The URL can be used to link to this page

Northampton_MVP-plan-update-WF3.25.2020PG. 1 City of Nor thampton Community Resilience Building Workshop Summary of Findings May 2018; Updated April 2019 and March 2020Thrive with chron ic s t ress thrive with acute stresssustainability & c o mmunity h e a lth NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 2 I. Overview Cities and towns across Massachusetts are feeling the effects of climate change. Annual temperatures have been getting warmer since the 1970s, and high-intensity storms are becoming more frequent. With a wider variability in weather extremes, risks such as flooding, electrical grid failures, droughts, changes in ecosystems, tick and mosquito-borne diseases, and heat-related illnesses are some of the many concerns that climate change is predicted to bring. In response, municipalities throughout Massachusetts have identified the need to better prepare for climate change. Forward-thinking cities such as Northampton have begun focusing on ways to adapt to hazards, and strategies that will help their infrastructure, neighborhoods, and ecosystems become more resilient. Through proactive and collaborative planning, Northampton is aiming to reduce climate risk, but also to adapt in ways that continue to make Northampton an increasingly vibrant and thriving community. This type of leadership offers a model for other municipalities in Massachusetts and New England to follow. In the fall of 2017, the City of Northampton joined the Massachusetts Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness (MVP) program (https://tinyurl.com/ycs5kv8r). This program supports municipalities in leading workshops to 1) identify vulnerabilities and strengths to climate change, and 2) develop prioritized actions for improving the city’s resilience. Participation in the program also makes Northampton eligible for future funding to implement climate adaptation measures. City of Northampton Community Resilience Building Workshop Summary of Findings Through proactive and collaborative planning, Northampton is aiming to reduce climate risk, but also to adapt in ways that continue to make Northampton an increasingly vibrant and thriving community.Thrive with chron ic s t ress thrive with acute stresssustainability & c o mmunity h e a lth NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS The City hosted two workshops on May 8th and 9th, 2018, which used a community-driven planning process called the Community Resilience Building (CRB) Planning Framework (www.CommunityResilienceBuilding.org). The City engaged MVP Linnean Solutions, Kim Lundgren Associates, Inc., and Fuss & O’Neill, Inc. to help facilitate this process and support the city in subsequent climate mitigation and adaptation planning. Workshop participants were provided with a series of maps that used city data and visualizations from the Department of Public Works to illustrate flood vulnerability and infrastructural, social, and environmental features. These maps served as a resource for discussing risk perceptions, shared values, strategies, and priorities. Content discussed during the workshop was recorded in the CRB “Risk Matrices”—a template for organizing the workshops’ discussion and findings—and participants also notated large “storyboard maps” with their concerns and ideas. Images of the maps and risk matrices are included in the appendix of this report. PG. 3 The workshop’s central objectives were to: •Define top local natural and climate-related hazards of concern; •Identify existing and future strengths and vulnerabilities; •Develop prioritized actions for the community; and •Identify immediate opportunities to collaboratively advance actions to increase resilience. The easterly edge of Main Street in downtown Northampton, along with most of the connecting roads to the southeast, are in the floodplain, but protected for the time being by a levee system. Photo credit: Alexius Horatius NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 4 This report compiles the rich information and conversations that came out of Northampton’s Community Resilience Building workshop process. It highlights the hazards that were focused on during the workshop, key vulnerabilities and strengths identified by the participants, and proposed actions for enhancing Northampton’s resilience. All of the content that is transcribed in this report is open to comments, corrections, and updates from the workshop participants as well as additional stakeholders. Adapting to climate change will be an ongoing process, and one that will benefit from the insight of many voices in shaping the pathway to a more resilient and thriving Northampton. In April 2019 and March 2020, the core team reconvened and CRB Workshop Participants and the public were consulted on the lessons learned to date from this MVP plan and from Northampton Designs with Nature (MVP Action Grant). The resulting consensus, emphasizing the need for FEMA Certification of the City's flood control levees (2019) and a revised resilience hub (2020), were added to this plan. II.Top Hazards and Vulnerable Areas A.Top Hazards and Current Concerns Presented by the Hazards Each group in the Community Resilience Building Workshops focused on vulnerabilities, strengths, and action items with respect to four main climate change hazards. These hazards were pre-identified by a core team of city representatives as the top climate change hazards that would bring a number of implications for Northampton. 1.Flooding With climate change we expect slightly more precipitation on an annual basis, but more significantly, we expect greater frequency and intensity of major storms. With these major storms, Northampton faces three types of flood risk: 1) The risk of riverine flooding from the Connecticut River, the Mill River, the Manhan River, and unnamed streams in and beyond the floodplain; 2) The risk of localized flooding when infiltration and the stormwater system reaches maximum capacity; and 3) The risk of downtown flooding if floodwaters overtop the dike. Downtown Northampton sits between the Connecticut River and the Mill River, and much of the southeast corner of the city sits within the floodplain. The flood control system, which was built This report compiles the rich information and conversations that came out of Northampton’s Community Resilience Building workshop process. NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 5 in the 1940s after two major floods in the 1930s damaged much of the city, currently affords the city protection from major floods. However, the system was designed to protect against peak flows of the 1% flood in the 1940s, which may not be sufficient for the higher intensity storms expected with climate change. Furthermore, more frequent high-intensity rain events are likely to surpass the capacity of the city’s culvert systems and stormwater storage, causing more localized flooding. Without updated infrastructure design standards, FEMA certification of the downtown levees, and new strategies for infiltrating and storing water, flooding is likely to increasingly impact roads, buildings, and communities. 2.Increasing temperatures Average annual temperatures in Northampton are predicted to increase by 3° –6°F by the 2050s, and by 4° – 9°F by the 2070s. Along with potential impacts to the city’s agriculture, its air quality, and its water supplies, these temperature increases are already showing effects on ecosystems, degrading the health of tree species that are accustomed to colder climates, contributing to pest outbreaks, and facilitating the spread of invasive species. Insects are less likely to die off in the winter with higher winter temperatures, allowing more species to breed. Northampton has seen higher rates of Lyme disease cases (carried by ticks) and may see increases in mosquito- and other vector-borne disease. In addition to increasing average temperatures, Northampton is likely to see more days where the maximum temperature exceeds 95°F, as well as more extended heat waves, which may produce more challenges than the occasional hotter day. Extreme heat and heat waves can lead to heat-related illness, particularly for people with compromised immune systems or without access to spaces with air conditioning. 3. Drought Northampton has a relatively robust water supply, drawing from three surface level aquifers located within Conway, West Hatley, Williamsburg, and Hatfield. Roughly one percent of the city’s water supply comes from wells, which have the capacity to provide up to half the city’s water supply if needed. The city additionally has an emergency backup water source. Nevertheless, climate change may bring longer periods of dry weather which may affect the health of the city’s water supply. In 2016, Massachusetts issued a drought declaration in which the Connecticut River Region reached “warning” status. Although the city had implemented water restrictions in years past (e.g., 2010), this level of drought instigated further discussions around water use and conservation in the city. Additionally, the vast majority of Northampton’s farmland is not irrigated, making the city’s agriculture especially vulnerable to drought. 