Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-02-21; City Council; 13043; Hosp grove hazard mitigation grant3 ? I 2 0 -X 6 6 8 z 3 c \l DEI CIT CIT Cl, OF CARLSBAD - AGEW BILL -' i AB # A=--- TITLE: HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT MTG. 2/21/95 FOR HOSP GROVE DEPT. FIR R€GOMM€ND€D AGTION; Direct staff to complete application for the Hazard Mitigation Grant in the aI: $177,000 for the purpose of abating the fire hazard presented by Hosp Grove. ITEM EXPLANATION: The Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) has granted f assistance to the state of California to fund certain hazard mitigation intended to prevent or reduce fire losses in wildland/urban interface and areas. The program targets local projects that create defensible space protection of structures from exposure to vegetation fires. FEMA recogni financial assistance will expedite local efforts to mitigate these conditions, reducing the potential for recurrence of wildfire disasters. Grant eligi limited to jurisdictions located within the six Southern California counties tl declared disaster areas during the Southern California Firestorms of 1993. The Governor's Office of Emergency Services (OES) is the grantee a administer the program. The OES office of Risk Management will review a applications from local jurisdictions to determine conformance with r: objectives and will prioritize accordingly. Due to the narrow window of opp to apply for this assistance, the Fire Department responded to the offe submitting a partial application for the grant prior to obtaining City Council a We are assured by the administrators of the program, however, that the apy can be withdrawn should Council decide to decline participation. FISCAL IMPACE Total cost of the project is estimated to be $177,000. The grant requires tht finance the work and submit proof of cost for reimbursement. grant require the City to participate at a level of 25% or $44,250. contribution may be in the form of cash or labor and equipment resources. The grant application estimates that the City's share would consist of $8,250 and $36,000 in equipment and labor resources if all of the labor is perf01 employees during normal working hours. The actual cash cost to the City higher if City resources are limited. The Fire Department currently has $15,000 appropriated for fire hazard mi work in Hosp Grove during fiscal 94-95, and will appropriate a like amc continue the mitigation work through fiscal 95-96. It is anticipated that thes will be sufficient to pay all cash costs incurred by the City under the grant agr EXHIBITS: 1. 2. 3. The term5 Th Staff Report Dated January 3, 1995 Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Application Strategic Plan Dated January 9, 1995 I Jdfinlgft I Y m m 1-3-95 TO: FROM: Mike Smith, Fire Marshal HOSP GROVE HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT ISSUE: Should the City participate in the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Program in ordt to fund a hazard reduction project in Hosp Grove? RECOMMENDATION The City should apply for financial assistance from FEMA to fund the Hosp Grovc Fire Hazard Mitigation Plan, since it will save seventy-five percent of project costs and facilitate earlier completion of the work. BACKGROUND: The Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) has granted financ assistance to the State of California to fund certain hazard mitigation projects intended to prevent or reduce fire losses in wildland/ urban interface and intermj Services (OES), is the grantee, and as such, reviews applications of local jurisdictic (sub-grantees) and recommends funding in accordance with the level of conformance of each project with the stated objectives of the program. Grant eligibility is limited to jurisdictions located within the six California counties that were declared disaster areas during the Southern California Firestorms of 1993. The program targets local projects that create defensible space for the protection of structures from exposure to vegetation fires. FEMA recognizes financial assistanc will expedite local efforts to mitigate hazardous conditions, thereby reducing the potential for wild fire disasters and the need for federal assistance that usually follows. Staff feels that the conditions within Hosp Grove meet the description of the hi@ priority objectives of the grant program, and therefore the probability of funding j high. The Fire and Park staffs have performed some hazard abatement work in tl grove over the past three years, but the work has been limited to the most critical areas on its perimeter. The funding of this project would permit staff to systematically clear hazardous conditions throughout the grove. Due to the narrow window of opportunity to apply for this assistance, the Fire Department responded to the offering by submitting a partial application for the grant prior to obtaining City Council approval. We are assured by the administrators of the program however, that the application can be withdrawn DENNIS VAN DER MAATEN, FIRE CHIEF areas throughout Southern California, The Governor’s Office of Emergency - m -. should Council decide to decline participation. Preliminary reports from OES indicate that the project is a viable candidate for funding. DISCUSSION. In a November 1993 report to the City Manager, staff provided an analysis of the fj problem presented by Hosp Grove in which several mitigation strategies were recommended. The report was commissioned as a result of fire safety concerns stated by residents living adjacent to the grove. Parks and Fire staff inspected the grove and consulted informally with State Division