MetroCOG_NaturalHazardMitigationPlan_2024.pdf

2 0 2 4 natural hazard mitigation plan update prepared on behalf of the municipalities of:

Bridgeport Easton Fairfield Monroe Stratford Trumbull

Draft for Public Review: May 29, 2024

Draft to DEMHS: June 5, 2024

Draft to FEMA: June 17, 2024

Public Comment Revisions: July 10, 2024

Approved Pending Adoption: August 2, 2024

Adopted: Month, ##, 2024

FEMA Approval:

Month, ##, 2024 ii

Hyperlinks are indicated with blue and underlined text.

CONTENTS

I Purpose & Regional Overview I.1 About the Plan & this Update I.2 Profile of the MetroCOG Region & Juris-dictions

I.2.i Regional Profile I.2.ii City of Bridgeport I.2.iii Town of Easton I.2.iv Town of Fairfield I.2.v Town of Monroe I.2.vi Town of Stratford I.2.vii Town of Trumbull

I.3 Development Trends I.3.iii City of Bridgeport I.3.iv Town of Easton I.3.v Town of Fairfield I.3.vi Town of Monroe I.3.vii Town Of Stratford I.3.viii Town of Trumbull

II Planning Process & Coordination II.1 Local Coordination II.2 Public Involvement II.3 Additional Stakeholder Outreach

III Hazard Identification & Risk Assesment

III.1 General Description of the MetroCOG Region

III.1.i Physical Setting III.1.ii Geology III.1.iii Human Activity III.1.iv Hydrology III.1.v Climate III.1.vi Climate Change III.1.vii Critical Infrastructure & Facilities 13 III.1.viii Vulnerable Communities III.1.ix Historic & Cultural Resources*.18

III.2 Methodology & Loss Estimates III.2.i Natural Hazards III.2.ii Loss Estimates III.2.iii Exposure Analysis III.2.iv Repetitive Loss Analysis Methodolo-gy

III.3 Hazard Profile: Hurricanes & Tropical Storms III.4 Hazard Profile: Flooding

III.4.i Coastal Flooding III.4.ii Inland Flooding

III.5 Hazard Profile: Sea Level Rise III.6 Summer Storms & Tornadoes III.7 Hazard Profile: Winter Storms III.8 Hazard Profile:

Dam Failure III.9 Hazard Profile: Extreme Heat III.10 Hazard Profile: Extreme Cold III.11 Hazard Profile: Drought III.12 Hazard Profile: Wildfires III.13 Hazard Profile: Earthquakes III.14 Risk Assessment Summary

IV Community Capabilities IV.1 Federal IV.2 State IV.3 Regional IV.4 City of Bridgeport IV.5 Town of Easton IV.6 Town of Fairfield IV.7 Town of Monroe IV.8 Town of Stratford IV.9 Town of Trumbull IV.10 Summary of Local Capabilities iii

V Mitigation V.1 Problem Statements

V.1.i City of Bridgeport V.1.ii Town of Easton V.1.iii Town of Fairfield V.1.iv Town of Monroe V.1.v Town of Stratford V.1.vi Town of Trumbull

V.2 Vision, Goals & Objectives V.3 Development of Mitigation Strategies .7 V.4 Review of Prior Hazard Mitigation Actions

V.4.i City of Bridgeport V.4.ii Town of Easton V.4.iii Town of Fairfield V.4.iv Town of Monroe V.4.v Town of Stratford V.4.vi Town of Trumbull

VI Implementation VI.1 Adoption & Responsibilities for Imple-mentation VI.2 Planning Mechanisms VI.3 Progress Monitoring, Public Participation & Plan Maintenance VI.4 Community Rating System Program ...4 VI.5 Mitigation Priorities VI.6 Top 5 Local Priorities

VI.6.i Bridgeport, Top 5 Priorities VI.6.ii Easton, Top 5 Priorities VI.6.iii Fairfield, Top 5 Priorities VI.6.iv Monroe, Top 5 Priorities VI.6.v Stratford, Top 5 Priorities VI.6.vi Trumbull, Top 5 Priorities

VI.7 Mitigation Action & Implementation Tables

VI.7.i Bridgeport VI.7.ii Easton VI.7.iii Fairfield VI.7.iv Monroe VI.7.v Stratford VI.7.vi Trumbull

VI.8 Technical & Financial Resources

Acknowedgements

Click below for:

Appendices A-G

HAZUS:

Earthquakes & Hurricane Storm Surge/Wnd Coastal Flooding Inland Flooding https://metrocog-website.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/Website+Content/NHMP/NHMP+2024+Update/NHMP+Appendix+A-G.pdf https://metrocog-website.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/Website+Content/NHMP/NHMP+2024+Update/HAZUS-EQ-HSS-HW.pdf https://metrocog-website.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/Website+Content/NHMP/NHMP+2024+Update/HAZUS-Coastal+Flooding.pdf https://metrocog-website.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/Website+Content/NHMP/NHMP+2024+Update/HAZUS-Inland+Flooding.pdf iv

LIST OF TABLES

I Purpose & Regional Overview I.2.i.1 Demographic Profile: Region I.2.ii.1 Demographic Profile: Bridgeport I.2.iii.1 Demographic Profile: Easton I.2.iv.1 Demographic Profile: Fairfield I.2.v.1 Demographic Profile: Monroe I.2.vi.1 Demographic Profile: Stratford I.2.vii.1 Demographic Profile: Trumbull I.3.1 Population Change, 2010-21 I.3.2 Annual Building Permits, 2017-22... 13

II Planning Process & Coordination II.1.1 Planning Team/Advisory Committee Members II.3.1 Adjacent Communities II.3.2 Regions II.3.3 State Agencies II.3.4 NGOs

III Hazard Identification & Risk Assesment

III.1.iv.1 Housatonic Basin III.1.iv.2 Saugatuck Basin III.1.iv.3 SW Eastern Regional Basin III.1.iv.4 SW Shorline Basin III.1.viii.1 Municipal Census Tracts, Socioeco-nomic Vulnerability Index Scores (SVI) III.1.viii.2 SVI Very High, Bridgeport Neigh-borhoods III.1.viii.3 Neighborhoods, SVI Relatively High III.1.viii.4 Neighborhoods, SVI Relatively Moderate III.1.viii.5 Resilient CT, Vulnerability Index by