4. Extreme weather Although Northampton’s average annual precipitation is not expected to increase drastically in the next 50 years, climate projections do suggest that the city will see Signage in Look Memorial Park in Florence, sharing the impacts of past hurricanes and floods. Photo credit: Holly Jacobson NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 6 greater extremes in weather—including heavy rainfall, hurricanes, and snowstorms. Without strategies to increase the resiliency of the city’s systems, these extreme weather events will likely bring power outages, interruptions in transportation services, heavier reliance on homeless and emergency shelters, and business and service closures. Resilience strategies will be necessary for reducing the impact that these events will have on residents’ health, wellbeing, and livelihoods. B. Areas of Concern (specific locations) Road segments -Vulnerable to flooding: Island Road; lower Elm Street; the intersection between Gothic and Main Street; Bay State; the underpass on North Street; the end of Church and State Street; the bike path where it crosses under the train tracks. Utility infrastructure -Vulnerable to flooding: The wastewater treatment facility (although behind the dike); power plants; buried powerlines in the downtown. -Vulnerable to extreme weather: Non-buried powerlines outside of the downtown. -Vulnerable to erosion: Sewer infrastructure along the Mill River Corridor. Sites and/or services - Vulnerable to flooding: The Senior Center; the Dialysis Center; the Meals on Wheels kitchen; the homeless tent encampment; the Meadows (agricultural land). -Vulnerable to heat: Bridge Street Elementary School; Jackson Street Elementary School; Leeds Elementary School; RK Finn Ryan Road School; JKF Middle School; Northampton High School. -Limited transportation/access: The VA Medical Center; The county shelter near Cooley Dickinson Hospital; The back-up shelter at UMass; Rainbow Beach and Reservoir/Reservoir Road (for cooling off in extreme heat); residential areas outside the downtown. Natural resources -Vulnerable to erosion/sedimentation: The Connecticut River; The Mill River; Paradise Pond. -Vulnerable to nutrient loading: The Mill River; The Oxbow. Bike path where it crosses under the train tracks. Photo credit: Holly Jacobson NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 7 III. Vulnerabilities and Strengths in Northampton Workshop participants collaborated in small groups to discuss the capacity of Northampton’s infrastructure, communities, businesses, institutions, and natural resources to respond and adapt to climate change. The ability of participants to recall past hazards—such as the flooding from Hurricane Irene, or the water restrictions during the 2016 drought—helped to frame discussions around what future events might entail. For the purpose of the workshop, “vulnerabilities” were considered to be aspects of the city that may lose function due to climate change hazards or that may feel the effects of climate change more acutely. “Strengths” were aspects of Northampton that would help the city adapt and thrive even in the face of climate change. Some features—such as the city’s flood control infrastructure—could be seen as both a strength and a vulnerability. The second phase of the workshop focused on reducing the vulnerable components, while enhancing the strengths. Where might Northampton’s electrical grid or stormwater infrastructure fail in a climate hazard? Which communities might feel the effects of extreme weather more than others? How can absorptive open land continue to act as an effective flood buffer? Concrete flood wall and critical electric substation on West Street on the bank of the Mill River. Photo credit: Holly Jacobson NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 8 A. Specific Categories of Concerns and Challenges Certain features in Northampton—including places, communities, natural resources, and infrastructure systems—may be particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Workshop participants identified the following items as key vulnerabilities and areas of concern in Northampton: Vulnerability of flood control infrastructure - High maintenance costs are needed to ensure that the flood control infrastructure remains effective; - Invasive species cause degradation to the levee slopes; - Uncertainty exists, regarding the sufficiency of the flood control infrastructure to weather future storms, especially because the levees are not certified; - Current citywide flood mapping does not accurately reflect climate change; - The flood control infrastructure only serves the downtown area. Vulnerabilities in water and wastewater infrastructure systems -There is potentially a limited number of days in which the water pumps could run on diesel generators if the city loses power; -In extended power outages, people with wells lose access to water; -Water main breaks have been more frequent in recent years; -The wastewater treatment facility is in the flood zone (although not mapped as such by FEMA because it is behind the dikes)—if anything were to happen to the pump station, this would be one of the first facilities to flood. Vulnerabilities in the stormwater infrastructure system -The city has aging infrastructure and deferred maintenance; -The stormwater system has limited capacity, particularly in the downtown; -Current stormwater infrastructure design standards will not be sufficient for future storm events; -There are substantial local flooding vulnerabilities, both within FEMA-mapped floodplains and outside of them, throughout the city; -Undersized culverts create pinch points for localized flooding. Vulnerability of electrical lines and power plants -Above-ground lines are vulnerable to wind, ice, and downed trees; -Buried power lines (in the downtown) are vulnerable to flooding; -Power plants are currently vulnerable to flooding. Vulnerability of residential building stock -A large proportion of homes are poorly insulated; -Much of the building stock, and large multifamily residential buildings in particular, lack design qualities for “passive survivability” during power outages. INFRASTRUCTURAL VULNERABILITIES NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 9 Vulnerability of Northampton schools -Schools do not have air conditioning, making students and teachers vulnerable in periods of high heat. Limitations in transportation access -There are limited transportation options for non-car users, especially outside downtown; -There are limited mobility/transit options for handicap persons, particularly in accessing the VA Medical Center; -There is currently no transit station in Northampton where the Pioneer Valley Transit Authority (PVTA) can charge electric buses (although there is a bus maintenance facility which could be retrofitted for electric bus charging). Pinch points for evacuation / frequently flooded roads -Coolidge Bridge across the Connecticut River (Route 9) is the only crossing for nine miles; -Certain roads tend to flood easily and it is unclear whether these will become increasingly problematic for evacuation or access to critical services; -Participants noted the following roads frequently experience flooding: Island Road (eight properties are considered to be repetitive flood zones—but only those with insurance are known), lower Elm Street, the intersection between Gothic and Main Street, Bay State, the underpass on North Street, and the end of Church and State Street. Enhanced vulnerability of particular populations -Homeless population (resource limitations, shelter limitations, etc.); -Student population (transient population, some international); -Elderly populations (limited mobility, networks, physical capacity, etc.); -Non-English-speaking populations (limited communication capacity, etc.); -Populations with mental health challenges (limited personal capacity to respond to emergencies, etc.). Community resiliency and sheltering strategy challenges -Need of front-line communities for essential sanitation and connection to services to address both chronic and acute stress. - Needs of the sheltering organizations can come into conflict with the needs of the populations seeking shelter; - Roles and responsibilities in decision-making can be unclear; - There are limitations and challenges in the current system for sheltering pets; - There does not seem to be a widespread awareness of emergency shelters; - People have trouble accessing the city's Smith Vocational School/county emergency shelter near Cooley Dickinson Hospital; - The back-up shelter is at UMass (Smith Vocational and Agricultural High School can hold 650 people), but a major flood event would cut off access. SOCIETAL VULNERABILITIES NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 10 Housing unaffordability, particularly in downtown -Employees who work in downtown often must commute from other areas, with limited transit options, because they are priced out of the downtown; -Economic stress from housing unaffordability creates less stable living situations. High flood vulnerability of specific social service locations -Certain locations that provide critical social services or that support vulnerable populations are exposed to flooding, including the Senior Center, the Dialysis Center, the Meals on Wheels kitchen, the bike path where it crosses under the train tracks, and the homeless tent encampment. Limitations in the Emergency Communication System (Reverse 911) -Only a portion of the population is signed up for these alerts; -Immigrant communities are hesitant to provide contact information to the City; -The alerts could be better at telling people where to go to get help; -There is a danger that the system gets overused (i.e., for snow parking bans), causing people to opt out. Limited locations for recreational swimming (problematic during extreme heat) -Rainbow beach is not accessible by car (only by boat); -Reservoir/Reservoir Road is the only legal swimming spot and people must pay to access. Economic implications of climate hazards -Power interruptions caused by extreme heat (brownouts) and storms interrupt business continuity (e.g., power interruptions caused Coca-Cola to temporarily close the plant); -Drought creates economic vulnerability (e.g., there is the possibility that Coca- Cola may need to reduce production or temporarily close during droughts). More limited social capital and connectedness in areas outside downtown -There is more limited access to services such as grocery stores, shelters, medical services, etc. outside of the downtown; -It’s harder to access places by walking, biking, or taking public transit; -There are further distances between neighbors if and when social support is needed. Psychological stress -Climate change can cause psychological stress and impact mental health due to repeated trauma; -The outdoors becomes less welcoming as it becomes seen as “a scary place”; -There is increased risk that decisions will be driven by fear as opposed to effective planning. NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 11 Threat posed by waterways and watershed hydrology -Rivers, streams, and the watershed’s hydrology pose high flood risk, particularly the Connecticut River, the Mill River, and small watershed unnamed streams; -Lack of natural storage areas makes for flashier flooding, especially in small watersheds. Increased risk of vector-borne diseases -Tires in yards and waste areas collect water, creating mosquito breeding grounds; -Tires also create warmer water temperatures, attracting mosquito species that are otherwise at the northerly edge of their territories; -Increased temperatures and reforestation are amplifying the risk of diseases spread by ticks; -A lack of awareness of the risk of Lyme disease, symptoms, and the need for treatment causes a public health risk and underreporting of tick-borne disease; -Lab work to identify Lyme disease is expensive. Risk of drought -Drought in 2016 indicated that the water supply could be vulnerable; -Based on experience in adjacent towns, wells may have the potential of running dry and supplying these households with water through other means is