of Forestry experts and a priv, forestry management firm on short and long term strategies for fire protection. Since then, staff has continued to research the problem and has updated the information in the 1993 report. Currently, annual work in the grove is limited to that which can be accomplished during our Weed Abatement season, using our contractor and hourly labor obtair by the Parks Department. The work is financed using available funds in the contr services account of the Weed Abatement Budget. This limits abatement efforts tc the removal of flash fuels in form of grass and litter. Any additional work towarc long term mitigation will require additional financial commitment The Fire Department will develop a work plan which details the objectives, scope and phasing of the work required to effectively reduce the hazard of the grove. Upon completion, several other departments and agencies will be asked to review and comment on the plan to insure that the proposed work is not in conflict with other agency objectives or standards. Staff estimates that funding through the gra program would permit completion of the entire project within 16 months. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the work is estimated at $177,000. This estimate is based only upc experience of staff in other hazard abatement projects and The Fire Marshal‘s consultation with Park Staff on the matter. It is a liberal representation of the perception of those costs, and while the probability of error is great, it is unlikely t project costs will exceed that amount. More accurate estimates will be obtained when the work plan is complete, the project phased and contract bids obtained. Under the terms of the grant, the City would be required to participate at a level o twenty-five percent of the total project cost, which is $44,250. This can be accomplished through cash contribution toward the expense, or other “In-kind” contributions such as labor and equipment. Staff recommends initial funding of the project from the general fund in the amount of $50,000. This will serve as ”Seed money” from which contractors will paid. Reimbursements will replenish that account thereby avoiding the need to return to Council for incremental financing. The Finance Department will man; the account and conduct these transactions. Each phase of the project will be bid independently, and every effort will be made to limit the cost of work in each pha to $25,000. - @ a 2 ALTERNATIVE: If Council chooses to decline participation in the grant program, the project could still go forward with financing from the General Fund. Staff anticipates phasing project over a three year period will require funding in the amount of $60,000 per year. CONCLUSION The condition of Hosp Grove presents a hazard to surrounding development, anc long term solution to the problem will be expensive. Of the two alternatives considered, participation in the Fire Hazard Mitigation Grant Program is the best the City, since it will accomplish the objectives in a much shorter time period at a savings estimate of $136,000. Exhibits: Grant application Strategic plan bc)& bLt c e 0 -. 1-9-95 TO: FROM: Mike Smith, Fire Marshal STRATEGIC PLAN FOR MITIGATION OF FIRE HAZARDS IN HOSP GROVE Fire problem Hosp Grove is a large stand of Eucalyptus Trees lying South of Jefferson Street, Ea5 of Pi0 Pic0 Avenue, North of Carlsbad Village Drive and West of El Camino Real. is well established and has been left in its natural state with the exception of recen annual efforts to remove combustible litter and dangerous vegetation from its perimeter. Colonies of chaparral and other vegetation have intruded into the grove creating an assortment of light ground fuels among the trees. It is virtually surrounded by residential development. Some of its interior has been developed well, creating a wildland/urban interface and intermix fire protection problem. Coastal humidity and temperature generally suppress the advancement of fires occurring in the grove. It is likely however, under extreme "Fire weather" conditions of high temperature, low humidity and high velocity winds, a ground fire could easily spread to canopy foliage and seriously threaten adjacent homes. Fire protection strategies The hazard presented by the grove lies in the potential for ground fire to migrate the canopy foliage. Therefore elimination of light fuels on the grove floor is the primary focus of this strategic plan. Although the risk of conflagration in the gro would be slight once this is accomplished. During the severe weather conditions mentioned above, the grove canopy can be susceptible to ignition by heat from ot hostile fires in the area, or a structure fire along its perimeter. For this reason, trc along the grove perimeter should be thinned to reduce available fuel. The following strategies are offered as the objectives of the mitigation program ar will provide the basis for the work plan. Although they provide a practical and effective protection scheme, and will reduce risk, it should be understood that un the most severe weather conditions, even these measures may not be enough to prevent losses. 1. DENNIS VAN DER MAATEN, FIRE CHIEF Create defensible space between the grove and surrounding structur in accordance with recognized fie protection standards. Reduce the likelihood of fire in the tree foliage by clearing the grove floor and surrounding areas of light grass, shrubs, brush, low-hangii foliage, immature trees, and combustible litter. Perform periodic maintenance in and around the grove to maintair fire safe conditions. 2. 