HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-07-13 Board of Selectmen Handout - Part 2TOWN OF READING
HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
11 IJ(_l011) ZUNF1;;
II
t 77~ ~
,~~5'~ d! rX" ES ~.l It r
' La.• 1 ~ ~r- I rte, ,
r „•r Y~-C~ ~,ir^(yy~~~'rV'~_~g3i,.r~"d i~' HS ~,L .}~'F, ~
7.9i f ~~''''(l~r ~ • SY ~
r
F-\ I l Rood Zones
Z~ A-NYfYw
F11-4 Zc
Z-AF- MY=
flad z-
°_cvH -doo - 300 U.
.7HOd z-
C
ellilHflPt>L IY"~11 ♦HC~ P4hNNiNtI Cf111Nf. 11.
Metropolitan Area Planning Council
April 22, 2010
DRAFT for MEMA and FEMA Review
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
1. INTRODUCTION
Planning Requirements under the Federal Disaster Mitigation Act
The Federal,Disaster Mitigation Act, passed in 2000, requires that after November. 1
2004, all municipalities that wish to continue to be eligible to receive FEMA funding for
hazard mitigation grants, must adopt a local multi-hazard mitigation plan. This planning
requirement does not affect disaster assistance funding.
Massachusetts has taken a regional approach and has encouraged the regional planning
agencies to apply for grants to prepare plans for groups of their member communities.
The Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) received a grant from the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) under the Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM)
Program, to assist the Town of Reading and 22 other communities develop their local
Hazard Mitigation Plans. The local Hazard Mitigation Plans produced under this grant
are designed to meet the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act for each community.
What is Hazard Mitigation?
Natural hazard mitigation planning is the process of figuring out how to reduce or
eliminate the loss of life and property damage resulting from natural hazards such as
floods, earthquakes and hurricanes. Hazard mitigation means to permanently reduce or
alleviate the losses of life, injuries and property resulting from natural hazards through
long-term strategies. These long-term strategies include planning, policy changes,
programs, projects and other activities.
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
II. COMMUNITY PROFILE
Overview
The Town of Reading is a medium size community which lies at a transportation hub.
With Interstate Route 93 along its western boundary and Interstate 95 along its southern
and southeastern boundaries, not only Boston but the seashore, retail shopping mails and
employment centers are easily accessible. This, accessibility plus the New England
character of the town make Reading an ideal residential area. First settled in 1639, the
town was incorporated in 1644. Under the guidance of a citizen volunteer committee,
Reading is looking forward to celebrating its 350th anniversary in 1994: This committee
is only one of many volunteer boards, committees and commissions that assist an elected
board of selectmen and a representative town meeting in governing the town. The town
manager is responsible for day-to-day operations of the local government.
(Narrative based on information provided by the Massachusetts Historical Commission and is taken from the
Community Profile on the website maintained by the Department of Housing and Community Development).
The Town is governed by a Board of Selectmen and a Town Manager. The town operates
under the representative town meeting format. The 2000 population was 23,708 people
and there were 8,823 housing units.
The town maintains a website at http://www.ci.reading.ma.us/
Existing Land Use
The most recent land use statistics available from the state are based on aerial
photography done in 1999. Table 1 shows the acreage and percentage of land in 21
categories. If the four residential categories are aggregated, residential uses make up 46
% of the area of the town. The next highest percentage is forest at 36% of the total land
area.
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 1
1999 Land Use in Reading
Land Use Type
Acres
%
Cropland
6.37
0.10
Pasture
22.90
0.36
Forest
2,314.45
.36.26
Non-forested wetlands
275.8
4.32
Mining '
6.17
0.10
Open land
101.65
1.59
Participatory recreation
174.33
2.73
Spectator recreation
0.00
0.00
Water recreation
1.24
0.02
Multi-family residential
53.76
0.84
High density residential .(less than '/4 acre lots)
0.00
0.00
Medium density residential ('/4 ='/Z acre lots)
2,430.43
38.08
Low density residential (larger than'/2 acre lot)
451.88
7.08
Salt water wetlands
0.00
0.00
Commercial
17.4.97
2.74
Industrial
76.19
1.19
Urban open
148.55
2.33
Transportation
128.34
2.01
Waste disposal
3.72
0.06
Water
0.00.
0.00
Woody perennials
11.41
0.18
Total
6,382.16
For more information on how the land use statistics were developed and the definitions of
the categories, please go to http://www.mass.gov/mais/lus.htm.
Potential Future Land Uses
MAPC consulted with town staff to determine areas that were likely to be developed in
the future. These areas are shown on Map 2, "Potential Development" and are described
below. The letters in parentheses refer to the letters on Map 2.
Stop and ShopJAl - This is a redevelopment project that is taking place in an old
building. It is currently under construction. The old building was demolished and a new
one built. It has been occupied for several months. The old parking lot used to flood
because the detention pond was too small and the catch basins surcharged. They have
installed large underground detention systems for the new parking lot. They also filled a
small floodplain and provided a compensatory area.
4
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
New Restaurants (B) - This lot has been subdivided into three parcels. The office
building will remain. The second building will remain. A Longhorn Steakhouse and a
Bertucci's are under construction on the third parcel. On the second lot, another building
was demolished and a new parking lot with an on-site infiltration system was installed.
This building is now occupied by Hallmark Health. The restaurants also have new on-
site infiltration.
Archstone (C) - This project has already been constructed. It is 204 rental units with a
clubhouse and pool. It was developed under Chapter 40B.
Johnson Woods (D) - So far, 166 condo units have been approved and about half have
been constructed under the PRD zoning. The project includes some affordable units and
a full stormwater management system. There is additional land for which plans have not
been received. Abutting land in Woburn between the town boundary and I-93 is under
construction and partly occupied with over 400 units, mostly rental apartments, but one
condo building. Access is only from West Street at the Reading/Wilmington line, and
Reading has an understanding with Woburn about emergency response. In the future, it
may be connected to the Johnson Woods roads.
80-100 Main Street ( Atlantic Tambone) (El - This is an approved redevelopment
project. Three existing buildings would be torn down and consolidated into one new one.
A restaurant will probably be the anchor for the development. The development will
include an on-site stormwater management system including a detention basin to alleviate
flooding of abutting residential lots on Haystack and Milepost Roads.
Addison - Wesley (F) - The Department of Housing and Community Development is
reviewing a pending application for a Smart Growth District.. The Community Planning
and Development Commission is holding a public hearing on the proposed zoning
changes for town houses, apartments, and an office building. Zoning changes will then
be considered December 10 at a Special Town Meeting. The final design must meet
DEP' Stormwater Management Policy.
Kylie Drive (G) - This is an eight lot subdivision. No buildings have been constructed
yet but the new road has been constructed. Lot releases are pending. The development
includes stormwater management systems that meet DEPs•policy.
Beniamin Lane (H) - This will be a four lot subdivision. Trees have been cleared from
the property. The utilities and roadways are under construction. The development
includes stormwater management systems that meet DEPs policy. .
Peter Sanborn Place Assisted Living (I) - This facility will be expanding. Plans have not
yet been submitted for review. The project will be built under Chapter 40B.
Maplewood Village (J) - This project consists of 36 new condos on Salem Street (Route
129) next to the Registry of Motor Vehicles, opposite Libby Avenue. This project has
been completed and is occupied. It was developed under Chapter 40B as a Local
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Initiative Project. The development includes stormwater management systems that meet
DEP policy. The developers filled a floodplain and provided compensatory storage.
Pleasant Street (K) - The Housing Authority is applying for permits for a 4 unit building
next to the Senior Center at #49 Pleasant Street. This building will share a parking lot
and will include drainage improvements.
Sailor Tom subdivision (L) - This is a 3 lot subdivision at 175 Franklin Street abutting
the west side of the Home Goods lot. The project includes stormwater management
systems that meet DEP policy. The project is under a limit for impervious cover as per
the Aquifer Protection District.
Camp Curtis Guild (M) - The National Guard recently decommissioned two firing ranges
and is constructing a large vehicle maintenance facility. Most of the work is in Lynnfield
but access and utilities are in Reading.
I-93/I-95 Interchange (N) - Mass Highway just filed an ENF for reconstruction of the
interchange. This is the busiest interchange in the state and has a high accident rate
including trucks with hazardous cargo. The proposed designs will have significant
wetlands impact and will require significant stormwater management improvements.
8 Walkers Brook Drive (O) - The town recently received a proposal to demolish an
existing gas station and build a bank. The fuel tanks have already been removed. The
site is close to Walkers Brook and will require a wetlands permit and stormwater
management system.
88 and 98 Walkers Brook (P) - This is a redevelopment project that. is in the permit
review process. The site will be used for an auto dealership and service center. One of
the two buildings will be demolished and the parking lot will be completely
reconstructed. Part of the site is the former town landfill and will need to be capped per
DEP regulations. There have been several hazardous waste releases that were identified
and cleaned up. The development will provide drainage system improvements but cannot
fully meet the DEP policy standards due to a high water table, landfill materials, the fact
that it abuts Mass Highway land and other constraints.
281,287 and 306 Main Street (Q) - These are all commercial sites where the previous
uses have been abandoned. All have significant hazardous waste contamination and are
in the middle of 21E analysis and cleanup processes. These sites are likely to be
redeveloped for commercial uses after cleanup. All of the sites abut Walkers Brook and
have wetlands so they will be subject to permits for the cleanup and for future
redevelopment. These sites are within the low area on Main Street that has been
identified as flood hazard area #5.
Meadow Brook Golf Club (R) - This golf course is located at the north end of Grove
Street. There are currently no plans to change the use of this area and the club has
recently installed new irrigation systems, updated the pool house, and made other
6
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
improvements. However, this is the largest tract of remaining open land in Reading, is
very close to the town wells, includes endangered species habitat, and has much upland
with good development, potential. A significant part ofthe'land is also in the floodplain
west of Grove Street and the Ipswich River floodplain north of the golf course.
40P, District (S) - The town has voted to establish a 40R zoning district in this location.
7
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
III. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Public participation occurred at two levels; the Metro Boston North/West Multiple
Hazard Community Planning Team (regional committee) and the Reading Multiple
Hazard Community Planning Team (local committee). In addition, the town held one
meeting open to the general public to present the plan and hear citizen input.
Reading's Participation in the Regional Committee
On July 7, 2006, a letter was sent notifying the communities of the first meeting of the
Metro Boston North/West Regional Committee and requesting that the Chief Elected
Official designate two municipal employees and/or officials to represent the community.
The following individual was appointed to represent Reading on the regional committee:
George Zambouras Town Engineer
The Metro Boston North/West Regional Committee met on the following dates:
July 26, 2006
March 28, 2007
November 1, 2007
June 26, 2008 .
The Local Multiple Hazard Community Planning Team
In addition to the regional committee meetings, MAPC worked with the local community
representatives to organize a local committee for Reading. MAPC briefed the local
representatives as to the desired composition of that team as well as the need for
representation from the business community and citizens at large.
The Local Committee Meetings
On November 7, 2007 MAPC conducted the first meeting of the Reading Multi-Hazard
Mitigation Planning Team. The meeting was organized by Carol Kowalski, Planning
Director. The purpose of this meeting was to review existing and potential mitigation
measures, evaluate and prioritize those measures and develop hazard mitigation goals.
Table 2 lists the attendees at each meeting of the team. The agendas for these meetings
are included in Appendix A. Other local meetings are noted in Table 3.
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 2
Attendance at the Reading Local Committee Meetings
Name
Representing
November 7, 2007
Fran Fink
Conservation Commission
James Cormier
Police Department
Greg Burns
Fire Department
Carol Kowalski
Planning
George Zambouras
Town Engineer
Larry Ramdin
Health Department
Ted McIntire
DPW Director
Peter I. Heckenbleikner
Town Manager
Table 3
Other Local Meetings
Date
Participants
Purpose
9/28/06
George Zambouras, Paul Jackson
Data collection
3/20/07
George Zambouras, Fran Fink
Data collection
7/26/07
Carol Kowalski
Project briefing
12/6/07
Fran Fink
Review the ortho
3/31/08
Fran Fink, Carol Kowalski, George
Zambouras
Review the ortho and
discuss potential mitigation
measures.
The Public Meeting - The plan was introduced to the public at a meeting of the Board of
Selectmen on August 5, 2008. The meeting was held in the Reading Town Hall. The
meeting was publicized as a regular Selectmen's meeting in the local newspaper and
posted in Town Hall. There were several members of the public in attendance during the
portion of the meeting at which the plan was discussed but there were no questions or
issues raised. Copies of an outline of the presentation were left for any members of the
public who wished to take one. Following the meeting, the draft plan was posted on the
Town's website and a press release was issued to inform, residents of a 30 day review
period (from August 5 - September 5) to comment on the plan. A copy of the press
release is included in Appendix D. Following the public meeting, on September 3, the
Town Engineer received an e-mail from a resident of Glenmere Circle informing the
town of flooding issues on his property.
