Northampton_HMP_u_070820_FinalDraft-WORDTHE CITY OF NORTHAMPTON
MULTI-HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
2020 Update
Adopted by the Northampton City Council on DATE
Prepared by:
The Northampton Hazard Mitigation Committee
and
Pioneer Valley Planning Commission
60 Congress Street
Springfield, MA 01104
(413) 781-6045
www.pvpc.org
Placeholder for new adoption certificate/ City Council approval.
Acknowledgements
Thanks to the Northampton Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee and those who participated in the planning process as specialty committee members, attending and consulting as needed,
and Planning & Sustainability, the City’s Hazard Mitigation Plan project manager.
The City of Northampton, its Mayor,and its City Council offers thanks to the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) for developing the Massachusetts Hazard Mitigation Plan
which served as a model for this plan. In addition, special thanks are extended to the staff of the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission for professional services, process facilitation
and preparation of this document.
Table of Contents1: Planning Process1Introduction1Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee1Participation by Stakeholders32: Local Profile7Community Setting73: Hazard Identification and Analysis13Natural
Hazard Analysis Methodology14Climate Change and Natural Hazards18Flooding21Dam Failure / Levee Breach36Drought40Extreme Temperatures46Wildfires / Brushfires56Invasive Species60Hurricane/
Tropical Storm66Severe Winter Storm / Nor’easter71Severe Thunderstorm / Wind / Tornado81Earthquake86Pandemic and Epidemic91Other Hazards994: Critical Facilities1015: Mitigation Strategies109Existing
Mitigation Strategies109Discontinued or Completed Mitigation Strategies146Prioritized Implementation Plan1486: Plan review, evaluation, implementation, and adoption161Plan Adoption161Plan
Implementation161Incorporation with Other Planning Documents161Plan Monitoring and Evaluation1637: Appendices164Appendix A – Documentation of the Planning Process164Appendix B – List
of Acronyms185Appendix C – Past and Potential Hazards / Critical Facilities Map187Appendix D – Natural Hazard Profiling Methodology188Appendix E – References191Appendix F – Technical
Resources194
1: Planning Process
Introduction
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) define Hazard Mitigation as any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate
long-term risk to people and property from natural hazards such as flooding, storms, high winds, hurricanes, wildfires, and earthquakes. Mitigation efforts undertaken by communities
will help to minimize damages to buildings and infrastructure, such as water supplies, sewers, and utility transmission lines, as well as natural, cultural and historic resources.
Planning efforts, like the one undertaken by the City of Northampton and the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission, make mitigation a proactive process. Pre-disaster mitigation planning
emphasizes actions that can be taken before a natural disaster occurs. Future property damage and loss of life can be reduced or prevented by a mitigation program that addresses the
unique geography, demography, economy, and land use of a community within the context of each of the specific potential natural hazards that may threaten a community.
Preparing a Local Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan before a disaster occurs can save the community money and will facilitate post-disaster funding. Costly repairs or replacement of buildings
and infrastructure, as well as the high cost of providing emergency services and rescue/recovery operations, can be avoided or significantly lessened if a community implements the mitigation
measures detailed in the Plan. FEMA requires that a community adopt a pre-disaster mitigation plan as a condition for mitigation funding, including the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
(HMGP), the Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (FMA), and the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program (PDM).
Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee
In 2020, the City of Northampton completed an update of their 2015 Hazard Mitigation Plan, in collaboration with the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission. All portions of the plan were
reviewed and updated as necessary. Planning for hazard mitigation in Northampton involved a seven-member Steering Committee:
Jon Davine, Fire Department and Emergency Management
Jody Kasper, Police Chief
Sarah LaValley, Planning and Sustainability
Doug McDonald, Stormwater Manager, Public Works
David Pomerantz, Central Services Director
David Veleta, PE, City Engineer, Public Works
Kelly Schuetze, Dispatch Director
In addition to the Steering Committee, the following stakeholders attended committee meetings and were available for consultation throughout the planning process:
Wayne Feiden, Planning and Sustainability
Chris Mason, Central Services
Donna LaScalia, Department of Public Works
Merridth O'Leary, Department of Health
Andrew Pelis, Fire Department and Emergency Management
The Hazard Mitigation Plan update process for the City included the following tasks:
Reviewing and incorporating existing plans and other information.
Identifying the natural hazards that may impact the community.
Conducting a Vulnerability/Risk Assessment to identify the infrastructure and structures at the highest risk for being damaged by the identified natural hazards, particularly flooding.
Identifying and assessing the policies, programs, and regulations the community is currently implementing to protect against future disaster damages.
Identifying deficiencies in the current strategies and establishing goals for updating, revising or adopting new strategies.
Adopting and implementing the final updated Hazard Mitigation Plan.
The key product of this process was the development of a Mitigation Strategy and Action Plan with a Prioritized Implementation Schedule.
Hazard Mitigation Committee Meetings
Northampton kicked off its Hazard Mitigation Plan update at the same time as the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) was spreading across the United States and the world. Federal, state, and
local restrictions on public gatherings and social distancing inhibited the Steering Committee and project planning team from meeting in person. The same restrictions prohibited in-person
public meetings. As a result, all HMP meetings, both of the Steering Committee and for public engagement, were held virtually using a Zoom platform until COVID-19 restrictions were lifted
in early summer of 2020. Meetings were held on the dates listed below. Agendas for each meeting are included in Appendix A. After review by MEMA, the Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee
met to review and incorporate MEMA feedback.
April 2, 2020, 9:30 a.m., Zoom
April 28, 2020, 7:30 p.m. Zoom
May 21, 2020, 9:30 a.m., Zoom
June 4, 2020, 9:30 a.m., Zoom
June 22, 2020, 7:30 p.m., Zoom
Agendas and sign-in sheets for each meeting can be found in Appendix A. While not all members of the Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee were able to attend each meeting, all members
collaborated on the plan and were updated on progress by fellow Committee members after meetings occurred as necessary.
Participation by Stakeholders
A variety of stakeholders were provided with an opportunity to be involved in the development of the Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan. The different categories of stakeholders that
were involved, and the engagement activities that occurred, are described below.
Local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities and surrounding community engagement and input
The Pioneer Valley Planning Commission is a regional planning agency for 43 towns and cities in Massachusetts' Hampden and Hampshire Counties. PVPC regularly engages with the City of
Northampton as part of its regional planning efforts, which include the following:
Developing the Pioneer Valley Regional Land Use Plan, Valley Vision 2, which advocates for sustainable land use throughout the region and consideration for the impact of flooding and
other natural hazards on development.
Developing the Pioneer Valley Climate Action and Clean Energy Plan, which assesses the impact that climate change will have on the region and recommends strategies for mitigation that
can be implemented by local municipalities and businesses.
Collaborating with state agencies, such as the Department of Conservation and Recreation, to maintain inventories of critical infrastructure throughout the region.
All of these PVPC initiatives considered the impact of natural hazards on the region and strategies for reducing their impact to people and property through hazard mitigation activities.
The facilitation of the Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan by PVPC ensured that the information from these plans was incorporated into the Hazard Mitigation Planning process.
In addition, the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission and several representatives of the Northampton Hazard Mitigation Committee (Jon Davine and Andrew Pelis) are actively involved in
the Western Region Homeland Security Advisory Council (WRHSAC). WRHSAC, which includes representatives from western Massachusetts municipalities, Fire Departments, Public Works Departments,
Police Departments, area hospitals and regional transit from throughout the four counties of western Massachusetts, is responsible for allocating emergency preparedness funding from
the US Department of Homeland Security. The representatives of these disciplines who serve on the WRHSAC are charged with sharing the information discussed at meetings with their colleagues
at their regular meetings. During the HMP update process, PVPC staff attended all WRHSAC and WRHSAC Pandemic Flu Planning Subcommittee meetings and all WRHSAC members wereaware of the
fact that Northampton was updating their Hazard Mitigation Plan. Meetings of WRHSAC regularly involve discussion about how to improve emergency preparedness in western Massachusetts,
and hazard mitigation activities are included in this discussion.
For the update of this Hazard Mitigation Plan, PVPC asked fellow members of WRHSAC for feedback on mitigation activities and natural hazards pertaining to Northampton, and kept WRHSAC’s
Pandemic Flu Planning Subcommittee apprised on the Plan Update process. This was the method through which WRHSAC was engaged in the planning process.
In addition, PVPC staff regularly present to their Executive Committee and Commission (representatives from the 43 cities and towns that comprise the Pioneer Valley), when new projects
are launched and when funding opportunities are available. As result, all the communities in the region were informed of Northampton’s Hazard Mitigation Plan update process and encouraged
to comment.
PVPC staff included a summary article on the status of Hazard Mitigation planning in Northampton and the region in the monthly e-reader newsletter that is mailed to area Chambers of
Commerce, all member municipalities, area colleges and universities and other key stakeholders in the region. In this way, businesses, educational institutions and other key stakeholders
were educated about and informed of Northampton’s Hazard Mitigation planning work.
Agencies that have the authority to regulate development
Several City staff who participated in the Northampton Hazard Mitigation Committee have direct connections to various municipal commissions, boards, and committees within Northampton
that have the authority to regulate development. These commissions and the Hazard Mitigation Committee members involved in each are as follows:
Transportation and Parking Commission, Energy and Sustainability Commission, Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee, Planning Board, Resilience Hub planning group - Wayne Feiden, Planning
and Sustainability
Department of Public Works - David Veleta, PE, City Engineer
Conservation Commission, Historical Commission, Community Preservation Committee - Sarah LaValley, Planning and Sustainability
Local Emergency Planning Committee - Jon Davine, Fire Department and Emergency Management Coordinator
Energy and Sustainability Commission - Chris Mason, Energy and Sustainability Officer in Central Services
Feedback from the stakeholder agencies listed above was ensured through the participation of the Hazard Mitigation Committee members, who were able to attend the Hazard Mitigation Committee
meetings representing their respective groups.
In addition, the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission, as a regional planning authority, works with all agencies that regulate development in Northampton, including the municipal entities
listed above and state agencies, such as the Department of Conservation and Recreation and MassDOT. This regular involvement ensured that during the development of the Northampton Hazard
Mitigation Plan, the operational policies and any mitigation strategies or identified hazards from these entities were incorporated into the Hazard Mitigation Plan.
Participation by the Public, Businesses, and Neighboring Communities
Two public planning sessions were held as part of the development of the Northampton Plan – on April 28th, 2020 at 6:30 p.m. and June 22th, 2020 at 6:30 p.m. While the first public meeting,
convened virtually via Zoom, was held early in the planning process, the second meeting, also convened virtually via Zoom, occurred after the Hazard Mitigation Committee had provided
input on hazards and mitigation strategies relevant to the community. Notice of both public meetings was posted on the City of Northampton and its Planning and Sustainability webpage
calendars and at Northampton City Hall in compliance with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ Open Meeting Law. Public meeting agendas and notices can be found in Appendix A.
On June 15, 2020, the City sent a press release to all area media outlets to inform the public that a draft of the Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan had been posted at http://northamptonma.gov/plan
and PVPC’s website. The release also indicated that hard copies were available at Northampton City Hall, and that all residents of Northampton were encouraged to comment on the Plan
by e-mailing or calling staff contacts at PVPC or the City of Northampton.
The press release and a screen shot of PVPC’s website showing the link to the press release can be found in Appendix A.
All press releases were sent to local media outlets and the 1849 members of the Planning and Sustainability mailing list, which includes City residents and businesses, local and regional
social service organizations, and nonprofits, and municipalities throughout the Pioneer Valley, as well as to Western Massachusetts’ media outlets.
The Hazard Mitigation Committee determined that the most effective outreach strategy for engaging with the public, businesses and neighboring communities was through the media and Planning
& Sustainability’s list serve, and so this was the outreach strategy employed for reaching out to all three groups of stakeholders. The press release indicated that residents of Northampton
were invited to attend the public event, which was also intended to include representatives of businesses in Northampton and residents of neighboring communities.
Businesses and neighboring communities were also provided with an opportunity to provide feedback through the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission. PVPC is regularly involved in land use,
transportation, and environmental planning initiatives in Northampton and surrounding communities. Regular feedback received from these other initiatives were incorporated into the hazard
mitigation planning process.
Additional outreach to surrounding communities occurred through the regular monthly e-newsletter that PVPC sends out to its member communities about its recent activities. In these publications,
adjacent municipalities were encouraged to reach out to PVPC about hazard mitigation plans by e-mailing or calling staff contacts at PVPC. These notices are included in Appendix A.
Feedback was received from the public during and in response to the two public meetings. That feedback has been incorporated into the plan body where appropriate. In many cases, members
of the public asked questions and expressed concern over emergency preparedness, response, and recovery topics that fell outside of the purview of this HMP. For instance, one comment
related to the City’s readiness to handle a natural gas line explosion like the ones that happened in Lawrence, MA in recent years. Another comment expressed concern about maintaining
communications during emergency response periods for those who rely solely on internet – a situation that gained particular interest during the COVID-19 quarantine and shelter-in-place
periods of the spring of 2020. Wherever possible, these comments and concerns were folded into the Plan under the capabilities assessment or hazard profiles as indirect impacts or vulnerabilities.
The City had undergone multiple planning processes, which included robust community engagement through online and paper surveys, in-person community meetings, and stakeholder meetings,
among other strategies, over two years leading up to this HMP update. Some of these planning processes included the development of the City’s Climate Resilience and Regeneration Plan
(CCRP) in March 2018 and Community Resilience Building (CRB) workshops through the Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness (MVP) Program in May 2018. Community surveys providing valuable
insight into the community’s needs and concerns relative to natural hazards and climate resilience were a component of the CCRP. The HMP Steering Committee incorporated the concepts
and community-driven responses to those planning processes into this Hazard Mitigation Plan update. Many of the priorities and proposed strategies identified in the City’s Statement
of Findings, through the MVP CRB process, are found in this plan. Northampton residents, boards and committees, and elected officials all contributed to the development of those planning
processes, and because they happened so close in time to the HMP update the HMP Steering Committee decided not to conduct an additional public survey. The overlap of these issues and
strategies confirms Northampton’s commitment of understanding ways to ensure climate resiliency in development, city operations and policies. Those plans and summaries of the associated
public engagement processes can be viewed at https://www.northamptonma.gov/2069/Climate and https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2019/07/11/Northampton%20Report.pdf .
No other feedback was received from businesses or neighboring communities during the plan update process. Any future input received from the public, as well as any other stakeholders,
will be incorporated into the Plan during future regular updates.
City Council Meeting
In 2019, the City of Northampton began the process of updating its Hazard Mitigation Plan. Once the plan was provisionally approved by FEMA, the City Council held a public hearing to
formally adopt the Plan Update.
2: Local Profile
Community Setting
Northampton, Massachusetts, is approximately 36.1 square miles. It is mid-way between Connecticut to the south and Vermont to the north and between Albany, NY, to the west and Boston
to the east.
The City lies within the Connecticut River watershed, located west of the river. The land nearest the Connecticut River has rich, fertile soils and a deep agricultural history. Adjacent
to these fertile floodplains of the Connecticut River is the deep, flat glacial outwash, underlying much of the historic residential, commercial and industrial development in downtown
Northampton, downtown Florence, and many other older established residential neighborhoods.
The population of Northampton was 28,451 in 2019, according to the U.S. Population and Housing Estimates Program, scattered through downtown, and throughout villages of Florence, Leeds,
Bay State, and Village Hill.
Development
During the past five years, Northampton has seen new and infill development in various neighborhoods in the City.
The most significant development is the redevelopment of the former Northampton State Hospital, or now Village Hill, which continues to be built out. There are two affordable housing
projects, with a total of 66 units, and a co-housing project under construction.
There continues to be development in downtown Northampton and its commercial district of King Street with multi-family, townhome residential development in downtown, and new businesses
on King Street. The city also is exploring the Community & Resilience Hub to be sited in downtown Northampton. There are some commercial and municipal development projects in the planning
stages elsewhere in the city, and there is healthy residential development all over the city.
There has not been any development in flood zones or other areas determined to be at high risk from the hazards identified in this plan, though downtown Northampton is located in the
inundation area that would be affected by a failure of the Connecticut River levee system.
Development in Hazard Areas
Most hazards identified in this plan are regional risks, therefore, all new development falls into the hazard area. The exception to this is flooding. Northampton is a participating
member of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). According to FEMA’s Community Information System (CIS), there were 88 National Flood Insurance Policy (NFIP) policies in force
in Northampton in May, 2020, including 76 residential policies and 12 non-residential policies. The majority of these policies (60 or 88) are associated with structures located within
the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) or 100-year floodplain, shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps as zones beginning with the letters 'A' or 'V'.
Infrastructure
Northampton’s location on the Connecticut River was a strong determinant on the growth of the city. The river bottom provided rich alluvial soils for agriculture and the river itself
provided power and shipping opportunities for the silk industry. The gentle sloping terrain of the Berkshire foothills, in the western section of the city, helped keep development concentrated
in the downtown center that grew along the banks of the river. The existing infrastructure reflects the influence of this geography.
Roads and Highways
Northampton sits in the heart of the crossroads of New England and, therefore, has many major thoroughfares running through its borders. The most significant transportation route, Interstate
91, has four exits in Northampton. Other major roadways are Routes 5, 9, 10 and 66. Route 9 connects Northampton with towns to the east including Hadley, Amherst, Belchertown, Ware
and all points east as well as the westerly towns of Williamsburg, Cummington and Pittsfield. Route 66 connects Northampton with Westhampton, Huntington and the Hilltowns to the West.
Routes 5 and 10 converge in Northampton, providing connection to Hatfield, Greenfield and Brattleboro, Vermont. Route 10 runs south from Northampton to connect with Easthampton and
Route 141; Route 5 runs south from Northampton to connect with Holyoke, Springfield, and Enfield, Connecticut.
There are major roadway construction projects currently underway or due to start within the next year throughout the city including construction of aroundabout at Exit 19 off I-91, a
roundabout on N. King Street, replacement of the I-91 bridges over Route 5 the railroad and Hockanum Road, and reconstruction of Damon Road and King Street from Bright to Church Streets.
There are related repaving, sidewalk replacements, and handicap access projects that are also underway or due to start within the next two years.
Since 2018, the City has led a collaboration to meet the region’s unique challenges. ValleyBike share is designed to promote short bike trips within core communities, where clusters
of large employers, colleges, shopping, tourist destinations and residents can readily be connected. The program initially started with 50 bike share stations where people are able to
rent bicycles. Northampton will be constructing new stations in the future.
Rail
Freight traveling on the Boston and Maine Rail Line runs through the center of downtown Northampton on a daily basis, with a bridge over Route 9, and sharing tracks with Amtrak. The
City of Northampton is situated within the Sustainable Knowledge Corridor, a region of New England that includes the Hartford and Springfield metropolitan regions connected by Amtrak’s
New Haven Rail Line, which runs north-south from Connecticut to Vermont. New passenger train service called the “Valley Flyer” is currently operating on a pilot basis until the fall
of 2021 that provides daily service, tripling Amtrak’s daily frequency through the corridor. This new service supplements the existing Vermonter route.
Public Transportation
Served by various regional bus companies, including Greyhound and Peter Pan, downtown Northampton is the pulse point for public transportation in the city. Northampton also has multiple
linkages to surrounding communities through both the Pioneer Valley Transit Authority (PVTA) and the Franklin Regional Transit Authority (FRTA). Bus lines operated by the PVTA travel
roundtrip east-to-west along Route 9 to and from Amherst, Hadley and South Hadley. These fixed routes run hourly throughout the day and primarily serve Five College commuters. Bus
stops are located in both high-volume sections of the city as well intermittent locations along served routes. A PVTA bus route runs between downtown Northampton and downtown Florence
during regular business hours. A PVTA bus route runs between downtown Northampton and the Holyoke Mall. Neighboring Easthampton has two bus routes that connect with Northampton, PVTA’s
Nashawannuck Express, which operates as a flex route shuttle, and a PVTA bus route.
A bus route maintained by FRTA runs between Northampton and Greenfield during regular business hours. The PVTA also provides demand-response transportation services for the elderly and
disabled residents within their jurisdiction, which includes Northampton.
Public Drinking Water Supply
City Water is available to Florence, Bay State, Leeds, Village Hill and Northampton and along those routes where development has occurred. The Northampton Department of Public Works
provides potable water to approximately 8,705 customers, through 8,534 service connections. These connections include approximately 189 commercial, 17 industrial, 98 institutional and
29 municipal facilities, and over 8,000 residential services.Outlying developed areas of Northampton are served by private wells.
In 2019, approximately 99 percent of the drinking water supply came from three surface water reservoirs and watersheds: the Francis P. Ryan and West Whately Reservoirs and watersheds,
located in Whately, Williamsburg and Conway, and the Mountian Street Reservoir and watershed, located in Williamsburg, Hatfield and Whately. The City owns, operates and maintains a water
filtration plant in Williamsburg that treats and disinfects drinking water from these sources prior to distribution.
Additionally, Northampton gets approximately 1 percent of its drinking water supply from wells in the Florence section of Northampton. These wells have the capacity to provide up to
half of the City’s supply under demand, and have chlorination systems installed. In 2018, the dam creating the Upper Roberts Meadow Reservoir was removedfor disinfection.
In 2018, the high hazard dam creating the Upper Roberts Meadow Reservoir in Leeds, the long abandoned, original water supply for the City, was removed. The Middle and Lower Roberts Meadow
Reservoirs downstream are also former water supply reservoirs that remain but are no longer connected to the water distribution system. The Middle Roberts Meadow Reservoir could be used
as a source of water for fire suppression in an emergency.
The primary water supply for the City is delivered through two transmission mains, a 36-inch main installed in 1993 below established roadways and a 20-inch cross-country main installed
in 1901 and field-lined in 1958 that generally follows Beaver Brook from Route 9 to the Mountain Street reservoir with difficult and wet access that also traverses private property.
Both mains are in service and needed for water distribution.
According to the most recent Open Space, Recreation & Multi-Use Trail Plan (2018-2025), the City supplies 1.25 billion gallons of water to customers, or an average of 3.4 million gallons
per day, with a maximum peak of 4.8 million gallons. The most water used in one day was 3.96 million gallons. The design capacity of the water filtration plant is 6.5 million gallons,
which can easily meet the city’s peak demand.
During dry summer months, the City’s DPW implementsa water use restriction policy in order to comply with the MassDEP’s requirements. DEP requires that water use be restricted when average
daily stream flow in the Mill River drops below 26.3 cubic feet per second for a 3-day period or when the State issues a drought advisory. The Water Use Restriction can be lifted when
the stream flow average meets or exceeds the minimum flow for 7 consecutive days. When a water use restriction is in place, there is a ban on non-essential outdoor watering. The City
ended the water use restriction most recently in December 2019.
The City has and continues to work with surrounding communities to acquire water supply lands and jointly preserve the watersheds. Additionally, much of Hatfield’s drinking water aquifer
is located in Northampton, and the City has aggressively regulated this area and acquired open space to protect Hatfield’s water supply.
Sewer Service
Northampton, Bay State, Leeds, Village Hill, and Florence have municipal sewer services, as do the connecting points in between. The City has a sewer treatment facility that treats effluent
from both Northampton and neighboring Williamsburg, including institutional, commercial, and industrial users. Wastewater receives preliminary treatment, primary treatment, secondary
treatment, and disinfection.Sludge is separated and dewatered and then trucked outside of Northampton for final disposal. Wastewater is discharged to the Connecticut River via outfall
pipe.
The city has roughly 110 miles of sanitary sewer pipes.Outlying developed areas of Northampton are served by private septic systems regulated by the Board of Health.
Schools
Public and private schools in Northampton include Bridge Street School, Jackson Street School, Leeds School, Ryan Road School, Smith College Campus School, Smith College, Montessori
School of Northampton, Solomon Schechter Day School, JFK Middle School, Northampton High School, and Smith Vocational & Agricultural High School. Smith Vocational & Agricultural High
School serves an emergency regional shelter serving both humans and pets. During the first phase of Covid-19 emergency, the Northampton High School was used as an emergency shelter for
homeless populations.
Natural Resources
The rich alluvial floodplains of the Connecticut River define Northampton’s eastern boundary. In the bottomlands, wetlands and farm fields continue to provide the same scenic and ecological
benefits to Northampton that have existed for thousands of years since the end of the last ice age (and the corresponding formation and draining of Glacial Lake Hitchcock) some 12,000
years ago. On the city’s western boundary, the foothills of the Berkshires begin their slow, steady rise to the peak of Mount Greylock. To the north and south, the Connecticut River
Valley stretches north to Vermont and South to Connecticut. These features, the river, the valley and the hills, frame Northampton and provide a home to not only Northampton’s dynamic
population of more than 28,000 individuals but also to hundreds of species of flora and fauna.
Forests
Approximately fifty percent of Northampton is covered by a mixed deciduous forest, including oak, maple, and beech, with smaller coniferous forests, including spruce, pine, and hemlock.
Forests provide an abundance of timber, opportunities for recreation, wildlife habitat, the benefits of climate moderation, and the protection of water quality. The City’s Tree Warden
has planted over 1,000 trees since 2016, bolstering a robust urban forest that helps to mitigate the impacts of climate change. The forest and intermixed agricultural land also provide
a visually pleasant landscape for residents and visitors too. The City's forests are mainly closed-canopied and middle-aged, having a great diversity of species, but no diversity of
horizontal or vertical structural.
Tree species and forest composition reflect this variety of landforms. Because of Northampton’s latitude, those species associated with northern hardwood forests are most common. In
Northampton’s floodplain, silver maple, cottonwood, elms, along with other species common to frequently inundated areas, are common. In higher, drier terrain, oaks, hickories, maples,
black birch and scarlet oak are common species in fields, front lawns and gentle hills. On shady hillsides, it is commons to find oaks, hickories, white birch and other species associated
with transitional hardwood forests.
The forests and wetlands that fill Northampton’s landscape also play host to a wide variety of wildlife. Bear, bobcat, minx, fishers, moose and deer have all been sighted in Northampton,
and the city’s wetlands and water bodies are important homes for salamanders, frogs, turtles and snakes as well as many fish species.
Water Resources
Northampton water resources include open water bodies, wetlands, floodplain, and drinking water suppliesand aquifers. These water resources are all sensitive ecological resources, but
they also provide excellent agricultural, forest, open space, scenic, recreation, and wildlife habitat resources for the city’s residents.
Rivers and Streams
The Connecticut River forms Northampton’s eastern boundary and is the city’s most significant river. The Mill River and the Manhan River are two smaller, but important, rivers for the
City to monitor and protect. The Mill River runs parallel to downtown Northampton, was once diverted, and has had an Army Corps levee system constructed to reduce flooding risk. The
Connecticut River and Mill River both have floodplains, and each has a pumping station that works in conjunction with their levee systems. The Manhan River flows through Northampton’s
southwestern edge, enters Easthampton, and then drains into the Connecticut RiverOxbow. There are 9 major brooks: Marble Brook, Turkey Brook, Beaver Brook, Day Brook, Roberts Meadow
Brook, Clark Brook, Broad Brook, Hannum Brook and Parsons Brook.
Wetlands
The City estimates that there are over 3,000 acres of wetlands in Northampton. Many, but certainly not all, of the City’s wetlands are mapped by the National Wetlands Inventory with
local supplemental data extracted from permit filings.
Beaver Dams
Beaver activity continues to be an issue in Northampton. Wetland areas have been flooded by beaver dam construction. As a result, their vegetation has changed from forested wetland
to marshy habitat. Sometimes beaver activity is detrimental to property, causing problems for local land owners (e.g., flooding of wells, septic systems, lawns, out-buildings, and roadways).
Affected individuals must contact the Board of Health and Conservation Commission for advice and permission to alleviate the beaver problem.
Aquifers
Northampton has a public drinking water aquifer located in Florence. The City also shares an aquifer with Hatfield, which is in the Broad Brook area of Northampton, and neighboring Easthampton’s
aquifer is located in the West Farms area of Northampton.
The Northampton Aquifer has three delineated Zone II recharge areas. A Zone II is area of an aquifer that contributes to a well under the most server pumping and recharge conditions
that can be anticipated. Threats to Zone II recharge areas can include contamination from residential use, roadways, hazardous materials, oil contamination and agricultural uses.
3: Hazard Identification and Analysis
This chapter examines the natural hazards which are identified as likely to affect Northampton in more detail, and includes a summary of disasters that have affected or could affect
Northampton. In order to identify natural hazards of concern for the Plan Update, the Committee and its consulting team reviewed the 2015 Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan, the 2018
Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation and Climate Adaptation Plan (SHMCAP), available hazard mapping, and other weather-related databases. Historical research and conversations with
local officials and emergency management personnel were also used to identify and profile the natural hazards which are most likely to have an impact on the City.
The assessment conducted for the former HMP recognized the following 8 natural hazards that could potentially impact Northampton:
Floods
Severe snowstorms / ice storms
Hurricanes
Severe thunderstorms / wind / tornadoes
Wildfires / brushfires
Earthquakes
Dam failure / levee breech
Drought
All of the hazards identified and assessed in the 2015 HMP were determined to be relevant for the 2020 Plan Update. However, some of these hazards were reclassified to align with the
2018 SHMCAP (for example, “hurricanes” was expanded to include “hurricanes/ tropical storms,” and severe snowstorms / ice storms” was renamed to “severe winter storm/ nor’easter”) and
three new hazards—extreme temperatures, invasive species, and pandemic—were added.
The resulting refined list of hazards profiled in this plan update is as follows:
Flooding
Dam failure / Levee Breech
Drought
Extreme Temperatures
Wildfires / Brushfires
Invasive Species
Hurricanes/ Tropical Storms
Severe Winter Storm / Nor'Easter
Severe thunderstorms / Wind / Tornadoes
Earthquake
Pandemic
Each of these hazards was assessed by the Committee for location of occurrence, extent, previous occurrences, and probability of future events. (See Appendix Dfor sources, methodology.)
All hazard profiles were updated for the 2020 Plan Update with any new available information, and data from the 2015 HMP were retained where it was appropriate and still deemed current.
The resulting hazard risk ranking is presented in Table 2later this chapter.
Natural Hazard Analysis Methodology
This chapter examines the hazards which are identified in the Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation and Climate Adaptation Plan and by the Northampton HMP Update Steering Committee as
likely to affect Northampton. The analysis is organized into the following sections: Hazard Description, Location, Extent, Previous Occurrences, Probability of Future Events, Impact,
and Vulnerability. A description of each of these analysis categories is provided below.
Hazard Description
The natural hazards identified for Northampton’s 2020 HMP update are: flooding, dam failure / levee breach, drought, extreme temperatures, wildfire/brushfire, invasive species, hurricane/
tropical storm, severe winter storm/nor’easter, severe thunderstorms / wind / tornado, earthquake, andpandemic/epidemic. Many of these hazards result in similar impacts to a community.
For example, hurricanes, tornadoes and severe snowstorms may cause wind-related damage.
Location
Location refers to the geographic areas within the planning area that are affected by the hazard. Some hazards affect the entire planning area universally, while others apply to a specific
portion, such as a floodplain or area that is susceptible to wild fires. Classifications are based on the area that would potentially be affected by the hazard, on the following scale:
Percentage of City Impacted by Natural Hazard
Land Area Affected by Occurrence
Percentage of City Impacted
Large
More than 50% of the city affected
Medium
10 to 50% of the city affected
Small
Less than 10% of the city affected
Extent
Extent describes the strength or magnitude of a hazard. Where appropriate, extent is described using an established scientific scale or measurement system. Other descriptions of extent
include water depth, wind speed, and duration.
Previous Occurrences
Previous hazard events that have occurred are described. Depending on the nature of the hazard, events listed may have occurred on a local, state-wide, or regional level. Where information
is available on emergency costs for specific events, that information is provided.
Probability of Future Events
The likelihood of a future event for each natural hazard was classified according to the following scale:
Frequency of Occurrence and Annual Probability of Given Natural Hazard
Frequency of Occurrence
Probability of Future Events
Very High
70-100% probability in the next year
High
40-70% probability in the next year
Moderate
10-40% probability in the next year
Low
1-10% probability in the next year
Very Low
Less than 1% probability in the next year
Impact
Impact refers to the effect that a hazard may have on the people and property in the community, based on the assessment of extent described above. Impacts are classified according to
the following scale:
Extent of Impacts, Magnitude of Multiple Impacts of Given Natural Hazard
Extent of Impacts
Magnitude of Multiple Impacts
Catastrophic
Multiple deaths and injuries possible. More than 50% of property in affected area damaged or destroyed. Complete shutdown of facilities for 30 days or more.
Critical
Multiple injuries possible. More than 25% of property in affected area damaged or destroyed. Complete shutdown of facilities for more than 1 week.
Limited
Minor injuries only. More than 10% of property in affected area damaged or destroyed. Complete shutdown of facilities for more than 1 day.
Minor
Very few injuries, if any. Only minor property damage and minimal disruption on quality of life. Temporary shutdown of facilities.
Vulnerability
Sectors Assessed
A number of key sectors were evaluated as part of the risk assessment for each of the hazards profiled in the sections below. These sectors are introduced here and are included in the
hazard profiles where appropriate and where sufficient data allowed.
Populations
The impacts on human health, particularly vulnerable populations, were considered by the Committee and incorporated into the hazard profiles where possible. The risk analysis relied
on U.S. Census data and stakeholder information regarding frontline and vulnerable populations (including but not limited to disabled, low-income, homeless and single room occupancy
(SRO) residents, and low English proficiency populations) that could potentially be more severely impacted by each hazard. Among other factors, these populations may require extra time
or outside assistance during evacuations or during events that cause power outages or isolation, and are considered to be more likely to seek or require emergency services. They are
also more likely to live in risk-prone areas with poor infrastructure and higher levels of air pollution.
Vulnerability is influenced by three factors: exposure or contact with the hazard; sensitivity or degree to which people or communities are affected by the exposure to the hazard; and
capacity to adapt or the ability of communities, institutions, or people to adjust and respond to and recover from potential hazards. The major health impacts from natural hazards and
climate change include:
Heat-related illnesses and death from an increase in extreme temperatures and poor air quality (SHMCAP, 2018).
Increases in food and waterborne illnesses and other infectious diseases from altering geographic and seasonal distributions of existing vectors and vector-borne diseases (SHMCAP, 2018).
Injuries and accidental premature death associated with extreme weather events. Extreme weather events can result in acute health impacts, such as injuries and accidental premature death
during an event (e.g., drowning during floods). In addition, health impacts can also occur during disaster preparation and post-event cleanup. Other impacts include damage to property,
destruction of assets, loss of infrastructure and public services, social and economic impacts, environmental degradation, and other factors (SHMCAP, 2018).
Exacerbation of chronic diseases (SHMCAP, 2018).
Mental health and stress-related disorders ranging from minimal stress and distress symptoms to clinical disorders such as anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress, and suicidality.
Specific groups of people who are at higher risk for distress and other adverse mental health consequences from exposure to climate-related or weather-related disasters include children,
the elderly, women (especially pregnant and post-partum women), people with preexisting mental illness, the economically disadvantaged, the homeless, and first responders. Populations
living in areas most susceptible to specific climate change events are at increased risk for adverse mental health outcomes (SHMCAP, 2018).
In most natural hazard events, the vulnerability of a population is largely dependent on local preparedness and availability of human resources for social services staffing and supplies
distribution. While this Hazard Mitigation Plan does not aim to recommend specific emergency preparedness and response activities, it should be noted that preparing for emergencies by
training a large group of public and professional responders to ensure continuity of operations during a hazard event can be a critical tool for mitigating the overall impacts of any
hazard event.
Built Environment
The built environment sector includes all buildings in Northampton including critical facilities owned by the municipality and critical infrastructure sectors that provide or link to
key lifeline services, social welfare, and economic development. Assessments were based on assessor’s data of the total value of all structures in Northampton ($2,742,056,662.00in 2014,
the most recent year for which data was available according to MassGIS L3 data), along with the median value of a home in Northampton ($321,900 based on median value of owner-occupied
housing units, 2014-2018American Community Survey). The critical facilities assessed were derived from the critical facilities inventory as updated by the Northampton HMP Committee.
The facility types include police facilities, fire facilities, hospitals, emergency operation centers, schools, and more. Other critical infrastructure sectors including transportation
facilities, water infrastructure, etc. were assessed when applicable and where information was available.
Natural Resources and Environment
The natural resources and environment sector includes land-based assets in the city. It also includes key habitats and natural landscapes documented in the Northampton’s BioMap 2 (Conserving
the Biodiversity of Massachusetts in a Changing World) and species identified in the State’s Wildlife Action Plan as being present in Northampton.
Economy
Economic impacts include economic loss resulting from damage to critical facilities, the built environment, municipal resources, natural resources, and other sectors. Many sectors of
the economy are dependent on the integrity of natural resources. For example, if a major recreation area is damaged beyond repair by a storm, that property will no longer attract tourists
and the local economy may experience a loss of revenue from tourism and recreation. Other impacts include loss of businesses that do not return after a major catastrophic event and the
loss of property tax revenue that could result from a major loss of homes and/or businesses from a disaster.
Climate Change and Natural Hazards
With each update of the Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan, the planning team widens the lens through which natural hazards are assessed with regards to climate change, or the statistically
significant variation in climate data or patterns over multiple decades due to climate variability or human activity. The Northeast Climate Adaptation Science Center (NE CASC) developed
downscaled climate data that was used in the development of the 2018 SHMPCAP, forming a new basis and format for the categorization of natural hazards as they relate to the primary climate
change interactions discussed in this section.
The risk assessment in this 2020 Northampton HMP Update refers to the 2018 SHMCAP analysis and incorporates climate change interactions into each hazard assessment. A categorization
of traditional natural hazards, within the context of climate change, is included below to demonstrate the connections between traditional natural hazard analysis and climate change
projections. This categorization also aligns with the four climate change categories included on the Commonwealth’s resilient MA Climate Change Clearinghouse website (http://www.resilientma.org/).