COG

III.1.ix.1 Cultural & Historic Resources in Flood Zones

III.2.ii.1 Annualized Loss Estimates by Natural Hazard, in Thousands III.2.iii.1 Exposure Analysis, At-Risk Locations, City of Bridgeport III.2.iii.2 Exposure Analysis, At-Risk Locations, Town of Easton III.2.iii.3 Exposure Analysis, At-Risk Locations, Town of Fairfield III.2.iii.4 Exposure Analysis, At-Risk Locations, Town of Monroe III.2.iii.5 Exposure Analysis, At-Risk Locations, Town of Stratford III.2.iii.6 Exposure Analysis, At-Risk Locations, Town of Trumbull III.3.1 Saffir Simpson Hurricane Scale III.3.2 Hurricanes: Previous Occurences..32 III.3.3 Storm Surge, Count of Buildings by Damage Level III.3.4 Storm Surge, Count of Moderately Damaged Essential Facilities III.3.5 Storm Surge: Debris Generated, Shel-ter, Economic Loss III.3.6 Damage Description from Hazus-MH Hurricane Model Technical Manual III.3.7 Hurricane, Number of Buildings Dam-aged III.3.8 Hurricane, Count of Moderately Dam-aged Essential Facilities III.3.9 Hurricane, Debris Generated in Tons.38 III.3.10 Hurricane, Persons Seeking Short- Term Shelter III.3.11 Hurricane, Building-Related Economic Loss, in Thousands III.3.12 FEMA, Public Assistance for Hurri-canes, 2011-Present III.3.13 FEMA, Approved Individual As-sistance to Homeowners for Hurricanes, 2011-Present v

III.3.14 FEMA, Approved Individual Assis-tance to Renters for Hurricanes, 2011-Present III.3.15 Hurricanes: Estimated Annual Loss.41 III.4.1 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), Local Participation* III.4.2 Repetitive Loss (RL) & Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL) Properties III.4.3 Climate Change Vulnerability Index.46 III.4.i.1 Coastal Flooding, Previous Occurenc-es III.4.i.2 Coastal Flooding, Buildings by Dam-age Level III.4.i.3 Coastal Flooding, Count of Moder-ately Damaged Essential Facilities III.4.i.4 Coastal Flooding, Debris Generated, Tons III.4.i.5 Coastal Flooding, Persons Seeking Short-Term Shelter III.4.i.6 Coastal Flooding, Building-Related Economic Loss, in Thousands III.4.i.7 Coastal Flooding: Estimated Annual Loss III.4.ii.1 Inland Flooding, Previous Occurences III.4.ii.2 Inland Flooding, Buildings by Dam-age Level III.4.ii.3 Inland Flooding, Count of Moderate-ly Damaged Essential Facilities III.4.ii.4 Inland Flooding, Debris Generated, Tons III.4.ii.5 Inland Flooding, Persons Seeking Short-Term Shelter III.4.ii.6 Inland Flooding, Building-Related Economic Loss, in Thousands III.4.ii.7 FEMA, Public Assistance for Inland Flooding, 2007-Present III.4.ii.8 Individual Owner Assistance III.4.ii.9 Individual Renter Assistance

III.4.ii.10 Riverine Flooding: Estimated Annual Loss III.6.1 Summer Storms: Previous Occurences III.6.2 Previous Occurences, Tornadoes...72 III.6.3 Summer Storms, Estimated Annual Loss III.7.1 Winter Storms Previous Occurences.75 III.7.2 FEMA Assistance for Winter Storms.76 III.7.3 Winter Storms*,Estimated Annual Loss III.8.1 Dam Classifications III.8.2 Count of Dams III.8.3 Class B & C Dames III.9.2 Heat Wave,Estimated Annual Loss.85 III.9.1 All-Time Maximum Temperatures, Con-necticut III.10.1 Extreme Cold, Previous Occurences.87 III.10.2 Cold Wave,Estimated Annual Loss.87 III.11.1 Drought, Estimated Annual Loss III.12.1 Wildfire, Estimated Annual Loss III.13.1 Earthquakes, Previous Occurences.94 III.13.2 Earthquake Estimated Annual Loss.96 III.13.3 Earthquakes, Essential Facilities III.13.4 Earthquakes, Buildings Damaged.96 III.13.5 Earthquakes, Buildings-Related Eco-nomic Loss* III.13.6 Earthquakes, Debris Generated & Shelter Needs III.14.1 Summary Table

IV Community Capabilities IV.10.1 Floodplain Regulations & Substantial Improvements (SI) /Substantial Damage (SD)

V Mitigation V.3.1 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), Local Participation vi

V.4.i.1 2019 Mitigation Action Status, City of Bridgeport V.4.ii.1 2019 Mitigation Action Status, Town of Easton V.4.iii.1 2019 Mitigation Action Status, Town of Fairfield V.4.iv.1 2019 Mitigation Action Status, Town of Monroe V.4.v.1 2019 Mitigation Action Status, Town of Stratford V.4.vi.1 2019 Mitigation Action Status, Town of Trumbull

VI Implementation VI.2.1 Local POCD Status VI.3.1 Post Adoption Plan VI.7.i.1 Implementation Matrix, City of Bridge-port VI.7.ii.1 Implementation Matrix, Town of Easton VI.7.iii.1 Implementation Matrix, Town of Fair-field VI.7.iv.1 Implementation Matrix, Town of Monroe VI.7.v.1 Implementation Matrix, Town of Strat-ford VI.7.vi.1 Implementation Matrix, Town of Trumbull VI.8.1 Federal Funding for Implementation.53

Acknowedgements vii

I Purpose & Regional Overview Figure I.3.b PSEG site, Bridgeport Figure I.3.c Stratford Army Engine Plant

II Planning Process & Coordination Figure II.2.a Map, Bridgeport meeting Figure II.2.b Word cloud from survey