Table 4
Attendance at the An
Representing Name
Board of Selectmen Ben Tafoya, Vice Chairman
James Bonazoli, Secretary
Camille Anthone
Town
Peter I. Heckenbleikner
10
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
IV. OVERVIEW OF HAZARDS AND VULNERABILITY
Overview of Hazards and Impacts
The Massachusetts Hazard Mitigation Plan 2007 (state plan) provides an in-depth
overview of natural hazards in Massachusetts. The state plan indicates that Massachusetts
is subject to the following natural hazards (listed in order of frequency); floods, heavy
rainstorms, nor'easters, coastal erosion, hurricanes, tornadoes, urban and wildfires,
drought and earthquakes. These risks were reviewed with the Local Committee at its first
meeting. No additional hazards were identified and local officials concurred that
flooding was the primary hazard facing the town.
Table 5 summarizes the federally declared disasters and emergencies since 1991 in the
region.
Table 5
Disaster and Emergency Declarations for Middlesex County
ID Number
Type
Date
1701
Severe Storms and Inland and Coastal Flooding
April 2007
1642
Severe storms, flooding
May 2006
1614
Severe storms, flooding
October 2005 _
3252
Hurricane (Katrina)
August 2005
3201
Snow
January 2005
1512
Flooding
April 2004
3191
Snowstorm
December 2003
3175
Snowstorm
February 2003
3165
Blizzard
March 2001
1364
Severe storms, flooding
March 2001
1224
Heavy rain, flooding
June 1998
1142
Severe storms, flooding
October 1996
1090
Blizzard
January 1996
3103
Blizzard
March 1993
920
Severe Coastal Storm
October 1991
914
Hurricane (Bob)
August 1991
Sources: www1ema.gov and State Hazard Mitigation Plan, MEMA and DCR, October 2007.
Table 6 summarizes the hazard risks for Reading by hazard type. This evaluation takes
into account theTrequency of the hazard, historical records and variations in land use.
This analysis uses the same vulnerability assessment methodology used in the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan, October 2007.
11
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 6
Hazard Risks
Hazard
Frequency
Severity
Flooding
High
Serious
Winter storms
High
Serious
Hurricanes
Medium
Serious e
Earthquakes
Low
Catastrophic
Tornadoes
Low
Extensive
Landslides
Low
Minor
Brush fires
Low
Minor
Dam failures
NA
NA
Definitions used in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan
Frequency
Very low frequency: events that occur less frequently than once in 1,000 years (less than 0.1% per
year)
Low frequency: events that occur from once in 100 years to once in 1,000 years (0.1% to 1% per year);
Medium frequency: events that occur from once in 10 years to once in 100 years (1% to 10% per year);
High frequency: events that occur more frequently than once in 10 years (greater than 10% per year).
Severity
Minor: Limited and scattered property damage; no damage to public infrastructure (roads, bridges,
trains, airports, public parks, etc.); contained geographic area (i.e.one or two communities); essential
services (utilities, hospitals, schools, etc) not interrupted; no injuries or fatalities.
Serious: Scattered major property damage (more than 50% destroyed); some minor infrastructure
damage; wider geographic area (several communities); essential services are briefly interrupted; some
injuries and/or fatalities.
Extensive: Consistent major property damage; major damage public infrastructure damage (up to
several days for repairs); essential services are interrupted from several hours to several days; many
injuries and fatalities.
Catastrophic: Property and public infrastructure destroyed; essential services stopped, thousands of
injuries and fatalities.
12
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Flood Hazards
Flooding was the most prevalent natural hazard identified by the State Hazard Mitigation
Plan as well as. local officials in Reading. Flooding can occur during hurricanes,
nor'easters, severe rainstorms and thunderstorms.
Regionally Significant Storms
There have been a number of major rain storms that have resulted in significant flooding
in northeastern Massachusetts over the last fifty years. Significant storms include:
August 1954
March 1968
January 1979
April 1987
October 1991 ("The Perfect Storm")
October 1996
June 1998
March 2001
April 2004
May 2006
April 2007
Wind-related hazards
Wind-related hazards include hurricanes and tornadoes as well as high winds during
severe rainstorms and thunderstorms. As with many communities, falling trees that result
in downed power lines and power outages are an issue in Reading.
Between 1858 and 2000, Massachusetts has experienced approximately 32 tropical
storms, nine Category 1 hurricanes, five Category'2 hurricanes and one Category 3,
hurricane. This equates to a frequency of once every six years. There was a tropical
storm that tracked through Reading in 1861. A hurricane or storm track is the line that
delineates the path of the eye of a hurricane or tropical storm. However, the town does
experience the impacts of the wind and rain of hurricanes and tropical storms regardless
of whether the storm track passed through the town. The hazard mapping indicates that
the 100 year wind speed is 110 miles per hour. There have been no tornadoes recorded
within the Town limits.
Winter Storms
In Massachusetts, northeast coastal storms known as nor'easters occur 1-2 times per
year. Winter storms are a combination hazard because they often involve wind and high
snow fall. The average annual snowfall for the town is 48.1- 72.0 inches.
13
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Fire Related Hazards
The Reading Fire Department responds to approximately 26 brush fires annually. None
of these have been major in terms of property damage and none have resulted in any
deaths. Most brush fires are accidentally caused.
Geologic Hazards
Most town officials admitted that earthquakes-were the hazard for which their community
was least prepared. Although new construction under the most recent "building codes
generally will be built to seismic standards, there are still many structures which pre-date
the most recent building code.
Regional Overview
According to the State Hazard Mitigation Plan, New England experiences an average of
five earthquakes per year. From 1627 to 1989, 316 earthquakes were recorded in
Massachusetts. Most have originated. from the La Malbaie fault in Quebec or from the
Capp Anne fault located off the coast of Rockport. The region has experienced larger
earthquakes, of magnitude 6.0 to 6.5 in 1727 and 1755. Other notable earthquakes
occurred here in 1638 and 1663. (Tufts). There have been no recorded earthquake
epicenters within Reading although there is one just over the border in Stoneham.
Earthquake Impacts - Earthquakes are a hazard with multiple impacts beyond the
obvious building collapse. Buildings may suffer structural damage which may or may
not be readily apparent. Earthquakes can cause major damage to roadways, making
emergency response difficult. Water lines and gas lines can break, causing flooding and
fires. Another potential vulnerability is equipment within structures. For example, a
hospital may be structurally engineered to withstand an earthquake, but if the equipment
inside the building is not properly secured, the operations at the hospital could be
severely impacted during an earthquake. Earthquakes can also trigger landslides.
Landslideg,
The entire town has been classified as having a low risk for landslides. There have been
no recorded landslides in Reading.
Critical Infrastructure in Hazard Areas
Critical infrastructure includes facilities that are important for disaster response and
evacuation (such as emergency operations centers, fire stations, hospitals, etc.) and
facilities where additional assistance might be needed during an emergency (such as
nursing homes, elderly housing, day care centers, etc.). It also includes facilities that
might pose a particular danger during a natural disaster such as a sewage treatment plant
14
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
or chemical facility. These facilities are listed in Table 7 and are shown on all of the
maps in Appendix B. .
The purpose of mapping the natural hazards ,and critical infrastructure is to present an
overview of hazards in the community and how they relate to critical infrastructure.
Flooding-There are seven critical facilities sites that fall within a locally identified area
of flooding. The majority of these (5) are within the Track Road area. There are also
seven sites that fall within mapped FEMA flood zones.
Landslides- The entire town is considered to have a- low risk for landslides and therefore,
all critical infrastructures sites fall within this hazard category.
Earthquakes - All areas of the town have a low risk for earthquakes.
Explanation of Columns in Table 7.
Column 1: ID A The first column in Table 6 is an ID number which appears on the maps that are part of
this plan. See Appendix B.
Column 2: Site Name: The second column is the name of the site. If no name appears in this column,
this information was not provided to MAPC by the community.
Column 3: Site Type: The third column indicates what type of site it is.
Column 4: Landslide Risk: The fourth column indicates the degree of landslide risk for that site. This
information came from NESEC. The landslide information shows areas with either a low susceptibility or
a moderate susceptibility to landslides based on mapping of geological formations. This mapping is
highly general in nature. Fot more information on how landslide susceptibility was mapped, refer to
http://pubs. usgs.gov/pp/P1183/pp'1183.html.
Column 5: FEMA Flood Zone: The fifth column addresses the risk of flooding. A "No" entry in this
column means that the site is not within any of the mapped risk zones on-the Flood Insurance Rate
Maps (FIRM maps). If there is an entry in this column, it indicates the type of flood zone as follows:
Column 6: Locally Identified Areas of Flooding: The locally identified areas of flooding were identified by
town staff as areas where flooding occurs. These areas do not necessarily coincide with the flood zones
from the FIRM maps. They may be areas that flood due to inadequate drainage systems or other local
conditions rather than location within a flood zone. The numbers correspond to the numbers on Map 8,
"Hazard Areas".
Column 7: Average annual snowfall: The snowfall mapping indicates that there are two bands of snowfall
in southeastern Massachusetts. An entry of "high" indicates an annual average of 48.1 - 72 inches of
snow. An entry of "low" indicates a range of 36-48 inches.
15
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 7
Relationship of Critical Infrastructure to Hazard Areas
ID
NAME
TYPE
Within Locally Identified
Area of Flooding
Within
FEMA
Flood Zone
1
Reading Baptist Day School
Daycare
No
No
2
Christian Cooperative Preschool
Daycare
No
No
3
Humpty Dumpty School
Daycare
No
No
4
Sandra Lane Nursery School
Daycare
No
No
5
Sawyer Nursery School
Daycare
No
No
6
Reading Extended-Day Activities Program
Daycare
No
No
7
Little Treasure School House
Daycare
No
No
8
Burbank YMCA Preschool Program
Daycare
No
No
9
Perry, Linda
Daycare
No
No
10
Van Horn, Susan L.
Daycare
No
No
11
Becker, Mary Ellen
Daycare
No
No
12
Blake, Gayle K.
Daycare .
No
No
13
Bouchard, Jeanne F.
Daycare
Track Road at Line Road
No
14
Gingras, Linda H.
Daycare
No
No
15
Melanson, Barbara
Daycare
No
No
16
Reading Extended Day at Killam School
Daycare
No
No
17
Reading Extended Day at Joshua Eaton
Daycare
No
No
18
Kariger, Diane L.
Daycare
No
No
19
Tinney, Suzann M.
Daycare
No
No
20
' Callahan, Louise M.
Daycare
No
No
21
Tucker, Susan
Daycare
No
No
22
Driscoll, Catherine H.
Daycare
No
No
23
Miller, Joan
Daycare.
No
No
24
Zaccardo, Patricia
Daycare
No
No
16
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 7
Relationship of Critical Infrastructure to Hazard Areas
ED
NAME
TYPE
Within Locally Identified
Area of Flooding
Within
FEMA
Flood Zone
25
Thayer, Debra
Daycare
No
No
26
Gard-Bruce, Anna P.
Daycare
No
No
27
Pustorino, Concetta
Daycare
No
No
28
Brown, Krystal Gayle
Daycare
No
No
29
Melanson, Patricia
Daycare
No
No
30
. Evangelista, Alison
Daycare
No
No
31
Reynolds, Dawn
Daycare
No
No
32
Lievenbruck, Nadine
Daycare
No
No
33
McWeeney, Kathryn
Daycare .
No
No
34
Bartalini, Rockell M.
Daycare
No
No
35
Whelan, Katherine M.
Daycare
No
No
36
Giuliotti, Virginia
Daycare
No
No
37
Doucette, Shirley
Daycare
No
No
38
Austin Prepatory School
School
No
No
39
Alice M Barrows
School
No
No
40
Walter S Parker Middle
School
No
No
41
Joshua Eaton
School
No
No
42
J Warren Killam School
School
No
No
43
Birch Meadow Elementary School
School
No
No
44
Reading Police Department
EOC
No
No
.45.
