1. Introduction
2. Goals and Objectives
3. Workshop Description
4. Outline Mitigation Plans
1. Recommendations from Groups
2. Comments on Outline Mitigation Plans
5. Workshop Evaluation
6. Consultants’ Comments and Recommendations

• Appendix 1 Workshop Agenda
• Appendix 2 List of Participants
• Appendix 3 Availability of Hazard and Resource Data
• Appendix 4 Mitigation Plan Outlines – Recommendations from Groups
• Appendix 5 Workshop Evaluation

1.0 Introduction

As part of the Post-Georges Disaster Mitigation Project, the USAID / OAS are assisting the Government of St. Kitts and Nevis with the development of a natural hazard mitigation plan. As part of the 14-month process of plan development, two workshops on natural hazard mitigation and mitigation planning were held in St. Kitts and Nevis from June 13 to 16, 2000. The first workshop, an introduction to natural hazard mitigation, was held from June 13 to 15. The second workshop, designed to develop a workplan for the mitigation plan, was held on June 16. Both workshops were held at the Ocean Terrace Inn in Basseterre. This report summarises the activities and recommendations of the first workshop.

2.0 Goals and Objectives

The goal of the workshop was to introduce senior technical personnel in the public and private sector to the basic concepts and techniques of natural hazard mitigation and mitigation planning.

The objectives of the workshop were as follows:

1. To sensitise participants to the characteristics of the natural hazards which affect St. Kitts and Nevis and the wider Caribbean, and to the vulnerability of natural and human resources to these hazards;
2. To outline a common vocabulary of terms and to demonstrate basic techniques of hazard and vulnerability assessment;
3. To outline the importance of natural hazard mitigation in development planning;
4. To present the mitigation plan development process and to develop outlines of national and sectoral mitigation plans;
5. To establish a baseline of information on natural hazards and resources at risk.

3.0 Workshop Description

The workshop agenda is presented as Appendix 1. Dr. Cassandra Rogers and Mrs. Lynette Atwell facilitated the workshop and were the lead presenters. Other presenters included Mr. Ellsworth Warner (hurricanes) and Mr. Don Grant (floods) of the St. Kitts and Nevis Meteorological Services.

A total of 41 participants, comprising senior personnel from the public and private sector, attended more than one day of the workshop (See Appendix 2). They included representatives from the National Emergency Management Agency, Public Works Division, Water Services Department, Physical Planning, Economic Planning, Human Resources, Agriculture, Lands and Housing, Health, Community and Social Development, Education, Tourism, Environment, Human Resources, Port Authority, Protected Services (Police and Fire), Insurance, the Contractors Association and the Red Cross and Information Services. The PGDM Project Manager also attended.

The first day of the workshop was devoted to a discussion of the different types of natural hazards which impact or are likely to impact on the country and the wider Caribbean, the role and importance of hazard mitigation in disaster management and a discussion of techniques for natural hazard and vulnerability assessment.

Day 2 was devoted to mitigation planning, its role in development and the detailed procedures for the development of mitigation plans, policies and programmes. On the final day, participants documented sources of information on natural hazards and resources at risk and presented the outlines of several mitigation plans.

The lecture material was directly applicable to the Caribbean. Where material was available, case studies focused on St. Kitts and Nevis. Participants also added to the discussion by sharing their experiences.

4.0 Outline Mitigation Plans

On Day 2 participants were divided into five groups; each group was required to develop the detailed outline of a mitigation plan. The groups selected were multisectoral in nature and were required to emphasize team-building and inter-agency collaboration. The following plans were developed:

• A national natural hazard mitigation plan for St. Kitts and Nevis;
• A natural hazard mitigation plan (local area plan) for Nevis;
• A natural hazard mitigation plan for the infrastructure sector
• A natural hazard mitigation plan for the tourism sector and
• A natural hazard mitigation plan for the housing sector.

On the final day, each group made 15-minute oral presentations of the plan outlines and also submitted written reports.

4.1 Recommendations from Groups

Each mitigation plan outline included several recommendations. These are presented in Appendix 4.

