The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20040787.tiff Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: Spreading the cost of this project out over various agencies and companies and doing it during the county fair will allow the maximum amount of people to be reached for very little cost. Action Item#6: Determine shelter locations in Lincoln County, Arriba, Genoa, Hugo and Limon, and identify them for easy access. These would be utilized during severe weather and temporary evacuation situations. Target date is 2004. Issue Statement: Major highways come through Lincoln County. During severe weather, especially tornados, the traveling public will stop and ask where there is shelter. Public shelters in these situations have not been identified and management and staff at businesses cannot direct the traveling public to a safe location. Further, there are new citizens to the county who may not know where to seek shelter. Also, if temporary evacuation of citizens in any of the towns in Lincoln County would become necessary shelters have not been identified for this purpose. The safety of our citizens and those traveling through our county is paramount and shelters in both of these situations need to be identified. Implementation Manager and strategy: OEM and Town Managers Priority: High Cost Estimate: $1,000. The funding source for this project would come from Lincoln County and the towns. If necessary, PDM grant funds would be applied for to obtain signage for the shelters. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: Once shelters are determined they can be marked with signage and business management and staff can be provided lists of the locations. This project, while possibly providing safe locations for hundreds of people, can be accomplished with relatively little cost by the county and the towns, with most of it being in-kind. 101 0009- 01FS7 Ern 00I3 LOGAN COUNTY PLANNING ELEMENT . d.,.,tf r ;• ..:'.k kph miThrflr4 ,. .) .j,_ —-_ r__� r i $a�'„t 7.,,,,:,‘,,,,,,,,„ •ev rook t 1' -1 - . i s _ - € , - { �,. s3+acM , d, � 1• �ti�.ti, 'If� L I ��t�� ,."..,:.77„,,,,t;'.„:;,� -a ,�� -", i�-I % I' s % strx ��, r „.1.= c rat, c h` ' . �° ,� a I i,,,,."..-..,,_,. .-.t.,;.„:54 Y4_,. .-.., n . W ' - tie` , r• k '. V gyp' `' Ty a. f ir ` ,� "� ire "� �" .7 tit " 8 '�S` Ai tI. �,xlflIb :sX r �s 2 Y 5.TTTI c t'''ai:''' �' s _. l :S' rok<` .4. .,, ._ r ₹ r 4. .1-.. r w ..,... -----,=-,..t.,..1!". • k� Fyn 'Y C �'ut_, ., -,' t t� F - . �pY :' att0e "4•, "`"I'4.----.", .4 {,ms .....-,--A.,- -I,'''''' rt" ,'5[5'411`� ,li,'44': a* ss t :7, ra a ., ,. to 5". �r+ �r..•"v :3' xxi�t. .' r ' "'-�'.a.��'"� -'`tea ,., C .. • ,,w/ _ i � . . \ 102 Logan County Planning Subcommittee and General Description The following entities participated in the DMA planning process through the Logan County Planning Subcommittee (CPS): • Logan County • City of Sterling • Town of Crook • Town of Fleming • Town of Iliff • Town of Merino • Town of Peetz • Crook Fire Protection District • Sterling Rural Fire Protection District • Buffalo School District • RE-1 Valley School District • RE-4J Merino Schools • Fleming School District • Highline Electric Association • Bravo Ditch Company • Iliff Platte Valley Drainage District • Farmer's Pawnee Canal Company • Spring Dale Ditch Company • Sterling Irrigation Company • Logan County Water Conservancy District • North Sterling and Prewitt Reservoirs • LifeCare Ambulance Service • American Red Cross • Northeast Colorado Health Department. The land area of Logan County is 1,845 square miles. The population (2000 census) for Logan County was 20,504 --- an average density of 11.1 people per square mile. Logan County grew at a rate of 16.7%between 1990-2000. The county is home to the major community of Sterling, while the remainder is predominantly rural. In 1997, Sterling and the neighboring community of Atwood were struck by a devastating flood along Pawnee Creek that resulted in over$19 million dollars in damages and a Federal Disaster Declaration. 0 CO V 103 Logan County History of Recorded Natural Hazard Losses There are 330 events listed by the National Climatic Data Center between 1950-2002 (NCDC Filters Applied: Tornadoes ≥ Fl; Damage ≥ $3,000; Hail ≥ 2"; Wind ≥ 75 MPH) &" Date Event jI ,LLocationr, i:,,,,,`,4- Damages , Other..Ihfo° r`"'_ Data Sourdal 1844 Flood "Bluff to Bluff' USACE 1864 3 Floods May&June USACE May, 1876 Flood USACE June 2, 1894 Flood S. Platte "Two Miles Wide" USACE 1921 Flood S. Platte USACE 1935 Flood Crook,Pawnee C r. Up to UPRR grade USACE Sept. 1938 Flood Tributaries to S. Platte USACE May 1942 Flood S. Platte USACE May 1949 Flood S. Platte USACE 12/31/1949 Blizzard 2-3 day storm Planning Team May 31, 1965 Flood S. Platte, USACE Pawnee Cr. Aug. 13, 1968 Flood ? 11"rain NCDC May 8, 1969 Flood S. Platte Fed. Dec. 15 cty USACE April, 1973 Flood S. Platte USACE 3/17.1977 Blizzard HEA lost 250 poles, ice damage Power out 2 weeks 1980 Grasshoppers State Dec CO-OEM 1980 Flood State Dec CWCB/CO-OEM 1981 Grasshoppers State Dec CO-OEM June, 1995 Flood $261,200 Road damage CWCB June 6, 1997 - Flood Atwood,Pawnee Creek 1,300 hms/St. @ 8.931M Total of$19.090M FEMA July, 1997 (Fed. # 1186) 100 hms/At @ $872.5K 13 homes destroyed CWCB 200 Bus/St @$1.374M $604.6K TH CO-OEM Ag. Damage @$6.850M $210K IFG(75%) Planning Team Roads$IM, RR-$100K $3.215M berm/levees 1998 Hail/Tomado Crook NCDC 2000 Hail NCDC 2000 Drought Contiguous County USDA (USDA Dec) April 2001 Winter Storm HEA lost 260 poles, ice damage REA's damaged REA Fed#1374 =$390,660 _ July 13-14, Severe Planning Team 2001 Weather 2002 Drought Over SIB in NE Colorado Planning Team/FSA 104 LOGAN COUNTY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TOTAL VALUES AT RISK FROM HAZARDS: (2001 data—actual values): Crook: 115 buildings valued @ $3,361,948; Fleming: 68 buildings valued @ $2,234,019 Miff $8.1M in assessed property Merino: $12.2M in assessed property Sterling: $661.4M in assessed property Unincorporated County: $576.11M in Residential Property $111.31M in Commercial Property $ 15.66M in Industrial Property $ 98.21M in Agricultural Property $ 87.86M in Public Utilities FLOODPLAIN INVENTORYNULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT AND ASSOCIATED NFIP DATA: NFIP Mapping Information: Crook: Panel#080111, 2/5/86, 100% of Town in floodplain, 115 buildings valued @ $3,361,948 Fleming: No Floodplain Identified Miff: Panel #080207, 8/4/87: Unknown #of buildings in floodplain, small area by tracks in SW corner of town Merino: No Floodplain Identified Sterling: Panel#080294, 2 panels + Index, 9/29/89, 1,660 buildings in Pawnee Creek Overflow floodplain valued @ $91.3M County: Panel#08011, 33 panels plus index, 9/29/89, no floodplain inventory conducted due to vast rural area Policies and Claims Information: There are 408 policies in force in the entire county Crook: 6 A-Zone policies Miff, 1 A-Zone policy Sterling:344 A-Zone polices, 20 policies outside the mapped floodplain, 33 claims paid for$ 67,815 (1978-1999) County: 33 A-Zone policies, 4 policies outside the mapped floodplain, 18 claims paid for$131,814 (1978-1999) 105 Floodplain Population Information: The state estimates that there are 3,676 people, 3,635 1-4 family structures, and 313 other types of structures in the county floodplains (1997). Logan County was identified in the State flood risk assessment as Moderate Risk, based upon the floodplain population, the number of structures at risk, and the number of dams. Critical Facilities in Floodplain: The Logan County CPS is still working to identify all critical facilities in the floodplains of each community, and will indicate if such facilities are protected from flooding. CROP LOSS DATA (for the years 1980-2001, from the Federal Crop Insurance Services): $ 854,097/year in crop insurance payments (average of claims paid: 1980-2001) $47,723,953 in coverage over the 21-year period $ 4,506,051 collected in premiums over the 21-year period $17,936,045 paid in claims over the 21-year period, receiving approximately a 4:1 return on investment OTHER HAZARDS IN LOGAN COUNTY: Tornadoes: 44 between 1950-1997 (approximately 1/yr) Grass Fires: (Crook Fire District: 420 incidents between 1971-2002; (approximately 14/per year) NOTE: Grass Fires are only a small percentage of the total number of calls fielded and responded to. West Nile: 2 infected horses, 1 infected human(2002) Dams: 1 Class 1 Dam (N. Sterling-`Point of Rocks reservoir"), 0 Class 2 Dams; Julesburg (Jumbo) Reservoir is on the eastern county border and is owned by Julesburg Irrigation. There are reports of the seeping along the west bank (in Logan County). Earthquake: None on record Landslide: No risk (OEM map) Severe wind storms: Average# Heat: Highest Recorded Temperature in County, 110 Cold: Lowest Recorded Temperature in County, -35 106 HISTORIC SITES IN LOGAN COUNTY: Merino: Davis Barn, 13341 County Rd. 8 (wood-frame Round-Roof Barn) Sterling: All Saints Episcopal Church German Congregational Zion Church First United Presbyterian Church Han-is House, 102 Taylor St. I & M Building 223 Main St. Logan County Courthouse Luft House, 1429 Colo. Hwy 14 St. Anthony's Roman Catholic Church, 329 3r°. St. Main Post Office, Federal Building & Courthouse, 3`°& Poplar Sterling Public Library, 210 S. 4`h Union Pacific Railroad Depot 113 N. Front DEVELOPMENT TRENDS IN LOGAN COUNTY: There is slow, steady growth to west of Sterling along Colo. Hwy 14. 107 LOGAN COUNTY CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT LOGAN Crook Fleming Iliff Merino Sterling Comp Plan Y N Y Land Use Plan Y Y Y Subdivision Ord Y Y Y Zoning Ord Y V Y NFIP/FPM Ord Y Y N Y N Y - Map Date Sep-89 Feb-86 NSFHA 8/87-FIRM NSFHA Sep-89 -Sub.Damaqe? N N/A -Administrator? Y N/A Y -#of FP Bldgs? N/A 1,660 -#of policies 33/37 6 0 1 N/A 344/364 -#of RL's? 0 N/A 0 CRS Rating N/A N/A N/A Stormwater Prgrm N N N Building Code Y N Y Building Official. Y N Y - Inspections? Y Y-NEW Y BCEGS Rating N N Y-6? LEOP In progress In progress HM Plan In Progress Warning Y Y Y Storm Ready? N Weather Radio? Y Sirens? Y Y Y Y:1+1 Y Y Emergency Warning N N N N N N Notification? Other? Y GIS System Y N N Structural Projects Y Y N Property Protection Y N N Crit.Fac.Protection Y N N Natural Res. Inv. N N N Cultural Res. Inv. N N N Erosion Control N N Sediment Control N Y Pub. Info Prqrm Website N N Env. Ed Prgrm N N N 108 Additional Existing Mitigation Projects and Capabilities: Sterling Irrigation Company February 1998; Watershed Protection constructed at main diversion at a cost of$65,247. March 1999; Riprap rollover dam at bladder gates constructed at Pawnee Creek diversion at a cost of$32,481. April 2000, Installed 100' of bladder gates along with 2 radial gates at a cost of$360,317 Company also previously has installed the following: Pawnee Cr. Diversion gate Pawnee Cr. Radial gate Headwater measuring weir Ditch end radial gate The minimum replacement value of these structures is $165,000 These structures work in smaller floods, but do not eliminate damage from huge floods Farmer's Pawnee Canal Company has 14 augmentation ponds and is constructing new ponds and new wellheads to lessen drought impacts. Highline Electric Association has established a new substation on E. side of Platte River to power City sewage plant, which flooded in 1965 and 1967. Sterling Correctional Facility can shelter and feed an additional 2,000 in an emergency, such as a prolonged closure of I-76 Peetz School is a designated shelter(with a keypad lock), and has 5 busses and food available, if necessary 109 LOGAN COUNTY GOALS & RECOMMENDATIONS GOAL: IMPROVE LOGAN COUNTY CAPABILITY TO REDUCE DISASTER LOSSES Action Item#1: County should work to become certified as "Storm Ready"by National Weather Service. Issue Statement: A primary goal of the Northeast Colorado Emergency Managers Association multi jurisdictional DMA Hazard Mitigation Plan is for each county to become "Storm Ready" certified within the next three years. "Storm Ready" certification is an indication that the community has prepared for adverse weather conditions, trained officials and citizens to recognize and report adverse weather conditions, and has established and regularly tested a system for receiving and disseminating severe weather information and warnings to the public. Implementation Manager and strategy: Sterling City/Logan County Emergency Manager will contact the National Weather Service to determine what Logan County needs to accomplish, and then seek funding through grants to make the necessary improvements. Among the known deficiencies are the lack of a county Emergency Operations Center(EOC) and a set of hazardous weather Emergency Operating Procedures (EOP) Priority: High Cost Estimate: $60,000 for Emergency Warning Notification system, additional sirens (e.g., Merino needs an all-hazards siren), NOAA"Weather Radio""repeaters," and NOAA "Weather Radios" and scanners for all government buildings, plus any necessary training, and public education. (EOC is a separate recommendation). Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: The potential for saving just one life, and providing time for individuals and businesses to take effective actions to protect property, far outweighs the potential cost of the warning system and equipment. This goal and recommended action was selected by the MCPC due to its return on investment and relative ease in achieving. It may be the single most effective action the county and the entire Planning Area can undertake to reduce future disaster losses. Cost-effectiveness of EOC addressed separately. 110 Action Item#2: County should work to increase weather alert speed. Issue Statement: The Sterling Emergency Communications Center currently uses sirens, cable TV override, the RUOK telephone system, and police/fire/ambulance radio frequencies to broadcast warnings. In addition, information is forwarded to two local radio stations. Establishing a dedicated local public frequency for alerts would allow dispatchers to warn the public directly, more quickly. Implementation Manager and strategy: Sterling City/Logan County Emergency Manager and the Sterling Emergency Communications Center. Seek funding through grants to fund the necessary improvements. Priority: High Cost Estimate: $15,000 Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: Again, the potential for saving just one life, and providing time for individuals and businesses to take effective actions to protect property, far outweighs the potential cost of the warning system and equipment. Action Item#3: County should establish a Local Emergency Planning Committee and complete the development of the multi- jurisdictional Local Emergency Operations Plan (LEOP). Issue Statement: Sterling City/Logan Office of Emergency Management is in the process of combining and updating the city and county LEOP. In the past, only a volunteer served as the Chairman of a one-person committee. Implementation Manager and strategy: Sterling City/Logan County Emergency Manager. LEPC will be used as an all-hazard planning and mitigation committee. The LEPC will lead the development, exercise and maintenance of the LEOP, under the direction of the Emergency Manager. The LEPC will also serve as the local Citizen Corps council, and the mandated LEPC required under EPA's SARA Title III. Priority: High Cost Estimate: $4,000 total: $3K for the LEOP and $1K for the LEPC. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: LEPC would coordinate planning and mitigation efforts county-wide. The LEPC and LEOP are requirements of EPA and FEMA, respectively 111 Action Item#4: County should pursue the development of a combined Emergency Operations Center/Communications Center for Logan County and Sterling. Issue Statement: Logan County has no dedicated EOC location. The City of Sterling only has the Council Chambers to use as an EOC in the event of an emergency or disaster. The Council Chambers has no communications, media or computer capabilities. An Ad Hoc EOC will significantly hinder emergency response, coordination, and management of any event. Co-locating with a Communications Center will improve the capabilities of both operations. This activity also provides a step forward towards Storm Ready certification by the NWS. Implementation Manager and strategy: Elected Officials of City of Sterling and Logan County. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Approximately$3 Million. Funding can be obtained through bonds, grants, and E-911 fees. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: This would provide a long-term solution to the crowded and inadequate Communications Center and establish an EOC facility. GOAL: REDUCE LOSSES OF LIFE AND PROPERTY FROM FLOODS, DROUGHTS AND STORMS/TORNADOES Action Item #5: Implement the Pawnee Creek Flood Mitigation Project(s). Issue Statement: Pawnee Creek flooded in 1997 causing nearly$20 million in losses. Engineering and cost/benefit studies have been completed. The project(s) consist of reconstructing bridges and widening channels that pass beneath; and constructing a channel to the Platte River. Some levees would also be required. Implementation Manager and strategy: Logan County Water Conservancy District (LCWCD). The LCWCD is scheduled to begin discussion with the engineers that developed the designs and studies in the near future. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Estimates range between $10-$20 million, depending upon the level of implementation. Funding can be obtained through a Mil Levy and Flood Mitigation grants. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: This would prevent waters from flooding property and allow water to flow to the South Platte. 112 Action Item#6: Implement the Sand Creek Flood Mitigation Project for Sterling. Issue Statement: This project is currently under development trough the NRCS and FSA. The project consists of a series f dams to contain flooding and remove North Sterling from the floodplain. Implementation Manager and strategy: Logan County Water Conservancy District (LCWCD) with NRCS and FSA Priority: High Cost Estimate: $2-5 million. Funding can be obtained through a Mil Levy for the local cost-share(35%). NRCS programs can provide 65%project funding. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: This would reduce future flood damages and eliminate the annual expense of mandatory flood insurance purchase by removing the entire portion of North Sterling from the identified floodplain. Action Item#7: Construct a multi purpose flood control dam at Pawnee Pass. Issue Statement: In conjunction with the Pawnee Flood Mitigation Project, this structure would control flood waters at an upstream location. It is currently in the feasibility study stage. The facility would be multi-objective, allowing for water conservation, drought mitigation, and flood control. Implementation Manager and strategy: Logan County Water Conservancy District(LCWCD). Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: $5-8 million. Funding can be obtained through a Mil Levy, NRCS, grants, and NE Colorado Water District. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: This would reduce future flood damages and also serve as a water conservation and drought mitigation project. 113 Action Item#8: Construct additional small retention ponds throughout the watershed Issue Statement: This project has been requested by many individual landowners. The retention ponds are to serve as flood and drought mitigation facilities. Implementation Manager and strategy: Logan County Water Conservancy District (LCWCD) and NRCS. Priority: Low Cost Estimate: Unknown at this time. Depend upon number of structures, size and location. Structures should be built on basis of availability of funds and the order in which they are requested. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: PROBLEMS: Public money for Private property. Should be built for B/C not first come first served. All projects are built on basis of availability of funds. Alternatives? Action Item#9: Promote the construction of model and full-scale tornado shelters and "Safe-Rooms" Issue Statement: On average, over the past 47 years, Logan County has experienced at least one tornado each year. While damage has been minimal to date, it is merely a matter of time before a more serious event occurs. "Safe-Rooms"have been proven to be effective, have been"pre-designed," and are relatively inexpensive. Implementation Manager and strategy: County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with local building materials suppliers and schools or Sterling Correctional facility. Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: $5,000 in grants and/or private donations. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: Project will encourage people to construct private"Safe-Rooms." Preventing one loss of life or serious injury from wind or other hazards would be worth the expense. 114 GOAL: INCREASE PUBLIC AWARENESS REGARDING POTENTIAL HAZARD LOSSES AND PROTECTIVE MEASURES Action Item #10: Sterling should undertake a targeted Public Education program for the 1,324 uninsured floodprone property owners. Crook should undertake a targeted Public Education program for the 109 uninsured floodprone property owners. Issue Statement: Of the 1,660 properties identified within the mapped floodplain of Sterling, only 344 carry flood insurance policies issued through the NFIP. Of the 115 properties identified within the mapped floodplain of Crook, only 6 carry flood insurance policies issued through the NFIP. Sterling and Crook should undertake public information campaigns to ensure that floodprone property owners and occupants are aware of the availability of flood insurance through the NFIP, and the limitations of other insurance policies they might own. Implementation Manager and strategy: The City of Sterling/Logan County Emergency Manager in conjunction with the local officials in Sterling and Crook responsible for enforcing the floodplain management ordinance. They should provide information describing the availability and benefits of flood insurance through the NFIP, as well as information of the likelihood of flooding and the consequences of flooding. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Existing budgets to develop and conduct survey by mail or telephone. Obtain existing public information brochures on flood insurance and flood damages and provide to floodprone property-owners. Monitor the number of insurance policies in force, and repeat as necessary. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is no increased cost to the Town. The benefits are to building owners who choose to insure against flood losses, and to taxpayers who no longer would have to subsidize those losses. Action Item#11: Logan County should provide "Refresher Training"for local lenders and insurance agents regarding the NFIP, publicize the NFIP, and promote the purchase of insurance for structures in the floodplain. Issue Statement: The enormous lack of flood insurance in Sterling and Crook raises the question whether or not elements of the NFIP are being properly implemented. Specifically, a requirement of any federally backed mortgage, including recent re-finances, within an identified floodplain is to purchase and maintain flood insurance throughout the life of the loan. A common area where this mandate is subject to error is through lenders and insurers. Specific training can be provided for these audiences free of charge. Implementation Manager and strategy: City/County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with the Sterling Floodplain Management Administrators should invite the CWCB to conduct "Refresher Training" for both lenders and insurance agents. CWCB and FEMA can also provide public information brochures describing the benefits of purchasing flood insurance. Each community should annually notify floodprone occupants of their location and of the availability of flood insurance. 115 Priority: High Cost Estimate: Can be accomplished within existing budgets or with minimal expense. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is little or no increased cost to the Town. The benefits are to floodprone building owners who choose to insure against flood losses, and to taxpayers who no longer would be faced with subsidizing those potential losses. Action Item#12: Sterling and Crook should conduct the one-day flood recovery& mitigation exercise as an awareness tool for local officials Issue Statement: Significant portions of Sterling, and all of Crook, are built in and around the floodplain, and floods would cause considerable damage and hardship within these communities. Conducting this FEMA-developed, one-day flood exercise would allow local officials to identify and react to the many problems they would likely encounter, thus providing a pre-flood"to-do" list, as well as an increased awareness of what emergency actions to take in an actual post-flood situation. Implementation Manager and strategy: City/County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with CWCB and FEMA. Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: Can be accomplished within existing budgets Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is little cost associated with this project. The benefits are to the community in being more prepared to realistically address the emergency management concerns of a flood in their community. Action Item#13: Promote the benefits of the crop insurance to the County agricultural community Issue Statement: Agricultural losses are the #1 annual dollar loss in Logan County. Over the past 20-years,policyholders have, on average, received a 4-to-1 return on their investment in this loss protection mechanism. Implementation Manager and strategy: City/County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with USDA and NRCS. Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: Can be accomplished within existing budgets Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is little cost associated with this project. The benefits are in receiving compensation for otherwise lost agricultural revenue, which in turn, contributes significantly to the county economy. 116 Action Item#14: Conduct a Public Education Campaign that addresses both Water Conservation and Tornado Safety. Issue Statement: For Water Conservation, create a display for use at the Logan County Fair. Develop Public Service Announcements. Issue "Conservation Awards"to homes, businesses and industries with exemplary practices. For Tornado Safety, reach out to rural schools, businesses and groups. Many from the outlying communities are unable to travel to Sterling for classes such as Weather Spotting." Implementation Manager and strategy: City/County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with NRCS for Water Conservation and NWS for Tornado Safety. Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: $6,000 for both programs. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: The benefits are in the potential for saving just one life, and providing time for individuals and businesses to take effective actions to protect property. Public education can be one of the most effective methods in reducing future property losses. The weather education efforts can bring severe weather education to 10,000 rural county residents. Providing awards creates public attention to "best management practices" and creates incentives for other private sector participation in similar efforts. Action Item#15: Create and Train and Equip a Logan County Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) Issue Statement: CERTs are a growing and effective means to improve community readiness and response capabilities, particularly in the post"9/11" environment of Emergency Management. FEMA widely supports the development of CERTs Implementation Manager and strategy: City/County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with ARC, CO-OEM and FEMA. CERT membership focuses on civic, school and other community leaders, including the local HAM radio operators. Priority: High Cost Estimate: $5,000 Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: Creating CERTs provides civilians with education and training to help themselves and others, as well as providing training assistance to our professional community responders. 117 Additional Action Items to be addressed by CPS. • Each incorporated community with a mapped floodplain should inventory critical facilities within the floodplain to determine if they should be protected. Facilities would include power substations, water sources such as wellheads, sewage treatment facilities, police and fire stations, hospitals, and nursing homes. • Investigate the feasibility of installing both "dry hydrants' and dedicated irrigation wells to augment water supply for fire suppression. Dry hydrants allow for water to be drawn easily from existing water sources such as ponds and lakes. Irrigation wells could be used for water supply if there were proper couplings to hook-up equipment. The wells are usually turned off during the winter months. F l Dry Fire Hydrant Installation as ., - i. _.._._._ .... .... f t t _ Y • Continue to request FEMA to revise the floodplain maps in Sterling. • Coordinate the collection of critical infrastructure and key assets (CI/KA) for the Sterling Fire Department to meet Homeland security needs. 118 MORGAN COUNTY PLANNING ELEMENT y .w. .... . . .. 'yam a 1 ',_,L rte.• SHERXIX SI 7 _ ' r NATIONAL _ F HISTORIC • ti a �t DISTRICT Ht roNe t`" ` NO l ti cog t I t+ IGGIN s . t .C ; a GWitty, to II Plavu a,{d rM Raki NN E'gE if • y, h 111 Srd6h' 3 , - " •�. i , 00 ,j4#; fr.:"r • e51 �' 6J4ft'i ti, r O. y R . Y"� Al. J � Nom. 119 Morgan County Planning Subcommittee and General Description The following entities participated in the DMA planning process through the Morgan County Planning Subcommittee(CPS): • Morgan County • City of Brush! • City of Fort Morgan • Town of Hillrose • Town of Wiggins • Brush School District • Fort Morgan Schools • Wiggins Schools • Weldon Valley School District • RE-3 School District • Morgan County Rural Electric Association • Fort Morgan Chamber of Commerce • Colorado Plains Medical Center • Quality Water • Leprino Foods The land area of Morgan County is 1,294 square miles. The population(2000 census) for Morgan County was 27,171 --- an average density of 21 people per square mile. Morgan County grew at a rate of 23.8%between 1990-2000. Morgan County is a rural county in the eastern plains of central Colorado, located a little over 100 miles northeast of the state capital of Denver. The largest city in the county is Fort Morgan. The South Platte River and Interstate Highway 76 transit the county. The county is typical of the mid-western plains, with a rural orientation and solid agricultural basis. :pd 21v • o4y„.t Y q t p ~ I T ` ' N .t ;,xTc aY vP,,ee 120 Morgan County History of Recorded Natural Hazard Losses There are 394 events listed by the National Climatic Data Center between 1950-2002 (NCDC Filters Applied: Tornadoes ≥ Fl; Damage ≥ $3,000; Hail ≥ 2"; Wind ≥ 75 MPH) k :Date kEvent".21/2,":0,,,„t* Location --,_' auiages Other Info„ ,3-‘ ,5 >Data.Source'. 1905 Flood S. Platte 1909 Smallpox c. 1920 Rabbits Rabbit Drives Ft. Morgan Museum 1930's Drought Planning Team Dust Bowl Drought Plan May, 1935 Flood Platte River Power/Water Out 1.5 days Ft. Morgan Traffic Delayed Several Days Museum 1938 Grasshoppers Newspaper February, 1938 Flood Brush FIS July 8, 1955 Tornado $3K F2 NCDC June 1, 1956 Tornado F2 NCDC June 19, 1956 Tornado F2 NCDC August 21, 1957 Wind 78 MPH NCDC June, 1965 Flood Planning team, newspapers June 7, 1966 Hail 2.75" NCDC July 7, 1977 Hail 2.75" NCDC August 1, 1979 Wind 70 MPH NCDC 1980 Grasshoppers (State Dec) CO-OEM 1981 Grasshoppers (State Dec) CO-OEM June 13, 1981 Tornado $25K Fl NCDC June 14, 1982 Hail 2.75" NCDC May 24, 1984 Tornado $250K F2 NCDC June 13, 1984 Tornado $25K Fl NCDC Sept. 21, 1984 Tornado $3K Fl NCDC June 24, 1985 Wind 70 MPH NCDC July 15, 1985 Hail 2.5" NCDC July 18, 1985 Tornado $25K Fl NCDC April 3, 1986 Ice storm Planning Team 09/18/1986 Tornado $250K F2 NCDC 121 .. - ;;Date' .; L.—Event w�" T ocation ,:"../;g4 ii,, toarriages>.•. • „Othe , i o ,. .DatalSo*eaga May 19, 1989 Wind 70MPH NCDC June 30, 1989 Hail 4.5 " NCDC June 1, 1990 Wind 77-95 MPH NCDC June 14, 1990 Tornado $250K F2 NCDC July 14, 1994 Wind/Hail $500K NCDC August 1, 1994 Drought USDA/FSA June, 1, 1995 Flood County $303,348.00 State Exec. Order DOLA/CO-OEM $12 Million Ag. Damage CWCB May 3, 1996 Tornado $150K F2 NCDC Wiggins $2,500.00 NCDC 10/29/1996 Wind $5.2Million NCDC 1996 Tornado Twin funnels $300,000.00 Local Declaration June 2, 1997 Flood Schaefer Draw, $286,341.00 15,000 acres affected DOLA/CO-OEM (Weldona) (Fed. # 1186) breaching of $327,080.00 36 homes affected CWCB July 30, 1997 the Riverside Ditch, 6 businesses affected FEMA (Weldona) and Weldon Valley $1,106,348.00 TOTAL DAMAGES NCDC August 3, 1997 Ditch $800,000 to Weldona Levee Project (Hillrose area) roads/bridges cost $629,229.00 June 22, 1997 Tornado Brush $3,500 Fl NCDC October, 1997 Blizzard NCDC May, 1998 Severe Wiggins, Brush, Log County Declaration, County Weather Lane Village, Ft. $31.8M in insurance (PI Project Impact June, 1998 Morgan application) Application Hail 1999 Hail County $278,531.00 Building Damage County Finance $8,357.41 Vehicle Damage Dept. March 07, 2000 Wind 100 MPH NCDC April 29, 2000 Wind Orchard & Weldona 95MPH NCDC May 17, 2000 Wind $25K 90 MPH NCDC July 12, 2000 Flood E. Central $50K Property damage NCDC $200K Crop damage 2000 Drought Contiguous County USDA/FSA April, 2001 Blizzard HEA lost 2 poles—$2,947 REA (FEMA MCREA>800 poles= DOLA/CO-OEM 122 Pt' j'dt e .' ,z sEveh ocit]0,. . yt e h ges , k `- Other:Irt 'q "Data° ,;! 1 #1374) $1.5M/power out 8 days FEMA $1.1 FEMA paid May 20, 2001 Wind $3.4M in property 84MPH NCDC damage 2002 Drought CO-OEM (USDA) USDA March 31, 2003 Snow Event Central Colorado Included in Disaster CO-OEM Declaration but did not FEMA participate Planning Team 2003 West Nile 53 reported human cases CDPHE Virus as of 10/02/2003 123 MORGAN COUNTY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TOTAL VALUES AT RISK FROM HAZARDS: Brush: $179,311,370 $34,800,440 (Actual Improvements &land combined, followed by Assessed Values, 2002 data) Ft. Morgan: $424,597,100 $90,997,440 Hillrose: $ 6,384,560 $ 1,056,420 Log Lane Village: $ 16,274,490 $ 1,793,180 Wiggins: $ 29,059,160 $ 4,316,160 Unincorporated County $69,336,360 in Residential/Assessed Value $40,995,680 in Commercial/Assesses Value $32,045,690 in Agricultural property/Assessed Value $51,682,270 in Industrial/Assessed Value FLOODPLAIN INVENTORYNULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT AND ASSOCIATED NFIP DATA: NFIP Mapping Information: Brush: Panel #080103, 10/13/81 Inventory: 935 buildings in mapped 100-year floodplain with an actual value of$63,583,252 39%of Brush is in the floodplain. 100-yr flood would average 2 deep, causing a 20% loss or$12.7 Million in damage Ft Morgan: Panel #08013, 2/5/86 Inventory: 1 building in floodplain, the Public Works storage facility(City is out of floodplain) Hillrose: not mapped Log Lane Village: not mapped Wiggins: Panel #080204, mapped in 2/15/79; now protected by a levee, no buildings in floodplain County: Panel #080129, 22 panels + index, 9/29/89, Q3 data available, no detailed inventory conducted due to vast rural area Policies and Claims Information: There are 155 policies in force in the entire county: Brush: There are 113 A-Zone policies, and 11 more outside of the floodplain. The insurance coverage in the A-Zone is $8,004,300 (87.9% of buildings are uninsured, 87.4% of value is uninsured). Claims: 17 losses, $2,970 paid (1978-99). Fort Morgan: There is 1 policy in the city. 1 loss has been reported, but the claim was not paid. Wiggins: There are two 2 policies outside the floodplain in Wiggins. No claims have ever been filed. County: There are 28 A-zone policies in the unincorporated areas of the county, and 4 policies outside of the mapped floodplains. 5 claims have been filed and paid for a total of$22,112. 124 Floodplain Population Information: The state estimates that there are 2,359 people, 408 1-4 family structures, and 79 other types of structures in the county floodplains (1997). Morgan County was identified in the State flood risk assessment as Moderate Risk, based upon the floodplain population, the number of structures at risk, and the number of dams. Critical Facilities in the Floodplain: Brush: City Hall Fire Hall, Pubic Works shop Water supply(Water Tank with well pump) and tanks in Floodplain Post Office Central School (no longer a school) Knearl School (museum, no longer a school) Thomson Elementary(property only) Brush Middle School (designated shelter) Flood Information for Unincorporated Communities: Weldona is protected by a levee Snyder is reported to be subject to flooding. The new bridge is said to have eliminated much of this problem. CROP LOSS DATA (for the years 1980-2001, from the Federal Crop Insurance Services): $818,780/year in crop insurance payments (average of claims paid: 1980-2001) $40,690,648 in coverage over the 21-year period $3,334,264 collected in premiums over the 21-year period $15,400,629 paid in claims over the 21-year period: Receiving over 4:1 return on investment OTHER HAZARDS IN MORGAN COUNTY: Tornadoes: 50 between 1950-1997, 1/year average Grass Fires: N/A West Nile: 53 human cases reported as of 10/02/2003 Dam Failure: 1 Class 1 Dam, 3 Class 2 Dams Landslides: No risk indicated (OEM map) Earthquakes: (None historically) Heat: Highest Recorded Temperature in County, 107 (NRCS) Cold: Lowest Recorded Temperature in County, -32 125 HISTORIC SITES IN MORGAN COUNTY: Brush: Ebenezer Lutheran Care Center, Brush Knearl School, Brush Carroll Hotel, Brush Central School, Brush Residence at 720 Cameron, Brush Ft. Morgan Rainbow Bridge, Fort Morgan Power Station, Ft. Morgan Main Street District, Fort Morgan (under application) Historic City Hall, Fort Morgan Armory, Fort Morgan Morgan Community College, Bloedom Center for Community Economic Development Houses on 400-500 block of Sherman, Fort Morgan County Old Sheriffs Office, County DEVELOPMENT TRENDS IN MORGAN COUNTY: Wiggins is growing to the south and east Brush is growing to the West; and Fort Morgan is growing to the southwest Hillrose has no trend. Does have a 4,500 head dairy. County is growing West of Highway 52 and south of County Road W. 126 MORGAN COUNTY CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT MORGAN Brush Ft. Morgan Log Lane Hillrose Wiggins Village Comp Plan Y Y Y Y Land Use Plan Y N Subdivision Ord Y Y N Zoning Ord Y Y Y NFIP/FPM Ord Y Y Y N/A N/A N/A -Sub.Damage? ? Y N/A -Administrator? In Progress Y Y N/A -#of FP Bldqs? 