Reading Town Hall
Town Hall
No
No
46
Reading Fire Department
Fire
No
No
47
Reading Fire Department
Fire
No
No
48
Reading Police Department
Police
No
No
17
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 7
Relationship of Critical Infrastructure to Hazard Areas
ID
NAME
TYPE
Within Locally Identified
Area of Flooding
Within
FEMA
Flood Zone
49
Wood End Elementary School
School
No
No
50
DPW Garage
DPW Garage
No
No
51
Louanis Water Treatment Plant
Water Treatment Plant
Water Treatment Plant
No
52
Reading Municipal Light substation
Power Substation
No
No
53
Arthur W Coolidge. Middle School
School
No
No
54 -
Reading Memorial High School
School
No
No
55
Reading Senior Center
Senior Center
No
No
56
Camp Curtis Guild, MA
Hazardous Materials Site
No
ANI
57
Hodson Oil
Hazardous Materials Site
No
No-
58
Mass Highway Dept Facility
Hazardous Materials Site
No
No
59
New England Tel & Tel Company
Hazardous Materials Site
No
No
60
DPW Garage
Hazardous Materials Site
No
No-
61
Cumberland Farms (Mobil gas station)
Hazardous Materials Site
Track Road at Line Road
No
62
Louanis Water Treatment Plant
Hazardous Materials Site
Water Treatment Plant
No
63
Cumberland/Exxon (gas station)
Hazardous Materials Site
No
No
64
Main St Petroleum, LLC (Mobil)
Hazardous Materials Site
No
No
65
Reading Petroleum (gas station)
Hazardous Materials Site
No
No
66
Reading Car Care Center (gas station)
Hazardous Materials Site
No
No
67
Reading Square Shell (Gas Station)
Hazardous Materials Site
No
No
68
Reading Service Inc. Mobil on the Run
Hazardous Materials Site
No
No
69
Main Street Sunoco
Hazardous Materials Site
No
No
70
East Coast Gas
Hazardous Materials Site
No
No
71
Motiva Enterprises (Texaco gas station)
Hazardous Materials Site
No
X500
72
West Street Mobil (Gas Station)
Hazardous Materials Site
No_
No
18
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 7
Relationship of Critical Infrastructure to Hazard Areas
ED
NAME
TYPE
Within Locally Identified
Area of Flooding
Within
FEMA
Flood Zone
73
Amico, Tonya Marie
Daycare
No
No
74
Clock Tower Kids
Daycare
No
No
75
Coffill, Patricia
Daycare
No
No
76
Cunningham, Dawn
Daycare
No
No
77
Dillaway, Ann A.
Daycare
No
No
78
Ellington, Holly
Daycare
No
No
79
Gaunci,. Anne Marie
Daycare
No
No
80
Malcolm, Loretta
Daycare
No
No
81
Yang, Yi Fang
Daycare
No
No
82
Nichols, Kristina
Daycare
No
No
83
Cedar Glen
Elderly Housing
No
No
84
Peter Sanborn Place
Elderly Housing
No
No
85
Reading Housing Authority
Elderly Housing
No
No
86
Longwood Place
Elderly Housing
No
No
87
Sawtelle Family Hospice House.
Nursing Home
No
No
88
Daniels House Nursing Home
Nursing Home
No
No
89
Wingate at Reading -
Nursing Home
No
X500
90
EKS 2 Corporation Shell Station
Hazardous Materials Site
No
No
91
Auburn Street Water Tank
Water Tank
No
No
92
Bear Hill Stand Pipe
Water Tank
No
No
93
Batchelder Road Sewer Pumping Station
Sewer Pump Station
No
'No
94
Charles Street Pumping Station
Sewer Pump Station
No
No
95
Haverill Sewer Pumping Station
Sewer Pump Station
No
X500
96
Collins Avenue Pumping Station
Sewer Pump Station
No
No
19
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
. Table 7
Relationship of Critical Infrastructure to Hazard Areas
ID
NAME
TYPE
Within Locally Identified.
Area of Flooding
Within
FEMA
Flood Zone
97
Joseph Way Pumping Station
Sewer Pump Station
No
No
98
Strout Avenue Sewer Pumping Station
Sewer Pump Station
No
No
99
Grove Street Sewer Pumping Station
Sewer Pump Station
No
No
100
Brewer Lane Sewer pumping Station
Sewer Pump Station
No
No
101
Small Lane Sewer Pumping Station
Sewer Pump Station
No
No
102
" West Street Sewer Pumping Station
Sewer Pump Station
No
No
103
Longwood Road Sewer Pumping Station
Sewer Pump Station
No
No
104
Lothrop Road Water Booster Station
Water Booster Station
No
No
105
Sturgis Park Sewer Pumping Station.
Sewer Pump Station
No
No
106
Revay Well
PWS
No
No
107
Reading Well # 13
PWS
No
No
108
Reading Well # 15
PWS
No
No
109
Reading Well # 2
PWS
No
No _
110
Reading Well # 3
PWS
No
No
111
Reading B-Line Well
PWS
No
No
112
Reading 66-8 Well
PWS
No
No
113
Reading Town Forest Well
PWS
No
No
114.
Reading Well # 82-20 _
PWS
No
No
118
193 over West Street Bridge
Bridge
No
No
119
Apache Pass Mass Highway DPW Facility
DPW
No
No
120
195 over Rte 28 Bridge
Bridge
No
No
121
Track Road Bridge #I
Bridge
Track Road at Line Road
AE
122
Track Road Bridge #2
Bridge
Track Road at Line Road
AE
123
Track Road Bridge #3
Bridge
Track Road at Line Road
AE
20
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 7
Relationship of Critical Infrastructure to Hazard Areas
ID
NAME
TYPE
Within Locally Identified
Area of Flooding
Within
FENIA
Flood Zone
124
Mineral Street Bridge
Bridge
No
No
125
129 RailRoad Bridge
Bridge
No
No
126
Reading Internal Medicine Offices
Medical
No
No
MWRA Summer Avenue Sewer Pumping
127
Station
Sewer Pump Station
No
No
128
Hallmark Health Building
Medical
No
No
129
Reading Municipal Light Department
Municipal
No
No
130
RCTV Inc Studio
Broadcast
No
No
21
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
HAZUS -NM Results
Introduction to HAZUS -NM
HAZUS- MH (multiple-hazards) is a computer program developed by FEMA to estimate
losses due to a variety of natural hazards. The following overview of HAZUS-MH is
taken from the. FEMA website. For more information on the HAZUS-MH software, go
to http://www.fdma.gov/ Ip an/prevent/hazus/index.shtm.
"HAZUS-MH is a nationally applicable standardized methodology and software
program that contains models for estimating potential losses from earthquakes,
floods, and hurricane winds. HAZUS-MH was developed by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) under contract with the National
Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS). Loss estimates produced by HAZUS-MH
are based on current scientific and engineering knowledge of the effects of
hurricane winds, floods and earthquakes. Estimating losses is essential to
decision-making at all levels of government, providing a basis for developing and
evaluating mitigation plans and policies as well as emergency preparedness,
response and recovery planning..
HAZUS-MH uses state-of-the-art geographic information system (GIS) software
to map and display hazard data and the results of damage and economic loss
estimates for buildings and infrastructure. It also allows users to estimate the
impacts of hurricane winds, floods and earthquakes on populations."
There are three modules included with the HAZUS-MH software: hurricane wind,
flooding, and earthquakes. There are also three levels at which HAZUS-MH can be run.
Level 1 uses national baseline data and is the quickest way to begin the risk assessment
process. The analysis that follows was completed using Level 1 data.
Level 1 relies upon default data on building types, utilities, transportation, etc. from
national databases as well as census data. While the databases include a wealth of
information on the nine communities that are a part of this study, it does not capture all
relevant information. In fact, the HAZUS training manual notes that the default data is
"subject to a great deal of uncertainty."
However, for the purposes of this plan, the analysis is useful. This plan is attempting to
only generally indicate the possible extent of damages due to certain types of natural
disasters and to allow for a comparison between different types of disasters. Therefore,
this analysis should be. considered to be a starting point for understanding potential
damages from the hazards. If interested, communities can build a more accurate database
and further test disaster scenarios.
22
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
HAZUS-MH Results for Hurricanes
According to the State Hazard Mitigation Plan, between 1858 and 2000,. there were 15
hurricanes. 60% were Category 1, 33% were Category 2 and 7% were Category 3. For
the purposes of this plan, a Category 2 and a Category 4 storm was chosen to illustrate
damages. The reason is to present more of a "worst case scenario" that would help
planners and emergency personnel evaluate the impacts of storms that might be more
likely in the future, as we enter into a period of more intense and frequent storms.
Table 8
Estimated Damages from Hurricanes
Category 2
Category 4
Building Characteristics
Estimated total number of buildings
7,178
7,178
Estimated total building replacement value .
(Year 2002 (Millions of Dollars)
$1,593
$1,593
Building Damages
# ,of buildings sustaining minor damage
1,601
331
# of buildings sustaining moderate damage
337
1,092
# of buildings sustaining severe damage
25
1,942
# of buildings destroyed
20
3,777
Population Needs
# of households. displaced
64
7,407
# of people seeking public shelter
13
1,463
.Debris
.
Building debris generated (tons)
5,788
193,839
Tree debris generated (tons)
58,523
_ 95,474
# of truckloads to clear building debris
234
7,778
Value of Damages Thousands of dollars
Total property damage
$39,907.35
$1,686,234,13
Total losses due to business interruption
$4,342.54
$195,653.77
No Category 4 or 5 hurricanes have been recorded in New England. However, a Category 4
hurricane was included to help the communities understand the impacts of a hurricane
beyond what has historically occurred in New England.
23
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
HAZUS-M111 Results for Earthquakes
The HAZUS earthquake module allows users to define a number of different types of
earthquakes and to input a number of different parameters. The module is more useful
where there is a great deal of data available on earthquakes. In New England, defining
the parameters of a potential earthquake is much more difficult because there is little
historical data. The earthquake module does offer the user the opportunity to select a
number of historical earthquakes that occurred in Massachusetts. For the purposes of this
plan two earthquakes were selected: a 1963 earthquake with a magnitude of 5.0 and an
earthquake with a magnitude of 7.0.
Table 9
Estimated Damages from Earthquakes
Magnitude
5.0
Magnitude
7.0
Building Characteristics
Estimated total number of buildings
7,178
7,178
Estimated total building replacement value (Year
2002 $)(Millions of dollars)
$1,593
$1,593
Building Damages
# of buildings sustaining slight damage
48
2,429
# of buildings sustaining moderate damage
7
1,364
# of buildings sustaining extensive damage
1
308
# of buildings completely damaged
0
71
Population Needs
# of households displaced
0
336
# of people seeking public shelter
0
68
Debris
Building debris generated (tons)
NA
NA
# of truckloads to clear building debris
NA
NA
Value of Damages Millions of dollars
Total property damage
$3.18
$163.51
Total losses due to business interruption
$0.08
$18.09
24
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Vulnerability Assessment for Flooding
MAPC did not use HAZUS-MH to estimate flood damages in Reading. In addition to
technical difficulties with the software, the riverine module is not a reliable indicator of
flooding in areas where inadequate drainage systems contribute to flooding even when
those structures are not within a mapped flood zone. In Reading, much of the flooding is
due to deficiencies in the drainage system. In lieu of using HAZUS, MAPC developed a
methodology to give a rough approximation of flood damages.
Reading is 9.97 square miles or 6,382 acres. Approximately 163 acres have been
identified by local officials as areas of flooding. This amounts to 2.5% of the land area in
Reading. The number of structures in each flood area was estimated by applying the
percentage of the total land area to the number of structures (7,178) in Reading; the same
number of structures used by HAZUS for the hurricane and earthquake calculations.
HAZUS uses a value of $221,789 per structure for the building replacement value. This
was used to calculate the total building replacement value in each of the flood areas. The
calculations were done for a low estimate of 10% building damages and a high estimate
of 50%o as suggested in the FEMA September 2002 publication, "State and Local
Mitigation Planning how=to guides". (Page 4-13). The range of estimates for flood
damages is $8,294,909 - $41,474,543. These calculations are not based on location
within the floodplain or a particular type of storm (i.e. 100 year flood).
25
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 10
Estimated Damages from Flooding
ID
Flood Hazard Area
Approximate
Area in cres
% of Total
Land Area
Approximate
# of
Structures
Replacement
Value
. Low
Estimate of
Damages
High Estimate
of Damages
1
Sunnyside and Fairview
2.36
0.04
3
$665,367
$66,537
$332,684
2
New Crossing@ DPW Garage
7.12
0.11
8
$1,774,312
$177,431
$887,156
3
Track Road at Line Road
16.31
0.26
19
$4,213,991
$421,399
$2,106,996
4
South Main Street
17.12
0.27
20
$4,435,780
$443,578
.$2,217,890
5
Brook and Ash Streets
4.62
0.07
6
$1,330,734
$133,073
$665,367
6
Morgan Park
9.94
0.16
12
$2,661,468
$266,147
$1,330,734 "
7
150 West St, Keith-Glenmere-Garrett Area
33.94
0.53
39
$8,649,771
$864,977
$4,324,886
8
Lowell Street at Intervale
1.54
0.02
2
$443,578
$44,358
$221,789
9
Willow Street/Austin Prep
1.94
0.03
3
$665,367
$66,537
$332,684
10
Main Street
30.04
0.47
34
$7,540,826
$754,083
$3,770,413
11
Milepost at Haystack
12.32
0.19
14
$3,105,046
$310,505
$1,552,523
.12
Pine Ridge/Cherry Hill
3.37
0.05
4
$887,156
$88,716
$443,578
13
Haverhill Street at the Town Line
3.83
0.06
5
$1,108,945
.$110,895
$554,473
14
Water Treatment Plant
8.59
0.13
10
$2,217,890
$221,789
$1,108,945
15
Hopkins Street
2.97
0.05
4
$887,156
$88,716
$443,578
16
Hunt Park
6.92
0.11
8
$1,774,312
$177,431
$887,156
TOTAL
162.93
2.55
183
$40,587,387
$4,058,739
$20,293,694
$8,294,909
$41,474,543_
26
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Future Development in Hazard Areas - As indicated in Table 11, some potential
development and redevelopment sites are partially within flood zones.