The reports submitted were of a high standard. The recommendations of the groups reflected concerns with the major hazards which confront St Kitts and Nevis. Based on the presentations, it was clear that there was a general understanding of the requirements for the development of a mitigation plan. The groups made a number of recommendations, some of which can be used in the proposed natural hazard mitigation plan for the country.

5.0 Workshop Evaluation

A summary of the responses to the workshop questionnaire is presented in Appendix 5. All participants rated the course as good or very good, and felt that the course had met its objectives and that it was very relevant to their jobs. All expressed, by questionnaire or during discussion, that the workshop was interesting and informative and rated the course very highly in terms of its success in improving understanding of natural hazards and hazard mitigation planning. The performances of both lead presenters were rated on average as good to very good. 95% of the participants felt that handouts were helpful. 40% rated the course length as poor or fair, while 60% rated it as good or very good. The large majority rated the physical facilities highly, although the majority felt that the availability of computers was poor or fair. Participants also noted that the approach taken at the workshop, in which they were they were required to research information for use in the development of plan outlines, enhanced their understanding of hazard mitigation and the mitigation plan development process.

6. Consultants’ Comments and Recommendations

• The consultants were very impressed by the high level of participant enthusiasm and discussion and quality of participant presentations.

• Due to time constraints, a few topics had to be rushed and were not covered at the desired level of detail. In addition, it was not possible to undertake the task of development of hazard database in the allocated time. Further consideration should be given to lengthening the course by one day.
• Although some members of staff of the National Emergency Management Agency were present at the workshop, the head of NEMA, St. Kitts unfortunately could not attend. This is a concern as it is essential that the NEMA head is exposed to the techniques for plan preparation, since he is expected to provide guidance to the Mitigation Guidance Committee. The plan outcome may be adversely affected as a result. In addition, it is recommended that the Mitigation Guidance Committee make a concerted effort to bring more private sector participants into its activities once the plan is being developed.
• The comments by participants that computer facilities were poor to fair is valid. Participants were expected to use computer facilities in their individual offices for preparation of outline mitigation plans. This may have presented a limitation, especially to the participants who travelled from Nevis. It is recommended that under such circumstances, computers should be made available at the workshop venue.

July 2, 2000

Facilitators: Dr. Cassandra Rogers, Mrs. Lynette Atwell

9.00 – 9.45 Opening Ceremony

10.00 – 10.15 Introduction

10.15 – 10.35 Disaster management

10.50 – 11.10 Mitigation measures

11.10 – 12.00 Natural Hazards in the Caribbean / St. Kitts and Nevis

• Tropical cyclones
• Earthquakes and Tsunamis

1.00 – 2.45 Natural Hazards in the Caribbean / St. Kitts and Nevis (cont’d)

• Volcanoes
• Flooding
• Landslides
• Economic, social and environmental consequences of disasters

Session 2B Hazard / Vulnerability Assessment

3.00 – 3.25 Hazard mapping and assessment

3.25 – 3.50 Vulnerability assessment

3.50 – 4.00 Review

4.00 – 4.30 Exercise 1– Compilation of Available Hazard Data

Wednesday 14 June 2000

8.30– 9.00 Why hazard mitigation Planning

9.00 – 9.30 Existing Hazard Mitigation Approaches, St. Kitts and Nevis

9.30 – 12.30 The Hazard Mitigation Plan Process

• Basic Principles for Plan Preparation
• Plan Formulation
• Tools and Techniques
• Co-ordinating plan preparation and resource sharing
• Stakeholders

1.30 – 2.00 Exercise 2: Group Assignment - Presentation

2.00 - 4.30 Exercise 2: Group Assignment - Breakout

9.00 - 12.00 Exercise 2: Group Assignment - Breakout (Continued)

1.00 – 1.30 Exercise 2: Group Assignment - Breakout (Continued)