935 1 N/A -#of policies 113+11 1 N/A -#of RL's? 0 0 N/A CRS Rating N/A N/A N/A N/A Stormwater Prqrm Y Y Y N Building Code N Y Y-UBC '97 N Building Official. N Y Y Limited - Inspections? State P&E Y Y Limited BCEGS Rating Y-9 N N LEOP Y C In Progress C C C HM Plan Y In Progress In Progress C C C Warning Y Storm Ready? C C C C C C Weather Radio? Y Y Y Y Sirens? Y Y Y Y Emergency Warning Y C C C C C Notification? Other? Y-EAS Y-EAS Y-EAS Y-EAS AMBER GIS System N CADD Y N Structural Projects Y Y N Property Protection Y Y Y N Crit.Fac.Protection N/A N Backup N Power Natural Res. Inv. Y Y Y N Cultural Res. Inv. Y Y Y N Erosion Control Y Y Y N Sediment Control Y Y N N Pub. Info Prgrm NCEM Web Y Y Env. Ed Prqrm Y Y N 127 OTHER MITIGATION CAPABILITIES (PROJECTS IN PLACE): Morgan County was Project Impact Community Safe Room installed Safe Room Model constructed/available (scale and full size) County is NWS Storm Ready Certified Weldona Flood Levee constructed (1999-2001) Weldona Valley Day Care facility is elevated above floodplain and has safe-room installed Wiggins has a Flood Levee Wiggins Elementary has safety glass and film installed Snyder has a Flood Levee ? Flood retention pond at CR 15 & CR R (protecting roadways) County received FMA funding for flood proofing projects (paid for floodgates, 8 in Brush, and 7 in Ft. Morgan) Safety glass on school windows in Ft. Morgan and Brush! Spotter Network, Recent training, April 2003 •a fl '�, 1' y tr1 •f sac.' lbo rTaan'Mft Yorpan MAJb a �_ .. 4 . CRCAN SF• 1 I t. fe' `I e ,.r a�ffiIt(�s t, EMERGENCY h, ±,. TTY si , ',11L'e E-` * 4 OPERATIONS CENTERgec .1,g04 ;4:"-I ,, 128 MORGAN COUNTY RECOMMENDATIONS: COUNTY PRIORITIES FROM PROJECT IMPACT: Provide Education& Public Information Establish an Emergency Warning Notification System Support and Implement Mitigation Measures for Flooding and Tornadoes GOAL: INCREASE PUBLIC AWARENESS REGARDING POTENTIAL HAZARD LOSSES AND PROTECTIVE MEASURES Action Item#1: Brush should undertake a targeted Public Education program for the 822 uninsured floodprone property owners. Issue Statement: Of the 935 properties identified within the mapped floodplain of Brush, only 113 carry flood insurance policies issued through the NFIP. Brush should undertake a public information campaign to ensure that floodprone property owners and occupants are aware of the availability of flood insurance through the NFIP, and the limitations of other insurance policies they might own. Implementation Manager and strategy: The Morgan County Emergency Manager in conjunction with the local officials in Brush responsible for enforcing the floodplain management ordinance. They should provide information describing the availability and benefits of flood insurance through the NFIP, as well as information of the likelihood of flooding and the consequences of flooding. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Existing budgets. Obtain existing public information brochures on flood insurance and flood damages and provide to floodprone property-owners. Monitor the number of insurance policies in force, and repeat as necessary. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is no increased cost to the Town. The benefits are to building owners/occupants who choose to insure against flood losses, and to taxpayers who no longer would have to subsidize those losses. Action Item#2: Morgan County should provide "Refresher Training"for local lenders and insurance agents regarding the NFIP, publicize the NFIP, and promote the purchase of insurance for structures in the floodplain. Issue Statement: The significant lack of flood insurance in Brush raises the question whether or not elements of the NFIP are being properly implemented. Specifically, a requirement of any federally backed mortgage, including recent re-finances,within an identified floodplain is to purchase and maintain flood insurance throughout the life of the loan. A common area where this mandate is subject to error is through lenders and insurers. Specific training can be provided for these audiences free of charge. 129 Implementation Manager and strategy: Morgan County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with the Brush Floodplain Management Administrator should invite the CWCB to conduct"Refresher Training" for both lenders and insurance agents. CWCB, CO-OEM and FEMA can also provide public information brochures describing the benefits of purchasing flood insurance. Each community should annually notify floodprone occupants of their location and of the availability of flood insurance. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Can be accomplished within existing budgets or with minimal expense. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is little or no increased cost to the Town. The benefits are to floodprone building owners who choose to insure against flood losses, and to taxpayers who no longer would be faced with subsidizing those potential losses. Action Item#3: Brush should undertake a public works program to protect community facilities that would be critical to remain functioning in the event of a flood. Such "critical facilities"might include power substations, water supply pumps, sewage lift stations, and emergency response buildings like the police and fire stations. Typical protection methods include small walls, backflow valves, earthen berms, and elevation of critical components. Issue Statement: Most"critical facilities"of Brush lie within the floodplain. Protecting them from flood damages would ensure that they would remain functioning when needed most Implementation Manager and strategy: Brush Public Works in conjunction with the Morgan County Emergency Manager, CWCB, CO-OEM and FEMA. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Unknown at this time. Depends upon the number of facilities and the design of the solutions. Some small projects should be able to be worked into existing budgets. Larger projects will require grants (CDBG, FMA, FEMA/PDM or HMGP). Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: The benefits are to the community in being more prepared to realistically address the emergency management concerns of a flood in their community. One can calculate the additional damages that would be incurred if the power, water, and sewage were to fail, and emergency response was slowed or inhibited. 130 Action Item#4: Wiggins should conduct a full-scale exercise to practice closing the floodgate that seals the levee protecting the community. Issue Statement: Significant portions of Wiggins are subject to flooding if the levee protecting the community cannot be properly sealed in a timely manner. Additionally, residents are at increased risk because when the levee was constructed the community was administratively"removed" from the floodplain--- eliminating the requirement for floodprone building owners to purchase and maintain flood insurance coverage for their property. There are only 2 flood insurance policies in force in the town of Wiggins. The exercise would re-enforce how to seal the levee, the length of time required to put the barriers in place, and to make sure they still have all the timbers required to seal the levee. The exercise will reveal that the gate cannot currently be sealed. The roadway guardrail prevents placement of the gate, and the whereabouts of the timbers used to seal the levee are reportedly unknown. Implementation Manager and strategy: Wiggins Public Works, Morgan County Emergency Manager, and CDOT. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Can be accomplished within existing budgets. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is little cost associated with this project. The benefits are to the community in being more prepared to realistically address the emergency management concerns of a flood in their community. n nom`. • I 131 Action Item#5: Brush should conduct the one-day flood recovery& mitigation exercise as an awareness tool for local officials and a separate short exercise with the 8 building owners to practice using the flood gates that were purchased and installed utilizing FMA funding. Issue Statement: Significant portions of Brush are built in and around the floodplain, and a flood would cause considerable damage and hardship within the community. Conducting this FEMA-developed, one-day flood exercise would allow local officials to identify and react to the many problems they would likely encounter, thus providing a pre-flood "to-do" list, as well as an increased awareness of what emergency actions to take in an actual post-flood situation. The exercise for the 8 building owners would re- enforce how to use the system, the length of time required to put the system in to place, and to make sure they still have all the pieces of hardware required to make the system work. Implementation Manager and strategy: City/County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with CWCB, CO-OEM and FEMA. Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: Can be accomplished within existing budgets, or small ($2,500) training grant. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is little cost associated with this project. The benefits are to the community in being more prepared to realistically address the emergency management concerns of a flood in their community. Action Item#6: Fort Morgan should conduct a short exercise with the 7 building owners to practice using the flood gates that were purchased and installed utilizing FMA funding. Issue Statement: The exercise for the 7 building owners would re-enforce how to use the system, the length of time required to put the system in to place, and to make sure they still have all the pieces of hardware required to make the system work. Implementation Manager and strategy: City/County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with CWCB, CO-OEM and FEMA. Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: Can be accomplished within existing budgets, or small ($2,500) training grant. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is little cost associated with this project. The benefits are to the community in being more prepared to realistically address the emergency management concerns of a flood in their community. 132 Action Item#7: Promote the benefits of the crop insurance to the County agricultural community Issue Statement: Agricultural losses are the #1 annual dollar loss in Morgan County. Over the past 20-years, policyholders have, on average, received a 4-to-1 return on their investment in this loss protection mechanism. Implementation Manager and strategy: City/County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with USDA and NRCS. Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: Can be accomplished within existing budgets Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is little cost associated with this project. The benefits are in receiving compensation for otherwise lost agricultural revenue, which in turn, contributes significantly to the county economy. 133 PHILLIPS COUNTY PLANNING ELEMENT - , rvs. y f,: x _. Haxmn i - C2 �� x «,�.. , 'rte' ti A'rM " .. • ..... y 1 vY'va . - - -Holyoke t • J F � s y t iv 4 I 1 l Y1 5984 r, .