Annex A.25
Insurance Coverage, Claims Paid, and Repetitive Losses
The City of Citrus Heights joined the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) on November
15, 1989. The City does not participate in the CRS program. NFIP data indicates that as of
November 30, 2010, there were 173 flood insurance policies in force in the City with
$26,939,200 of coverage. Of the 173 policies, 172 were residential (single-family homes) and 1
was non-residential; 14 of the policies were in A zones (the remaining 159 were in B, C, and X
zones). The GIS parcel analysis detailed above identified 28,192 parcels in the 100-year flood
zone. 14 policies for 157 parcels in the 100-year floodplain equates to insurance coverage of 8.9
percent. There have been no historical claims for flood losses in the City.
Flood: Localized/Stormwater
The General Services Department maintains a citywide list of past chronic flooding within the
City. This list includes flood complaints registered with the General Services Department using
data from the past several years. Figure A.8 depicts known ponding and street flooding locations
in the City. This map is an initial inventory of key problem areas and is not intended to be a
complete inventory of all problems and locations associated with severe weather events and
localized flooding in the City of Citrus Heights. Damage estimates due to flooding at these
locations was unavailable.
September 2011
Annex A.26
Figure A.8.
Localized Flooding Map for the City of Citrus Heights
September 2011
Annex A.27
River/Stream/Creek Bank Erosion
Stream bank erosion is a natural process, but acceleration of this natural process leads to a
disproportionate sediment supply, stream channel instability, land loss, habitat loss and other
adverse effects. As farmers settled the valleys in the 1800s, the Gold Rush drew prospectors to
the hills. As mining in the Sierra Nevada turned to the more “efficient” methods of hydraulic
mining, the use of environmentally destructive high-pressure water jets washed entire
mountainsides into local streams and rivers. As a result, the enormous amounts of silt deposited
in the riverbeds of the Central Valley increased flood risk. As a remedy to these rising riverbeds,
levees were built very close to the river channels to keep water velocity high and thereby scour
away the sediment. However, the design of these narrow channels has been too successful.
While the Gold Rush silt is long gone, the erosive force of the constrained river continues to eat
away at the levee system and stream banks within the City of Citrus Heights. Cripple Creek,
Arcade Creek, and Brooktree Creek traverse the City and are at risk to bank erosion.
A.6 Capability Assessment
Capabilities are the programs and policies currently in use to reduce hazard impacts or that could
be used to implement hazard mitigation activities. This capability assessment is divided into five
sections: regulatory mitigation capabilities, administrative and technical mitigation capabilities,
fiscal mitigation capabilities, mitigation outreach and partnerships, and other mitigation efforts.
A.6.1 Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities
Table A.15 lists regulatory mitigation capabilities, including planning and land management
tools, typically used by local jurisdictions to implement hazard mitigation activities and indicates
those that are in place in the City of Citrus Heights.
Table A.15.
City of Citrus Heights Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities
Regulatory Tool (ordinances, codes,
plans)
Y/N
Date
Comments
General plan
Y
2008
Update in progress. Web
Zoning ordinance
Y
2010
Web
Subdivision ordinance
Y
1997
Attached
Growth management ordinance
N
Floodplain ordinance
Y
1997
Attached
Other special purpose ordinance
(stormwater, steep slope, wildfire)
Y
2004
Attached
Building code
Y
2011
Version: CBC
BCEGS Rating
Fire department ISO rating
Erosion or sediment control program
September 2011
Rating:
Y
2010
Attached
Annex A.28
Regulatory Tool (ordinances, codes,
plans)
Y/N
Date
Comments
Stormwater management program
Y
2010
Attached
Site plan review requirements
Y
1997
Web
Capital improvements plan
Y
2010
Web
Economic development plan
Y
Local emergency operations plan
Y
Community Wildfire Protection Plans
N
Flood insurance study or other
engineering study for streams
Y
Sac County
Elevation certificates
Y
Sac County
Attached
2005
Attached
Other
General Plan
California Law requires that every City and County in the state have a General Plan. The Citrus
Heights General Plan, adopted in 2000, was prepared over a two-year period that included an
extensive public review process. Since that time there have been only minor amendments to the