Those categories are illustrated as follows.
Changes in Precipitation: Changes in the amount, frequency, and timing of precipitation—including both rainfall and snowfall—are occurring across the globe as temperatures rise and other
climate patterns shift in response.
Sea Level Rise: Climate change will drive rising sea levels, and rising seas will have wide-ranging impacts on communities, natural resources, and infrastructure along the Commonwealth’s
1,519 tidal shoreline miles.
Rising Temperatures: Average global temperatures have risen steadily in the last 50 years, and scientists warn that the trend will continue unless greenhouse gas emissions are significantly
reduced. The 9 warmest years on record all occurred in the last 20 years (2017, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, 2010, 2009, 2005, and 1998), according to the U.S. National Oceanographic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Extreme Weather: Climate change is expected to increase extreme weather events across the globe, as well as right here in Massachusetts. There is strong evidence that storms—from heavy
downpours and blizzards to tropical cyclones and hurricanes—are becoming more intense and damaging, and can lead to devastating impacts for residents across the state.
The hazards presented in this risk assessment, and the order in which they appear, are based on the taxonomy presented in Table 1 below.
Table 1. Climate Change and Natural Hazard Taxonomy
Primary Climate Change Interaction
Natural Hazard
Other Climate Change Interactions
Representative Climate Change Impacts
Changes in Precipitation
Flooding
Extreme Weather
Flash flooding, urban flooding, drainage system impacts (natural and human-made), lack of groundwater recharge, impacts to drinking water supply, public health impacts from mold and
worsened indoor air quality, vector-borne diseases from stagnant water, episodic drought, changes in snow-rain ratios, changes in extent and duration of snow cover, degradation of stream
channels and wetland
Drought
Rising Temperatures,Extreme Weather
Dam Failure/ Levee Breach
Extreme Weather
Rising Temperatures
Extreme
Temperatures
N/A
Shifting in seasons (longer summer, early spring, including earlier timing of spring peak flow), increase in length of growing season, increase of invasive species, ecosystem stress,
energy brownouts from higher energy demands, more intense heat waves, public health impacts from high heat exposure and poor outdoor air quality, drying of streams and wetlands, eutrophication
of lakes and ponds
Wildfire/ Brushfire
Changes in Precipitation
Invasive Species
Changes in Precipitation, Extreme Weather
Extreme Weather
Hurricane/Tropical Storm
Rising Temperatures,
Changes in Precipitation
Increase in frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, resulting in greater damage to natural resources, property, and infrastructure, as well as increased potential for loss
of life
Severe Winter Storm / Nor’easter
Severe Thunderstorm / Wind / Tornado
Non-Climate- Influenced Hazards
Earthquake
Not Applicable
There is no established correlation between climate change and this hazard
Pandemic
Not Applicable
There is no established correlation between climate change and this hazard
Based on the above metrics and analyses, the Committee determined a hazard index rating for each hazard. The hazard index ratings are based on a scale of 1 through 5 as follows:
1 – Highest risk
2 – High risk
3 – Medium risk
4 – Low risk
5 – Lowest risk
The ranking is qualitative and is based, in part, on local knowledge of past experiences with each type of hazard. The size and impacts of a natural hazard can be unpredictable. However;
many of the mitigation strategies currently in place and many of those proposed for implementation can be applied to the expected natural hazards, regardless of their unpredictability.
Table 2. Hazard Identification and Analysis for Northampton
Type of Hazard
Location of Occurrence
Probability of Future Events
Impact
Hazard Risk Index Rating
Flooding
Medium
High
Limited (with loss of key transportation routes)
2 - High risk
Dam Failure / Levee Breach
Medium
Low
Critical
3- Medium risk
Drought
Large
Low
Minor
4- Low risk
Extreme Temperatures
Large
High
Limited
2 – High Risk
Wildfire / Brushfire
Medium
Low
Minor
4 - Low risk
Invasive Species
Medium
High
Minor
4 – Low Risk
Hurricane/ Tropical Storm
Large
Moderate
Limited
3- Mediumrisk
Severe Winter Storm / Nor’easter
Large
High
Limited
3 - Medium risk
Severe Thunderstorm / Wind / Tornado
Small
Severe thunderstorms: Moderate
Winds: Moderate
Tornadoes: Low
Limited
Severe thunderstorms: 4– LowRisk
Winds: 3– MediumRisk
Tornadoes: 4 – Low risk
Earthquake
Large
Low
Limited
4 - Low risk
Pandemic
Large
Low
Critical
3 – Medium Risk
Flooding
Hazard Description
There are three major types of storms that can generate flooding in Northampton:
Continental storms are typically low-pressure systems that can be either slow or fast moving. These storms originate from the west and occur throughout the year.
Coastal storms, also known as nor’easters, usually occur in late summer or early fall and originate from the south. The most severe coastal storms, hurricanes, occasionally reach Massachusetts
and generate very large amounts of rainfall.
Thunderstorms form on warm, humid summer days and cause locally significant rainfall, usually over the course of several hours. These storms can form quickly and are more difficult to
predict than continental and coastal storms.
A floodplain is the relatively flat, lowland area adjacent to a river, lake or stream. Floodplains serve an important function, acting like large “sponges” to absorb and slowly release
floodwaters back to surface waters and groundwater. Over time, sediments that are deposited in floodplains develop into fertile, productive farmland like that found in the Connecticut
River Valley. In the past, floodplain areas were also often seen as prime locations for development. Industries were located on the banks of rivers for access to hydropower. Residential
and commercial development occurred in floodplains because of their scenic qualities and proximity to the water. Although periodic flooding of a floodplain area is a natural occurrence,
past and current development and alteration of these areas will result in flooding that is a costly and frequent hazard.
Floods can be classified as one of two types: flash floods and general floods.
Flash floods are the product of heavy, localized precipitation in a short time period over a given location. Flash flooding events typically occur within minutes or hours after a period
of heavy precipitation, after a dam or levee failure, or from a sudden release of water from an ice jam. Most often, flash flooding is the result of a slow-moving thunderstorm or the
heavy rains from a hurricane. In rural areas, flash flooding often occurs when small streams spill over their banks. However, in urbanized areas, flash flooding is often the result
of clogged storm drains (leaves and other debris) and the higher amount of impervious surface area (roadways, parking lots, roof tops).
General floods may last for several days or weeks and are caused by precipitation over a longer time period in a particular river basin. Excessive precipitation within a watershed of
a stream or river can result in flooding particularly when development in the floodplain has obstructed the natural flow of the water and/or decreased the natural ability of the groundcover
to absorb and retain surface water runoff (e.g., the loss of wetlands and the higher amounts of impervious surface area in urban areas).
The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) data on flood insurance policies, repetitive loss (RL) properties, and severe repetitive loss (SRL) properties are useful for determining
the location of areas vulnerable to flood and severe storm hazards. A RL property is a property for which two or more flood insurance claims of more than $1,000 have been paid by the
NFIP within any 10-year period since 1978. A SRL property is defined as one that “has incurred flood-related damage for which 4 or more separate claims payments have been paid under
flood insurance coverage, with the amount of each claim payment exceeding $5,000 and with cumulative amount of such claims payments exceeding $20,000; or for which at least 2 separate
claims payments have been made with the cumulative amount of such claims exceeding the reported value of the property” (FEMA). It should be noted that policy and claim data reflect the
time period from 1978 to 2019, while RL and SRL values are calculated using a rolling 10-year period.
Location
FEMA last published flood insurance rate maps for Hampshire County in the late 1970’s, and the City of Northampton adopted those maps to stay compliant with NFIP participation and for
residents to remain eligible to buy flood hazard insurance through NFIP.
The Critical Facilities and Past Hazard Areas map for the City of Northampton shows the 100-year and 500-year flood zones identified by FEMA flood maps. The 100-year flood zone is the
area that will be covered by water as a result of a flood that has a one percent chance of occurring in any given year. Likewise, the 500-year flood has a 0.2 percent chance of occurring
in any given year. In Northampton, the 100-year flood zone covers narrow bands of level floodplain land along the Mill River, the Mill River Diversion, Basset Brook / Parsons Brook,
Broad Brook, Manhan Brook, Roberts Meadow Brook, and the Connecticut River. In several areas, the flood zone widens out to encompass farmland, some residential land, and industrial
lands. There are also significant areas of localized flooding, including on Lower Elm Street and Avis Circle.
When ice jams occur, water flow can be backed up in the Connecticut River and Mill River and flood nearby low lying lands.
The National Flood Insurance Program has produced maps that identify floodplainsacross America. The following waterbodieshave been designated as contributing to flooding in Northampton:
Mill River
Mill River Diversion
Parsons Brook / Basset Brook
Broad Brook
Marble Brook
Connecticut River
Roberts Meadow Brook
Manhan River
Based on an approximate flood elevation at Route 5 in downtown Northampton of 124’ MSL for the 100-year flood (FEMA A Zone), roughly 3,960 acres or 18% of Northampton including 167 acres
of downtown could be affected by flooding of the Connecticut River alone. Some other areas outside of the mapped flood zone may still be subject to local flooding and to larger rarer
storm events. Therefore, the percentage of City impacted by the flood hazard is considered to be “Medium” (10 to 25 percent of the City).
Extent
The observed1971 - 2000 average annual precipitation for Northampton and surrounding areas in the Connecticut River watershed is 46.4 inches, with the majority of rainfall occurring
in the spring and summer.Relative to this baseline, the total annual precipitation in this watershed is expected to increase by 1.3” to 6.2” by 2050, and winter precipitation is expected
to increase by up to 25% by mid-century, and by up to 37% by 2100 (resilient MA, 2018).
Water levels in Northampton’s rivers, streams, and wetlands rise and fall seasonally and during high rainfall events. High water levels are typical in spring, due to snowmelt and ground
thaw. This is the period when flood hazards are normally expected. Low water levels occur in summer due to high evaporation and plant uptake (transpiration). At any time, heavy rainfall
may create conditions that raise water levels in rivers and streams above bank full stage, which then overflow adjacent lands.
The following are the historical flooding crests, or highest recorded water levels, for the Mill River. The River’s minor flood stage is 11 feet, a height which it has reached 22 times
in Northampton since 1950. The River’s action stage is 9 feet, a height which has been reached 16 times in Northampton since 1950. Three of the top 7 recorded crest elevations have occurred
in the past 5 years.
Table 3. Historical Crests for the Mill River in Northampton
Rank
Date
Height
Stage
1
8/28/11
16.42 ft
Minor flooding
2
4/16/07
15.58 ft
Minor flooding
3
10/9/05
13.72 ft
Minor flooding
4
2/25/16
13.47 ft
Minor flooding
5
10/30/17
12.80 ft
Minor flooding
6
4/3/05
12.73 ft
Minor flooding
7
9/30/15
12.32 ft
Minor flooding
8
3/7/11
12.26 ft
Minor flooding
9
9/29/11
12.2 ft
Minor flooding
10
9/28/03
12.11 ft
Minor flooding
11
3/31/10
11.83 ft
Minor flooding
12
3/9/08
11.81 ft
Minor flooding
13
8/19/55
11.78 ft
Minor flooding
14
12/21/18
11.64 ft
Minor flooding
15
12/12/08
11.55 ft
Minor flooding
16
9/7/11
11.5 ft
Minor flooding
17
9/17/99
11.42 ft
Minor flooding
18
9/8/11
11.38 ft
Minor flooding
19
12/8/11
11.27 ft
Minor flooding
20
12/21/12
11.18 ft
Minor flooding
21
9/18/18
11.04 ft
Minor flooding
22
6/6/82
10.98 ft
Action stage
23
10/15/05
10.81 ft
Action stage
24
11/3/18
10.81 ft
Action stage
25
2/14/08
10.58 ft
Action stage
26
11/9/06
10.47 ft
Action stage
27
3/23/10
10.46 ft
Action stage
28
4/5/84
10.42 ft
Action stage
29
5/13/06
10.39 ft
Action stage
30
10/28/06
10.3 ft
Action stage
31
12/27/09
10.29 ft
Action stage
32
4/24/05
10.27 ft
Action stage
33
2/7/08
10.11 ft
Action stage
34
10/25/05
10.02 ft
Action stage
35
10/15/55
9.81 ft
Action stage
36
3/31/51
9.38 ft
Action stage
37
9/12/60
9.1 ft
Action stage
Source: National Weather Service
The following are the historical flooding crests for the Connecticut River. The major flood stage for the river is 120 feet, which has been reached three times since 1935. The moderate
flood stage is 115 feet, which has been reached 16 times since 1935. The minor flood stage is 112 feet, which has been reached 64 times since 1935. The action stage is 110 feet, which
has been reached 11 times since 1935.
Table 4. Historical Crests of the Connecticut River in Northampton
Rank
Date
Height
Stage
1
03/19/1936
129.40
Major Flood
2
09/22/1938
125.00
Major Flood
3
05/31/1984
120.80
Major Flood
4
04/06/1960
119.90
Moderate Flood
5
01/01/1949
118.60
Moderate Flood
6
04/01/1987
118.00
Moderate Flood
7
03/23/1948
117.70
Moderate Flood
8
03/29/1953
117.60
Moderate Flood
9
08/30/2011
117.16
Moderate Flood
10
05/05/1940
117.0
Moderate Flood
11
10/09/2005
116.3
Moderate Flood
12
03/15/1977
116.2
Moderate Flood
13
06/03/1952
116.0
Moderate Flood
14
04/03/1976
115.7
Moderate Flood
15
04/23/1969
115.5
Moderate Flood
16
04/01/1951
115.4
Moderate Flood
17
04/24/1958
115.3
Moderate Flood
18
03/24/1968
115.2
Moderate Flood
19
05/01/1956
115.0
Moderate Flood
20
07/02/1973
114.9
Flood Stage
21
04/19/1982
114.8
Flood Stage
22
04/07/1952
114.8
Flood Stage
23
03/27/1979
114.6
Flood Stage
24
04/17/1996
114.6
Flood Stage
25
04/01/1998
114.6
Flood Stage
26
04/04/2005
114.6
Flood Stage
27
03/19/1973
114.6
Flood Stage
28
04/17/2007
114.5
Flood Stage
29
12/16/1983
114.5
Flood Stage
30
04/13/1947
114.4
Flood Stage
31
04/18/1994
114.4
Flood Stage
32
04/05/1959
114.3
Flood Stage
33
04/24/2001
114.3
Flood Stage
34
05/14/1996
114.2
Flood Stage
35
12/22/1973
114.2
Flood Stage
36
02/26/1981
114.2
Flood Stage
37
04/02/1962
114.1
Flood Stage
38
04/02/2004
114.0
Flood Stage
39
04/02/1977
114.0
Flood Stage
40
03/18/1990
113.9
Flood Stage
41
05/06/1972
113.9
Flood Stage
42
01/19/2006
113.7
Flood Stage
43
04/08/1984
113.7
Flood Stage
44
04/01/1986
113.5
Flood Stage
45
04/01/1993
113.5
Flood Stage
46
03/22/1945
113.5
Flood Stage
47
04/14/2011
113.4
Flood Stage
48
04/17/1993
113.4
Flood Stage
49
11/30/1959
113.4
Flood Stage
50
03/29/1976
113.4
Flood Stage
51
04/21/1972
113.3
Flood Stage
52
10/30/2003
113.2
Flood Stage
53
04/17/2014
113.1
Flood Stage
54
04/17/2019
113.0
Flood Stage
55
03/31/2003
113.0
Flood Stage
56
10/27/2005
113.0
Flood Stage
57
04/15/2008
112.9
Flood Stage
58
01/10/1998
112.9
Flood Stage
59
02/27/2016
112.8
Flood Stage
60
04/18/2011
112.8
Flood Stage
61
04/17/1955
112.8
Flood Stage
62
03/31/2010
112.8
Flood Stage
63
09/08/2011
112.7
Flood Stage
64
04/06/1950
112.7
Flood Stage
65
09/08/2011
112.7
Flood Stage
66
10/21/1975
112.6
Flood Stage
67
05/07/1989
112.5
Flood Stage
68
05/26/1979
112.5
Flood Stage
69
04/04/1967
112.5
Flood Stage
70
12/19/2000
112.4
Flood Stage
71
04/04/1963
112.4
Flood Stage
72
04/16/1964
112.4
Flood Stage
73
01/28/1996
112.4
Flood Stage
74
04/08/1989
112.4
Flood Stage
75
04/23/2019
112.2
Flood Stage
76
03/24/2010
112.2
Flood Stage
77
04/06/1974
112.2
Flood Stage
78
05/05/1971
112.2
Flood Stage
79
04/26/1970
112.1
Flood Stage
80
08/20/1955
112.0
Flood Stage
81
04/19/1954
112.0
Flood Stage
82
04/11/1980
112.0
Flood Stage
83
12/13/2008
111.9
Action Stage
84
05/21/2006
111.8
Action Stage
85
12/01/1959
111.8
Action Stage
86
04/06/2000
111.8
Action Stage
87
04/05/1990
111.8
Action Stage
88
04/17/2002
111.7
Action Stage
89
12/26/1990
111.7
Action Stage
90
05/05/1983
111.6
Action Stage
91
04/04/1973
111.6
Action Stage
92
04/30/1988
111.6
Action Stage
93
12/26/2003
111.5
Action Stage
Source: National Weather Service
The increased amount of strong precipitation events and overall increase in rainfall resulting from climate change will likely result in more flooding in the region.
Previous Occurrences
Between 1954 and 2020, Hampshire County was included in fiveFEMA declared flood-related disasters (DR) or emergencies (EM) classified as one or a combination of the following hazards:severe
storms, flooding, and inland and coastal flooding. Northampton may not have been impacted by all of these events. According to the USACE Ice Jam Database, there were 233 reported ice
jams in Massachusetts between 1920 and 2020, 12 of which were located in Northamptonas shown below (USACE, 2020).
Table 5. Historic Ice Jams in Northampton
River
Jam date
Water year
Jam type
Gage number
Damages
Connecticut River
03/13/1936
1936
-
?
?
Mill River
02/08/1941
1941
-
01171500
?
Mill River
01/02/1945
1945
-
01171500
?
Connecticut River
03/01/1946
1946
Break-up
?
?
Mill River
03/09/1950
1950
-
01171500
?
Mill River
01/23/1957
1957
-
01171500
?
Mill River
01/22/1959
1959
-
01171500
?
Mill River
01/25/1964
1964
-
01171500
?
Bassett Brook
02/09/1965
1965
-
01171800
?
Mill River
02/08/1965
1965
-
01171500
?
Bassett Brook
02/13/1966
1966
-
01171800
?
Bassett Brook
03/18/1968
1968
-
01171800
?
Though not recorded in the USACE Ice Jam Database, the most significant ice jam event that has occurred in Northampton since the last HMP update was in the winter of 2018 along the CT
River. Large blocks of floating ice caused significant damage to floating and permanent structures at the Connecticut River Greenway. The gangway, docks, harbor, and railings were damaged
to a cost of roughly $30,000. In response, the City cut out the damaged rails, but Northampton Community Rowing has not yet replaced the gangway and docks. The harbor, dug out when the
New Haven and Northampton Canal was built in the early 1800’s, silted in more than it had in all that time. The City has never dredged the area, and based on the great expense of doing
so it may never happen.
Known flood events, including FEMA disaster declarations, which have impacted Northampton in the past 100 years are identified in Table 6 below. Loss and impact information could vary
depending on the source. Therefore, the accuracy of monetary figures discussed is based only on the available information identified during research for this plan.
Table 6. Floods Causing Significant Damage in Northampton, 1914-2020
Date
Description
Cost of Damage
Cost Adjusted for Inflation
9/18/2018
Flash Flood from Heavy Rain - Storm total rainfall amounts reached two to five inches. The Mill River reached Flood Stage at 11.04 ft.
NA
NA
10/25/2017
Flood from Heavy Rain - In Northampton, flood waters closed the intersection of Main and Market Streets. A car was trapped by flood waters on West Street near Smith College.
NA
NA
8/5/2017
Flood from Heavy Rain - Flooding in Northampton peaked between 2 and 3 PM. At 2:14 PM, State Street had between eight and twelve inches of flooding between Bedford Terrace and Summer
Street. Several manhole covers came off due to flooding, including three on Elm Street near Childs Park and one on Old South Street. At 2:27 PM, Jackson Street was flooded and impassable,
with the water two feet deep on King Street near the Bluebonnet Diner. At 2:40 PM, an underpass near North Street and Market Street was flooded and impassable.
NA
NA
2/25/2016
Flood from Heavy Rain - In Northampton, the Mill River overflowed its banks resulting in flooding on Meadow Street in Leeds. On 2/27 CT River reached Flood Stage at 112.88 ft.
NA
NA
9/30/2015
Flood from Heavy Rain - Twelve inches of water was flooding portions of Route 9 near in Haydenville the Northampton town line.
NA
NA
8/27/2011
Hurricane Irene
$96,400
$111,600
4/15/07 – 4/16/07
100-year flood Mill River Floodplain
NA
NA
5/13/2006
Heavy rainfall caused the Mill River to flood
$5,000
$6,400
9/16/1999
Tropical Storm Floyd, Flooding to Mill River Floodplain
$900,000
$1,394,000
3/31/87/ - 4/7/87
Connecticut River Floodplain
$126,000
$286,000
5/28/84 – 6/5/84
50-year flood Connecticut River Floodplain
$377,000
$937,000
6/6/82
50 to 100 year flood Mill River Floodplain
$104,000
$278,000
3/15/77
10-year flood; Connecticut River Floodplain
$112,000
$447,000
4/6/60
10-year flood; Connecticut River Floodplain
$38,000
$331,000
10/15/55
50 to 100-year flood Mill River Floodplain
$48,000
$462,000
3/29/53
10-year flood Connecticut River Floodplain
$40,000
$387,000
6/3/52
10-year flood Connecticut River Floodplain
$38,000
$370,000
1/1/49
10-year flood Connecticut River Floodplain
$37,000
$401,000
3/23/48
10-year flood Connecticut River Floodplain
$32,000
$323,000
9/22/38
100-year flood Connecticut River Floodplain
$81,500
$1,492,000
3/13/36
100-year flood Connecticut River Floodplain
$200,000
$3,714,000
Northampton’s most significant flood event on record was the “the Great Flood” of March 1936. The account of the flood is as follows:
An unusually cold and snowy winter, followed by a spell of warm and rainy weather, turned the normal spring rising of the Connecticut River into an unprecedented natural catastrophe.
The flood inundated Hadley, Hatfield, Northampton, Holyoke, and Springfield, as well as smaller towns and villages along its course. In Massachusetts alone, the Great Flood killed ten
people and left 50,000 homeless. It was an unmatched natural catastrophe for the Bay State, causing over $200,000,000 in damage in 1936 dollars.
Probability of Future Events
Based upon previous data, there is a “high” chance (between 40 percent and 70 percent in the next year) of flash flooding or general flooding occurring in Northampton. This is partly
a function of the presence of the Connecticut River and the Mill River, both of which contain significant floodplain acreage in Northampton.
Flooding frequencies for the various floodplains in Northampton are defined by FEMA as the following:
10-year floodplain – 10 percent chance of flooding in any given year
25-year floodplain – 2.5 percent chance of flooding in any given year
100-year floodplain – 1 percent chance of flooding in any given year
500-year floodplain – 0.2 percent chance of flooding in any given year
In actuality, flooding occurs more frequently than this because the current FEMA-defined flood zones are based on historical patterns of rainfall intensity and frequency, and do not
take into account the impacts that climate change will have on Northampton. Overall it is anticipated that the severity of flood-inducing weather events and storms will increase as a
result of climate change. Research has shown that rainfall is increasingly concentrated into the most severe events (Easterling, 2017). While trends in overall precipitation are less
clear, the increase in severe rainfall events will exacerbate the risk of localized flooding.In future years, it is likely that the currently designated 10-year, 25-year, 100-year and
500-year floodplains of the Mill River and Connecticut River will flood more frequently due to climate change.
The City of Northampton believes this to be a severe risk.
Impact
The City faces a “limited” impact, with 10 percent or less of total city area affected, from flooding.
The National Weather Service maintains water level gauges on the Mill River and Connecticut River in Northampton, to monitor flooding. The NWS has various flooding classifications based
on water level. These classifications and their definitions are:
Action Stage - the stage which, when reached by a rising stream, represents the level where the NWS or a partner/user needs to take some type of mitigation action in preparation for
possible significant hydrologic activity. The type of action taken varies for each gauge location. Gauge data should be closely monitored by any affected people if the stage is above
action stage.
Minor Flooding is defined to have minimal or no property damage, but possibly some public threat. A Flood Advisory product is issued to advise the public of flood events that are expected
not to exceed the minor flood category. Examples of conditions that would be considered minor flooding include:
water over banks and in yards
no building flooded, but some water may be under buildings built on stilts (elevated)
personal property in low lying areas needs to be moved or it will get wet
water overtopping roads, but not very deep or fast flowing
water in campgrounds or on bike paths
inconvenience or nuisance flooding
small part of the airstrip flooded, and aircraft can still land
one or two homes in the lowest parts of town may be cut off or get a little water in the crawl spaces or homes themselves if they are not elevated
Moderate Flooding is defined to have some inundation of structures and roads near the stream. Some evacuations of people and/or transfer of property to higher elevations may be necessary.
A Flood Warning is issued if moderate flooding is expected during the event. Examples of conditions that would be considered moderate flooding include:
several buildings flooded with minor or moderate damage
various types of infrastructure rendered temporarily useless (i.e. fuel tanks cannot be reached due to high water, roads flooded that have no alternates, generator station flooded)
elders and those living in the lowest parts of the village are evacuated to higher ground
access to the airstrip is cut off or requires a boat
water over the road is deep enough to make driving unsafe
gravel roads likely eroded due to current moving over them
widespread flooding, but not deep enough to float ice chunks through town
water deep enough to make life difficult, normal life is disrupted and some hardship is endured
airstrip closed
travel is most likely restricted to boats
Major Flooding is defined to have extensive inundation of structures and roads. Significant evacuations of people and/or transfer of property to higher elevations are necessary. A Flood
Warning is issued if major flooding is expected during the event. Examples of conditions that would be considered major flooding include:
many buildings flooded, some with substantial damage or destruction
infrastructure destroyed or rendered useless for an extended period of time
multiple homes are flooded or moved off foundations
everyone in threatened area is asked to evacuate
National Guard units assist in evacuation efforts
erosion problems are extreme
the airstrip, fuel tanks, and the generator station are likely flooded
loss of transportation access, communication, power and/or fuel spills are likely
fuel tanks may float and spill and possibly float downstream
ice chunks floating through town that could cause structural damage
high damage estimates and high degree of danger to residents
Various critical facilities are at risk within Northampton’s floodplain:
100-year floodplain
EPA Tier II Facility on Island Road in the Connecticut River Oxbowarea
The Northampton Airport
Fair Grounds—potential gathering spot for thousands of people and livestock during the Three County Fair. In addition, the area is also susceptible to localized flooding.
Sections of Route 5, Mount Tom Road, and Route 10 at the South St bridge with the flood control drop structure underneath, cutting off southbound access to the City.
Waterlines and sewer lines mounted on the City’s bridges—a flood that destroyed a bridge could result in a potential loss of services for residential populations.
Road adjacent to the Mill River (causing destruction to road)
Power substations at Smith College, King Street, and Route 5 at Easthampton line
500-year floodplain
Group Home/Assisted Living Facility and Paradise Pond Transitional Apartments within the Mill River’s floodplain on West Street
In addition, there are several facilities that are located outside the floodplain because of the City’s levee system. Should this system fail, these facilities would be at risk:
Power facilities located on West Street
The City’s wastewater treatment facility
Much of downtown
Localized flooding
The Hazard Mitigation Committee identified several points in the City as areas that flood frequently but are outside of the community’s Flood Insurance Rate Map boundaries. The locations
of these areas and the impact of flooding to them are the following:
Ice pond culvert on Route 66/Rocky Hill Road has a history of flooding and is on a primary evacuation route.
The intersections of Church Street, Stoddard Street, State Street, and Perkins Avenue to Route 5 & 10.
The area surrounding Elm Street, Riverside Drive, Nutting Avenue, Ormond Street, and Federal Street.
Austin Circle.
Reservoir Road. The road was closed during Hurricane Irene.
Denise Court area.
King Street Brook.
Elm Street Brook.
Williams Street Brook.
Flooding can also cause damage to bridges, especially the lowest bridges in the City which are located in Florence at Pine Street and Meadow Street. Many water lines in the Cityare located
on bridges and damage to these could disrupt the water supply.
Vulnerability
Based on the above analysis, Northampton has a hazard index rating of “2 – high risk” for flooding.
There are approximately 4,150 acres of land within the FEMA mapped 100-year floodplain and 82 acres of land within the 500-year floodplain within the City of Northampton. There are
approximately 90 residential structures located within the 100-year flood plain in Northampton, with roughly 573 people living in the 100-year flood plain and 132 people live in the
500-year flood plain.According to FEMA’s Community Information System (CIS) reporting from April, 2020, there are only 76 residential structures holding flood insurance through the National
Flood Insurance Program. This may indicate that some structures within the 100-year floodplain, one of the highest flood risk areas in town, may not have insurance against flood damage.
Utilizing the City’s median home value of $321,900 (American Community Survey, 2014-2018), up to $28,971,000 worth of damage could occur from a 100-year flood. The damage estimate is
a rough estimate and likely reflects a worst-case scenario. Computing more detailed damage assessments based on assessor’s records is a labor-intensive task and beyond the scope of
this project.
Areas where localized flooding has been a problem in the past will also be vulnerable to increased flooding from climate change, though their risk is presumed to be moderate.
Population
Advance weather forecasting, blockades, and emergency alerts and warnings help to minimize the total number of injuries and casualties that typically result from riverine flooding. However,
even a relatively low-level flood can be hazardous and can result in direct mortality to individuals interacting with the flood zone. For example, while 6 inches of moving water can
cause adults to fall, 1 foot to 2 feet of water can sweep cars away. Downed powerlines, sharp objects in the water, or fast-moving debris that may be moving in or near the water, all
present an immediate danger to individuals in the flood zone. Floodwater can also carry a wide range of infectious organisms from raw sewageand/or chemicals and hazardous materials swept
away from containment areas.
The most vulnerable populations exposed to the flood hazard include people with low socioeconomic status, people over the age of 65, young children, people with medical needs, and those
with low English language fluency. Populations that live or work in proximity to facilities that use or store toxic substances are at greater risk of exposure to these substances during
a flood event.
The increased flooding due to climate change will have disproportionate impacts to several special populations in Northampton. The socioeconomic status of residents in the floodplains
is lower than the City as a whole, meaning that flooding will have more of an impact on lower income residents. Several facilities that serve special populations are located near the
City’s levee system, and would be within the floodplain should the levee system be compromised. These facilities include: Salvo House, ServiceNet, the Hampshire Dialysis Center, and
the Northampton Senior Center. Flooding in this area will affect both low-income and market rate housing development. Other locations that provide critical social services or that support
vulnerable populations are exposed to flooding, including the Meals on Wheels kitchen, the bike path where it crosses under the train tracks, and the homeless tent encampment.
Built Environment and Economy
Buildings, infrastructure, and other elements of the built environment are vulnerable to inland flooding. Buildings within the floodplain are highly vulnerable to inland flooding and
are likely to become increasingly vulnerable as riverine flooding increases due to climate change (resilient MA, 2018).
The intersections of Church Street, Stoddard Street, State Street, and Perkins Avenue to Route 5 & 10 are susceptible to localized flooding. This neighborhood is medium density residential.
Approximately 18 structures could be affected by a flood incident. At a rate of 100 percent damage to 100 percent of the structures, the estimated cost of repairing or replacing these
properties would be $5,794,200.
The area surrounding Elm Street, Riverside Drive, Nutting Avenue, Ormond Street, and Federal Street is susceptible to localized flooding. Approximately 68 structures could be affected
by a flood incident. At 100 percent damage to 100 percent of the structures, the estimated cost of repairing or replacing would be $21,889,200.
The City of Northampton’s levee protection system, designed after the 1936 Hurricane, is designed to prevent flooding from up to a 500-year flood. The damage estimates above are based
on one of two scenarios: 1) the levee system is structurally compromised or 2) flooding occurs that exceeds the design height of the levee system. Furthermore, flood control pump stations
that are located at the WWTP are fairly old and showing signs of wear. These pump stations are essential to the City’s standing flood mitigation capabilities and if they failed, they
could create severe damage to both the treatment plant and the surrounding low-lying neighborhood.
The City is currently assessing the levee system to determine what changes are needed, if any, to allow them to be FEMA certified. In addition, a Comprehensive Wastewater Management
Plan (CWMP) was completed and submitted to MassDEP in 2016. The CWMP recommended system-wide improvements of approximately $80M over 20 years, with $30M of that in the first 5 years.
As part of an initial project, a conversion from gaseous chlorine to hypochlorite, mitigating a significant hazard, was completed in 2017. Other near-term upgrades would address daily
and emergency power reliability issues, reducing vulnerability of a failure.
The impacts of climate change will increase the vulnerability of the nearly 600 people who currently live in the 100-year flood plain and more than 100 people who live in the 500-year
flood plain.More damage will occur in areas too small to have FEMA floodplain designation and not already zoned floodplain, such as Roberts Meadows Brook. Currently 284 people live in
this area and could be affected. Many of these areas already flood consistently, and so climate change will be potentially very damaging to these areas. The City of Northampton believes
these risks to be severe.
Flooding can cause direct damage to critical facilities and result in roadblocks and inaccessible streets that impact the ability of public safety and emergency vehicles to respond to
calls for service.
Gas stations located within the 100-year floodplain and the 500-year floodplain should take precautions to ensure a flood event would not result in facility damage or environmental contamination
from a gas spill.
At a neighborhood to regional scale, highly developed areas and areas with high impervious surface coverage may be most vulnerable to flooding. Even moderate development that results
in as little as 3 percent impervious cover can lead to flashier flows and river degradation, including channel deepening, widening, and instability (SHMCAP, 2018). Additionally, changes
in precipitation will threaten key infrastructure assets with flood and water damage. Climate change has the potential to impact public and private services and business operations.
Most flood events that occur in Northampton are not accompanied by a FEMA Emergency or Disaster declaration and, as a result, all costs associated with the events are borne by local
City budgets. In FY19, $97,751 was budgeted from Northampton’s Stormwater Enterprise Fund for flood. Any City response to the events listed in the Previous Occurrences section above
would have likely included payroll overtime for personnel, and operational costs for electricity, natural gas, fuel, and repair and maintenance costs for equipment, buildings, grounds,
communication and supplies, and safety supplies. If the frequency of flooding increases in future years, so will the financial burden on tax payers to support City response.
Natural Resources
Flooding is a natural environmental phenomenon. However, severe flood events can also result in substantial damage to the environment and natural resources, particularly in areas where
human development has interfered with natural flood-related processes. As described earlier in this section, severe weather events are expected to become more frequent as a result of
climate change; therefore, flooding that exceeds the adaptive capacity of natural systems and the built environment may occur more often.
One common environmental effect of flooding is riverbank and soil erosion. Riverbank erosion occurs when high, fast water flows scour the edges of the river, transporting sediment downstream
and reshaping the ecosystem. This process can clog riverbeds and streams, disrupting the water supply to downstream habitats. In Northampton, the FEMA SFHA overlaps with BioMap2 Critical
Natural Landscapes and Core Habitat along the banks of the Mill and CT Rivers, as well as along Marble Brook, Bassett Brook, Parson’s Brook and Broad Brook. These areas are particularly
vulnerable to the impacts of bank destabilization and erosion from flooding.
Dam Failure / Levee Breach
Hazard Description
Dams and levees and their associated impoundments provide many benefits to a community, such as water supply, recreation, hydroelectric power generation, and flood control. However,
they also pose a potential risk to lives and property. Dam or levee failure is not a common occurrence, but dams do represent a potentially disastrous hazard. When a dam or levee fails,
the potential energy of the stored water behind the dam is released rapidly. Most dam or levee failures occur when floodwaters above overtop and erode the material components of the
dam. Water running between a levee and original grade, and eroding dam materials, is also a potential risk. Often dam or levee breaches lead to catastrophic consequences as the water
rushes in a torrent downstream flooding, an area engineers refer to as an “inundation area.” The number of casualties and the amount of property damage will depend upon the timing of
the warning provided to downstream residents, the number of people living or working in the inundation area, and the number of structures in the inundation area.
Many dams in Massachusetts were built during the 19th Century without the benefit of modern engineering design and construction oversight. Dams of this age can fail because of structural
problems due to age and/or lack of proper maintenance, as well as from structural damage caused by an earthquake or flooding.
The Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation Office of Dam Safety is responsible for regulating dams in the state (M.G.L. Chapter 253, Section 44 and the implementing
regulations 302 CMR 10.00). To be regulated, these dams are in excess of 6 feet in height (regardless of storage capacity) and have more than 15 acre feet of storage capacity (regardless
of height). Dam safety regulations enacted in 2005 transferred significant responsibilities for dams from the State of Massachusetts to dam owners, including the responsibility to conduct
dam inspections.
The City of Northampton’s levees are part of the City’s Flood Control System constructed by the Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) between March 1939 and June 1941. The system is designed
to protect a large portion of the City against flooding from the Connecticut River and the Mill River. The City of Northampton is responsible for maintenance and operation of the Northampton
Flood Control System and for maintaining compliance with standards set forth by the USACE. The USACE conducts annual inspections of the Northampton Flood Control System.