- / i+r... „ � } I Paoli IA ky. •i .. ,tea.. a ' _•r 134 Phillips County Planning Subcommittee and General Description The following entities participated in the DMA planning process through the Phillips County Planning Subcommittee (CPS): • Phillips County • Town of Haxtun • City of Holyoke • Haxtun Public Schools • Holyoke Public Schools The land area of Phillips County is 688 square miles—the 2"a smallest within the Planning Area. The population(2000 census) for Phillips County was 4,806--- an average density of 7 people per square mile. Phillips County grew at a rate of 6. hill 1990-2000. The county is predominantly rural. r 4Y cf' %.b ��+' 135 Phillips County History of Recorded Natural Hazard Losses There are 152 events listed by the National Climatic Data Center between 1950-2002 (NCDC Filters Applied: Tornadoes ≥ Fl; Damage ≥ $3,000; Hail ≥ 2"; Wind ≥ 75 MPH) 4;T:Date t Ir Event` ';1114 r , ',Location„= . Damages : Other Info 11414. Data So e 1930's Drought Dust Bowl Farms abandoned Planning Team 6/6/40 Flood Frenchman Creek 2.8"rain in 24 hours FIS 9/23/41 Flood Frenchman Creek 2.0"rain in 24 hours FIS 4/15/1948 Prairie Fire 50,000 acres burned 4 lives lost CO School of Mines 12/31/1949 Blizzard Northeast Colorado Isolation the towns Power out 2-3 weeks 6/28/1950 Hail $3-5IC in Holyoke Golf ball size for 1 hour NCDC 2/8/1951 Drought Tried cloud seeding Newspaper 5/15/51 Flood Frenchman Creek 3.5"rain in 24 hours FIS 6/8/1955 Tornado $250K F2, 1 injury NCDC 5/24/1965 Tornado $25K F2 NCDC 7/3/1971 Tornado $3K Fl NCDC 8/15/1976 Tornado $25K NCDC 3/17/1977 Blizzard 5,500 poles lost-HEA 1,600 in Phillips Newspaper ice damage power out up to 6wks REA 1980 Grasshoppers State Dec CO-OEM 1981 Grasshoppers State Dec CO-OEM 5/2/1991 Tornado $250K Fl NCDC 8/6/1993 Hail Holyoke $500K in crop damage NCDC 6/12/1994 T-Storm/Wind Haxtun $50K NCDC 8/1/1994 Tornado Haxtun $500? Damage at airport NCDC August, 1994 Drought Multi-County $31M NCDC 6/6/1995 T-Storm/Wind Haxtun $6K NCDC June, 1995 Flood $68,881 road damage CWCB-CO pd$35K CWCB 6/15/1997 Flood $264K to roads 31 homes affected FEMA Fed#1186 $400K total 30,200 acres lost CO-OEM (wheat, corn,millet) CWCB July, 1990 Drought 20 counties $1 billion(USDA) USDA 2000 Drought (USDA Dec) Contiguous County USDA 2000 Ice Storm Minor damage $1K/pole NCDC April 2001 Winter Storms REA's damaged REA Fed#1374 136 PHILLIPS COUNTY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TOTAL VALUES AT RISK FROM HAZARDS: Haxtun: $4.585M in Assessed Value (2001 data) Holyoke: $9.703M in Assessed Value (2001 data) Paoli: $ 670K in Assessed Value (2001 data) Unincorporated County: $118.329M in Residential/Actual Value $ 31.367M in Commercial/Actual Value $ 70.266M in Agricultural Property/Actual Value $ 580K in Industrial/Actual Value FLOODPLAIN INVENTORYNULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT AND ASSOCIATED NFIP DATA: NFIP Mapping Information: Haxtun: Panel#NSFHA(no special flood hazard area=no mapped floodplain); mapped in 1974, rescinded later Holyoke: Panel #080141-FIRM, 2/19/1987 Inventory: 70 properties in the mapped floodplain 3 commercial properties in floodplain valued @ $984,124 (these are 2001 actual values) 15 residential properties in floodplain valued @1,572,271 33 manufactured homes in floodplain valued @ $344,517 (Bahler's MH Park) 19 manufactured homes in floodplain valued @ $93,457 (Frenchman's MH Park) Paoli: Never Mapped County:Never Mapped, but joined regular program in 1998, so insurance is available Policies and Claims Information: There are 4 policies in force in the entire county: Holyoke: 3 policies for$326,300, 1 paid, $2,244 (78-99); 67 uninsured floodprone buildings County: 1 policy for$45,000; 0 paid Floodplain Population Information: The state estimates that there are 424 people, 119 1-4 family structures, and no other types of structures in the county floodplains (1997). Phillips County was identified in the State flood risk assessment as Low Risk, based upon the floodplain population, the number of structures at risk, and the number of dams. 137 Critical Facilities in Floodplain: Haxtun: Community has aboveground drainage system, using an inverse crowned road. In 1987, the floodplain map was rescinded for Haxtun, as all areas were determined to be in the"C" zone. The County has recently raised the roads, and they now act as a dam and actually lessen the drainage problem. WAPA (Western Area Power Association) substation has had water before (— 1 ft), though it would take four feet of water to interrupt the power. Holyoke: Sewage lift station moved. Original was 'V4 mile N. Moved in 1999 as part of sewer master plan update; the new sewer line is elevated above flood stage. Power substation is at the edge of the 500-year floodplain. CROP LOSS DATA for the years 1980-2001, from the Federal Crop Insurance Services: $866,680/year in crop insurance payments (average of claims paid: 1980-2001) $45,085,255 in coverage over the 21-year period $4,213,333 collected in premiums over the 21-year period $18,200,278 paid in claims over the 21-year period: Receiving over 4:1 return on investment OTHER HAZARDS IN PHILLIPS COUNTY: Tornadoes: 27 between 1950-1997 (approx 1 every other year) Grass Fires: 60/year, minor(<30 acres)—"stubble" fires, drain fires, lightning West Nile: 2 infected horses (2002), 21 reported human cases as of 10/02/2003 Dams: 0 Class 1 Dams; 0 Class 2 Dams; 1 Dry dam: The"Means" Wildlife area(5 miles west of Holyoke) has an earthen dam that has no permanent pool. It failed once when retaining water, but caused little damage. Earthquake: None on record, Low Risk by USGS NO landslide risk(OEM map) Severe Windstorms: Average# Heat: Highest Recorded Temperature in County, 109 Cold: Lowest Recorded Temperature in County, -33 138 HISTORIC SITES IN PHILLIPS COUNTY: St. Paul's Lutheran Church, Amherst First National Bank of Haxtun (Town Hall) Shirley Hotel (Haxtun Inn) Heginbotham House (Holyoke Public Library) Reimer-Smith Oil Station, Holyoke Sawyer House, Sears Hotel (Burge Hotel), Holyoke I k 4 k w A '' t fTHl5 SIA�IroN �( '}* RI '^� [TI3 ' AS"A[FN IIAUifONTHF t 1 • DEPART 'LIRIOR F � 'Axxt' gh'3 ,, �. v'ft; c.,s :+F"'p�w �. _} DEVELOPMENT TRENDS: None. While the county has experienced limited growth, there is no distinguishable pattern as to where it occurs. 139 PHILLIPS COUNTY CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT PHILLIPS CO Haxton Holyoke Paoli Comp Plan Y N Y Y Land Use Plan Y N Y Y Subdivision Ord Y Y Y Zoning Ord Y Y V- being updated Y NFIP/FPM Ord Y N-Map Rescinded Y N - Map Date Never Mapped 12/11/1985-NSFHA 2/19/1987-FIRM Never Mapped - Sub.Damage? N N/A Y N/A -Administrator? Y-Zoning Office N/A Y-Bldg. Inspector N/A -#of FP Bldgs? 0 0 70 0 -#of policies 1 N/A 3 N/A -#of RL's? 0 N/A 0 N/A CRS Rating N/A N/A N/A N/A Stormwater Prgrm N N Y N Building Code NI Y-'98 UBC Y-'98 UBC N Building Official. Y-Zoning permits Y-As to type/Land-Use Y-Building Official N - Inspections? N N Y-Setbacks only N BCEGS Rating N N N N LEOP Y C C C HM Plan N N N N Warning Y Y Y Y Storm Ready? N N-But has Spotters N N Weather Radio? Partial reception Y Partial reception Partial reception Sirens? N Y-2 Y-5: public info exists Y-1 Emergency Warning N N N N Notification? Other? cable override, but N N N EAS 2/3 not on cable: mostly satellite GIS System CADD N Partial N Structural Projects N Inverse crown streets N N Property Protection N Bought lots for inverted N N streets Crit.Fac.Protection N N N N Natural Res. Inv. N N N N Cultural Res. Inv. Y N N N Erosion Control N N N N Sediment Control N N N N Pub. Info Prgrm Newspaper N N N Env. Ed Prgrm N N N N 140 OTHER MITIGATION CAPABILITIES (PROGRAMS/PROJECTS IN PLACE): The Highline Electric Association has an ongoing Hazard Mitigation program—though they don't formally call it that. The program is implemented as an ongoing effort, and affects both new construction &rebuilding. Each year, 30-50 miles of power lines are replaced or built, at a cost of approximately$1,000 per pole, with 20 poles per mile. The old standard was 18 poles per mile, which equates to between- pole spans of 280-300 feet. Under the new program, spans do not exceed 250 feet, and the poles being utilized are larger in diameter. There is an on-site drainage pond built in 1997 at the Highline Electric Association building (1300 S. Interocean Avenue. It was increased in size in 2000. ((. q Yes .NG'k the N£v �;i v 1� F .4: 4t roj The County has a web site that is used predominantly for economic development, and each community within the county has access to 18 pages of space. This holds significant opportunities for supporting a loss-reduction public education program. 141 PHILLIPS COUNTY RECOMMENDATIONS: Action Item#1: County should work to become certified as "Storm Ready"by National Weather Service. Issue Statement: A primary goal of the Northeast Colorado Emergency Managers Association multi jurisdictional DMA Hazard Mitigation Plan is for each county to become"Storm Ready"certified within the next three years. "Storm Ready" certification is an indication that the community has prepared for adverse weather conditions, trained officials and citizens to recognize and report adverse weather conditions, and has established and regularly tested a system for receiving and disseminating severe weather information and warnings to the public. Implementation Manager and strategy: Philips County Emergency Manager will contact the National Weather Service to determine what Phillips County needs to accomplish, and then seek funding through grants to make the necessary improvements. Priority: High Cost Estimate: $8,000. Cost could change depending upon need for additional sirens, NOAA"Weather Radio" "repeaters," and NOAA"Weather Radios" for all government buildings, plus any necessary, training, and public education. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: The potential for saving just one life, and providing time for individuals and businesses to take effective actions to protect property, far outweighs the potential cost. This goal and recommended action was selected by the MCPC due to its return on investment and relative ease in achieving. It may be the single most effective action the county and the entire Planning Area can undertake to reduce future disaster losses. Action Item#2: Holyoke should undertake a targeted Public Education program for the 67 uninsured floodprone property owners Issue Statement: Of the 70 properties identified within the mapped floodplain of Holyoke, only 3 carry flood insurance policies issued through the NFIP. The majority of these properties are manufactured housing—which is more susceptible to flood damages than other type of construction. The City of Holyoke should undertake a public information campaign to ensure that floodprone property owners and occupants are aware of the availability of flood insurance through the NFIP, and the limitations of other insurance policies they might own. However, it is important to recognize that some manufactured housing producers and sellers do offer other types of flood insurance, so the first effort should be to determine if any of the floodprone property owners own, or think they own, some type of flood insurance. Implementation Manager and strategy: The County Emergency Manager should conduct a survey of floodprone property-owners to determine if they own, or believe they own, some form of flood insurance. This should be followed up with information 142 describing the availability and benefits of flood insurance through the NFIP, as well as information of the likelihood of flooding and the consequences of flooding. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Existing budgets to develop and conduct survey by mail or telephone. Obtain existing public information brochures on flood insurance and flood damages and provide to floodprone property-owners. Monitor the number of insurance policies I force, and repeat as necessary. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is no increased cost to the Town. The benefits are to building owners who choose to insure against flood losses, and to taxpayers who no longer would have to subsidize those losses. Action Item#3: Replace Railroad bridge %z mile west of Paoli, north of U.S. Highway 6 Issue Statement: Flooding occurs every few years in Paoli. Two projects have been completed in an attempt to alleviate the problem. Phillips County constructed a major drainage project on the North Fork of Frenchman Creek, and the Colorado Department of Transportation is currently replacing the highway bridge with a larger structure. One needed last step would be to replace the railroad bridge structure to allow a larger flow. Implementation Manager and strategy: The County Emergency Manager should contact the NKC (Nebraska-Kansas-Colorado) railroad Operations Officer to initiate the conversation. The County Emergency Manager could also ask CDOT to provide NKC with the benefit-cost analysis they utilized to justify constructing their improved bridge. The County should also provide their justification and design work for the drainage project they constructed. Priority: High Cost Estimate: $300,000 Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: Major damage has occurred in Paoli due to water not being able to pass through the CDOT and NKC bridges. The water is diverted into town. This project will prevent those damages from recurring. Action Item#4: Improve the drainage system with the City of Holyoke by installing Storm Drains. Issue Statement: The drainage down Gordon and Hale streets in Holyoke is inadequate during heavy rainstorms. Implementation Manager and strategy: Mark Brown, City Superintendent. City should document prior damages incurred as a result of inadequate drainage, and estimate future potential losses in a 100-year event, in order to justify installation of storm drains. 143 Simultaneously, monitor funding availability through grants for public infrastructure improvements (EPA, CDBG, FEMA, CWCB, CDOT, DOLA) Priority: High Cost Estimate: $250,000. Grants should be explored. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: If drainage is not improved, substantial flood damage could occur. Action Item#5: Integrate the concept of Mitigation into the Comprehensive Plans (County, Holyoke, Paoli) as scheduled review and updates are undertaken Issue Statement: One of the most successful and easiest ways to accomplish hazard mitigation is to integrate the concept into the day-to-day workings of the local government. As the existing Comprehensive Plans undergo their regular review and update, opportunities should be identified to include the acknowledgement of existing hazard threats in the plans. Community activities, such as land-use and development should then take this hazard information into account, thus minimizing any potential loss from hazards before they occur. Implementation Manager and strategy: County Emergency Manager, Community Planners and Development Coordinators. These officials can provide explain the concept to the review committees and provide sample language that can be customized and adopted. A copy of a"model"natural hazards element for a local comprehensive plan is available through MA. Priority: High,because updates are currently scheduled Cost Estimate: Zero. Utilize existing budgets to pay for staff time required Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is no increased cost to the Town. The benefits are decreased exposure of future development and community assets to losses from natural hazards. Action Item #6: Undertake a Public Education campaign to inform people about keeping grass/brush away from structures, animal pens and chemical storage areas. Issue Statement: Small Grass Fires are the most frequently occurring hazard within the county. This education effort would help reduce the losses that are caused by these fires. 144 Implementation Manager and strategy: County Emergency Manager and community Fire Departments Priority: High Cost Estimate: Minimal Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is little cost associated with this project. The benefits are decreased exposure of future development and community assets to losses from natural hazards. Action Item#7: Installation of inverted streets (or lower street level, as storm water system) in Haxtun Issue Statement: During heavy rainstorms, the drainage in Haxtun, from Town Hall down Fletcher, Logan and Grant Streets is not adequate. Implementation Manager and strategy: George Michael, Haxtun Town Superintendent. Town should document prior damages incurred as a result of inadequate drainage, and estimate future potential losses in a 100-year event, in order to justify installation of inverse street crowns or lowering of street surface level (so graded curbs contain drainage flows). Simultaneously, monitor funding availability through grants for public infrastructure improvements (EPA, CDBG, FEMA, CWCB, CDOT, DOLA) Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: $500,000. Grants should be explored Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: If drainage is not improved, substantial flood damage could occur. Action Item#8: Installation of an overflow channel east of City of Holyoke. Issue Statement: Flooding has occurred in Holyoke because water is unable to move quickly through the Town. It currently backs up and spreads out. If the ox-bows in Frenchman Reek could be straightened with an"overflow channel," it would allow flood flows to get pass through Town quickly. That would prevent the current backing up and spreading out of floodwaters. Implementation Manager and strategy: Mark Brown, City Superintendent. City should document prior damages incurred as a result of water backing up and spreading out, and estimate future potential losses in a 100-year event, in order to justify installation of storm drains. Simultaneously, monitor funding availability through grants for public infrastructure improvements (EPA, CDBG, FEMA, CWCB, CDOT, DOLA) 145 Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: $300,000. Grants should be explored Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: If drainage is not improved, substantial flood damage could occur. Action Item#9: Promote the benefits of the crop insurance to the County agricultural community Issue Statement: Agricultural losses are the#1 annual dollar loss in Phillips County. Over the past 20-years, policy holders have, on average, received a 4-to-1 return on their investment in this loss protection mechanism. Implementation Manager and strategy: County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with USDA and NRCS. Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: Can be accomplished within existing budgets Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is little cost associated with this project. The benefits are in receiving compensation for otherwise lost agricultural revenue, which in turn, contributes significantly to the county economy. 146 SEDGWICK COUNTY PLANNING ELEMENT _ ',IV, R A I L R O 1 U S f y ..t.'., 'vim � _ '. x' F {{�''� C tlC 1 yt .9a. M tx',7s,--.'�� SY ?�Rt_�Yp�� 5*-- X11 . .1 i� i � t. *„ 4�. � �...,.�,._ ��,.$ u I S aP �. t_____—...• Ovid „,...J.,,.,,,„ 1 s �r C TY IRI MIT ,7 _ ! ' ELE 3521 FT ---,Ts -- - , y .. a._. .t N:- -�--'- -t,,,,- -- S•he: *'•^u .n '�I T, .s ..yam k""' . "' ' •: °'Js.: , y� a , is n , A°`. - ss.,,s: uy,v„- ' , amp. LIB - `., . A z } COL° POO d; 147 Sedgwick County Planning Subcommittee and General Description The following entities participated in the DMA planning process through the Sedgwick County Planning Subcommittee(CPS): • Sedgwick County • Town of Julesburg • Town of Ovid • Town of Sedgwick • Julesburg Irrigation District • Julesburg Public Schools • Highline Electric Association • Kinder-Morgan Gas Company The land area of Sedgwick County is 549 square miles—the smallest within the Planning Area. The population(2000 census) for Sedgwick County was 2,747---an average density of 5 people per square mile. Sedgwick County grew at a rate of 2.1%between 1990-2000. The county is predominantly rural. The County was named after General John Sedgwick, killed in 865 while staffing Army Posts established to protect the Pony Express,the Stagecoach line and the Emigrant train from Indians. Indians burned down Julesburg the same year. It is where Lodgepole Creek(from Wyoming and then Nebraska)meets the South Platte River. It was a popular place for Wagon Trains to cross the Platte River on their way to Oregon and California. Ovid was home to a Great Western Sugar Beet factory between 1925-1985. nAII RI) tI3 ` yy. ~asi is e: x p n xnnlm sw:�.�.:'. .. ✓, � . fin' . .. 148 Sedgwick County History of Recorded Natural Hazard Losses There are 178 events listed by the National Climatic Data Center between 1950-2002 (NCDC Filters Applied: Tornadoes ≥ Fl; Damage ≥ $3,000; Hail ≥ 2"; Wind ≥ 75 MPH) '^Date k`/f Event ;rt t A=Location ''iDamages Other Info ;;_ 4 __ � - , . . aEa'Source 4&12/1903 Grassfires Freiberg's bridge to Considerable winter feed Between Venango& Ft. Sedgwick Historical Sedgwick: S. of river Holyoke Society(FSHS) 1908, 1910, Grassfires FSHS 1916, 1917 May 10, 1917 Dam Failure Julesburg Reservoir Took out RR, FSHS Flooded Sedgwick 12/29/1924 Rabbits 125,000 killed in 6 Governor Declared 4,000 shipped to FSHS county area Hunt Day Denver needy 1931, 1937, Grasshoppers All beets in Ovid Spraying split 3 ways FSHS late 1950's with Fed& State Jan/May, Rabbits 15,000 killed FSHS 1935 1935 Flood USACE/FSHS 1930's Drought Dust Bowl Farms abandoned FSHS June 6, 1947 Tornado Julesburg FSHS Jan. 6, 1949 Blizzard Julesburg,Ovid 6-ft drifts, REA out FSHS rail service stopped Ovid Sugar factory NCDC provided power May 24, 1951 Flood Julesburg Bridge, RR washed out NCDC homes flooded crops washed/silted out June 22, 1960 Tornado&hail Between Ovid& Trees,roofs, antennas, 9 mile swath NCDC Julesburg Drive-in, water tanks, HEA power lines, Ag buildings,cars 2400 windows @ 2245 acres of beets in Ovid Ovid Sugar factory June 29, 1960 Tornado&hail NW of Sedgwick to 2 dead,thrown from cars NCDC Amherst Blgs, Power lines,roofs May 31, 1965 Flood Ovid/Lodgepole Came south from USDA/SCS Creek/S. Platte Sidney,NE May 8, 1969 Flood S. Platte Fed. Dec. 15 cty NCDC March 25, Snow Storm NCDC 1975 1980 Grasshoppers State Dec CO-OEM 1980 Flood State Dec CO-OEM 149 ... .:Date ei01 „>> . b.4tLocation ,e.,,,, ,-4.64,,,Damages ,,,,.(4,,a . ,;, Other' nfo,' ' :a,, .a., Data.Souree , 1981 Grasshoppers State Dec CO-OEM July, 1990 Drought 20 counties $1 billion(USDA) USDA June, 1995 Flood $68,331 road damage CWCB- CWCB 2000 Drought (USDA Dec) Contiguous County USDA April 2001 Winter Storms Ice damage: HEA lost 563 poles. REA's damaged FEMA, CO-OEM Fed#1374 FEMA provided$12,853 Poles cost$829,960 REA&CWCB August 24, Hail-Winds In County 80%of beet crop, FSA report: USDA/FSA SITREP 2002 75% of beans&soybeans 20 bldgs.,40 vehicles 150 SEDGWICK COUNTY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TOTAL VALUES AT RISK FROM HAZARDS: Julesburg: $27.813M in Total Actual Values (2002 data) Sedgwick: $2.249M in Total Actual Values Ovid: $4.898M in Total Actual Values Unincorporated County: $60.235M in Total Actual Values FLOODPLAIN INVENTORYNULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT AND ASSOCIATED NFIP DATA: NFIP Mapping Information: Julesburg: Panel # 080169 (FIRM), 4/2/86. There are no buildings in the floodplain within the Town of Julesburg. Ovid: Panel #080170 (FHBM), 11/21/78 Inventory: There are 7 Buildings in identified floodplain of Ovid with a total assessed value of$580,980. Ovid does not participate in the NFIP and is therefore ineligible for FEMA PDM/FMA funding, and flood insurance in unavailable. Sedgwick: Panel # 080171, 8/3/89 Inventory: There are 3 buildings in identified floodplain of Sedgwick with a total assessed value of$30,268 County: Never mapped. Policies and Claims Information: There are zero policies within the participating communities. Zero claims have been filed, and none have been paid. Floodplain Population Information: The state estimates that there are 7 people, 4 1-4 family structures, and 11 other structures in the county floodplains (1997). Sedgwick County was identified in the State flood risk assessment as Low Risk, based upon the floodplain population, the number of structures at risk, and the number of dams. Critical Facilities in the Floodplains: Julesburg: The sewer facility is in the floodplain. It is protected by a small berm. Sedgwick: The sewer facility is in the floodplain. It is protected by a small berm. 151 CROP LOSS DATA (for the years 1980-2001, from the Federal Crop Insurance Services): $356,959/year in crop insurance payments (average of claims paid: 1980-2001) $19,723,896 in coverage over the 21-year period $1,698,597 collected in premiums over the 21-year period $7,496,149 paid in claims over the 21-year period: Receiving over 4:1 return on investment OTHER HAZARDS IN SEDGWICK COUNTY: Tornadoes: 23 occurrences between 1950-1997 (approximately 1 every other year) Grass Fires: numerous occurrences, primarily caused by lightning and sparks from braking railroad cars West Nile: 2 infected horses, (2002)—Have $4,000 budget for weed&pest control Dams: I Class 1 Dam; (Julesburg Reservoir) 0 Class 2 Dams; Irrigation ditches breach during flood events Noxious Weeds: Hunting clubs buying land and letting it revert to natural state. Noxious weeds (Canadian and Vineweed) then clog the drainageways and watercourses, spreading the water over a wider area, in turn spreading the seeds, creating an ongoing, worsening cycle. Earthquake: None on record NO landslide risk(OEM map) Average# of severe windstorms: N/A Heat: Highest Recorded Temperature in County, 109 Cold: Lowest Recorded Temperature in County, -37 HISTORIC SITES IN SEDGWICK COUNTY: Hippodrome Theatre, Julesburg Julesburg Library, Julesburg Ovid High School, Ovid Train Depot& Sedgwick Hotel/Bank are being added to list DEVELOPMENT TRENDS: None. While the county has experienced limited growth, there is no distinguishable pattern as to where it occurs. 