City of Punta Gorda

Due to the City?s size and available funds, staff utilizes a variety of grants and opportunities to partner with local & regional groups and organizations, as well as a variety of state and federal agencies in an effort to complete studies and projects. In 2009 the City partnered with the Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program (CHNEP) and the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC) to produce a City Adaptation Plan. The vulnerability assessment of any city is a function both of the city?s sensitivity to changes in climate as well as its adaptive capacity to adjust to changes in climate (either reactively or proactively through planning decisions). To assess its vulnerability, the city described the specific effects from climate change that are likely to affect key management goals. Climate change impacts will vary regionally, as will the approach taken to identify the most significant vulnerabilities. There are many different approaches to completing an assessment, from simple back-of-the-envelope approaches based on effects that are already occurring, to more sophisticated approaches that examine the links between multiple effects using predictive modeling or other tools to help project changes. Although a general understanding of vulnerability may be enough of a basis to inform adaptation actions in coastal areas, most cities need and develop city-specific information that better characterizes the spatial distribution, intensity, and frequency of projected impacts. A more detailed and descriptive assessment is necessary to better inform stakeholders and to prioritize and gain support for actions. Additionally, the time frame for effects will vary according to the selected planning horizon for the city. Regardless, a vulnerability assessment could include: a description of the approach used, a summary of the most significant effects, the timeframe for the predicted effects, and any considerations for uncertainties or other factors needed to set priorities. Adaptation actions required consent from the citizens who live, work, and play in the city, as well as decision makers who will have to provide approval, funding, or both in carrying out the selected actions. National Estuary Programs (NEPs) are very experienced with appropriate communication tools for their locales, and should be able to readily incorporate climate adaptation planning into ongoing information and education programs. However, in many places communication for climate adaptation may demand either a different approach or new expertise for the NEPs. In particular, some NEPs will be trying to develop alternatives to prevent future negative outcomes that are either uncertain or unimagined. Rather than returning to historic conditions of water quality or ecosystem health, citizens and officials may have to anticipate conditions that, as yet, have not manifested in the system. A ?multi-modal? communication strategy was utilized to address some of these unfamiliar concerns and to provide specific information on the actions that will be necessary in the Peace River watershed. Include information on how the most vulnerable stakeholder groups in the community were included the decision making process. When the opportunity to partner with the CHNEP and the SWFRPC arose, the City was ready with Comprehensive Plan policies that allowed for the partnership. The City?s progressive actions had included climate change planning in their Comprehensive Plan. The objective and policy are listed below. City of Punta Gorda Comprehensive Plan Climate Change Objective and Policy: Objective 2.4.2: Address the impacts of sea level rise, and seek strategies to combat its effects on the shoreline of the City. Policy 2.4.2.1: The City will work with the SWFRPC to determine potential sea level rise impacts on the Coastal Planning Area. Measurement: Completion and implementation of developed coastal studies or development of model scenarios. With the policy in place, the City worked through the CHNEP and SWFRPC staff on adaptation planning. A series of three public meetings was decided upon, the first one to be held on April 9, 2009, followed by other meetings on June 2, 2009 and September 6, 2009. Since this effort was supported by the grant from EPA, fundraising for meeting space and other aspects was not a factor, but may be in other situations, something to be taken into consideration. Outreach, using CHNEP?s press contacts, resulted in newspaper articles and interviews on local television news that helped publicize the first meeting. Also, the CHNEP and SWFRPC websites featured the event prominently, email ?blasts? were sent out to regular subscribers of CHNEP E-news, and postcards were mailed to CHNEP supporters living in the Punta Gorda area. CHNEP hosted online registration for the meeting, but phone registration was also available and walk-ins were accepted. First Public Workshop: space was donated by the Punta Gorda Isles Civic Association and the SWFRPC underwrote the refreshments. Contacts in the city staff as well as Team Punta Gorda advised that morning meetings would draw the most participants, so the meeting on April 9 was scheduled to run from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Thirty eight people attended, which, according to local expertise, was a good turnout. The participants included residents, people who work in the city, city staff, and seasonal visitors. Some represented specialized groups, like recreational fishermen. The attendees were asked to fill out a questionnaire when they came in which provided demographic information as well as the respondent?s opinions and observations about climate, wildlife and storms in Punta Gorda. The survey and raw data can be found in the Appendix of the approved Climate Adaptation Plan. Survey Results: The results of the survey showed that most of the participants live in Punta Gorda year round and have been in Florida an average of 22 years. Most were from the 33950 ZIP code, indicating that they live in or near the downtown area. Most of the people who work, work in that same ZIP code. Most respondents thought that winters in Florida are becoming drier and cooler and that summers are becoming drier and warmer. Of