expensive; -Communication around drought risk and response strategies or requirements (particularly for businesses) is not necessarily clear; -The health of trees and soils will likely be compromised by drought. Soil degradation, sedimentation, erosion -Increasing storm intensity creates more sedimentation and erosion; -Extreme weather events lead to significant losses of agricultural top soil; -Soils which are critical for water infiltration are losing their capacity to absorb water due to paving, lawns, or getting trampled; -Smith is no longer responsible for dredging the sediment from Paradise Pond—the sediment filling up the pond may reduce the pond’s capacity and degrade the flood control system; -Erosion along the Mill River and Connecticut River impacts utilities (such as sewer infrastructure along the Mill River Corridor). Vulnerability of tree health -Tree species in Northampton are becoming increasingly vulnerable to climatic changes, new pests, and invasive species; -Tree die-offs can lead to blocked roads and downed powerlines, as well as increased erosion and wild fire risk. ENVIRONMENTAL VULNERABILITIES NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 12 Non-native invasive plants and animals -Changing climatic conditions can encourage invasive species; -Flooding can spread invasive species. Vulnerabilities of agricultural land along the Connecticut River -Only a quarter of the Meadows is permanently protected by ownership or farmland preservation ordinances. -Agricultural uses may become no longer viable. Nutrient loading -Increases in nutrient loading have been observed, particularly in the Mill River and the Oxbow; -No entity has a complete understanding of the extent of the problem; -There is a lack of nutrient coverage by stormwater regulations. Threat of food insecurity / challenges to food system -Changes to agriculture viability (due to loss of topsoil, drought, etc.) may hinder local food production; -It remains unclear how hazards that impact Northampton’s food system (hindering transportation, storage, etc.) may impact the city’s food security. -Households in Northampton tend to “eat fresh” and therefore do not have much food stored for emergencies; -Power outages have a substantial impact on grocery stores (e.g., unable to operate registers, forced to throw out all perishable food, etc.). Regional scale challenges -Many environmental vulnerabilities are regional in scale and are therefore hard to address at the level of the local municipality. The Oxbow on the Connecticut River, Northampton. Image Source: Google Earth NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 13 B. Current Strengths and Assets While certain features in Northampton—including places, communities, natural resources, and infrastructure systems—may be particularly vulnerable to climate change hazards, others may serve as key assets or strengths in helping Northampton’s communities adapt. Workshop participants identified the following items as key strengths and assets in Northampton: Critical emergency services with back-up power -The shared back-up power system (microgrid) between Smith Vocational and Agricultural High School (an American Red Cross emergency shelter), Cooley Dickinson Hospital, and the Department of Public Works enhances resilience across these facilities. Protection offered by the flood control system -Currently, dikes and levees are able to protect areas of the city that would otherwise be vulnerable to flooding. Capacity of Cooley Dickinson Hospital to weather extreme events -The hospital is in a fairly good position to withstand flooding events based on its location and building design; -The hospital’s back-up systems can operate even in a week-long power outage. Capacity of Smith College to weather extreme events -Smith College has an independent power station that uses gas (a strength during a storm as long as there is a gas supply, and during extreme heat when there may be brownouts); INFRASTRUCTURAL STRENGTHS Bridge on the Norwottuck Rail-Trail. Photo credit: John Phelan. NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 14 -The campus is located mostly outside of the floodplain; -The campus has some redundancy / back-up power systems (but there is potential in its systems for cascading failure). Bike path system -The bike path connects people out-of-town to Northampton’s downtown; -It provides an alternative route to access Easthampton; -It creates less of a reliance on cars. Easy access to I-91 -Easy access to I-91 allows some Northampton residents to leave the city in an emergency if needed. Stormwater regulations -The stormwater utility brings in money to support stormwater system upgrades. Strong social resources -Northampton is home to strong social services for supporting residents facing poverty, homelessness, addiction, mental illness, and other challenges. Smith Vocational and Agricultural High School serves as shelter -Smith Voc. serves as a regional shelter; -The shelter serves both humans and pets, which encourages households with pets to feel comfortable seeking shelter. Smith College capacity and services -Smith has the capacity to shelter its student body; -The college offers institutional support and collaboration with the City. National Grid support for “critical care customers” -National Grid keeps a list of critical care customers who live in their own homes and need electricity for in-home care, and reaches out prior to a storm (to make preparations) and during a storm (to check in). Northampton serves as a regional hub for resources -Northampton tends to be a hub for other areas in terms of tourism, as well as social services (but the City needs to consider what this role means to effectively serve as a location that may welcome populations from other towns, climate refugees, during a hazard). SOCIETAL STRENGTHS NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 15 Relatively wealthy population with education and resources -Northampton’s relatively wealthy population allows it access to resources to deploy in emergency situations (although it’s important to consider the biases and blind spots that this position may create, particularly when this wealth is not universal in Northampton). Regulations and zoning to support conservation and agricultural land -Conservation land maintains green space, areas for water infiltration, healthy ecosystems, and cooling capacity; -Forested uplands help absorb rainwater before it burdens the stormwater system; -Northampton’s wetland regulations protect ecosystem and human health, surface water quality, and persons and property from flooding; -Development limitations in flood-prone areas help maintain the city’s resilience; -Agricultural land in the Meadows creates a buffer to absorb flood water. Parks and green space -The city’s parks and green space absorb stormwater; -The green space helps to cool the city in periods of high heat. Tree canopy -The City has conducted a tree inventory; -There are ongoing efforts to plant shade trees (by the Shade Tree Commission) and trees accustomed to more southern regions to prepare for climate change. Redundancy of water sources -Northampton has multiple water sources and backup water sources. ENVIRONMENTAL STRENGTHS The Mill River north of Mulberry Street in Leeds. Photo credit: John Phelan NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 16 IV. Recommendations to Improve Resilience In response to the identified vulnerabilities and strengths, workshop participants collaborated in small groups to discuss policy strategies, capital investments, planning processes, and public outreach strategies to enhance Northampton’s climate resilience. The range of backgrounds of the workshop participants helped to develop approaches that were new, more comprehensive, cross-disciplinary, and/or forward- thinking. All of these strategies are listed below, grouped by order of prioritization, in sections B, D, and E. Section A highlights particular themes or top areas of focus that were discussed consistently across the groups. A. Top Areas of Focus / Cross-Cutting Themes Workshop participants identified short-term, long-term, and ongoing strategies that could help reduce the vulnerabilities and/or enhance the strengths that were listed in Section III. While there were a wide range of strategies, certain recurring themes, or themes cutting across all vulnerabilties, emerged as the top focus ares. These included: 1. Flood Resiliency and Green Infrastructure Planning and Investment Northampton’s flood control infrastructure was designed in the 1940s for peak flows for the 1% storm—making it vulnerable to overtopping with the effects of climate change. Discussions made it clear that infiltrating and storing stormwater and managing the floodwater from the Connecticut and Mill Rivers (among other smaller streams and brooks) were significant concerns. Groups focused on a number of assessments and strategies for using nature-based solutions to store and potentially treat stormwater and floodwater, and to improve the soil’s ability to infiltrate water. How could we encourage households to improve the insulation in their homes? What types of nature-based solutions could cost-effectively manage stormwater and floodwater? Could a shelter operations plan focus on better strategies to support people with mental illness in an emergency? Homes in Laurel Park. Photo credit: Holly Jacobson NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 17 These strategies were coupled with ideas for infrastructure assessments, FEMA certification of flood control levees, and investments to upgrade the city’s culverts to design standards that account the water flows from climate change. 2.Energy Security Many groups discussed the ways in which improved backup power systems, energy islanding, and microgrids could allow for redundancy in the city’s energy system to ensure that critical services (such as hospitals, shelters, and critical city operations) continue to operate during a climate hazard. Alternative energy and community aggregation programs were strategies that dovetail with the above strategies, facilitating redundancy in the City’s energy system and reducing the city’s reliance on fossil fuels. Likewise, many participants focused on developing incentives and campaigns to help residents improve the insulation of their homes, and to enhance the “passive survivability” of buildings, particularly multifamily housing complexes. With these strategies, residents would be able to remain more comfortable in their homes during a power outage in hot or cold temperatures—as well as reduce their energy consumption on a day-to-day basis. 