3. - CAhi#lT 0 0 I' - HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM APPLICATION FEMA- 1005 - DR - CA Date Submitted 13-1 F. rl/, 1. SUMMARY INFORMATION -- .." A. Project title: HOSD Grove Fi-rrl Manave- B. Grant amount requested: $ 17790°,0 C. Applicant organization/agency: City of Carlsbad California D. Applicant's agent (project director or project manager). Name: Michael E. Smith Title: ... Fi rp T)Pn;lrtmFlnt nlvT <, nn r&f /ui To wFlr&i Address: 2560 Orion Way Carlsbad, CA 92008 Business Phone: (619) 931-2125 Fax: (619)929-0256 Alternate Contact Person Name: Dennis Van Der Maaten Title: Fire Chief Address: 2560 Orion Way Carlsbad, CA 92008 Business Phone: (619)931-2141 Fax: (619) 929-0266 E. Project address or location description (also attach maps in Attachment J): City of Carlsbad, South of Jefferson Street, West of El Camino Rea. of Carlsbad Village Drive, East of Pi0 Pic0 Avenue. I’ .. 0 0 : II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Project Objective: nt A. B. Summary of Preferred Project (attach more detailed description, if availabl as Attachment A): Please see attached C. Summary of alternative strategies considered for meeting the same objectiv as the preferred project (you may attach a more detailed description, if availal as Attachment A): Please see attached ill. COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY (provide details in Attachment D) 1. Hazard Mitigation Grant Program Funds Requested: (note: may be no more than 75% of total eligibie costs): $132,750 Other funding sources. (Note: include the dollar value of any in-kind contribution the project, with details provided in Attachment C). 2. In-kind contributions $36,@ 3. Cash contribution by sub-grantee $ 8,; Total Funds Required to Complete Project: $177 ,( 2 * 0 0 - IV. PUBLIC ASSISTANCE ELIGIBILITY Note: Hazard Mitigation projects associated with a public or non-profit facility that sufi damage during the federally-declared disaster may be eligible for support under the Pub Assistance Program, which can provide more financial support to applicants than the Hi Mitigation Grant Program. Contact your state hazard mitigation ofjcicer or public assist oflcer for more infomtion. A. Is the project related to a public or non-profit facility that suffered disaster damage? ..................................... B. If yes, has there been a State or federal determination whether this pro& could be funded under the Public Assistance Program? Explain briefly. V. PROJECT ELIGIBILITY CHECKLIST I’leasc use the following checklist to screen your a1;plication to ensure :hat it is eligible Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funding. Federal and state reviewers will use a sirnil checklist when evaluating the proposal. Your attachments should provide sufficient information for state and federal reviewers t determine whether the application meets each of these criteria. Does the proposed project.. . 1. Address a local hazard mitigation plan objective? 2. Have a beneficial impact on the federally-declared disaster area? ................... - .......... - 3. Cause a long-term, significant. reduction in a repetitive hazard when implementation is completed?. .............................. - 4. Represent the best alternative of a range considered? ................. - 5. Have manageable maintenance requirements? (Provide details of maintenance requirements, as appropriate, in Attachment A) ........... 6. Provide greater net benefits than it costs? (Complete Attachment D) 7. Comply with floodplain management guidelines? (complete Attachment F) .... - ....... - 3 a 0 - Vi. COMPLIANCE CONDITIONS Agreement to the following conditions is required for consideration of the grant applicati Failure to fulfill any of these conditions may jeopardize receipt of federal funds, pursuar 44 CFR, Section 13.43. 1. Code comp!iance (check those that apply): [ x] The project will meet all applicable local, state, and federal law, reguiatio codes and standards. The project requires an exemption or variance from one or more codes. Please explain, using additional sheets as necessary. [ I 2. Local Funding Participation a. Matching funds and resources are available to supplement the requested HMG grant with a value of $ 44,250 b. The applicant pledges to fund and implement all necessary maintenance for th project over the expected life of the project. 3. Other Conditions Note: Certain of these assurances may not be applicable to your project or program. have questions, please contact your State or FEMA Hazard Mitigation Oflcer. As the duly authorized agent of the applicant I certify that the subgrantee named above a. Has the legal authority to apply for federal assistance, and the institutional, managerial, and financial capability (including funds sufficient to pay the non-fe share of project costs) to ensure proper planning, management and cornpietion c project(s) described in my. application. b. Will give the awarding agency, the Comptroller General of the United States, t€ any authorized representative, access to and the right to examine all records, bo papers, or documents related to the assistance; and will establish a proper accou tracing of funds to a level of expenditures adequate to establish that such funds not been used in violation of the restrictions and prohibitions of applicable stan c. Will maintain records which adequately identify the source and application of f This responsibility rests entirely with the subgrantee, and failure to keep and II! proper documentation will result in disallowing reimbursement of final claimed 4 system in accordance with generally accepted accounting standards to permit th 0 e * at time of final inspection or audit and the refunding of funds previously