General Plan. In February 2009, the City Council directed that the General Plan be updated,
primarily to respond to changes in state regulations since 2000. Legislation such as:
Climate Change/Sustainability
Circulation and mobility
Water Quality
Flood Control
The General Plan is the most important policy and planning document in the city, and is used by
virtually every department. The General Plan is the city's statement of its vision for the future.
The General Plan contains policies covering every aspect of the city: Land Use (how land can be
developed), circulation, noise, air quality, housing, open space and conservation, and health and
safety.
Ordinances
The City of Citrus Heights has many ordinances related to mitigation. These ordinances can be
primarily or secondarily focused on mitigation.
Ordinances Primarily Focused on Mitigation
City of Citrus Heights Zoning Code (Chapter 106)
The City of Citrus Heights Zoning Code is the primary implementing mechanism of the General
Plan. Unlike the General Plan, which provides long-range, comprehensive general policies for
September 2011
Annex A.29
the general direction of land use in the City, the Zoning Code provides more specific descriptions
of the types of uses that are allowed in certain areas, development standards (e.g., setbacks,
building heights, lot coverage) and other detailed guidance for property development. The
Zoning Code is required to be consistent with the General Plan.
The Citrus Heights Zoning Code prohibits new construction within the 100-year floodplain,
except for specific landscaping and fences. The Zoning Code also includes minimum creek
setbacks for development adjacent to creeks. For existing properties that are entirely in the
floodplain and comply with the City’s Drainage and Development Policy, development may
occur, provided that each structure is designed to have the habitable finished floor elevation a
minimum of two feet above the 100-year floodplain. Therefore, housing would not be placed in
the 100-year flood hazard area that could put residents in danger, nor would any structures built
in the 100-year flood hazard area impede or redirect flood flows.
In addition, Policy 49.2 in the Draft General Plan commits the City to continue to implement
floodplain zoning and undertake actions required to comply with the flood-related regulations
described in “Regulatory Setting.” Policy 49.3 requires that potential flood hazards are analyzed
before development is approved. Finally, Policy 49.7 directs the City to assist in the raising of
existing residences above the 100-year base flood elevation and ensuring that new construction
conforms to all applicable provisions of the National Flood Insurance Program.
Specific Plans and Special Planning Areas
A specific plan is a detailed plan for the development of a particular area in compliance with the
city or county general plan. Specific plans are intended to provide predetermined specifications
regarding the types of uses to be permitted, development standards (e.g., setbacks, height limits,
landscape, architecture), and circulation and infrastructure improvements that are broadly
defined by the general plan. Specific plans are often used to ensure that multiple property
owners and developers adhere to a single common development plan, as well as to provide
flexibility in development standards beyond those contained in the Zoning Code as a means of
achieving superior design. There are two specific plans in Citrus Heights:
Stock Ranch Guide for Development
The Boulevard Plan – Reinventing the Auburn Boulevard Corridor
In addition to these specific plans, there are 12 Special Planning Areas (SPAs) within the City.
Two of the SPAs correspond to the specific plans identified above.
Building Code (Section 16-88)
The California Building Code 2010 Edition, including the Appendix Chapter 1 Administration, is
hereby adopted by reference based on the 2009 International Building Code. The chief building
official of the city is designated to be the authority having jurisdiction of the Citrus Heights
Building Code. The chief building official shall administer, enforce, and render interpretations of
September 2011
Annex A.30
the provisions of the Citrus Heights Building Code, and shall, upon application and after receipt
of proper documentation as required under this chapter, grant permits for the construction,
alteration, maintenance, and moving of all buildings and structures within this jurisdiction.
Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance (Chapter 82)
This chapter derives from Sacramento County Code Title 22, Land Development. Information
regarding this ordinance can be found in Section 4.4.1 of the base plan.
Flood Ordinance (Chapter 42)