Table 11
Relationship of Potential Development Parcels to Hazard Areas
Parcel.
Landslide risk
Flood zone
Stop & Shop
Low
92% within flood zone
New restaurants
Low
51% within flood zone
Archstone
Low
Not within flood zone
Johnson Woods
Low
Not within flood zone
Tambonis
Low
Not within flood zone'
Addison Wesley
Low
Not within flood zone
Kiley Drive
Low
Not within flood zone
Benjamin Lane
Low
Not within flood zone
Peter Sanborn Place
Low
8% within flood zone
Maplewood Village
Low
45% within flood zone
Pleasant Street
Low
Not within flood zone
Sailor Tom
Low
Not within flood zone
Camp Curtis Guild
Low
Not within flood zone
I-93/195 Interchange
Low
Not within flood zone
8 Walkers Brook Drive
Low
72% within flood zone
88-98 Walkers Brook
Drive
Low
9% within flood zone
281-287 & 306 Main
Street
Low
100% within flood zone
Meadow Brook Golf Club
Low
41 % within flood zone
40R
Low
Not within flood zone
27
METRO BOSTON NORTHWEST MULTI-HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
THE READING ANNEX
V. HAZARDS AND EXISTING MITIGATION MEASURES
Flood-Related Hazards
Overview of Drainage Issues
Reading is divided by topography into three watersheds. Tributary streams that arise in
these watersheds flow to the Aberjona, the Saugus and the Ipswich Rivers. The streams
are associated with large swamps and marshes that play a significant role in flood storage
and control. Flooding from the Ipswich River and its major tributary, Bare Meadow
Brook, does not affect many structures because the Town has preserved most of the
floodplains as open space. Because most of the development in Reading has been
constructed above the floodplains, Reading does not have many serious flooding
problems. However, there are areas where flooding occurs during major storms, causing
damage to buildings and roadways. Some of the flooding problems may be exacerbated
by historical filling of floodplains and routing of streams through culverts in older parts
of town. Subdivisions, commercial development, and other large projects permitted in
the last 25 years generally includes stormwater management systems designed to detain
runoff and thus control downstream flooding. Flood hazard areas tend to be small in
scale and clustered in the southern part of town.
Conservation Commission Issues
According to the conservation agent, the town's wetlands regulations are adequate to
protect wetlands and no further regulations are needed. at this time. The most recent
amendments to the regulations were passed by Town Meeting in 2001. The long term
maintenance of stormwater management systems is a concern because the storage
capacity of these systems decreases when they are not maintained.
On privately owned wetlands, the most common types of violations tend to be filling,
brush and trash dumping, poor erosion controls during construction, paving without
permits, hazardous materials releases and cutting trees without permits. On publicly
owned lands the violations are primarily brush dumping and the use of all terrain
vehicles. The conservation department has no staff or budget for maintenance.
There are two potential mitigation measures that should be considered for stormwater
management. These are to retrofit neighborhoods with underground storage and to
encourage or mandate rooftop infiltration.
Areas of Flooding
Information on flood hazard areas was taken from two sources. The first was the
National Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The FIRM flood zones are shown on Map 3 in
Appendix B. The second was discussions with local officials. The locally identified
areas of flooding described below were identified by town staff as areas where flooding
29
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
occurs. These areas do not necessarily coincide with the flood zones from the FIRM
maps. They may be areas that flood due to inadequate drainage systems or other local
conditions rather than location within a flood zone. The numbers correspond to the
numbers on Map 8, "Hazard Areas". The numbers do not reflect priority order.
Saugus River Watershed Flood Hazard Areas
Walkers Brook and its associated tributaries in southern Reading are the headwaters of
the Saugus River in Wakefield. Flooding of property and roadways occur at numerous
locations within the watershed and is caused by a combination of system capacity
inadequacies and localized capacity deficiencies. A large portion of the basin lies in the
moderately dense older portion of the town which affords little or no available land for
storage or retention of flood waters. As planned improvements within Reading may
impact communities downstream, the mitigation of flood damage to roadways and
properties within the watershed is a true urban challenge making resolution of flooding in
this watershed the town's highest priority.
The town has recently appropriated $200,000 to perform a hydraulic and hydrological
study of the watershed. The study will provide recommendations to alleviate flooding
and to provide an extensive stormwater management plan for the basin.
The individual flood hazard areas are as follows:
Sunnyside and Fairview (#1) - There are six homes where severe flooding occurs within
the properties and within Sunnyside Avenue. This flooding is due to system surcharges
and capacity deficiencies of the drainage system. This neighborhood is in the middle
third of one of the primary tributaries of the drainage basin.
New Crossing at the DPW Garage (#2) -Flooding in this area affects New Crossing
Road, the primary access to the DPW facility, the Fraen Corporation manufacturing
facility and the adjacent office building and is therefore a high priority for the town.
Both Walkers Brook and a tributary stream join downstream of the area causing flooding
of New Crossing Road, adjacent to the Lowell Branch commuter rail and the Fraen site.
Flooding has also occurred from the tributary stream over the southern end of the
industrial park off Ash Street to the northeast of New Crossing Road. Newer
development in this area has incorporated detention basins and infiltration systems but is
in adequate in providing relief to the area.
Track Road at Line Road (#3) - This area is within the lower reaches of the watershed
and experiences backyard and basement flooding along several private properties. The
stream banks are steep and unstable which results-in excessive erosion during periods of
high stream flows. Two of the bridges within this neighborhood have been condemned
due to structural deficiencies. Failure to modify the channel to effectively accept high
flows and control erosion could result in the failure of the only remaining bridge due to
scouring, with loss of access for this area.
30
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
South Main Street (#4) - Flooding in this area occurs along Main Street (Route 28), an
adjacent apartment building and several businesses. Flooding occurs for a variety of
reasons including undersized drains and culverts, excess impervious cover, lack of an
area for detention and infiltration systems, accumulations of sediments and debris in
stream channels and culverts that block flows. This is a high priority area because of the
flooding of Route 28, a major arterial roadway.
Brook and Ash Streets (45) - There are 3-4 houses that flood due to elevated levels of
sediment within the adjacent wetland and drainage channel attributed to years of
sediment accumulation from untreated roadway discharges.
Morgan Park(96) - Flooding occurs upstream and downstream along the drainage
channel. and wetlands adjacent to the Parker Middle School and affects homes on the
northerly side of Woburn Street, easterly side of Temple Street and in Morgan Park. The
town is planning to dredge the drainage channel this year to remove over 70 years of
sedimentation. However, the dredging will provide no flood relief during moderate to
severe storm events due to the downstream capacity deficiencies.
Aberjona River Watershed Flood Hazard Areas
This is the second highest priority area for the town. The town has allocated $75,000 to
fund a study of drainage and flooding problems in this watershed. The town will be
issuing an RFP in the spring of 2008.
150 West Street, Winslow Street, Keith-Glenmere-Garrett area (#7) - There are several
houses that experience flooding because a majority of the neighborhood is in a low lying
area. There is an undersized drainage channel and conduit system that runs along the rear
lots and continues under Howard Street and Keith Road, and then northwesterly around
Glenmere to Garrett and Munroe. The flooding is influenced by the undersized culvert
and drainage channel and is compounded as the area is low lying, with wetlands and a
high water table.
Lowell Street at Intervale (#8) - There is one house and one business that experience
backyard flooding.
Willow Street/Austin Prep (0) - Flooding occurs on Willow Street, within rear yards of
several homes along the easterly side of Willow Street and within low-lying portions of
the Austin Prep School campus. The flooding is due to capacity deficiencies along the
north branch of the Aberjona River.
Main Street, Ridge Road, Waverly Road, Whittier Road, Tennyson Road and Birch
Meadow Drive (#10) - The Church of the Nazarene and more than a dozen' homes
experience property and basement flooding associated with streams and wetlands in this
area.
31
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Milepost and Haystack (#11) - There are approximately five homes that experience
property and occasional basement flooding. Recent re-development along Main Street,
tributary to this area, is required to install detention facilities that will only provide minor
improvements to the affected area.
Pine Ridge/Cherry Hill (#12) - Flooding occurs in two areas, affecting approximately six
houses. The flooding is caused by an undersized culvert system.
Ipswich River Watershed
Haverhill Street at the town line (#13) - This section of Haverhill Street is closed by
floods from Bare Meadow Brook during all major storms. Haverhill Street is an arterial
roadway and is the third highest priority for the town because of access issues. The most
likely solution to flooding in this area would be to raise the roadway and construction of a
new bridge.
Water treatment plant (#14) - The town recently joined the MWRA and closed the water
treatment plant located on the Ipswich River. The town is required to maintain the
existing wells for an emergency supply. The area in the vicinity of the water treatment
plant has experienced flooding in the past and the cessation of daily pumping may cause
increased flooding of the area as well as the emergency pump station and chlorine feed
facility necessary for the emergency well system connection.
Other Flood Hazard Areas
Hopkins Street (#15) - There is one house on this street that experiences chronic flooding
from roadway drainage from Reading and Wakefield. The property floods multiple times
per year and the property owner has previously taken legal action against a nearby
apartment complex and the town. The town has recently increased the capacity of the
apartment complexes' detention basin. However, the improvements will offer little
improvements during severe storm events as runoff from Wakefield cannot be controlled
locally without extensive drainage system replacement. Another potential mitigation
measure would be for FEMA to purchase the property.
Hunt Park (#16) This neighborhood consists of Osborne, Wilson, Elm; Green and
Eaton Streets. The stream that flows through this area comes down through Memorial
Park from north of Charles Street and enters Walkers Brook through the large floodplain
in the vicinity of Lakeview Avenue. Several houses, parts of the park and several
additional yards are affected by flooding. Street drains surcharge and this affects travel.
Water Main Breaks
The town has the normal number of water main breaks. The water department does have
a program for regularly exercising the water main gates and valves.
32
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Repetitive Loss Properties
There are no repetitive loss structures in Reading. As defined by the Community Rating
System (CRS) of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), a repetitive loss property
is any property which the NFIP has paid two or more flood claims of $1,000 or more in
any given 10-year period since 1978. For more information on repetitive losses see
http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip/replps.shtm.
Existing Multi-Hazard Mitigation Measures
There are several mitigation measures that address more than one hazard. These include
the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP), the Massachusetts State
Building Code and participation in a local Emergency Planning Committee.
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) Every community in
Massachusetts is required to have a Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan. These
plans address mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery from a variety of natural
and man-made emergencies. These plans contain, important information regarding
flooding, dam failures and winter storms. Therefore, the CEMP is a mitigation measure
that is relevant to many of the hazards discussed in this plan.
Enforcement of the State Building Code - The Massachusetts State Building Code
contains many detailed regulations regarding wind loads, earthquake resistant design,
flood-proofing and snow loads.
Participation in the Mystic Region Emergency Management Planning Committee (LEPC)
The Mystic Region LEPC serves as the LEPC for the following communities: Chelsea,
Everett, Lynnfield; Malden, Medford, Melrose, North Reading, Reading, Revere, Saugus,
Stoneham, Wakefield, Winchester, Winthrop and Woburn.
Existing Flood Hazard Mitigation Measures and Compliance with NFIP
Participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) - The town of Reading
participates in the NFIP. FEMA maintains a database on flood insurance policies and
claims. This database can be found on the FEMA website at
http://www.fema.gov/business/nfip/statistics/pcstat.shtm. The following information is
provided for the Town of Reading. ,
Flood insurance policies in force (as of August 31, 2007
18
Coverage amount of flood insurance policies
$3,262,000
Premiums paid
$8,920
Total losses (all losses submitted regardless of the status)
13
Closed losses (Losses that have been aid)
10
Open losses (Losses that have not been paid in full)
0
CWOP losses ( Losses that have been closed without payment)
3
Total payments (Total amount aid on losses)
$25,058.67
33
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Drainage Master Plan - The town is just starting on a comprehensive drainage, master
plan. The last drainage study was done in 1970 and is outdated. The town has hired SEA
as their consultant and will also be providing in-house services.. The consultant will be
completing a map of the drainage system in Fiscal Year 2007. The second phase will be
do identify problem areas and determine what is causing the problem. The third phase
will be to develop a capital improvement plan to address the problem areas. The total
project is approximately $250,000.