reimburse( or advanced; and will retain such records for three (3) years following any final payments and project closure. d. Will submit progress reports on a quarterly basis until project closeout, Reports wi indicate the status and completion dates for each project funded. Any problems or circumstances affecting the completion dates, scope of work, or prcject costs whicb are expected to result in noncompliance with the approved grant conditions shaIl be described in the report. e. Will cause to be performed the required financial and compliance audits in accorda with the Single Audit Act of 1984. Will comply with all federal statutes relating to nondiscrimination. These include, are not limited to, the following: (a) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L 88-352) which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origi (b) Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C.: 1681 1683 and 1685-1686) which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex; (c) Sectic 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C.: 794) which prohib discrimination on the basis of handicaps; (d) the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, amended (42 U.S.C.: 6101-6107) which prohibits discrimination on the basis of a{ (e) the Drug Abuse Office and Treatment Act of 1972 (P.L. 91-616) as amended, relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of drug abuse; (9 the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of l! (P.L. 91-616) as amended, relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of alcohol al or alcoholism; (8) 523 and 527 of the Public Health Service Act of 1912 (42 U.S 290 dd-3 and 290 ee-3), as amended, relating to confidentiality of alcohol and dn abuse patient records; (h) Title VI11 of the Civil rights Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C.: 3 et seq.), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination in the sale, rental or financing housing; (i) any other nondiscrimination provisions in the specific statute(s) under which application for federal assistance is being made, and (i) the requirements 01 any other nondiscrimination statute(s) which may apply to the application. Will comply, as applicable, with the provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S. 276a to 276A-7), the Copeland Act of 1973 (40 U.S.C.:276c and 18 u.s.c.:874 Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act (40 U.S.C.: 327-333) regarding standards for federally assisted construction subagreements. h. Will comply with federal and state environmental regulations. These include, bu not limited to, the following: (a) environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (p.0. 91-190) and Executive Order (EO) 115 (b) notification of violating facilities pursuant to EO 11738; (c) protection of we1 pursuant to EO 11990; (d) evaluation of flood hazards in floodplains in accordar with EO 11988; (e) assurance of project consistency with the approved state f. g. 5 a 0 0 . management program developed under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 197 U.S.C.: 1451 et seq.); (f) conformity of federal actions to State (Clean Air) Implementation Plans under Section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act of 1955, as ame (42 U.S.C.: 7401 et seq.); (g) protection of underground sources of drinking wat under the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, as amended, (P.L. 93-523); (h) protection of endangered species and habitat under the Endangered Species Act 0' 1973, as amended, (P.O. 93-205); and (i) requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines. Will comply with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968 (16 U.S.C.: 1271 et SI related to protecting components or potential components of the national wild anc scenic rivers system. Will assist the awarding agency in assuring compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C.: 470), EO 1 (identification and preservation of historic properties), and the Archaeological anc Historic Preservation Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C.: 469a-1 et seq.). k. Will comply with mandatory standards and policies relating to energy efficiency which are contained in the state energy conservation plan issued in compliance w the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (P.L. 94-163). Will minimize the time elapsing between the transfer of funds and their disburser whenever possible; and will promptly, but at least quarterly, remit interest earnec advances to the state. Subgrantees may keep interest amounts up to $100 dollars year for administrative expenses. i. j. 1. m. Will provide assurances to obtain reasonably available, adequate, and necessary insurance for the type or types of hazard for which the major disaster was declari n. Will initiate and complete the work within the applicable time frame after receipt approval of the awarding agency. 0. Will provide and maintain competent and adequate engineering supervision at the construction site to ensure that the complete work conforms with the approved pl and specifications. p. Will establish safeguards to prohibit employees from using their positions for a purpose that constitutes or presents the appearance of personal or organizational conflict of interest, or personal gains. q. Will comply with the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Act (42 U.S.C.: 4801 et seq.) which prohibits the use of lead based paint in construction or rehabilitation or residential structures. 