Chapter 1 - Hazard Mitigation Web Portal - State of California

Repetitive Loss CommunitiesState of California Multi‐Hazard Mitigation PlanChapter 5 – Earthquakes, Floods and Wildfires: Risks and StrategiesAreas flooded in the past continue to be inundated repeatedly. The repetitive nature of flooddamage causes the greatest concern. FEMA, in coordination with the state, identifies California’stop Repetitive Loss (RL) communities, which account for 84 percent of the state’s total NFIPlosses. Repetitive loss communities in California account for nearly $166 million in totalpayments, representing 8,014 losses on 2,988 properties throughout the state.The top 10 Repetitive Loss Communities account for over $115 million in total payments, or 61%of total payments for Repetitive Loss Communities. In order of losses, the top 10 include:• Sonoma County• City of Malibu• Lake County• City of Los Angeles• County of Sacramento• Monterey County• Marin County• Santa Cruz County• Los Angeles County• City of NapaComparison of Repetitive Loss Communities in 2007 with RL communities in 2010 show agenerally steady pattern, with relatively few changes in top 10. For details about the top 10 RLCommunities, see Appendix P.Click Here ToComment On:Chapter 5Section 3.45.3.4 Assessment of Local Flood Vulnerability and Potential LossesThe following section addresses local flood hazard vulnerability and potential losses based onestimates provided in local risk assessments, comparing those with findings of the state riskexposure findings presented in the GIS analysis in Section 5.1.1 of this chapter.Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Flood Hazard RatingsDuring the 2007 SHMP review of 436 FEMA‐approved LHMPs, the most significant hazardsreported were earthquakes, floods, and wildfires—the three primary hazards identified on astatewide basis by the SHMP. Including these three, LHMPs identified a total of 57 distinct localhazards.Map 5.X summarizes relative ratings of flood hazards in the 2007 review of LHMPs. 61 Displayedare predominant hazard ratings shown as high (brown), medium (orange), and low (yellow)rankings reflecting ratings given by at least 51% of the jurisdictions with LHMPs within eachcounty. Counties shown in gray represent either jurisdictions not having FEMA‐approved LHMPsat that time or counties where data was missing or problematic.An updated source regarding local perceptions of vulnerability to flood threats is found in thecollection of additional 305 FEMA‐approved Local Hazard Mitigation Plans (LHMPs) prepared61Source: 2007 SHMP Chapter 6Public Comment Draft – July 2010 195