Street sweeping - The town does most of its street sweeping in-house but hires a
contractor in the spring to supplement the towns' efforts. The town has two vacuum
sweepers which are ten years old and will eventually need to be replaced. Every street is
swept once in the spring and other problem areas throughout the town are swept several
times a year.
Catch basin cleaning - The town has an older Vac-All and a catch basin cleaning truck..
Every basin is cleaned every other year and all the work is done in-house.
Stormwater utility - In 2007 the Town initiated a stormwater utility fee. All property
owners receive a bill similar to their water and sewer bills. The fees go to a dedicated
fund that the DPW may use for equipment and labor to maintain the drainage
infrastructure.
Roadway treatments - Because of the towns' reliance on groundwater, a salt and sand
mix is used to treat the roads. Straight salt is used only when there are severe icing
conditions. Otherwise, the town uses calcium chloride. The, use of sand contributes to
siltation in streams and within culverts.
Reading Zoning By-Laws Related to Flooding
Establishment and Purpose of Districts - The zoning bylaw establishes three overlay
districts that are relevant to hazard mitigation: the Flood Plain District, the Wetlands
Protection District and the National Flood Insurance Flood Management District.
Section 3.6.0 of the zoning bylaw states that the purpose of the Floodplain District is to
"provide that land in the Town of Reading subject to seasonal or periodic flooding shall
not be used for residence or other purposes in such a manner as to endanger the health or
safety of the occupants thereof'.
Section 3.6.1 describes the purposes of the Wetlands Protection District as follows:
a. To provide that lands in the Town of Reading subject to seasonal or
periodic flooding shall not be used for residence or other purposes in a
manner as to endanger the health or safety of the occupants thereof, or the
public generally or to burden the public with costs resulting from the
unwise individual choices of land use;
34
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND CREDITS
This plan was prepared for the Town of Reading by the Metropolitan Area Planning
Council (MAPC) under the direction of the Massachusetts Emergency Management
Agency (MEMA) and"the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation
(DCR). The plan was funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA)
Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Grant Program.
MAPC Officers
President:
Vice President:
Secretary:
Treasurer:
Executive Director:
Credits
Project Manager:
Lead Project Planner:
Mapping/GIS Services:
Jay Ash
Michelle Ciccolo
Marilyn Contreas
Grace S. Shepard
Marc. D. Draisen
Martin Pillsbury
Joan Blaustein
Allan Bishop, Tarin Comer and David dosReis
Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency
Director: Don Boyce
Department of Conservation and Recreation
Commissioner: Rick Sullivan
Town of Reading Engineering Department
Town Engineer: George Zambouras
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
1.
Introduction
1
II.
Community Profile
3
III.
Public Participation
9
IV.
Overview of Hazards and Vulnerability
11
V.
Hazards and Existing Mitigation Measures
29
VI.
Hazard Mitigation Goals and Objectives
43
VII.
Potential Mitigation Measures
45
VIII.
Regional and Inter-Community Considerations
55
IX.
Plan Adoption and Maintenance
57
X.
List of References
59
Appendix A
Hazard Mapping
61
Appendix B
Meeting Agendas
69
Appendix C
Documentation of Public Meeting
75
Appendix D
Documentation of Plan Adoption
77
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
s
LIST OF TABLES AND MAPS
Table # Table
Page
1
1999 Land Use, in Reading i
. 4
2
Attendance at the Reading Local Committee Meetings
10
3
Other Local Meetings
10
4
Attendance at the Public Meeting
10
S
Disaster and Emergency Declarations for Middlesex County
11
6
Hazard Risks Summary
12
7
Relationship of Critical Infrastructure to Hazard Areas
16
8
Estimated Damages from Hurricanes
23
9
Estimated Damages from Earthquakes
24
10
Estimated Damages from Flooding
26
11
Relationship of Potential Development Parcels to Hazard. Areas
27
12
Existing Mitigation Measures
38
13
Potential Mitigation Measures
49
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
b. To protect water supplies;
C. To assure the continuation of the natural flow patterns of the water courses
within Reading and to preserve natural flood water storage areas so as to
protect persons and property against the hazards of flood inundation.
Site Plan Requirements - Section 4.3.3.5.1 b requires that all site plans show proposed
storm water drainage facilities. Section c. requires that site plans show all wetlands and
flood plain areas. The site plan must also be accompanied by drainage calculations
performed by a registered engineer and storm drainage design must conform to the
subdivision regulation and DEP storm water regulations. One of the criteria for site plan
approval is that the plan must minimize the extent of storm water flow from the site.
National Flood Insurance Flood Management District - The boundaries of this district
are the boundaries of the National Flood Insurance Flood Management District and
includes those areas designated as Zone A and Zone B on the FIRM maps. In this
district, certain municipal recreation and water supply uses are allowed, as well as
agriculture but no new. buildings may be erected. Other uses may be allowed by special
permit if it can be proven that the land is not subject to flooding.
Wetlands Protection District - This district allows outdoor recreation, conservation,
agricultural uses and the creation of ponds. It allows the removal of silt and other debris
that may be interfering with_the natural flow of water.
Dam Failures
There are no dams in Reading.
Wind-Related Hazards
There was a tropical storm that tracked through Reading in 1861.This storm track is
shown on Map 5 in Appendix B. A' hurricane or storm track is the line that delineates the
path of the eye of a hurricane or tropical storm. The Town does experience the impacts
of the wind and rain of hurricanes and tropical storms, regardless of the storm track. The
hazard mapping indicates that the 100 year wind speed is 110 miles per hour. Tornadoes
are extremely rare in this part of Massachusetts. No tornadoes have been recorded within
the Town of Reading.
Existing Wind Hazard Mitigation Measures
Massachusetts State Building Code - The town enforces the Massachusetts State
Building Code whose provisions are generally adequate to mitigate against most wind
damage. The code's provisions are the most cost-effective mitigation measure against
tornados given the extremely low probability of occurrence. If a tornado were to occur in
Reading, damages would be extremely high due to the prevalence of older construction
and the density of development.
35
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Tree-trimming program - The town has a three person crew with a brush grinder and a
bucket truck. The crew does preventative maintenance and clean-up after storms.
Winter-Related Hazards
Winter hazards include regular snowfalls and blizzards. The average annual snowfall for
the majority of the town is 48.1 - 72.0 inches. The most severe winter storm was the
blizzard of 1978.
Existing Winter Hazard Mitigation Measures
Snow disposal - Because there is no dense downtown, there are very few areas where the
town needs to haul snow away. There are certain bad intersections where the town will
remove snow banks. The snow is then disposed of at the yard waste recycling facility or
the DPW yard.
Existing Winter-Storm Related Mitigation Measures
Section 4.3.3.5.1 a requires that all site plans show areas for snow storage after plowing.
Roadway treatments - Because of the towns' reliance on groundwater, a salt and sand
mix is used to treat the roads. Straight salt is used only when there are severe icing
conditions. Otherwise, the town uses calcium chloride.. The use of sand contributes to
siltation in streams and within culverts.
Fire-Related Hazards
The Reading Fire Department responds to approximately 26 brush fires annually. None
of these have been major in terms.of property damage and none have resulted in any
deaths. Most brush fires are accidentally caused. The incidence, of brush fires is
distributed throughout the town with only two areas with a higher frequency.
North of Fairchild Drive (917) - This is a wooded area within a residential
neighborhood..
Northeastern Reading (918) -This is a large wooded area east of Haverhill Street and
abutting Lynnfield and North Reading.
Existing Fire Hazard Mitigation Measures
Permits required for outdoor burning- The Town allows outdoor burning but a permit is
required. The resident must. go to the fire station and fill out a permit application.
36
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Subdivision review - The Fire Prevention Officer is involved in reviewing site plans for
subdivisions to ensure that there is adequate access for fire trucks and an adequate water
supply.
-Geologic Hazards
Most municipal officials acknowledged that earthquakes were the hazard for which their
community was least prepared. There have been no recorded earthquake epicenters
within the Town of Reading although residents may feel the tremors from one or more of
the infrequent earthquakes recorded within the region. The entire town is classified as
having a low risk for landslides. Information on earthquakes and landslides is shown on
Map 4 in Appendix B.
Although new construction under the most recent building codes generally will be built to
seismic standards, much of the development in the town pre-dates the most recent
building code. Massachusetts in general has a low risk for earthquakes.
Existing Geologic Hazard Mitigation Measures
Massachusetts State Building Code - The State Building Code contains a section on
designing for earthquake loads (780 CMR 1612.0). Section 1612.1 states that the
purpose of these provisions is "to minimize the hazard to life to occupants of all buildings
and non-building structures, to increase the expected performance of higher occupancy
structures as compared to ordinary structures, and to improve the capability of essential
facilities to function during and after an earthquake". This section goes on to state that
due to the complexity of seismic design, the criteria presented are the minimum
considered to be "prudent and economically justified" for the protection of life safety.
The code also states that absolute safety and prevention of damage, even in an earthquake
event with a reasonable probability of occurrence, cannot be achieved economically for
most buildings.
Section 1612.2.5 sets-up seismic hazard exposure groups and assigns all buildings to one
of these groups according to a Table 1612.2.5. Group 11 includes buildings which have a
substantial public hazard due to occupancy or use and Group III are those buildings
having essential facilities which are required for post-earthquake recovery, including fire,
rescue and police stations, emergency rooms, power-generating facilities, and
communications facilities.
37
z
O
d
N
a
N
z
O
d
Q
Lei
0
e~
H ~
w
Z. m
Z pm
a
~z
°
~U
o
z
z
z
o
w
ar
orm
~ (z
Z
y
U
w
bA
O
cd cd O ~ 't7 cn
~
rn
-V)
ti
+
.
. U
c
O
(U
y
C) O
O
.
i
~
bq
RS
(u cn
it
-
4 1a
ww
w
to
O
3 c'd N N
o
O'
O
O
C,3~
p
0
4-
~
S
E
2
4 "
5
is o
0
0
0
d U
F
E~
H
>
bn
O
C
o cri
U E
t7
-0
o
0 o
0 -0
'O O,
0
cu"
a
s ~
c 0
U. c
co
~
0
"
w
~
tr
W o
T a
U
a
C
.
p cC!
O
o
v
V) ~
U ~ 'c
o
~
En
~
.2
C.
r
03
cn
r. x w
42' .2 Z
'-i= u ~
>
7B.
cz
L=
0
~
_
Q
®
W
W H
Ems-
o
U
a~
°
.
.
u
G7
U
O
Eri
~ O
v~
V) U
La
an
b
z
W
n
-
O
~a
c
l W
.a
v
Q" bo
O
Ow
E-a
FL
E
cn
~
V)
u L.
(D
H
U a
aW
M
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 12
Existing Mitigation Measures
Type of Existing Protection
Description
Area
Effectiveness
Improvements/
Covered
/Enforcement
Changes Needed
FLOOD RELATED IUZARDS
Drainage Master Plan
The town has begun a
Town-wide.
Study is currently
Study is currently
comprehensive drainage master
underway.
underway.
plan.
Participation in the National Flood
The town participates in the
Areas
There are 18
Encourage all
Insurance Program
National Flood Insurance Program
identified on
policies in force.
eligible
and has adopted the effective FIRM
the FIRM
homeowners to
maps. The town actively enforces
maps
obtain insurance.
the floodplain regulations.
Street sweeping
Every street is swept once in the
Town-wide.
Effective.
Equipment is old
spring and other problem areas in
and will need to
town are swept several times a year.
be replaced.
Catch basin cleaning .
Every basin is cleaned every other
Town-wide.
Effective.
None.
year.
Roadway treatments
Because of the town's reliance on
Town-wide.
Effective.
None.
groundwater, a mixture of salt and
sand is used in winter.
Zoning District: National Flood Insurance
Zoning allows certain municipal
Zone A and
Effective.
None.
Flood Management District
recreation and water supply uses
Zone B on
and agriculture but no new
the FIRM
buildings. Other uses may be
maps.
allowed by special permit if land is
proven to not be subject to flooding.
39
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 12
Existing Mitigation Measures
Type of Existing Protection
Description
Area
Effectiveness
Improvements/
Covered
/Enforcement
Changes Needed
Floodplain District
The purpose into ensure that land
subject to seasonal or periodic
flooding shall not be used for
residences or iri other ways that
endanger the health or safety of
residents.
Site Plan Section 4.3.3.5.1 (b)
All site plans must show storm
Town-wide.
Effective.