6 0 0 I I* r. Will comply, or has already complied, with the requirements of Titles I1 and I11 ( the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act of 1970 (P. 91-646) which provides for fair and equitable treatment of persons displaced or w property is acquired as a result of federal and federally assisted programs. These requirements apply to all interests in real property acquired for project purposes regardless of federal participation in purchases. s. Will comply with all applicable requirements of all other federal laws, Executive orders, regulations and policies governing this program. Has requested, through the State of California, federal financial assistance to be 11 to perform eligible work approved in the subgrantee application for federal assist; Will, after the receipt of federal financial assistance, through the State of Califon agree to the following: 1. The state warrant covering financiai assistance will be deposited in a special ai separate account, and will be used to pay only eligible costs for project(s) descrit in the application; 2. To return to the State of California such part of the funds so reimbursed pursu to the above numbered application which are excess to the approved, actual expenditures as accepted by final audit of the federal government or the State Controller, or both; and, 3. In the event the approved amount of the above numbered project application i reduced, the reimbursement applicable to the amount of the reduction will be promptly refunded to the State of California. t. ' The undersigned represents that he is authorized by the above named subgrantee to ente this agreement for and on behalf of the said subgrantee. 2zh&&.eE sd / L -/6- 9$/ SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED APPLICANT'S AGENT DATE 12-16-94 Michael E. Smith/Division Chief PRINTED NAME AND TITLE 7 0 0 .I VI 1. ATTACHMENTS: A. Detailed Project Description B. Project Costs C. Work Schedule D . Cost-Effectiveness Analysis E. Environmental Concerns Checklist F. Floodplain Management Review Information (for projects involving G. Copy of Articles of Incorporation and tax exempt ruling. H. Maps construction or modification of structures). (If Applicant is an Non-profit organization) 8 e e ,* ATTACHMENT A. Detailed Project Description You may use this attachment to provide further details on the proposed project and any alternatives that were considered. Please provide sufficient information for reviewers to understand : Project objectives, Actions involved in the proposed project. Alternatives considered. Why the proposed project was preferred over the alternatives. * The ongoing maintenance or other activities that will be required after the activil supported by grant funds are compieted. You may attach additional pages or supporting materials, as appropriate. 9 e e ATTACHMENT A. Detailed Project Description IL PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Project Objective: The objective of the project is to mitigate the fire hazard presented by a grove of mature Eucalyptus Trees through the: 1. Creation of a defensible space along the interface of the grove and adjacent existing residential structures. Landscaping of cleared defensible space where necessary to prevent erosion and resurgence of hazardous vegetation. Abatement of hazardous conditions within the grove which elevate the risk and spread of fire to the overhea canopy foliage of the grove. 2. 3. B. Summary of Preferred Project and actions involved in proposed project: Background Hosp Grove is a dense stand of mature Eucalyptus Trees covering approximately 100 acres of irregular topography near the Northern boundary of the city of Carlsbad. It is bordered almost entirely by residential structures, many of which would be immediately threatened by fire due to their close proximity. Approximately 70 ac of the grove is owned by the City, and annual maintenance is performed to remove hazardous weed growth on the grove perimet in an attempt to reduce the potential for ignition of flash fuels. Fires that have occurred within the grove have occasionally spread to the foliage canopy overhead, due to the presence of understory fuels in the form of shrubs, grasses, loose bark and small eucalyptus specimens. The fact that no structural losses have occur is attributed to the relatively high humidity resulting from the coas influence. However, it is feared that a fire occurring in the grove during the seasonal "Santa Ana" conditions, could result in severe losses. Fire Officials observe that conditions in the grove are simila those contributing to the fire losses experienced in Oakland Califorr in 1992. Defensible Space The creation of defensible space would involve the removal of all t within 10 feet and immature trees within fifty feet of structures alor e 0 . ATTACHMENT A. page 2 the interface. The defensible space created may vary in width in consideration of topography, slope severity and slope aspect. The resulting usable wood products may be disposed of as partial products will be chipped in place and applied as mulch to suppress resurgence of unwanted vegetation. Landscaping The removal of trees may necessitate landscaping of some areas to prevent erosion and the resurgence of hazardous vegetation which 1 suppressed now by the shade of the foliage canopy. replacement will be accomplished in accordance with The Fire Suppression Element of the City of Carlsbad Landscape Guidelines, i! will include provisions for temporary irrigation systems to insure tl- plantings are well established. Abatement of hazardous conditions Approximately 20% of the grove floor is covered with understory fu such as small tree specimens, shrubs and light grasses. dead branche: loose bark and low hanging limbs which must be removed to significantly reduce fire risk. They