III Hazard Identification & Risk Assesment

Figure III.1.i.a Region Base map Figure III.1.ii.b Bedrock Geology Figure III.1.ii.c Surficial Geology Figure III.1.iv.a Watersheds Figure III.1.v.a Average temperature Figure III.1.v.b Maximum & minimum tempera-tures Figure III.1.v.c Precipitation Figure III.1.vii.a pump station,Fairfield Figure III.1.viii.a FEMA NRI Viewer Figure III.1.viii.b Social Vulnerability Index.17 Figure III.1.ix.a Freeman Houses drawing, Bridgeport Figure III.1.ix.b Southport Historic District.19 Figure III.3.a Beardsley Park, Isaias damage Figure III.3.b Historic hurricae activity Figure III.4.a Trumbull, Twin Brook culvert.42 Figure III.4.b Repetitive Loss census block groups Figure III.4.c Vulnerability Index Figure III.4.i.a FEMA flood zones Figure III.5.a Stratford, Bond's Dock Figure III.5.b SLR & storm surge Figure III.5.c SLR, region Figure III.8.a Stevenson Dam, Monroe Figure III.8.b Map of dams

Figure III.8.c Easton, reservoir Figure III.9.a NWS Heat Index Figure III.11.a CT climate zones

IV Community Capabilities Figure IV.3.a Metropolitan Transportation Plan Figure IV.3.b Ash Creek Estuary Plan Figure IV.3.c Rooster River Plan Figure IV.4.d Concept for Sliver by the River.23 Figure IV.5.e Conservation subdivision, Easton

POCD

Figure IV.10.h Open space priorities from

POCD

V Mitigation

VI Implementation

Acknowedgements

LIST OF FIGURES

viii

LIST OF REVISIONS

Made during public comment period ending June 28th, 2024

I Purpose & Regional Overview I.3 Development Trends: I.3.iii City of Bridge-port section, removed “New residential uses are not proposed for flood zones” (15)

II Planning Process & Coordination

II.2 Public Involvement: Documentation of 2nd series of public meetings (3-4), added stakeholders to NGO list (5).

III Hazard Identification & Risk Assesment

III.1 General Description of the MetroCOG Region: expanded “III.1.ix Historic & Cultural Resources” (18-20) to provide a summary of resources and potential vulnerabilities for each municipality.

V Mitigation

V.1 Problem Statements, “V.1.v Town of Strat-ford”, added the following: “Drainage-related flooding during intense precipitation is a con-cern townwide, and areas of emerging flood risk are located in Lordship. One of the typical areas of risk is lower Washington Parkway in the vicinity of West Hillside Avenue. Other ar-eas may emerge, including Third Avenue and Fifth Avenue, as well as individual streets and groups of streets not yet identified.” (4)

V.4 Review of Prior Hazard Mitigation Actions: revised V.4.iii, Town of Fairfield, text and update column table:

• Added “Fairfield is about to embark on a ma-jor townwide Flood, Erosion and Resilience plan (2024 Town of Fairfield Flood, Erosion and Resilience Plan) which will be used to inform future mitigation and adaptation strat-egies for the Town.” (23)

• #7 (added in italics): The study has been completed, but nothing has been implement-

ed. Fairfield tried to break up the project, but it would not be possible. It is estimated at 1 billion dollars. This will be explored in the upcoming 2024 Master Flood Erosion and Resilience Plan. (24)

• #8 (added): Profiles for four of the five town beaches have been developed and pre-liminarily reviewed. The town plans to add Penfield Beach once the FEMA NOV has been satisfied and secure approval for all five engineered beach profiles. (24)

• #15 (added in italics): DEEP Permitting has been acquired in 2024. This will be explored in the upcoming 2024 Master Flood Erosion and Resilience Plan. (24)

• #16 removed “Project completed” and added “A study was completed by CIRCA outlining a series of possible solutions for underpass flooding, this will be finalized in the upcoming 2024 Master Flood Erosion and Resilience Plan.” (24)

• #18 removed “Outreach conducted” and added “An expanded study for this section will be explored in the upcoming 2024 Master Flood Erosion and Resilience Plan.”

(25)

• 21 (added): “The 2024 Master Flood Erosion and Resilience Plan will determine if the road needs to be raised.” (25)

VI Implementation

VI.6 Top 5 Local Priorities: revised VI.6.v Stratford Top 5 Priorities to the following: “Pur-ix sue funding to mitigate existing/future risks to the South End, the adjacent commercial and industrial area, and Lordship. as identified in POCD based on findings/ feedback from Phase III of Resilient CT. Funds may be used to reconstruct drainage systems, install flood control systems and/or elevate/extend sea-walls as necessary.” (7)

VI.7 Mitigation Action & Implementation Tables

VI.7.i, Bridgeport

• Minor revisions to responsible departments, cost, and funding.

• #5 (added in italics): Support the creation and exploration of resiliency centers/hubs for each neighborhood in the city (10)

• #13 (added to action): “Seek funding to implement habitat restoration and nature based solutions/living shoreline in Ash Creek tidal estuary, examine feasibility of thin layer deposition to address erosion and ecosys-tem collapse at Sand Spit and Great Marsh Island.” (12)

• #55 (new action): “Examine feasibility of dredging and beach nourishment at Seaside Park to ensure resilience and sustaiability of the cultural and environmental resource.”

(19)

• #56 (new action): “Conduct focus groups to determine emergency preparedness for and notifying the City's unhoused population of natural hazard events.” (19)

• #57 (new action): “Review evacuation routes and update based on new development, daytime/nightime population needs, and/or changes to the street network.” (19)

VI.7.ii, Easton, new action: “Conduct a town-wide hydrologic analysis that addresses flood-ing, stormwater, and water conveyance needs to identify projects that can be implemented to reduce risks to infrastructure and people.

Based on this analysis, evaluate long-term mitigation strategies.” (22)

VI.7.iii, Fairfield

• Minor revisions to responsible departments, cost, and funding.

• #13: Revised Implementation Process “On hold, will be reviewed as part of 2024 Town of Fairfield Flood, Erosion and Resilience Plan Update. The initial conceptual drawings for flood protection indicate the plan would not have been impactful. CT DEEP coordination is needed for meaningful implementation. 25

• #52 (new action) “Conduct study of Ash Creek sedimentation to determine if sedi-mentation will enhance longevity, stability, and sustainability of the ecosystem.