None.
water drainage facilities as well as
wetlands and. flood zones. Plans
must show that development will
minimize the extent of storm water
flow from the site.
Wetlands Protection Overlay District
Allows outdoor recreation,
Town-wide.
Effective.
None.
conservation and agricultural uses.
Allows the removal of silt and
debris that interfere with the natural
flow of water.
DAM FAILURES
There are no dams in Reading.
40
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 12
Existing Mitigation Measures
Type of Existing Protection
Description
Area
Covered
Effectiveness
/Enforcement
Improvements/
Changes Needed
WIND-RELATED HAZARDS -
Massachusetts State Building Code
The town enforces the
Town-wide.
Effective for most
None.
Massachusetts State Building Code.
situations except
severe storms
Tree trimming program
The town has a three person crew
Town-wide.
Effective.
None.
with a brush grinder and a bucket
truck. The crew does preventative
maintenance and clean-up after
storms.
WINTER-RELATED HAZARDS
There are no specific measures beyond
regular salting and sanding of the roads and
local plowing.
FIRE RELATED HAZARDS
Permits required for outdoor burning
Residents must obtain a permit by
Town-wide.
Effective.
None.
filling out an application at the fire
station.
Subdivision review
The Fire Prevention Officer is
Town-wide.
Effective.
None.
involved in site plan review to
ensure there is access for fire trucks
and an adequate water supply.
41
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 12
Existing Mitigation Measures
Type of Existing Protection
Description
Area
Effectiveness
Improvements/
Covered
/Enforcement
Changes Needed
GEOLOGIC HAZARDS
Massachusetts State Building Code
The town enforces the state building
Town-wide.
Effective for most
None.
code:
situations.
42
METRO BOSTON NORTH/WEST MULTI-HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
THE READING ANNEX
VI. HAZARD MITIGATION GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The Reading Local Multiple Hazard Community Planning Team met on November 7,
2007. At that meeting, the members reviewed and discussed options for setting goals and
objectives for the Multihazard Mitigation Plan The following nine goals and objectives
resulted from that discussion and were endorsed by the team:
1. Prevent and reduce the loss of life, injury and property damages resulting from all
major natural hazards..
2. Identify and seek funding for measures to mitigate or eliminate each known
significant flood hazard area.
3. Integrate hazard mitigation planning as an integral factor in all relevant municipal
departments, committees and boards.
• Ensure that all relevant municipal departments consider hazard mitigation
in the course of carrying out their responsibilities.
• Review zoning regulations to ensure that the ordinance incorporates all
reasonable hazard mitigation provisions.
• Ensure that all relevant municipal departments have the resources to
continue to enforce codes and regulations related to hazard mitigation.
4. Prevent and reduce the damage to public infrastructure resulting from all hazards.
Begin to assess the vulnerability of municipal buildings and infrastructure to
damage from an earthquake. '
Maintain existing mitigation infrastructure in good condition.
5. Encourage the business community, major institutions and non-profits to work
with the Town to develop, review and implement the hazard mitigation plan.
6. Work with surrounding communities, state, regional and federal agencies to
ensure regional cooperation and solutions for hazards affecting multiple
communities.
• Continue to participate in the Mystic Region LEPC.
7. Ensure that future development meets federal, state and local standards for
preventing and reducing the impacts of natural hazards.
8. Educate the public about natural hazards and mitigation measures that can be
undertaken by property-owners.
43
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
VII. POTENTIAL MITIGATION MEASURES
What is hazard mitigation?
Hazard mitigation means to permanently reduce or alleviate the losses of life, injuries and
property resulting from natural and human-made hazards through long-term strategies.
These long-term strategies include planning, policy changes, programs, projects and other
activities. FEMA currently has three mitigation grant programs: the Hazards Mitigation
Grant Program (HGMP), the Pre-Disaster Mitigation program (PDM), and the Flood
Mitigation. Assistance (FMA) program. The three links below provide additional
information on these programs.
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/hmgp/index.shtm
http://www.fema.gov/governm.ent/grant/12dm/index.shtm
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/fma/index.shtm
Identification and Prioritization of Potential Mitigation Measures
Process for Setting Priorities
The decision on priorities was made at a meeting of the local committee. The method
used was to reach consensus through discussion, rather than taking a vote. Priority setting
was based on local knowledge of the hazard areas, cost information and an assessment of
benefits.
MAPC staff attended a Benefit-Cost Analysis Training Course on October 31-November
1, 2005 and a workshop on project development on October 23, 2007. Information from
these two training workshops was shared with local officials when MAPC made a Power
Point presentation at the June 26, 2008 meeting of the Metro Boston North/West Multi-
Hazard Mitigation Community Planning Team: This was done in order to help local
officials understand the role of a benefit/cost analysis in developing and evaluating
potential mitigation projects and to provide guidance concerning project development.
Based on information gained from the Benefit-Cost Analysis training and a review of the
STAPLEE criteria (a checklist for evaluating social, technical, administrative, political,
legal, economic and environmental issues) MAPC instructed town staff to take into
consideration factors such as the number of homes and businesses affected, whether or
not road closures occurred and what impact closures had on delivery of emergency
services and the local economy, anticipated project costs, whether the town had the
technical and administrative capability to carry out the mitigation measures, whether any
environmental constraints existed, and whether the town would be able to justify the costs
relative to the anticipated benefits.
45
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
HiLFh Prioritv Mitigation Measures
Potential Flood Hazard Mitigation Measures
The town is in the process of funding two drainage studies. The sum of $200,000 has
been appropriated for a hydraulic and hydrological study, of the Saugus River watershed
and $75,000 has been allocated for a study of the Aberjona River watershed. The town
believes that it would be prudent to wait for the recommendations from these studies .
before identifying specific projects to be implemented in the future. Upon completion of
these studies, the town will be in a better position to select potentially fundable projects
to move forward with.
The town has identified the entire Saugus River watershed as the highest priority for
action and the Aberjona River watershed as the second highest priority. Within those
watersheds, certain specific flood hazard areas are particularly of concern because of
access issues. Specific flood mitigation areas include the following:
1. Sunnyside and Fairview - This area will be included in the Saugus River watershed
study.
2. New Crossing at the DPW Garage - This is a high priority for the town because it
impacts access to the DPW facility.
3. Track Road at Line Road - This is a critical area because, of the possibility of flood
damage to -the only remaining bridge in this area.
4. South Main Street - This is a high priority area because of flooding on a major
arterial, Route 28.
5. Brook and Ash Streets - This area could benefit from the removal of sediments in the
drainage channel
6. Morgan Park - The town will be dredging the drainage channel to remove years of
accumulated sediment. This is likely to improve flooding from smaller storms only.
7. 150 West Street - This area has an undersized culvert and drainage channel which
may need to be upgraded.
8. Lowell Street at Intervale
9. Willow StreetlAustin Prep
10. Main Street (Church of the Nazarene) and neighboring streets.
11. Milepost and Haystack
46
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
12. Pine RidgelCherry Hill
13 Haverhill Street at the town line
Potential Brush Fire Mitigation Measures
14 Additional fir fighting equipment - The Fire Department has identified the following
equipment needs for fighting brush fires: lightweight hose and portable small pumps for
pickup trucks.
Measures to Ensure Compliance with NFIP
15. Local Bylaws and Regulations Review and revise local bylaws and regulations on
storm water and floodplains.
16. Land Acquisition /Protection of Open Space - Protection of open space is important
to ensure future development does not increase flooding. The town should continue its
efforts for open space,purchases and negotiate conservation restrictions and easements
Medium Priority Mitigation Measures
Additional potential flood mitigation areas that will be evaluated in the town's two
drainage studies that were given a medium priority by the local team include:
17. Hopkins Street
18. Hunt Park
As with the high priority area, when the drainage studies are completed the town will
evaluate which specific mitigation projects to pursue for implementation.
Introduction to Summary of Potential Mitigation Measures (Table 13)
Description of the Mitigation Measure - The description of each mitigation measure is
brief and cost information is given only if cost data were already available from the
community. The cost data represent a point in time and would need to be adjusted for
inflation and for any changes or refinements in the design of a particular mitigation ,
measure.
Priority - The designation of high, medium or low priority was done at the meeting of the
Local Multiple Hazard Community Planning Team meeting. . In determining project '
priorities, the local team considered potential benefits and project costs. The designations
reflect discussion and a general consensus developed at the meeting but could change as
conditions in the community change.
47
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Implementation Responsibility - The designation of implementation responsibility was
done by MAPC based on a general knowledge of what each municipal department is
responsible for. It is likely that most mitigation measures will require that several
departments work together and assigning staff is the sole responsibility of the governing
body of each community.
Time Frame - The time frame was based on a combination of the priority for that
measure, the complexity of the measure and whether or not the measure is conceptual, in
design, or already designed and awaiting funding. Because the time frame for this plan is
five years, the timing for all mitigation measures has been kept within this framework.
The identification of a likely time frame is not meant to constrain a community from
taking advantage of funding opportunities as they arise.
Potential Funding Sources - This column attempts to identify the most likely sources of
funding for a specific measure. The information on potential funding sources in this table
is preliminary and varies depending on a number of factors. These factors include
whether or not a mitigation measure has been studied, evaluated or designed or is still in
the conceptual stages. MEMA and DCR assisted MAPC in reviewing the potential
eligibility for hazard mitigation funding. Each grant program and agency has specific.
eligibility requirements that would need to be taken into consideration. In most
instances, the measure will require a number of different funding sources. Identification
of a potential funding source in this table does not guarantee that a project will be eligible
for, or selected for funding. Upon adoption of this plan, the local committee responsible
for its implementation should begin to explore the funding.sources in more detail.
Additional information on funding; sources - The best way to determine eligibility for a
particular funding source is to review the project with a staff person at the funding
agency. The following websites provide an overview of programs and funding sources.
Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) - The website for the North Atlantic district
office is http://www.nae.usace.army.mil/. The ACOE provides assistance-in a
number of types of projects including shoreline/streambank protection, flood
damage reduction, flood plain management services and planning services.
Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA)- The grants page
http://www.mass.gov/dem/programs/mitigate/grants.htm has a useful table that
compares eligible projects for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and the Flood
Mitigation Assistance Program.
United States Department of Agriculture - The USDA has programs by which
communities can get grants for fire fighting needs.. See the link below for some
example.
http://www.rurdev.usda.-gov/rd/newsroom/2002/cfq.html
48
METRO BOSTON NORTHIWEST MULTI-HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
THE READING ANNEX
Table 13
Potential Mitigation Measures
Hazard Areal
Implementation
Estimated
7
Potential
Miti ation Measure
Priori
Responsibility
Time Frame
Cost
Funding Sources
High Priori Miti a
tion Measures
1. Sunnyside and
First highest
DPW
Scheduling to be.
Solutions will be
Town funds;
Fairview
priority
addressed
identified as part of
FEMA grants.
following
the Saugus River
completion of the
drainage study.
Saugus River
drainage study.
2. New Crossing at the
First highest
DPW
Scheduling to be
Solutions will. be
Town funds;
DPW Garage
priority
addressed
identified as part of
FEMA grants.
following
the Saugus River
completion of the
drainage study.
Saugus River
drainage study..
3. Track Road at Line
First highest
DPW
Scheduling to be
Solutions will be
Town funds;
Road
priority
addressed
identified as part of
FEMA grants.
following
the Saugus River
completion of the
drainage study.
Saugus River
drainage study.
4. South Main Street
First highest
DPW
Scheduling to be
Solutions will be
Town funds;
priority
addressed
identified as part of
FEMA grants.
following
the Saugus River
completion of the
drainage study.
Saugus River
drainage study.
49
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 13
Potential Mitigation Measures
Hazard Area/
Implementation
Estimated
Potential
Mitigation Measure
Priori
-Res onsibili
Time Frame
Cost
Funding Sources
5. Brook and Ash Street
First highest
DPW
Scheduling to be
Solutions will be
Town funds;
priority
addressed
identified as part of
FEMA grants.
following
the Saugus River
completion of the
drainage study.
Saugus River
drainage study.
6. Morgan Park
First highest
DPW
Scheduling to be
Solutions will be
Town funds;
priority
addressed
identified as part of.
FEMA grants.
following
the Saugus River
completion of the
drainage study.
Saugus River
drainage study.
7. 150 West Street and
Second
DPW
Scheduling to be
Solutions will be
Town funds;
surrounding streets
highest
addressed
identified as part of
FEMA grants.
priority
following
the Aberjona River
completion of the
drainage study.
Aberjona River
drainage study.
8. Lowell Street at
Second
DPW
Scheduling to be
Solutions will be
Town funds;
Intervale
highest
addressed
identified as part of
FEMA grants.
priority
following
the Aberjona River
completion of the
drainage study.
Aberjona River
drainage study.