are referred to as ladder fuels si they create a path of fire spread to the foliage canopy above. The material will be removed, chipped in place and again, applied as mu to the grove floor to prohibit weed growth. Summary of alternative strategies considered for meeting the same objectives as the preferred project. The fire losses experienced by the City of Oakland, California in 1992 and the contribution to those losses by large stands of Eucalyptus Trc heightened community awareness of the hazard presented by Hosp Grove. In 1993 Carlsbad Fire Officials began to seek advice of forestr experts to evaluate the local problem. It became apparent that meet the objectives stated above in a short period of time would be financially burdensome to the city. City Parks Maintenance Person are not trained or equipped to handle the task, nor are funds availal to finance it. The alternative was to accomplish the project incrementally over a period of several years. Early in 1994 the City Council funded a hazard abatement program which focused on the perimeter of the grove, adjacent to structures. Due to limited fund only very high risk areas received attention. No trees were removc and the scope of the work was limited mostly to the removal of flas fuels in the form of grasses, weeds and shrubs. compensation to contractors performing the removal. Unusable The landscape C. - e e ATTACHMENT A. page 3 Why the proposed Project is preferred over alternative Funding for hazard abatement similar to that provided in 1994 will b considered by the City Council next year, and the following year, but q this rate, the incremental improvement of conditions will continue be insignificant when compared to the severity of the remaining hazard. Funding of the project through the Hazard Mitigation Gran Program will permit the city to significantly reduce the fire risk in a much shorter period of time. Ongoing maintenance or other activities that will be required after the activities supported by grant funds are completed, Upon completion of the objectives identified earlier, the city Parks ai Fire Departments will continue annual inspection and abatement of fire hazards in the grove. Activity will include removal of ladder fuels, deadfalls, trash and resurgent vegetation from the grove interj and its perimeter defensible space. Landscaping will require monthly inspection until plantings are well established. - e 0 ATTACHMENT B. Project Costs Provide details of the costs and resource requirements of the proposed project. If in-kind contributions of labor or materials devoted to the project are being claimed as part of the grant matching requirements, provide an documentation of the basis for valuation of the contributions. DO NOT INCLUDE grant administration costs in the budget, such as the following: * preparing the project application * responding to requests for information on the project by the State or FEMA * prepering quarterly progress reports and invoices * maintaining project records If the grant is approved, such costs will be covered by a supplemental "subgrantee administrative cost" award, calculated as follows: Eligible Costs Suberantee - admin cost formula $0-$ 100,000 $100,00 1 -$ 1 ,000,000 $ 1 ,000,OO 1 -$5,000,000 > $5,000,000 NOTE: If you have more than one hazard mitigation grant approved following a given disaster declaration, the subgrantee administrative cost formula is applied to cumulative total of the eligible costs on all your grants. 3% of eligible costs $3,000 + 2% of the amount above $100,000 $21,000 + 1 % of the amount above $1,000,000 $61,000 + 0.5% of the amount above $5,000,000 10 . 0 0 ATTACHMENT B. Project Costs The following is an estimate of cost and resource requirements of the project. It includes in-kind contributions in the form of labor, supervision and equipment. Fuel modification zones This portion of the project will involve creation of defensible space in the form oi fuel modification zones along the interface of Hosp Grove and existing residentia structures. Activitv cost Removal of trees $16,340 Tot a1 $19,714 Reduction of unusable wood product $ 3,374 Erosion control This measure involves the landscaping of the fuel breaks to prevent erosion and resurgence of hazardous vegetation. Projections are based on the anticipated neec to landscape 43,000 square feet. Activity Cost Hydroseeding ($.32/sq ft) $13,760 Total $35,260 Installation of irrigation svstems ($.50/ sq ft) $21,500 Removal of unde rstow I fuels This involves the removal of hazardous ground fuels from the grove interior. Activitv Cost Removal of material $62,221 Reduction of material on-site $15,555 Total $77,776 Grant amount requested by sub-grantee totals $132,750 $132,75Q Activity In-kind contributions by sub-grantee Amount Develop access roads $12,000 Equipment rental and maintenance $10,000 Refuse removal and disposal $ 6,000 Supervision of contractors $ 8,000 Cash contributions by sub-gantee u25Q Total in-kind contributions by sub-grantee $36,000 Total contributions by sub-grantee $44,250 $44,250 Total Project Costs $177,000 - 0 0 ATTACHMENT C. Work Schedule Provide information on the expected schedule for major phases or milestones. Include charts or tables, as appropriate. The following workplan indicates the phasing of the mitigation project by zone. t? description of the work to occur in each zone is based upon inspections by staff an( application of nationally recognized wildland/urban interface fire protection standards. Some modification of the plan may be required after work commences due to conditions that may exist of which staff is currently unaware. Subdivision, phasing and cost control The project is