3.Strategies for Effective Communication and Outreach Workshop participants noted that effective communication and public education strategies would support a large number of resilience-based initiatives, ranging from efforts to control invasive species, to signing up for the Reverse 911 system, to understanding the risk of tick-borne disease. Simultaneously, workshop participants discussed strategies for better reaching diverse communities in this process, including attending meetings or events in neighborhoods and working with trusted community partners. It was noted that in order to design strategies that focus on equity or that focus on the needs of certain populations, it will be important to have the insight of these populations in the planning process. 4.The needs of front-line communities Workshop participants noted that unique needs of front-line communities, those residents without resources on the front-line of climate change and other chronic and acute stress (e.g., homeless, low income, SRO residents, disadvantaged) Navigational sign on the Mass-Central Rail Trail helps bikers and pedestrians travel between key points of interest. Photo credit: Holly Jacobson NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 18 B. High Priorities Flood Resilience and Green Infrastructure -Certify the flood control levees in and around downtown. - Conduct a Comprehensive Flood Resilience Plan that would consider implementation of green infrastructure, culvert upgrades, and priority project concept design; - Conduct a town-wide assessment for culvert replacement and aquatic activity; - Identify “pinch points” such as road segments on evacuation routes or that connect neighborhoods to critical resources that frequently flood; - Identify and prioritize upgrades to the most vulnerable infrastructure focusing on nature-based solutions; - Expand projects currently in the pipeline to have a larger focus on green infrastructure and rainwater catchment, including an education component on the importance of these design features; - Expand strategies for more stormwater and flood storage in open space, capturing water that would otherwise flow through culverts and gray infrastructure in a way that is more cost-effective than increasing the size of those culverts and infrastructure; - Use open-bottom culverts to create more nature-based treatment, slow the velocity of stormwater, and/or provide co-benefits for wildlife; - Develop the flood resilience plan through a whole-watershed approach (not through isolated implementation of green infrastructure), focusing on soil health and infiltration. Passive Survivability of Critical Buildings and Residential Building Stock -Encourage passive survivability of critical buildings, including large multifamily housing buildings and emergency shelters, in order to ensure greater resiliency of occupants in power outages, as well as reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions; -Retrofit the tax incentive structure to better encourage energy retrofits to older houses; -Identify opportunities to install combined heat and power (CHP) systems (with natural gas fuel source), which would provide electricity; -Encourage installation of air-source heat pumps; -Prioritize low-income and minority communities, incorporating a tandem goal of making staying in one’s home more affordable; -Work with the Northampton Housing Authority and other affordable housing providers, who are already pursuing energy efficiency and weatherization strategies; -Set a “passive survivability bar” as metric of success or require passive survivability modeling on all new construction or substantial renovations as part of permitting. INFRASTRUCTURAL HIGH PRIORITIES NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 19 Stormwater / Floodwater Regulatory Review -Update stormwater / floodwater design standards; -Assess and revise freeboard regulations to consider climate projections; -Determine design standards for areas protected by the dikes, but that are below 125’ elevation (and thus still potentially vulnerable); -Develop a new standard of construction for building in areas outside the floodplain, but that still see frequent localized or riverine flooding. Design and Implementation of the Microgrid Project -Use study results from Northwestern to issue a request for proposals (RFP) for microgrid project to create a resilient power source for Cooley Dickinson Hospital, Smith Vocational and Agricultural High School (emergency shelter), and the Department of Public Works; -Proceed with design and construction of the microgrid. Improved Transportation Access, Focusing on Equity -Accelerate expansion of the bike share program, particularly in areas with larger minority or low-income populations, in order to improve access to affordable modes of transportation; -Consider strategies to better serve unbanked populations; -Advocate for more public transportation improvements, ensuring that routes and service times aim to specifically support the needs of low-income and minority communities; -Ensure that low-income and minority neighborhoods have access to conservation land and green space (i.e., areas that will be cooler in extreme heat) via bike or pedestrian paths. Targeted Outreach and Listening Sessions -Conduct outreach sessions with specific communities so that the knowledge and insight of vulnerable communities (e.g., people experiencing poverty or homelessness, households with limited English proficiency, individuals that are elderly or disabled, etc.) directly shape the strategies that are developed to support vulnerable populations; -Conduct outreach sessions by attending (rather than hosting at a City-chosen venue) community meetings / functions designed to reach diverse community groups “where they’re at.” -Work with “local neighborhood trust networks” to help disseminate and gather information; -Potentially recreate a previously existing mentoring program, whereby community members who feel comfortable interacting with City government act as a liaison between the City and residents. SOCIETAL HIGH PRIORITIES NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 20 Resilience Hub and Emergency Shelters Assessment and Operations -Develop a resilience hub to cluster services (e.g., sanitation, showers, and clothes washing, healthcare, food and meals, point of entry and day programming for social services, case managers, direct service, and help finding housing, a place to store personal items, and escape from cold, heat, and the elements). The greatest need for a resilience hub is to address chronic and acute stresses to frontline communities (homeless, SRO residents, low income, and disadvantaged populations on the front-line of climate change and any stress) without other resources. In addition, a resilience hub can also address acute stresses (i.e., from a specific event) for any community members. A resilience hub is needed in walking distance of downtown area homeless shelters and SROs. - Develop an Emergency Shelter Operations Plan that formerly defines lines of decision-making, and a line of command even if personnel change; - Expand shelters’ backup generation capacity and diesel supplies, pairing with implementation of the microgrid(s), to lengthen the duration that shelters are operable during a citywide power outage; - Assess the ability of both shelters and schools to house people/students during periods of extreme heat, and consider strategies for enhancing passive survivability; - Assess transportation access to shelters and whether extreme weather events (such as flooding) will prevent access; - Ensure strategies for effectively supporting people with mental illness, and include clinical support experts in the development of these strategies; - Involve people who have limited English proficiency, who are elderly, and who have experienced/are experiencing homelessness (as well as representatives of social services who support these populations) in the development of this plan; - Expand shelter capacity by expanding shelter space or by reducing the need for them (e.g., work with hotels to ensure prices are kept low during an emergency, that the hotels have capacity to house emergency responders, and/or other agreements); - Develop a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Smith College to delineate sharing of resources in an emergency. Cross-cutting (External & Internal) Communication & Public Education Plan -Develop a multi-pronged strategy for various levels of resilience-based communication, including emergency alerts, regular notifications (i.e., snow parking bans), as well as ongoing public education and outreach on a variety of topics; -Develop ongoing public education and outreach programs focused on topics including invasive species management, tick-borne diseases, land-use strategies, resilience strategies (through table-top exercises), the value of the city’s stormwater utility and green infrastructure implementation, native plant gardens, drought mitigation and water conservation strategies, among others. -Identify ways to better use the City’s webpage and social media (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram) in a way that is coordinated and engages people; -Identify ways to better connect with diverse populations and underrepresented communities, including using trusted community partners (e.g., the Northampton Survival Center) to encourage individuals to sign up for Reverse 911 and to disseminate other resilience-based information on an ongoing basis. NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 21 Strong Neighborhood Program -Define what makes a “strong neighborhood,” and assess neighborhoods based on the extent to which they meet those characteristics (based on access to resources, etc.); -Share this assessment with City Emergency Response; -Create more spaces for shelters, temporary housing, and social centers as needed; -Enhance inter-municipal cooperation beyond emergencies to better develop networks of resilient neighborhoods; -Identify opportunities for public/private partnerships to provide resources or services; -Help businesses develop strategies for business continuity; -Foster interest in building neighborhood cohesion. Food Resilience Plan -Understand the vulnerability of the Meals on Wheels program (e.g., many of the drivers for this program are elderly and are less able to deliver in a storm); plan for emergency events (e.g., How reliant are people on these meals? How can we ensure customers have a back-up food supply?); -Develop alternative strategies and public/private partnerships that may be able to help provide resources or services (i.e., identify barriers to having restaurants support distribution of food in emergency