50
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 13
Potential Mitigation Measures
Hazard Area/
Implementation
Estimated.
Potential
Mitigation Measure
Priori
Responsibility
Time Frame
Cost
Funding Sources
9. Willow Street/Austin
Second
DPW
Scheduling to be
Solutions will-be
Town funds;
Prep
highest
addressed
identified as part of
FEMA grants.
priority
following
the Aberjona River
completion of the
drainage study.
Aberjona River
drainage study.
10. Main Street (Church
Second
DPW
Scheduling to be
Solutions will be
Town funds;
of the Nazarene) and
highest
addressed
identified as part of
FEMA grants.
neighboring streets.
priority.
following
the Aberjona River
completion of the
drainage study.
Aberjona River
drainage study.
I I.Milepost and
Second
DPW
Scheduling to be
Solutions will be
Town funds;
Haystack
highest
addressed
identified as part of
FEMA grants.
priority.
following
the Aberjona River
completion of the
drainage study.
Aberjona River
drainage study.
12. Pine Ridge/Cherry
Second
DPW
Scheduling to be
Solutions will be
Town funds;
Hill
highest
addressed'
identified as part of
FEMA grants.
priority
following
the Aberjona River
completion of the
drainage study.
Aberjona River
drainage study.
51
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 13
Potential Mitigation Measures
Hazard Area/'
Implementation
Estimated
Potential
Mitigation Measure
Priori
Responsibility
Time Frame
Cost
Funding Sources
13 Haverhill Street at
Third highest
DPW
Beyond the five
To be determined.
Town funds;
the town line
priority.
year time frame for
FEMA grants.
this plan.
14. Brush Fires -
High
DPW
Beyond the five
To be determined.
Town funds;
Additional firefighting
year time frame for
FEMA grants.
equipment (lightweight
this plan.
hose and portable small
pumps)
Measures to Ensure "
Com liance with NFIP
15. Review and revise
Medium/NFIP
Planning /
Medium Term
Town Staff or
Town, EOEEA or
local bylaws and
Conservation /
consultant (cost
DEP Grants
regulations on storm
Engineering
TBD)
water and floodplains
16. Land Acquisition/
Medium/NFrP
Conservation
Ongoing and Long-
Varies significantly
Town, CPA funds,
Protection of Open
term
from town staff time.
EOEEA, gifts
Space
to $1 million or more
to purchase land
Medium Priori Mi
ti ation Meas
ures.
17. Hunt Park
Medium
DPW
2010 or_beyond.
To be determined.
Town funds;
FEMA grants.
18. Hopkins Street
Medium
DPW
2010 or beyond.
To be determined.
Town funds;
FEMA grants.
52
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Table 13
Potential Mitigation Measures
Hazard Areal Implementation Estimated Potential
Mitigation Measure Priori Res onsibili Time Frame Cost Funding Sources
Low Priori Mitigation Measures
19. Water treatment Low DPW Beyond the five To be determined. Town funds;
plant year time frame for FEMA grants.
this plan.
Abbreviations Used in Table 13
FEMA Mitigation Grants includes:
FMA = Flood Mitigation Assistance Program.
HMGP = Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.
PDM = Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program
ACOE = Army Corps of Engineers.
MHD = Massachusetts Highway Department.
EOT = Executive Office of Transportation.
DCR = Department of Conservation and Recreation
DHSIEOPS = Department of Homeland Security/Emergency Operations
EPA/DEP (SRF) = Environmental Protection Agency/Department of Environmental Protection (State Revolving Fund)
USDA = United States Department of Agriculture
53
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
VIII. REGIONAL AND INTER-COMMUNITY CONSIDERATIONS
Some. hazard mitigation issues are strictly local. The problem originates primarily within
the municipality and can be solved at the municipal level. Other issues are inter-
community issues that involve cooperation between two or. more municipalities. There is
a third level of mitigation which is regional; involving a state, regional or federal agency
or an issue that involves three or more municipalities.
Regional Partners
In many communities, mitigating natural hazards, particularly flooding, is more than a
local issue. The drainage systems that serve these communities are a complex system of
storm drains, roadway drainage structures,. pump stations and other facilities owned and
operated by a wide array of agencies including but not limited to the Town of Reading,
the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA), Massachusetts Highway
Department (MHD) and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA). The
planning, construction, operations and maintenance of these structures are integral to the
flood hazard mitigation efforts of communities. These agencies must be considered the
communities regional partners in hazard mitigation. These agencies also operate under
the same constraints as communities do including budgetary and staffing constraints and
numerous competing priorities. In the sections that follow, the plan includes
recommendations for activities to be undertaken by these other agencies. Implementation
of these recommendations will require that all parties work together to develop solutions.
Regional Issues
Saugus River Watershed - The Town of Reading recognizes that planned improvements
within Reading may impact communities downstream and therefore, the mitigation of
flood damage to roadways and properties within the Saugus River watershed is a true
urban challenge making resolution of flooding in this watershed the town's highest
priority.
55
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
IX. PLAN ADOPTION AND MAINTENANCE
Plan Adoption
The Reading Hazard Mitigation Plan was adopted by the Board of Selectmen on [ADD
DATE]. See Appendix D for documentation. The plan,was approved by FEMA on
[ADD DATE] for a five-year period that will expire on [ADD DATE].
Plan Maintenance
MAPC worked with the Reading Hazard Mitigation Planning Team to prepare this plan
This group will continue to meet on an as-needed basis to function as the Local Hazard
Mitigation. Implementation Team, with one town official designated as the coordinator.
Additional members could be added to the local implementation group from businesses,
non-profits and institutions.
Implementation Schedule
Bi-Annual Survey on Progress- The coordinator of the Local Hazard Mitigation
Implementation Team will prepare and distribute a biannual survey in years two and four
of the plan. The survey will be distributed to all of the local implementation team
members and other interested local stakeholders. The survey will poll the members on
any changes or revisions to the plan that may be needed, progress and accomplishments
for implementation, and any new hazards or problem areas that have been identified.
This information will be used to prepare a report or addendum to the Reading Hazard
Mitigation Plan. The Local. Hazard Mitigation Implementation Team will have primary
responsibility for tracking progress and updating the plan.
Develop a Year Four Update - At the beginning of the fourth year after plan adoption,
the coordinator of the Local Hazard Mitigation Implementation Team will convene the
team to begin to prepare for an update of the plan, which will be required by the end of
year five in order to maintain the town's approved plan status with FEMA. The team will
use the information from the year four biannual review to identify the needs and priorities
for the plan update.
Prepare and Adopt an Updated Local Hazard Mitigation Plan - FEMA's approval of this
plan is valid for five years; by which time an updated plan must be prepared and
approved in order to maintain the town's approved plan status and its eligibility for
FEMA mitigation grants. Because of the lead time required to secure a planning grant,
prepare an updated plan, and complete the approval and adoption of an updated plan, the
local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team should begin the process at the beginning of
Year 4. This will help the town avoid a lapse in its approved plan status and grant
eligibility when the current plan expires.
At this point, the Local Hazard Mitigation Implementation Team may decide to
undertake the update themselves, contract with the Metropolitan Area Planning Council.
57
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
to update the plan or to hire another consultant. However the Hazard Mitigation
Implementation Team decides to update the plan, the group will need to review the
current FEMA hazard mitigation plan guidelines for any changes. The update of the
Reading Hazard Mitigation Plan will be forwarded to MEMA and DCR for review and to
FEMA for approval.
Integration of the Plans with Other Planning Initiatives
Upon approval of the Reading Hazard Mitigation Plan by FEMA, the Local Hazard
Mitigation Implementation Team will provide all interested parties and implementing
departments with a copy of the plan and will initiate a discussion regarding how the plan
can be integrated into that department's ongoing work. At a minimum, the plan will be
reviewed and discussed with the following departments:
Police Department
Fire Department
Emergency Management
Engineering Department
Highway Department
Department of Public Works
Parks-and Recreation Department
Planning and Community Development Department
Conservation Commission
Board of Health
The actions in the hazard mitigation plan will be incorporated into the town's Capital
Improvement Plan and departmental budgets. The actions will also be incorporated into
the Community Development Plan and Open Space Plan where relevant. Hazard
mitigation concerns are already included in the zoning ordinance as described on Page
32-33.
Other groups that will be coordinated with include large institutions (hospitals, colleges),
Chambers of Commerce, land conservation organizations and watershed groups. The
plans will also be posted on a community's website with the caveat that the local
coordinator will review the plan for sensitive information that would be inappropriate for
public posting. The posting of the plan on a web site will include a mechanism for
citizen feedback such as an e-mail address to send comments.
58
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
X. LIST OF REFERENCES
In addition to the specific reports listed below, much of the technical information for this
annex came from meetings with town department heads and staff.
Town of Reading Zoning Bylaws, February, 2005.
Town of Reading, MA 2005 Master Plan
Town of Reading General Bylaws, Amended through February, 2006.
HAZUS-MH: Earthquake Event Report.
HAZUS-MH Hurricane Event Report.
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, MacConnell Land Use Statistics, 1999.
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Flood Insurance Rate Maps for Reading, MA
MA Executive Office of Environmental Affairs, Buildout Analysis for Reading, MA
2000
Metropolitan Area Planning Council, Geographic Information Systems Lab
Metropolitan Area Planning Council, Regional Plans and Data
59
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
APPENDIX A
HAZARD MAPPING
The MAPC GIS (Geographic Information Systems) Lab produced a series of maps for
each community. Some of the data came from the Northeast States Emergency
Consortium (NESEC). More information on NESEC can be found at
http://www.serve.com/NESEC/. Due to the various sources for the data and varying
levels of accuracy, the identification of an area'as being in one of the hazard categories
must be considered as a general classification that should always be supplemented with
more local knowledge. The documentation for some of the hazard maps was incomplete
as well.
The map series consists of four panels with two maps each plus one map taken from the
State Hazard Mitigation Plan.
Ma 1.
Population Density
Map 2.
Potential Development
Map 3.
Flood Zones
Ma 4. -
Earthquakes and Landslides
Ma 5.
Hurricanes and Tornadoes
Ma 6.
Average Snowfall
Map 7.
Composite Natural Hazards
Map 8.
Hazard Areas
Mapl: Population Density - This map uses the US Census block data for 2000 and
shows population density as the number of people per acre in seven categories with 60 or
more people per acre representing the highest density areas.
Map 2: Potential Development - This map shows potential future developments, and
critical infrastructure sites. MAPC consulted with town staff to determine areas that were
likely to be developed or redeveloped in the future.
Map 3: Flood Zones - The map of flood zones used the FEMA Q3 Flood Zones as its
source. For more information, refer to http://www.fema.gov/fhm/fq_g3.shtm.
The definitions of the flood zones are described in Appendix III and in more detail at
http://www.fema.gov/fhm/fq_term.shtm. The flood zone map for each community also
shows critical infrastructure and municipally owned and protected open space.
Map 4: Earthquakes and Landslides - This information came from NESEC. For most
communities, there was no data for earthquakes because only the epicenters of an
earthquake are mapped.
61
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
The landslide information shows areas with either a low susceptibility or a moderate
susceptibility to landslides based on mapping of geological formations. This mapping is
highly general in nature. For more information on how landslide susceptibility was
mapped, refer to http://pubs.usgs.gov/pp/pl 183/ppl 183.html.
Map S: Hurricanes and Tornadoes - This map shows a number of different items. The
map includes the storm tracks for both hurricanes and tropical storms. This information
must be viewed in context. A storm track only shows where the eye of the storm passed
through. In most cases, the effects of the wind and rain from these storms were felt in
other communities even if the track was not within that community. This map also shows
the location of tornadoes with a classification as to the level of damages. What appears
on the map varies by community since not all communities experience the same wind-
related events. These maps also show the 100 year wind speed and hurricane surge areas.
Hurricane storm surge is an abnormal rise in sea level accompanying a hurricane or other
intense storm. Along a coastline a hurricane will cause waves on top of the surge.
Hurricane Surge is estimated with the use of a computer model called SLOSH. SLOSH
stands for Sea Lake and Overland Surge from Hurricanes. The SLOSH models are .
created and run by the National Hurricane Center. The SLOSH model results are merged
with ground elevation data to determine areas that will be subject to flooding from
various categories of hurricanes. Hurricane categories are defined by the Saffir-Simpson
Scale. Appendix 17V contains a description of the Saffir-Simpson Scale.
Map 6. Average Snowfall - - This map shows the average snowfall and open space. It
also shows storm tracks for nor'easters, if any storms tracked through the community.
Map 7: Composite Natural Hazards - This map shows four categories of composite
natural hazards for areas of existing development. The hazards included in this map are
100 year wind speeds of 110 mph or higher, low and moderate landslide risk, FEMA Q3
flood zones (100 year and 500 year) and hurricane surge inundation areas. Areas with
only one hazard were considered to be low hazard areas. Moderate areas have two of the
hazards present. High hazard areas have three hazards present and severe hazard areas
have four hazards present.