It is the purpose of this chapter to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare and to
minimize public and private losses due to flood conditions in specific areas by provisions
designed to:
Protect human life and health;
Minimize expenditure of public money for costly flood-control projects;
Minimize the need for rescue and relief efforts associated with flooding and generally
undertaken at the expense of the general public;
Minimize prolonged business interruptions;
Minimize damage to public facilities and utilities such as water and gas mains; electric,
telephone and sewer lines; streets; and bridges located in areas of special flood hazard;
Help maintain a stable tax base by providing for the second use and development of areas of
special flood hazard to minimize future flood-blight areas;
Ensure that potential buyers are notified that property is in an area of special flood hazard;
and
Ensure that those who occupy the areas of special flood hazard assume responsibility for
their actions.
In order to accomplish its purposes, this chapter includes methods and provisions for:
Restricting or prohibiting uses which are dangerous to health, safety, and property due to
water or erosion hazards or which result in damaging increases in erosion or flood heights or
velocities;
Requiring that uses vulnerable to floods, including facilities which serve such uses, be
protected against flood damage at the time of initial construction;
Controlling the alteration of the natural floodplain, stream channels, and natural protective
barriers, which help accommodate or channel floodwaters;
Controlling fill, grading, dredging, and other development which may increase flood damage;
and
Preventing or regulating the construction of flood barriers which will unnaturally divert
floodwaters or which may increase flood hazards in other area.
September 2011
Annex A.31
This chapter shall apply to all areas of special flood hazards, areas of flood-related erosion
hazards and areas of mudslide (i.e., mudflow) hazards within the jurisdiction of the City. In all
areas of special flood hazards, the following standards are required:
Anchoring. Standards for anchoring shall be as follows:
All new construction, substantial improvements, and other proposed new development
shall be adequately anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement of the
structure resulting from hydrodynamic and hydrostatic loads, including the effects of
buoyancy.
All manufactured homes shall meet the anchoring standards of section 42-18
Construction materials and methods. Standards for construction materials and methods shall
be as follows:
All new construction, substantial improvement and other proposed new development
shall be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage.
shall be constructed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage.
shall be constructed with electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing and air conditioning
equipment and other service facilities that are designed and/or located to prevent water
from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding.
Require within zone AH or AO that adequate drainage paths around structures on slopes
guide floodwaters around and away from proposed structures.
Elevation and floodproofing. Standards for elevation and floodproofing shall be as follows:
New construction, substantial improvement and other proposed new development shall
have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated to or above the base flood elevation.
Nonresidential structures may meet the standards in subsection (3)c of this section. Upon
the completion of the structure, the elevation of the lowest floor, including basement,
shall be certified by a registered professional engineer or surveyor or verified to be
properly elevated by the community building inspector. Such certification or verification
shall be provided to the floodplain administrator.
New construction, substantial improvement, and other proposed new development in
zone AO shall have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated above the highest
adjacent grade at least as high as the depth number specified in feet on the FIRM or at
least two feet if no depth number is specified. Nonresidential structures may meet the
standards in subsection (3)c of this section. Upon the completion of the structure, the
elevation of the lowest floor, including basement, shall be certified by a registered
professional engineer or surveyor or verified to be properly elevated by the community
building inspector. Such certification or verification shall be provided to the floodplain
administrator.
September 2011
Annex A.32
Nonresidential construction shall either be elevated to conform with the previous two