subdivided into 25 mitigation zones as depicted by the accompanyin map entitled Attachment C Exhibit 1. The purpose of subdivision is to assist staff the control of spending as the project progresses. After establishing the cost of mitigation in each geographic of subdivision of the project, the subdivisions will assigned to one of seven phases in a manner that limits the aggregate cost of each phase to $25,000. Until bids are received for each subdivision, the specific location work in each phase cannot be determined. For that reason we ask that a work pla addressing only a general phasing be accepted until the bids are accepted. Subdivision of the project also facilitates identification of the boundaries of the three mitigation measures proposed. Each work site is identified first by Assessor parcel number. Each APN is assigned a zone identifier. For example, the identifil for APN 156-080-15 is Zone I, Because of its size and the varying mitigation work required, Zone 1 is further sub-divided into Zones la, lb and IC. Commencement of work Although contractual agreements will be arranged during the spring of 1995, wor will not begin on the various sites until mid-June. through June, Hazard Abatement Contractors are traditionally committed to the weed abatement programs of local jurisdictions. A project start of mid-June will provide greater assurance of competitive bidding on each phase by competent contractors. Proiect phasing and completion dates Subdivision bids -------- X Phase 1 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6 Phase 7 During the period April 5-95 8-95 11-95 2-96 4-96 7-96 8-96 9-96 Project phasing ----------- X Phase 2 X ------_---------- X _--__11__1-__1_______I----------- X --------------------_____I________ X -------I------------l______l______l____ X -------l-----l-l----_l-------l-------l--------- X ----1-----1---------__1______1_____1____------- X --------------------_1___1_1____1_______------------------- e 0 Attachment C. Work Schedule (continued) Mitigation methods Mitigation methods for each zone will vary with topography, slope aspect and proximity to structures. Methods range from removal of understory fuels to areas. Removal of understorv fuels This process targets brush, shrubs, grass, weeds, trash, small branches, shaggy bark 6 feet in height, low hanging foliage to 6 feet in height, tree specimens less than 2 inches in diameter and all standing dead trees. When possible, all natural rnateri, will be reduced by chipping on site. Removal of trees in fuel modification zones All trees within 10 feet, and immature trees within 50 feet of structures will be removed in order to create defensible space along the interface. This process targe all specimens less than 4 inches in diameter, and approximately fifty percent of those less than 6 inches in diameter. The thinning will reduce the fuel load and eliminate ladder foliage of intermediate height. Larger trees will remain to presei thinning of immature trees. Erosion control measures may be required in some the shading effect of the grove floor by the overhead canopy. Erosion control This measure will be required to stabilize soil when significant vegetation is removed from areas of severe topography. Dangerous understory fuels will be removed and replaced by drought tolerant, fire retardant ground cover species. Temporary irrigation systems will be required to establish plantings. Landscapinl will conform to the fire suppression element of the City of Carlsbad Landscape Guidelines and be supervised by the City Parks Department. The matrix provided as Attachment C Exhibit 2 reflects the mitigation measures planned for each subdivision depicted on the project map. e 0 Attachment C. Work Schedule Exhibit 2 MITIGATION MEASURES BY PROJECT SUBDIVISION Remove Thin Subdivision understory mature Erosic Item APN identifier Acreage fuels trees contrl 1 156-080-15 la 2 X X 2 lb 6 X 3 IC 7 X 4 156-080-19 2a 1 X X 5 2b 5 X 6 2c 5 X 7 2d 6 X 8 156-280-23 3 <I X 9 156-280-22 4 1.3 X 10 156-340-15 5 5.7 X 11 156-080-13 6a 1 X X X 12 6b 1.6 X 13 156-080-11 7a 1 X X X 14 To 2 X 15 156-080-1 0 8a 1 X X X 16 8b 3.6 X 17 154-140-29 9a 1.6 X X 18 9b 1 X 19 154-140-30 10 5.5 X 156-301-04 11 25 x 20 22 12b 4.2 X - 23 156-331-25 - 13 - 6.6 - ____________________---------_-------------------------- x 21 156-080-18 12a i X Total acreage targeted 72.35 72.35 7.6 I* x. Total area requiring erosion control - 0 0 ATTACHMENT D. Benefit-Cost Analysis State and federal reviewers will perform a benefit-cost analysis of the project to estimate whether project benefits are likely to be greater than their costs. To support this analysis. please provide the following information, along with any back-up material you have to support your estimates; 0 Expected useful life of the project, Frequency of the disaster event the project is designed to address, Rough estimate of the expected benefits of the project for each disaster event, in terms of avoided property damage and reduced risk of other nega consequences (death, injury, etc.). Note: There is often a high degree of uncertainty around these estimates. In such cases, ask for your best judgment, along with whatever basis you are using for that judgment. 