those with an opinion, respondents generally thought that fishing in Charlotte Harbor is declining, that water quality in the Harbor is declining, that water quality in the canals of Punta Gorda is declining, and that the presence of wildlife in Punta Gorda is decreasing. It should be noted that a significant number of respondents were not sure about changes in those conditions. Most people did not feel that storms are getting more severe or frequent, but a majority felt that they expected weather to get worse in the future. A large percentage of the attendees felt weather would stay the same. Almost all respondents reported damage to their property from Hurricane Charley in 2004, ranging from roof and structural damage to loss of vegetation and landscaping. Most people had responded to that damage by fixing and/or upgrading roofs, windows, and garage doors, purchasing generators and shutters, and adapting their landscaping to absorb more rainfall and be less vulnerable to high winds. Many people listed other improvements they would like to make, but, for most, cost is the limiting factor. Respondents also listed things local, state and federal government could do differently to be better prepared for storms, droughts and floods in the future. Those suggestions included ?intelligent growth? physically raising the elevations of certain local roads, improved water resource planning, public education, improved evacuation routes, irrigation restrictions, improved wetland protections, better forecasting and improved communications. Three presentations were given before the participants were broken up into small groups for discussion. The first presentation was given by Dr. Lisa Beever of the CHNEP, giving the background of the project and the CHNEP?s role. The second presentation was given by myself, reviewing the city?s concern with climate change, especially sea level rise, in the wake of the devastation from Hurricane Charley in 2004. The final presentation was by Jim Beever of the SWFRPC, who gave a primer on climate in southwest Florida and the implications of climate change for the area. These presentations are also contained in the Appendix of the City?s approved Adaptation Plan. With all this background, the participants were divided up into several small groups of no more than eight, lead by a CHNEP or SWFRPC facilitator. Dr. Beever introduced the small group activity, which involved: ? The Vulnerability Game, ? The Adaptation Game, ? The Acceptability Game The Vulnerability Game: was designed after a frame game called Group Scoop, originally Group Grope. Group Scoop and the concept of frame games were designed by Dr. Sivasailam ?Thiagi? Thiagarajan. A frame game is a tested training game where one can insert their own content. For the Vulnerability Game, participants were allowed to form their own groups and were given as many index cards as they could use. They were asked to individually brainstorm climate change vulnerabilities that they and City of Punta Gorda faced. Each idea was put on a separate card. After 10 minutes, the cards were collected, shuffled, and three to five cards dealt to each participant. Remaining cards were put in the middle. Each participant had to pick and discard vulnerabilities so that they had the three to five most serious vulnerabilities in their hand. The remaining cards were removed. Then, the participants shared their cards with each other and, as a group, selected the most important three to five vulnerabilities. Group Grope has been used in other venues by CHNEP to replace scribing ideas on an easel pad. The game is quicker because individuals are concurrently writing ideas. Other benefits include greater ownership of ideas, ability to quickly consolidate high ranked ideas, and inability for participants to be passive. The Adaptation Game: was based on another frame game called Envelopes. The top three to five vulnerabilities from the previous game were written on separate 8? x 10? envelopes. The envelopes were distributed among the group members. Each participant brainstormed alternative possible adaptations on individual index cards and placed the cards in the envelope. After a couple minutes, group members traded envelopes. Each member was able to contribute adaptation ideas to their envelopes. Group members were also encouraged to include ideas that they may not necessarily agree with, so that they might have the opportunity to reject them. The Acceptability Game: was conducted with the participants reassembled in the main room. During the break, staff reviewed the envelopes and similar vulnerabilities from different groups were collapsed. As each vulnerability (from the envelopes) was called out, participants showed a thumbs up, thumbs down, or thumbs sideways to show the level of their agreement for addressing the vulnerability in the adaptation plan. The intent of the game was to gain a sense of agreement for each of the adaptation measures. However, the method took longer than the time allocated. Staff offered to develop a survey instrument from the Adaptation Game to be posted on the CHNEP website. Second Public Workshop was held on June 2, 2009. It was scheduled to review various adaptation strategy scenarios developed with input from earlier workshop and on-line questionnaires. The agenda featured one major activity- a board game. The purpose of the game was to identify general support or lack of support for adaptation options. The adaptation options presented had been identified by participants of the first public workshop and were identified from the literature. ?The Adaptation Game? is an original creation for this public workshop. The game board was created in ArcGIS from aerial imagery and provided additional information such as storm surge zones and critical facilities. All areas considered for annexation, as well as existing city facilities outside of the city limits, are shown. The board included an inset for an enlargement of downtown. The board also included two ?parking lots,? one for city-wide adaptations and one for adaptations the participant recommends against. The board was 34 x 44 inches in size for easy viewing and space for the ?parking lot? answers. The game pieces were ?EcoFriendly White Return Address Labels? printed