Location
There are 18 dams on public and private land in the City of Northampton, as well as one dam in West Whately and one dam in Williamsburg impacting the City’s drinking water supply. In
addition, levee systems exist along the Mill River and Connecticut River. The names and hazard levels of the individual structures are:
Table 7. Dams and Levees in Northampton or Affecting Northampton
Dam
Street Name
Hazard Level
Lower Roberts Meadow Dam
Reservoir Road
High
Middle Roberts Meadow Dam
Reservoir Road
High
Ryan Reservoir Dam
West Whately
High
Mountain Street Reservoir Dam
Williamsburg
High
Paradise Pond
College Lane
High
Chartpac Dam (Orange Dam)
River Road
Significant
Clear Falls Pool Dam
Drury Lane
Significant
Mill River Diversion Dam
South Street
Significant
Vistron Pro Corporation Dam
Pine Street
Significant
Country Club Dam (Cook Dam)
Arch Street, Main Street
Significant
Button Shop #2 Dam
Main Street, Leeds
Significant
Button Shop #1 Dam
Main Street, Leeds
Significant
Rocky Hill Pond Dam
Rocky Hill Road
Low
Fitzgerald Lake Dam
North Farms Road
Low
Mill River/Yankee Hill
Ladd Avenue
Low
Howards Ice Pond Dam
Dimock Street
Low
Vaznis Farm Pond Dam
Unknown
NA
Florence Ice Pond Dam
Spring Street Extension
NA
Look Park Dam
North Main Street, Florence
NA
Connecticut River levee system
Along Connecticut River
NA
Mill River levee system
Along Mill River
NA
Source: MassDEP 2019
The failure of a high hazard dam or flood control levee could affect a “medium” amount of the land area in Northampton, or between 10 and 50 percent of the total land area.
The Connecticut River Flood Control System consists of approximately 4,800 linear feet of levee that extends from Pomeroy Terrace to the high ground west of Route 5 (Pleasant Street/Mount
Tom Road). The levee has a maximum height of 23 feet.The Mill River Flood Control System consists of two levee sections. The Smith College Levee is located along the east bank of the
Mill River between Paradise Pond Dam and West Street. The Diversion Levee extends from the Manhan Rail Trail to Hebert Avenue. Combined, these two sections of levee are approximately
2,000 feet in length with a maximum height of 25 feet.
While the state does not evaluate the hazard level of levees, the Hazard Mitigation Committee assessed both the Mill River levee system and Connecticut River levee system and determined
the percent of City affected by their failure to be 5 percent and 15 percent respectively, meaning they would affect a "medium" amount of the total land area, but would flood some of
the highest value areas in the city.
Extent
Often dam or levee breaches lead to catastrophic consequences as the water ultimately rushes in a torrent downstream flooding an area engineers refer to as an “inundation area.” The
number of casualties and the amount of property damage will depend upon the timing of the warning provided to downstream residents, the number of people living or working in the inundation
area, and the number of structures in the inundation area.
Dams in Massachusetts are assessed according to their risk to life and property. The state has three hazard classifications for dams:
High Hazard: Dams located where failure or improper operation will likely cause loss of life and serious damage to homes, industrial or commercial facilities, important public utilities,
main highways, or railroads.
Significant Hazard: Dams located where failure or improper operation may cause loss of life and damage to homes, industrial or commercial facilities, secondary highways or railroads
or cause interruption of use or service of relatively important facilities.
Low Hazard: Dams located where failure or improper operation may cause minimal property damage to others. Loss of life is not expected.
Previous Occurrences
There have been no catastrophic dam or levee failures in Northampton in over a century. The scars of an 1874 failure of a dam upriver of Northampton which largely destroyed the Northampton
village of Leeds, however, remains a powerful reminder of the potential.
Probability of Future Events
Currently the frequency of dam failures is “very low” with a less than 1 percent chance of a dam failing in any given year.As Northampton’s high hazard dams age, precipitation and impoundment
volumes increase with climate change, and if maintenance is deferred, the likelihood of a dam failurewill increase.
Mass DEP has evaluated the overall condition of 15 of the dams in Northampton. Of those evaluated, four were deemed “Satisfactory,” eight were deemed “Fair,” and two were deemed “Poor.”An
explanation for each of these ratings is provided below.
SATISFACTORY - Minor operational and maintenance deficiencies. Infrequent hydrologic events would probably result in deficiencies.
FAIR - Significant operational and maintenance deficiencies, no structural deficiencies. Potential deficiencies exist under unusual loading conditions that may realistically occur.
Can be used when uncertainties exist as to critical parameters.
POOR - Significant structural, operational, and maintenance deficiencies are clearly recognized under normal loading conditions.
Northampton’s levee systems along the Mill River and Connecticut River were very well constructed in 1940 and are regularly maintained, though a sufficiently large flood could cause
structural damage to the levee and cause it to partially breach. Given current conditions, the primary risk is where the levees meet the original grade that water, with enough hydrostatic
pressure, could slip below the levees.Core samples of the levees were drilled in 2020 and are currently being analyzed to ensure the integrity of the levees.
However, due to rarity of major floods during the last few decades, the frequency of levee breach or failureremains“very low,” with a less than 1 percent chance in any given year.
Impact
The City faces a “critical” impact from failure of dams or levees with a high hazard level, with 25 percent of Northampton affected.
Complete failure of a high significant hazard dam in Northampton is estimated to impact between 0 and 25 percent of the City, and resulting in property losses up to $685,514,166. Other
dams are not expected to have a risk to property and people. Costs are based on the total value of all structures in Northampton of $2,742,056,662.
While the state does not evaluate the hazard level of levees, the Hazard Mitigation Committee assessed both the Mill River levee system and Connecticut River levee system and determined
the percent of City affected by their failure to be 5 percent and 25 percent respectively.
Vulnerability
Based on this analysis, Northampton has a hazard index rating of “5 – very low risk” from dam failure or levee breach.
Population
The most vulnerable populations exposed to the Dam Failure / Levee Breach hazard include people in frontline communities, those with low socioeconomic status, over the age of 65, young
children, people with medical needs, and those with low English language fluency. Populations that live or work in proximity to facilities that use or store toxic substances within the
affected area of a dam failure or levee breach are at greater risk of exposure to these substances. Populations identified by the 2010 Census as minority, low income, and English isolated
that are living in an area protected by a levee are particularly vulnerable.
Advance weather forecasting, blockades, and emergency alerts and warnings help to minimize the total number of injuries and casualties that typically result from dam failure or levee
breach. While dam failure can lead to flash flood conditions that are harder to mitigate with early warning messages, even a relatively low-level flood can be hazardous and can result
in direct mortality to individuals interacting with the flood zone. See the Vulnerability discussion under the Flood profile above for additional information.
Built Environment and Economy
Flooding from dam failure or levee breach can cause direct damage to critical facilities and result in roadblocks and inaccessible streets that impact the ability of public safety and
emergency vehicles to respond to calls for service.
There are a number of critical facilities in the levee-protected zone. For instance, the wastewater treatment facility is in the levee-protected zone – if any part of the flood control
system, such as the levee of pump stations, were to fail, this would be one of the first facilities to flood. This and other critical facilities in the levee-protected area should take
precautions to ensure a flood event would not result in facility damage or environmental contamination.
A catastrophic failure of Northampton’s flood control system would impact many of the downtown businesses. FEMA research has shown that nearly 1 in 4, or 25%, of businesses do not return
after a major catastrophic event. This would have a major impact on City tax income and operating budget. A significant loss of homes due to the same levee failure or a dam failure could
also have major tax implicationsthat could strain City cash flow for years after the event.
Natural Resources
Dam failures and levee breaches result in severe and flash flood conditions leading to substantial damage to the environment and natural resources, particularly in areas where human
development has interfered with natural flood-related processes. The Francis P. Ryan Reservoir Dam and the adjascent West Whately Reservoir Dam retain one of the City’s primary sources
of drinking water and are rated in “Fair” condition according the Office of Dam Safety (ODS) regulations. Improvements to the spillways and embankments are required to address current
deficiencies and to provide sufficient capacity to pass the one half the Probable Maximum Flood (1/2 PMF) without overtopping the dams.
Drought
Hazard Description
Like flooding, drought is a normal, recurrent feature of climate. It occurs almost everywhere, although its features vary from region to region. In the most general sense, drought originates
from a deficiency of precipitation over an extended period of time, resulting in a water shortage for some activity, group, or environmental sector. Reduced crop, rangeland, and forest
productivity; increased fire hazard; reduced water levels; increased livestock and wildlife mortality rates; and damage to wildlife and fish habitat are a few examples of the direct
impacts of drought. Of course, these impacts can have far-reaching effects throughout the region and even the country.
Location
Because of this hazard’s regional nature, a drought would impact the entire city, meaning the location of occurrence is “large” or over 50 percent of the City affected. How a drought
is experienced can depend on geographic factors such as land use change, the existence of dams, and water supply withdrawals or diversions. For example, impervious surfaces associated
with development can exacerbate the effects of drought due to decreased groundwater recharge.
Extent
The severity of a drought would determine the scale of the event and would vary among city residents depending on whether the residents’ water supply is derived from a private well or
the public water system.
The U.S. Drought Monitor also records information on historical drought occurrence. Unfortunately, data could only be found at the state level. The U.S. Drought Monitor categorizes drought
on a D0-D4 scale as shown below.
U.S. Drought Monitor
Classification
Category
Description
D0
Abnormally Dry
Going into drought: short-term dryness slowing planting, growth of crops or pastures. Coming out of drought: some lingering water deficits; pastures or crops not fully recovered
D1
Moderate Drought
Some damage to crops, pastures; streams, reservoirs, or wells low, some water shortages developing or imminent; voluntary water-use restrictions requested
D2
Severe Drought
Crop or pasture losses likely; water shortages common; water restrictions imposed
D3
Extreme Drought
Major crop/pasture losses; widespread water shortages or restrictions
D4
Exceptional Drought
Exceptional and widespread crop/pasture losses; shortages of water in reservoirs, streams, and wells creating water emergencies
Source: US Drought Monitor, http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/classify.htm
When evaluating drought risk utilizing the Palmer Drought Severity Index, Massachusetts is historically in the lowest percentile for severity and risk of drought. Even so, there have
been several years of drought-like conditions in Western Massachusetts: 1940-1952, 1980-1983, 1995-2001, 2010 and 2016. Furthermore, global warming and climate change may have an effect
on drought risk in the region. With the projected temperature increases, some scientists think that the global hydrological cycle will also intensify. This would increase the severity
and duration of droughts that might impact Northampton.
The extent of a severe drought in Northampton would be minor, with very few injuries, if any, only minor property damage and minimal disruption on quality of life, and a temporary shutdown
of facilities or limits placed on water usage.
Previous Occurrences
In Massachusetts, six major droughts have occurred statewide since 1930, the most severe in 1960 and the most recent in 2016. They range in severity and length, from three to eight
years. Although it was shorted in duration, the severity of the 2016 drought state-wide was equivalent to that of the historic drought of the 1960s. In many of these droughts, water-supply
systems were found to be inadequate. Water was piped in to urban areas, and water-supply systems were modified to permit withdrawals at lower water levels. The following table indicates
previous occurrences of drought since 2000, based on the US Drought Monitor.Note, the table below only reports on the highest recorded drought level for each year:
Annual Drought Status
Year
Maximum Severity
2000
No drought
2001
D2 conditions in 21% and D1 conditions in 79% of the state
2002
D2 conditions in 99% of the state
2003
No drought
2004
D0 conditions in 44% of the state
2005
D1 conditions in 7% and D0 conditions in 100% of the state
2006
D0 conditions in 98% of the state
2007
D1 conditions in 71% and D0 conditions in 100% of the state
2008
D0 conditions in 57% of the state
2009
D0 conditions in 44% of the state
2010
D1 conditions in 27% and D0 conditions in 100% of the state
2011
D0 conditions in 0.01% of the state
2012
D2 conditions in 51% and D1 conditions in 96% of the state
2016
D3 conditions in 52% of the state,D2 in 38%, and D1 in 8% of the state
2017
D3 conditions in 9% of the state, D2 in 60%, and D1 in 28% of the state
2018
D1 in 36% of the stateand D0 conditions in 49% of the state
2019
D0 conditions in 85% of the state
Through May 2020
D0 conditions in 26% of the state
Source: US Drought Monitor
Northampton has had limited experience with severe drought conditions. According to the Massachusetts SHMCAP, between 2001 and 2017 the City experienced up to 69 weeks of Severe Drought
and 21 weeks of Extreme Drought, as many weeks as any other municipality in the State as classified by the U.S. Drought Monitor.
In the summer of 2016, Northampton experienced drought conditions that were impacting most of the Commonwealth. The lack of adequate rainfall coupled with warm summer temperatures over
a span of months prompted authorities to implement water-use restrictions for residents and businesses alike.The City’s Water Department actively managed the two water supply reservoirs
andactivated their two groundwater wells to supplement supply from the reservoirs. Restrictions were placed on the allowable time and location for outdoor watering, including the use
of hoses and sprinklers. The partial water ban was in accordance with the state's Water Management Act and Northampton’s Public Water Supply Water Management Act permit with MassDEP.
Similar bans were enacted and enforced in the summers of 2015, 2017, 2018, and 2019.
Probability of Future Events
The frequency and intensity of droughts are projected to increase during summer and fall as higher temperatures lead to greater evaporation and earlier winter and spring snowmelt, and
precipitation patterns become more variable and extreme. Also due to climate change, the proportion of precipitation falling as rain instead of snow in our region and the length of time
snowpack remains are both expected to decrease. This reduces the period during which snow melt can recharge groundwater supplies, bolster streamflow, and provide water for the growing
period.
In Northampton, as in the rest of the state, drought occurs at a “low” probability (1 to 10 percent in the next year).Based on past events and current criteria outlined in the Massachusetts
Drought Management Plan, it appears that western Massachusetts may be more vulnerable than eastern Massachusetts to severe drought conditions. However, many factors, such as water supply
sources, population, economic factors (i.e., agriculture based economy), and infrastructure, may affect the severity and length of a drought event.When evaluating the region’s risk for
drought on a national level, utilizing the Palmer Drought Severity Index, Massachusetts is historically in the lowest percentile for severity and risk of drought.
Due to the water richness of western Massachusetts, Northampton is unlikely to be adversely affected by anything other than a major, extended drought. While such a drought would require
water saving measures to be implemented, there would be no foreseeable damage to structures or loss of life resulting from the hazard.
Average temperatures in the Pioneer Valley have been increasing over time in the Pioneer Valley due to climate change, and this trend is likely to continue in the future. Higher temperatures
due to climate change will likely have an effect on future drought risk in Northampton. A slight decrease in summer precipitation will also support more frequent droughts, especially
short-term (1 to 3 months).Droughtsare likely to increase in their frequency in the Northeast to the level of once per year.
Impact
The impact of droughts as categorized by the U.S. Drought Monitor include:
Slowing or loss of crops and pastures
Water shortages or restrictions
Minor to significant damage to crops, pastures;
Low water levels in streams, reservoirs, or wells
However, the City’s local aquifer supply would help to reduce the effects of widespread drought on the local water supply. The impact of a drought is thus “minor,” with very few damages
to people or property likely to occur.
Secondary Hazards
Another hazard commonly associated with drought is wildfire. A prolonged lack of precipitation dries out soil and vegetation, which becomes increasingly susceptible to ignition as the
duration of the drought extends. As a result, a drought may increase the probability of a wildfire occurring. Additional information is provided on the wildfire hazard later in this
section.
In Northampton, the inability to provide sufficient water supply can itself be secondary to other natural or man-made hazard events. Power outage, tornado, building fires, construction/maintenance
projects, aging infrastructure, and inadequate water main sizes are the significant causes of water loss to the Town.
Vulnerability
Based on the above assessment, Northampton has a hazard index rating of “5 – very low risk” from drought. No loss of property, or damages to people or property, is expected due to this
hazard.
Populations
The entire population of Northampton would be vulnerable to the impacts of a drought. Residents with a private water supply such as a well, homeless residents, and populations with respiratory
health conditions are most vulnerable.
Built Environment
Some infrastructure may not be built to operate in drought conditions. Intake pipes may be too high above drought water levels, and wells may be too shallow. Private suppliers or residents
with private systems may need to drill deeper wells or find alternative supplies for emergency back-up during severe droughts.
Natural Resources
Prolonged droughts can have severe impacts on groundwater and surface water-dependent ecosystems and natural resources, as most organisms require water throughout their life cycle.
Economy
Economic impacts of drought can be significant in the agriculture, recreation, forestry, and energy sectors. Coca-Cola, a major employer and economic driver in Northampton, relies on
local water sources for its productivity. A prolonged drought may lead to reduced production capability or temporary closure. Farmers in the Meadows area of Northampton work with particularly
fertile and wet soil conditions, and therefore are not equipped with irrigation systems that would be required to maintain crop viability in the case of a severe drought.
Impacts on the individual level include the need to buy water from an alternative source during a drought emergency. Crop failure can also increase food prices, straining a portion of
the economy.
Extreme Temperatures
Hazard Description
What constitutes “extreme cold” or “extreme heat” can vary across different geographies, based on what the population of a particular place is accustomed to. According to the Massachusetts
State Hazard Mitigation and Climate Adaptation Plan, extreme heat for Massachusetts is usually defined as a period of 3 or more consecutive days above 90 degrees Fahrenheit (°F), but
more generally as a prolonged period of excessively hot weather, which may be accompanied by high humidity. Extreme cold is also considered relative to the normal climatic lows in a
region.
More broadly, extreme temperatures can be defined as those that are far outside the normal ranges. The average highs and lows of the hottest and coolest months in the nearby town of
Amherst, the closest site for which data was available, are provided in Table 8below.
Table 8. Monthly Temperature Normals
July (Hottest Month)
January (Coldest Month)
Average High (°F)
82.2
33.1
Average Low (°F)
59.2
23.1
Source: NOAA NWS, 2020. Monthly Climate Normals (1981 – 2010) Amherst, MA
The highest temperature recorded at the Amherst station for the period from 1893 to present was 104°F on July 4,1911 (NOAA NOW Data, Boston / Norton Weather Forecast Office, https://w2.weather.gov/climate/xmacis.php?wfo=box).
Projected temperature extremes will shift with climate change, according to research conducted by the Massachusetts Executive office for Energy and Environmental Affairs and the University
of Massachusetts, Amherst. By 2050, summer maximum temperatures (including the presumed hottest month of July) are expected to reach as high as 87.7°F in the Connecticut River Basin,
as opposed to a 1971-2000baseline of 80.2°F (resilientma.org).
Extreme cold events are when temperatures drop well below normal in an area. Generally, extreme cold temperatures are characterized by the ambient air temperature dropping to or below
0 degrees Fahrenheit (ºF) (National Weather Service [NWS] 2015). When winter temperatures drop significantly below normal, staying warm and safe can become a challenge. Extremely cold
temperatures may accompany or follow a winter storm, which may also cause power failures and icy roads. Many homes will be too cold, either due to a power failure or because the heating
system is not adequate for the weather. Extensive exposure to extreme cold temperatures can cause frostbite or hypothermia and can become life-threatening.
Extreme heat is defined by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) as temperatures which hover 10 degrees or more above the average high temperature for a region and that last for several
weeks (CDC 2016). Heat waves cause more fatalities in the U.S. than the total of all other meteorological events combined. Since 1979, more than 9,000 Americans have died from heat-related
ailments (EPA, 2016). In Massachusetts, a heat wave is defined as 3 or more days of temperatures of 90°F or above and is often accompanied by high humidity. The designation implies an
extended period of unusually high atmosphere-related heat stress, which forces affected populations to make temporary modifications in lifestyle to avoid adverse health consequences
(MA HMCAP, 2018).
Location
NOAA divides Massachusetts up into three climate divisions - Western, Central, and Coastal – and average annual temperatures vary slightly over the divisions. Another distinction between
the divisions is that extreme temperature events occur more frequently and vary more in the inland regions where temperatures are not moderated by the Atlantic Ocean. Northampton sits
along the western edge of the Central Division, with annual average temperatures of around 49°F.
Figure 1. Climate Divisions of Massachusetts
Source: NOAA, n.d.
Extreme temperatures would affect the whole community in Northampton, resulting in a “large” location of occurrence, or more than 50 percent of total land area affected.
Extent
The extent (severity or magnitude) of extreme cold temperatures are generally measured through the Wind Chill Temperature (WCT) Index. Wind Chill Temperature is the temperature that
people and animals feel when outside and it is based on the rate of heat loss from exposed skin by the effects of wind and cold. The chart shows three shaded areas of frostbite danger.
Each shaded area shows how long a person can be exposed before frostbite develops. In Massachusetts, a wind chill warning is issued by the NWS Taunton Forecast Office when the Wind Chill
Temperature Index, based on sustained wind, is –25ºF or lower for at least three hours. The WCT is presented in Figure 2.
Figure 2. NWS Wind Chill Index
Source: NWS 2018
The NWS Heat Index is used to measure extremely hot temperatures, combining relative humidity with actual air temperature to determine the risk to humans. The NWS issues a Heat Advisory
when the Heat Index is forecast to reach 100-104°F for 2 or more hours, and an Excessive Heat Warning if the Heat Index is forecast to reach 105°F or higher for 2 or more hours. The
chart in Figure 3 indicates the relationship between heat index and relative humidity and illustrates the adverse effects that prolonged exposure to heat and humidity can have on an
individual.
Figure 3. NWS Heat Index Chart
Source: National Weather Service (NWS), Heat Index, 2018
According to recent downscaled climate projections for Massachusetts, high, low, and average temperatures in Hampshire County are likely to increase significantly over the next century
as a result of climate change (resilient MA, 2019). This gradual change will put long-term stress on a variety of social and natural systems, and will exacerbate the influence of discrete
events. In the event of an extreme cold or heat event, multiple injuries and health impacts would be possible. Therefore, the extent of this hazard is critical.
Previous Occurrences
The following are the lowest temperatures recorded in parts of Massachusetts for the period from 1895 to present according to NOAA’s State Climate Extremes Committee (SCEC):
Taunton: -35°F, January 5, 1904
Coldbrook: -35°F, February 15, 1943
Chester: -35°F, January 12, 1981
Since 1994, there have been 33 cold weather events within the Commonwealth, ranging from Cold/Wind Chill to Extreme Cold/Wind Chill events. In February 2015, a series of snowstorms piled
up to 60 inches in some areas in 3 weeks and caused recurrent blizzards across eastern Massachusetts. Temperature gauges across the Commonwealth measured extreme cold, with wind chills
as low as 31°F. Four indirect fatalities occurred as a result of this event: two adults died shoveling snow and two adults were hit by snowplows. In February 2016, one cold weather event
broke records throughout the state. Extreme cold/wind chill events were declared in 16 climate zones across the Commonwealth (MASHMCAP, 2018).
According to the NOAA’s Storm Events Database, there were 43 heat events (ranging from Record Warmth/Heat to Excessive Heat events) in Massachusetts between 1995 and 2018, the most recent
of which occurred in July 2013. Whenever the heat index values meet or exceed locally or regionally established heat or excessive heat warning thresholds, an event is reported in the
database. In 2012, Massachusetts temperatures broke 27 heat records. Most of these records were broken between June 20 and June 22, 2012, during the first major heat wave of the summer
to hit Massachusetts and the East Coast. In July 2013, a long period of hot and humid weather occurred throughout New England. One fatality occurred on July 6, when a postal worker collapsed
as the Heat Index reached 100°F (MASHMCAP, 2018). None of these events was known to impact individuals in Northampton.
The lowest temperature recorded at the Barnes Municipal Airport in Westfield for the period from 1893 to present was -30°F on January 22, 1961 (NOAA NOW Data, Boston / Norton Weather
Forecast Office, https://w2.weather.gov/climate/xmacis.php?wfo=box).
Between 1954 and 2019, Hampshire County was not included in any FEMA declared extreme temperature-related disasters (DR) or emergencies (EM).
Probability of Future Events
The NE CASC data support the trends of an increased frequency of extreme hot weather events and a decreased frequency of extreme cold weather events. Figure 4 and
Figure5 show the projected changes in these variables between 2020 and the end of this century.
Figure 4. Projected Annual Days with Temperature Above 90°F
Source: resilient MA, 2019
Figure 5. Projected Annual Days with Temperature below 32°F
Source: resilient MA, 2019
The probability of future extreme heat and extreme cold is considered to be "high," or between 40 and 70 percent in any given year.
Secondary Hazard
According to the 2018 SHMCAMP, the most significant secondary hazard associated with extreme temperatures is a severe weather event. Severe heat events are often associated with drought,
as evaporation increases with temperature, and with wildfire, as high temperatures can cause vegetation to dry out and become more flammable. Warmer weather will also have an impact
on invasive species (see Invasive Species section below for additional detail). More commonly, heat events contribute to poor air quality that can exacerbate asthma and result in an
increase in emergency department visits.
Conversely, extreme cold events are primarily associated with severe winter storms. The combination of cold weather with severe winter storm events is especially dangerous because winter
weather can knock out heat and power, increasing exposure to extreme cold temperatures. Loss of heat and power may also lead to carbon monoxide poisoning from inappropriate use of combustion-powered
generators, heaters, and cooking appliances, and heavy snowfall may block vents for gas dryers and heaters. Similarly, prolonged exposure to extreme heat can compromise power infrastructure,
leaving customers without power or the ability to operate air conditioning. Power failure leads to increased use of diesel generators for power and more wood stoves are used in extreme
cold; both situations lead to increasing air pollution and health impacts.
Impact
In the event of an extreme cold or heat event, multiple injuries and health impacts would be possible. As shown in Figure 3above, the NWS Heat Index chart describes the impacts of extreme
high temperatures when coupled with higher humidity levels (which are characteristic of the Pioneer Valley region) as follows:
Extreme Danger: Heat stroke likely.
Danger: Sunstroke, muscle cramps, and/or heat exhaustion likely. Heatstroke possible with prolonged exposure and/or physical activity.
Caution: Fatigue possible with prolonged exposure and/or physical activity.
Since heat index values were devised for shady, light wind conditions, exposure to full sunshine can increase heat index values by up to 15°F.
According to recent downscaled climate projections for Massachusetts, high, low, and average temperatures in Hampshire County are likely to increase significantly over the next century
as a result of climate change (resilient MA, 2019), as are the occurrences of days over 90°F, 95°F, and 100°F. This pattern change will put long-term stress on a variety of social and
natural systems, and will exacerbate the influence of discrete events. Multiple instance of heat stress could occur during any given extreme heat event, and therefore, the City faces
a “Limited” impact from extreme temperatures.
Vulnerability
Extreme temperature can have a significant impact to human health, commercial/agricultural business
Population
Extensive exposure to extreme cold temperatures can cause frostbite or hypothermia and can become life-threatening. Extreme cold and extreme heat are dangerous situations that can result
in health emergencies for individuals without shelter or some other way to stay cool, or who live in homes that are poorly insulated, or without adequate heat or air conditioning. Power
outages may also result in inappropriate use of combustion heaters and other appliances, as discussed under Secondary Impacts above.
Extreme heat events can also contribute to a worsening of air quality, as high temperatures increase the production of ozone from aerosols such as volatile organic compounds. Weather
patterns that bring high temperatures can also transport air pollutants from other areas of the continent. Additionally, atmospheric inversions and low wind speeds associated with heat
waves allow polluted air to remain in one location for a prolonged period of time (UCI, 2017).
According to the 2018 SHMCAP, the interaction of heat and cardiovascular disease caused approximately 25 percent of the heat related deaths since 1999. Other vulnerability indicators
relative to extreme heat are presented in Table 9.
Table 9. General Vulnerability Indicators
Location
Estimated Increase in Average Temperature by 2100 (°F)
Proportion of Population Aged 65 or Older
Proportion of Population Aged Younger than 5 Years
Proportion of the Population Living Below Poverty Level
Hampshire County
+5.23 to +9.63°
17.2%
3.4%
11.1%
Northampton
N/A
16.6% (1)
3.6% (1)
16.1% (1)
Notes:U.S. Census Bureau Quick Facts, Hampshire County, MA. 2019.
(1) 2019 American Community Survey states that estimates are not comparable to other geographic levels due to methodology differences that may exist between different data sources.
Built Environment
With the exception of power infrastructure, most structures and infrastructure within the City are not at risk for damage due to extreme temperatures, but populations that are not prepared
to contend with these temperature extremes could be most vulnerable. However, extreme cold temperature events can damage buildings through freezing or bursting pipes and freeze and thaw
cycles. Furthermore, secondary impacts of this hazard include extreme temperature fluctuations, which have serious implications for transportation infrastructure life-span and maintenance
needs.
Natural Resources
Individual extreme temperature events usually have a limited long-term impact on natural systems, although unusual frost events occurring after plants begin to bloom in the spring can
cause significant damage. However, changing average temperatures and the changing frequency of extreme climate events will likely have a major impact on natural resources throughout
the Commonwealth and worldwide (2018 SHMCAP).
Changing temperatures will impact the natural environment in many ways. Because the species that exist in a given area have adapted to survive within a specific temperature range, extreme
temperature events can place significant stress both on individual species and the ecosystems in which they function.
Massachusetts ecosystems that are expected to be particularly vulnerable to warming temperatures include:
Coldwater streams and fisheries
Vernal pools
Spruce-fir forests
Northern hardwood (Maple-Beech-Birch) forests, which are economically important due to their role in sugar production
Hemlock forests, particularly those with the hemlock woolly adelgid
Urban forests, which will experience extra impacts due to the urban heat island effect (2018 SHMCAP)
Additional impacts of warming temperatures include the increased survival and grazing damage of white-tailed deer, increased invasion rates of invasive plants, and increased survival
and productivity of insect pests, which cause damage to forests.
Economy
Extreme temperatures can impact a municipal and regional economy in various ways. Northampton business owners may be faced with increased financial burdens due to unexpected building
repairs (e.g., repairs for burst pipes), higher than normal utility bills, or business interruptions due to power failure (i.e., loss of electricity and telecommunications). There is
a loss of productivity and income when the transportation sector is impacted and people and commodities cannot get to their intended destination. Employers with outdoor workers (such
as agricultural and construction companies) may have to reduce employees’ exposure to the elements by reducing or shifting their hours to cooler or warmer periods of the day – these
shifts can impact the earnings of both the company and the individual employee.
The agricultural industry is most directly at risk in terms of economic impact and damage due to extreme temperature and drought events. Extreme heat can result in drought and dry conditions,
which directly impact livestock and crop production (2018 SHMCAP) and also have adverse impacts on outdoor entertainment and dining, an important part of Northampton’s downtown economy.
Wildfires / Brushfires
Hazard Description
Wildfires are typically larger fires, involving full-sized trees as well as meadows and scrublands. Brushfires are uncontrolled fires that occur in meadows and scrublands, but do not
involve full-sized trees. Typical causes of brushfires and wildfires are lightning strikes, human carelessness, and arson.
FEMA has classifications for 3 different classes of wildfires:
Surface fires are the most common type of wildfire, with the surface burning slowly along the floor of a forest, killing or damaging trees.
Ground fires burn on or below the forest floor and are usually started by lightening.
Crown fires move quickly by jumping along the tops of trees. A crown fire may spread rapidly, especially under windy conditions.
Location
While Northampton is a city with a dense, well-defined downtown, it still contains several thousand acres of largely undeveloped space. The rural-urban interface is most pronounced
in those sections of city that are experiencing development, most notably Florence and Leeds. The total amount of city that could be affected by wildfire is categorized as “medium,”
at between 10 to 50 percent of the total area.
Extent
Wildfires can cause widespread damage to the areas that they affect. They can spread very rapidly, depending on local wind speeds and be very difficult to get under control. Fires can
last for several hours up to several days.
Approximately 1,150 acres of land in Northampton is forested according to MassGIS 2016 Land Cover/Land Use data and is therefore at risk of fire. Forested areas in Northampton cover
many of the city’s outlying areas, which can be remote and difficult for emergency crews to access. In drought conditions, a brushfire or wildfire would be a matter of concern. A large
wildfire could damage much of the land mass, including vital watershed lands, in a short period of time.
As described in the next section describing previous occurrences of wildfire, there have not been any major wildfires recorded in Northampton. However, based on other major wildfires
that have occurred in western Massachusetts, it is estimated that such a fire would likely destroy around 50 to 500 acres of forested area.
The overall extent of wildfires is shown in the table below:
Extent of Wildfires
Rating
Basic Description
Detailed Description
CLASS 1: Low Danger (L)
Color Code: Green
Fires not easily started
Fuels do not ignite readily from small firebrands. Fires in open or cured grassland may burn freely a few hours after rain, but wood fires spread slowly by creeping or smoldering and
burn in irregular fingers. There is little danger of spotting.
CLASS 2: Moderate Danger (M)
Color Code: Blue
Fires start easily and spread at a moderate rate
Fires can start from most accidental causes. Fires in open cured grassland will burn briskly and spread rapidly on windy days. Woods fires spread slowly to moderately fast. The average
fire is of moderate intensity, although heavy concentrations of fuel – especially draped fuel -- may burn hot. Short-distance spotting may occur, but is not persistent. Fires are not
likely to become serious and control is relatively easy.
CLASS 3: High Danger (H)
Color Code: Yellow
Fires start easily and spread at a rapid rate
All fine dead fuels ignite readily and fires start easily from most causes. Unattended brush and campfires are likely to escape. Fires spread rapidly and short-distance spotting is common.
High intensity burning may develop on slopes or in concentrations of fine fuel. Fires may become serious and their control difficult, unless they are hit hard and fast while small.
CLASS 4: Very High Danger (VH)
Color Code: Orange
Fires start very easily and spread at a very fast rate
Fires start easily from all causes and immediately after ignition, spread rapidly and increase quickly in intensity. Spot fires are a constant danger. Fires burning in light fuels may
quickly develop high-intensity characteristics - such as long-distance spotting - and fire whirlwinds, when they burn into heavier fuels. Direct attack at the head of such fires is rarely
possible after they have been burning more than a few minutes.
CLASS 5: Extreme (E)
Color Code: Red
Fire situation is explosive and can result in extensive property damage
Fires under extreme conditions start quickly, spread furiously and burn intensely. All fires are potentially serious. Development into high-intensity burning will usually be faster and
occur from smaller fires than in the Very High Danger class (4). Direct attack is rarely possible and may be dangerous, except immediately after ignition. Fires that develop headway
in heavy slash or in conifer stands may be unmanageable while the extreme burning condition lasts. Under these conditions, the only effective and safe control action is on the flanks,
until the weather changes or the fuel supply lessens.
Previous Occurrences
The wildfire season in Massachusetts usually begins in late March and typically culminates in early June, corresponding with the driest live fuel moisture periods of the year. April
is historically the month in which wildfire danger is the highest. Drought, snowpack level, and local weather conditions can impact the length of the fire season.
Few wildfires have been recorded in the past 100 years in the Pioneer Valley, and none has ever resulted in a FEMA disaster declaration. During the past 100 years, there have not been
many wildfires occurring in the Pioneer Valley. However, several have occurred during the past 20 years, as shown in the list below:
1995 – Russell, 500 acres burned on Mt. Tekoa
2000 – South Hadley, 310 acres burned over 14 days in the Litihia Springs Watershed
2001 – Ware, 400 acres burned
2010 – Russell, 320 acres burned on Mt. Tekoa
2012 – Eastern Hampden County, dry conditions and wind gusts created a brush fire in Brimfield, and burned 50 acres
2016 - Montgomery, 60 acres burned on Mt. Tekoa (MA HMP, 2013)
As a point of reference, the total number of any type of fire incidence in Northampton for the years 2013-2017 is provided below. The “Total # of Incidents” includes structural and vehicle
fires, while incidents classified as “other” could include, but do not necessarily include, brush fires. The Northampton Fire Department responds to house fires and the few “wildfires”
that occur.
Table 10. Total Fire Incidents in Northampton
Year
Total # of Incidents
“Other Fires”
2013
81
36
2014
67
36
2015
67
36
2016
73
28
2017
57
18
Source: Massachusetts Fire Incidence Reporting System, County Profiles, 2017 Fire Data Analysis and Annual Fact Sheets, https://www.mass.gov/service-details/fire-data-and-statistics
There are no other records, authenticated or anecdotal, of wildfires in Northampton.
Probability of Future Events
In accordance with the Massachusetts Hazard Mitigation Plan, the Northampton Hazard Mitigation Committee found it is difficult to predict the likelihood of wildfires in a probabilistic
manner because of the number of variables involved. Research has found that the frequency of lightning strikes – an occasional cause of wildfire – could increase by approximately 12
percent for every degree Celsius of warming (2018 SHMCAP). However, even with the increased lightning risks, based on previous occurrences, the Committee determined the probability of
future events to be “low” (1 percent to 10 percent probability in the next year).
Climate scenarios project summer temperature increases between 3.2ºF and 7.3ºF and fall precipitation decreases of up to 11 percent by 2050 in Northampton. Such conditions would exacerbate
summer drought and further promote high-elevation wildfires, releasing stores of carbon and further contributing to the buildup of greenhouse gases. Forest response to increased atmospheric
carbon dioxide—the so-called “fertilization effect”—could also contribute to more tree growth and thus more fuel for fires, but the effects of carbon dioxide on mature forests are still
largely unknown.
Climate change is also predicted to bring increased wind damage from major storms, as well as new types of pests to the region. Both increased wind and the introduction of new pests
could potentially create more debris in wooded areas and result in a larger risk of fires.
Impact
While a large wildfire could damage much of the landmass of Northampton, these areas are not populated by people, meaning that wildfire affected areas are not likely to cause damage
to property. For this reason, the City faces a “minor” impact from wildfires, with very few damages likely to occur.
Both wildfires and brushfires can consume homes, other buildings and/or agricultural resources. The impact of wildfires and brushfires are as follows:
Impact to benefits that people receive from the environment, such as food/water and the regulation of floods and drought
Impact on local heritage, through the destruction of natural features
Impact to the economy, due to damage to property and income from land following a wildfire
Impact through the destruction of people and property
Vulnerability
Based on the above assessment, Northampton has a hazard risk index of “4 – low risk” from wildfires.