Seek funding to implement habitat restoration and nature based solutions/living shoreline in Ash Creek tidal estuary, examine feasibili-ty of thin layer deposition to address erosion and ecosystem collapse at Sand Spit and Great Marsh Island.” (33)

• #53 (new action) “Continue to identify areas of erosion along Ash Creek that may require mitigation and secure funding for feasibility studies.” (33)

VI.7.v, Stratford

• #1 (revised, see VI.6.v, Priorities) “Pursue funding to mitigate existing/future risks to the South End, the adjacent commercial and industrial area, and Lordship. as identified in POCD based on findings/ feedback from Phase III of Resilient CT. Funds may be used to reconstruct drainage systems, install flood control systems and/or elevate/extend sea-walls as necessary.” (39)

• #41 (new action): Conduct a drainage study x of Washington Parkway in the vicinity of West Hillside Avenue to identify options for reducing road and property flooding and minimize disruptions to daily life of nearby residents. (48)

• #42 (new action): “Upgrade drainage systems as identified in the study of Washing-ton Parkway in the vicinity of West Hillside Avenue.” (48)

• #43 (new action): “Conduct drainage studies in other areas as needed, including other parts of Lordship..” (48).

I 1

I PURPOSE &

REGIONAL OVERVIEW

I.1 About the Plan & this Update The purposes of the update to the multijurisdic-tional Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan (NHMP) are to reduce the loss of life, personal injury and damage to property, infrastructure, and natural, cultural, and economic resources from a natural disaster to the municipalities that make up the Connecticut Metropolitan Council of Govern-ments: Bridgeport, Easton, Fairfield, Monroe, Stratford, and Trumbull. The Plan emphasizes actions that can be implemented now to reduce or prevent damage from a future natural disaster.

The assessments and evaluations are based on extensive data collection and outreach efforts to obtain information on the physical setting of the region, existing hazards, and the occurrence, frequency, duration, and strength of probable hazards.

AUTHORITY

The Plan is authorized under the federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA), also known as the 2000 Stafford Act amendments. The purpos-es of the DMA are to establish a national pro-gram for pre-disaster mitigation and streamline administration of disaster relief. The Act encour-ages the development of disaster preparedness and mitigation plans and the implementation of measures to reduce the effects of natural haz-ards. Under DMA, communities are required to develop and submit a Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan as a condition of eligibility for certain fund-ing opportunities offered by the Federal Emer-gency Management Agency (FEMA), including the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Commu-nities (BRIC) Program, Flood Mitigation Assis-tance Grant Program (FMA), and post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP).

BACKGROUND

This plan update builds on the 2014 and 2019 updates to the original 2006 NHMP for the former Greater Bridgeport Regional Planning Area, developed in cooperation with the City of Bridgeport and the Towns of Easton, Fairfield, Monroe, and Trumbull. The NHMP was adopted and approved by FEMA in January 2007. Sub-sequent to its adoption, the Plan was amended to include the NHMP for the Town of Stratford (Annex, 2008).

FEMA requires that all local and multi-jurisdic-tional (regional) plans be updated every five years to remain effective. The original NHMP for the Greater Bridgeport Region expired on Jan-uary 29, 2012. A NHMP Update was prepared by the Greater Bridgeport Regional Council (GBRC) and was approved by FEMA on July 22, 2014, with an expiration date of July 2019. The renamed GBRC, the Connecticut Metropolitan Council of Governments (MetroCOG) and con-sulting firm Milone & MacBroom, Inc., prepared the 2019 plan, which has an expiration date of August 8, 2024. The 2024 update is being led by MetroCOG, with assistance from consulting firm Resilient Land & Water.

ORGANIZATION

This NHMP is divided into six sections.

Chapter One describes the purpose of the plan, the MetroCOG Region and municipalities of the MetroCOG Region. Chapter Two summarizes the planning process. Chapter Three pro-vides an identification and assessment of risks.

A new Chapter Four reviews and assesses

I 2 each community’s capabilities. Chapter Five describes development of mitigation strategies and documents the progress on previous miti-gation strategies for the Region. Concluding the NHMP, Chapter Six presents current mitigation strategies for the Region, addresses how mitiga-tion actions will be implemented, and describes the process of maintaining the plan. The Plan’s appendices provide further details and data.

The NHMP addresses only natural hazards and disasters and does not directly address pandem-ics such as the COVID-19 pandemic, terrorism, sabotage, human induced emergencies (structure fires, hazardous material spills, contamination, and disease) or disaster response and recovery.

CHANGES TO PLANNING

PROCESS & NHMP DOCUMENT

The 2024 NHMP integrates FEMA’s April 2022 “Local Mitigation Planning Policy Guide” requirements, which became effective April 19, 2023. The policy guide detailed the following:

• Defines who to include in the planning pro-cess, including representatives from a broad range of sectors, community lifelines, the public and community-based organiza-tions that support underserved communities.

• Inclusion of the effects of climate change and other future conditions in the risk assessment.

• Recognizes the role of adopting and enforc-ing building codes and land use and devel-opment ordinances to improve mitigation capabilities.

• Facilitates stronger alignment with other FEMA mitigation programs such as the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), Community Rating System and flood risk mapping program.

• Emphasizes equity in the planning process.

In addition to integrating revised FEMA policies, numerous modifications were incorporated into the update of the NHMP. The following is a list of the key changes. Each is addressed in the appro-priate section of the document.

• Incorporates components from the State of Connecticut’s 2023 Natural Hazard Mitiga-tion Plan (NHMP).

• Summarizes the planning process and public outreach process conducted in the region, with details in Appendices C and D.

• Expands on the previous hazard identification and risk assessments. In addition to incor-porating potential impacts due to climate change, impacts from drought and extreme temperatures are also incorporated.

• Updates historical records of many hazards, including federally declared disasters be-tween 2018 and 2023.

• Updates the exposure analysis, which tabu-lates parcels, structures and other assets vul-nerable to the risks profiled in the plan. The current version of HAZUS-MH was utilized as part of this update.

Community Lifelines are the most funda-mental services in the community that, when stabilized, enable all other aspects of society to function. The integrated net-work of assets, services and capabilities that provide community lifeline services are used day to day to support recurring needs. Lifelines enable the continuous operation of critical government and busi-ness functions and are essential to human health and safety or economic security.