1.30 – 3.00 Presentation of Outline Mitigation Plans

3.15 – 3.45 Discussion of Presentations

3.45 – 4.15 The Way Forward

4.15 – 4.45 Closing Ceremony

Appendix 2: List of Participants

1. Establish an interagency task force to oversee the establishment of a Hazard Mitigation Unit in the Department of Public Works.
2. Develop the legal framework for the establishment of a local framework for a Hazard Mitigation Department within the Public Works Department.
3. Design a budget to support institutional requirements with respect to mitigation.
4. Procure and maintain appropriate heavy duty equipment for use in the Public Works Department

1. That funding be provided for a hazard mitigation officer for Nevis
2. That technical assistance is provided for the development of mitigation strategies for districts in Nevis.
3. That a standard format is prepared for documenting the impacts of natural hazard events.
4. That an all hazards safety programme is developed for all government buildings in Nevis.
5. That wells be designed and constructed in ghauts to stabilize ghaut levels and to control flow direction
6. That rock revetments be designed and constructed for threatened coastal areas in Nevis
7. That a hazard mitigation awareness campaign is developed for i) the general public and ii) all schools at the primary level

NATURAL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN FOR THE TOURISM SECTOR

This group made recommendations for selected hazards.

1. That there should be technical training for persons involved in construction of tourism plants.
2. That physical structures used for activities related to tourism are upgraded using relevant building codes.

1. That there is the need to increase the expertise with respect to the following:

- infrastructure development
- land use planning
- risk and hazard mapping
- hazard vulnerability

2. That there is a need to revegetate nature trails and waterways.
3. That external funding for a mitigation research and development programme for flooding should be sought.

1. That access should be provided to monitoring equipment for volcanic activity.
2. That a local data base for volcanic activity needs to be developed in conjunction with the Seismic Research Unit.

1. That existing buildings which house telecommunication facilities should be redesigned to resist earthquakes.
2. That existing facilities are strengthened to resist wind loading.
3. That there should be regular inspection of underground cables to ensure that there is no build up of excess water.
4. Where possible, relocate the main fibre optic ring away from the coastline.
5. Relocate, redesign and construct retaining walls to reduce hazard impacts.

1. Carry out studies to inform the development of drainage systems in major developments, so that roads are not adversely affected.
2. Develop methods to stabilize slopes so that roads are not affected by runoff.

1. That reservoirs and pipelines are designed to resist earthquakes
2. That pipelines and electrical wires to pumps are placed underground to avoid wind damage.
3. That reservoirs are sited in areas removed from lava flow.
4. That all water intakes are removed to lower elevations to avoid the impact of volcanoes
5. That proper drainage and soil conservation measures be undertaken on slopes.
6. Redesign intakes so that they are not susceptible to silting up from landslides.

1. That a bund wall 18 to 24 inches high around the power station is constructed to avoid road damage.
2. That an underground system is developed for power lines.

1. That the proposed Development and Planning Act is enacted to provide the legal basis for planning and development control in St. Kitts and Nevis.
2. That a Development and Planning Authority is established under the aegis of the proposed Development and Planning Act.
3. That planning and development control procedures are made available to the public through the compilation and publication of the following manuals:
1. A planning procedures manual
2. EIA procedure manuals
3. A manual for developers
4. That a comprehensive National Physical Development Plan is prepared every five years.
5. That comprehensive land use plans are prepared for each community.
6. That a GIS section should be established in the Physical Planning Department to facilitate the needs of the planning agency as well as other agencies.
7. That the required regulations are put in place to support the Planning and Development Act.
8. That the draft infrastructure, planning standards and building code manual prepared by OECS, NRMU and UNCHS should be reviewed, refined and streamlined in accordance with local needs.
9. That zoning and subdivision regulations should be introduced.
10. Standards for Hazardous Areas
1. In areas subject to coastal erosion a distance of 30 times the annual rate of erosion for the particular coastal area be used as the set back for residential buildings.
2. In areas subject to coastal erosion a distance of 60 times the annual rate of erosion be used as the setback for multi family residences and hotel structures greater than 5000 sq. ft.
3. In hazard prone areas developers should be given the option of concentrating development on portions of the site deemed low risk.
4. That incentive zoning regulations are adopted for high hazard areas, allowing bonuses for developments where amenities or concessions are made by developers.
11. That a differential taxation programme is adopted for coastal hazard areas to reduce the property tax on undeveloped parcels of land thereby reducing the pressure o convert the lands to more intensive uses.
12. That the adoption of "impact fees" is considered where public expenditure is required to recoup or mitigate the overall impacts of a project or development
13. That an "Emergency Management Preparedness and Assistance Trust Fund" is established. This Fund will impose a surcharge on insurance premiums on properties to be developed in high – hazard areas.
14. That a public awareness programme is undertaken before the onset of the hurricane season to inform residents of:
1. the nature and location of hazard zones
2. how to windproof and flood proof their homes
3. actions that can be taken to enhance the integrity of their existing structures to reduce property damage.