Using a total value of all structures in Northampton of $2,742,056,662 and an estimated 50 percent of damage to 1 percent of all structures, the estimated amount of damage from a forest
fire is $13,710,283. The cost of repairing or replacing the roads, bridges, utilities, and contents of structures is not included in this estimate.
Population
Human health and the lives of residents and responders are at risk from wildfire. The most vulnerable populations include emergency responders and those within a short distance of the
interface between the built environment and the wildland environment.
Built Environment
For the purposes of this planning effort, all elements of the built environment located near forested areas are considered exposed to the wildfire hazard.
Critical facilities are particularly important for routine town operation and emergency response in case of a severe wildfire. Energy distribution lines are subject to wildfire risk
because most poles are made of wood and susceptible to burning. Transmission lines are also at risk to faulting during wildfires, which can result in a broad area outage.
Natural Resources
Fire can serve important ecological purposes as a natural part of many ecosystems. Functions include facilitating the nutrient cycling from dead and decaying matter, removing diseased
plants and pests, and regenerating seeds or stimulating germination of certain plants. This is an important part of the cycle in the very limited Pine Barrens section of Northampton,
which developed with a fire ecology. Conversely, wildfires can also have significant negative impacts on the environment. Specifically, the ash they generate can distort the flow of
nutrients through an ecosystem, reducing the biodiversity that can be supported and adding to stream and waterbody sedimentation and eutrophication.
Economy
The initial loss of structures and the subsequent loss of revenue from destroyed businesses from a wildfire can have major economic impacts on a community. Individuals and families will
face economic challenges if their home is impacted by wildfire. The exposure of homes to this hazard is widespread. According to the characterization of wildland hazard areas by Radeloff
et al., the Massachusetts intermix hazard area contains 476,934 housing units (or approximately 17 percent of the total housing units in the Commonwealth). The interface hazard area
contains 715,209 housing units (or approximately 26 percent of the total housing units in the Commonwealth).
Invasive Species
Hazard Description
Invasive species are non-native species that threaten and damage local ecosystems, economies, and/or public health (NISC 2006). The Massachusetts Invasive Plant Advisory Group (MIPAG),
a collaborative representing organizations and professionals concerned with the conservation of the Massachusetts landscape, is charged by EOEEA to provide recommendations to the Commonwealth
to manage invasive species. MIPAG defines invasive plants as "non-native species that have spread into native or minimally managed plant systems in Massachusetts, causing economic or
environmental harm by developing self- sustaining populations and becoming dominant and/or disruptive to those systems" (MIPAG, n.d.).
Invasive terrestrial plants are the most studied and managed typed of invasive, but invasive insects are also relevant to Northampton. In all cases, these species have biological traits
that provide them with competitive advantages over native species, particularly because in a new habitat they are not restricted by the biological controls of their native habitat. As
a result, these invasive species can monopolize natural communities, displacing many native species and causing widespread economic and environmental damage.
The spread of invasive species is primarily caused by human activity. Common examples include:
Wood Products: Insects can get into wood, shipping palettes, and crates that are shipped around the world as well as travel in firewood.
Ornamental Plants: Some ornamental plants can escape into the wild and become invasive.
Pet Trade: Some invasive species start as pets that are intentionally or accidentally released.
Climate change: Warmer temperatures place stress on cold-weather species, while allowing non-native species accustomed to warmer climates to spread northward. As rainfall and snowfall
patterns change, certain habitats and species that have specific physiological requirements may be affected. The stresses experienced by native ecosystems as a result of these changes
may increase the chances of a successful invasion of non-native species.
Invasive plant species such as Asian honeysuckles, bittersweet, Japanese barberry, Japanese knotweed, autumn olive, burning bush, multiflora rose, garlic mustard, and glossy buckthorn,
are considered by the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources, New England Wildflower Society, U.S. Forest Service, and others as some of the worst invaders in the region.
Non‐native insects which currently threaten the region are the emerald ash borer (EAB), Asian longhorned beetle (ALB), Red Pine Scale, and hemlock wooly adelgid (HWA).
Emerald ash borer (EAB) is an exotic beetle that was discovered in southeastern Michigan in the summer of 2002. The larvae feed in the cambium between the bark and wood, producing S-shaped
galleries that girdle and kill branches and trees. As of February 22, 2019, EAB had been confirmed in 51 Massachusetts cities in towns, including Northampton (MDAR, 2019).
The Asian longhorned beetle (Anoplophora glabripennis, or ALB) is a major threat to hardwood trees. The species has decimated tree stock in Worcester County, but has not yet spread to
western Massachusetts.
Red Pine Scale (RPS) is an exotic invasive insect originating from Asia that only attacks Red Pine, one of North America’s only native pine species of “Eurasian” descent. RPS is a piercing,
sucking insect that overtakes trees in large numbers, with tens of thousands of the tiny insects feeding on the inner bark of the tree’s crown. Red pine trees succumb quickly, and mortality
can be hastened by compounding threats such as attacks by bark beetles or periods of drought. The insect spread into MA in the 1990sand has decimated areas of watershed land in Northampton.
Hemlock woolly adelgid, a small aphid-type insect, was introduced into Massachusetts in 1988 from an already existing infestation in Connecticut. The insect attacks both the Carolina
and Eastern hemlock and is capable of severely weakening and killing its host plants. It is atypical of most insect species in the Northeast in that it is inactive for much of the growing
season and very active throughout the winter. Hemlock wooly adelgid is currently present in the region, and has been positively identified on a number of conservation lands in Northampton.
Location
Invasive species can travel far distances (either via natural mechanisms or accidental human interference) and therefore can propagate rapidly over a large geographic area, often with
no natural predators. Open freshwater ecosystems generally don’t have physical barriers to prevent establishment (outside of physiological tolerances) so invasive species can quickly
spread once introduced, and find myriad opportunities for transport to new locations (by boats, for example).
In general, invasive species are most threatening to native or minimally managed ecosystems in Northampton. This includes many of the rivers and streams throughout the City, conservation
lands, as well as the City’s water supply watershed land serving reservoirs in Williamsburg, Whately and Conway. The total amount of City land that could be impacted by invasive species
is categorized as “medium,” between 10 percent to 50 percent of the total area.
Extent
Many invasive species have been identified in Northampton. On just one of the many conservation properties in Northampton alone, the Barrett Street Marsh, there were more than a dozen
invasive plant species identified in 2019 including Japanese barberry, glossy buckthorn, and multi-flora rose, all mentioned above, as well as Norway maple, black locust, common buckthorn,
Morrow’s honeysuckle, privet, Japanese knotweed, garlic mustard, moneywort, lesser celandine, yellow iris, purple loosestrife, Asiatic bittersweet, tansy, sweet cherry, and Japanese
maple.
Invasive insect species are also documented throughout the City, and those known to be present are also having the greatest impact on conservation areas and other forested tracts. Hemlock
woolly adelgid has weakened large stands hemlocks throughout Massachusettsand similarly led to declining health of hemlocks trees across the City.The Asian longhorned beetle has the
potential to cause more damage than Dutch elm disease, chestnut blight and gypsy moths combined, destroying millions of acres of America's treasured hardwoods, including national forests
and backyard trees. With no current cure, early identification and eradication are critical to its control. The Emerald ash borer causes the most amount of damage to ash trees in its
larval stage. Heavily infested trees exhibit canopy dieback, beginning at the top of the tree. When emerald ash borer populations are high, small trees can die within 1-2 years of initial
infestation, while larger trees may take 3-4 years before succumbing to this pest.
A full list of “Invasive” terrestrial, freshwater, and marine species are available on the MIPAG website (last updated April 2016) https://www.massnrc.org/mipag/speciesreviewed_category.htm
and in the 2018 SHMCAP, which also includes details on the nature of the ecological and economic challenges presented by each species as well as information on when and where the species
was first detected in Massachusetts.Despite the presence of these species, their impacts have not been clearly recorded. Anticipated impacts include increased tree mortality leading
to more downed trees and power outages during storm events.
Other species, while not yet well established in the region, are of particular concern to human health. These include species like the Asian tiger mosquito (Aedes albopictus). This invasive
mosquito, originally from southeast and subtropical Asia has moved through the Eastern U.S. and has recently arrived in Massachusetts. Capable of spreading West Nile Virus, Equine Encephalitis,
Zika, and numerous other tropical diseases, this aggressive mosquito is likely range-limited by cold winter temperatures, suitable landscape conditions (it prefers urban areas), and
variation in moisture. As winter temperatures increase, the species is likely to become more prevalent in Massachusetts and throughout the Northeast, increasing the risk of serious illness
for residents in summer months.
Based on current understanding of the impact and previous occurrences, the extent of significant impacts Northampton will likely suffer from invasive species in the short term is Limited.
Probability of Future Events
Changes in temperature and precipitation may increase chances of a successful invasion of non-native species. To become an invasive species, the species must first be transported to
a new region, colonize and become established, and then spread across the new landscape. Climate change may impact each stage of this process. Species may shift their ranges north as
the climate warms and be successful in regions they previously had not colonized. Invasives may also be able to spread more rapidly in response to climate change, given their high dispersal
rates and fast generation times. These faster moving species may be at a competitive advantage if they can move into new areas before their native competitors.
Here in the Northeast, observed and projected warming conditions are particularly concerning for some invasives because species ranges in temperate regions are often limited by extreme
cold temperatures or snowfall, both of which we will see less of in coming decades. There is concern that aquatic species, such as hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata) and water hyacinth
(Eichhornia crassipes), may be able to survive and overwinter in Massachusetts with increased temperatures and reduced snowfall. Nutria (Myocastor coypus), large, non-native, semi-aquatic
rodents that are currently established in Maryland and Delaware, are likely to move north with warming temperatures - perhaps as far as Massachusetts.
Extreme cold winter temperatures are also critical limiting factors for many forest pests, and warming is expected to increase their survival and lead to expansions and outbreaks. For
example, the current impact of hemlock woolly adelgid (Adelges tsugae) in Massachusetts has likely been limited by cold winter temperatures, as many infested forest stands are surviving
while in more southerly ranges there is near complete mortality from this pest. But the adelgid has already expanded its range with warming winter temperatures and is likely to have
increased survival and higher reproductive rates in the northern portion of its range as temperatures warm, likely leading to more significant impacts on forests.
In many cases, efforts to control invasive species growth are met by opposition either from natural processes or social factors. As an example, Northampton has management plans for its
watershed forests, and these plans guide a number of efforts to regenerate native flora and mitigate the spread of invasive plant species. However, much of the forest regeneration that
does occur is promptly browsed by deer (and to a lesser extent, moose). Recommended actions for addressing this issue include exploring ways to control the deer population, or exploring
ways to reduce deer access to recently harvested areas, but these are politically fraught issues.
Given these considerations, and the fact that some invasive species are already present in Northampton, the frequency of occurrence and annual probability of this hazard is High.
Impact
Invasive species in Northampton will not likely contribute directly to injuries, significant property damage, or facility shutdown and therefor the impact is deemed “Minor.” However,
while the impacts of invasive species may not be as direct as the impacts of other natural hazards in Northampton, our changing climate is creating an environment in which invasive species
could become more of a widespread threat. Anticipated impacts of declining tree health include more downed trees and subsequent power outages (due to weakened or dead trees falling on
powerlines) during storm events. The hemlock woolly Adelgid, for instance, mainly damages varieties of Hemlock trees. Hemlock, like White Pine, is a foundation tree species, and when
any foundation species experiences widespread illness and/or mortality they leave room for invasive plant species to take over, causing wildlife habitat and water quality decrease. Deer
use healthy hemlock stands for winter shelter, so there could be a detrimental impact to the deer population, and hunting, caused by the loss of hemlock. Hemlocks provide shade to waterways,
so their loss could mean warmer streams and lower water quality, potentially impacting aquatic life. The hemlock isnot a comparatively very valuable wood product, but it is used for
logging and wood products, so there are economic threats to its loss (Brrokline, 2017). Another example of the impact is illustrated by Northampton’s experience with large stands of
red pine that died quickly and en mass. The City took on several significant logging contracts to remove dead and dangerous trees that threatened adjacent roadways and power lines. This
clearing results in a prime opportunity for invasive plants to get established.
The impact of the emerald ash borer could be more significant. Ash logs are more valuable than hemlock logs, but the bigger concern with the loss of ash is the cascading ecological impacts.
There are over 40 arthropod obligate species that are threatened by the loss of ash trees (they depend on ash for their survival), and ripple effects of the loss of these arthropods
and the interrelationships aren’t even fully known at this point. Ash is a valuable tree for wood products and logging, so the economic impacts on a regional scale could be severe. More
locally, though, the cost to Northampton for removing dead or dying trees, and the aesthetic and community open space impacts caused by their loss could be significant.
Many invasive plants in Northampton threaten forest regeneration, and multi-flora rose and Asiatic bittersweet can destroy mature trees. Smaller invasive plants such as garlic mustard,
purple loosestrife, and goutweed present a threat to native herbaceous plants. Jeffrey Ward, Chief Scientist at the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, described the health
threat posed by Japanese barberry as a forest infested with Japanese barberry harbors an average of 120 black-legged ticks per acre while a forest without barberry harbors an average
of only 10 black-legged ticks per acre. Black-legged ticks are known to transmit the causal agents of several diseases, including Lyme disease.
The impacts of invasive species may interact with those of climate change, magnifying the negative impacts of both threats. Furthermore, due to the very traits that make them successful
at establishing in new environments, invasives may be favored by climate change. These traits include tolerance to a broad range of environmental conditions, ability to disperse or travel
long distances, ability to compete efficiently for resources, greater ability to respond to changes in the environment with changes in physical characteristics, high reproductive rates,
and shorter times to maturity.
Vulnerability
Populations
Invasive species can also directly or indirectly cause harm to human health. Some invasive plant species like giant hogweed and wild parsnip have phytophototoxic properties, meaning
direct contact of their sap with human skin can cause a chemical reaction that makes skin hypersensitive to ultraviolet light. Another example is that of Japanese barberry, which has
been proven to increase the incidence of Lyme disease by providing sheltered habitat that increases the abundance of small rodents, which act as hosts to the ticks that carry Lyme disease
pathogens (https://mnfi.anr.msu.edu/invasive-species/JapaneseBarberryBCP.pdf).
In Northampton, tree mortality resulting from invasive species infestation can lead to blocked roads and downed powerlines, as well as increased erosion, wildfire risk, and tree clearing
expenses.
Natural Environment
Risk to native or minimally managed ecosystems has increased as dispersion of exotic species has increased. One of the greatest challenges facing Northampton in the management of invasive
species is that many cannot be effectively eradicated (e.g., Japanese knotweed and bittersweet) without the use of herbicides. This has been the only way to effectively manage intrusion
of invasive plant species on the flood control levies and in other locations throughout the City, creating a secondary hazard to local ecosystems if not correctly applied and to citizen
opposition.
The Nature Conservancy reports that invasive species have contributed directly to the decline of 42% of the threatened and endangered species in the United States. Further, the annual
cost to the U.S. economy is estimated at $120 billion per year, with more than 100 million acres suffering from invasive plant infestation. Freshwater ecosystems and estuaries are especially
vulnerable to invasion, as these areas are very difficult to contain and reverse (the Nature Conservancy, https://www.nature.org/en-us/about-us/where-we-work/united-states/ohio/stories-in-ohio/invasive-species-protecting-native-plants-and-animals/).
Hurricane/ Tropical Storm
Hazard Description
Hurricanes and tropical storms are classified as cyclones and defined as any closed circulation developing around a low-pressure center in which the winds rotate counter-clockwise in
the Northern Hemisphere (or clockwise in the Southern Hemisphere). The primary damaging forces associated with these storms are high-level sustained winds and heavy precipitation. Tropical
cyclones (tropical depressions, tropical storms, and hurricanes) form over the warm, moist waters of the Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean Sea, and Gulf of Mexico, and are classified into one
of three categories:
A tropical depression is declared when there is a low-pressure center in the tropics with sustained winds of 25 to 33 mph.
A tropical storm is a named event defined as having sustained winds from 34 to 73 mph.
If sustained winds reach 74 mph or greater, the storm becomes a hurricane. The Saffir-Simpson scale ranks hurricanes based on sustained wind speeds—from Category 1 (74 to 95 mph) to
Category 5 (156 mph or more). Category 3, 4, and 5 hurricanes are considered “major” hurricanes. Hurricanes are categorized based on sustained winds; wind gusts associated with hurricanes
may exceed the sustained winds and cause more severe localized damage (NOAA, n.d.[b]).
Hurricanes are violent rainstorms with strong winds that can reach speeds of up to 200 miles per hour and which generate large amounts of precipitation. Hurricanes generally occur between
June and November and can result in flooding and wind damage to structures and above-ground utilities.
Climate change increases the threat of hurricanes and severe wind as oceans and the atmosphere warms. Warmer water fuels more intense and longer-lasting storms and expands the area in
which hurricanes can form. Warmer air can hold more moisture than cool air, increasing potential rainfall rates.
Location
Because of the hazard’s regional nature, all of Northampton is at risk from hurricanes, meaning the location of occurrence is “large.” Ridgetops are more susceptible to wind damage.
Areas susceptible to flooding are also likely to be affected by heavy rainfall.
Extent
As an incipient hurricane develops, barometric pressure (measured in millibars or inches) at its center falls and winds increase. If the atmospheric and oceanic conditions are favorable,
it can intensify into a tropical depression. When maximum sustained winds reach or exceed 39 miles per hour, the system is designated a tropical storm, given a name, and is closely
monitored by the National Hurricane Center in Miami, Florida. When sustained winds reach or exceed 74 miles per hour the storm is deemed a hurricane. Hurricane intensity is further
classified by the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale, which rates hurricane wind intensity on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the most intense.A description of the damages that could
occur due to a hurricane is described by the Saffir-Simpson scale, as shown below.
Table 11. Hurricane Damage Classifications
StormCategory
DamageLevel
Description of Damages
Wind Speed (MPH)
1
MINIMAL
No real damage to building structures. Damage primarily to unanchored mobile homes, shrubbery, and trees. Also, some coastal flooding and minor pier damage. An example of a Category
1 hurricane is Hurricane Dolly (2008).
74-95
Very dangerous winds will produce some damage
2
MODERATE
Some roofing material, door, and window damage. Considerable damage to vegetation, mobile homes, etc. Flooding damages piers and small craft in unprotected moorings may break their
moorings. An example of a Category 2 hurricane is Hurricane Francis in 2004.
96-110
Extremely dangerous winds will cause extensive damage
3
EXTENSIVE
Some structural damage to small residences and utility buildings, with a minor amount of curtain wall failures. Mobile homes are destroyed. Flooding near the coast destroys smaller
structures, with larger structures damaged by floating debris. Terrain may be flooded well inland. An example of a Category 3 hurricane is Hurricane Ivan (2004).
111-129
Devastating damage will occur
4
EXTREME
More extensive curtain wall failures with some complete roof structure failure on small residences. Major erosion of beach areas. Terrain may be flooded well inland. An example of
a Category 4 hurricane is Hurricane Charley (2004).
130-156
Catastrophic damage will occur
5
CATASTROPHIC
Complete roof failure on many residences and industrial buildings. Some complete building failures with small utility buildings blown over or away. Flooding causes major damage to
lower floors of all structures near the shoreline. Massive evacuation of residential areas may be required. An example of a Category 5 hurricane is Hurricane Andrew (1992).
157+
Catastrophic damage will occur
Source: National Hurricane Center, 2012
Previous Occurrences
Between 1954 and 2017, Hampshire County was included in 5 FEMA declared severe Hurricane/Tropical Storm-related disasters (DR) or emergencies (EM) classified as one or a combination
of the following hazards: hurricane and tropical storm. Northampton may not have been impacted by all of these events.
According to NOAA’s Historical Hurricane Tracks tool, there have been 30 hurricanes or tropical storms in recorded history that tracked within 65 miles of Northampton. They are shown
in the following table.
These hurricanes and tropical storms did not cause any significant damage to Northampton.
Table 12. Major Hurricanes and Tropical Storms Affecting Northampton
Hurricane/Storm Name
Year
Saffir/Simpson Category (when reached study area)
Unnamed
1861
Tropical Storm
Unnamed
1863
Tropical Storm
Unnamed
1874
Tropical Storm
Unnamed
1888
Tropical Storm
Unnamed
1893
H1
Unnamed
1893
Tropical Storm
Unnamed
1894
H1
Unnamed
1934
Tropical Storm
Great Hurricane of 1938
1938
H3
Able
1952
Tropical Storm
Carol
1954
H3
Brenda
1960
Tropical Storm
Donna
1960
H1
Unnamed
1961
Tropical Storm
Doria
1971
Tropical Storm
Belle
1976
Tropical Storm
Gloria
1985
H1
Bertha
1996
Tropical Storm
Floyd
1999
Tropical Storm
Irene
2011
Tropical Storm
Source: NOAA National Hurricane Center, 2019
While Superstorm Sandy in late October of 2012 had severe impacts on much of the Northeastern United States, there was minimal damage that occurred due to the storm locally in Northampton.
No roads were flooded or washed out. While shelters were opened temporarily in town, no residents encountered long-term displacement due to the storm's impacts. In nearby, more rural
areas of western Massachusetts, there were modest impacts, with localized flooding and downed power lines. Overall, western Massachusetts was able to send emergency response resources
to other states where the storm had a larger impact.
No known hurricane or tropical storm events have impacted Northampton since the last HMP (between 2015 and 2020).
Probability of Future Events
Northampton’s location in western Massachusetts reduces the risk of extremely high winds that are associated with hurricanes and tropical storms, although it can experience some high
wind events. Based upon past occurrences, it is reasonable to say that there is a “moderate” probability (10 percent to 40 percent in any given year) of hurricanes or tropical in Northampton.
Climate change is projected to result in more severe weather, including increased occurrence of hurricanes and tropical storms. Because of this, the occurrence of hurricanes will increase
in the future.
Impact
A description of the damages that could occur due to a hurricane is described by the Saffir-Simpson scale, as shown in Table 11 above. The City faces a “limited” impact from hurricanes,
with 10 percent or less of Northampton affected.
Vulnerability
Based on the above analysis, Northampton has a hazard index rating of “3 – medium risk” from hurricanes and tropical storms.
Using a total value of all structures in Northampton of $2,742,056,622 and an estimated 10 percent of damage to 5 percent of all structures, the estimated amount of wind damage from
a hurricane is $13,710,283. Estimating that flooding would create 10 percent of damage to 20 percent of structures, the resulting damage would be $54,841,132. The cost of repairing or
replacing the roads, bridges, utilities, and contents of structures is not included in this estimate.
Populations
Populations unable to safely evacuate are most at risk during a Hurricane or Tropical Storm hazard. Low income populations may lack means to evacuate. The elderly often face physical
challenges or require regular medical attention. Limited English proficiency populations may face challenges receiving and understanding emergency directions.
Built Environment and Economy
The entire town would be vulnerable to the impact of a hurricane or tropical storm. Hurricanes and tropical storms can result in power outages and road closures that impact emergency
response. Heavy rains can lead to contamination of well water, septic system failure, and overburdened stormwater systems. Areas prone to flooding are particularly vulnerable. Additionally,
high winds could impact the City’s communication and energy infrastructure, and damage older buildings.
Sometimes, wind gusts of only 40 to 45 mph can cause scattered power outages from downed trees and wires. This is especially true after periods of prolonged drought, excessive rainfall,
or insect damage, since all are situations that can weaken the root systems and branches and make them more susceptible to the winds’ effects. Roads may become impassable due to downed
trees or roadway flooding resulting from a severe wind or thunderstorm.
Natural Environment
High winds, flooding, and large quantities of debris can damage the natural environment through contamination of resources, felling trees, scouring riverbeds, and injury and mortality
of animals.
Severe Winter Storm / Nor’easter
Hazard Description
Severe winter storms include ice storms, nor’easters, heavy snow, blowing snow, ice storms, and other extreme forms of winter precipitation.
Snow is characterized as frozen precipitation in the form of six-sided ice crystal. In order for snow to occur, temperatures in the atmosphere (from ground level to cloud level) must
be at or below freezing. The strongest form of a severe snow storm is a blizzard. Blizzards are characterized by frequent wind gusts above 35 miles per hour, limited to no visibility
due to falling snow and extreme cold that lasts longer than three hours.
Ice storms are liquid rain that falls and freezes upon contact with cold objects. There must be an ice build-up of greater than ¼ inch for it to be considered an ice storm. When more
than a ½ inch of ice build-up is forecasted a winter storm warning can be triggered.
Nor’easters are among winter’s most ferocious storms. They are characterized by a large counter-clockwise wind circulation around a low-pressure center, and are known for producing heavy
snow, high winds, and rain. These storms occur most often in late fall and early winter.
Severe winter storms can pose a significant risk to property and human life. The rain, freezing rain, ice, snow, cold temperatures and wind associated with these storms can cause the
following hazards:
Disrupted power and phone service
Unsafe roadways and increased traffic accidents
Infrastructure and other property are also at risk from severe winter storms and the associated flooding that can occur following heavy snow melt
Tree damage and fallen branches that cause utility line damage and roadway blockages
Damage to telecommunications structures
Reduced ability of emergency officials to respond promptly to medical emergencies or fires
Elderly are affected by extreme weather
New England generally experiences at least one or two severe winter storms each year with varying degrees of severity. Research on climate change indicates that there is great potential
for stronger, more frequent storms as the global temperature increases. Severe winter storms typically occur during January and February; however, they can occur from late September
through late April.
Location
The entire City of Northampton is susceptible to severe snowstorms, which means the location of occurrence is “large.” Because these storms occur regionally, they would impact the entire
city.
Extent
Since 2005, the Regional Snowfall Index (RSI) has become the descriptor of choice for measuring winter events that impact the six climactic regions in the eastern two-thirds of the U.S.
The RSI ranks snowstorm impacts on a scale system from 1 to 5 as depicted in the table below. The RSI is similar to the scale used to measure tornadoes (Fujita) or hurricanes(Saffir-Simpson),
with the added benefit of considering population as a variable. The RSI is based on three factors: the spatial extent of the storm, the amount of snowfall, and population (NOAA, n.d.).
As a regional index, the RSI incorporates region-specific parameters and thresholds for calculating a storm’s category. Snowfall thresholds in Massachusetts (in the Northeast region)
are 4, 10, 20, and 30 inches of snowfall, while thresholds in the Southeast U.S. are 2, 5, 10, and 15 inches.
Regional Snowfall Index Categories, Corresponding RSI Values, and Description
Category
RSI Value
Description
1
1—3
Notable
2
3—6
Significant
3
6—10
Major
4
10—18
Crippling
5
18.0+
Extreme
Source: NCDC, n.d.
Prior to the RSI, the Northeast Snowfall Impact Scale (NESIS) was the ranking system used. It was developed by Paul Kocin of The Weather Channel and Louis Uccellini of the National Weather
Service (Kocin and Uccellini, 2004) to characterize and rank high-impact Northeast snowstorms. These storms have large areas of 10-inch snowfall accumulations and greater. NESIS has
five categories: Extreme, Crippling, Major, Significant, and Notable. The index differs from other meteorological indices in that it uses population information in addition to meteorological
measurements. Thus NESIS gives an indication of a storm's societal impacts.
NESIS scores are a function of the area affected by the snowstorm, the amount of snow, and the number of people living in the path of the storm. The aerial distribution of snowfall and
population information are combined in an equation that calculates a NESIS score which varies from around one for smaller storms to over ten for extreme storms. The raw score is then
converted into one of the five NESIS categories. The largest NESIS values result from storms producing heavy snowfall over large areas that include major metropolitan centers.
Northeast Snowfall Impact Scale Categories
Category
NESIS Value
Description
1
1—2.499
Notable
2
2.5—3.99
Significant
3
4—5.99
Major
4
6—9.99
Crippling
5
10.0+
Extreme
Source: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/snow-and-ice/rsi/nesis
The Sperry-Piltz Ice Accumulation (SPIA) Index (below) is a prediction tool (algorithm) that can be used in conjunction with National Weather Service data to predict the impact of winter
weather in terms of ice damage. It is currently being tested by the National Weather Service and FEMA in several regions with potential implementation in the future. In the meantime,
the index provides an outline of the potential damage impacts of ice storms based on accumulation and wind.
The Sperry-Piltz Ice Accumulation (SPIA) Index
Ice Damage Index
Damage and Impact Descriptions
0
Minimal risk of damage to exposed utility systems; no alerts or advisories needed for crews, few outages.
1
Some isolated or localized utility interruptions are possible, typically lasting only a few hours. Roads and bridges may become slick and hazardous.
2
Scattered utility interruptions expected, typically lasting 12 to 24 hours. Roads and travel conditions may be extremely hazardous due to ice accumulation.
3
Numerous utility interruptions with some damage to main feeder lines and equipment expected. Tree limb damage is excessive. Outages lasting 1-5 days.
4
Prolonged and widespread utility interruptions with extensive damage to main distribution feeder lines and some high voltage transmission lines/structures/ Outages lasting 5-10 days.
5
Catastrophic damage to entire exposed utility systems, including both distribution and transmission networks. Outages could last several weeks in some areas. Shelters needed.
Source: http://www.spia-index.com/images/SPIAIndexDescription.png
The extent of a severe winter storm event would be “Critical,” with 25 percent or more of property in the affected area damaged, multiple injuries possible, and a complete shutdown of
facilities for more than one week.
Previous Occurrences
There is significant overlap between winter weather disasters and other types of disaster, such as flooding. Based on data available from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
there were27 winter storms in the Northeast Urban Corridor since 2010 that have registered on the NESIS scale. Of these, approximately 13 storms resulted in snow falls of at least 10
inches in the Pioneer Valley. These storms are listed in Table 13 in order of their NESIS severity.
Table 13. Winter Storms Producing Over 10 inches of Snow in Northampton, 1958-2018
Date
NESIS Value
NESIS Category
NESIS Classification
3/12/1993
13.2
5
Extreme
1/21/2005
6.8
4
Crippling
2/15/2003
7.5
4
Crippling
2/10/1983
6.25
4
Crippling
1/19/1978
6.53
4
Crippling
12/25/1969
6.29
4
Crippling
2/2/1961
7.06
4
Crippling
3/2/1960
8.77
4
Crippling
2/14/1958
6.25
4
Crippling
1/29/2015
5.42
3
Major
2/11/2014
5.28
3
Major
3/12/2017
5.03
3
Major
2/7/2013
4.35
3
Major
1/9/2011
5.31
3
Major
2/23/2010
5.46
3
Major
2/8/1994
5.39
3
Major
2/5/1978
5.78
3
Major
2/18/1972
4.77
3
Major
2/22/1969
4.29
3
Major
1/18/1961
4.04
3
Major
12/11/1960
4.53
3
Major
3/11/2018
3.16
2
Significant
1/25/2015
2.62
2
Significant
3/5/2018
3.45
2
Significant
3/4/2013
3.05
2
Significant
3/15/2007
2.54
2
Significant
4/6/1982
3.35
2
Significant
2/8/1969
3.51
2
Significant
2/5/1967
3.5
2
Significant
1/3/2018
1.65
1
Notable
2/8/2015
1.32
1
Notable
10/29/2011
1.75
1
Notable
3/31/1997
2.29
1
Notable
2/2/1995
1.43
1
Notable
1/25/1987
1.19
1
Notable
Source: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/snow-and-ice/rsi/nesis
Note: These dates may indicate the beginning of a storm, but may not align with the day the storm impacted Northampton.
Between 2015 and 2020, Hampshire County was not included in any FEMA declared severe winter storm-related disasters (DR) or emergencies (EM). It should be noted that because population
is used as a criteria for FEMA declarations, the storms that rank higher will be those that impact densely populated areas and regions such as Boston and other large cities and, as such,
might not necessarily reflect the storms that impact less populated areas. For example, one of the most famous storms in the Commonwealth in modern history was the Blizzard of ’78,
which dropped over two feet of snow in the Boston area during 65 mph winds that created enormous drifts and stranded hundreds of people on local highways. The storm hit the snow-weary
city that was still digging out of a similar two-foot snowstorm 17 days earlier. Although HampshireCounty received snow from this storm, it was not listed in the declaration.
The October Snow Storm in 2011, which caused major damages and disruptions across New England, also impacted Northampton. Most Northampton residents of the City were without electricity
for over a week. While this was a severe storm paired with trees sill in full foliage, most winter storms that hit Northampton are manageable and simply more of a nuisance. Northampton
DPW was awarded reimbursements from FEMA for emergency work require as a result of this event.
There currently isn’t good local data on ice storms in Northampton. According to the 2013 State Hazard Mitigation Plan, there were 20 ice storms in Hampshire County between 1971 and
2012. This equates to a major ice storm every two years. The 2018 Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation and Climate Adaptation Plan indicates that ice storms of lesser magnitudes occur
on at least an annual basis. Areas located in higher elevations are more likely to experience ice storms. In recent history, there has been no loss of life from snow or ice storms, but
each year there are incidences of property damage and personal injuries.
Well-known as the most serious storm to impact Pioneer Valley communities in recent history was the Ice Storm of December 11, 2008. The storm created widespread downed trees and power
outages all across New York State, Massachusetts and New Hampshire. Over one million customers were without electricity, with 800,000 without power three days later and some without
power weeks later. Challenging living conditions were acerbated by extremely cold temperatures in the days following the event.
Known severe snowstorm and ice stormevents, including FEMA disaster declarations, that have impacted Northampton since the 2015 HMP, are identified in Table 14. Detailed information
on damages and impacts are included when available. Please note that not all losses and damages that have occurred in the City are included due to the extent of documentation and the
fact that not all sources may have been identified or researched.
Table 14. Severe Snowstorm and Ice Storm Events in Northampton, 2015-2020
Dates of Event
Event Type
FEMA Declaration Number (if applicable)
Losses/Impacts
October 27, 2016
Winter Weather
N/A
Several inches of wet snow fell across southern New England. An average of 4-5 inches of snow fell in western Hampshire County. Most trees still had leaves at this time, allowing the
snow to cause a significant amount of tree damage. There were many reports from Northampton: a tree was down on a house on Pentcastle Avenue; trees and wires were down at Fort Hill Terrace,
Clement Street, Hockanum Road; wires were down on Elm Street, Hatfield Street, and Adare Place; a tree was down on wires at Mount Tom, Loudville Road at Westhampton Road, Mountain Road,
Old Ferry Road, and North Farms Road; and a tree was blocking the road at the intersection of Depot and Main Streets.
December 11, 2016
Heavy Snow
N/A
Up to 6 to 7 inches of snow was reported in the slopes of the Berkshires, in the higher terrain of northwest Hampshire and western Franklin Counties. Snowfall totals of 5 inches were
reported in Northampton.
December 29, 2016
Heavy Snow
N/A
3 to 6 inches of snow was common in western and central Massachusetts, with 5 to 7 inches in the slopes of the Berkshires. Numerous reports (amateur radio, social media, CoCoRaHS, and
Cooperative Observer) indicated around 6 inches of snowfall in the towns of western Hampshire County. 5 inches were reported in Northampton. Strong winds occurred behind the storm during
the overnight hours, causing scattered tree and power line damage, with gusts mainly in the 30-50 mph range.
March 14, 2017
Heavy Snow
N/A
Winter storm “Stella” moved up the east coast, hugging the southern NJ coast then moving rapidly northeast across southern Rhode Island and interior southeast Massachusetts. Snowfall
rates of 3 inches per hour were observed in western MA. NESIS value of 5.03, classified as Major
Heavy snow fell throughout much of the day in eastern Hampshire County, where snowfall totals ranged from 9.2 inches in Amherst to 13.5 inches in Northampton. No damages were reported.
March 2, 2018
Winter Storm
N/A
This storm brought heavy snow to northwest Massachusetts, heavy rain and strong winds to central and eastern Massachusetts, and coastal flooding to the coastline. Snowfall from one
inch to twelve inches fell on Western Hampshire County, with the 1.5 inches reported in Northampton.
NESIS value if 3.45, classified as Significant.
March 11, 2018
Snow storm
N/A
No reports were available for Northampton. Snowfall in Williamsburg reached 12.5 inches, and Westhampton saw 8.2 inches. NESIS value of 3.16, classified as Significant
November 15, 2018
Heavy Snow / Nor'easter
N/A
An early-season nor'easter moved from the Mid-Atlantic coast to southeastern Massachusetts on the 15th and away from the region on the 16th. A quick thump of heavy snow occurred on
the front end of the storm, with most accumulations over with by or shortly after midnight on the 16th.
Based on numerous reports from CoCoRaHS, trained spotter, and amateur radio observers, snowfall ranged from 5.0 inches to 9.5 inches in eastern Hampshire County. 8.0 inches were reported
in Northampton. No damage was reported.
Source: NOAA Storm Events Database, 2020; FEMA 2020; CoCoRaHS, 2020 https://www.cocorahs.org/Maps/ViewMap.aspx?type=snow
Probability of Future Events
Based upon the availability of records for Hampshire County and the NESIS scale, the likelihood that a severe snow storm will affect Northampton is “high” (between 40 and 70 percent
in any given year).
Research on climate change indicates that there is great potential for stronger, more frequent storms as the global temperature increases. Extreme weather events—including extreme precipitation
and snowfall levels—are anticipated to occur more frequently as climate change occurs. However, as temperatures throughout the year increase, it is possible that nor’easter events may
become more concentrated in the coldest winter months when atmospheric temperatures are still low enough to result in snowfall rather than rain. More information about the effect of
Climate Change can be found at the Climate Change Clearinghouse for the Commonwealth at www.resiilentma.org.
The Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation and Climate Adaptation Plan has additional information about the impact of climate change and can be accessed at http://www.resilientma.org/shmcap-portal/index.html#/full-plan.
Impact
The City faces a “limited” impact or less than 10 percent of total property damaged, from snowstorms.
The weight from multiple snowfall events can test the load ratings of building roofs and potentially cause significant damage. For example, the roof of JFK Middle School is not designed
for multiple heavy snowfalls. Multiple freeze-thaw cycles can also create large amounts of ice and make for even heavier roof loads.
Other impacts from snowstorms and ice storms include:
Disrupted power and phone service
Unsafe roadways and increased traffic accidents
Infrastructure and other property are also at risk from severe winter storms and the associated flooding that can occur following heavy snow melt.
Tree damage and fallen branches that cause utility line damage and roadway blockages
Damage to telecommunications structures
Reduced ability of emergency officials to respond promptly to medical emergencies or fires
Vulnerability
Based on the above assessment, Northampton has a hazard index rating of “3 — medium risk” fromsevere winter storms and nor’easters.
Using an estimated value of $2,742,056,622 for all property in the City and an estimated 5 percent of damage to 10 percent of residential structures, approximately $ 13,710,283 worth
of damage could occur from a severe snowstorm. This is a rough estimate and likely reflects a worst-case scenario. Computing more detailed damage assessments based on assessor’s records
is a labor-intensive task and beyond the scope of this project. The cost of repairing or replacing the roads, bridges, utilities, and contents of structures is not included in this estimate.
Populations
Winter storms are considered deceptive killers because most deaths and other impacts or losses are indirectly related to the storm. They generally bring strong winds which create blizzard
conditions with blinding wind-driven snow, drifting snow, and extreme cold temperatures with dangerous wind chill. Injuries and deaths may occur due to traffic accidents on icy roads,
heart attacks while shoveling snow, or hypothermia from prolonged exposure to cold. Heavy snow can paralyze a region or town, shutting down transportation, stopping the flow of supplies,
and disrupting medical and emergency services. Accumulations of snow can cause buildings to collapse and knock down trees and power lines. Rural populations especially may become isolated
by downed trees, blocked roadways, and power outages. Residents may be displaced or require temporary to long-term sheltering.
Elderly populations are particularly susceptible to risks of extreme winter weather such as injury from falls, hypothermia, and overexertion. Low income residents are also susceptible
if they are not able to secure housing with adequate insulation and heating.
Built Environment and Economy
The City of Northampton’s power and communication infrastructure are vulnerable to the impacts of a severe winter storm. Because many of Northampton’s streets are lined with mature trees,
a severe snow or ice storm could also cause damage and power outages from downed trees. This could cause residents and businesses to lose power and could impact the City’s ability to
operate normally, impacting the City’s economy. Additionally, buildings with flat roofs are especially vulnerable to damage, especially when the snow is wet and heavy.
Most winter storm events that occur in Northampton are not accompanied by a FEMA Emergency or Disaster declaration and, as a result, all costs associated with the events are borne by
local City budgets. Any City response to the events listed in the Previous Occurrences section above would have likely included payroll overtime for DPW staff. Furthermore, spending
on snow and ice operations in the City typically exceeds the budgeted amount and, because it comes out of the General Fund, requires a City Council transfer to cover the deficit. For
example, the original allocation for FY19 was $500,000, the revised budget was $664,291, and the amount expended was $663,446. This included personnel services and ordinary maintenance
for: repair and maintenance of vehicles, snow removal, communication, weather reports, vehicle supplies, fuel, snow removal supplies and food. If the frequency of severe winter storms
increase in future years, so will the financial burden on taxpayers to support City response.
Natural Resources
Severe winter weather is common in Massachusetts and native species and habitats are well adapted to withstand most winter weather.
Severe Thunderstorm / Wind / Tornado
Hazard Description
A thunderstorm is a storm with lightning and thunder produced by a cumulonimbus cloud, usually producing gusty winds, heavy rain, and sometimes hail. Effective January 5, 2010, the NWS
modified the hail size criterion to classify a thunderstorm as ‘severe’ when it produces damaging wind gusts in excess of 58 mph (50 knots), hail that is 1 inch in diameter or larger
(quarter size), or a tornado (NWS, 2013).
Wind is air in motion relative to surface of the earth. For non-tropical events over land, the NWS issues a Wind Advisory (sustained winds of 31 to 39 mph for at least 1 hour or any
gusts 46 to 57 mph) or a High Wind Warning (sustained winds 40+ mph or any gusts 58+ mph). For non-tropical events over water, the NWS issues a small craft advisory (sustained winds
25-33 knots), a gale warning (sustained winds 34-47 knots), a storm warning (sustained winds 48 to 63 knots), or a hurricane force wind warning (sustained winds 64+ knots). For tropical
systems, the NWS issues a tropical storm warning for any areas (inland or coastal) that are expecting sustained winds from 39 to 73 mph. A hurricane warning is issued for any areas (inland
or coastal) that are expecting sustained winds of 74 mph. Effects from high winds can include downed trees and/or power lines and damage to roofs, windows, etc. High winds can cause
scattered power outages. High winds are also a hazard for the boating, shipping, and aviation industry sectors.
Tornadoes are swirling columns of air that typically form in the spring and summer during severe thunderstorm events. In a relatively short period of time and with little or no advance
warning, a tornado can attain rotational wind speeds in excess of 250 miles per hour and can cause severe devastation along a path that ranges from a few dozen yards to over a mile in
width. The path of a tornado may be hard to predict because they can stall or change direction abruptly. Within Massachusetts, tornadoes have occurred most frequently in Worcester
County and in communities west of Worcester, including towns in eastern Hampshire County. High wind speeds, hail, and debris generated by tornadoes can result in loss of life, downed
trees and power lines, and damage to structures and other personal property (cars, etc.).
Location
As per the Massachusetts Hazard Mitigation Plan, the entire City is at risk of high winds, severe thunderstorms, and tornadoes. The plan also identifies Northampton and the surrounding
communities as having a high frequency of tornados occurrence within Massachusetts. However, the actual area affected by thunderstorms, wind, or tornadoes is “small,” with less than
10 percent of the City affected.
Extent
An average thunderstorm is 15 miles across and lasts 30 minutes; severe thunderstorms can be much larger and longer. Southern New England typically experiences 10 to 15 days per year
with severe thunderstorms. Thunderstorms can cause hail, wind, and flooding.
The extent of hail that can be present in severe thunderstorms can be found in the table below.
Hail Extent
Hail Size
Object Analog
.50
Marble, moth ball
.75
Penny
.88
Nickel
1.00
Quarter
1.25
Half dollar
1.50
Walnut, ping pong
1.75
Golf ball
2.00
Hen egg
2.50
Tennis ball
2.75
Baseball
3.00
Tea cup
4.00
Grapefruit
4.50
Softball
Source: http://www.spc.noaa.gov/misc/tables/hailsize.htm
Tornadoes are measured using the enhanced F-Scale, shown with the following categories and corresponding descriptions of damage:
Enhanced Fujita Scale Levels and Descriptions of Damage
EF-Scale Number
Intensity Phrase
3-Second Gust (MPH)
Type of Damage Done
EF0
Gale
65–85
Some damage to chimneys; breaks branches off trees; pushes over shallow-rooted trees; damages to sign boards.
EF1
Moderate
86–110
The lower limit is the beginning of hurricane wind speed; peels surface off roofs; mobile homes pushed off foundations or overturned; moving autos pushed off the roads; attached garages
may be destroyed.
EF2
Significant
111–135
Considerable damage. Roofs torn off frame houses; mobile homes demolished; boxcars pushed over; large trees snapped or uprooted; light object missiles generated.
EF3
Severe
136–165
Roof and some walls torn off well-constructed houses; trains overturned; most trees in forest uprooted.
EF4
Devastating
166–200
Well-constructed houses leveled; structures with weak foundations blown off some distance; cars thrown and large missiles generated.
Previous Occurrences
Within Massachusetts, tornadoes have occurred most frequently in Worcester County and in communities west of Worcester.The most common months are June, July, and August, but the Great
Barrington, MA tornado (1995) occurred in May and the Windsor Locks, CT tornado (1979) occurred in October.
Since the 1950s, there have been 10 tornadoes reported in Hampshire County.Most recently, on February 25, 2017, an EF1 tornado touched down in Conway and Goshen, Massachusetts. The tornado
damaged dozens of homes, hundreds of trees and left 75% of the residents without power. This was the first tornado in Massachusetts to touch down in February since record keeping stated
in the 1950s.
Only thee recorded tornadoes have touched down in Northampton: a category F1 on June 2, 2000, a category F2 on August 14, 1958, and a category F3 on September 13, 1971. No records contained
information about damage or specific locations of touchdown, however the 1958 tornado was documented in southeastern Northampton and the 1971 tornado was documented in Florence. The
2000 tornado touched down in Leeds in June. This tornado was ranked F1 (Moderate Tornado) on the Fujita Scale of Tornado Intensity.
Probability of Future Events
One measure of tornado activity is the tornado index value. It is calculated based on historical tornado events data using USA.com algorithms. It is an indicator of the tornado level
in a region. A higher tornado index value means a higher chance of tornado events. Data was used for Hampshire County to determine the Tornado Index Value as shown in the table below.
Tornado Index for Hampshire County
Hampshire County
125.73
Massachusetts
87.60
United States
136.45
Source: USA.com http://www.usa.com/hampshire-county-ma-natural-disasters-extremes.htm
Based upon the available historical record, even given Northampton’s location in a high-density cluster of state-wide tornado activity, there is a “very low” probability (less than 1
percent chance in any given year) of a tornado affecting the City.
As per the Massachusetts Hazard Mitigation Plan, there are approximately 10 to 30 days of thunderstorm activity in the state each year. Thus, there is a “moderate” probability (10 percent
to 40 percent chance in any given year) of a severe thunderstorm or winds affecting the City.
Impact
Overall, Northampton faces a “limited” impact from severe thunderstorms, winds, or tornadoes, with 10 percent or less of the City affected.
As indicated as part of the Enhanced Fujita Scale Levels for tornados, the following impacts can result from a tornado:
EFO - Some damage to chimneys; breaks branches off trees; pushes over shallow-rooted trees; damages to sign boards.
EF1 - The lower limit is the beginning of hurricane wind speed; peels surface off roofs; mobile homes pushed off foundations or overturned; moving autos pushed off the roads; attached
garages may be destroyed.
EF2 - Considerable damage. Roofs torn off frame houses; mobile homes demolished; boxcars pushed over; large trees snapped or uprooted; light object missiles generated.
EF3 - Roof and some walls torn off well-constructed houses; trains overturned; most trees in forest uprooted.
EF4 - Well-constructed houses leveled; structures with weak foundations blown off some distance; cars thrown and large missiles generated.
Vulnerability
Based on the above assessment, Northampton has a hazard index rating of “4- low risk” from severe thunderstorms and tornadoes, and a “4 – Medium risk” from high winds.
The potential for locally catastrophic damage is a factor in any tornado, severe thunderstorm, or wind event. In Northampton, a tornado that hit the residential areas would leave much
more damage than a tornado with a travel path that ran along the city’s forested uplands, where little settlement has occurred. Most buildings in the city have not been built to Zone
1, Design Wind Speed Codes. The first edition of the Massachusetts State Building Code went into effect on January 1, 1975, and 85 percent of the City’s housing was constructed prior
to this date.
Using a total value of all structures in Northampton of $2,742,056,662 and an estimated 10 percent of damage to 5 percent of all structures, the estimated amount of damage from a tornado
is $13,710,283. The cost of repairing or replacing the roads, bridges, utilities, and contents of structures is not included in this estimate.
Populations
Populations unable to safely evacuate are most at risk from tornados. Low income populations may lack means to evacuate. The elderly often face physical challenges or require regular
medical attention. Limited English Proficiency (LEP) populations may face challenges receiving and understanding emergency directions.
Built Environment and Economy
The most common problem associated with severe weather is loss of utilities. Downed trees from severe wind storms can create serious impacts on power and aboveground communication lines.
Water and sewer systems may not function if power is lost. The vulnerabilities associated with flooding could be present if substantial rain accompanies severe thunderstorms. Additionally,
severe wind may damage older buildings. Many buildings throughout Northampton are older and designed to withstand lower wind speeds, meaning they are more vulnerable to damage from high
wind events, microbursts of tornadoes.
Sometimes, wind gusts of only 40 to 45 mph can cause scattered power outages from downed trees and wires. This is especially true after periods of prolonged drought or excessive rainfall,
since both are situations that can weaken the root systems and make them more susceptible to the winds’ effects. Roads may become impassable due to downed trees or roadway flooding resulting
from a severe wind or thunderstorm.
Natural Resources
Downed trees and the transportation of small flora and fauna by high winds can cause damage to the natural environment.
Earthquake
Hazard Description
An earthquake is a sudden, rapid shaking of the ground that is caused by the breaking and shifting of rock beneath the Earth’s surface. Earthquakes can occur suddenly, without warning,
at any time of the year. New England experiences an average of 30 to 40 earthquakes each year although most are not noticed bypeople. Ground shaking from earthquakes can rupture gas
mains and disrupt other utility service, damage buildings, bridges and roads, and trigger other hazardous events such as avalanches, flash floods (dam failure) and fires. Un-reinforced
masonry buildings, buildings with foundations that rest on filled land or unconsolidated, unstable soil, and mobile homes not tied to their foundations are at risk during an earthquake.
Location
Because of the regional nature of the hazard, the entire City of Northampton is susceptible to earthquakes. This makes the location of occurrence “high,” or over 50 percent of the total
area.
Extent
The magnitude of an earthquake is measured using the Richter Scale, which measures the energy of an earthquake by determining the size of the greatest vibrations recorded on the seismogram.
On this scale, one step up in magnitude (from 5.0 to 6.0, for example) increases the energy more than 30 times.
Richter Scale Magnitudes and Effects
Magnitude
Effects
< 3.5
Generally not felt, but recorded.
3.5 - 5.4
Often felt, but rarely causes damage.
5.4 - 6.0
At most slight damage to well-designed buildings. Can cause major damage to poorly constructed buildings over small regions.
6.1 - 6.9
Can be destructive in areas up to about 100 kilometers across where people live.
7.0 - 7.9
Major earthquake. Can cause serious damage over larger areas.
8 or >
Great earthquake. Can cause serious damage in areas several hundred kilometers across.
The intensity of an earthquake is measured using the Modified Mercalli Scale. This scale quantifies the effects of an earthquake on the Earth’s surface, humans, objects of nature, and
man-made structures on a scale of I through XII, with I denoting a weak earthquake and XII denoting an earthquake that causes almost complete destruction.
Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale for and Effects
Scale
Intensity
Description Of Effects
Corresponding
Richter Scale Magnitude
I
Instrumental
Detected only on seismographs.
II
Feeble
Some people feel it.
< 4.2
III
Slight
Felt by people resting; like a truck rumbling by.
IV
Moderate
Felt by people walking.
V
Slightly Strong
Sleepers awake; church bells ring.
< 4.8
VI
Strong
Trees sway; suspended objects swing, objects fall off shelves.
< 5.4
VII
Very Strong
Mild alarm; walls crack; plaster falls.
< 6.1
VIII
Destructive
Moving cars uncontrollable; masonry fractures, poorly constructed buildings damaged.
IX
Ruinous
Some houses collapse; ground cracks; pipes break open.
< 6.9
X
Disastrous
Ground cracks profusely; many buildings destroyed; liquefaction and landslides widespread.
< 7.3
XI
Very Disastrous
Most buildings and bridges collapse; roads, railways, pipes and cables destroyed; general triggering of other hazards.
< 8.1
XII
Catastrophic
Total destruction; trees fall; ground rises and falls in waves.
> 8.1
Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency
Previous Occurrences
The most recent earthquakes to affect Northampton are shown in the table below.According to the Northeast States Emergency Consortium, only one magnitude 4 or higher earthquake has occurred
in New England since 2010. This was a 4.6 magnitude earthquake centered at Hollis Center Maine, on October 16, 2012. This earthquake was not noted to cause any damage in Northampton
or the surrounding area.
Table 15. Largest Earthquakes Affecting Northampton, MA, 1924 – 2020
Location
Date
Magnitude
Ossipee, NH
December 20, 1940
5.5
Ossipee, NH
December 24, 1940
5.5
Dover-Foxcroft, ME
December 28, 1947
4.5
Kingston, RI
June 10, 1951
4.6
Portland, ME
April 26, 1957
4.7
Middlebury, VT
April 10, 1962
4.2
Near NH Quebec Border, NH
June 15, 1973
4.8
West of Laconia, NH
Jan. 19, 1982
4.5
Plattsburg, NY
April 20, 2002
5.1
Bar Harbor, NH
October 3, 2006
4.2
Hollis Center, ME
October 16, 2012
4.6
Source: Northeast States Emergency Consortium, 2019 website: www.nesec.org/hazards/earthquakes.cfm
Table 16. New England States Record of Historic Earthquakes
State
Years of Record
Number Of Earthquakes
Connecticut
1678 - 2016
115
Maine
1766 - 2016
454
Massachusetts
1668 - 2016
408
New Hampshire
1638 - 2016
320
Rhode Island
1766 - 2016
34
Vermont
1843 - 2016
50
New York
1737-2016
551
Note: Total Number of Earthquakes within the New England states between 1568 and 2007 is 1,932.
Source:NortheastStates Emergency Consortium website, www.nesec.org/hazards/earthquakes.cfm
Probability of Future Events
One measure of earthquake activity is the Earthquake Index Value. It is calculated based on historical earthquake events data using USA.com algorithms. It is an indicator of the earthquake
activity level in a region. A higher earthquake index value means a higher chance of earthquake events. Data was used for Hampshire County to determine the Earthquake Index Value as
shown in the table below.
Earthquake Index for Hampshire County
Hampshire County
0.17
Massachusetts
0.70
United States
1.81
Source: USA.com
Based upon existing records, there is a “very low” frequency (less than 1 percent probability in any given year) of an earthquake in Northampton.
Impact
Massachusetts introduced earthquake design requirements into their building code in 1975 and improved building code for seismic reasons in the 1980s. However, these specifications apply
only to new buildings or to extensively-modified existing buildings. Buildings, bridges, water supply lines, electrical power lines and facilities built before the 1980s may not have
been designed to withstand the forces of an earthquake. This is particularly true for a large number of the buildings in downtown Northampton, most of which could likely be completely
destroyed by a significant earthquake. The seismic standards have also been upgraded with the 1997 revision of the State Building Code. Liquefaction of the land near water could also
lead to extensive destruction.
While a significant earthquake, estimated to be approximately of magnitude 6.1 or higher, would cause a “critical”impact,with more than 25 percent of Northampton affected,a smaller earthquake
that is more likely to occur in Northampton would have "minor" impact, with only small damage to property. As shown in the table of the Richter Scale above, an earthquake of 6.0 or lower
would result in at most slight damage to well-designed buildings, which are the vast majority of structures in Northampton. Earthquakes between 3.5 and 5.4 would be felt but rarely cause
damage, and earthquakes smaller than 3.5 would not be noticed. Therefore, the overall impact rating for earthquake in Northampton is “Limited.”
Vulnerability
Based on the above analysis, Northampton has a hazard index rating of “4- low risk” from earthquakes. Using a total value of all structures in Northampton of $2,742,056,662 and an estimated
100 percent of damage to 25 percent of all structures (“critical” impact), the estimated amount of damage from an earthquake is $685,514,166. The cost of repairing or replacing the roads,
bridges, utilities, and contents of structures is not included in this estimate.
Populations
Socially vulnerable populations are at the highest risk from earthquakes. These populations may lack the means physically or financially to respond to an earthquake. They may not be
able to prepare and live self-sufficiently in the aftermath of an earthquake. Low-income populations are more likely to live in structurally compromised buildings.
Built Environment and Economy
Older buildings are particularly vulnerable to earthquakes because their construction pre-dates building codes that included strong seismic consideration. The City has a number of historical
buildings that could be damaged or destroyed if a large enough earthquake were to happen. A loss of these historic buildings could represent a loss of Northampton’s history and culture.
There have been no studies done to determine how Northampton’s critical infrastructure, such as the City Hall, would fair in an earthquake. The City’s Public Safety Complex was built
recently and would likely withstand an earthquake with little or no damage.
There are many ways in which Northampton‘s structures, infrastructure, and individuals would be vulnerable to earthquakes. Road closures could isolate populations and keep people from
getting to work, and loss of utilities could impact populations that suffered no direct damage from the earthquake itself. Following a severe earthquake, damage to roadways, bridges
or underpasses that serve as evacuation routes would limit access to emergency services and hospitals.
A catastrophic earthquake in Northampton would impact all structures, commercial and residential alike. FEMA research has shown that nearly 1 in 4, or 25%, of businesses do not return
after a major catastrophic event. The loss of 25% of businesses would have a major impact on City tax income and operating budget. A significant loss of homes due to the same earthquake
could also have major tax implications that could strain City cash flow for years after the event.
Natural Resources
A strong earthquake can cause trees to fall and cliffs or rock outcroppings to collapse. Such environmental damage can impact the balance within a habitat or ecosystem leading to increased
vulnerability to invasive species.
Pandemic and Epidemic
Hazard Description
Pandemic is defined as an epidemic occurring worldwide, or over a very wide area, crossing international boundaries and usually affecting a large number of people. Different from a pandemic,
an epidemic occurs when new cases of a certain disease, in a given population, substantially exceed what is expected. An epidemic may be restricted to one locale, and if it becomes global
it is called a pandemic. The severity of any pandemic can be higher when a large number of people in the population lack pre-existing immunity to the causative agent or when a larger
proportion of the population is infected. Organisms that cause pandemics may be transmitted from animals to humans, but the potential to cause a pandemic is increased when organisms
are readily transmitted from human to human, especially before a person has any symptoms.
A pandemic will cause both widespread and sustained effects and is likely to stress the resources of the federal, state, and local governments and health departments. The Massachusetts
Department of Public Health is the primary agency responsible for the study, planning, isolation/quarantine and actions, surveillance, and reporting for all public health emergencies
in Massachusetts.
The following diseases, in alphabetical order, have potential to become widespread, potentially affecting Northampton.
Coronavirusis a kind of common virus that causes an infection in the nose, sinuses, or upper throat. There are many different kinds of coronaviruses, and while most arenot dangerous,
some cause disease. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2) is one such infectious disease caused by a newly discovered coronavirus that emerged in China in December 2019. The COVID-19
virus spreads primarily through droplets of saliva or discharge from the mouth or nose when an infected person coughs or sneezes. Most people infected with the COVID-19 virus will experience
mild to moderate respiratory illness and recover without requiring special treatment, and symptoms tend to present within 14 days of exposure to the virus. Older people and those with
underlying medical problems like cardiovascular disease, diabetes, chronic respiratory disease and cancer, are more likely to develop serious illness. SARS, or severe acute respiratory
syndrome, is is another type of coronavirus that had an outbreak originating in China in 2003 and spread to other countries before ending in 2004.
Ebola virus disease is a rare and deadly disease caused by infection with one of the Ebola virus species. Ebola viruses are transmitted through direct contact with contaminated blood
or body fluids of a person who is sick or has died from Ebola. Ebola virus may have spread in central and west Africa as a result of handling wild animals hunted for food. Ebola was
first discovered in 1976 near the Ebola River in what is now the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the virus is now found in several African countries (https://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/history/distribution-map.html)
where outbreaks have occurred sporadically. There have been no reported cases of Ebola virus disease contracted in the United States, but in 2014, two U.S. residents were infected with
Ebola virus while traveling to areas where it is found, and were diagnosed in the United States; two healthcare workers who provided care for the first of these patients also became
infected with Ebola virus (CDC 2020).
HIV, or human immunodeficiency virus, is a viral infection that can be transmitted between two individuals by exposure to certain body fluids through sexual intercourse, sharing needles
or syringes, from an infected mother to child during pregnancy or breastfeeding, and byreceiving a blood transfusion, blood products, or organ/tissue transplants that are contaminated
by HIV (currently an extremely small risk in the United States). If left untreated after HIV is contracted, the viral infection severely compromises the immune system and leads to AIDS
(acquired immune deficiency syndrome). There is no effective cure for HIV, but it can be controlled with proper medical care and antiretroviral therapy. The first official report of
what became known as the AIDS epidemic occurred in 1981 (CDC 2020).
Influenza (Flu) is an infectious viral disease of birds and mammals commonly transmitted through the air through coughing and sneezing. Influenza type A viruses are found in many different
animals and in rare cases can evolve to infect humans (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/other_flu.htm). Influenza B viruses circulate widely only among humans. People who have influenza can have
some or all of these symptoms: fever, cough, sore throat, runny nose, muscle aches, headaches, fatigue, and sometimes vomiting and diarrhea. Complications from influenza virus infection
can be moderate (e.g., sinus or ear infections) to severe (e.g., pneumonia, inflammation of the heart [myocarditis], inflammation of the brain [encephalitis], failure of multiple organs,
and death).
The CDC describes an influenza pandemic as a global outbreak of a new influenza A virus when new (novel) influenza A viruses emerge which are able to infect people easily and spread
from person to person in an efficient and sustained way. New/novel influenza virus strains, or strains that had not circulated widely among the living population caused pandemics in
the late 20th and 21st centuries (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/basics/past-pandemics.html). Vaccines against a novel pandemic influenza will not be available immediately
in most pandemics (CDC 2020).
Measles (also known as rubella) is a serious respiratory disease caused by the measles virus. It can lead to pneumonia, encephalitis (swelling of the brain), and death. Measles is one
of the most contagious of all infectious diseases: approximately 90% of susceptible people with close contact to someone with measles will get measles. The virus spreads through aerosols
produced by coughing or sneezing. The measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine protects against measles (CDC 2020).
Mosquito-borne diseases are those transmitted to humans by the bite of an infected mosquito. They include Chikungunya, dengue, malaria, Saint Louis encephalitis (SLE), West Nile virus
(WNV) disease, and Zika virus disease. Diseases included in this plan that seem most relevant to Northampton are West Nile virus disease and Zika virus disease.
West Nile virus is the leading cause of mosquito-borne disease in the continental United States and is most commonly spread to people by mosquito bites. About 1 in 5 people who are infected
have a fever and other symptoms. About 1 out of 150 infected people develop a serious, sometimes fatal, illness. There are no vaccines to prevent WNV disease in humans and no specific
medications to treat WNV disease. WNV has been reported from all states in the continental United States (CDC 2020).
Zika virus is mostly transmitted by the bite of an infected Aedes species mosquito (Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus), but can also spread through sex, from an infected pregnant woman
to her fetus, and likely by transfusion of tainted blood. Many people infected with Zika virus won’t have symptoms or will only have mild symptoms. The most common symptoms of Zika virus
disease are fever, rash, headache, joint pain, red eyes, and muscle pain. Zika virus infection during pregnancy can cause a birth defect of the brain called microcephaly and other severe
brain defects. It is also linked to other problems, such as miscarriage, stillbirth, and other birth defects. Anyone who lives in or travels to an area where local transmission of Zika
virus is occurring can be infected. Once a person has been infected, he or she is likely to be protected from future infections.
Prior to 2014, very few travel-associated cases of Zika virus disease were identified in the United States. In 2015 and 2016, large outbreaks of the virus occurred in the Americas, resulting
in an increase in travel-associated cases in the U.S., widespread transmission in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and limited local transmission in Florida and Texas. Cases
in the U.S. started to decline in 2017, and in 2018 and 2019 no confirmed Zika virus disease cases were reported from United States territories.
The mosquito species known to transmit Zika virus are able to live and reproduce in some areas of Massachusetts, and this range may change to cover the entire state given warming temperatures
associated with climate change. Furthermore, these mosquitos could be imported (for example, in tires or potted plants) from areas where they occur (CDC 2020).
Mumps
Mumps is a contagious disease that is caused by the mumps virus. It is spread through saliva or mucus from the mouth, nose, or throat through coughing, sneezing or talking, sharing items
such as cups or eating utensils, and touching contaminated objects.Mumps typically starts with a few days of fever; headache, muscle aches, tiredness, and loss of appetite, and is followed
by swelling of salivary glands. Some people who get mumps have very mild or no symptoms; most people with mumps recover completely in a few weeks. Others may experience symptoms and
serious complications. There is no specific treatment for mumps.Anyone who is not immune from either previous mumps infection or from vaccination can get mumps. However, outbreaks can
also occur in a highly vaccinated population, especially in settings where people are in close contact, such as colleges and camps (CDC 2020).
Norovirus
Norovirus, formerly called norwalk-like virus, is a very contagious virus that causes diarrhea, vomiting, and abdominal pain in humans. Fever, chills, headache, body aches and fatigue
may also be present. Norovirus is sometimes called the stomach flu or stomach bug. However, norovirus illness is not related to the flu which is caused by influenza virus.
Norovirus is spread through contaminated food or water, by contact with an infected person, or by contamination of environmental surfaces. A person usually develops symptoms 12 to 48
hours after being exposed to norovirus. Most people with norovirus illness get better within 1 to 3 days.The virus has an incubation period of 24 to 48 hours. Infected individuals are
symptomatic for one to two days, but can still spread the virus for up to two weeks after recovering (CDC, 2020).
Location and Extent
By definition, a pandemic affects entire populations over large areas, so the whole City of Northampton could be affected. Densely populated areas have greater potential for person-to-person
transmission than less densely populated areas. Areas of abundant standing water (including areas used for flood irrigation or dumping sites with discarded plastic and tires) which provide
a breeding site for mosquitos could be more prone to an outbreak of mosquito-borne diseases.
The exact size and extent of an infected population depends on factors related to the virus organism, the people or animals affected, and the environment. Factors related to the organism
include what species it affects, how much of an organism is needed to establish an infection, how the organism is transmitted, and how stable it is in a given environment. Factors related
to people include how susceptible they are to infection, how long they are infectious, and the amount of contact between infected and uninfected individuals.
Previous Occurrences
Infectious diseases have been causing human illness and death since the dawn of human existence. The effective prevention and control of these diseases is one of the major reasons for
increases in life expectancy. In 1701, Massachusetts passed legislation requiring the isolation of the sick for better preventing the spread of infection. Since then, Massachusetts
has led the nation in infection prevention and control. Reportable conditions are captured by the Massachusetts Virtual Epidemiologic Network (MAVEN). MAVEN is an integrated, web-based
surveillance and case management system that enables state and local health departments to appropriately share public health, clinical, and case management data efficiently and securely
over the Internet. MAVEN provides automatic notifications around the clock to state and local officials of any event requiring immediate attention. (MA SHA, 2019)
The most recent flu pandemics occurred in 1889-90, 1918, 1957, 1968 and 2009. The 1918 pandemic resulted in an estimated 500,000 deaths in the United States (out of a total population
then of about 105 million), the 1968 pandemic caused an estimated 34,000 US deaths (out of a total population then of about 201 million), and the 2009 (H1N1) pandemic resulted in approximately
12,500 US deaths (out of a total population then of about 305 million) (CDC, 2017). The H1N1 flu (also referred to as the swine flu) was first recognized in the Commonwealth in April
of 2009. The H1N1 flu was identified by authorities as a pandemic as it spread quickly to many parts of the world andwas declared a public health emergency in Massachusetts.
Since its emergence as a human disease in 1938, the mosquito-borne virus of eastern equine encephalitis (EEE) has caused 100 identified human cases, 55 deaths and left 80% of survivors
with permanent neurological damage in Massachusetts. West Nile virus, which first appeared in the US in 1999, has caused at least 148 cases of clinical disease in Massachusetts. Instances
of other diseases and viruses profiled in this chapter may be more common, though not at a pandemic scale.
Between 1954 and 2020, FEMA declared one pandemic-related disaster in the State of Massachusetts. This declaration was made for all counties in the state on March 27, 2020 for the COVID-19
Pandemic. Four months earlier, in December, 2019, the Municipal Health Commission in Wuhan, China, had reported a cluster of cases of pneumonia in Wuhan, Hubei Province. A novel coronavirus
that likely surfaced in a Chinese seafood and poultry marketwas eventually identified.Officials confirmed the first recorded case of the virus outside of China in Thailand on January
13, 2020, and by the end of that month the World Health Organization (W.H.O.) situation report indicated 7818 total confirmed cases worldwide, with the majority of these in China, and
82 cases reported in 18 countries outside China including the United States. The first confirmed case in the United States was in Washington State, where a man in his 30s developed symptoms
after returning from a trip to Wuhan. On February 11, the W.H.O. proposed an official name for the disease caused by the new coronavirus: COVID-19, an acronym that stands for coronavirus
disease 2019. COVID-19 was characterized as a pandemic on March 11, 2020. As of May 28(the time of writing this report) COVID-19 had spread to at least 203 countries, killing more than
357,896 and sickening more than 5.8 million people. There are more infections in the United States than any other country in the world and over 100,000 people have died in the United
States. Massachusetts is fifth in the country for infections and has the third highest death rate in the country.
The City of Northampton Department of Public Health delivered public service announcements and situational awareness reports about the evolving pandemic, and ordered closures of non-essentialbusinesses
and some play areas and recreational facilities. Schools were closed and local emergency shelters activated. The Northampton High School was used as a primary shelter for the City’s
most vulnerable residents who lack housing, and was run cooperatively by the City’s Department of Public Health, Medical Reserve Corps Coordinator, and ServiceNet, with support from
Northampton’s Fire Rescue and Police Departments and Cooley Dickinson Hospital.
The full extent of the COVID-19 pandemic is yet to be known, but the disconnect between Massachusetts long-standing commitment to public health and the very high infection rate and extremely
high death rate must be explored and understood.
Probability of Future Events
Future occurrences of pandemic events are expected to continue, although the probability of a major pandemic impacting Northampton in any given year is “Low,” or less than 10%. As bacteria
and viruses continually evolve, there is always the opportunity for new diseases to occur. Factors in Northampton that heighten the probability of occurrences of such events include
large numbers of transient residents such as college students, and the large number of visitors that move in and out of the City on a daily basis which could lead to disease transmission
through individuals transporting or coming into contact with infected persons. Factors that reduce the probability of occurrence of high infection rates include the overwhelmingly white
racial make-up of the city as well as the relatively high incomes of most residents and the very few multi-family residences in which people may be unable to social distance.
Although many of the diseases listed earlier in this section have not been experienced at pandemic magnitudes, there is the potential of a pandemic occurring at any time, with pandemic
influenza being the most likely.
Pandemics are unpredictable. While history offers useful benchmarks, there is no way to know the characteristicsof a pandemic virus before it emerges. Nevertheless, public health officials
must make assumptions to facilitate planning efforts.According to the 2006 Pandemic Influenza Preparedness, Response, and Recovery Guide published by Homeland Security, Federal planning
efforts assume the followingabout the certain eventuality of the next pandemic influenza virus:
Susceptibility to the pandemic influenza virus will be universal.
Efficient and sustained person-to-person transmission signals an imminent pandemic.
Epidemics will last 6 to 8 weeks in affected communities.
Multiple waves (periods during which community outbreaks occur across the country) of illness are likely to occur with each wave lasting 2 to 3 months. Historically, the largest waves
have occurred in the fall and winter, but the seasonality of a pandemic cannot be predicted with certainty.
Worldwide, there has been an apparent increase in reports of infectious diseases, which is reflective of rapid demographic, environmental, social, technological, and other changes in
in human society. Mathematical models predict that climate change will likely affect changes in transmission patterns of infectious diseases (Climate Change and Human Health, Risks and
Responses. World Health Organization, 2003, http://www.who.int/globalchange/environment/en/chapter6.pdf), although the relationship between climate change and infectious diseases is
complex and not well understood. The ranges and impacts of important pathogens might change as a result of changing temperatures and precipitation. Changing climate might increase or
change the range of disease vectors such as mosquitoes or rodents. Heavy rainfall and flooding can be associated with waterborne disease outbreaks, especially where the drinking water
supply is not treated. (Advancing the Science of Climate Change, National Academies Press, 2010, https://www.nap.edu/read/12782/chapter/15#314).
Impact
The severity of an infectious disease pandemic, epidemic, or threat in Northampton varies depending on the organism, the susceptible population, ease of transmission, ability to identify
infected persons before they can spread disease, and availability and effectiveness of control measures. It is expected that during a pandemic of influenza, 25% of the population could
fall ill (NY Department of Health, 2020), and some facilities would be forced to shut down for more than one week. Therefore, the impact is considered “Critical.”
Pandemics could occur with very little warning. As seen with the COVID-19 pandemic in2019-2020, air travel can hasten or facilitate the spread of a new organism and decrease the time
available for early implementation of interventions. When outbreaks of a virus occur simultaneously in many parts of the country, sharing of human and material resources that would usually
occur in response to other disasters becomes limited. In general, warning time for pandemics will depend on the origin of the virus and the amount of time needed to identify the virus.
As described in the Massachusetts Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), a yearlong influenza pandemic without intervention could result in almost 10 million hospitalizations and an estimated
1.9 million Americans could die.The direct and indirect health costs alone (not including disruptions in trade and other costs to business and industry) have been estimated to approach
$181 billion for a moderate pandemic (similar to those in 1957 and 1968) with no interventions (CDC, 2017).
Vulnerability
While all individuals could experience pandemic impacts, the COVID-19 crisis showed that the most vulnerable were the elderly, especially in nursing homes, individuals with pre-existing
health issues, housing insecurities, Frontline communities, and front-line workers including health care workers, social service providers, delivery personnel, etc. Other infectious
diseases have higher risks for children and pregnant women.