-National Response Framework, 4th Edition https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema_local-mitigation-planning-policy-guide_042022.pdf

I 3

• Updates data and utilizes new data sources:

including 2020 Census population and hous-ing data, 2017-2021 American Community Survey data, loss estimates, and resources for risk, climate, vulnerability, and equity.

• A Chapter was added to detail and assess existing federal, state, and local capabilities.

• Reassesses the goals, objectives, and activi-ties presented in the 2019 NHMP.

◊ Assesses current mitigation measures included in the 2019 NHMP to deter-mine which have been implemented and whether or not they have been effective in reducing vulnerabilities and risks. See Tables V.4.i.1 to V.4.vi.1.

◊ Identifies and evaluates potential mitiga-tion measures that could be implemented to reduce risks and vulnerability. Tables VI.7.i.1to VI.7.vi.1 list actions proposed for 2024-2029, including some actions carried forward and/or updated from the 2019 NHMP.

◊ Develops and prioritizes recommenda-tions for future mitigation actions, as well as response strategies to address hazard mitigation.

• Updates FEMA’s grant programs, as well as other potential funding sources.

• Updates the “Critical Facilities,” Appendix A.

In 2019, this data provided a starting point for municipalities to check and amend every 5 years. Critical facility information is often vital for developing mitigation actions and completing FEMA benefit-cost analysis.

• Updates the “Historic Resources” Appendix B with the State Historic Preservation Office’s recently released ConnCRIS. In 2019, this data provided a starting point for municipal-ities to understand where to focus resources on risk assessments and new historic resource surveys in accordance with new mitigation actions about historic resources.

I.2 Profile of the MetroCOG Region & Jurisdictions The MetroCOG Region is located in in South-western Connecticut, entirely within Fairfield County, about fifty miles east of New York City and 150 miles west of Boston, Massachusetts.

The NHMP is a multi-jurisdictional plan, encom-passing the six municipalities of the region. Each community, including municipal staff and resi-dents, actively participated in the preparation of the NHMP Update. The six municipalities are:

• City of Bridgeport

• Town of Easton

• Town of Fairfield

• Town of Monroe

• Town of Stratford

• Town of Trumbull

This section presents demographic information for the Region and its communities. The demographic information presented herein represents 2020 United States Census data where more recent estimates developed from the 2017-2021 Amer-ican Community Survey (ACS) were not avail-able. Occasionally other estimates are presented such as from the Connecticut Data Collaborative (CTDC) for comparison purposes.

I.2.i REGIONAL PROFILE Together, the MetroCOG communities encom-pass about 145 square miles with a combined population of 325,985 people. The population density is the highest of any planning region in https://conncris.ct.gov/

I 4

Connecticut. This density is reflected in the fact that almost all the land lies within the designated urbanized area and about 98% of the residents live in the urban area. Bridgeport, Fairfield, and Stratford are coastal communities, situated along Long Island Sound. The inland communities of Easton, Monroe, and Trumbull make up the northern portion of the region.

The Region is ethnically diverse as about 41.9% of the population is estimated as belonging to an ethnic minority. Approximately 20.2% of the population is classified as African American.

Persons of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity account for about 25% of the Region’s population. Al-though this data suggests diversity throughout the Region, minority populations are concentrated in Bridgeport and parts of Stratford. About 22.9% of the Region’s population is younger than 18 years old and 14.9% are 65 years or older

(2017-2021 ACS).

There are 115,462 occupied housing units in the Region, with the majority (64.9%) owner occu-pied. About 7.2% of the Region’s housing units are vacant. Seasonal or recreational units ac-count for 6.3% of vacant units (2017-2021 ACS).

Despite the overall urban character of the Re-gion, land use patterns vary. The coastal com-munities, especially along the I-95 corridor, are the most densely developed and most urban in character. The inland communities and the northern part of Fairfield are primarily made up of lower density residential development and exhibit rural characteristics. Overall, 40% of the region is developed and 38% is forested, with the inland communities, especially Easton and Monroe, having greater forest cover. Agriculture is present, but it represents less than 2% of the land use of the entire region. Land cover statistics were derived from data provided by the UConn Center for Land Use Education and Research

(CLEAR).

The following sections describe the physical setting, population, demographics and general-ized land use of each jurisdiction involved in the

NHMP.

I.2.ii CITY OF BRIDGEPORT The City of Bridgeport is the most populous city in Connecticut with a population of 148,529 people. Bridgeport is the central city in the MetroCOG region and is bordered by Fairfield to the west, Trumbull to the north and Stratford to the east. Long Island Sound serves as the city’s

I.2.i.1 Demographic Profile: Region

Count Percent Population

Total Population 325,985

White 156,098 47.9%

Black or African American 61,475 18.9%

Hispanic or Latino 82,130 25.2%

Asian 13,273 4.1%

Other Race 2,740 0.8%

Two or More Races 8,023 2.5%

Age

< 18 Years Old 73,893 22.7%

> 65 Years Old 47,209 14.5%

Housing

Total Housing Units 124,438

Owner Occupied 74,886 60.2%

Renter Occupied 40,576 32.6%

Total Occupied Housing Units 115,462 92.8%

Vacant Units 8,976 7.2%

Seasonal Units 566 0.5%

Income

Households with Income < $25,000 55,296 44.4%

Population below Poverty Level 43,462 34.9%

Source, 2017-2021 ACS

I.2.ii.1 Demographic Profile: Bridgeport

Count Percent Population

Total Population 148,529 100.0%

White 27,218 18.3%

Black or African American 47,734 32.1%

Hispanic or Latino 61,917 41.7%

Asian 6,375 4.3%

Other Race 1,769 1.3%

Two or More Races 3,379 2.3%

Age

Median Age 34.9 -

< 18 Years Old 33,807 22.7%

> 65 Years Old 17,370 12.0%

Housing

Total Housing Units 58,625 100.0%

Owner Occupied 22,571 38.5%

Renter Occupied 30,343 51.7%

Total Occupied Housing Units 52,914 89.8%

Vacant Units 5,711 9.8%

Seasonal Units 245 0.4%

Income

Median Household Income $50,597 -

Per Capita Income $26,635 -

Households with Income < $25,000 40,103 27.0%

Population below Poverty Level 34,459 23.2%

Source, 2017-2021 ACS

I 5 though this data suggests diversity throughout the Region, minority populations are concentrated in Bridgeport and parts of Stratford. About 22.9% of the Region’s population is younger than 18 years old and 14.9% are 65 years or older

(2017-2021 ACS).