subsections of this section or, together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, shall:
o Be floodproofed so that, below the base flood level, the structure is watertight
with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water;
o Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic
loads and effects of buoyancy; and
o Be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect that the standards of
this subsection are satisfied. Such certifications shall be provided to the floodplain
administrator.
Require, for all new construction, substantial improvement and other proposed new
development, that fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are usable solely for
parking of vehicles, building access or storage in an area other than a basement and
which are subject to flooding shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic
flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of floodwater. Designs
for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional engineer
or architect or meet or exceed the following minimum criteria:
o Either a minimum of two openings having a total net area of not less than one
square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding shall be
provided, the bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot above grade
(openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, valves or other coverings or
devices, provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of floodwater); or
o Certification to comply with a local floodproofing standard approved by the
Federal Insurance Administration of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency.
Manufactured homes shall also meet the standards in section 42-18
Fire Prevention (Chapter 38)
The City Council of the City of Citrus Heights, for the purpose of prescribing regulations
governing conditions hazardous to life and property from fire or explosion, adopted the
California Fire Code, Title 24, California Code of Regulations, Part 9, 2010 Edition
incorporating the International Fire Code published by the International Code Council, being
particularly the 2010 Edition, including the appendices thereof, and the International Fire Code
Standards published by the International Code Council, being particularly the 2010 Edition, and
the wholes thereof, save and except such portions as hereinafter deleted, modified or amended
herein.
Sacramento County Stormwater and Grading Ordinances
This chapter derives from Sacramento County Code Title 15.12 and 16.44.
regarding this ordinance can be found in Section 4.4.1 of the base plan.
September 2011
Information
Annex A.33
Weed Control (Section 102, Article 3)
The Citrus Heights Municipal Code finds and declares that the uncontrolled growth and/or
accumulation of grass, weeds or other materials or obstructions on sidewalks, streets, and on
lands or lots is dangerous or injurious to neighboring property and the health or welfare of
residents of the vicinity and is a public nuisance in that it creates a condition that reduces the
value of private property, promotes blight and deterioration, invites plundering, creates fire
hazards, constitutes an attractive nuisance creating a hazard to the health and safety of minors,
creates a harbor for rodents and insects and is injurious to the health, safety and general welfare.
To avoid wildfire, Section 102-161 states that “All dry grass, brush, vines or other dry vegetation
shall be cleared for an area of not less than 30 feet from all structures, combustible fences,
vehicles and combustible storage. The local fire authority may require additional clearances
when topographical or geographical conditions warrant such action.”
Ordinances Secondarily Focused on Mitigation
City of Citrus Heights Standards
City of Citrus Heights Municipal Code Chapter 106.30.040 “Creekside Development & Flood
Hazard Mitigation” contains performance standards and requirements for development near
creeks, setback areas to open spaces, and flood hazard mitigation.
Tree Preservation and Protection Ordinance
Chapter 106.39 of the Citrus Heights Zoning Code provides regulations for the protection,
preservation, and maintenance of protected trees in the City. The ordinance protects native oak
trees, oak woodlands, trees of historic or cultural significance, groves and stands of mature trees,
and mature trees associated with development proposals.
A.6.2 Administrative/Technical Mitigation Capabilities
Table A.16 identifies the City department(s) responsible for activities related to mitigation and
loss prevention in Citrus Heights.
Table A.16.
City of Citrus Heights Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities
Personnel Resources
