Option 1: Climate Related Risk Management Planning Step

Marina,  I also noticed some overlap between the different categories that were required for the Hazard Assessment Workbook. Our firm is pursuing this credit for a project site in Mansfield, NJ. This project site is close to the Delaware river. Although it is not in a specific flood zone there are still certain risks with being on 2.25 miles from the river.  I found that while completeing the workbook several of the different sections discuss the topic of flood zones in just different ways but all get to the same point. This could be streamlined into a different format so that things aren't repeating. 

Our team attempted Option 2 Emergency Preparedness Planning, however we were not able to provide signed Red Cross Ready Advance Assessment forms for the design submission. We also found many similarities between the prerequisite requirement and Option 1. Since we had alredy prepared a thorough resilience assessment, we were able to automatically meet the additional requriements of Option 1. 

Hi all, We had a similar experience pursuing the prerequisite + Option 1 - there was a lot of overlap. The workbook was a helpful tool in guiding conversations and could be used to guide a resiliency focused workshop. Some streamlining of the workbook would be helpful in that scenario to keep the discussion topics from repeating and keep the conversation succinct.

Our team is pursuing this credit for a project in Guatemala, and it was extremely difficult to find references or tools with the same information provided by the suggested pages within the credit. We agreed that many of the hazards are repeated, as well as their exposure, sensitivity, and vulnerability. Definitely, the format doesn't make it very user-friendly. Improving accessibility, usability of the format and include sample entries that demonstrate how to properly report hazards, as well as how to reference specific data sources would certainly make it easier to implement these credits in the future.

Our firm worked on this credit previously for sites in Baltimore, MD, and Mansfield, NJ noticed considerable repetition between the prerequisite and Option 1, particularly when using the combined worksheet. Terms like “exposure,” “sensitivity,” and “vulnerability” appeared multiple times across different sections, often addressing the same concerns in slightly different formats. The Hazard Assessment Workbook was useful in prompting important conversations about climate risks such as potential flooding near Chesapeake Bay for my project in Hampton VA. But I still would like to see a streamlined approach that would help reduce redundancy and improve clarity during workshops or team discussions. Despite these overlaps, the credit plays a critical role in encouraging forward-thinking design strategies that build resilience in the built environments.

In our project, we also pursued this pilot credit and made use of publicly available hazard mapping and climate data tools to complete the assessment. We combined FEMA’s Flood and Earthquake Hazard Maps, NOAA’s Historical Hurricane Tracks, the U.S. Forest Service Wildfire Hazard Potential, and the National Integrated Drought Information System (drought.gov) to evaluate climate and natural hazards. In addition, we used the World Bank’s Climate Change Knowledge Portal for long-term projections of temperature, precipitation, and degree-day changes. This combination of tools allowed us to identify risks such as drought and extreme heat as high-priority issues for our site, while hazards such as hurricanes and tornadoes were found to be negligible.