There are 115,462 occupied housing units in the Region, with the majority (64.9%) owner occu-pied. About 7.2% of the Region’s housing units are vacant. Seasonal or recreational units ac-count for 6.3% of vacant units (2017-2021 ACS).

Despite the overall urban character of the Re-gion, land use patterns vary. The coastal com-munities, especially along the I-95 corridor, are the most densely developed and most urban in character. The inland communities and the northern part of Fairfield are primarily made up of lower density residential development and exhibit rural characteristics. Overall, 40% of the region is developed and 38% is forested, with the inland communities, especially Easton and Monroe, having greater forest cover. Agriculture is present, but it represents less than 2% of the land use of the entire region. Land cover statistics were derived from data provided by the UConn Center for Land Use Education and Research

(CLEAR).

The following sections describe the physical setting, population, demographics and general-ized land use of each jurisdiction involved in the

NHMP.

I.2.ii CITY OF BRIDGEPORT The City of Bridgeport is the most populous city in Connecticut with a population of 148,529 people. Bridgeport is the central city in the MetroCOG region and is bordered by Fairfield to the west, Trumbull to the north and Stratford to the east. Long Island Sound serves as the city’s

I.2.ii.1 Demographic Profile: Bridgeport

Count Percent Population

Total Population 148,529 100.0%

White 27,218 18.3%

Black or African American 47,734 32.1%

Hispanic or Latino 61,917 41.7%

Asian 6,375 4.3%

Other Race 1,769 1.3%

Two or More Races 3,379 2.3%

Age

Median Age 34.9 -

< 18 Years Old 33,807 22.7%

> 65 Years Old 17,370 12.0%

Housing

Total Housing Units 58,625 100.0%

Owner Occupied 22,571 38.5%

Renter Occupied 30,343 51.7%

Total Occupied Housing Units 52,914 89.8%

Vacant Units 5,711 9.8%

Seasonal Units 245 0.4%

Income

Median Household Income $50,597 -

Per Capita Income $26,635 -

Households with Income < $25,000 40,103 27.0%

Population below Poverty Level 34,459 23.2%

Source, 2017-2021 ACS southern border. The city has a land area of 16 square miles, a waterfront of 22 miles, and an elevation that reaches to 310 feet in the north-west corner. Bridgeport is the most urban, dense-ly populated, and diverse municipality in the Region, accounting for 45.6% of the Region’s population. The city is home to the majority of the Region’s non-white population and persons of Hispanic or Latino ancestry. African American residents make up 34.7% of the city’s population and 47% of the city’s population is another, non-white race which includes residents of Hispanic or Latino descent who comprise 41.7% of Bridgeport’s population (2017-2021 ACS).

The median age of people living in Bridgeport is about 34.9 years old, making the city a relatively young place. The proportion of residents young-er than 18 years old is not significantly higher than the Region or state, indicating that the lower median age is partly due to a higher number of people between the ages of 20 and 40 years old, as well as the lower proportion of elderly residents living in Bridgeport (12%) than that of the Region as a whole (2017-2021 ACS).

The city has a total of 58,625 housing units, with about 9.8% listed as vacant. A slight majority of housing units are renter occupied, at 51.7%. Al-though owner-occupied housing accounts for only about 38.5% of the total, this proportion is higher than the cities of Hartford and New Haven. A total of 245 units, 0.4% of the total, are considered seasonal or recreational (2017-2021 ACS).

The entire city meets the definition of an econom-ically distressed area. The median per capita income for Bridgeport workers is approximate-ly $26,635 per year. About 27% of the city’s households earn less than $25,000 per year, with 23.2% of the population living below the poverty line The median household income for

Bridgeport is about $50,597 per year (2017-

2021 ACS).

Bridgeport has a rich history as a manufacturing center and experienced rapid industrialization due to its deep-water harbor and the construc-tion of railroad lines and good harbor access.

The city experienced rapid growth in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, in-creasing from approximately 29,000 residents in 1880 to 143,000 in 1920. The population

I 6 peaked in the 1950s, then steadily decreased throughout the late twentieth century as a result of suburban growth and the decline of industry in the area. This declining trend was reversed be-tween 2000 and 2010, as the current population increased by about 3%.

Today, land use in the city reflects its industrial past. While many of the industrial plants have been demolished or left vacant, remnants of this legacy endure. Residential neighborhoods are close-knit and retain historic configurations.

Many residential areas were built in proximity to factories to attract and retain the workers needed by industry, and commercial activity is interspersed within the residential mix of many neighborhoods. Downtown Bridgeport is home to federal, state, and county courthouses. The city serves as a regional center for medical care due to St. Vincent’s Medical Center and Bridgeport Hospital. Two colleges are located in Bridge-port: the University of Bridgeport in the South End (just north of Seaside Park and Long Island Sound) and Housatonic Community College in the Downtown. Although Sacred Heart University is technically located in Fairfield, the college is located on upper Park Avenue which serves as the border between Bridgeport and Fairfield.

Bridgeport also serves as a major transporta-tion hub. Commuter (Metro North) and intercity (Amtrak) rail service is provided at the Bridgeport rail station, located at the Bridgeport Intermodal Transportation Center in Downtown. Connected to the rail station by an overhead, covered walk-way, Greater Bridgeport Transit’s main bus termi-nal is also located in the Downtown. Bus service radiates from the downtown terminal throughout Bridgeport and into Fairfield, Stratford, and Trum-bull. Interstate 95 traverses the southern half of the region and has an interchange with the Route 8/25 Expressway in Bridgeport.

The Port of Bridgeport, classified as a commer-cial harbor, is one of three deep water ports in Connecticut. Activities within the harbor include recreational boating and support facilities, com-mercial fishing, dry docks and boat repair facili-ties, tugboat docking, and passenger and vehicle ferry service. The Bridgeport and Port Jefferson Steamboat Company operates the ferry service to Long Island and leases the Water Street Dock for loading and unloading. The Water Street Dock is strategically located in Downtown and is functionally connected to the Intermodal Trans-portation Center.