Yes/No
Department/Position
Planner/Engineer with knowledge of land
development/land management practices
Y
CED/Planners
GSD/Engineers
Engineer/Professional trained in
construction practices related to buildings
and/or infrastructure
Y
GSD/Engineers
CED/Building Official
CED/Building Inspectors
Planner/Engineer/Scientist with an
understanding of natural hazards
Y
GSD/Engineers
CED/Planners
September 2011
Comments
Community/Economic
Development (CED).
General Services
Department (GSD)
Annex A.34
Personnel Resources
Yes/No
Department/Position
Personnel skilled in GIS
Y
IT/Analyst
GSD/Engineers
CED/Planners
Full time building official
Y
CED/Building Official
Floodplain Manager
Y
GSD/Principal Engineer
Emergency Manager
Y
PD – Daman C. Lt.
Grant writer
Y
ALL CITY STAFF
Y
GSD/Engineer
Comments
Other personnel
GIS Data – Hazard areas
GIS Data - Critical facilities
GSD/Engineer
GIS Data – Building footprints
GSD/Engineer
Floodplain only
GIS Data – Land use
Y
CED/Planner
GIS Data – Links to Assessor’s data
Y
Sac County
Sac County is responsible
Warning Systems/Services (Reverse 9-11,
cable override, outdoor warning signals)
Y
PD/Support Services Manager
Sac County
Sac County alert stations
Other
Flood Control/Management
The City is provided flood control and management services from the Sacramento County Water
Agency (SCWA). The SCWA, through its efforts at managing the flood control system under its
jurisdiction, has created three Zones, which the City is covered under. These Zones include Zone
11, Zone 12, and Zone 13. Zone 11 is a drainage fee zone formed to provide funding for the
construction of drainage facilities in Sacramento County. Fees are collected through Zone 11
from new development. Zone 12, now a separate utility, provides storm drain maintenance and
improvements for Sacramento County, such as channel clearing and servicing pumping plants.
Zone 13, an assessment district, provides funding for flood control and water supply planning,
groundwater studies, and FEMA programs. Zone 13 collects fees from benefiting parties. Since
July 2010, the City no longer contracts with Sacramento County for the operations and
maintenance of drainage facilities. The City contracts with private contractors to provide these
services.
A.6.3 Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities
Table A.17 identifies financial tools or resources that the City could potentially use to help fund
mitigation activities.
Table A.17.
City of Citrus Heights Fiscal Mitigation Capabilities
Financial Resources
Community Development Block
Grants
September 2011
Accessible/Eligible to Use (Y/N)
Comments
Y
Annex A.35
Financial Resources
Accessible/Eligible to Use (Y/N)
Capital improvements project funding
Y
Authority to levy taxes for specific
purposes
N
Fees for water, sewer, gas, or
electric services
N
Impact fees for new development
Y
Incur debt through general obligation
bonds
N
Incur debt through special tax bonds
N
Incur debt through private activities
Y
Withhold spending in hazard prone
areas
Y
Comments
Under Sac County drainage fee
program
Other
A.6.4 Mitigation Outreach and Partnerships
CERT
SSQP
BERC
Creek Week
Green Planning Academy.
Regional Mutual Aid Plan
The California Office of Emergency Services’ mutual aid plan for Region IV consists of the
following counties: Nevada, Placer, Yolo, Sacramento, El Dorado, Alpine, Amador, San
Joaquin, Calaveras, Tuolumne, and Stanislaus. The Region IV Multi-Casualty Incident Plan
develops standard multiple casualty procedures so that jurisdictions can work together
effectively in the case of a fire, explosion, chemical spill, or natural disaster that becomes a
multiple casualty incident.
The purpose of the Region IV Multi-Casualty Incident Plan is to standardize emergency response
procedures through the use of consistent response organization responsibilities, mobilization of
resources, communications and documentation, patient dispersal and tracking, and regional
hospital capabilities. The plan is designed to allow each agency to utilize the multiple casualty
procedures both to enhance day-to-day medical response operations, and as a method to ensure
that agencies efficiently share resources and communicate rapidly during multi-casualty
incidents.
September 2011
Annex A.36
A.6.5 Other Mitigation Projects and Efforts
20 houses raised
Purchased house
SRCC creek cleaning
Drainage pipe rehab program
Floodplain building policy
A.7 Mitigation Strategy
This section describes the mitigation strategy process and mitigation action plan for the City of
Citrus Heights’s inclusion with the Sacramento County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan update.
A.7.1 Mitigation Goals and Objectives
The City of Citrus Heights adopts the hazard mitigation goals and objectives developed by the