Populations
Pandemics throughout history have exacerbated existing public health and socioeconomic disparities. When diseases become associated with certain people and communities, the stigma and
bigotry that can result often lead to dangerous secondary impacts that often interfere with effective public health responses. Racial inequalities and health disparities that exist in
a society before a pandemicput disadvantaged and disenfranchised people at greater risk of severe symptoms and complications. During the COVID-19 outbreak in both New York City and Barcelona,
low income neighborhoods where poorer families are more likely to live in close-quarter housing experienced disproportionately high occurrences of the disease. These populations are
also more likely to work in low-skill labor force, working as supermarket tellers and elder care providers, which were deemed essential during the crisis and therefor led to increased
exposure to the virus.In Northampton, the greatest challenge for local emergency responders has been providing adequate sheltering for the region’s homeless and nursing home residents,
while also abiding by social distancing requirements.
Other social impacts of pandemics are the result of strained or suspended community, religious, and social activities. Schools may be closed for extended periods of time, increasing
pressure on families with working parents. Similarly, places of worship may be closed. Social isolation due to quarantine and social-distancing guidelines, fear, and unemployment and
financial factors can lead to or worsen existing mental health illness, and lead to an increase in domestic violence and intimate partner violence.
Economy
In addition to the impact on human health, the impact of a pandemic to national, state, and local economies would be severe. A pandemic will likely reduce dramatically the number of
available workers in all sectors, and significantly disrupt the movement of people and goods, which will threaten essential services and operations within and across many economic sectors,
especially those that cannot transition easily to remote working. Given today’s highly mobile population, disease outbreaks may occur simultaneously throughout the country making the
reallocation of human and material resources more difficult than in other disaster or emergency situations.
Rates of employee absenteeism will depend on the severity of the pandemic. In a severe pandemic, absenteeism attributable to illness, the need to care for ill family members, and fear
of infection would be highest during the peak weeks of a community outbreak, with lower rates of absenteeism during the weeks before and after the peak. Certain public health measures
(closing schools, quarantining household contacts of infected individuals, “snow days”) are likely to increase rates of absenteeism.
Economic impacts of a pandemic will be experienced in the short and long term. During a quarantine period, lost revenues from parking, meals, excise, and marijuana taxes, among others,
could have a major impact on the City’s operating budgets. Unlike an extended power outage that could force similar business closures, economic shutdowns or slowdowns due to a pandemic
can last months or even years, leading to uncertainty that could limit investments in other important areas such as infrastructure improvement.
As described in the Dam/Levee Failure and Earthquake hazard profiles above, FEMA research has shown that nearly 1 in 4, or 25%, of businesses do not return after a major catastrophic
event. Social distancing and other restrictions placed on businesses during a pandemic could restrict revenues so severely that many businesses would be forced to close permanently.
This would have a major impact on City tax income and operating budget, potentially straining City cash flow for years after the event.
Natural Resources
Widespread mortality and economic shifts that result from a pandemic can lead to profound impacts on the natural environment. According to anthropologist Elic Weitzel, the social and
economic fallout from the 14th century bubonic plague that wiped out at least one-third of Europe’s population within a few years had dramatic long-term environmental consequences. Farm
fields, abandoned because laborers died or had to move for economic opportunity, reverted to forest land, lowering atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. A glacial ice core also revealed
a reduction in atmospheric lead pollution due to a slowdown in mining and metallurgical activity. Modern pandemics that necessitate social distancing or shelter in place orders will
reduce airplane and automobile traffic and fossil fuel combustion, reducing contaminant loads from stormwater runoff entering waterways, and more. In 2020, public health restrictions
to prevent the spread of Covid-19 resulted in a sharp dip in air pollution across China, Europe and the US, rapidly reducing carbon emissions from the burning of fossil fuels. Some estimate
showed environmental pollution reduced up to 30%, and mobility reduced up to 90%. It should be noted that any environmental impacts are minor compared to the great social and economic
losses inflicted by a pandemic.
Other Hazards
In addition to the hazards identified above, the Hazard Mitigation Committee reviewed the full list of hazards listed in the 2018 Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation and Climate Adaptation
Plan. Due to the location and context of the City, coastal erosion, landslides, and tsunamis, were determined to not be a threat.
During the public engagement process for this HMP update, the committee received public comments that, among other things, highlighted concerns over non-natural hazard events such as
gas explosions and cyber-attack. Gas explosion is one of many man-made hazards that may pose a threat to people, property, or critical infrastructure in Northampton. Manmade hazards
may be included in a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan according to FEMA, but they are not required and will not be reviewed to meet plan requirements. See Integrating Manmade Hazards into
Mitigation Planning (FEMA 386-7 https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/4528) for suggestions and information on including these types of hazards in the mitigation plan.
For this Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan update, the Committee only evaluated man-made hazards that would pose a threat as a result of a natural hazard occurring. These instances are
often referred to as secondary risks or secondary hazards. For instance, secondary risks of a flood include hazardous materials spills or leaching due to floodwaters reaching extremely
high elevations. The secondary risks of snowstorms could possibly include fires and carbon monoxide poisoning due to the use of alternate heat sources. The Hazard Mitigation Committee
will revisit the discussion about the City’s vulnerability to man-made hazards during future updates of this Hazard Mitigation Plan.Alternatively, the City may want to explore these
concerns in a complementary planning document such as a Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA) specific to man-made hazards, or with other disaster preparedness
planning tools.
4: Critical Facilities
Section 201.6 44CFR states that a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan risk assessment shall provide a description of the jurisdictions vulnerability to the identified hazards of concern and
this vulnerability should be described in terms of:
The types and numbers of existing and future buildings, infrastructure, and critical facilities located in the identified hazard areas.
The law does not specify or define the term “Critical Facility,” but instead allows each unique planning effort to identify and define those facilities and infrastructure that are critical
to providing emergency services to the planning area. These definitions can and should be unique to the defined planning area.
FEMA defines critical facilities as facilities/infrastructure that are critical to the health and welfare of the population and that are especially important following hazard events.
Critical facilities include, but are not limited to, shelters, police and fire stations, and hospitals. For the purposes of the Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan Update, a Critical
Facility is defined as a building, structure, or location which:
Is vital to the hazard response effort.
Maintains an existing level of protection from hazards for the community.
Would create a secondary disaster if a hazard were to impact it.
Critical Facilities within Hazard Areas
Northampton's Hazard Mitigation Committee reviewedthe Critical Facilities list from the 2015 Plan, and made updates based on local knowledge and updated MassGIS data to create the following
list.
Northampton's Hazard Mitigation Committee has broken up this list of facilities into three categories:
Facilities needed for Emergency Response in the event of a disaster, referred to as Emergency Response Facilities and Services.
Non-Emergency Response Facilities that have been identified by the Committee as non-essential. These are not required in an emergency response event, but are considered essential for
the everyday operation of Northampton.
Facilities/Populations that the Committee wishes to protect in the event of a disaster.
The Critical Facilities Map at the end of this Plan identifies these facilities.
Category 1 – Emergency Response Services
The City has identified the Emergency Response Facilities and Services as the highest priority in regards to protection from natural and man-made hazards.
Emergency Operations Center (EOC)
Northampton Fire Department – Carlon Drive
Northampton Police Department (Secondary EOC)– Center Street
Fire Station
Northampton Fire Station – Carlon Drive
Florence Substation – Maple Street
Police Station
Northampton Police Station – Center Street
State Police Station B-6 - North King Street
Hampshire County Sheriff - Rocky Hill Road
Transportation Network Maintenance
DPW Complex – Locust Street
Forests, Parks, and Cemeteries Facility – 320 North Maple Street
MassDOT Highway Maintenance Shed #1
MassDOT Highway Maintenance Shed #2
Potable Water
Water Treatment Plant - Mountain Street, Williamsburg
Waste Water and Flood Control
Northampton Wastewater Treatment Plant – Hockanum Road
Seven wastewater pump stations
Flood control pump stations that are located at the WWTP
West Street flood control pump station
Emergency Fuel Storage
DPW Complex Fuel Depot – two above-ground storage tanks, diesel and gasoline, just under 12,000 gallons each
Fire Department Headquarters – Diesel storage tank
Emergency Shelters
Smith Vocational and Agricultural High School (Regional Shelter) – 80 Locust Street
Northampton High School – 380 Elm Street
JFK Middle School – 100 Bridge Road, Florence
Senior Center (cooling/warming center) – 67 Conz Street
All libraries in Northampton elementary schools have cooling capacity, and therefore could be used as temporary cooling or warming centers as needed.
Transfer Station
Northampton Transfer Facility – Locust Street
Secondary Transfer Facility – Glendale Road
Helicopter Landing Sites
Northampton Airport – Old Ferry Road
Cooley Dickinson Helicopter Pad – Hospital Road
Primary Evacuation Routes
Interstate 91
MA Route 5
MA Route 10
MA Route 9
MA Route 66
MA Route 5 &10
Bridges Located on Evacuation Routes
MA Route 10, Earle Street
MA Route 9, Calvin Coolidge Bridge
I-91 bridges
Bicycle and pedestrian only bridges over CT River, North Street, Main Street (Route 9), and Easthampton Road (Route 5).
Communication Facilities
RegisteredTowers
Crown Atlantic Company LLC - Atwood Drive
SBA Infrastructures LLC- 254 Old Wilson Road
IWG Towers Assets I LLC - 790 Florence Road
City of Northampton - 26 Carlon Drive
American Towers LLC – 170 Glendale Road: hosts a repeater for the Police Department as well as other cell subleases
Commonwealth of Massachusetts - 555 North King Street (at State Police)
Global Tower LLC through American Towers LLC123 - Haydenville Road (on Smith Vocational land)
Cell tower (name unknown) – King Street
Critical IT Equipment
The HMP Committee also made note of IT equipmenthoused in the following facilities that would be critical to emergency operations:
DPW Water Treatment Plant - Mountain Street, Williamsburg
Puchalski Municipal Building - 212 Main Street
Emergency Communications Center - 26 Carlon Drive
Northampton High School - 380 Elm Street
DPW Administration Building - 125 Locust Street
Northampton IT Offices, James House - 42 Gothic Street
Of the critical emergency response facilities listed in Category 1, the following are known to be equipped with back-up power generation capabilities to support at least partial facility
operation during an outage of the power grid.
Northampton High School
JFK Middle School
Northampton VA Medical Center
Cooley Dickinson Hospital
Smith College Campus School
Hampshire County House of Correction
Fire Department / Emergency Operations Center
Northampton Police Department
Northampton Department of Public Works
Municipal Building
Smith Vocational & Agricultural High School
Smith College (multiple)
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Water Treatment Plant
Wastewater Treatment Plant Flood Control System
Waste Water Pump Stations (7 – not all have permanent back-up power, but all are equipped with hookups to connect to mobile generator)
Category 2 – Non Emergency Response Facilities
The City has identified these facilities as non-emergency facilities; however, they are considered essential for the everyday operation of Northampton.
Water Supply
Francis P. Ryan Reservoir – Whately
West Whately Reservoir – Whately
Mountain Street Reservoir – Williamsburg
Supplemental water supplies are obtained from two wells in Florence, one off Spring Street and another off Clark Street.
The three Roberts Meadow Reservoirs do not serve as emergency drinking water supply. They may be suitable for very localized firefighting in an extreme emergency limited by reservoir
capacity and pressure head.
Communications and Utilities
National Grid power sub-stations - West Street, King Street, and Florence Junction
Verizon Station – Masonic Street
Problem Culverts
A list of potential problem culverts is compiled by the Highway Superintendent and on file with the Northampton DPW.
Category 3 – Facilities/Populations to Protect
The third category contains people and facilities that need to be protected in event of a disaster.
Medical Facilities
Cooley Dickinson Hospital – Elm Street
Hampshire County Dialysis Center – Conz Street
US Veterans (VA)Medical Center Hospital – North Main Street
Vulnerable Populations
Climate-vulnerable frontline populations – homeless, single room occupancy (SRO) and public housing residents, and food insecure
Individuals without a reliable form of private transportation
Populations with functional needs/disabilities
Elderly – Significant population in Downtown Areas
Hampshire County Jail and House of Correction - Rocky Hill Road
Community Enterprises - Pleasant Street (job training, employment, case management, education and housing support for people with disabilities)
Elderly Housing
Walter Salvo House – Conz Street
Frank J. Cahill – Fruit Street
Harold J. Forsander – High Street
Joan Tobin Manor – Maple Street
Joseph McDonald House – Old South Street
Nursing Homes / Assisted Living
Care One Nursing Home – Elm Street
Linda Manor / Zoe Life Retirement Community – Haydenville Road
Lathrop Retirement Community – South Street
Rockridge – North King
River Valley Rest Home – Pine Street
Christopher Heights – Hospital Hill
Schools
Bridge Street School – Bridge Street
Jackson Street School – Jackson Street
John F Kennedy Middle School - Bridge Road
Lander Grinspoon Academy - Prospect Street
Leeds School – Florence Street
Montessori School of Northampton - Bates Street
New Directions School (Cutchins Program) - Pomeroy Terrace
Northampton High School – Elm Street
(RK Finn) Ryan Road School – Ryan Road
Smith College – Elm Street
Smith College Campus School - Prospect Street
Smith Vocational and Agricultural High School – Locust Street
Houses of Worship
Blessed Sacrament Church – Elm St
College Church – Pomeroy Terrace
Congregation B’Nai Israel – Prospect Street
Edwards Church – Main Street
Christ Science Society– 4Center Street
First Churches – 129 Main Street
Kingdom Hall – Jehovah’s Witness – Bridge Street
Northampton Friends Meeting43 Center Street, 2nd Floor
St. Elizabeth Ann Seton – King Street
St. John’s Episcopal Church – Elm Street
Unitarian Society – Main Street
Historic Buildings/Sites
Academy of Music - 274 Main St
Calvin Coolidge House – Massasoit Street
Dimmock Estate - Grove Hill Mansion - Front St
First Congregational Church – Main Street
Graves Avenue – 8—22 Graves Avenue
Hampshire County Court House – Gothic Street
Hotel Northampton – King Street
Memorial Hall – Main Street
Northampton VA Medical Center – North Main Street
Sylvester Graham House – Pleasant Street
The Manse – Prospect Street
Unitarian Church – Main Street
West Farms Church – West Farms Street
Elm Street Historic District
Fort Hill Historic District
Northampton Downtown Historic District
Pomeroy Terrace Historic District
Employment Centers
Smith College – Elm Street
Cooley Dickinson Hospital – Elm Street
VA Medical Center– North Main Street
L-3 Harris– Prince Street/ State Route 66
Coca Cola – Industrial Drive
PCA Northampton – Mount Tom Road
Downtown — Routes 5 & 9
Mobile Home Parks
None in Northampton
Libraries
Forbes Library - 20 West Street
Lilly Library - 19 Meadow Street
Smith College Library – Elm Street
Table 17.Critical Facilities and Evacuation Routes Potentially Affected by Hazard Areas
Hazard Type
Hazard Area
Critical Facilities Affected
Evacuation Routes Affected
Flooding
Mill River
Connecticut River
Should the levee system fail, the entire downtown would be flooded, including emergency operations from the police station; Part of Leeds Village Apartments senior housing is in flood
zone; cell towers of Atwood Drive and Bridge Street
Route 10 in extreme conditions, Route 5; Route 66/Rocky Hill Road at Ice Pond Road; Route 9.
Dam Failure/ Levee Breach
Varies depending on structure
Site Specific
Site Specific
Drought
Entire City
Firefighting operations
None
Extreme Temperatures
Entire City
None
None
Wildfire/Brushfire
Spring Street
Ryan Rd.
Chesterfield Rd.
Site Specific
Site Specific
Invasive Species
Conservation lands, forests
Potential for increased erosion, sedimentation, heat islands, disease vectors and disease, loss of street trees
None
Hurricane/ Tropical Storm
Mill River
Connecticut River
Should the levee system fail, much of downtown would be flooded
Route 10 in extreme conditions, Route 5; Route 66; Route 9.
Severe Winter Storm/ Nor’easter
Entire City
Cooley Dickinson-possible power outage
Nursing Homes-Rock Ridge
Route 10 in extreme conditions, Route 5; Route 66; Route 9.
Severe Thunderstorms / Wind / Tornadoes
Entire City
Site Specific
Site Specific
Earthquake
Entire City
Emergency operations; residential and commercial structures; emergency shelters; waste management and treatment plants
Route 91 in extreme conditions, Route 5; Route 66; Route 9.
Pandemic
Entire City
Staffing of certain critical facilities could be impacted by reduced willingness of volunteers to risk exposure.
None
(Critical Facilities Map Located In Appendix C)
5: Mitigation Strategies
One of the steps of this Hazard Mitigation Plan is to evaluate all of the City’s existing policies and practices related to natural hazards and identify potential gaps in protection.
After reviewing these policies and the hazard identification and assessment, the Hazard Mitigation Committee developed a set of hazard mitigation strategies it would like to have implemented
moving forward.
The City of Northampton has developed the following goal to serve as a framework for mitigation of the hazards identified in this plan. The goal addresses present-day concerns of local
residents, business owners, and officials in Northampton.
Goal Statement
To minimize injury and the loss of life, damage to property, and the disruption of governmental services and general business activities due to the following hazards: flooding, severe
winter storm/nor’easter, severe thunderstorm/wind/tornado, hurricane/tropical storm, wildfire/brushfire, earthquake, dam failure/levee breach, extreme temperature, invasive species,
drought, and pandemic.
Existing Mitigation Strategies
The City of Northampton had many mitigation strategies in place prior to the update of this Hazard Mitigation Plan in 2020. These strategies are included on the following pages and have
been evaluated in the “Effectiveness” column.
Strategies that were completed since the last version of the plan are listed in bold. For a list of completed strategies that were previously identified as part of the prioritized implementation
list, see the table of “Deleted and Completed Strategies” later in this section.
Flooding
The key factors in flooding are the water capacity of water bodies and waterways, the regulation of waterways by flood control structures, and the preservation of flood storage areas
and wetlands. As more land is developed, more flood storage is demanded of the City’s water bodies and waterways. The City currently addresses this problem with a variety of mitigation
tools and strategies. Flood-related regulations and strategies are included in the City’s zoning ordinance, and subdivision regulations. Infrastructure like dams and culverts are in
place to manage the flow of water.
Management Plans
The Comprehensive Emergency Management (CEM) Plan for Northampton lists the following measures for flood planning:
Identify areas in the community that are flood prone and define methods to minimize the risk. Review National Flood Insurance Maps.
Disseminate emergency public information and instructions concerning flood preparedness and safety.
Community leaders should ensure that Northampton continues to be enrolled in the National Flood Insurance Program.
Strict adherence should be paid to land use and building codes, (e.g. Wetlands Protection Act), and new construction should not be built in flood-prone areas.
Ensure that flood control works are in good operating condition at all times.
Natural water storage areas should be preserved.
Maintain plans for managing all flood emergency response activities including addressing potentially hazardous dams.
The Local Emergency Flood Plan for Northampton lists the following measures for flood planning that require action at various Connecticut River and Mill River elevations when a flood
event occurs. A summary of actions include notifications to emergency dispatch, public works and closure of roads, etc. No flood planning strategies are outlined in this document.
Subdivision Rules and Regulations
Northampton’s Subdivision Rules and Regulations govern the subdivision of land and were adopted for the purpose of “protecting the safety, convenience and welfare of the inhabitants
of Northampton by regulating the laying out and construction of ways in subdivisions providing access to the several lots there [and]…for securing safety in the case of fire, flood,
panic, and other emergencies.” The Subdivision Rules and Regulations contain several provisions that mitigate the potential for, and impact of, flooding. The City’s subdivision regulationsexplicitly
offer standards for residential development seeking Low Impact Development (LID) option, in addition to requiring compliance to the Mass DEP Stormwater Handbook.
There is a range of regulatory techniques available to prevent flood damage in Northampton. These include:
When a Definitive Plan is submitted, proponents must delineate natural waterways and floodways.
All Definitive Plans must comply with the Massachusetts’ Wetlands Protection Act (Chapter 131, Section 40) and Wetlands Protection Ordinance and retain all wetlands and flood lands.
When permitting the subdivision, the planning board must ensure that the regulations of the Water Supply Protection District are met, when the development is located within the WSP.
This works to retain flood and rainwater storage capacity in Northampton’s critical waterways.
Stormwater drainage and infiltration systems must be designed to withstand 1, 2, 10 and 100 year storms in Northampton.
When a plan is developed and submitted to the Planning Board, all definitive plans must indicate, clearly, any floodplain lands and demonstrate compliance with the City’s Floodplain
District.
Northampton Zoning Ordinance
The City of Northampton has adopted several land use regulations that serve to limit or regulate development in floodplains, to manage stormwater runoff, and to protect groundwater and
wetland resources, the latter of which often provide important flood storage capacity. To review the City of Northampton’s Zoning Ordinance, visit www.northamptonma.gov/plan.
The City of Northampton has established a set of ordinances designed in part to “lessen congestion in the streets; to conserve health; to secure safety from fire, flood, panic, and other
dangers” The Zoning Ordinance include several provisions that mitigate the potential for flooding, including:
Any body of water or wet area that is proposed for filling and is proposed to receive 500 cubic yards of fill, or where the proposed area exceeds 10,000 s.f., must receive permission
from the Conservation Commission and must: a) not be located within the Special Conservancy District, b) be executed within the context of existing plans, c) sufficiently document the
impacts on downstream locations, d) be designed not to impair surface drainage or increase erosion, e) be designed to minimize off-site accumulation of fill materials, f) must not impair
any septic disposal systems, and g) no filling shall cause water or other materials to intrude upon a neighboring property without the express permission of the neighbor.
The site plan review process shall: have all stormwater systems approved, floodplains and water bodies must be delineated, an erosion control plan that prevents infill of water bodies
must be approved, not result in water damage to surrounding properties, not result in an increase in surface water runoff from 1, 2 or 10 year storm events in the Central Business District.
The Special Conservancy Zoning District has been created in Northampton to maintain the natural and safe flow of floodwaters, and to protect persons and property by ensuring that development
does not interfere with flood storage capacity. The District also prevents the construction of residencies and the addition of fill; these preserve the natural hydrology of the City’s
watershed lands and provides storage areas for rain waters. Construction of new residential development is prohibited in this district within the 500-year flood plain. The 500-year flood
plain is used as an estimate for the increased precipitation predicted due to climate change.
The Farms, Forest and Rivers Overlay District (FFR) encourages the preservation of open space and caps impervious surface area at 25 percent of the total lot size. The FFR works to
maintain open space and rainwater storage areas and, as such, makes the City less susceptible to damage from flooding.
The Water Supply Protection District prohibits the use of toxic chemicals and restricts the excavation land within those lands that are critical to the City’s drinking water supplies.
This works to maintain natural hydrology.
The Open Space Residential Development (OSRD) ordinance requires that 50 percent of a new subdivision (when ordinance is used) be preserved as open space. This preserves open space
and can slow and store rain waters.
Open Space Acquisition Program
The City purchases land area for open space either in fee or by agriculture and conservation restrictions.A quarter of the City, including its only bog, is now protected land, with about
20 percent owned by the City and the balance owned by state or federal government, or farmers or forest owners who have agreed to property restrictions. This includes floodplain and
flood prone areas. Specific actions involved in the City’s Open Space Acquisition Program are identification of high-risk flooding areas, working with land owners, and acquiring land
in conjunction with land owners and state conservation programs.
River and Stream Protection
The City of Northampton follows the standards established by the Wetlands Protection Act, which protects water bodies and wetlands through the city Conservation Commission. The City
also has instituted its Wetlands Ordinance and Special Conservancy District, an overlay district that provides restrictions on use categories, the use of septic tanks and leach fields,
as well as on the impacting of the flood storage capacity of the land. The City also has a Water Supply Protection District, which prohibits the use of septic tanks within the City’s
aquifer protection district and creates greater buffer distances from certain wetlands.
Stormwater Utility and Flood Control Ordinance
Passed by the City Council in 2014, the utilitypays for necessary stormwater and flood control system construction and maintenance. Property owners in Northampton are billed based on
the amount of stormwater runoff their land generates, with the calculation based on the amount of impervious and pervious surface on site.
Public Education and Outreach
The City conducts outreach to homeowners’ associations to ensure they are maintaining culverts and stormwater managementareas and getting them replaced as needed. The City has been especially
active in working with the Ice Pond Neighborhood Association, whose detention pond caused significant damage to a nearby road, the Tinkham Woods Neighborhood Association, whose restrictive
covenants and detention pond is 30 years old, and the Saw Mill Hills Neighborhood Association, who donated some of the common land to the city for permanently protected open space and
to ensure no new development would occur there that would tax the stormwater system.
Code RED – City’s Reverse 911 Program
Residents can sign up to receive Reverse-911 Emergency Notifications via landline, cell, text and/or email. City public safety officials send voice messages to thousands of residents
and businesses within minutes with specific information about emergencies and time-sensitive local community issues including flooding, dam failure, extreme temperatures, wildfire, hurricanes
and other natural disasters. Code RED has worked well for the City for more than 5 years since the previous HMP. It is well utilized by emergency management and can now target a defined
area with specific messaging.
National Flood Insurance Program
The National Flood Insurance Program has produced maps that identify floodways across America. Northampton is a participating member of the National Flood Insurance Program, and had
the following NFIP policy and claim statistics as of 2020:
Flood Insurance Maps (FIRMs) are used for flood insurance purposes and are on file with the Northampton Planning Board.
FIRMs have been effective since May 31, 1974 with the current map in effect since April 3, 1978.
Northampton has 88in-force policies in effect for a total of $22,468,900 worth of insurance.
There have been a total of 61NFIP claims for which $603,372 has been paid, the most recent claim was made in 2011.
As of 2018, there were8Repetitive Loss Properties in Northampton, all of which were residential. Between these 8 properties, there have been 23 claims made between the years 1982 and
2011.
The City will maintain compliance with the NFIP throughout the next 5-year Hazard Mitigation Planning cycle by monitoring its Flood Plain Overlay District and ensuring that the district
accurately reflects the 100-year flood plain and FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM).
The Flood Insurance Rate Maps in Hampshire County are scheduled to be updated by FEMA in the next few years. When these maps are updated, the City of Northampton will adjust its zoning
to accommodate changes to the location of floodplains.
Community Rating System
Northampton currently participates in the National Flood Insurance Program’s Community Rating System, a program based on incentivizing implementation of suggested floodplain management
activities for communities who wish to more thoroughly manage or reduce the impact of flooding in their jurisdiction. Through use of the rating system (CRS rating), a community’s floodplain
management efforts can be evaluated for effectiveness. The rating, which indicates an above average floodplain management effort, is then factored into the premium cost for flood insurance
policies sold in the community. The higher the rating achieved in that community, the greater the reduction in flood insurance premium costs for local property owners. Northampton
currently has a CRS Class 8 rating, which confers up to a 20% discount on insurance premiums for NFIP policy holders in the City.
Flood Control Structures
FEMA has identified the following flood control structures in Northampton: Northampton Connecticut and Mill River Flood Control Levees, constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The City regularly maintains these levees, floodwalls and flood control pumping stations as per U.S. Army Corps of Engineers requirements. See the Dam Failure/Levee Breach section for
more detail.
Capital Improvement Projects
The City routinely invests in capital improvement projects to minimize the impact of flooding. Since the last plan, DPW completed a bank stabilization of the Roberts Meadow Brook, and
repaired a Mill River retaining wall near the Williamsburg Town line, among other projects.
Culvert Inventory and Prioritization
Northampton DPW began conducting culvert assessments in 2019 using the North Atlantic Aquatic Connectivity (NAACC) assessment protocol for aquatic organism passage. Culverts were prioritized
for assessments based first on their location along a coldwater fishery (CWF), and second on perennial and intermittent streams. When the NAACC Condition Assessment manual was released
later that year, DPW staff added condition assessments to their data collection process. Culverts for which sufficient data had been collected were then evaluated for geomorphic compatibility
using a rapid assessment tool developed for the Vermont Agency of Natural Resources. As of the writing of this plan in the summer of 2020, most culverts on streams that are CWF have
been assessed, and several of the culverts on non-CWF streams have been assessed, but more than 50 culverts throughout the City have not been evaluated.
Northampton Open Space, Recreation, and Multiuse Trail Plan 2018-2025
The Open Space, Recreation, and Multiuse Trail Plan inventories the City’s natural features and promotes natural resource preservation in the City, including areas in the floodplain.
Wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, farms, open space, rivers, streams, and brooks are addressed in the plan, which encourages forestland and farmland protection to help conserve the City’s
flood storage capacity.
Northampton Climate Resilience & Regeneration Plan
Since the last update to this Hazard Mitigation Plan, the City drafted the 2019 Northampton Climate Resilience and Regeneration Plan which will be incorporated into the City’s Master
Plan, Sustainable Northampton. The Northampton Climate Resilience & Regeneration Plan lays out a pathway for the City to mitigate climate change, build capacity to anticipate, adapt,
and thrive in a changing climate, and reduce the City’s contribution to climate change. Many of these strategies include ways to plan for increased climate events, like flooding.
Table 18. Existing Flood Mitigation Measures
Existing Action
Description
Area Covered
Effectiveness
Potential Changes
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
The CEM Plan lists the following measures for flood planning: Identify areas in the community that are flood prone, review National Flood Insurance Maps, disseminate emergency public
information and instructions concerning flood preparedness and safety, adhere to land use and building codes, ensure that flood control works are in good condition, and preservation
of natural are in good operating condition at all times.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Subdivision Rules and Regulations
Definitive plan requires delineating natural waterways and floodways.
The subdivision regulations must comply with zoning protections for natural features.
Subdivision drainage must be designed to withstand 1, 2 10 and 100 year storms.
Utilities must be buried.
Stormwater management in new development must be designed so that post-development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre-development peak discharge rates.
If LID subdivision, must be compliant with DEP Stormwater Handbook and additional requirements.
Entire City.
Somewhat effective for mitigating or preventing localized flooding of roads and other infrastructure.
Somewhat effective for controlling impacts from stormwater runoff.
Prevents flood damage to infrastructure.
Effective for preventing increased stormwater discharge.
None.
Zoning Ordinance:
Site Plan Review
Special Conservancy
Floodplain Overlay
Farm, Forest and Rivers Overlay District
Water Supply Protection District
Requires the site plan to show erosion control, drainage facilities, stormwater runoff, no net change to water supply.
Preserves the floodplain through preventing new residential development in 500-year flood plain. Planning Board and Conservation Commission approval for construction, while allowing
conservation by right. Commercial development is also severely restricted.
Preserves and protects for various commercial areas not protected by Special Conservancy District.
Protects vulnerable, sensitive and important ecosystems through requiring that all construction be sited to minimize a project’s footprint on the land; allows clustering and sets a 25%
maximum footprint for infrastructure.
Preserves primary and secondary recharge areas through preventing the use of hazardous chemicals—either through strict conditions or outright prohibitions.
Entire City.
Area designated on Zoning Map.
Area designated on Zoning Map.
Area designated on Zoning Map.
Area designated on Zoning Map.
Somewhat effective.
Effective.
Somewhat effective.
Somewhat effective.
Somewhat effective.
None.
Open Space Residential Development Ordinance
Allows development while conserving valuable open space.
Entire City.
Effective at maintaining flood storage land.
Consider adding more specific impacts to address including topographic change, removal of cover vegetation, risk of erosion or siltation and increased storm water runoff.
Open Space Acquisition Program
The City is currently purchasing about 0.5 percent of the City’s land area either in fee or by agriculture and conservation restrictions. Specific actions involved in the City’s Open
Space Acquisition Program are identification of high-risk flooding areas, working with land owners, and acquiring land in conjunction with land owners and state conservation programs.
Areas within the 100-year Floodplain.
Effective.
None.
Wetlands Ordinance
Protects wetlands, including floodplains, rivers and wetlands.
All wetlands and floodplains.
Effective at limiting development that would harm these resources.
None.
Stormwater Utility and Flood Control Ordinance
Charges property owners for stormwater runoff based on amount of impervious and pervious surface on their land, in order to pay for improvements to stormwater system and flood control
system.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Northampton Open Space, Recreation, and Multiuse Trail Plan 2018 – 2025
Inventories natural features and promotes natural resource preservation in the City, including areas in the floodplain; such as wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, farms and open space,
rivers, streams and brooks.
Entire City
Effective in identifying sensitive resource areas, including floodplains.Encourages forestland and farmland protection, which will help conserve the City’s flood storage capacity.
Consider implementing the Seven-Year Action Plan strategies, particularly those dealing with protection of forests, farmland and floodplain forests.
Participation in the National Flood Insurance Program
As of 2020, there were 88homeowners with flood insurance policies.
Areas identified by the FEMA maps.
Somewhat effective, provided that the City remains enrolled in the National Flood Insurance Program.
The City should consider re-applying for Community Rating System status and continue to work with MEMA regarding flood mitigation requirements.
Participate in NFIP Community Rating System (CRS)
As of 2020, the City holds a Class 8 rating, which confers up to a 20% discount on insurance premiums for NFIP policy holders in the City.
Entire City
Effective in reducing insurance premiums for NFIP policy holders.
A new Class 8 prerequisite will require communities to adopt and enforce at least a 1-foot freeboard requirement for all residential buildings constructed, substantially improved, and/or
reconstructed due to substantial damage, throughout its Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) where base flood elevations have been determined. This requirement may limit the feasibility
of the City maintaining its Class 8 rating.
FEMA Risk Mapping Assessment & Planning
Discovery Report 01 inventoried local flood hazard and risks with help from City. Next phase of study includes study of riverine zones A and AE within Connecticut Watershed. Updates
FIRMs.
Entire City.
Effective.
Climate Resilience & Regeneration Plan
A component of the 2020 Update to Sustainable Northampton addressing climate adaptation and mitigation to make the City more resilient and regenerative. Provides for design standards
and exploration of policies raising requirements for new design storm intensities and rainfall distributions, closed drainage systems, and increasing stormwater conveyance capacity through
blue-green-gray infrastructure.
Entire City
Somewhat Effective, as the City will eventually include the document in their 2020 Master Plan Update
The City is currently on its way to adopting the plan and exploring implementation.
Maintenance of Northampton Connecticut and Mill River Flood Control Levees
The City regularly maintains the flood control leveesalong the Connecticut and Mill Rivers, as required by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The City is currently completing studies
to assess necessary improvements to this infrastructure to keep it in good maintenance.
Mill River and Connecticut River flood plains
Effective.
Improvements to flood control structures (see list of future strategies)
Maintenance of channel behind Fire Department
Department of Public Works maintains the channel behind the Fire Department to prevent the marsh from flooding the Fire Department building.
Fire Department and nearby marsh.
Effective.
None.
Hampshire County Shelter System Concept of Operations
Shelter System Concept of Operations outlines process of which a shelter would open in Northampton based on flooding or other natural disaster. Smith Vocational HS is identified as a
Primary and Animal Facility and JFK Middle School as a Secondary Facility. Smith has limited generator capacity.
Entire City.
Somewhat effective.
CodeRED – Reverse 911 System
Emergency Management can target messaging to certain areas or the entire city to inform of emergencies and time-sensitive community issues, like flooding.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Bank stabilization of the Roberts Meadow Brook
A channel section immediately downstream of the Lower Roberts Meadow Reservoir Dam was historically constructed at a steep slope, resulting in significant bank erosion and channel meander
over time, threatening bank stability and adjacent property. Reconstruction included bank stabilization and channel step pools to provide fish habitat and maintain channel stability.
Flooding
DPW with funding from FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
Completed
Repair of Mill River Retaining Wall
A retaining wall along the Mill River near the Williamsburg Town line was poorly constructed and deterioration over time threatened flooding of the adjacent roadway and the integrity
of the main sewer interceptor from Williamsburg to the Northampton WWTP. The new concrete retaining wall mitigated these threats.
Mill River near the Williamsburg Town line
Completed
Dam Failure / Levee Breach
Dam or levee failure is a highly infrequent occurrence, but a severe incident could prove catastrophic. In addition, dam failure most often coincides with flooding, so its impacts can
be multiplied, as the additional water has nowhere to flow.
Management Plans and Regulatory Measures
The Northampton Comprehensive Emergency Management (CEM) Plan contains the following mitigation measures for dam failure:
Develop and conduct public education programs concerning dam hazards.
Maintain up-to-date plans to deal with threat and actual occurrence of dam over-spill or failure.
Emergency Management and other local government agencies should familiarize themselves with technical data and other information pertinent to the dams which impact Northampton. This
should include determining the probable extent and seriousness of the effect to downstream areas.
Dams should be inspected periodically and monitored regularly.
Repairs should be attended to promptly.
As much as is possible burdens on faulty dams should be lessened through stream re-channeling.
Identify dam owners.
Determine minimum notification time for downstream areas.
Contaminate-laden waste (including dams that hold back pollution from traveling downstream).
Permits Required for New Dam Construction
Massachusetts State Law (M.G.L. Chapter 253 Section 45) regulates the construction of new dams. A permit must be obtained from the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) before
construction can begin. One of the permit requirements is that all local approvals or permits must be obtained. All new dams must adhere to seismic requirements set forth in the 8th
Edition of the Massachusetts State Building Code.
Dam Inspections and Removal of Dams
The DCR requires that dams rated as Low Hazards are inspected every ten years and dams that are rated as Medium/Significant Hazards are inspected every five years. High Hazard dams
must be inspected every two years. Of the three City-owned dams in Northampton, both Middle and Lower Roberts dams are designated as high hazard dams, and the South Street dam is medium
hazard. The City dams are in good shape according to the DPW. However, data from private dam inspection is lacking.
Zoning
There is no mention made regarding the construction of new dams in Northampton.
Restrictions on Development
There are no City restrictions on dam locations. The DCR issues permits for new dams and does have the authority to deny a permit if it is determined that the design and/or location
of the dam is not acceptable.