Future land use in Bridgeport is anticipated to re-flect existing land uses, with potential mixed-use development on large vacant and underutilized parcels of land that had previously supported industrial uses.

I.2.iii TOWN OF EASTON The Town of Easton’s population of 7,602 people is the lowest in the Region (2017-2021 ACS). The Town is located in the Region’s northwest and is bordered by the MetroCOG communities of Fairfield (to the south), and Monroe and Trumbull (to the east). The towns of Redding and Newtown (to the north) and Weston and Westport (to the west) are served by the Western Connecticut Council of Governments (WestCOG).

Easton is one of the Region’s three inland com-munities. With a land area of 28.8 square miles, the Town largely consists of rolling, hilly terrain.

Elevations range from 110 feet at the Fairfield border to approximately 740 feet at the northern boundary with Newtown.

11.4% of the Town’s residents report an ethnicity other than white; 2.9% of residents are of His-panic or Latino ancestry. Easton’s population has the highest median age of the Region at 47.9

I.2.iii.1 Demographic Profile: Easton

Count Percent Population

Total Population 7,602 100.0%

White 6,593 86.7%

Black or African American 244 3.2%

Hispanic or Latino 223 2.9%

Asian 90 1.2%

Other Race 150 2.0%

Two or More Races 302 4.0%

Age

Median Age 47.9 -

< 18 Years Old 1,774 23.3%

> 65 Years Old 1,419 18.7%

Housing

Total Housing Units 2,741 100.0%

Owner Occupied 2,275 83.0%

Renter Occupied 444 16.2%

Total Occupied Housing Units 2,719 99.2%

Vacant Units 22 0.8%

Seasonal Units 0 0.0%

Income

Median Household Income $165,469 -

Per Capita Income $72,660 -

Households with Income < $25,000 117 4.3%

Population below Poverty Level 487 6.4%

I 7

The Port of Bridgeport, classified as a commer-cial harbor, is one of three deep water ports in Connecticut. Activities within the harbor include recreational boating and support facilities, com-mercial fishing, dry docks and boat repair facili-ties, tugboat docking, and passenger and vehicle ferry service. The Bridgeport and Port Jefferson Steamboat Company operates the ferry service to Long Island and leases the Water Street Dock for loading and unloading. The Water Street Dock is strategically located in Downtown and is functionally connected to the Intermodal Trans-portation Center.

Future land use in Bridgeport is anticipated to re-flect existing land uses, with potential mixed-use development on large vacant and underutilized parcels of land that had previously supported industrial uses.

I.2.iii TOWN OF EASTON The Town of Easton’s population of 7,602 people is the lowest in the Region (2017-2021 ACS). The Town is located in the Region’s northwest and is bordered by the MetroCOG communities of Fairfield (to the south), and Monroe and Trumbull (to the east). The towns of Redding and Newtown (to the north) and Weston and Westport (to the west) are served by the Western Connecticut Council of Governments (WestCOG).

Easton is one of the Region’s three inland com-munities. With a land area of 28.8 square miles, the Town largely consists of rolling, hilly terrain.

Elevations range from 110 feet at the Fairfield border to approximately 740 feet at the northern boundary with Newtown.

11.4% of the Town’s residents report an ethnicity other than white; 2.9% of residents are of His-panic or Latino ancestry. Easton’s population has the highest median age of the Region at 47.9

I.2.iii.1 Demographic Profile: Easton

Count Percent Population

Total Population 7,602 100.0%

White 6,593 86.7%

Black or African American 244 3.2%

Hispanic or Latino 223 2.9%

Asian 90 1.2%

Other Race 150 2.0%

Two or More Races 302 4.0%

Age

Median Age 47.9 -

< 18 Years Old 1,774 23.3%

> 65 Years Old 1,419 18.7%

Housing

Total Housing Units 2,741 100.0%

Owner Occupied 2,275 83.0%

Renter Occupied 444 16.2%

Total Occupied Housing Units 2,719 99.2%

Vacant Units 22 0.8%

Seasonal Units 0 0.0%

Income

Median Household Income $165,469 -

Per Capita Income $72,660 -

Households with Income < $25,000 117 4.3%

Population below Poverty Level 487 6.4%

Source, 2017-2021 ACS years old, as the proportion older than 65, slight-ly higher than the Region as a whole at 8.7%

(2017-2021 ACS).

The total number of occupied housing units in Easton is 2,719, 83% of housing units are own-er-occupied. Rental units account for 16.2% of the Town’s housing. About 0.8% of the housing stock is vacant (2017-2021 ACS); no units are classified as seasonal or recreational. (2017-

2021 ACS).

Easton is a wealthy community, as indicated by the annual median household income of $165,469. The Town’s median per capita income of $72,660 per year is among the higher income levels in the state. 4.3% of households in the Town of Easton earned less than $25,000 per year, with 6.4% of the population below poverty level (2017- 2021 ACS).

The Town is almost exclusively residential and is primarily composed of single-family houses on large lots. About 0.1% of land in Easton is used for commercial purposes. The Town does not have a specific concentrated commercial area and no industry is located within the town limits.

However, Easton has a strong agricultural history and agricultural activities continue to play an important role in the community, including the leasing of farmland at the Easton Elementary School.

Over one third of Easton is preserved as either current water company owned lands or former water company property. Four public supply reservoirs (Easton, Aspetuck, Hemlock and Sau-gatuck) are either partially or wholly located in the town. About 2,300 acres of the Centennial Watershed State Forest are located in Easton.

Made up of a patchwork of hundreds of parcels of varying sizes scattered throughout mostly Fair-field County, this state forest was formed in 2002 with the primary purpose of protecting water quality, wetlands, and woodlands. The State of Connecticut, in partnership with The Nature Con-servancy (TNC), has also acquired ownership of roughly 6,000 acres of public supply watershed lands, as well as conservation and public access easements on an additional 9,000 acres.

As Easton is devoted to maintaining a pure water supply for the region, future land development will be limited and focused on preservation.

I 8

I.2.iv TOWN OF FAIRFIELD The Town of Fairfield has a population of 61,737 people (2017-2021 ACS). Fairfield is bordered by the MetroCOG communities of Easton (to the north), and Bridgeport and Trumbull (to the east).