Map 8: Hazard Areas - For each community, locally identified hazard areas are overlaid
on an aerial photograph dated April, 2001. The critical infrastructure sites are also
shown. The source of the aerial photograph is Mass GIS.
62
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
moo„ r-
p
I-T
I ;y a ? -z
a 'AL
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE SITES
11 Do
t' S
Sda Raa&rTnmp~ tian
- Cotes
3'r3ats: -
~+r~~ Jixautu
1
63
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
hi9P
FLOiOI) Zo-NES f`E, _1 THQLAKES _ -7ND L ADS DES
hiA° A .
J C
1 r; - -
J/ U3 ty E` F V e Ff t { lv- 1 F'\
AN"
t-
ILL.
31
r j
J
i
r ~
jj c F~✓ VKII J
i ~.-R..d Zones
i n-tm~
I
..j
~
L-&id:s
Sdes Etondst;;znsportaCOn
awl
Earfhgmte
c
t
_
w
-
e
sec
CRITICAL UNFRASTRUCT13RE SITES
-
~
_
~ -
~ ~ -
+ L
'M~z{u~Tan~m..sta mnu tn't _
64
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
Hi RIC ES 1D TaI2i ADO S
"'ERAGE'SNONATALL
J
Y t o f ~ S
r
/
~
F
ti
1, V
ti
f 1
~ ~`V 'i'
~ ~
}r'
~
~ - ~ j +y r ~ ~L1
z~] '~J is 1 . II t ! 1
~
~
,~Y 3
t't \ ~
P' ~ ~ i ~ r II ~
.1/ 1 ` -
1 t ♦ Y. 3'3
LLL
i
Oil,
Zs-
Smm lrx&L
'.,1- rl f -
t
~
I <
7 1 ,l -4 T9tEidOt3
~
I
Y^
i ~ ~ e Stt3~~ILCGfI
s
l
n
t
mSt
r SAGS Roxd5 f Tr=Tortada*
wu
a
C
:
_
-
a
x:c
Hyam
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE SITES
t
:zr
~i
- -
_
-
-
a
_
T
. 1: ~ t~._~ ern. l i'✓ ~ f-~~yrf _
_t}-~
Ji
65
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
collPosrrF- \,~TT-RATIHA7kRDS ice'
x.A, z ~xv A-uE A
777-1,
6,
Z
f ~fi
Ca~arittSatcrai
7
a-rd
>rv:.mn••
5
~ f
t
c ~
iwz ~ Y
x r-L
Hid
~~y Rnads rTran:paaafiac
a Gc-al ~Faaae`s5m -.ecaE
Hsdm - L.m2ai
Gac3:ias as
CRITICAL LNTRASTRUCTURE SITES
67
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
APPENDIX B
MEETING AGENDAS
NORTH SUBURBAN REGIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION
COMMUNITY PLANNING TEAM
AND
READING LOCAL
HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING TEAM
69
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
~ i'€ MITT ROMNEY, GOVERNOR
Cristine McCombs Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency
Director 400 WORCESTER ROAD, FRAMINGHAM, MA 01702-5399 508-820-2000 FAX 508-820=1404
,Department of Conservation and Recreation
251 CAUSEWAY STREET, SUITE 600-900, BOSTON, MA 02114-2104 617-626-1250 FAX 617-626-1351
Metropolitan Area Planning Council
60 TEMPLE PLACE, 6TH FLOOR, BOSTON, MA 02111 617-451-2770 FAX 617-482-7185
Stephen H. Burrnngton
COMMISSIONER
North Suburban
Hazard Mitigation Community Planning Team
First Meeting
WEDNESDAY, JULY 26, 2006, 9:30 AM
MAPC
Community Room
Marc D. Draisen
Wakefield. Public Safety Building
Executive Director
1 Union Street, Wakefield, MA
AGENDA
METRO NORTHWEST
PRE-DISASTER
MTITGATIONON PLAN
9:30 WELCOME Et INTRODUCTIONS (Please sign contact sheet
9:45 OVERVIEW OF FEDERAL DISASTER MITIGATION ACT a
NORTH SUBURBAN
PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION PLANNING
Burlington
Presentation, Questions Et Discussion
e
--Martin Pillsbury, Manager of Regional Planning, MAPC
Read
ing g
ead
Stoneham
10:15 GETTING STARTED: THE METRO NORTHWEST PRE-DISASTER
Wakefield
MITIGATION PLAN - NORTH SUBURBAN SUBREGION
Wilmington
Woburn
Review of Scope of Work It Schedule
Joan Blaustein, MAPC Senior Planner
• Questions Et Discussion - Local Issues Et Priorities
11:00 PREVIEW OF MAPPING AND DATABASES FOR THE PLAN
• Examples from the North Shore Et Metro Boston PDM Plans
--Alan Bishop, GIS Manager, MAPC
11:20 NEXT STEPS / MEETING SCHEDULE
70
METRO BOSTON NORTHWEST MULTI-HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
THE READING ANNEX
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
DEVAL PATRICK, GOVERNOR
Ken McBride Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency
acting Director 400 WORCESTER ROAD, FRAMINGHAM, MA 01702-5399 508-820-2000 FAX 508-820-1404
Department of Conservation and Recreation
251 CAUSEWAY STREET, SUITE 600-900, BOSTON, MA 02114-2104 617-626-1250 FAX 617-626-135
Metropolitan Area Planning Council
60 TEMPLE PLACE, 6TH FLOOR, BOSTON, MA 02111 617-451-2770 FAX 617-482-7185
Priscilla E. Geigis
ACTING COMMISSIONER North Suburban
Hazard Mitigation Community Planning Team
Second Regional Meeting
MAPC WEDNESDAY, MARCH 28, 2007, 930 AM
Marc D. Draisen Wakefield Public Safety Budding
Executive Director 1 Union Street, Wakefield, MA
METRO NORTHWEST
HAZARD MITIGATION 9:30 WELCOME, INTRODUCTIONS It OVERVIEW OF AGENDA
PLAN
Martin Pillsbury, Project Manager
NORTH SUBURBAN 9:40 REVIEW OF HAZARD MAPPING AND CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
Burlington DATA COLLECTION
Lynnfield
Read
Readiing g • Allan Bishop, GIS Manager, will present the draft regional hazard map
and a sample community map,
Wakefield Stoneham • Draft local hazard maps will be distributed on CD ROM to all towns
Wa
Wilmington • Update on Critical Facilities data base and process for local review
Woburn and QA/QC of draft hazard maps and data
10:30 UPDATE ON LOCAL PLANS
• Joan Blaustein will discuss local and regional issues emerging in the
planning process
• Review next steps in mapping localized hazard areas
• Martin Pillsbury will review plan approval requirements
10:45 QUESTIONS AND DISCSSION WITH TEAM MEMBERS
11:00 NEXT STEPS / MEETING SCHEDULE / ADJOURN
71
METRO BOSTON NORTHWEST MULTI-HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
THE READING ANNEX
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
i DEVAL PATRICK, GOVERNOR
Dan Boyce Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency
Director 400 WORCESTER ROAD, FRAMINGHAM, MA 01702-5399 508-820-2000 FAX 508-820-1404
Department of Conservation and Recreation
251 CAUSEWAY STREET, SUITE 600-900, BOSTON, MA 02114-2104 617=626-1250 FAX 617-626-1351
Metropolitan Area Planning Council
60 TEMPLE PLACE, 6TH FLOOR, BOSTON, MA 02111 617-451-2770 FAX 617-482-7185
Richard Sullivan
COMMISSIONER North Suburban,
Hazard Mitigation Community Planning Team
Iv1A P~ THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 20077 9:30 AM
Wakefield Public Safety Building
Marc D. Draisen
Executive Director 1 Union Street, Wakefield, MA
9:30 WELCOME, INTRODUCTIONS Et OVERVIEW OF AGENDA
• Martin Pillsbury, Project Manager
METRO NORTHWEST
HAZARD MITIGATION 9:40 REVIEW OF HAZARD MAPPING AND CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
PLAN DATA COLLECTION
NORTH SUBURBAN • Allan Bishop, GIS Manager, will present the final regional hazard
Burlington maps and an example set of community maps
Lynnfield • Final hazard maps and Critical Facilities data bases will be distributed
Reading to all towns (hard copy and on CD-ROM)
Stoneham
Wakefield 10:00 UPDATE ON LOCAL PLANS
Wilmington • Update on local PDM annexes (Joan Blaustein)
Woburn Review of next steps for plan completion, review, and approval
10:15 REGIONAL ISSUES IN THE PDM PLAN
• Facilitated discussion to identify and prioritize key regional issues
that should be included in the Regional PDM Plan for North Suburban
10:35 BRIEFING ON FEMA TRAINING FOR PROJECT DEVELOPMENT
11:00 NEXT STEPS / MEETING SCHEDULE / ADJOURN
72
READING HAZARD'MITIGATION PLAN
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
DEVAL PATRICK, GOVERNOR
Dan Boyce. Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency
Director 400 WORCESTER ROAD, FRAMINGHAM, MA 01702-5399 508-820-2000 FAX 508-820-1404
Department of Conservation and Recreation
251 CAUSEWAY STREET, SUITE 600-900, BOSTON, MA 02114-2104 617-626-1250 FAX 617-626-1351
Metropolitan Area Planning Council
60 TEMPLE PLACE, 6TH FLOOR, BOSTON, MA 02111 617-451-2770 FAX 617-482-7185
Richard Sullivan
COMMISSIONER North Suburban
Hazard.Mitigation Community Planning Team
MAPC' THURSDAY, JUNE 267 2008, 10:00 AM
Community Room
Marc D. rQ1Sen
Executive Director Wakefield Public Safety Building.
METRONORTHiwEST 1 Union Street, Wakefield, MA
HAZARD MITIGATION
PLAN 10:00 WELCOME a INTRODUCTIONS (Please sign contact sheet)
10:05 REVIEW OF THE REGIONAL HAZARD MITIGATION MAP SERIES
NORTH SUBURBAN
Martin Pillsbury will present an overview of the regional
Burlington
Hazard Mitigation maps (copies will be distributed on CD-ROM)
Lynnrfeld
Reading
10:25 REGIONAL GOALS AND OBACTIVES, ISSUES, RECOMMENDATIONS
Stoneham
Wakefield
Martin Pillsbury will review the draft goals and objectives for the
Wilmington
Regional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Joan Blaustein will facilitate a
Woburn
discussion of the regional issues and recommendations for the plan.
11:00 OVERVIEW OF FEMA BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS FOR GRANTS
Joan Blaustein will present an overview of FEMA's requirements for
Benefit-Cost Analysis for grant applications for mitigation projects.
11:25 REVIEW OF NEXT STEPS:
• Complete remaining local annexes and public meetings
Plan review and approval by MEMA Et FEMA
• Plan Adoption by the towns (Selectmen/City Council)
• Final Approval letter issued by FEMA
73
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
The Reading Multi-Hazard Mitigation Planning Team
November 7, 2007
Reading Town Hall
9:00 - 10:30 AM
1. Welcome and introductions
2. Review of grant scope of work and progress to date
3. Maps and critical infrastructure
4. Review aerial photograph showing natural hazard areas and future development
5. Develop goals and objectives
6. Discuss potential mitigation measures
7. Next steps
74
READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
TOWN OF READING
NOTICE OF MEETING - BOARD OF SELECTMEN
DATE: August 5, 2008
CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m.
PLACE: Selectmen's Meeting Room
16 Lowell Street, Reading, Massachusetts
OFFICE HOURS - Richard Schubert 6:30
1) Executive Session 7:00
a. Labor Negotiations
b. Approval of Minutes
June 3, 2008
2) Reports and Comments
a. Selectmen's Liaison Reports and Comments
b. Public Comment
C. Town Manager's/Assistant Town Manager's
Report
3)
Proclamations/Certificates.of Appreciation
4)
Personnel & Appointments
5)
Discussion/Action Items
a. Highlights - RCTV 7:30
b. Presentation of Hazard Mitigation Plan - MAPC 8:00
C. Approval of Alley Way Agreements 8:30
d. Update - Downtown 8:45
e. Close Warrant for State Primary Election
f. Review Action Status Reports
6)
App.roval'of Minutes
a. June 3, 2008
b. July 29, 2008
7)
Licenses, Permits and Approvals
a. Special Three Day License issued to Meadow Brook
Social Committee for sale of all alcoholic beverages
for a Summer Social on August 2, 2008
b. Special Three Day License issued to Meadow Brook
Social Committee for sale of all alcoholic beverages for
a Police Department Summer Party on August 23, 2008
76