Levee Maintenance
The City regularly maintains the levee systems on the Mill River and Connecticut River in accordancewith the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers requirements to ensure the flood control system
is in good repair. It should be noted that vegetation management is usually a routine maintenance activity, however, the DPW identified that major vegetation management to maintain its
levees included a significant amount of tree and wood growth removal where woody growth should not be present. The DPW is now more responsive to vegetation management after a period
of time of deferred maintenance. Some other related repairs due to the deferred maintenance include floodwall concrete repair, raising the earthen levees in several areas, and other
minor repairs to the both the Connecticut River and Mill River systems.
FEMA Levee Accreditation
Years after the current Northampton FIRM mapping was completed, FEMA promulgated a requirement that flood control systems be accredited in accordance with certain engineering evaluations
that demonstrate adequate protection for the 1% probability flood event. Northampton’s levees have never been accredited by FEMA, and without thataccreditation the map modernization
process would likely consider the area behind the levees as floodplain.
In 2018, the City initiated an engineering evaluation of its levees and flood control system to establish capital improvement priorities and prepare documentation to submit to FEMA for
accreditation of the system in advance of map modernization.
Proactively, the City will be undertaking pre-disaster “brick and mortar” mitigation construction projects that are needed to advance the levee accreditation process. Projects for Levee
Toe Drain Maintenance and Hockanum Flood Pumping Station Phase 1 Upgrades work have been funded and are going to bid in 2020. These projects are mainly paid for through the existing
City stormwater enterprise fund, which is capped at $2 million per year. However, this stormwater enterprise fund supports personnel and routine maintenance as well as drainage capital
projects and is not enough for all the capital projects that may be needed going forward for FEMA accreditation. Other funding sources are being explored for capital projects that may
be needed to receive FEMA accreditation. The City has prioritized implementing recommendations from the engineering evaluations that would support a successful submission for FEMA accreditation.
Table 19. Existing Dam Failure and Levee Breach Hazard Mitigation Measures
Existing Action
Description
Area Covered
Effectiveness
Potential Changes
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
The CEM Plan includes a variety of public education and regular maintenance initiatives for dam and levee safety.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Permits required for new dam construction
State law requires a permit for the construction of any dam.
Entire City.
Effective. Ensures dams are adequately designed.
None.
Dam Inspections
DCR has an inspection schedule that is based on the hazard rating of the dam (low, medium, high hazard).
Entire City.
Dams located on private land must be inspected by property owner. The City’s Conservation Commission is responsible for inspecting two City-owned dams and DPW for three City-owned dams.
None.
Evacuation Plans
Comprehensive evacuation plans ensure the safety of the citizens in the event of dam failure.
Inundation areas in City.
Effective.
None.
Identification of inundation zones
Mapped inundation zones identify areas where dam breaches would result in a loss of life and damage to property.
Inundation areas in City.
Effective.
None.
Emergency Action Plans
EAPs are in place for the two Roberts Meadows dams, which includes identification of City inundation areas
Inundation areas in City.
Effective.
None.
Local Emergency Flood Plan
Plan lists measures that require action at various Connecticut River and Mill River elevations when a flood event occurs.
Inundation areas in City.
Effective.
None.
Levee maintenance
The City regularly maintains the levee systems on the Mill River and Connecticut River in accordance with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers requirements to ensure the flood control system
is in good repair.
Inundation areas in City.
Effective.
None.
Remove unnecessary dams and other manmade structures where feasible:
1. Upper Roberts Dam removal
2. Fitzgerald Lake Dam Repair
1. The City removed the Upper Roberts Reservoir Dam in 2018.
2. DPW repaired the Fitzgerald Lake Dam after determining that the dam presented a low enough hazard that it did not need to be removed.
Dam failure
1. DPW with funding from the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
2. EEA Dam Safety Grant, City Capital Improvement Program
Completed/Discontinued Remaining dams on the Mill River are under private ownership and therefore not priority projects for the City.
CodeRED – Reverse 911 System
Emergency Management can target messaging to certain areas or the entire city to inform of emergencies and time-sensitive community issues, like dam failure.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Drought
Although Massachusetts does not face extreme droughts like many other places in the country, it is susceptible to dry spells and drought. Drought can most likely be effectively mitigated
in regions like the Pioneer Valley if measures are put into place, such as ensuring that groundwater is recharged.
State Regulations
The City of Northampton follows the state’s Water Management Act, which limits the amount of water consumption during a state-issued Water Emergency Declaration. For more information
visit: www.mass.gov/eea/agencies/massdep/water/drinking/the-massachusetts-water-management-act-program.html.
City Operations
The City of Northampton routinely works to identify and repair water system leaks. Current water loss due to leakage is less than 10 percent of the total consumption. In addition, the
City installedirrigation well at Florence Field, and is also working with Smith College to determine the feasibility of irrigation wells on campus, which would further conserve the City’s
water supply.
Table 20. Existing Drought Mitigation Measures
Existing Action
Description
Area Covered
Effectiveness
Potential Changes
Massachusetts Water Management Act
Regulates amount of water that can be used during a Water Emergency Declaration.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Identification and reduction of water system leaks
The Department of Public Works routinely inspects and repairs water system leaks.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Water System Emergency Response Plan
Plan includes information about what City will do in response to water emergencies, including droughts.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Extreme Temperatures
A Continuity of Operations Plan outlines City government’s functions and responsibilities in a natural disaster, which includes extreme temperatures, and relocation of services during
these declared disasters.
Zoning Ordinance
In 2016, the City adopted a Zoning Ordinance (§350-12.3 Significant Trees) requiring that projects that meet site plan approval thresholds must replace any trees that are cut which are
deemed “significant”, which is any tree of 20 inches diameter breast height (DBH) or larger or any other tree specifically identified as a specimen tree on any Tree Inventory Plan adopted
by the Planning Board.
Northampton Community & Resilience Hub
A Community & Resilience Hub is being explored as an effort to support Northampton residents who face chronic and acute stress due to natural and human-caused disasters, climate change,
and social and economic challenges. This Hubis proposed to coordinate the distribution of various resources and services during normal times to more challenged populations through partnership
with local service providers, public private partnerships, etc.; however, during major disruptions like a future disaster or pandemic, the Hub would provide the service and resource
distribution citywide to all residents as now the Hub would play a role in the planning of preparing and responding to disaster.The Community & Resilience Hub would also potentially
serve as a cooling and warming shelter in the case of extreme temperatures.
City Resilience Projects
In 2019, the Public Shade Tree Commission adopted a planting plan and planting list based on tree species that would be able to accommodate climate change and invasive species pressure.
The Public Shade Tree Commission works in collaboration with the City Tree Warden and a private citizens’ group, Tree Northampton. Together they promote ecological stewardship, volunteering
to support Northampton’s tree program by caring and planting trees all over the City.
In addition to the tree planting plan and revised planting list, the City continues to participate in resilient activities, such as replanting and reforesting an 80 acre golf course
with money from the Significant Tree Fund and MVP grant. Additional tree planting projects for resilience include at Connecticut River Park, where Northampton Community Rowing serves
as a partner in doing ongoing watering of newly planted trees.
Overall, the City budget for tree purchase and installation has increased in the past few years.
Table 21. Existing Extreme Temperatures Mitigation Measures
Existing Action
Description
Area Covered
Effectiveness
Potential Changes
Relocation of public safety operations
The Police and Fire Departments have a relocation plan in the case of an emergency
Entire City
Effective
None.
Zoning Ordinance
The City adopted a significant tree zoning ordinance in 2016
Entire City
Effective
None.
CodeRED – Reverse 911 System
Emergency Management can target messaging to certain areas or the entire city to inform of emergencies and time-sensitive community issues, like extreme temperatures.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Wildfires/Brushfires
Wildfire and brushfire mitigation strategies involve educating people about how to prevent fires from starting, as well as controlling burns within the City.
Management Plans
The Northampton Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan does not include any specific information on wildfires.
Regulatory Measures
Burn Permits: The City of Northampton does allow open burning under the guidelines of the Department of Environmental Protection. Open Burning is authorized from January 15 to May 1.
Burning is permitted between the hours of 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. The Officer in Charge of the Fire Department will determine if burning will be allowed at the beginning of the shift and
can suspend burning if weather conditions change.
Subdivision Review: The procedures for the submission of preliminary and definitive subdivision plans require that the fire department be an active participant in the review of proposed
subdivision plans. This involves verifying that proficient water supplies exist and that access routes to and from a given subdivision adequately meet public safety needs.
Public Education/Outreach: The Northampton Fire Department maintains a public outreach program that targets children and seniors with the intention of spreading information about fire
safety within these two populations. Furthermore, the City has a safety inspection program that works to ensure that fire safety standards are being met.
Restrictions on Development
There are currently no restrictions on development that are based on the need to mitigate the hazards of wildfires and brushfires.
Table 22. Existing Wildfire/Brushfire Hazard Mitigation Measures
Existing Action
Description
Area Covered
Effectiveness
Potential Changes
Burn Permits
Residents are permitted to obtain burn permits over the phone. State police personnel provide information on safe burn practices.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Subdivision Review:
Fire Safety
The Fire Department is involved in the review of subdivision plans.
The City of Northampton has extensive public water supplies and all residents are within the City’s fire prevention operations.
Regulations allow lower water flows above certain elevations for sprinkler systems and water storage in houses that are not connected to city water lines.
Entire City.
Effective.
Would be effective in providing for an increase in fire suppression capacity.
Effective.
None.
Public Education/Outreach
The Fire Department has an ongoing educational program in the schools.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Invasive Species
The spread of invasive species is a serious concern as species ranges shift with a changing climate. People can also carry invasive plant species on their clothing if walking through
trails that may be present in soils.
Management Plans
The Open Space, Recreation & Multi-use Trails Plan offers a strategy of using volunteers to remove invasive species when exotics and non-native plants compete with local plants and degrade
animal life. In 2012-2013, DCR approved Forest Management Plans for watershed forests in Northampton that identified invasive species as a threat to forest regeneration and overall forest
health. Those plans provide a roadmap for future efforts to control invasive plant populations in the watershed to reduce the amount of forest cover lost to invasive plants. Among other
things, the plans recommended managing invasives (bittersweet, etc.) to ensure a resilient forest that continues to provide a sustained supply of high quality water.
Regulatory Measures
Plants and trees invasive to Massachusetts are not allowed in the Highway Business Zone, per the Zoning Ordinance. Additionally, replacement trees shall be noninvasive deciduous or coniferous
trees (as defined by the City's Tree List and Planting Guidelines) planted on or off site, as approved as part of a site plan or administrative site plan, or on any City-owned property
with approval by the Office of Planning and Sustainability. The City Planning and Sustainability Department supports the Boards that oversee many of the regulatory requirements of tree
planting, like requirements in site plan approval, subdivision regulation, or zoning relief.
Table 23. Existing Invasive Species Mitigation Measures
Existing Action
Description
Area Covered
Effectiveness
Potential Changes
Open Space, Recreation & Multi-Use Trails Plan
Invasive plant species removal via volunteer and City collaboration
Entire City
Effective
None
Zoning Ordinance
Requirement of non-invasive trees to be planted in HB Zoning District
Replacement trees shall not be noninvasive deciduous or coniferous trees as defined by the City’s Tree List.
HB Zoning District
Entire City
Effective
Effective
None
None
Subdivision Regulations
Definitive Plan requirement for a tree inventory identifying significant groups of trees or any tree over 12 inches in diameter, including species
Standards for planting include a tree list for shade trees within a subdivision
Entire City
Effective
None
Hurricane / Tropical Storm AND Severe Thunderstorm / Wind / Tornado
Hurricanes, severe thunderstorms, and tornadoes all generate high winds that can fell trees, down electrical wires, and generate hurtling debris. This common characteristic means that
the same set of mitigation strategies applies equally to all four hazards. For example, current land development regulations, such as restrictions on the height of telecommunications
towers, can help prevent wind damages from all four types of hazards. In addition to wind damage, hurricanes can generate significant flooding that damages buildings, infrastructure
and threatens human lives. All of the existing mitigation measures listed in the Flooding section are also hurricane mitigation measures.
Management Plans
The Comprehensive Emergency Management (CEM) Plan for Northampton includes the following mitigation measures for hurricanes, severe thunderstorms, wind, and tornadoes:
Develop and enforce building codes to enhance structural resistance to high winds.
Develop and disseminate emergency public information and instructions concerning disaster safety, especially guidance regarding in-home protection and evacuation procedures, and locations
of public shelters.
Zoning
The Telecommunications Facilities Zoning Ordinance requires that telecommunications towers be setback from adjacent property lines. This requirement prevents telecommunications facilities
and ice on those facilities from falling and damaging neighboring properties.
Restrictions on Development
The City’s Subdivision Ordinance requires that all new subdivisions have buried utility lines.
Mobile Homes
According to the Northampton Zoning Ordinance, mobile homes are not an allowed use. However, all regulations and legal protections given to victims of fires or other natural disasters
must be followed, and such regulations are located in M.G.L. Chapter 40A.
State Building Code
For new or recently built structures, the primary protection against wind-related damage is construction that adheres to the State Building Code, which, when followed, results in buildings
that withstand high winds. The City of Northampton employs a building inspector for all inspection duties and responsibilities.
Flood Mitigation Strategies
Because one of the primary impacts of hurricanes and severe thunderstorms is intense rainfall that generates flooding, all of the flood mitigation strategies discussed above are also
mitigation strategies for hurricanes and severe thunderstorms.
Table 24. Existing Hurricane / Tropical Storm / Severe Thunderstorm / Wind / TornadoMitigation Measures
Existing Action
Description
Area Covered
Effectiveness
Potential Changes
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
The CEM includes the following mitigation measures: 1) Develop and enforce building codes to enhance structural resistance to high winds and 2) develop and disseminate emergency public
information and instructions concerning disaster safety, especially guidance regarding in-home protection and evacuation procedures, and locations of public shelters.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Zoning regulations for tele-communications facilities
No facility shall exceed 220 feet in height as measured from the mean finished grade at facility base.
No tower, exclusive of any attachments, shall be erected nearer to any property line than a distance equal to twice the vertical height.
Entire City.
Effective.
Consider adding safety and prevention of wind-related damage as a stated purpose.
Subdivision Regulations – Utilities
(electric and telephone)
The City requires all utilities for new subdivisions to be underground.
Entire City.
Somewhat effective for ensuring that utility service is uninterrupted by severe storms in new areas of residential development.
Work with utility companies to underground new utility lines in general and existing utility lines in locations where repetitive outages occur.
Zoning Regulations regarding new mobile homes
Mobile homes are not an allowed use in all districts.
Entire City.
Does not address the potential for wind-related damage to mobile homes.
None.
State Building Code
The City of Northampton has adopted the Massachusetts State Building Code.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
CodeRED – Reverse 911 System
Emergency Management can target messaging to certain areas or the entire city to inform of emergencies and time-sensitive community issues, like hurricanes and severe weather events.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Severe Winter Storm / Nor’easter
Winter storms can be especially challenging for emergency management personnel. The Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) serves as the primary coordinating entity in the
statewide management of all types of winter storms and monitors the National Weather Service (NWS) alerting systems during periods when winter storms are expected. Even though the storm
has usually been forecast, there is no certain way for predicting its length, size or severity. Therefore, mitigation strategies must focus on preparedness prior to a severe snow/ice
storm.
The City’s current mitigation tools and strategies focus on preparedness, with many regulations and standards established based on safety during storm events. To the extent that some
of the damages from a winter storm can be caused by flooding, flood protection mitigation measures also assist with severe snowstorms and ice storms.
Management Plans
The Comprehensive Emergency Management (CEM) Plan for Northampton lists the following mitigation measure for severe winter storms:
Develop and disseminate emergency public information concerning winter storms, especially material which instructs individuals and families how to stock their homes, prepare their vehicles,
and take care of themselves during a severe winter storm.
To the extent that some of the damages from a winter storm can be caused by flooding, all of the flood protection mitigation measures undertaken by the City can also be considered as
mitigation measures for severe snowstorms/ice storms.
Restrictions on Development
There are no restrictions on development that are directly related to severe winter storms. However, the Subdivision Rules and Regulations do set grade limits on driveways and address
frontage variances for flag lots to ensure that roads and driveways will be passable in the winter.
The City of Northampton Subdivision Rules and Regulations set grade limits on streets that are included in Section 7:01: Streets and Ways and as part of Section 7:22: Underground Utility
Systems, which, although not specified as weather hazard mitigation, can serve to minimize accident potential and power loss from severe winter storms. The City of Northampton Zoning
Ordinance also regulates common driveways.
State Building Code
For new or recently built structures, the primary protection against snow-related damage is construction according to the State Building Code, which addresses designing buildings to
withstand snow loads. Northampton has a full-time, professional building inspector on its staff.
Improvements to Backup Power Supply
The City continuesworking to improve the electrical resiliency of its emergency facilities, in case of power loss from hazards such as snowstorms. As part of this work, the City commissioned
a study by Rivermoor Systems to make recommendations for improvements, such as adapting current buildings to backup power generators and photovoltaic facilities. The City is also working
to improve the resiliency of the energy grid that serves emergency services and critical facilities.
In the draft Climate Resilience & Regeneration Plan to be included in the update to the City’s Master Plan, the City is seeking a pathway to retrofit, upgrade and require new constructions
of buildings and energy systems that can better withstand floods, heat waves, or extreme storms. Some recommendations include the development of microgrids and distributed energy systems
with battery storage, particularly to power emergency services, providing backup power if the grid fails.
Table 25. Existing Severe Winter Storm / Nor’easter Mitigation Measures
Existing Action
Description
Area Covered
Effectiveness
Potential Changes
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
The CEM Plan lists the following mitigation measure for severe winter storms: Develop and disseminate emergency public information concerning winter storms, especially material which
instructs individuals and families how to stock their homes, prepare their vehicles, and take care of themselves during a severe winter storm.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Subdivision Regulations – Design Standards for Roads
Standards for Flag Lots
Standards include street grade regulations (five to eight percent maximum).
Requires that snow management strategy be a clear part of the conditions to permit a flag lot.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Subdivision Regulations – Utilities (electric and telephone)
The City requires all utilities for new subdivisions to be underground.
Entire City.
Somewhat effective for ensuring that utility service is uninterrupted by severe storms in new areas of residential development.
Work with utility companies to underground existing utility lines in locations where repetitive outages occur.
State Building Code
Northampton follows the Massachusetts State Building Code.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Resiliency of electrical grid
Implementing improvements to electrical systems of emergency facilities.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Electrical grid for emergency services
Working to ensure resiliency of microgrid for emergency service facilities, and reviewing Smith College as a model.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Stretch Energy Code
The City adopted the Stretch Energy Code which is more aggressive than base code, allowing for buildings to achieve more energy savings and increase their passive survivability.
Entire City
Effective
None.
Earthquake
Although there are five mapped seismological faults in Massachusetts, there is no discernible pattern of previous earthquakes along these faults nor is there a reliable way to predict
future earthquakes along these faults or in any other areas of the state. Consequently, earthquakes are arguably the most difficult natural hazard for which to plan.
Most buildings and structures in the state were constructed without specific earthquake resistant design features. In addition, earthquakes precipitate several potential devastating
secondary effects such as building collapse, utility pipeline rupture, water contamination, and extended power outages. Therefore, many of the mitigation efforts for other natural hazards
identified in this plan may be applicable during the City’s recovery from an earthquake.
Management Plans
The Northampton Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan lists the following mitigation measures for earthquakes:
Community leaders in cooperation with Emergency Management Personnel maintain an assessment of structures and land areas that are especially vulnerable to earthquake.
Strict adherence should be paid to land use and earthquake resistant building codes for all new construction.
Periodic evaluation, repair, and/or improvement should be made to older public structures.
Emergency earthquake public information and instructions should be developed and disseminated.
State Building Code
State and local building inspectors are guided by regulations put forth in the Massachusetts State Building Code. The first edition of the Massachusetts State Building Code went into
effect on January 1, 1975 and included specific earthquake resistant design standards. These seismic requirements for new construction have been revised and updated over the years and
are part of the current, 8th edition of the Massachusetts State Building Code. Given that most structures in Massachusetts were built before 1975, many buildings and structures do not
have specific earthquake resistant design features. In addition, built areas underlain by artificial fill, sandy or clay soils are particularly vulnerable to damage during an earthquake.
The City has since adopted the stretch code as it became a Green Community.
Restrictions on Development
There are no seismic-related restrictions on development beyond that in the building code.
Table 26. Existing EarthquakeMitigation Measures
Existing Action
Description
Area Covered
Effectiveness
Potential Changes
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
The CEM Plan includes measures for earthquake preparation that include keeping an assessment of structures and land areas that are especially vulnerable to earthquakes, strict adherence
to building code, periodic evaluation, repair, and/or improvement to older public structures, and dissemination of public information about how to prepare for earthquakes.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
State Building Code
The City of Northampton has adopted the 9th Edition of the State Building Code.
Entire City.
Effective for new buildings only.
Evaluate older structures to be used as shelters and determine if they are earthquake resistant as per 9th Edition of the State Building Code.
Pandemic
The Comprehensive Emergency Management (CEM) Plan for Northampton includes the following mitigation measures for pandemics:
Develop and disseminate emergency public information and instructions concerning personal health, hygiene, and sanitation.
Developing epidemic intelligence, evaluation, prevention and detection of communicable diseases and disease control operations.
Collection of vital statistics.
Northampton Resilience Hub
A Resilience Hub is being explored as an effort to support Northampton residents who face chronic and acute stress due to natural and human-caused disasters, climate change, and social
and economic challenges. It will serve the 1% (homeless and others under the most severe chronic stress), the 15% (below the poverty line), the 40% (housing-burdened and under chronic
stress) and the 100% (those at risk of acute, but not regular, adverse events), by providing access to resource, developing a network of neighbors, and building social resilience.This
Hub is proposed to coordinate the distribution of various resources and services during normal times to more challenged populations through partnership with local service providers,
public private partnerships, etc.; however, during major disruptions like a future disaster or pandemic, the Hub would provide the service and resource distribution citywide to all residents
as now the Hub would play a role in the planning of preparing and responding to disaster.
Table 27. Existing Pandemic Mitigation Measures
Existing Action
Description
Area Covered
Effectiveness
Potential Changes
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
The CEM Plan includes measures for pandemics that include development and dissemination of public information regarding personal health and hygiene, developing epidemic intelligence
and disease control operations, and collecting vital statistics.
Entire City.
Effective.
None.
Discontinuedor Completed Mitigation Strategies
Several mitigation strategies listed in the 2015 version of the Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan have been removed or completed in the time since this 5-year update. Deleted and completed
strategies, and their status, are indicated in the table below. Mitigation strategies from the 2015 plan that were partially complete and are ongoing are presented with detailed status
reports in the following section.
Table 28. Discontinnued or Completed Mitigation Strategies
Action Name
Description
Hazards Mitigated
Responsible Agency
Status
Remove unnecessary dams and other manmade structures where feasible:
1. Upper Roberts Dam removal
2. Fitzgerald Lake Dam Repair
1. The Upper Roberts Meadow Reservoir Dam was a High Hazard dam that the Office of Dam Safety (ODS) ordered the City to remove or repair. The dam was removed in 2018, eliminating the
risk of dam failure and associated downstream flooding, and restoring the channel for unobstructed fish passage and natural flow.
2. DPW repaired the Fitzgerald Lake Dam after determining that the dam presented a low enough hazard that it did not need to be removed
Dam failure
1.DPW with funding from the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
2. Capital Budget
Completed
Bank stabilization of the Roberts Meadow Brook
The City stabilized the banks of Robert Meadows Brook
Flooding
DPW with funding from FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
Completed
Repair of Mill River Retaining Wall
A retaining wall along the Mill River near the Williamsburg Town line was poorly constructed and deterioration over time threatened flooding of the adjacent roadway and the integrity
of the main sewer interceptor from Williamsburg to the Northampton WWTP. The new concrete retaining wall mitigated these threats.
Flooding
DPW with funding from FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
Completed
Upgrade flood control system to replace wooden stop logs with aluminum stop logs.
The DPW has reviewed quotes for current pricing to replace the wooden stop logs with aluminum stop logs for the West Street closure structure and determined that current costs are prohibitive
for the benefit gained.
N/A
N/A
Discontinued. The wooden stop logs for the Route 5 and railroad stop logs were replaced with high quality, grade-stamped timbers and the stop log storage structures were reconstructed.
Prioritized Implementation Plan
Several of the action items previously identified in the 2015 Hazard Mitigation Plan are currently continuing, either because they require more time to secure funding or their construction
process is ongoing. In addition, the Hazard Mitigation Committee identified several new strategies that are also being pursued. These new strategies are based on experience with currently
implemented strategies, as well as the hazard identification and risk assessment in this plan. Overall mitigation strategy priorities have not changed since the last version of this
plan, with specific mitigation strategies addressing all identified hazards through a combination of planning, public outreach, and infrastructure improvements.
Prioritization Methodology
The Northampton Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee reviewed and prioritized a list of previously identified and new mitigation strategies using the following criteria:
Application to multiple hazards – Strategies are given a higher priority if they assist in the mitigation of several natural hazards.
Time required for completion – Projects that are faster to implement, either due to the nature of the permitting process or other regulatory procedures, or because of the time it takes
to secure funding, are given higher priority.
Estimated benefit – Strategies which would provide the highest degree of reduction in loss of property and life are given a higher priority. This estimate is based on the Hazard Identification
and Analysis Chapter, particularly with regard to how much of each hazard’s impact would be mitigated.
Cost effectiveness – in order to maximize the effect of mitigation efforts using limited funds, priority is given to strategies low-cost that would require low-cost investments by the
CIty. For example, regular tree maintenance is a relatively low-cost operational strategy that can significantly reduce the length of time of power outages during a winter storm. Strategies
that have identified potential funding streams, such as the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, that would off-set the cost of an expensive project are also given higher priority.
Eligibility Under Hazard Mitigation Grant Program – The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) provides grants to states and local governments to implement long-term hazard mitigation
measures after a major disaster declaration. The purpose of the HMGP is to reduce the loss of life and property due to natural disasters and to enable mitigation measures to be implemented
during the immediate recovery from a disaster. Funding is made available through FEMA by the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency. Municipalities apply for grants to fund specific
mitigation projects under MEMA requirements
The following categories are used to define the priority of each mitigation strategy:
Low – Strategies that would not have a significant benefit to property or people, address only one or two hazards, or would require funding and time resources that are impractical
Medium – Strategies that would have some benefit to people and property and are somewhat cost effective at reducing damage to property and people
High – Strategies that provide mitigation of several hazards and have a large benefit that warrants their cost and time to complete
Several hazard mitigation strategies identified in the previous Hazard Mitigation Plan have not yet been completed, but were changed in priority during the update of this plan by the
Hazard Mitigation Committee. The Committee changed priorities by evaluating the entire list of mitigation strategies in a comprehensive manner according to the factors listed above.
For strategies that have changed in priority, the previous priority is provided in parenthesis in the “Priority” column.
Cost Estimates
Each of the following implementation strategies is provided with a cost estimate. Projects that already have secured funding are noted as such. Where precise financial estimates are
not currently available, categories were used with the following assigned dollar ranges:
Low – cost less than $50,000
Medium – cost between $50,000 – $250,000
High – cost over $250,000
Cost estimates take into account the following resources:
City staff time for grant application and administration (based on estimated average hourly rate of City staff)
Consultant design and construction cost (based on estimates for projects obtained from City and general knowledge of previous work in City)
City staff time for construction, maintenance, and operation activities (based on estimated average hourly rate of City staff)
Project Timeline
Each strategy is provided with an estimated length of time it will take for implementation. Where funding has been secured for the project, a specific future date is provided for when
completion will occur. However, some projects do not currently have funding and thus it is difficult to know exactly when they will be completed. For these projects, an estimate is provided
for the amount of time it will take to complete the project once funding becomes available.
Table 29. Mitigation Strategies to be Implemented
Mitigation Action
Status
Mitigation Category
Hazards Mitigated
Responsible Department/Board
Timeline
Potential Funding Source(s)
Estimated Cost
Priority
1
Continue current improvement strategies for flood control facility and implement recommendations.
Continue
SIP
Flooding, Hurricanes, Thunderstorms
City Council, Mayor’s Office, Department of Public Works
2 years
MVP grant, HMGP, CIP, Stormwater Utility
$1M
High
Status: Continuing. Contract engineers conducting assessments and improvements on behalf of the City, in line with requirements of US Army Corps of Engineers and FEMA accreditation.
Initial assessment of Hockanum Road flood control pumpstation completed and Phase 1 rehabilitation design in progress.Condition assessment and repair of some sections of toe drains in
progress. Future needs include, but are not limited to vegetation management at Mill and Connecticut River levees.
2
Retrofit existing or install new back-up power sources at government buildings to supplement existing fuel sources with external generators and photovoltaic cells.
Ongoing
SIP
All hazards
Central Services, Emergency Management Director, Department of Public Works, Fire Department
4 years
HMGP, CIP
<$500,000
High (formerly medium)
Status: Backup generator installed for the Police Department radio tower at the landfill in 2017. Continuing as two sub-projects.:
1. Planning for islandable microgrid at DPW, Smith Vocational School, and Cooley Dickinson Hospital underway
2. PV/battery backup at Fire HQ: new parking lot design complete; procuring designer services for PV/battery system, waiting on grant extension
3
Evaluate and make needed improvements to King Street Brook drainage area from Round Hill through Barrett Street marsh to the Connecticut River
Ongoing
SIP, NSP
Flooding, Hurricanes, Thunderstorms
Department of Public Works
4 years
MVP, HMGP
High
High
Status: City completed evaluation of potential for and initial design of nature-based design at Jackson Street School to hold back some water completed using MVP funds. Short term improvements
at the Barrett Street marsh beaver dam and downgradient stream completed by DPW.DPW continues to implement short-term improvements to the King Street Brook area of flooding including
cleaning out of the culverts and removing beaver dams and impediments to minimize flooding to residential areas on State Street and Church Street. An assessment and conceptual design
has been completed for the construction of a berm to improve flow through the culvert under the Northampton Bikeway but funding has not been determined. Additional evaluation of other
improvements may be necessary.
4
Evaluate feasibility and design options to install automated debris racks at the stone arch structure in the King Street Brook Drainage Area
Continue
SIP
Flooding, Hurricanes, Thunderstorms
Department of Public Works
3 years
HMGP funds
Medium
High
5
Make needed improvements to address flooding of Elm Street Brook and Williams Street Brook
Continue
SIP, NSP
Flooding, Hurricanes, Thunderstorms
Department of Public Works
4 years
HMGP funds
High
High
Status: Incremental steps have been completed, including an evaluation of potential nature-based solutions at Elm Street and elsewhere along the stream. Elm Street Brook flooding will
be incrementally addressed by a new strategy to build infiltration trenches and other structures on City right of way and properties to reduce flows in the watershed. Drainage improvements
in the Bridge Street and Williams Street Brook areas have shifted to assessment and repair/upgrade of the Day Avenue Brook drainage system in conjunction with improvements as part of
the Damon Road reconstruction project. Much work remains to be done to mitigate the flood problems in these two distinct watersheds.
6
Develop a more formalized beaver management strategy to build upon currentprocess
Continue. Solutions are unique to each site and it was determined that an overall checklist or management strategy will need to provide a unique framework for each site.
LPR, NSP
Flooding, Hurricanes, Thunderstorms
Conservation Commission, Planning and Sustainability, Planning and Sustainability
4 years
Department of Public Works, Planning and Sustainability
Low
Medium (previously high)
7
Public education outreach for floodplain related information
Ongoing
EAP
Flooding, Hurricanes, Thunderstorms.
Planning and Sustainability
Every year
Operating budget
Low
Medium
Status: The City distributes floodplain related information at the Forbes Library and does annual mailing outreach to repetitive loss areas of the floodplain and to banking and real
estate services.
8
Develop an outreach program to ensure that owners of private stormwater systems are maintainingculverts, floodwater storage areas and other stormwater management structures.
Continue
EAP
Flooding, Hurricanes, Thunderstorms
Department of Public Works
2 years
Department of Public Works / Volunteers
Low
Medium (previously low)
Status: The DPW and Office of Planning and Sustainability will continue to monitor the status of maintenance of private stormwater systems and reach out to homeowners’ associations and
other owners of private stormwater systems to educate about on-going operation and maintenance responsibilities.
9
Conduct on-going review of impacts of climate change on people, property, and critical facilities in Northampton
Ongoing.
LPR
All hazards
Planning and Sustainability
3 years
HMGP funds
Low
Medium
Status: Periodic assessments as part of Northampton Resilience strategy, MVP applications, FEMA hazard mitigation plans, primarily focused on downscaling regional climate data supplementing
by local information when needed. In addition the City’s planning for a community and resilience hub includes understanding impacts on frontline communities. Potential for a partnership
between the City, State, and other municipalities to build on the ongoing map modernization FEMA study of the watershed projecting floodplain limits in 1, 2, 10 year storms.
10
Complete recently initiated inventory and prioritization of culvert repairs throughout the City. Upgrade and repair undersized stormwater drainage systems as appropriate.
Revised and ongoing.
SIP
Flooding, Hurricanes, Thunderstorms
City Council, Mayor’s Office, Department of Public Works, Department of Planning and Sustainability
5-20 years
Department of Public Works, Planning and Sustainability, HMGP
Very high
Medium
Status: This strategy was previously more broadly focused:“Upgrade and repair undersized stormwater drainage system near downtown Northampton,” and is revised this year to directly address
one part of t stormwater system – culverts. Upgrades and repairs of stormwater systems and culverts are ongoing based on specific needs, condition assessments and in coordination with
the schedule for roadway reconstruction. The 2012 Stormwater and Flood Control System Assessment and Utility Plan provides guidance for upgrades and sizing of the stormwater system.
In 2019, the City initiated a six year design project to redesign Main Street and improve green infrastructure to retain water longer, and added rain gardens to Pulaski Park to catch
some Main Street stormwater. Additionally, the 2018 Technical Memorandum-Infrastructure Resilience Strategy Recommendations for the Northampton Climate and Resiliency Plan provides guidance
on the specific design storm to use for determining stormwater infrastructure sizing. In 2019,Planning and Sustainability’s Design with Nature project assessed opportunities for nature-based
solutions to hold stormwater before it reaches stormwater systems and causes flooding.
11
Investigate opportunities for incentivizing utility companies for undergrounding utilities. Conduct background research of similar approaches in other communities.
Ongoing.
LPR
All hazards
Planning and Sustainability, PVPC
3 years
MVP, HMGP funds
Medium
Medium
12
Work with local building official andHampshire county emergency response providers to identify an earthquake-resilientregional shelter to comply with latest version of the building code.
Ongoing, revised
LPR
Earthquake
Building Inspector, EMD, WRSHAC
2 years
FEMA, WRSHAC, Hampshire County Emergency Shelter
Low
Low
13
Educate homeowners on how to prepare for a tornado or hurricanes.
Ongoing
EAP
Tornadoes, hurricanes
Emergency Management Director, Fire Department
2 years
Western Region Homeland Security Advisory Council, Capital Budget
Low
Low
Status: The City's Emergency Management Coordinator is active in the Western Region Homeland Security Advisory Council, which regularly conducts public outreach programs for preparedness.
These efforts will continue moving forward.
14
Achieve FEMA Accreditation of flood control system. Borings and full analysis of flood control levees underway (funded by MVP grant and stormwater utility)
New strategy, related to strategy #1 above.
SIP, LPR
Flooding, Hurricanes, Thunderstorms
City Council, Mayor’s Office, Department of Public Works, Planning and Sustainability
2 years, based on FEMA mapping modernization project for the Middle Connecticut watershed
MVP, HMGP, CIP, Stormwater Utility
< $750,000 - $2M
High
15
Upgrades to the Hockanum Pumping Station including an evaluation study to inform engineering design and construction for three phases of upgrades. Phase 1 includes major electrical upgrades,
fuel storage tank replacement, and sewer line replacement.
New strategy, related to strategy #1 above.
SIP
Flood
Department of Public Works
10 years
Department of Public Works, MVP, EEA Dam and Seawall Repair Grant Program
Approx. $6M
High
16
Complete the toe drain inspections that werestarted in 2015, install new access manholes, and spot repair collapsed segmentsof toe drain, as needed.
New strategy, related to strategy #1 above.
SIP
Flood
Department of Public Works
2 years
Department of Public Works, EEA Dam and Seawall Repair Grant Program
$680,000
High
17
Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) upgrades in accordance with the 2016 Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan (CWMP)
New strategy
SIP
Flood, Hurricane/Tropical Storm/ Severe Wind
Department of Public Works
20 years
Department of Public Works, Clean Water State Revolving Funds (CWSRF)
FY18, $900,000
FY21-22 $10M
High
18
Rehabilitate the Francis P. Ryan Reservoir Dam and the West Whately Reservoir Dam to meet Office of Dam Safety requirements
New strategy
SIP
Flood, Dam/ Levee Failure
Department of Public Works
5 years
Department of Public Works, EEA Dam and Seawall Repair Grant Program
Approx. $6M
High
19
New: Develop Community & Resilience Hub as a downtown physical facility with a coordinated program for frontline communities and all residents who face chronic and acute stress due to
disasters, pandemics, climate change, and other social and economic challenges.
New strategy
SIP
Pandemic, all hazards
Planning and Sustainability
5 years
HMGP, MVP, other state grants
High
High
20
Restore Rocky Hill Greenway-Pine Grove Golf Course: Restore former golf course to a natural system, removing catch basins, reservoirs, concrete blocks and other fill, and grass cover,
and restoring wetlands, floodplain, natural riparian channel, and floodplain.
New strategy. First $300,000 phase (catch basins, grass cover, start of natural forest) completed in 2020 with MVP funds.
NSP, SIP
Flood
Planning and Sustainability
5 years
HMGP, MVP, other state grants
$1.5M
High
21
Replace Ice Pond outlet structure. Combination of natural systems enhancement and reconstruction of outlet structure to capture stormwater that is threatening and has previouslydamaged
Rocky Hill Road/Route 66.