events); -Help businesses, such as restaurants and grocery stores, become better prepared to maintain business continuity and prevent food loss. Urban Heat Island / High Heat Day Plan -Identify ways to increase public access to swimmable areas in Northampton; -Identify key urban heat island areas and prioritize tree planting in those locations; -Determine if schools can be used to create more neighborhood splash parks; -Identify parks that are in vulnerable communities and add water features; -Fund low-income memberships to parks with water features / access. Hazard Mitigation, Emergency Response, and Resilience Plan Alignment - Revise FEMA Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan to reflect MVP Process; -Provide crosswalk study between Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan, Emergency Response Plan, and Climate Resiliency Plan. Forest Vulnerability Assessment -Conduct an inventory of tree populations, identifying locations of large stands of tree species that are vulnerable to invasive species, pests, and changes in climate; -Assess tree populations at a town-wide scale, including conservation land as well ENVIRONMENTAL HIGH PRIORITIES NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 22 as private property (since ecosystems don’t follow property boundaries); -Develop City strategies (monitoring, selective harvesting) in tandem with a public campaign to help address vulnerabilities in tree stocks and ecosystems. Comprehensive Control and Education Strategy for Ticks and Invasive Species -Develop a comprehensive strategy to address ticks and invasive species that includes land management, invasive species control strategies, and the integration of more permaculture practices; -Apply for funding to further research tick-borne illness, as well as funding and personnel for implementation of a comprehensive control and education program. Soil Retention Demonstration Projects -Conduct demonstration projects in collaboration with Smith Vocational and Agricultural High School to incentivize perennial plantings along the river that also serve as a harvest crop for farmers; -Link the demonstration projects with development of the horticulture program to align career development with strategies to increase local food production (sold and consumed locally) to enhance local food security / resilience. C. Moderate Priorities Energy Security -Acquire grant funding / personnel to complete an assessment on community choice aggregation, local solar generation, and the implementation of microgrids (to improve resilience and enhance the City’s goals of reaching 100 percent renewable energy); -Consider strategies for islanding / energy resilience in not only hospitals and campuses, but also in neighborhoods, grocery stores, etc.; -Potentially collaborate with Amherst and Pelham who are interested in advancing similar initiatives. Downtown Resilience and Business Continuity -Ensure that downtown businesses are equipped to handle increased risk of flooding, power outages, and extreme heat; -Identify top critical services in the floodplain and create redundancies for them elsewhere (e.g., potentially a back-up dialysis center); -Ensure infrastructure in downtown is designed to withstand predicted heat wave intensities and durations; -Consider the implementation of a microgrid for King Street; -Increase the tree canopy in the downtown area. INFRASTRUCTURAL MODERATE PRIORITIES NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 23 Housing Insulation Campaign -Develop an outreach campaign to encourage households to upgrade building envelopes with better insulation (larger apartment complexes can fall under the PACE for commercial program; encourage households to use Mass Save); -Partner with universities who have good energy efficiency data analyses to support the argument for investing in building upgrades. Ongoing Evaluation and Upgrades to the Flood Control Infrastructure -Continue ongoing evaluations to look at the capacity of the pump station, its location, needed repairs, and its backup power supply; -Maintain existing inspections and oversight programs for repair, maintenance, and upgrades of flood control infrastructure, and strengthen drills and inspections as needed. Dike System as Public Green Space and Public Education -Enhance the area around the dike to be better used as a public park that could help with heat island mitigation; -Invite the public to see how the dike system works, air the event on Google TV, and invite stakeholders and interested residents from nearby communities in order to enhance people’s understanding of the flood management system, its limitations, and its maintenance/investment needs. Alternative Transportation Programs -Collaborate with a local entrepreneur who could expand transportation access by running a minibus between neighborhoods and shopping centers within Northampton, as well as to nearby towns. Preparation for Transition to Electric Vehicles and Buses -Assess how the city will accommodate the increasing need for charging stations; -Work with businesses to come up with a transition plan that will allow private entities to implement charging station networks. Strengthened Partnerships and New Social Capital -Strengthen partnerships between the City and existing community groups and work with communities to create new groups to help build social capital; -Revisit strategies from the Re-Energize Democracy plan in order to make sure people feel a part of the city and the planning processes. Neighborhood-Scale Emergency Planning -Facilitate planning for emergency management, focusing on responses at a neighborhood scale with access issues in mind; -Start this process by reviewing existing strategies with the Board of Health. SOCIETAL MODERATE PRIORITIES NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 24 Emergency Transportation Plan -Understand PVTA’s emergency management plan; -Clarify roles in decision-making and execution during a citywide evacuation; -Investigate models to enlist private cars in an evacuation ride-share program. Policies / Planning to Maintain Health of Water Supply -Assess impacts from climate change on water sources and the water treatment system (from contamination due to flooding, from drought, etc.); -Investigate whether households with wells are having trouble / seeing shortages; -Plan for a phased drought mitigation and action plan, and develop a strategy for advanced notice protocols to large water users; -Detail necessary conservation efforts; -Explore strategies for better data collection to give a more accurate representation of drought conditions and water supply; -Develop a public education strategy to raise awareness about water restrictions; -Ensure that strategies for source protection (e.g., the City buying land) continue. Acquisition of Land for Flood Management -Continue land acquisition in flood plain; -Buy out homes in places with high vulnerability to flooding; -Continue buying land (must be near the floodplain) where water can be stored before it hits the floodplain; -Complete land acquisition in accordance with City’s open space prioritization list. Erosion and Sedimentation Control -Assess erosion in the Mill River channel, and strategies for improving river bank stability; -Examine the island south of Paradise Pond and the Route 66 bridge to assess whether it is growing due to erosion and sedimentation; -Assess the old dams and the role they may be playing in increasing sedimentation; - Remove old dams that are not viable for power production when funds are available; -Engage interested players (e.g., Smith, Audubon, etc.); -Assess street sweeping, and where sediment may be coming off the streets. ENVIRONMENTAL MODERATE PRIORITIES NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 25 D. Lower Priorities Strategy for Reuse of Industrial / Commercial Greywater -Conduct a City regulatory review of the reuse of Coca-Cola graywater; -Design a study for transport (for irrigation use) or infiltration of Coca-Cola water (secondary, beneficial use, non-potable); -Look into potential collection from other entities (e.g., breweries in Northampton and Williamsburg, cardboard manufacturer near Mt. Tom on Route 5, Smith College, Cooley Dickinson Hospital, etc.) for further water reuse. Strengthen Transportation Linkages -Identify locations that offer critical services in an emergency and ensure that there is a range of transportation options that link those services to neighborhoods; -Ensure redundancies in transportation routes and networks so that no neighborhoods are cut off from critical services. Pet Emergency Management -Strengthen ties with pet rescue; -Develop pet disaster kits and records. Comprehensive Approach for Increasing Infiltration and Recharge -Develop an approach to how the City and private land owners would work together on increasing infiltration and recharge; -Conduct an education and outreach program on the best methods and priorities for how private landowners can increase rainwater infiltration. Daylighting the Mill River to Increase Flood Storage -‘Daylight’ the historical Mill River and create more flood storage to mitigate flooding around the wastewater treatment plant and pump station. Prioritize Local Supply Food Production -Ensure continuation of productive land use in the Meadows as farmers age and may transition ownership; -Assess how to ensure food production (and not mono-cropping) in the Meadows to be used for local food consumption. Nutrient Loading Regulations -Conduct a study to understand nutrient loadings and sources; -Host regional farmers’ meetings to discuss nutrient loadings; -Create local nutrient release regulations that surpass state regulations. INFRASTRUCTURAL LOWER PRIORITIES SOCIETAL LOWER PRIORITIES ENVIRONMENTAL LOWER PRIORITIES NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 26 V. Appendix A. CRB Workshop Participants Price Armstrong, Pioneer Valley Transit Authority Reid Bertone-Johnson, Smith College – Landscape Studies Stephanie Ciccarello, City of Amherst – Sustainability Joanne DeRose, National Grid Wayne Feiden, Northampton – Planning & Sustainability Adele Franks, Grow Food Northampton Jody Kasper, Northampton – Police Department Sarah LaValley, Northampton – Planning & Sustainability Denise Lello, Mothers Out Front and Climate Action Now Andrew Linkenhoker, Smith Vocational and Agricultural High School John Lombardi, Cooley Dickinson Hospital Doug McDonald, Northampton – Department of Public Works Chris Mason, Northampton – Central Services Darci Maresca, UMass Amherst – School of Earth and Sustainability Terry Masterson, Northampton – Economic Development Claire McCoy, Northampton intern; Smith College