Res 2018-025/adopting the 2018 Hays County, Texas Hazard Mitigation Plan as the official plan of the City; authorizing the inclusion of the City of San Marcos Hazard Mitigation Plan as an appendix; designating the City Manager as the official authorized

Home Browse Search

Creation/Incorporation of Other New Mitigation Action Items Through data collection conducted throughout Phase 1 (Organize and Review) and Phase 2 (Risk Assessment) activities, MPC planners provided potential resources for measures, projects and regulations that could be incorporated into the HMP. Documents reviewed for incorporation are listed in each jurisdiction’s annex. Evaluation and Prioritization In order to evaluate feasibility and to analyze prioritization of actions, all new and existing actions were reviewed. This process utilized the Mitigation Action Prioritization Tool (found in Appendix C). This worksheet included consideration of the: • type of action; • ranking of how the action meets the listed feasibility criteria; and • Risk Ranking Score for the hazard that is being mitigated. Type of Action Actions were classified as one of the following types: • Plans/Regulations • Structure/Infrastructure Projects • Natural Systems Protection • Education and Awareness Programs Mitigation Strategy Definitions and examples of these classification types can be found in Chapter 3 The Mitigation Strategy, Step 2 Identify/Update Mitigation Goals. Planners ranked the feasibility of identified mitigation actions using 1 of 3 ratings. +1 Highly effective or feasible 0 Neutral -1 Ineffective or not feasible Feasibility considerations included the following 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 or infrastructure?) • Technical (How technically feasible and long-lasting is the solution? Does the action effectively mitigate the hazard?) • Political (Is there public support for the action? Would political leaders support it? ) • Legal (Can the community legally implement the action?) • Environmental (How does the action impact the environment? Would it be compliant with environmental regulations and requirements?) • Social (Will the action adversely impact any people? Does it disrupt neighborhoods, voting districts or involve the relocation of those with lower incomes?) • Administrative (Are there administrative and operational capabilities to implement and maintain the action or will work have to be outsourced?) • Local Champion (Does the project/action have a strong advocate that will support the implementation?) • Other Community Objectives (Does the action achieve the goals or objectives of any other community plans such as capital improvement, environmental quality or open space preservation? Does it support comprehensive plan policies?) 68