New strategy. Design phase, necessary easement, and FEMA grant application are complete as of June, 2020.
NSP, SIP
Flood
Planning and Sustainability
3 years
MVP for design, HMGP
$350,000
High
22
Purchase at risk properties in floodplain. Purchase and remove structures from floodplain. Purchase other flood prone properties for permanently protected open space preservation.
New strategy, already in progress. For example, the City, through Planning and Sustainability, purchased Pine Grove Golf Course (2020), and donated land to Conte Fish and Wildlife Refuge
(2020),
LPR, NSP
Flood
Planning and Sustainability
10 years
HMGP, LAND, FLWCF
$1 M
High
23
Public education to minimize the impact of invasive species. Continue growing an existing volunteer program to mechanically manage invasive plant populations.
New strategy
EAP
Invasive Species
Planning and Sustainability, Conservation Commission, DPW
2 years
Staff time, CPA
Low
Low
24
Conduct annual forest surveys on conservation lands to identify new invasive infestations and initiate rapid response efforts to control those infestations before they become established
populations
New
NSP
Invasive Species
Planning and Sustainability, Conservation Commission, DPW
5 years
Staff Time, MVP, DCR
Low-Medium
Medium
25
Public education campaigns to minimize the impact of extreme temperature events
(1) promote utility and state-funded residential insulation and air sealing incentive programs
(2) promote increased use of high-efficiency air source heat pumps for residential heating and cooling, particularly to populations sensitive to extreme temperatures.
New
EAP
Extreme temps
Central Services / Energy & Sustainability Commission
Annually, bienniallyor trienniallyas funding and staff time allows
Massachusetts Clean Energy Center, operating budget (staff time), utility partnership(s), resident volunteers
Low
Low
26
Increase shade trees for cooling. Over 1,000 trees planted within the last 5 years
New
NSP
Extreme temps
DPW
Short and long term
DPW Budget, significant tree mitigation fund, volunteers.
Medium
Medium
27
Review city and regional emergency response plans to better prepare for pandemics, recognizing how design of place for social distancing leading up to any event can impact risk levels
for vulnerable populations during a pandemic. Also, review and update HMP through a new lens based on our experience with COVID-19.
New
LPR
All hazards, pandemic
Emergency Management, Planning and Sustainability, Board of Health
2 years
HMGP, FEMA
Low
High
Notes:“All Hazards” indicates all hazards profiled in this plan.
Acronyms and Abbreviations:
COACouncil on Aging
DPW Department of Public Works
DLTADistrict Local Technical Assistance
FEMAFederal Emergency Management Agency
FPA Floodplain Administrator
HMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance
N/A Not applicable
NFIP National Flood Insurance Program
MEMA Massachusetts Office of Emergency Management
MVPMunicipal Vulnerability Preparedness Program
Timeline:
Short 1 to 5 years
Long 5 years or greater
OG On-going program
DOF Depending on funding
Costs:
Where actual project costs have been reasonably estimated:
Low < $50,000
Med $50,000 to $250,000
High > $250,000
Where actual costs cannot reasonably be established at this time:
Low Possible to fund under existing budget. Project is part of, or can be part of an existing on-going program.
Med Could budget for under existing work plan, but would require a reapportionment of the budget or a budget amendment, or the cost of the project would have to be spread over multiple
years.
High Would require an increase in revenue via an alternative source (i.e., bonds, grants, fee increases) to implement. Existing funding levels are not adequate to cover the costs of
the proposed project.
Mitigation Category:
Local Plans and Regulations (LPR) – These actions include government authorities, policies, or codes that influence the way land and buildings are being developed and built.
Structure and Infrastructure Project (SIP) - These actions involve modifying existing structures and infrastructure to protect them from a hazard or remove them from a hazard area. This
action could apply to public or private structures as well as critical facilities and infrastructure. This type of action also involves projects to construct manmade structures to reduce
the impact of hazards.
Natural Systems Protection (NSP) – These actions minimize damage and losses and also preserve or restore the functions of natural systems.
Education and Awareness Programs (EAP) – These actions inform and educate citizens, elected officials, and property owners about hazards and potential ways to mitigate them. These actions
may also include participation in national programs, such as StormReady and Firewise Communities
6: Plan review, evaluation, implementation, and adoption
Plan Adoption
Upon completion of the draft Hazard Mitigation Plan, a public meeting was held on June 22th to receive comments. The Hazard Mitigation Plan was then submitted to the Massachusetts Emergency
Management Agency (MEMA) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency for their review. Upon receiving conditional approval of the plan by FEMA, the plan was presented to the Northampton
City Council and adopted.
Plan Implementation
The implementation of this plan began upon its formal adoption by the City Council and approval by MEMA and FEMA. Those City departments and boards responsible for ensuring the development
of policies, ordinance revisions, and programs as described in Sections 5 and 6 of this plan will be notified of their responsibilities immediately following approval. The Hazard Mitigation
Committee will oversee the implementation of the plan.
Incorporation with Other Planning Documents
Existing plans, studies, reports and municipal documents were incorporated throughout the planning process. This included a review and incorporation of significant information from the
following key documents:
Northampton Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan(particularly the Critical Infrastructure Section) – the Critical Infrastructure section was used to identify those infrastructure
components in Northampton that have been identified as crucial to the function of the Northampton; also, this resource was used to identify special needs populations as well as potential
emergency shortcomings.
Northampton Open Space, Recreation, and Multiuse Trail Plan 2018-2025– this Plan was used to identify the natural context within which the Northampton mitigation planning would take
place. This proved useful insofar as it identified water bodies, rivers, streams, infrastructure components (i.e. water and sewer, or the lack thereof), as well as population trends.
This was incorporated to ensure that the City’s mitigation efforts would be sensitive to the surrounding environment. During the OSRP update, Northampton incorporated the work of the
Hazard Mitigation Plan update in 2015 to incorporate identified hazard areas into open space and recreation planning. This could either take the form of acquiring parcels of land that
are currently un-developed, but situated within an identified hazard area, as permanent open space, thereby minimizing the likelihood that critical infrastructure components will be
constructed in an area prone to damage from natural hazards.
Northampton Zoning Ordinance - The City’s Zoning was used to gather identify those actions that the City is already taking that are reducing the potential impacts of a natural hazard
(i.e. floodplain regulations) to avoid duplicating existing successful efforts.
Massachusetts’ State Hazard Mitigation and Climate Adaptation Plan - This plan was used to insure that the City’s HMP was consistent with the State’s Plan.
The Flood and Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan for the City of Northampton was used to gather information on those actions and activities that the City is already undertaking in regards
to pre-disaster mitigation for the City’s greatest threat, flooding. This included incorporating statistical research, existing mitigation measures, and project rankings for Northampton.
The Sustainable Northampton Comprehensive Plan – actions from the Hazard Mitigation Plan that promote a sustainable Northampton are incorporated.
Northampton Climate Resilience and Regeneration Plan (2019) Draft will be incorporated into the Sustainable Northampton Comprehensive Plan in the next update. The document identifies
the dedication of city-wide systems and policies to mitigate climate change and build resilience and regenerative programming for the future.
Summary of Findings, City of Northampton Community Resilience Building Workshop, updated March 2020 – priorities and actions identified per hazard confirming community commitment through
the MVP program’s Community Resilience Building workshop to promote building resilient systems and processes
Discovery Report for the Middle Connecticut Watershed, HUC-8 01080201, FEMA product prioritizes areas and infrastructure of concern within the watershed. A product of this planning process
will include the remapping of selected major floodplains.
Guided by the resources identified above and other best practices, the Committee made a number of changes to this Hazard Mitigation Plan Update. The most notable include:
Adding Extreme Temperatures, Invasive Species, and Pandemic to the list of profiled Hazards of Concern
Expanding the description of the sectors assessed for the vulnerability analysis
Adding a section on Climate Change and Natural Hazards to the beginning of the Risk Assessment Chapter, and redistributing the discussion of climate change considerations formerly included
at the end of the Risk Assessment Chapter into each hazard profile.
Reorganizing the Critical Facilities list to more clearly delineate the buildings and infrastructure which have been determined to be critical to providing emergency services to the
planning area. Features of these facilities, such as whether or not they are equipped with back-up power, are included as notes or elsewhere in the plan.
Reprioritized all of the new and existing mitigation strategies to reflect current financial, legal, political, and post-disaster conditions.
The Hazard Mitigation Plan will also be incorporated into updates of the following plans:
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
Open Space, Recreation, and Multiuse Trail Plan updates
Flood and Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan for the City of Northampton
Sustainable Northampton Comprehensive Plan
Future updates of the City of Northampton Community Resilience Building Workshop Summary of Findings
Northampton Climate Resilience and Regeneration Plan
During regular update meetings for the Hazard Mitigation Plan, the Hazard Mitigation Committee will review whether any of these plans are in the process of being updated. If so, the
Hazard Mitigation Committee will provide copies of the Hazard Mitigation Plan to relevant City staff and brief them on the content of the Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Hazard Mitigation
Committee will also review current City programs and policies to ensure that they are consistent with the mitigation strategies described in this plan.
Plan Monitoring and Evaluation
The measure of success of the Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan will be the number of identified mitigation strategies implemented. In order for the City to become more disaster resilient,
there must be a coordinated effort between elected officials, appointed bodies, City employees, regional and state agencies involved in natural hazard mitigation, and the general public.
The Northampton Hazard Mitigation Committee will meet on an annual basis or as needed (i.e., following a natural disaster) to monitor the progress of implementation, evaluate the success
or failure of implemented recommendations, and brainstorm for strategies to remove obstacles to implementation. As the Hazard Mitigation Plan is monitored and evaluated, the Committee
will add information about hazard events / disasters that have occurred in the prior planning year in order to avoid missing them in the next update.
Following these discussions, it is anticipated that the committee may decide to reassign the roles and responsibilities for implementing mitigation strategies to different City departments
and/or revise the estimated costs, timelines for implementation, or priority of one or more proposed action. The committee will review and update the plan every year, beginning in the
spring of 2021. The meetings of the committee will be organized and facilitated by Planning and Sustainability. Public participation will be a critical component of the Hazard Mitigation
Plan maintenance process. The Hazard Mitigation Committee will hold all meetings in accordance with Massachusetts open meeting laws. Hard copies of the plan will be available in City
Hall and at Forbes Library. Any proposed amendments resulting from annual Committee meetings will be advertised and posted on the city's website and the Planning and Sustainability
listserve newsletter. Any changes will be preceded by a public hearing and solicitation of public comments.
7: Appendices
Appendix A – Documentation of the Planning Process
Invitation to Participate in the Planning Process
Committee Meeting Agendas and Records of Attendance
Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Steering Committee
Meeting #1 Agenda
Virtual Zoom Meeting
April 2, 2020, 9:00 a.m.
Introductions and Roll Call
Overview of Hazard Mitigation Planning Process (see HMP Overview.doc)
What is Hazard Mitigation Planning
Planning process and requirements
Items to be reviewed/ updated from current HMP
Value of all property in city
Recent and planned development projects
History of natural hazards in last 5 years
Hazard identification map (including culverts)
Critical facilities inventory and map
Hazard risk assessments
Status of previously identified mitigation strategies
New mitigation strategies
Build on the lessons learned from recent planning
MVP planning grant
MVP Northampton Designs with Nature action grant
Northampton Climate Resiliency and Regeneration Plan
Our tasks Today:
Select hazards to include in the plan (see hazards matrix handout)
Confirm/Update Planning Goal: To minimize the loss of life, damage to property, and the disruption of governmental services and general business activities due to the following hazards:
flooding, severe snowstorms/ice storms, severe thunderstorms, hurricanes, tornadoes, wildfires/brushfires, earthquakes, dam failures, and drought.
Agree on future meeting schedule (see below)
Develop outreach strategy (refer to HMP Overview.doc)
Questions?
Next Steps
Review Draft Press Release (Emily to distribute), submit to local media
Complete hazard events worksheet (Emily to distribute)
Next committee meeting agenda:
Review of Hazards/Critical Facilities
Identify Unique Local Hazards (past and potential) on Base Map
Identify Local Critical Facilities
2020 City of Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan Update (FEMA)
Committee Meeting Sign-In Sheet
Meeting Date: April 2, 2020
Steering Committee Core Member
Position
Representing
Present
David Veleta, PE
City Engineer
Public Works
y
Doug McDonald
Stormwater
Public Works
y
Jon Davine
Fire Chief
Emergency Management
n
Jody Kasper
Police Chief
Police
y
David Pomerantz
Director
Central Services
y
Sarah LaValley
Environmental Planner
Planning and Sustainability
y
Kelly Schuetze
Director
Dispatch
y
Attending and Consulting as needed
Specialty Member
Position
Representing
Wayne Feiden, FAICP
Planning Director
Planning and Sustainability
y
Chris Mason
Energy & Sustainability Officer
Central Services
y
Donna LaScalia
Director
Public Works
n
Andrew Pelis
Deputy Fire Chief
Fire, Emergency Management
y
Merridith O’Leary
Director
Public Health
n
PVPC staff
Lead Staffer
Title
Notes
Emily Slotnick
Senior Planner
Project manager
y
Ken Comia
Land Use Planner
y
Jake Dolinger
GIS
n
Members of the Public
None
Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Steering Committee
Meeting #2 Agenda
Virtual Zoom Meeting
April 28, 2020, 7:30 p.m.
Introductions and Roll Call
All participants to type names into Zoom chat feature to indicate attendance
Our tasks Today:
Review Local Critical Facilities
Identify locations of unique local hazards (past and potential)
Request updated list of problem culverts
Identify/Update Potential New Development Sites
Questions?
Next Steps
Complete capabilities assessment worksheet (Emily to distribute)
Next committee meeting agenda:
Review capabilities assessment
Review existing mitigation strategies and “integration actions”
Review other recommended mitigation measures from 2015 plan
Upcoming schedule
CM #3: Thursday May 21, 9:00 – 11:00 am
CM #4: Thursday June 4, 9:00 – 11:00 am
Complete draft HMP update the week of June 15th
PM #2 and CM #5: Monday, June 22, 6:30-8:30 pm
Present draft plan at PM#2
Send draft plan to City Council for reading at their June 18th or July 9th meeting
Submission to MEMA for review – First week of July
Current plan expires August, 2020
Attendees
Committee Members
David Pomerantz
Chris Mason
Emily Slotnick
Kelly Schuetze
Wayne Feiden
Sarah LaValley
David Veleta
Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Steering Committee
Meeting #3 Agenda
Virtual Zoom Meeting
May 22, 2020, 9:00 a.m.
Introductions and Roll Call
All participants to type names into Zoom chat feature to indicate attendance
Our tasks Today:
Review capabilities assessment
Review existing mitigation strategies and “integration actions”
Review other recommended mitigation measures from 2015 plan, as time allows
Questions?
Next Steps
Complete mitigation strategy worksheet (Emily to distribute)
Next committee meeting agenda:
Review proposed mitigation strategy
Prepare for Public Meeting #2
Plan Review, Evaluation, Implementation, and Adoption, if time allows
Upcoming schedule
CM #4: Thursday June 4, 9:00 – 11:00 am
Complete draft HMP update the week of June 15th
PM #2 and CM #5: Monday, June 22, 6:30-8:30 pm
Present draft plan at PM#2
Send draft plan to City Council for reading at their June 18th or July 9th meeting
Submission to MEMA for review – First week of July
Current plan expires August, 2020
Attendees
Committee Members
Wayne Feiden
Sarah LaValley
Kelly Schuetze
David Veleta
Doug McDonald
Chris Mason
David Pomerantz
PVPC
Emily Slotnick
Kenneth Comia
Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Steering Committee
Meeting #4 Agenda
Virtual Zoom Meeting
June 4, 2020, 9:00 a.m.
Introductions and Roll Call
All participants to type names into Zoom chat feature to indicate attendance
Review Completed, Deleted, and Proposed Mitigation Strategies
Costs
Prioritization
Responsible entities
Funding sources
Prepare for Public Meeting #2
Plan Review, Evaluation, Implementation, and Adoption
Next Steps:Complete draft HMP update the week of June 15th
Next meeting date: PM #2 and CM #5: Monday, June 22, 6:30-8:30 pm
Present draft plan at PM#2
Send draft plan to City Council for reading at their June 18th or July 9th meeting
Attendance
Committee Members
Andrew Pelis
David Pomerantz
Wayne Feiden
Sarah LaValley
Chris Mason
Doug McDonald
Josh Shanley
David Veleta
PVPC
Emily Slotnick
Northampton Hazard Mitigation Committee
Meeting Agenda
Zoom Meeting
June 22, 2020, 7:30 p.m. – 8:30 p.m.
Review of revisions required based on public input
Next Steps
Submission to MEMA for review – First week of July
Send draft plan to City Council for reading at their August meeting
Current plan expires August, 2020
Attendance
Committee Members
Andrew Pelis
David Pomerantz
Wayne Feiden
Sarah LaValley
Chris Mason
Doug McDonald
Josh Shanley
David Veleta
PVPC
Kenneth Comia
Public Meeting Agendas, Records of Attendance, Press Releases, and Presentations
Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
Public Meeting #1
Virtual Zoom Meeting
April 28, 2020, 6:30 p.m.
Agenda
Welcome and introductions
Overview of hazard mitigation planning process
Hazard identification and risk assessment
Types of hazards affecting Northampton
Previous occurrences, extent, location, impact, future probability, and vulnerability of each hazard
Next steps
Attendees
Committee Members
David Pomerantz
Chris Mason
Emily Slotnick
Kelly Schuetze
Wayne Feiden
Sarah LaValley
David Veleta
Members of the Public
Alex Jarrett, Ward 5 City Councilor
Sarah Howard
Molly Moss, Forbes Library
Linda Danube
Jenn Guetti Slocum, Head Start
Alisa Klein, Grow Food Northampton
Sharon Moulton
Jamie Kaplan
Debin Bruce
Rowan Cignoni
Bruce Stedman, Conway School of Landscape Design
Jonathan Danube
George Kohout, Planning Board
Ed Skroski
Marianna Zak
MEDIA RELEASE / NOTICE
CONTACT: Emily Slotnick, PVPC Senior Planner, (413) 285-1188or eslotnick@pvpc.org
Sarah I. LaValley, Conservation, Preservation and Land Use Planner, Northampton Office of Planning and Sustainability, 413-587-1263 or slavalley@northamptonma.gov
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 3, 2020
City of Northampton to Hold Public Engagement Event for itsHazard Mitigation Plan Update
Northampton residents, businesses, and surrounding community representatives are invited to learn about the City of Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) Update and provide comments
at a Zoom meeting on April 28 from 6:30-7:30 pm. Individuals can connect to the meetingusing the Zoom desktop client, Zoom mobile app, landline, or cell phone. The meeting will include
an overview of thehazard mitigation planning process and a discussion of existing mitigation initiativesaddressing natural hazards in Northampton. Members of the HMP steering committee,
municipal officials and PVPC staff will be available to answer questions and receive input on the impacts of natural hazards on the City.All members of the public, representatives from
surrounding communities and other interested parties are welcome to attend the event.
https://tinyurl.com/HampHMP
Meeting ID: 306 528 007; Password: 027571 or dial in at +1-301-715-8592
This planning effort is being undertaken to help Northampton assess the risks faced from natural hazards, identify action steps that can be taken to prevent injury, loss of life, and
damage to property, and prioritize funding for mitigation efforts. A mitigation action is any action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property from hazards.Past
Hazard Mitigation Plans have made the City eligible for grant-funded construction projects (e.g., bank stabilization along Roberts Meadow Brook, flood control measures along River Road,
and elevating a house on Island Road) and advanced regulatory reform (e.g., revising the City's floodplain regulations).
To facilitate the HMP update process, the City has established a steering committee to update its HMP with assistance from the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission and funding from the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA). All steering committee working meetings will be posted on the City’s website and
are open to the public. Individuals interested in the HMP update process who are unable to attend a meeting can submit questions and comments to the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission.
For more information, please contact PVPC's Emily Slotnick at eslotnick@pvpc.org or (413) 285-1188.
Slides from Public Outreach Presentation on April 28, 2020
Northampton Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
Public Meeting #2
Virtual Zoom Meeting
June 22, 2020, 6:30 p.m.
Agenda
Welcome and introductions
Presentation of Draft Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
Review of Mitigation Strategy
Next Steps
Attendance
Fred Zimnoch, Ward3
David Veleta, DPW
Andrew Peli, Northampton Fire
Wayne Feiden, Planning & Sustainability
Sarah LaValley, Planning & Sustainability
Louis Hasbrouck, Northampton Building Department
George Kohout, Planning Board
Doug McDonald, DPW
David Veleta, DPW
Catherine Ratte PVPC
Ken Comia PVPC
Media and Press Release
Slides from Public Outreach Presentation on July 22, 2020
Location of Draft Hazard Mitigation Plan on Website of Pioneer Valley Planning Commission
http://www.pvpc.org/plans/city-northampton-hazard-mitigation-plan
Appendix B – List of Acronyms
CCRPNorthampton Climate Resilience and Regeneration Plan
CDCCenter for Disease Control
CEMCommunity Emergency Management
CISFEMA Community Information System
COVID-19Coronavirus Disease
CRBCommunity Resilience Building
CRSCommunity Rating System – Page 117
DCRDepartment of Conservation and Recreation – Page 7
DPWNorthampton Department of Public Works – Page 13
EOCEmergency Operations Center
EOPEmergency Operations Plan
FEMAFederal Emergency Management Agency
FFRFarms, Forest and Rivers Overlay District
FIRMFlood Insurance Rate Maps
FMAFlood Mitigation Assistance Program
FRTAFranklin Regional Transit Authority
HMGPHazard Mitigation Grant Program
LEPLimited English Proficiency
LIDLow Impact Development
MassDEPMassachusetts Department of Environmental Protection – Page 13
MassDOTMassachusetts Department of Transportation – Page 7
MassGISMassachusetts Bureau of Geographic Information
MAVENMassachusetts Viral Epidemiological Network
MEMAMassachusetts Emergency Management Agency
MVPMunicipal Vulnerability Preparedness
NAACCNorth Atlantic Aquatic Connectivity
NE CASCNortheast Climate Adaptation Science Center
NFIPNational Flood Insurance Program
NOAANational Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration
OSRDOpen Space Residential Development
PDMPre-Disaster Mitigation Program
PVPCPioneer Valley Planning Commission
PVTAPioneer Valley Transit Authority
RiskMAPFEMA Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning
SFHASpecial Flood Hazard Area
SHMCAPState Hazard Mitigation and Climate Adaptation Plan
SROSingle Room Occupancy
THIRAThreat Identification and Risk Assessment
WHOWorld Health Organization
WRHSACWestern Region Homeland Security Advisory Council
Appendix C – Past and Potential Hazards / Critical Facilities Map
Appendix D – Natural Hazard Profiling Methodology
In order to adeptly profile each of the hazards, a Hazard Identification and Analysis Matrix was prepared to organize the information that was gathered for this project.
The matrix is organized into the following sections: Type of Hazard, Location of Occurrence, Extent of Impacts, Previous Occurrences, Probability of Future Occurrence, and Hazard Index.
The Hazard Index was completed to rank the hazards according to the frequency of occurrence and the amount of potential damage likely to occur. The Hazard Index forms the basis for
concentrating the future mitigation efforts outlined in this plan. A description of each of the matrix categories is provided below. The completed Matrix is shown as Table 2. Hazard
Identification and Analysis for Northampton(Section 3, page 20).
Location of Occurrence
The classifications are based on the area of the City of Northampton that would potentially be affected by the hazard. The following scale was used:
Table D.1: Location of Occurrence, Percentage of Town Impacted of Given Natural Hazard
Location of Occurrence
Percentage of Town Impacted
Large
More than 50% of the town affected
Medium
10 to 50% of the town affected
Small
Less than 10% of the town affected
Extent of Impacts
The extent of direct impacts an affected area could potentially suffer were classified according to the following scale:
Table D.2: Extent of Impacts, Magnitude of Multiple Impacts of Given Natural Hazard
Extent of Impacts
Magnitude of Multiple Impacts
Catastrophic
Multiple deaths and injuries possible. More than 50% of property in affected area damaged or destroyed. Complete shutdown of facilities for 30 days or more.
Critical
Multiple injuries possible. More than 25% of property in affected area damaged or destroyed. Complete shutdown of facilities for more than 1 week.
Limited
Minor injuries only. More than 10% of property in affected area damaged or destroyed. Complete shutdown of facilities for more than 1 day.
Minor
Very few injuries, if any. Only minor property damage and minimal disruption on quality of life. Temporary shutdown of facilities.
Previous Occurrences
Whether or not previous hazard events had occurred is also included, with detailed descriptions of specific previous occurrences within the hazard identification and vulnerability assessments,
if necessary.
Probability of Future Occurrence
The likelihood of a future event for each natural hazard was classified according to the following scale:
Table D.3: Frequency of Occurrence and Annual Probability of Given Natural Hazard
Frequency of Occurrence
Probability of Future Event
Very High
70-100% probability in the next year
High
40-70% probability in the next year
Moderate
10-40% probability in the next year
Low
1-10% probability in the next year
Very Low
Less than 1% probability in the next year
Hazard Index
The hazard index ratings were determined after assessing the frequency, location and impact classifications for each hazard. The hazard index ratings are based on a scale of 1 (highest
risk) through 5 (lowest risk). The ranking is qualitative and is based, in part, on local knowledge of past experiences with each type of hazard. The size and impacts of a natural
hazard can be unpredictable however; many of the mitigation strategies currently in place and many of those proposed for implementation can be applied to the expected natural hazards,
regardless of their unpredictability.
The Hazard Ratings are labeled as follows:
1 – High Risk
2 – Medium-High Risk
3 – Medium Risk
4 – Medium Low Risk
5 – Low Risk
Appendix E – References
Advancing the Science of Climate Change, National Academies Press, 2010, https://www.nap.edu/read/12782/chapter/15#314
CDC, 2017. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/pdf/pan-flu-report-2017v2.pdf
CDC, 2019. https://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/history/distribution-map.html
CDC, 2020.https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/basics/past-pandemics.html
Comprehensive Emergency Management (CEM) Plan
Comprehensive Waster Management Plan, 2016.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), www.fema.gov/hazards/earthquakes/quake.shtm
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Integrating Manmade Hazards into Mitigation Planning, https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/4528
FEMA Community Information System, 2020.
FEMA Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning (RiskMAP), 2019. Discovery Process for Middle Connecticut Watershed
Hampshire County Shelter System Concept of Operations
Jamison DT, Gelband H, Horton S, et al., editors. Washington (DC): The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank; 2017 Nov 27
Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation and Climate Adaptation Plan (MA HMCAP), 2018
Massachusetts Natural Resources Collaborations, Invasive Plants Advisory Group, 2016. https://www.massnrc.org/mipag/speciesreviewed_category.htm
Massachusetts Fire Incidence Reporting System, County Profiles, 2017 Fire Data Analysis and Annual Fact Sheets, https://www.mass.gov/service-details/fire-data-and-statistics
Massachusetts State Climate Change Adaptation Report (MASHMCAP), 2018. www.mass.gov/eea/air-water-climate-change/climate-change/climate-change-adaptation-report.html
Massachusetts State Health Assessment, 2017. https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2017/11/03/Chapter%204.pdf?_ga=2.25220475.759884785.1589405533-1602091269.1500652517
Massachusetts State Wildlife Action Plan, 2015. www.mass.gov/service-details/state-wildlife-action-plan-swap
MassGIS, 2014 L3 Data
MassGIS BioMap2, 2012. maps.massgis.state.ma.us/dfg/biomap/pdf/town_core/Northampton.pdf
"Mental health and psychosocial considerations during the COVID-19 outbreak" (PDF). World Health Organization. 18 March 2020.; Godbole T (9 April 2020). "Domestic violence rises amid
coronavirus lockdowns in Asia". Deutsche Welle (DW). Retrieved 11 April 2020
National Drought Mitigation Center – http://drought.unl.edu
National Weather Service (NWS), Heat Index, 2018
National Weather Service (NWS), 2020, https://water.weather.gov/ahps2/river.php?wfo=box&wfoid=18682&riverid=205004&pt%5B%5D=145908&allpoints=145908%2C146659&data%5B%5D=impacts&data%5B%5D=stage&data%5B%5D=crests
National Weather Service (NWS), 2020,
https://water.weather.gov/ahps2/river.php?wfo=box&wfoid=18682&riverid=203796&pt%5B%5D=144445&allpoints=143763%2C141260%2C143709%2C141640%2C144423%2C150552%2C141250%2C144445%2C142863%2C142203%2C142784%2C142297%2C144501&data%5B%5D=crests
The Nature Conservancy, https://www.nature.org/en-us/about-us/where-we-work/united-states/ohio/stories-in-ohio/invasive-species-protecting-native-plants-and-animals/
NOAA, 2020. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/extremes/scec/records; https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/extremes/scec/records
NOAA, n.d., Climate Divisions of Massachusetts
NOAA, n.d., NOW Data
Northeast Snowfall Impact Scale (NESIS), 2018, http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/snow-and-ice/rsi/nesis
NOAA, Hail Size, n.d., http://www.spc.noaa.gov/misc/tables/hailsize.htm
Northampton Climate Resilience & Regeneration Plan
Northampton Code of Ordinances
Northampton Open Space, Recreation, and Multiuse Trail Plan 2018-2025
Northampton Subdivision Rules and Regulations
Northampton Zoning Ordinance
Northeast Climate Adaptation Science Center (NE CASC), 2018. necsc.umass.edu
Northeast States Emergency Consortium, www.nesec.org/hazards/earthquakes.cfm
NPDP, 2018. National Performance of Dam Program (NPDP), Dam Incident Notification (DIN) system, http://npdp.stanford.edu/dams_database
Pioneer Valley Planning Commission’s Climate Action and Clean Energy Plan, www.pvpc.org/plans/climate-action-and-clean-energy-plan
Pioneer Valley Regional Land Use Plan, www.pvpc.org/plans/valley-vision-4-land-use
resilient MA, 2018/UMass climate data. resilientma.org
Sapiens, 2020. https://www.sapiens.org/archaeology/covid-19-environment/
Science of the Total Environment, 2020. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969720323378
Sperry-Piltz Ice Accumulation (SPIA) Index , http://www.spiaindex.com/images/SPIAIndexDescription.png
Summary of Findings, City of Northampton Community Resilience Building Workshop
Sustainable Northampton Comprehensive Plan
USA.com, http://www.usa.com/hampshire-county-ma-natural-disasters-extremes.htm
USACE, Ice Jam Database, 2018
UCI, 2017. University of California Irvine. https://news.uci.edu/2017/03/01/concurrent-heat-waves-air-pollution-exacerbate-negative-health-effects-of-each/
US Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2375. “National Water Summary 1989 – Floods and Droughts: Massachusetts.” Prepared by S. William Wandle, Jr., US Geological Survey.
"Western Massachusetts escapes Hurricane Sandy's wrath, but impact elsewhere still being felt." http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/10/western_massachusetts_escapes.html. October
30, 2012. Accessed March 6, 2015.
World Health Organization, Climate Change and Human Health, Risks and Responses, 2003. http://www.who.int/globalchange/environment/en/chapter6.pdf
Appendix F – Technical Resources
1) Agencies Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA)508/820-2000Hazard Mitigation Section 617/626-1356Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)617/223-4175MA Regional Planning
Commissions:Berkshire Regional Planning Commission (BRPC)413/442-1521Cape Cod Commission (CCC)508/362-3828Central Massachusetts Regional Planning Commission (CMRPC)508/693-3453Franklin
Regional Council of Governments (FRCOG)413/774-3167Martha’s Vineyard Commission (MVC)508/693-3453Merrimack Valley Planning Commission (MVPC)978/374-0519Metropolitan Area Planning Council
(MAPC)617/451-2770Montachusett Regional Planning Commission (MRPC)978/345-7376Nantucket Planning and Economic Development Commission (NP&EDC)508/228-7236Northern Middlesex Council of
Governments (NMCOG)978/454-8021Old Colony Planning Council (OCPC)508/583-1833Pioneer Valley Planning Commission (PVPC)413/781-6045Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic Development
District (SRPEDD)508/823-1803MA Board of Building Regulations & Standards (BBRS)617/227-1754MA Coastal Zone Management (CZM)617/626-1200DCR Water Supply Protection617/626-1379DCR Waterways617/626-1371DCR
Office of Dam Safety508/792-7716DFW Riverways617/626-1540MA Dept. of Housing & Community Development617/573-1100Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute508/457-2180UMass-Amherst Cooperative
Extension413/545-4800National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)617/770-3000New England Disaster Recovery Information X-Change (NEDRIX – an association of privatecompanies & industries
involved in disaster recovery planning)781/485-0279MA Board of Library Commissioners617/725-1860MA Highway Dept, District 2413/582-0599MA Division of Marine Fisheries617/626-1520MA Division
of Capital & Asset Management (DCAM)617/727-4050University of Massachusetts/Amherst413/545-0111Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS)413/253-4350MA Historical Commission617/727-8470U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers978/318-8502Northeast States Emergency Consortium, Inc. (NESEC)781/224-9876National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: National Weather Service; Tauton, MA508/824-5116US
Department of the Interior: US Fish and Wildlife Service 413/253-8200US Geological Survey 508/490-50002) Mitigation Funding Resources404 Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)Massachusetts
Emergency Management Agency406 Public Assistance and Hazard MitigationMassachusetts Emergency Management AgencyCommunity Development Block Grant (CDBG)DHCD, also refer to RPCDam Safety
ProgramMA Division of Conservation and RecreationDisaster Preparedness Improvement Grant (DPIG)Massachusetts Emergency Management AgencyEmergency Generators Program by NESEC‡ Massachusetts
Emergency Management AgencyEmergency Watershed Protection (EWP) ProgramUSDA, Natural Resources ConservationService Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (FMAP)Massachusetts Emergency Management
AgencyFlood Plain Management Services (FPMS)US Army Corps of EngineersMitigation Assistance Planning (MAP)Massachusetts Emergency Management AgencyMutual Aid for Public WorksWestern
Massachusetts Regional Homeland Security Advisory CouncilMunicipal Vulnerability Preparedness ProgramMA Executive Office of Energy and Environmental AffairsNational Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) † Massachusetts Emergency Management AgencyPower of Prevention Grant by NESEC‡ Massachusetts Emergency Management AgencyRoadway Repair & Maintenance Program(s)Massachusetts Highway
DepartmentSection 14 Emergency Stream Bank Erosion & Shoreline ProtectionUS Army Corps of EngineersSection 103 Beach ErosionUS Army Corps of EngineersSection 205 Flood Damage ReductionUS
Army Corps of EngineersSection 208 Snagging and ClearingUS Army Corps of EngineersShoreline Protection ProgramMA Department of Conservation and RecreationVarious Forest and Lands Program(s)MA
Department of Environmental ProtectionWetlands Programs MA Department of Environmental Protection
‡NESEC – Northeast States Emergency Consortium, Inc. is a 501(c)(3), not-for-profit natural disaster, multi-hazard mitigation and emergency management organization located in Wakefield,
Massachusetts. Please, contact NESEC for more information.
† Note regarding National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) and Community Rating System (CRS): The National Flood Insurance Program has developed suggested floodplain management activities
for those communities who wish to more thoroughly manage or reduce the impact of flooding in their jurisdiction. Through use of a rating system (CRS rating), a community’s floodplain
management efforts can be evaluated for effectiveness. The rating, which indicates an above average floodplain management effort, is then factored into the premium cost for flood insurance
policies sold in the community. The higher the rating achieved in that community, the greater the reduction in flood insurance premium costs for local property owners. MEMA can provide
additional information regarding participation in the NFIP-CRS Program.
3) Internet Resources
Sponsor
Internet Address
Summary of Contents
Natural Hazards Research Center, U. of Colorado
http://www.colorado.edu/litbase/ha zards/
Searchable database of references and links to many disaster-related websites.
Atlantic Hurricane Tracking Data by Year
http://wxp.eas.purdue.edu/hurricane
Hurricane track maps for each year, 1886 – 1996
National Emergency Management Association
http://nemaweb.org
Association of state emergency management directors; list of mitigation projects.
NASA – Goddard Space Flight Center “Disaster Finder:
http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/ndrd/dis aster/
Searchable database of sites that encompass a wide range of natural disasters.
NASA Natural Disaster Reference Database
http://ltpwww.gsfc.nasa.gov/ndrd/main/html
Searchable database of worldwide natural disasters.
U.S. State & Local Gateway
http://www.statelocal.gov/
General information through the federal-state partnership.
National Weather Service
http://nws.noaa.gov/
Central page for National Weather Warnings, updated every 60 seconds.
USGS Real Time Hydrologic Data
http://h20.usgs.gov/public/realtime.html
Provisional hydrological data
Dartmouth Flood Observatory
http://www.dartmouth.edu/artsci/g eog/floods/
Observations of flooding situations.
FEMA, National Flood Insurance Program, Community Status Book
http://www.fema.gov/fema/csb.html
Searchable site for access of Community Status Books
Florida State University Atlantic Hurricane Site
http://www.met.fsu.edu/explores/tropical.html
Tracking and NWS warnings for Atlantic Hurricanes and other links
The Tornado Project Online
http://www.tornadoroject.com/
Information on tornadoes, including details of recent impacts.
National Severe Storms Laboratory
http://www.nssl.uoknor.edu/
Information about and tracking of severe storms.
Independent Insurance Agents of America IIAA Natural Disaster Risk Map
http://www.iiaa.iix.com/ndcmap.html
A multi-disaster risk map.
Earth Satellite Corporation
http://www.earthsat.com/
Flood risk maps searchable by state.
USDA Forest Service Web
http://www.fs.fed.us/land
Information on forest fires and land management.