student Jenny Meyer, Northampton – Board of Health Carolyn Misch, Northampton – Planning & Sustainability Sharon Moulton, First Churches and Climate Action Now David Pomerantz, Northampton – Central Services Catherine Ratté, Pioneer Valley Planning Commission Lyn Simmons, Northampton – Mayor’s Office Emily Slotnik, Pioneer Valley Planning Commission, Northampton resident Irvine Sobelman, Climate Action Now; Northampton resident Ron Vandendolder, Coca-Cola David Veleta, Northampton – Department of Public Works Ben Weil, UMass Amherst – Clean Energy Extension; Northampton resident Dano Weisbord, Smith College – Sustainability and Campus Planning Marie Westburg, Northampton Senior Center Peter Wingate, Community Action of the Pioneer Valley Keith Zaltzberg, Regenerative Design Group NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 27 B. CRB Workshop Project Team Northampton Core Team Alan Wolf (2020) and Lyn Simmons (2018-2019), Mayor’s Chief of Staff Carolyn Misch, Assistance Director Planning & Sustainability Chris Mason, Energy and Sustainability Officer, Central Services David Veleta, City Engineer, Department of Public Works Donna LaScaleia, Director of Public Works Doug McDonald, Stormwater Coordinator, Department of Public Works Jody Kasper, Police Chief, Police Department Jon Davine, Fire Chief/Emergency Management Coordinator Keith Benoit (2020), Community Development Planner, Planning & Sustainability Merridith O’Leary, Director of Public Health Sarah LaValley, Conservation/Land Use Planner, Planning & Sustainability Wayne Feiden, Director Planning & Sustainability Facilitation Team Jim Newman, Principal, Linnean Solutions (Lead Facilitator) Holly Jacobson, Resilience Consultant, Linnean Solutions (Facilitator) Kim Lundgren, CEO, Kim Lundgren Associates (Facilitator) Mary Monahan, Associate, Fuss & O’Neill (Facilitator) Julie Busa, Environmental Scientist, Fuss & O’Neill (Facilitator) Kelsey Powers, Sustainability Consultant, Linnean Solutions (Notetaker) Ellie Hoyt, Sustainability Consultant, Linnean Solutions (Notetaker) Rachael Weiter, Water Resources Engineer, Fuss & O’Neill (Notetaker) Claire McCoy, Intern, City of Northampton (Notetaker) Jean Palma, Fellow, City of Northampton (Notetaker) C. Acknowledgments Special thanks to the City of Northampton and the Northampton Core Team for supporting, developing, and executing the MVP Program and for consulting for the April 2019 and March 2020 updates. D. Recommended Citation Feiden, W., Jacobson, H., and Newman, J. (2018). Community Resilience Building Workshop Summary of Findings. City of Northampton, Linnean Solutions, Kim Lundgren Associates, Inc., and Fuss & O’Neill, Inc. Northampton, MA. NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 28 E. Workshop Maps and Resources Base “Storyboard Map” The base “storyboard map” facilitated participatory mapping during the workshop. Workshop participants annotated this map as a way to visually represent their thoughts, tell stories of past experiences, flag particularly vulnerable locations, and highlight areas that might serve as a strengths. The annotated maps from each of the groups are included below the original. $XJÇ ñ ñ ñ ñ ÆP CooleyDickinsonHospital ConnecticutRiver HockanumMeadowsHulbertsPond HockanumRoad Pond OxbowCutoff Oxbow MillRiver BassettBrook Mil l R i v e rDi v e r s io n FlorenceStream Mil l Str e a m Broad Brook RockyHillPondBrookHannumBrookHalfway Brook Mil lRi ver Pars o n s Bro o k Mi l lRive rMillStream RobertsM eadow Broo kD a yBro okRunningGu t te r Cl ar kBr ookUnquomonkBrookB a s settB r ookT urkey B ro o k Br oa dBro o k Mill R iv e r Unquomonk Brook BarrettBrookRoaringBrookBroadBr ookNorthBranchManhanRiver DeerBrook Old Mill R iv e r B a s s e t t B r o o kFlorenc e Stream Elm er BrookDeerBrookDayBrookNo r t hBranchManhanRiverMarbleBrookRo c k y Hi l l P o n d Br ookB e a v e rBr o o k ClarkBrookRoaringBrookDay BrookBroadBrookS a n d y H illB r o o kRobertsMeadow BrookPineBrookDry BrookBroughtonsBrook NORTHAMPTONWESTHAMPTONNORTHAMPTONEASTHAMPTON NORTHAMPTONWILLIAMSBURG NORTHAMPTON HADLEYNORTHAMPTONHATFIELD WESTHAMPTONEASTHAMPTONWESTHAMPTONWILLIAMSBURG SO UTH H A DLE Y H O L Y O K E SOUTH HADLEYHADLEYEASTHAMPTO N HOLYOKEWILLIAMSBURGHATFIELD HA D LE YHATFIELD SmithCollege NORTHAMPTONCITY HALL WILLIAMSBURG TOWN HALL HADLEYTOWN HALL HATFIELDTOWN HALL Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and theGIS User Community ñ Town Hall $XJÇ Private ÆP Hospital Perennial Stream Intermittent Stream Pond, Lake, Ocean Wetland 1% Annual Chance of Flooding µ Data sources: MassGIS - Infrastructure, Hydrology, and Administrative Data ESRI - World Topographic Map - Base Map 0 0.5 10.25 Miles NORTHAMPTON, MA MUNICIPAL VULNERABILITY PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM Note: 1% Annual Chance of Flooding areabased on 1978 FEMA data. TownDump ÆPÆP STORYBOARD MAP [ORIGINAL] Workshop participants used a copy of this map to visually represent their thoughts. NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 29STORYBOARD MAP[BLUE GROUP] NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 30STORYBOARD MAP[RED GROUP] NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 31STORYBOARD MAP[GREEN GROUP] NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 32STORYBOARD MAP[YELLOW GROUP] NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 33 Risk Matrices Each group used a risk matrix to record vulnerabilities and strengths; locations and ownership of those features; action items to reduce vulnerability and enhance strengths; and then the relative level of priority and urgency of those action items. The annotated risk matrices from each group are included on the following pages. Community Resilience Building Risk Matrix www.CommunityResilienceBuilding.com Top Priority Hazards (tornado, floods, wildfire, hurricanes, earthquake, drought, sea level rise, heat wave, etc.)H‐M‐L priority for action over the Short or Long term (and Ongoing)Priority TimeV = Vulnerability S = Strength Features Location Ownership V or S Infrastructural Societal Environmental H ‐ M ‐ L Short Long OngoingFloodingIncreased temperatures Drought Extreme weather RISK MATRIX [ORIGINAL] Workshop facilitators used a copy of this risk matrix to record the findings from the group discussions. NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 34RISK MATRIX[BLUE GROUP] NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 35RISK MATRIX[RED GROUP] NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 36RISK MATRIX[GREEN GROUP] NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 37RISK MATRIX[YELLOW GROUP] NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 38 0 0.5 1 mileNORTHAMPTONHADLEYHADLEY NORTHAMPTON N SMITHCOLLEGE CONNECTICUT RIVERCONNEC T I C U T R I V E R Flooded Area Levee-Protected Area Phase C - “Flood Stage”Water surface elevation: 112 ft. Based on National Weather Service Flood Stages for the Connecticut River. At this flood stage, flooding causes minimal or no property damage, but possibly some public threat. Manhan Meadows starts flooding into Fort Hill Sewer interceptor. CITY HALL N O R T H A M P T O N E A S T H A M P T O N Figure adapted from “City of Northampton Local Emergency Flood Plan,” revised February 21, 2018. Flood data from City of Northampton Public Works is layered on ESRI World Topo base map. FLOOD MAPS The following flood maps are adapted from the City of Northampton Local Emergency Flood Plan, revised February 2018. They illustrate the extent of flooding to be expected in the southeast portion of the city when the water surface elevation reach 112 feet, 115 feet, and 135 feet, respectively. Provided Resource Maps The following maps were provided at the workshop tables to serve as resources for discussion. NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 39 0 0.5 1 mileNORTHAMPTONHADLEYHADLEY NORTHAMPTON N SMITHCOLLEGE CONNECTICUT RIVERCONNECT I C U T R I V E R CITY HALL N O R T H A M P T O N E A ST H A M P T O N Flooded Area Levee-Protected Area Phase D - “Moderate Flood Stage”Water surface elevation: 115 ft. Based on National Weather Service Flood Stages for the Connecticut River. At this flood stage, there is some inundation of structures and roads. Some evacuations of people and/or transfer of property to higher elevations may be necessary. Route 5 / Mt. Tom Road floods near the Easthampton line and/or Island Road. Venturer’s Field Road and Hockanum Road near flooding. Figure adapted from “City of Northampton Local Emergency Flood Plan,” revised February 21, 2018. Flood data from City of Northampton Public Works is layered on ESRI World Topo base map. FLOOD MAPS CONTINUED NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 40 0 0.5 1 mileNORTHAMPTONHADLEYHADLEY NORTHAMPTON N SMITHCOLLEGE CONNECTICUT RIVERCONNECT I C U T R I V E R CITY HALL N O R T H A M P T O N E A ST H A M P T O N Flooded AreaPhases F1, F2, F3 - “Major Flood Stages”Water surface elevation: 135 ft. Based on National Weather Service Flood Stages for the Connecticut River. At this flood stage, there is extensive inundation of structures and roads. Significant evacuations of people and/or transfer of property to higher elevations is necessary. Flooding reaches the top of the floodwall at 130 feet, and overtops the Connecticut River dikes at 132 feet. Figure adapted from “City of Northampton Local Emergency Flood Plan,” revised February 21, 2018. Flood data from City of Northampton Public Works is layered on ESRI World Topo base map. FLOOD MAPS CONTINUED NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 41FLORENCENORTHAMPTONLEEDS5REFERENCE MAPS The following maps show infrastructural, societal, and environmental features, respectively, within Northampton. They are designed to serve as a reference for discussion. NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 42SmithCollegeVeterans AffairsMedical CenterCooley DickinsonHospitalFLORENCENORTHAMPTONLEEDS5REFERENCE MAPS CONTINUED NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 43FLORENCENORTHAMPTONLEEDS5REFERENCE MAPS CONTINUED NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 44 F. Downscaled Climate Data Below are downscaled climate data for the Connecticut River Watershed, developed by the Northeast Climate Science Center at the University of Massachusetts Amherst with support from the Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs. These standardized, peer-reviewed set of climate change projections show the changes in temperature and precipitation that we can expect due to climate change through the end of the century. Changes in average, maximum, and minimum temperatures Average temperatures for the Connecticut River Watershed are expected to increase throughout the 