152 SEDGWICK COUNTY CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT SEDGWICK Julesburg Ovid Sedgwick Comp Plan N Y N Y Land Use Plan Y Y N Y Subdivision Ord Y Y N Y Zoning Ord Y Y Y Y NFIP/FPM Ord N Y N Y - Map Date N/A 4/86-FIRM 11/78 FHBM 8/89-FIRM - Sub.Damage? N N N Y -Administrator? N Y N Y -#of FP Bldgs? N/A 0 7 3 -#of policies 0 0 0 0 -#of RL's? 0 0 0 0 CRS Rating N/A N/A N/A N/A Stormwater Prgrm N N N N Building Code N-Disclaimer re: State minimum codes Y N N Building Official. N Y N N - Inspections? N Y N N BCEGS Rating N N N N LEOP Y County County County HM Plan Y-This Plan County County County Warning Y Y Y V Storm Ready? N N/A N/A N/A Weather Radio? Y Y Y Y Sirens? N Y Y Y Emergency Warning N N N N Notification? Other? EAS N N N GIS System Y N N N Structural Projects Y N N N Property Protection N N N N Crit.Fac.Protection N N N N Natural Res. Inv. N N N N Cultural Res. Inv. Y N N N Erosion Control N N N N Sediment Control N N N N Pub. Info Prgrm Y Newsletter Newsletter Y Env. Ed Prgrm N N N Y 153 OTHER MITIGATION CAPABILITIES (PROGRAMS/PROJECTS IN PLACE): There are 7 dry dams in the Sedgwick-Sand Draws Watershed, providing limited flood protection for the entire county from floodwaters originating in Nebraska, where the majority of the watershed exists. �Nv G Q.R ko } There are several public tornado shelters in the County: basements of the County Courthouse, Julesburg Town Hall, and area churches. Framers utilize no till farming and crop rotation to combat erosion. Warnings are disseminated by television, radio, and sirens. The County provides public information to explain them. 154 SEDGWICK COUNTY RECOMMENDATIONS: The largest gap in Sedgwick County's capability to address future hazard losses is the lack of participation in the NFIP by Ovid, the lack of a warning siren in Sedgwick, and the lack of building codes outside of Julesburg. Action Item #1: Ovid needs to consider joining the NFIP. Issue Statement: Due to their lack of participation in the NFIP, the owners of the 7 Buildings in the Ovid floodplain, valued at $580,980, cannot obtain flood insurance, even if they wanted to. Not participating in the NFIP also makes Ovid ineligible for PDM, FMA and some HMGP $ from FEMA. However, it should be noted that Ovid has never considered applying for these funds in the past. Implementation Manager and Strategy: The Town of Ovid, through their Town Council/Manager, should invite the CWCB to explain the"pros and cons"of joining the NFIP to the City Council. Council will then make a decision regarding joining the NFIP. Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: No new expenses. Someone will need to verify that new construction in floodplain is properly constructed. The easiest method of implementation would be to not allow new buildings, or substantial improvements to existing buildings,within the mapped floodplain of Ovid. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is no increased cost to the Town. The benefits are to building owners who choose to insure against flood losses, and to taxpayers who no longer would have to subsidize those losses. 155 Action Item#2: County should work to become certified as "Storm Ready"by National Weather Service. Issue Statement: A primary goal of the Northeast Colorado Emergency Managers Association multi jurisdictional DMA Hazard Mitigation Plan is for each county to become "Storm Ready" certified within the next three years. "Storm Ready" certification is an indication that the community has prepared for adverse weather conditions, trained officials and citizens to recognize and report adverse weather conditions, and has established and regularly tested a system for receiving and disseminating severe weather information and warnings to the public. Implementation Manager and strategy: Sedgwick County Emergency Manager will contact the National Weather Service to determine what Sedgwick County needs to accomplish, and then seek funding through grants to make the necessary improvements. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Up to $25,000 for a siren in Sedgwick, NOAA"Weather Radios" for all government buildings, NOAA "Weather Radio""repeaters"where necessary, training, and public education. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: The potential for saving just one life, and providing time for individuals and businesses to take effective actions to protect property, far outweighs the potential cost. This goal and recommended action was selected by the MCPC due to its return on investment and relative ease in achieving. It may be the single most effective action the county and the entire Planning Area can undertake to reduce future disaster losses. Action Item#3: Improve drainage west of Julesburg by installing larger culverts beneath UP Railroad tracks. Issue Statement: Currently, water backs up at this location in minor storms and rainfall events. Larger storms can cut road, and possibly even rail, traffic. A larger culvert would allow the water to reach the Platte River, and reduce disruptions Implementation Manager and strategy: Sedgwick County Public Works will document expenses and disruptions incurred to date, determine the appropriate size culvert needed to alleviate the conditions, develop a cost estimate for replacing the culvert, and contact the UPRR representative to discuss cost-sharing options. Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: Unknown at this time. Estimate will be developed as part of implementing this recommendation. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: Unknown at this time. Implementation strategy will provide data necessary to determine if this is a cost-effective project. 156 Action Item#4: Obtain the Emergency Action Plans for Julesburg and Sterling Reservoirs. Issue Statement: Class 1 dams in Colorado are required to have Emergency Action Plans (EAPs). EAPs provide data on what will be inundated downstream from the dam, should it fail, including emergency contact information for dam owners and downstream property owners. The plans exist, but copies are not readily available within the County. Julesburg Reservoir is located in Sedgwick County, and failed in 1917, flooding the Town of Sedgwick. Sterling Reservoir is in Logan County, but the waters would flow into Sedgwick County if it failed. Implementation Manager and strategy: Sedgwick County Emergency Manager will contact the Office of the State Engineer Priority: High Cost Estimate: No cost. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: The potential for saving life and property at no cost is cost-effective. Action Item#5: Plant future Living Snow Fences further from farm buildings than is the current practice to reduce the fire danger. Issue Statement: Currently, Living Snow Fences are planted so close to the buildings they are protecting that if they caught fire they would threaten the buildings. Implementation Manager and strategy: Sedgwick County Emergency Manager will contact the USDA/NRCS to identify any Living Snow Fences planned for the future, and work to determine a"maximum benefit"distance where the fences maintain their effectiveness in blocking blowing snow, while alleviating, as best possible, the threat of fire to buildings, should the fence catch fire. Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: No cost. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: The potential for protecting against future property losses at no cost is cost-effective. 157 Action Item#6: Promote the benefits of the crop insurance to the County agricultural community Issue Statement: Agricultural losses are the#1 annual dollar loss in Sedgwick County. Over the past 20-years, policyholders have, on average, received a 4-to-1 return on their investment in this loss protection mechanism. Implementation Manager and strategy: County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with USDA and NRCS. Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: Can be accomplished within existing budgets Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is little cost associated with this project. The benefits are in receiving compensation for otherwise lost agricultural revenue, which in turn, contributes significantly to the county economy. 158 WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING ELEMENT r I.5$ }iKt .t' k ; -.17.y •,:***;;: 4� .y I.,'..?. t ,;I • 444 �f M�jp kk i' k ' 't'y3 fi �^H". p.,�_a Y.?yd .. Sy.`");./14 . Sy 5„wr;W� k P r 'r, x* y{xwW..a} W`..,`{p v'i`a` .�T,#'{Cry. .;µy!, a a 159 Washington County Planning Subcommittee and General Description The following entities participated in the DMA planning process through the Washington County Planning Subcommittee(CPS): • Washington County • Town of Akron • Town of Otis • Town of Arickaree • Arickaree Public School • Akron Public Schools • Akron Head Start • Lone Star School • ABC Development • Washington County Senior Citizens • Washington County Mental Health • CSU Cooperative Extension • Y-W Electric Association. The land area of Washington County is 2,523 square miles. The population (2000 census) for Washington County was 4,926--- an average density of 2 people per square mile. Washington County grew at a rate of 2.4% between 1990-2000. The county is predominantly rural. 160 Qouff far..-t.•i" Weld L , a.r 1 kreast I lar.xnm 4 riiffi Avery r.+... nLrJk.,yxen &anal J• arfx�fx7 y �Ne -rarahoe. Carlel/ ). . Ilra(pahc'e t; lri ` — _ J tee \ 2 .1 1(50 -.. rra... 1 Prr.4 .p Elbert - Cl - .. .,r.�n•T r. rP `y ffx�r`r /bC!'!to t.f - Stadia* 7.,„Iro}r I Vie.. Qerff ."•r'ne oars r a a..,yer r z• _, ja,P,ax'd4 dw- N:l • n.)re/ Se rwhe era. Ptieihr 17e tr/ AP4res erk.yr 'L Cor»yor Lax 4rr.rnaa la PiaraLaP/a/ - ,�o u ! Ens /Irldn:na 1883 1887 126u- r Lar.ener --.\ a Loden Ann e 0 if t t Lonnie,- \alLera n Y�ncn Grand e...-,, .� I 'r pIwrrco drsrr/ - 't 777�I !lY,1 :� tl xdfelt . Arrrpah ©.r j field' Ce li�` 're -..7 e t c. r} / P.n.."' t f:xrA s S'd; £/a.' �.e[«.r i G} rrw....t.. hrr.E .$ 1 !rt}. ? ../.....^ i t- 5 L of'„ -. `_ t� figs, :L ccrt.,--r7 �� r Lill ^,°n ` 1' — lt. fMre...,w f e CC P q ti raye �+ • r xcr . ro°` o lrrn.w. --- Nrr'r t3 a O rr.P•:da rt00 ,t V - .o t...._ .'.w',via". .,, 94 in''' 4 e I. , � 3.n.r.� i ,-.-q rlr.: , 01 Op/arri .... k rr a.,.ee:e nor w" A^ ' Dnlre..1 ' l._ erre 1 .› ' fa �r • D ? e ' � � '- . %er � d' �0 M.�<4M�,,.r `s �L.1a 4,7:177 trJ L J .... t —� 1889 1903 From 1883-1887 present day Washington County was part of Weld and Arapahoe counties. At that time Weld County covered an area from the front-range to the northern and eastern state lines. In 1887, Washington County was divided off of Weld and Logan Counties, running south along the baseline and eastward to the state line. Arapahoe County encompassed much of the southern parts of Washington County until it was divided in 1903, when the southern borders of Washington and Yuma counties were expanded to their present day locations. 161 Washington County History of Recorded Natural Hazard Losses There are 424 events listed by National Climatic Data C between 1950-2002 (NCDC Filters Applied: Tornadoes ≥ F1; Damage ≥ $3,000; Hail ≥ 2"; Wind ≥ 75 MPH) v Date Event"12" ;-, Location ' Damages ,; Othe lnfo S 4.. s'aPata Source., Dec.4-6, 1913 Blizzard County-wide 30" of snow FFA Weather Document largest in 100 years 8/10/1924 Tornado Thurman 12 deaths Most from single tornado NCDC in CO history 1930's Drought Dust Bowl Farms abandoned Planning Team Nov. 4-6, 1949 Blizzard 24-30"of snow FFA Jan. 1-4,1949 Blizzard RR and highways shut FFA down 4 weeks 6/26/1952 Tornado $250K F2, 7 miles long, NCDC 33 yards wide 3/31/1954 Tornado $3K NCDC 4/12/1955 Tornado $25K NCDC 7/20/1958 Tornado $3K F2 NCDC 5/31/1965 Flood Road out on 34, Akron isolated: NCDC Bridge out on 63 6/6/1967 Tornado $3K Fl NCDC 7/5/1969 Tornado $3K NCDC 5/8/1969 Flood S. Platte Fed. Dec. 15 counties 5/10/1975 Tornado $25K F3 NCDC 3/10/1977 Blizzard Highline EA(approx 1,000) & Power out for week, some REA Y-W EA Lost 5500 poles out for 30 days 1980 Grasshoppers State Dec CO-OEM 1981 Grasshoppers State Dec CO-OEM 1982 Flood Otis July, 1990 Drought 20 counties $1 billion(USDA) USDA 5/29/1991 Tornado $25K NCDC 6/20/1992 Tornado& Lone Star, then $50K property damage NCDC Hail Platner to Otis $14M in crop damage (FFA) 5/18/1994 T-storm winds Otis $5K NCDC 7/23/1995 Flood $101,489 road&bridge CWCB damage at 36 sites 5/30/1996 Tornado Elba $300K F3 NCDC 10/29/1996 Winds Akron 78 MPH NCDC 9/19/1998 T-storm winds Anton NCDC 162 rv' -,,Date- .r: a Even k. w'"` icationi, ‘.•42%,;.4,,,,,,,L.Damages 40,_, .,,,K.-_, Other info ,..: Pof4 Data)$.oprc 7e 8/5/1999 Flood $772K CWCB 5/12/2000 Freeze 50% loss to wheat&beets NCDC 2000 Drought (USDA Dec) USDA Spring 2001 Disease 78,000 acres of wheat Strip Rust fungus USDA 33%of crop Exacerbated by humidity 6/8/2001 Flood/Hail/ $90K to roads and bridges (NRCS) USDA/FSA Tornado 100%loss of Millet& NRCS Sunflowers (1728 acres ea) (USDA/FSA) April 2001 Winter Storms Ice damage $0 paid FEMA Fed#1374 HEA lost 16 poles=$24K approx$600K est. (CO) CO-OEM 08/1 & 13/ Hail 135,000 acres 125 farms NCDC 2001 8/24/2002 Flash Flood $150K to roads&bridges Hwy 63 N. of Akron NCDC 2' water on Hwy 61 13 mi N. of Otis 2002 Drought $1 Billion statewide (USDA) 9.49 annual rainfall, USDA lowest in 95 years 163 WASHINGTON COUNTY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TOTAL VALUES AT RISK FROM HAZARDS: Akron: $7,015,650 in Total Assessed Values (2002 data) Otis: $1,549,490 in Total Assessed Values Unincorporated County: Residential Improvements= $4.842M Commercial Improvements =$2.393M Industrial Improvements = $47K Agricultural Residential = $3.462M Manufactured Housing= $285K Agricultural Support Buildings= $3.715M FLOODPLAIN INVENTORY/VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT AND ASSOCIATED NFIP DATA: NFIP Mapping Information: Akron: Panel#080177, 2 panels, (FHBM), 3/5/76 (converted by letter 4/1/88). Inventory: There are 4 buildings in the floodplain in Akron. 