My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan: 19. Mitigation Strategy
PublicDocuments
>
Civil Defense
>
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan 2010
>
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan: 19. Mitigation Strategy
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2011 8:07:28 AM
Creation date
8/11/2011 8:06:25 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
39
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Chapter 19:Mitigation Strategy <br /> • Preventive land use measures. Existing shoreline setback regulations require a minimum of <br /> 40' setback from the certified shoreline. Whether this 40' provides adequate buffer relative <br /> to the rate of sea cliff erosion such as in the Hamakua area requires further study. Based on <br /> the findings, the shoreline setback requirement should be adjusted accordingly for these <br /> areas. <br /> 19.3 Priority Criteria <br /> Mitigation actions were selected for implementation based on community acceptance criteria <br /> referred to as the STAPLEE criteria (Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Eco- <br /> nomic, and Environmental) and then prioritized.'16 The STAPLEE evaluation criteria analyze <br /> the appropriateness of alternative mitigation actions by considering the following questions: <br /> • Social <br /> • Will the proposed action adversely affect one segment of the population? <br /> • Is the proposed action culturally insensitive? <br /> • Technical <br /> • Is the proposed action technically feasible? <br /> • Is the proposed action a long-term solution or a short-term"band-aid"'? <br /> • Are there secondary effects resulting from the proposed action? <br /> • Administrative <br /> • Does the proposed action require additional staffing? <br /> • Does the proposed action require additional training? <br /> • Does the proposed action require ongoing maintenance? <br /> • Political <br /> • Is the proposed action controversial? <br /> • Does the proposed action require legislative approval? <br /> • Does the proposed action affect multiple stakeholders and have they all had an opportunity to be <br /> involved'? <br /> • Legal <br /> • Does the County have jurisdiction to implement the proposed action? <br /> • Are new laws required to implement the proposed action? <br /> • Are liability risks involved with the proposed action? <br /> • Economic <br /> • What are the costs involved to implement the project? <br /> • Is the proposed action eligible for outside funding? <br /> • Is the burden of the choice of funding borne by those who benefit? <br /> • Is a more detailed cost-benefit analysis warranted? <br /> • Environmental <br /> 116 Priority-setting methodology from FEMA,How-To Guide 43:Developing The Mitigation Plan;Identifying <br /> Mitigation Actions And Implementing Strategies,FEMA No.386-3,April 2003. <br /> 19-9 Hawaii County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.