21st century, reaching a 2° - 4°F increase by the 2030s, and a 4° - 11°F increase by the 2090s (Figure 1). We are expected to see higher maximum temperatures in the summer, and higher minimum temperatures in the winter as well. Changes in the number of days above 90°, 95°, and 100°F The number of days where maximum temperatures reach above 90°F in the Connecticut River Watershed is expected to increase throughout the 21st century, reaching a total of 13 - 26 days in the 2030s, and a total of 21 - 82 days by the 2090s (Figure 2). The number of days above 95° and 100°F are likewise expected to increase. CONNECTICUT BASIN Connecticut Basin Observed Baseline 1971-2000 (°F) Projected Change in 2030s (°F) Mid-Century Projected Change in 2050s (°F) Projected Change in 2070s (°F) End of Century Projected Change in 2090s (°F) Average Temperature Annual 46.98 +2.18 to +4.46 +3.00 to +6.43 +3.57 to +9.00 +4.04 to +10.94 Winter 25.01 +2.36 to +5.37 +3.02 to +7.99 +3.95 to +9.54 +4.18 to +10.83 Spring 45.35 +1.51 to +3.30 +2.26 to +5.21 +2.76 to +7.23 +3.11 to +8.81 Summer 67.93 +2.19 to +4.54 +3.05 to +7.24 +3.44 to +10.52 +3.91 to +12.94 Fall 49.24 +2.27 to +5.23 +3.81 to +6.81 +3.75 to +9.57 +4.21 to +11.69 Maximum Temperature Annual 58.45 +2.03 to +4.24 +2.65 to +6.56 +3.18 to +9.13 +3.63 to +11.03 Winter 35.23 +1.96 to +4.66 +2.61 to +7.11 +3.19 to +8.53 +3.43 to +9.63 Spring 57.16 +1.38 to +3.23 +2.13 to +5.16 +2.66 to +7.53 +3.17 to +8.99 Summer 80.18 +1.89 to +4.67 +2.75 to +7.45 +3.25 to +10.93 +3.76 to +13.41 Fall 60.8 +2.47 to +5.04 +3.65 to +7.16 +3.54 to +9.91 +4.21 to +12.20 Minimum Temperature Annual 35.51 +2.38 to +4.81 +3.35 to +6.64 +3.93 to +8.89 +4.37 to +10.89 Winter 14.8 +2.63 to +6.03 +3.56 to +8.76 +4.51 to +10.54 +4.94 to +11.83 Spring 33.53 +1.62 to +3.63 +2.38 to +5.64 +2.96 to +7.07 +3.29 to +8.59 Summer 55.67 +2.34 to +4.62 +3.21 to +7.33 +3.63 to +10.13 +4.07 to +12.49 Fall 37.68 +1.97 to +5.33 +3.58 to +6.64 +3.82 to +9.22 +4.21 to +11.37  The Connecticut basin is expected to experience increased average temperatures throughout the 21st century. Maximum and minimum temperatures are also expected to increase throughout the end of the century. These increased temperature trends are expected for annual and seasonal projections.  Seasonally, maximum summer and fall temperatures are expected to see the highest projected increase throughout the 21st century. o Summer mid-century increase of 2.8 °F to 7.5 °F (3-9% increase); end of century increase of 3.8 °F to 13.4 °F (5-17% increase). o Fall mid-century increase of 3.7°F to 7.2°F (6-12% increase); end of century increase by and 4.2 °F to 12.2 °F (7-20% increase).  Seasonally, minimum winter and fall temperatures are expected to see increases throughout the 21st century. o Winter mid-century increase of 3.6 °F to 8.8 °F (24-59% increase); end of century increase by 4.9 °F to 11.8 °F (33-80% increase). o Fall mid-century of 3.6 °F to 6.6 °F (10-18% increase); end of century increase of 4.2°F to 11.4 °F (11-30% increase). Figure 1. Average, maximum, and minimum temperature projections for the Connecticut River Watershed. NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 45 Number of days with a minimum temperature below 0° and 32°F The number of days where minimum temperatures are below 0°F in the Connecticut River Watershed is expected to decrease throughout the 21st century, dropping to a total of 4 - 7 days in the 2030s, and a total of 2 - 6 days by the 2090s (Figure 3). The total number of days below 32°F are likewise expected to decrease. CONNECTICUT BASIN Connecticut Basin Observed Baseline 1971-2000 (Days) Projected Change in 2030s (Days) Mid-Century Projected Change in 2050s (Days) Projected Change in 2070s (Days) End of Century Projected Change in 2090s (Days) Days with Maximum Temperature Over 90°F Annual 6.41 +6.36 to +19.72 +9.87 to +35.35 +11.98 to +57.07 +14.50 to +76.01 Winter 0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 Spring 0.39 +0.14 to +0.91 +0.30 to +1.76 +0.37 to +3.31 +0.28 to +5.00 Summer 5.73 +5.53 to +16.97 +8.31 to +29.50 10.37 to +46.30 +12.47 to +60.30 Fall 0.29 +0.44 to +2.09 +0.51 to +4.58 +0.61 to +8.80 +1.02 to +11.94 Days with Maximum Temperature Over 95°F Annual 0.46 +1.74 to +7.34 +2.77 to +16.31 +3.55 to +32.96 +4.56 to +49.67 Winter 0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 Spring 0.00 +0.00 to +0.26 +0.02 to +0.49 +0.04 to +1.03 +0.03 to +1.93 Summer 0.45 +1.71 to +6.53 +2.54 to +14.84 +3.05 to +28.97 +4.16 to +43.03 Fall 0.01 +0.06 to +0.63 +0.09 to +1.19 +0.13 to +3.23 +0.20 to +4.87 Days with Maximum Temperature Over 100°F Annual 0.00 +0.14 to +1.54 +0.22 to +4.35 +0.41 to +11.64 +0.38 to +23.33 Winter 0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 Spring 0.00 +0.00 to +0.03 +0.00 to +0.06 +0.00 to +0.21 +0.00 to +0.45 Summer 0.00 +0.13 to +1.45 +0.20 to +4.17 +0.36 to +10.72 +0.33 to +21.46 Fall 0.00 +0.00 to +0.14 +0.00 to +0.37 +0.01 to +0.75 +0.00 to +1.29  Due to projected increases in average and maximum temperatures throughout the end of the century, the Connecticut basin is also expected to experience an increase in days with daily maximum temperatures over 90 °F, 95 °F, and 100 °F. o Annually, the Connecticut basin is expected to see days with daily maximum temperatures over 90 °F increase by 10 to 35 more days by mid-century, and 15 to 76 more days by the end of the century. o Seasonally, summer is expected to see an increase of 8 to 30 more days with daily maximums over 90 °F by mid-century. o By end of century, the Connecticut basin is expected to have 12 to 60 more days. Figure 2. Number of days above 90°, 95°, and 100°F for the Connecticut River Watershed. CONNECTICUT BASIN Connecticut Basin Observed Baseline 1971-2000 (Days) Projected Change in 2030s (Days) Mid-Century Projected Change in 2050s (Days) Projected Change in 2070s (Days) End of Century Projected Change in 2090s (Days) Days with Minimum Temperature Below 0°F Annual 11.33 -4.01 to -7.02 -4.88 to -8.3 -5.42 to -8.76 -5.53 to -9.57 Winter 11 -3.84 to -6.82 -4.67 to -7.96 -5.11 to -8.52 -5.33 to -9.1 Spring 0.38 -0.08 to -0.44 -0.12 to -0.44 -0.18 to -0.49 -0.18 to -0.55 Summer 0.00 -0.00 to -0.00 -0.00 to -0.00 -0.00 to -0.00 -0.00 to -0.00 Fall 0.01 -0.02 to -0.00 -0.02 to -0.00 -0.02 to -0.00 -0.02 to -0.00 Days with Minimum Temperature Below 32°F Annual 158.63 -10.58 to -28.13 -18.57 to -37.28 -22.18 to -50.76 -22.88 to -59.79 Winter 85.33 -1.15 to -5.9 -2.37 to -8.5 -3.50 to -15.82 -4.26 to -19.49 Spring 41.52 -3.47 to -9.56 -6.03 to -13.97 -6.70 to -17.87 -8.82 to -19.42 Summer 0.02 -0.01 to -0.17 -0.01 to -0.27 -0.01 to -0.23 -0.01 to -0.26 Fall 31.7 -4.87 to -12.57 -9.60 to -15.50 -8.89 to -19.96 -9.36 to -22.29  Due to projected increases in average and minimum temperatures throughout the end of the century, the Connecticut basin is expected to experience a decrease in days with daily minimum temperatures below 32 °F and 0 °F.  Seasonally, winter, spring and fall are expected to see the largest decreases in days with daily minimum temperatures below 32 °F. o Winter is expected to have 2 to 9 fewer days by mid-century, and 4 to 19 fewer by end of century. o Spring is expected to have 6 to 14 fewer days by mid-century, and 9 to 19 fewer by end of century. o Fall is expected to have 10 to 16 fewer days by mid-century, and 9 to 22 fewer days by end of century. Figure 3. Number of days below 0° and 32°F for the Connecticut River Watershed. Number of heating, cooling, and growing degree days Over the 21st century, the number of heating degree days are expected to decrease, and the number of cooling degree days and growing degree days are predicted to increase in the Connecticut River Watershed (Figure 4). This suggests, in particular, that buildings will need to be heated less, but cooled more than they are currently on an annual basis. See the caption of Figure 4 for an explanation of these metrics. NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 46 CONNECTICUT BASIN Connecticut Basin Observed Baseline 1971-2000 (Degree- Days) Projected Change in 2030s (Degree-Days) Mid-Century Projected Change in 2050s (Degree-Days) Projected Change in 2070s (Degree-Days) End of Century Projected Change in 2090s (Degree-Days) Heating Degree-Days (Base 65°F) Annual 7038.04 -579.08 to -1220.89 -807.65 to -1696.71 -932.31 to -2213.81 -1061.27 to -2563.22 Winter 3617.34 -196.64 to -492.19 -267.53 to -731.67 -348.79 to -867.16 -385.45 to -997.60 Spring 1827.32 -122.30 to -279.16 -188.81 to -436.93 -225.95 to -566.74 -272.18 to -666.52 Summer 127 -45.72 to -80.45 -63.18 to -101.77 -66.76 to -116.60 -72.74 to -119.29 Fall 1471.22 -176.19 to -404.39 -298.62 to -486.71 -283.22 to -674.74 -306.64 to -768.06 Cooling Degree-Days (Base 65°F) Annual 459.27 +200.92 to +430.52 +272.64 to +749.47 +326.52 to +1142.40 +379.72 to +1504.58 Winter nan -0.39 to +2.36 +0.05 to +6.58 -0.14 to +3.38 -0.29 to +7.15 Spring 20.23 +10.02 to +28.89 +17.52 to +55.39 +21.11 to +92.67 +20.81 to +121.55 Summer 396.24 +162.41 to +335.42 +204.13 to +564.51 +235.28 to +853.52 +270.64 to +1075.43 Fall 37.72 +25.68 to +84.68 +40.57 to +136.51 +49.64 to +225.83 +63.95 to +304.46 Growing Degree-Days (Base 50°F) Annual 2348.43 +392.37 to +801.41 +536.06 to +1252.31 +652.08 to +1894.77 +739.11 to +2379.52 Winter 3.8 -0.26 to +8.95 +0.09 to +9.32 +0.51 to +14.24 +1.70 to +19.27 Spring 278.98 +59.68 to +130.77 +91.58 to +225.48 +117.65 to +331.37 +117.61 to +434.70 Summer 1649.87 +201.11 to +416.74 +279.05 to +664.79 +315.32 to +966.48 +358.57 to +1190.01 Fall 403.13 +105.14 to +284.19 +169.55 to +395.11 +166.52 to +591.21 +211.39 to +734.09 Due to projected increases in average, maximum, and minimum temperatures throughout the end of the century, the Connecticut basin is expected to experience a decrease in heating degree-days, and increases in both cooling degree-days and growing degree-days. Seasonally, winter historically exhibits the highest number of heating degree-days and is expected to see the largest decrease of any season, but spring and fall are also expected to see significant change. o The winter season is expected to see a decrease of 7-20% (268-732 degree-days) by mid-century, and a decrease of 11-28% (385-998 degree-days) by the end of century. o The spring season is expected to decrease in heating degree-days by 10-24% (189-437 degree-days) by mid-century, and by 15-36% (272-667 degree-days) by the end of century. o The fall season is expected to decreases in heating degree-days by 20-33% (299-487 degree-days) by mid-century, and by and 21-52% (307-768 degree-days) by the end of century. Conversely, due to projected increasing temperatures, summer cooling degree-days are expected to increase