(20 respondents)

In an effort to improve the quality of subsequent courses, please answer the following questions.

1 = Very Poor; 2 = Poor; 3 = Fair; 4 = Good; 5 = Very Good; n/a = not applicable.

1. How would you rate the following:

• Physical Facilities: 4.4
• Availability of computers: 2.3
• Utility of course assignments and exercises: 4.1
• Relevance of the course to your job: 4.5
• Duration of the course: 3.7
• Course instructor/presenter delivery and understanding of material:
• Cassandra Rogers 4.7
• Lynette Atwell 4.3

2. Were the handouts helpful in improving your understanding of the course material? 4.3

3. Was the course helpful in improving your understanding of natural hazards and hazard mitigation planning: In your current job? 4.3

4. Did the course meet its objectives? 4.2

5. How would you rate the course on an overall basis? 4.5

6. Do you intend to use this information directly in your current job? Explain.

• To develop plans for hurricane prevention and educating the general public
• To further develop my organisation’s capacity to produce mitigative measures and to ensure that various departments are provided with the appropriate information
• As project manager the information would be needed for project implementation
• To include in the preparation of a strategic development plan for Nevis
• To design feature television and radio programs on the issue of mitigation of disasters
• Yes, public utilities (infrastructure) need to be considered in any hazard mitigation plan
• PWD engineers are required to assess damages after disaster and to recommend solutions. A mitigation plan put in place can reduce the level of stress that usually accompanies these events. I intend to start thinking of the mitigation measures and implement them
• Yes, ensuring that hazard mitigation considerations are part of the application review cycle
• I will prepare a natural hazard mitigation plan for my organisation
• The course shows us that a lot of destruction due to natural hazards could be minimised through long term mitigation practices; educating the general public to mitigate would be strong on my agenda for district activities.

  7. How could the course be improved?

• Course should be longer
• Permanents secretaries of various government departments should attend
• Site visits
• Less time spent on simple explanations, which can be explained in handouts to avoid participants with previous knowledge having to sit through explanations they already know
• By providing more data specifically relevant to the local situation and for reference
• Need involvement at the ministerial level for Nevis
• Access to computers at the site of the workshop is essential, as time is lost commuting between workshop venue and workplace. Also means that corrections and additions cannot be easily made
• More case studies to highlight how mitigation plans have actually improved socio-economic well-being of people
• Broader participation by stakeholders
• Adding an additional day to fine tune group work and for field trips
• This course was very technical and was presented at a very high level. I would allocate more time for the development of the assignment.

  8. Add any additional comments here.

• Very useful workshop, should continue to engage participants to continue with the efforts in this regard
• Need to invite more senior officials so that decisions they make can be more informed
• Was time well spent
• Must be encouraged to be a regular feature for the whole federation. It keeps us in a frame of readiness to assist at all levels
• An enlightening workshop with excellent presenters and good participant interaction
• It is very important to complete this process to the actual generation of a national hazard mitigation plan
• I would like to commend the OAS though Mr. Keith, Stichter and Parker, but moreso Dr. Rogers and Ms. Atwell for being so well-versed in hazard mitigation; it has been quite a learning experience.