HMPC and described in Chapter 5 Mitigation Strategy of the base plan.
A.7.2 NFIP Mitigation Strategy
As a participant of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), the City of Citrus Heights has
administered floodplain management regulations that meet the minimum requirements of the
NFIP. The management program objective is to protect people and property within the City.
The City of Citrus Heights will continue to comply with the requirements of the NFIP in the
future.
The City’s regulatory activities apply to existing and new development areas of the City;
implementing flood protection measures for existing structures and maintaining drainage
systems. The goal of our program is to enhance public safety, and reduce impacts and loses
while protecting the environment.
The City of Citrus Heights General Services Department provides public outreach activities
which include map information services, public awareness, public hazard disclosure, and flood
protection information. This information is readily available to the public and consists of current
and accurate flood mapping. In addition, the General Services Department provides information
about our stormwater management program and up-to-date information related to the
maintenance of our drainage system.
The National Flood Insurance Program’s (NFIP) Community Rating System (CRS) is a
voluntary incentive program that recognizes and encourages community floodplain management
activities that exceed the minimum NFIP requirements. As a result, flood insurance premium
rates are discounted to reflect the reduced flood risk resulting from the community actions
meeting the three goals of the CRS which are to reduce flood losses, facilitate accurate insurance
September 2011
Annex A.37
rating, and promote the awareness of flood insurance. The City of City Heights is currently
evaluating joining the CRS.
A.7.3 Mitigation Actions
The planning team for the City of Citrus Heights identified and prioritized the following
mitigation actions based on the risk assessment and in accordance with the process outline in
Section 5, Mitigation Strategy, of the base plan. Background information and information on
how each action will be implemented and administered, such as ideas for implementation,
responsible office, potential funding, estimated cost, and timeline are also included. General
processes and information on plan implementation and maintenance of this MHMP by all
participating jurisdictions is included in Section 7, Plan Implementation and Maintenance, of the
base plan.
1. Integrate Local Hazard Mitigation Plan into Safety Element of General Plan
Hazards Addressed: All
Issue/Background: Local jurisdiction reimbursement for mitigation projects and cost recovery
after a disaster is guided by Government Code Section 8685.9. Specifically, this section requires
that the City must adopt a local hazard mitigation plan (LHMP) in accordance with the federal
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 as part of the safety element of its general plan adopted pursuant
to subdivision (g) of Section 65302. It is important for the City of Citrus Heights to incorporate
the City’s LHMP annex into the safety element as part of the next general plan update.
Other Alternatives: No feasible alternatives
Existing Planning Mechanisms through which Action will be Implemented:
Responsible Office: Water District
Priority (High, Medium, Low): High
Cost Estimate: $8,000-10,000 application fees
Potential Funding: State and/or Federal Grant
Benefits (avoided Losses): Planning documents will help the City maximize potential for state
reimbursement
Schedule: As soon as possible
2. Rinconada Flood Wall
Hazards Addressed: Flooding
September 2011
Annex A.38
Issue/Background Statement: Major flooding during the 1986 and 1995 floods. Approximately
1250 LF of flood wall are required to mitigate the potential for flooding.
Other Alternatives: No action.
Existing Planning Mechanisms through which Action will be Implemented:
Responsible Office: General Services Department
Priority (H, M, L): Medium
Cost Estimate: $400,000
Benefits (Losses Avoided): Life safety, reduction in property loss.
Potential Funding: HMGP and Stormwater Utility Funds
Schedule: Within 5 years
September 2011
Annex A.39

Annex A City of Citrus Heights - Water Resources

Transcription

Similar documents

sunray plaza

REACH Out Newsletter August 2013

2012 Estate PP BLANC

history of our school. - Colorado Heights University

Sam`s Club Ground Lease Citrus Heights, CA

City of Harker Heights Blood Drive

Mariachi Los Camperos

Sales Sheet for Tocobaga

ealifornia means many things to many people and offers almost

job shop poster-05