by 52-142% (204-565 degree-days) by mid-century, and by 68-271% (271- 1075 degree-days) by end of century. Figure 4. Number of heating degree days (HDD), cooling degree days (CDD), and growing degree days (GDD) in the Connecticut River Watershed. Note: HDDs are defined as the number of degrees that a day’s average temperature is below 65°F; CDDs are the number of degrees that a day’s average temperature is above 65°F; and GDDs are the number of degrees that a day’s average temperature is above 50°F. Number of days with precipitation over one inch, two inches, and four inches The number of days receiving over one inch of precipitation is expected to increase over the 21st century in the Connecticut River Watershed, with most of that increase coming in the winter and spring (summer and fall on the other hand may become drier) (Figure 5). The number of days with precipitation over two inches and over four inches may fluctuate, but are not projected to increase or decrease substantially. Seasonally, summer historically exhibits the highest number of growing degree-days and is expected to see the largest decrease of any season, but the shoulder seasons of spring and fall are also expected to see an increase in growing degree-days. o The summer season is projected to increase by 17-40% (279-665 degree-days) by mid- century, and by 22-72% (359-1190 degree-days) by end of century. o Spring is expected to see an increase by 33-81% (92-225 degree-days) by mid-century and 42-156% (118-435 degree-days) by end of century. o Fall is expected to see an increase by 42-98% (170-395 degree-days) by mid-century and 52-182% (211-734 degree-days) by end of century. CONNECTICUT BASIN Connecticut Basin Observed Baseline 1971-2000 (Days) Projected Change in 2030s (Days) Mid-Century Projected Change in 2050s (Days) Projected Change in 2070s (Days) End of Century Projected Change in 2090s (Days) Days with Precipitation Over 1” Annual 6.5 +0.05 to +2.22 +0.52 to +3.15 +0.80 to +2.82 +0.67 to +4.35 Winter 1.04 -0.04 to +0.74 +0.05 to +1.01 +0.06 to +1.30 +0.22 to +1.64 Spring 1.56 -0.08 to +0.62 +0.08 to +0.81 +0.17 to +1.20 +0.21 to +1.62 Summer 1.98 -0.37 to +0.57 -0.19 to +0.97 -0.34 to +0.66 -0.38 to +0.74 Fall 1.89 -0.28 to +0.70 -0.17 to +0.82 -0.27 to +1.00 -0.40 to +1.17 Days with Precipitation Over 2” Annual 0.55 -0.05 to +0.40 -0.01 to +0.39 +0.00 to +0.45 +0.04 to +0.58 Winter 0.03 -0.02 to +0.05 -0.02 to +0.07 -0.01 to +0.08 -0.01 to +0.09 Spring 0.1 -0.03 to +0.10 -0.03 to +0.09 -0.02 to +0.17 +0.00 to +0.25 Summer 0.26 -0.06 to +0.16 -0.07 to +0.17 -0.06 to +0.17 -0.09 to +0.19 Fall 0.16 -0.06 to +0.17 -0.06 to +0.16 -0.04 to +0.18 -0.05 to +0.19 Days with Precipitation Over 4” Annual 0.00 -0.03 to +0.03 -0.02 to +0.03 -0.01 to +0.05 -0.01 to +0.05 Winter 0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 Spring 0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 +0.00 to +0.00 Summer 0.00 -0.02 to +0.02 -0.02 to +0.02 -0.02 to +0.03 -0.02 to +0.03 Fall 0.00 -0.02 to +0.03 -0.01 to +0.03 -0.01 to +0.04 -0.01 to +0.04 The projections for expected number of days receiving precipitation over one inch are variable for the Connecticut basin, fluctuating between loss and gain of days. o Seasonally, the winter season is generally expected to see the highest projected increase. o The winter season is expected to see an increase in days with precipitation over one inch of 0-1 days by mid-century, and of 0-2 days by the end of century. o The spring season is expected to see an increase in days with precipitation over one inch of 0-1 days by mid-century, and of 0-2 days by the end of century. Figure 5. Number of days with over one inch, two inches, and four inches of rain. NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS PG. 47 Total precipitation Annual precipitation for the Connecticut River Watershed is expected to increase throughout the 21st century, increasing by 1 - 6 inches by the 2050s and by 2 - 8 inches by the 2090s (Figure 6). We are expected to see most of that increase occurring in the winter and spring (the summer and fall, in fact, may become drier). CONNECTICUT BASIN Connecticut Basin Observed Baseline 1971-2000 (Inches) Projected Change in 2030s (Inches) Mid-Century Projected Change in 2050s (Inches) Projected Change in 2070s (Inches) End of Century Projected Change in 2090s (Inches) Total Precipitation Annual 46.39 -0.40 to +4.99 +1.25 to +6.22 +1.95 to +7.26 +1.68 to +8.30 Winter 10.34 -0.39 to +2.08 +0.07 to +2.59 +0.30 to +3.03 +0.73 to +3.87 Spring 12.12 -0.05 to +2.09 +0.32 to +2.13 +0.57 to +2.80 +0.45 to +2.87 Summer 11.98 -0.37 to +1.76 -0.17 to +2.13 -0.34 to +1.85 -1.03 to +1.90 Fall 11.94 -1.20 to +1.48 -1.26 to +1.65 -1.50 to +1.78 -1.73 to +1.49 Similar to projections for number of days receiving precipitation over a specified threshold, seasonal projections for total precipitation are also variable for the Connecticut basin. o The winter season is expected to experience the greatest change with an increase of 1-25% by mid-century, and of 7-37% by end of century. o Projections for the summer and fall seasons are more variable, and could see either a drop or increase in total precipitation throughout the 21st century. The summer season projections for the Connecticut or basin could see a decrease of 0.2 to an increase of 2.1 inches by mid-century (decrease of 1% to increase of 18%), and a decrease of 1.0 to an increase of 1.9 inches by the end of the century (decrease of 9% to increase of 16%). The fall season projections for the Connecticut basin could see a decrease of 1.3 to an increase of 1.7 inches by mid-century (decrease of 11% to increase of 14% and a decrease of 1.7 to an increase of 1.5 inches by the end of the century (decrease of 14% to increase of 12%). Connecticut Basin Observed Baseline 1971-2000 (Days)Projected Change in 2030s (Days) Mid-Century Projected Change in 2050s (Days) Projected Change in 2070s (Days) End of Century Projected Change in 2090s (Days) Consecutive Dry Days Annual 16.41 -0.18 to +1.34 -0.42 to +1.75 -0.73 to +2.26 -0.35 to +2.44 Winter 11.4 -0.77 to +1.14 -0.57 to +1.30 -0.80 to +1.18 -1.21 to +1.47 Spring 11.95 -1.05 to +0.50 -0.91 to +1.05 -1.24 to +1.13 -1.24 to +0.76 Summer 11.57 -0.70 to +1.46 -0.61 to +1.07 -0.91 to +1.61 -1.37 to +1.87 Fall 12.03 -0.12 to +1.72 -0.21 to +2.35 -0.61 to +2.61 -0.13 to +2.78 Annual and seasonal projections for consecutive dry days, or for a given period, the largest number of consecutive days with precipitation less than 1 mm (~0.04 inches), are variable throughout the 21st century. o For all the temporal parameters, the Connecticut basin is expected to see a slight decrease to an increase in consecutive dry days throughout this century. o Seasonally, the fall and summer seasons are expected to continue to experience the highest number of consecutive dry days. The fall season is expected to experience an increase of 0-3 days in consecutive dry days by the end of the century. CONNECTICUT BASIN Connecticut Basin Observed Baseline 1971-2000 (Inches)Projected Change in 2030s (Inches) Mid-Century Projected Change in 2050s (Inches) Projected Change in 2070s (Inches) End of Century Projected Change in 2090s (Inches) Total Precipitation Annual 46.39 -0.40 to +4.99 +1.25 to +6.22 +1.95 to +7.26 +1.68 to +8.30 Winter 10.34 -0.39 to +2.08 +0.07 to +2.59 +0.30 to +3.03 +0.73 to +3.87 Spring 12.12 -0.05 to +2.09 +0.32 to +2.13 +0.57 to +2.80 +0.45 to +2.87 Summer 11.98 -0.37 to +1.76 -0.17 to +2.13 -0.34 to +1.85 -1.03 to +1.90 Fall 11.94 -1.20 to +1.48 -1.26 to +1.65 -1.50 to +1.78 -1.73 to +1.49 Similar to projections for number of days receiving precipitation over a specified threshold, seasonal projections for total precipitation are also variable for the Connecticut basin. o The winter season is expected to experience the greatest change with an increase of 1-25% by mid-century, and of 7-37% by end of century. o Projections for the summer and fall seasons are more variable, and could see either a drop or increase in total precipitation throughout the 21st century. The summer season projections for the Connecticut or basin could see a decrease of 0.2 to an increase of 2.1 inches by mid-century (decrease of 1% to increase of 18%), and a decrease of 1.0 to an increase of 1.9 inches by the end of the century (decrease of 9% to increase of 16%). The fall season projections for the Connecticut basin could see a decrease of 1.3 to an increase of 1.7 inches by mid-century (decrease of 11% to increase of 14% and a decrease of 1.7 to an increase of 1.5 inches by the end of the century (decrease of 14% to increase of 12%). Connecticut Basin Observed Baseline 1971-2000 (Days) Projected Change in 2030s (Days) Mid-Century Projected Change in 2050s (Days) Projected Change in 2070s (Days) End of Century Projected Change in 2090s (Days) Consecutive Dry Days Annual 16.41 -0.18 to +1.34 -0.42 to +1.75 -0.73 to +2.26 -0.35 to +2.44 Winter 11.4 -0.77 to +1.14 -0.57 to +1.30 -0.80 to +1.18 -1.21 to +1.47 Spring 11.95 -1.05 to +0.50 -0.91 to +1.05 -1.24 to +1.13 -1.24 to +0.76 Summer 11.57 -0.70 to +1.46 -0.61 to +1.07 -0.91 to +1.61 -1.37 to +1.87 Fall 12.03 -0.12 to +1.72 -0.21 to +2.35 -0.61 to +2.61 -0.13 to +2.78  Annual and seasonal projections for consecutive dry days, or for a given period, the largest number of consecutive days with precipitation less than 1 mm (~0.04 inches), are variable throughout the 21st century. o For all the temporal parameters, the Connecticut basin is expected to see a slight decrease to an increase in consecutive dry days throughout this century. o Seasonally, the fall and summer seasons are expected to continue to experience the highest number of consecutive dry days. The fall season is expected to experience an increase of 0-3 days in consecutive dry days by the end of the century. Figure 6. Total precipitation for the Connecticut River Watershed. Consecutive dry days Annual and seasonal projections for the number of consecutive dry days are variable for the Connecticut River Watershed throughout the 21st century (Figure 7). See the caption of Figure 7 for an explanation of the metric. Figure 7. Number of consecutive dry days for the Connecticut River Watershed. Consecutive dry days are defined as the largest number of consecutive days within a particular period with precipitation less than 1mm (approximately 0.04 inches). Photo credit for the back page: Holly Jacobson Photo credits for the cover images (from left to right, top to bottom): Alexius Horatius, John Phelan, Alexius Horatius, John Phelan, John Phelan, Jvlind, Daderot, Winding Road, Magic Piano. Summary Report produced by Linnean Solutions. NORTHAMPTON COMMUNITY RESILIENCE BUILDING WORKSHOP SUMMARY OF FINDINGS