12 e e v ATTACHMENT D. Benefit-cost Analysis Expected useful life of the project The applicant expects to be able to maintain the subject property in a fire safe condition from the date of completion without further assistance. Annual maintenance costs are not expected to exceed 10% of the cost of the project. Frequency of the disaster event the project is designed to address No frequency of event can be established since no significant fire loss has occurrec However, the unusual weather conditions that elevate the risk of a disaster eveni occur 4-6 times during the fall months each year, Rough estimate of the expected benefits of the project for each disaster event, in terms of avoided property damage and reduced risk of other negative consequencl (death, injury, etc.) Should such an event occur, it is likely that wind driven fire will immediately outstrip the resources of the local fire agency and will destroy residences before mutual aid forces can be deployed to assist in fire control. In this situation, fire c; be expected to spread further into neighborhoods from structures immediately 01 the interface. Under the most extreme weather and fire conditions, loss of life ca: also be expected. Avoidable residential fire loss $60,000,000 Avoidable loss in watershed Avoidable deaths and injuries 50 acres 1000-1500 citizens at risk I 0 0 - ATTACHMENT E. Environmental Concerns Checklist All project elements must comply with the National Environmental Policy Act in order assure that potential environmental and social impacts are considered before federal fun( granted to a project. The level of review required will depend on the project. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) may also apply to many projects. Tc avoid duplication of effort, applicants are encouraged to work with the Office of Emerg Services to conduct combined NEPNCEQA reviews that meet the requirements of both simultaneously. Projects may require public hearings and coordination among several agencies to assure important concerns are addressed. AppIicants may ask OES to obtain FEMA participat; such discussions or meetings in order to speed up review of the project application. The following checklist is intended as a broad survey of potential impacts that may be considered under NEPA. Applicants are encouraged to consult with agencies that may 1 expertise in a particular issue while completing the checklist. Please list the contact per at all agencies consulted at the end of the checklist. For Yes determinations, please include a brief description of how the issue would be addressed. Attach additional paper if needed. A. Lalid Use and Socioeconomic Effects 1. Would the proposed project be inconsistent with current land use or zoning? . . . - Yc Comments: 2. Would the proposed project involve the relocation of existing structures? . . . . . - Comments: 3. Would the proposed project affect economic activities’? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - Comments: 4. Would the proposed project affect parks or recreation areas? . . . . . . . . . . . . - Comments: 5. Would the proposed project affect coastal zone environments? . . . . . . . . . . . . - Comments: 13 .. L 0 0 Attachment G, Project Title: Hosp Grove Fire Hazard Management Program 6. Other land use/ socioeconomic impact concerns? .................... - I Comments: B. Air/Water Quality 1. Would the proposed project alter air quality? ...................... I Comments: 2. Would the proposed project involve dredging/disposal in water? .......... - Comments: ......... 3. Would the proposed project involve modification of a waterway?. - Comments: 4. Other aidwater quality concerns? ............................. - Comments: C. Natural Resources 1. Would the proposed project remove vegetation? ................... - No native undisturbed plant species will be removed. Comments: Project will target hazardous vegetation. 2. Would the proposed project affect a wetland? ..................... - Comments: 3. Would the proposed project affect an endangered species? .............. - Comments: 4. Would the proposed project affect a wildlife/conservation area? ........... - Comments: 14 8 Attachment G, Project T‘ Hosp Grove Fire Hazard Man ” - $- z 5. Would the proposed project affect aquifers or streamflows? ............. N . Comments: fi 6. Other natural resource concerns? ............................. - Comments : D. Archeological and Historic 1 1. Would the proposed project affect an archeological, cultural or historic site? . . - Comments: 2. Other archeological or historic concerns? ........................ 1. Comments: E. Other Issues (describe below). 15 I * - e 0 .. .. i * ATTACHMENT F. Floodplain Management Review Information Executive Order 11988 requires the federal government to assure that the floodplain management impacts are considered of all federally-assisted projects that take place in o affect a floodplain. To assist FEMA with this review, please answer the following: 1. Does the project involve construction or modification of existing structures? - (If no, skip the remaining questions in this attachment). 2. Is the project locaLed in an area mapped by the National Flood Insurance Program? - If yes, attach a copy of the relevant portion of the map, identifying the map nan number and the project location. (YOU should be able to get information on floodplain maps from your jurisdictio: planning, zoning, or code enforcement agency). 3. If the project is located in or affects a floodplain, are any special measures being inc in the project design to protect against potential impacts from hture floods? Please ex1 below. 16 ‘U T 0 0 \ .- ATTACHMENT G. Non-profit Organization Documentation Public agencies do not need to complete this section. Non-profit organization applicants, please attach a copy of your articles of incorporation and your federal tax-exempt status documentation. 17 *u Y $9 P 9 v ATTACHMENT H. Maps Attach local and area maps and directions sufficient to enable a visitor to find the project location. Adequate maps are not available at this time. 1994. They will be submitted by Dec 18