from a word processing file. Adaptation options from the first workshop were grouped by the major vulnerabilities identified at the first workshop. Potential adaptations identified by participants had a white background and additional adaptations identified in the literature had a yellow background. This was done so that the participants would know the source of the adaptation and show that we predominately used their earlier work. The font for each adaptation was adjusted in size so each would be as large as possible. The original lists were made available to the participants over the break so that they could familiarize themselves with the list of adaptations and make initial selections. These sheets were easier to read because of the consistent font size and became a useful tool for the participants. Six tables were set up with a game board, duplicate sheets of game labels, and a tabletop name tent identifying which vulnerability or group of related vulnerabilities that table represented. Each table had a separate set of game labels that were related to the vulnerability or group of related vulnerabilities. Participants were allowed to go to the table of their choosing and spend as much time at any individual table that they chose. Most participants were able to visit all the tables in the time available. This strategy allowed adequate room for the participants and allowed for easy sorting of the chosen adaptations. Participants were asked to place adaptations from the sheets onto the map where the adaptation should take place. If they wanted the adaptation to apply city-wide, they would ?park? the label in the city-wide box. If they didn?t like an adaptation, they ?parked? the label in the box named ?Adaptations I Recommend Against.? By counting the number of times any particular adaptation was chosen, relative support for that adaptation could be determined. Likewise, undesirable adaptations were documented. The resulting information allowed the CHNEP and the SWFRPC proceed with the Vulnerability Assessment and the City of Punta Gorda Adaptation Plan based on the information that was gathered from the stakeholders: citizens; construction, business, real estate, and agricultural interests; retirees; families; emergency services; city and county government and more. The City of Punta Gorda has already undertaken a variety of affirmation adaptation actions that will assist in reducing the impacts form climate change and increasing resiliency to climate change effects. These include elevation of structure and improvements of drainage systems as part of the City?s recovery from the impacts of Hurricane Charley; relocation of the public works facility to a location of lower hazard from natural disasters and coastal flooding, adoption of a Transfer of Development Rights program to protect historical and natural resource areas, and a completed Local Mitigation Strategy for natural disasters. Include partners/organizations who were involved in supporting the solution and their roles. 1.) Charlotte Harbor National Estuary Program (CHNEP): Responsible for partnering with the City through the Department of Environmental Protection National Estuary Program. The CHNEP Policy Committee added a climate change adaptation component to its Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan (CCMP), adopted on March 24, 2008. This set the stage for the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) Region 4 to fund CHNEP and, its host agency, the Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council (SWFRPC) to conduct a vulnerability assessment concerning CHNEP?s seven-county study area. EPA Headquarters then named Charlotte Harbor one of six Climate Ready Estuary (CRE) pilot programs. CHNEP and SWFRPC planned to partner with a city to develop an adaptation plan through a project entitled: Development of a Climate Change Adaptation Plan for a Southwest Florida City. Due to existing policies included in the City of Punta Gorda specifically addressing sea level rise, Punta Gorda was chosen as the southwest Florida City. 2.) Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council: Responsible fro the research work and was completion of the Vulnerability Assessment Technical Report 09-3 and the City of Punta Gorda Adaptation Plan Technical Report 09-4 3.) Team Punta Gorda: a citizen stakeholder group, (http://www.teampuntagorda.com/). Team Punta Gorda was initially formed as a grass-roots organization working on recovery following Hurricane Charley. 4.) Stakeholders: citizens; construction, business, real estate, and agricultural interests; retirees; families; emergency services; city and county government and more. Length of implementation. This is an ongoing programing and the City believes that the success of the strategic policies are based on the small incremental steps taken as opportunities arise. With a very active community, the City works with the residents and visitors alike on a regular basis. The strategies are discussed at meetings and there are no major changes from the City?s Annual Strategic Plan. As opportunities arise the City takes the occasion to bring the issues to the community and get their support on a variety of issues. Include current management systems used to support the solution. The City actively works with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinances, Building Codes and Land Use Regulations. In addition, updates are provided to the various Advisory Committees and regular meeting are held with the representatives of the numerous homeowner and business groups in the City. Through careful implementation the City of Punta Gorda has already undertaken a variety of affirmation adaptation actions that will assist in reducing the impacts from climate change and increasing resiliency to climate change effects. These adaptation actions include elevation of structure and improvements of drainage systems as part of the City?s recovery from the impacts of Hurricane Charley; relocation of the public works facility to a location of lower hazard from natural disasters and coastal flooding, adoption of a Transfer of Development Rights program to protect historical and natural resource areas, and a completed Local Mitigation Strategy for natural disasters.