The western border is with the Town of Westport, which is located in the WestCOG Region. Long Island Sound makes up the Town’s southern border. The Town has a land area of 30.6 square miles, rising to the north from its shoreline to an elevation of approximately 450 feet at Hoyden Hill near the northern border with Easton.

Fairfield’s population is predominately white, with 87.2% of residents reporting to be white.

Approximately 12.8% of the Town’s residents report a race other than white. Persons of His-panic or Latino descent comprise 7.2% of the population. The median age of Fairfield residents is 40.4 years old, with the proportion older than 65 years old accounting for about 15.6% of the population (2017-2021 ACS).

The total number of occupied housing units is 21,086; 79.2% are owner-occupied. The 16.3% of renter occupied units account for a higher proportion of housing units as compared to Easton, Monroe and Trumbull. Vacant housing units comprise 4.5% of the total housing stock with 0.3% of the units classified as seasonal or recreational (2017-2021 ACS).

Fairfield is a wealthy community, as indicated by an annual median household income of $149,621, only slightly less than the median fami-ly income in Easton. The median per capita in-come is $53,368 per year. Households earning less than $25,000 per year accounted for 8.4% of all households and 5.7% of the population live below the poverty line. (2017-2021 ACS).

Fairfield is a town with two distinct development patterns. Although the Town is predominantly res-idential, more intense development patterns are concentrated in the eastern and southern areas of the Town and along the Metro-North New Haven Line and the Interstate 95 corridor. The major business and industrial areas are located along US Route 1 and the southern portion of Route 58 (Black Rock Turnpike and Tunxis Hill Road). The northwestern part of town is relatively rural and is predominantly made up of large lot, single family homes. Residential distribution is denser in the eastern portion of the community.

I.2.iv.1 Demographic Profile: Fairfield

Count Percent Population

Total Population 61,737 100.0%

White 51,906 84.1%

Black or African American 1225 2.0%

Hispanic or Latino 4,425 7.2%

Asian 2,575 4.2%

Other Race 332 0.5%

Two or More Races 1274 2.0%

Age

Median Age 40.4 -

< 18 Years Old 14,019 22.7%

> 65 Years Old 9,112 15.6%

Housing

Total Housing Units 22,075 100.0%

Owner Occupied 17,483 79.2%

Renter Occupied 3,603 16.3%

Total Occupied Housing Units 21,086 95.2%

Vacant Units 989 4.5%

Seasonal Units 67 0.3%

Income

Median Household Income $149,621 -

Per Capita Income $53,368 -

Households with Income < $25,000 5,186 8.4%

Population below Poverty Level 2,519 5.7%

I 9

Coastal development is primarily residential and includes beaches and private marinas. Two col-leges are located in Fairfield: Fairfield University and Sacred Heart University (on the border of Bridgeport).

Fairfield is served by three commuter rail stations on the Metro-North New Haven Line: Fair- field Metro Center, Fairfield Center, and Southport.

Local bus service, oriented to and from Down-town Bridgeport is provided along the US Route 1 (Kings Highway East to the Post Road) and Route 58 corridors. In addition to Interstate 95, the Merritt Parkway (Route 15) passes through the northern part of Fairfield.

I.2.v TOWN OF MONROE The Town of Monroe has a population of 18,927 people (2017-2021 ACS). Monroe is located in the northern part of the Region and is bordered by of Easton to the west and Trumbull to the south. To the east, the Town shares a border with Shelton, which is represented by the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments (NVCOG).

Monroe has a northeast border with the Town of Oxford (NVCOG) along Lake Zoar and the Housatonic River. The land area of Monroe is

26.4 square miles, and the Town’s highest elevation is approximately 600 feet.

The ethnic mix of Monroe’s population is simi-lar to that of other suburban communities in the Region. The population is predominately white at 82.8% of residents while approximately 17.2% of the Town’s residents report a race other than white. Persons of Hispanic or Latino descent comprise 8.8% of the population. The median age of Monroe’s residents is 41.4 years old.

The proportion of the population older than 65 accounts for about 14.9% of the population and is lower than other communities in the region

(2017-2021 ACS).

The total number of occupied housing units in Monroe is 6,274, with 87.3% of units occupied by the owner. This percentage is comparable to other similarly sized towns in the Region, such as Easton and Trumbull. Rental units account for 7.6% of all units. Vacant housing units comprise 5.1%; no units are classified as seasonal or recre-ational (2017-2021 ACS).

The annual median household income for Mon-roe is $127,995 and the per capita income is

I.2.v.1 Demographic Profile: Monroe

Count Percent Population

Total Population 18,927 100.0%

White 12,912 78.8%

Black or African American 640 3.4%

Hispanic or Latino 1,659 8.8%

Asian 1021 5.4%

Other Race 0 0.0%

Two or More Races 695 3.6%

Age

Median Age 41.4 -

< 18 Years Old 4,863 25.7%

> 65 Years Old 2,815 14.9%

Housing

Total Housing Units 6,607 100.0%

Owner Occupied 5,768 87.3%

Renter Occupied 506 7.6%

Total Occupied Housing Units 6,274 94.9%

Vacant Units 333 5.1%

Seasonal Units 0 0.0%

Income

Median Household Income $127,995 -

Per Capita Income $47,991 -

Households with Income < $25,000 1,552 8.2%

Population below Poverty Level 606 3.2%

I 10

$47,991 per year. About 3.2% of the population earns an income below the poverty line and 8.2% of the households earn less than $25,000 per year (2017-2021 ACS).

Monroe is a predominantly residential commu-nity comprised of single family, detached units on one to three acre lots. Several condominium complexes provide a higher concentration of housing. Commercial activities are concentrated along the Route 25 and Route 111 corridors, and several industrial parks are located along Pepper Street in the northern part of town.

Future land use in Monroe is anticipated to be consistent with existing development patterns.

I.2.vi TOWN OF STRATFORD The Town of Stratford has a population of 52,360 people (2017-2021 ACS). Stratford is bordered by the MetroCOG communities of Bridgeport and Trumbull to the west. The Town borders the City of Shelton (NVCOG) to the north and the City of Milford (South Central Region Council of Governments) to the east. The Housatonic River flows along the border be-tween Stratford and Milford. Long Island Sound makes up the town’s southern border. The land area of Stratford is 19.6 square miles.