2 Residential Buildings valued @ $60,224 1 Commercial Buildings valued @ $2,313 1 Building with no value found Otis: Panel # 080178 001 FIRM, (rescinded by CWCB 5/99, H&H revised in 2002). Inventory: There are 27 buildings in the floodplain in Otis. 20 Residential Buildings valued @ $555,061 2 Commercial Buildings valued @ $312,369 5 buildings with no value found (M&M/Cargill storage bins/tanks on RR lease) County:Never mapped Policies and Claims Information: There are zero policies within the two participating communities in Washington County. Thus, zero claims have been filed or paid. Floodplain Population Information: The state estimates that there are 38 people, 14 1-4 family structures, and 2 other structures in the county floodplains (1997). Washington County was identified in the State flood risk assessment as Low Risk, based upon the floodplain population, the number of structures at risk, and the number of dams. 164 Critical Facilities in the Floodplains: There are no critical facilities in floodplains of Akron or Otis. The county maintains an inventory of critical facilities in the LEOP. h , tt,..e • �2 as s• mow. ;¢ .a r �{ v . yy The floodplain in Akron PLooking through the Hwy 34 culverts at the RR culverts County Emergency Manager inspecting Floodplain CROP LOSS DATA (for the years 1980-2001, from the Federal Crop Insurance Services): $818,780/year in crop insurance payments (average of claims paid: 1980-2001) $3,939,414 in coverage over the 21-year period $4,430,908 collected in premiums over the 21-year period $17,194,372 paid in claims over the 21-year period: Receiving approximately a 4:1 return on investment OTHER HAZARDS IN WASHINGTON COUNTY: Tornadoes: 114 between 1950-2002 (>2 per year) Grass Fires: sparked by lightning &railroad sparks, In 2002, 12,000 acres burned—near western county line West Nile: 6 infected horses, 1 human (2002) Dams: 1 Class 1 Dam; (Prewitt, drains into Logan County) 0 Class 2 Dams; Earthquake: None on record Landslide risk: Area of"Suspected High Risk" in SW portion of County. There are no pipelines indicated in the area. Severe wind storms: Average# Noxious Weeds: Tumbleweeds contribute to grass and prairie fires, and aggravate flooding by clogging channels and culverts. Heat: Highest Recorded Temperature in County, 107; 21 consecutive days >90 in 1939 Cold: Lowest Recorded Temperature in County, -32 Precipitation Data: Average annual snowfall, 30.24 inches (Based on 95 years: 1908-2002, USDA) Average annual rainfall, 16.53 inches 165 HISTORIC SITES IN WASHINGTON COUNTY: Akron Public Library Washington County Courthouse (Akron) Plum Bush Creek Bridge (Last Chance) West Plum Creek Bridge (Last Chance) Hoopes Drug Store (Otis) Otis Commercial District (100 block of S. Washington & 102 N. Washington) Otis Municipal Waterworks System Schliesfsky's Dime Store(Otis) DEVELOPMENT TRENDS: None. While the county has experienced limited growth, there is no distinguishable pattern as to where it occurs. 166 WASHINGTON COUNTY CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT WASHINGTON Akron Otis Comp Plan Y Land Use Plan Y Subdivision Ord Zoning Ord Y NFIP/FPM Ord N Y Y - Map Date N/A 04/88-FHBM 8/85-FIRM - Sub.Damage? -Administrator? -#of FP Bldgs? 4 27 -#of policies N/A 0 0 -#of RL's? N/A N/A N/A CRS Rating N/A N/A N/A Stormwater Prgrm N N N Building Code State P&E State P&E State P&E Building Official. N N N - Inspections? State P&E State P&E State P&E BCEGS Rating N N N LEOP Y C C HM Plan In Progress C C Warning Y Y Y Storm Ready? N Weather Radio? Spotty at best Spotty Spotty Sirens? Y-2 V Y Emergency Warning Y C C Notification? Other? GIS System N N N Structural Projects N N N Property Protection N N N Crit.Fac.Protection N N N Natural Res. Inv. Y N N Cultural Res. Inv. Y Y Y Erosion Control N N N Sediment Control N N N Pub. Info Prgrm Newspaper Coffee Shop! Y Env. Ed Prgrm N N N 167 OTHER MITIGATION CAPABILITIES (PROGRAMS/PROJECTS IN PLACE): The Y-W Electric Association has an ongoing Hazard Mitigation program —though they don't formally call it that. The program is implemented as an ongoing effort, and affects both new construction & rebuilding. Y-W has increased their heavy loading criterion over the industry design standard. The industry standard is .5 inch of radial ice and 4 pounds of wind per square foot. Y-W's criterion is 1.25 inches of radial ice and 12 pounds of wind per square foot (69.3 miles per hour). The industry standard for pole placement is 18 poles per mile, which equates to between-pole spans of 280-300 feet. The higher loading criterion adopted by Y-W now requires the use of shorter spans (between 223-256 feet), larger poles, and heavier pole top construction. The ABC Development day-care center has installed a tornado "Safe-Room." 168 WASHINGTON COUNTY RECOMMENDATIONS Action Item#1: County should work to become certified as "Storm Ready"by National Weather Service. Issue Statement: A primary goal of the Northeast Colorado Emergency Managers Association multi-jurisdictional DMA Hazard Mitigation Plan is for each county to become"Storm Ready" certified within the next three years. "Storm Ready" certification is an indication that the community has prepared for adverse weather conditions, trained officials and citizens to recognize and report adverse weather conditions, and has established and regularly tested a system for receiving and disseminating severe weather information and warnings to the public. Warning is critical as tornadoes are the most frequently occurring hazard in the county. Implementation Manager and strategy: Washington County Emergency Manager will contact the National Weather Service to determine what Washington County needs to accomplish, and then seek funding through grants to make the needed improvements. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Up to $50,000 for 2 NOAA "Weather Radio" "repeaters" throughout the county. Existing coverage is inadequate, particularly near the Town of Cope. The county will also need to purchase"Weather Radios" for all government buildings, and sponsor training and public education. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: The potential for saving just one life, and providing time for individuals and businesses to take effective actions to protect property, far outweighs the potential cost. This goal and recommended action was selected by the MCPC. It may be the single most effective action the county and the entire Planning Area can undertake to reduce future disaster losses. �y r ti �t Y 89 • •44 jj$ C eA♦M�ye.. A d♦444N+vim *•j iJA• �♦0L AA AU AO�F'r1 t } 169 Action Item#2: Washington County should provide "Refresher Training"for local lenders and insurance agents regarding the NFIP, publicize the NFIP, and promote the purchase of insurance for structures in the floodplain. Issue Statement: There are 27 buildings in floodplain in Otis and 4 in the floodplain in Akron., but there are zero polices in force in either community. Otis has most at risk. In Otis, approximately$1 million in damage would occur if all structures were lost. The 100-year flood would average about two feet deep. Statistically, there is a 1% chance in any given year of incurring $200K in damages. Property owners should be afforded the opportunity to protect against these losses if they so choose. Implementation Manager and strategy: County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with the Otis and Akron Town Managers and Councils, should invite the CWCB to conduct"Refresher Training" for both lenders and insurance agents. CWCB and FEMA can also provide public information brochures describing the benefits of purchasing flood insurance. Each community should annually notify floodprone occupants of their location and of the availability of flood insurance. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Can be accomplished within existing budgets or with minimal expense. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is little or no increased cost to the Town. The benefits are to floodprone building owners who choose to insure against flood losses, and to taxpayers who no longer would be faced with subsidizing those potential losses. Action Item#3: Washington County and the Town of Otis should continue to work with the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) in their ongoing efforts to reduce future flood losses. Issue Statement: The Town of Otis is susceptible to flooding. In a recent study, "Flood Mitigation Alternatives Study, Town of Otis"developed by McLaughlin Water Engineers for the Colorado Water Conservation Board(DRAFT, January 2003. The study examines non-100-year channel improvements to a newly delineated floodplain based upon changes and improvements made since the date of the original FHBM. It suggests a variety of mitigation tools in combination with each other. Implementation Manager and strategy: County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with the Otis Town Manager and Council, should continue to work with CWCB to identify flood-prone areas and search for cost-effective solutions, including public information about flooding, flood damage, and flood protection actions that individual property owners can undertake. The least expensive and most effective action the Town can undertake to keep matters from worsening is to stringently regulate new development in the floodplain. Priority: On-going Cost Estimate: Can be accomplished within existing budgets or with minimal expense. 170 WELD COUNTY PLANNING ELEMENT • • •r � m ti"c cENESB :a �� Weicome To -� ai� h �� R.s,�Rro�•i U F r s�, rusk Fw��v Aa.a Na Fu , ut the CITY of AACC3RTC t,X z - STORAi • TSTGR41 WARM:3 ....r.... �.. . g,#'' .. tllFkT '{ [� )OI PLJ:1�.E ♦rrtxprma--'""( _ _ r \ , the l...t Ft "` y: r Gc,^.'a.a WNk'ixo.i 7"`��' ? -»..`«, K, p`A Y ;: f ' 'M fort Clollms ) i • CyTE �� ✓• FIFVii !�• ` �1 s ♦ LuGx • ,, r .'.JIS" 8a HOSPliAL12E0 iN n ' , `•"' S:OT fiT LEGIONNAIRES- DISEASE OVit1Pt•.w: 4 �__ '1 • f ,p �I X} /.m�'�o �i G I ,,, FT. LUPTo v � • 171 1 T d $ { 1 , y., .b V + �3 t 144443' � ° � �. re7 r « 4. cNI 1 i , ��k y ,'" - fi � s I c " t* ' e. Y , .,x ... 4 , t I T 1 i� • , .W i''r �R y O 3 d P+ r r f b s , R 'fi ` v,TM tti1 �# �. r,(P1 If,Will .. Weld County Planning Subcommittee and General Description The following entities participated in the DMA planning process through the Washington County Planning Subcommittee (CPS): • Weld County • Town of Ault • City of Dacona • City of Evans • Town of Firestone • City of Fort Lupton • Town of Frederick • Town of Garden City • Town of Gilcrest • Town of Hudson • Town of Johnstown • Town of Keenesburg • Town of Kersey • Town of LaSalle • Town of Mead • Town of Milliken • Town of New Raymer • Town of Platteville • Town of Severance • Town of Windsor • Weld County RE-4, RE-6 and RE-8 School Districts • Platte Valley Schools • Platte Valley Fire District • Loup Reservoir Company • BBWI-Fort Saint Vrain • South Weld Victim Services • Centennial Critical Incident Stress Management The land area of Weld County is 3,999 square miles, the largest among the 11 counties included in the Planning Area. The population (2000 census) for Weld County was 155,582, also the largest within the planning area. This equates to an average density of 39 people per square mile. Weld County grew at a rate of 23.8%between 1990-2000. The county is still predominantly rural, but has many, many towns and cities, most of which are growing in size and population. 173 Weld County History of Recorded Natural Hazard Losses There are 936 events listed by the National Climatic Data Center between 1950-2002 (NCDC Filters Applied: Tornadoes ≥ Fl; Damage ≥ $3,000; Hail ≥ 2"; Wind ≥ 75 MPH) `a: - Locatintn` -: ;r ,:, Damages - z:, ,Other-Info .�� ram„;°DataS a ' ' :; `�Date.t .. �� t, , sEvent � 4 1899, 1901, '03, '21 Floods Windsor Windsor Police/Sr. Center July 31, 1905 Tornado Tore walls off the IOOF Windsor Police/Sr. Center &Masonic Halls, 3 homes, 1 new brick building 1907 Dam Failure Chambers Lake, Windsor Windsor Police/Sr. Center 1905, '13 & '20 Blizzards Windsor Police/Sr. Center 1923 Flood Poudre River Bridges out, phone lines Highlights in the History of (At Windsor) down, no mail Windsor, Co(Roy Ray) 1930's Drought Dust Bowl January 2-4, 1949 Blizzard Weld County People isolated,cattle died, Greeley Tribune/Greeley roads/schools closed, Journal/Windsor Beacon food/supply shortages Police Dept., Sr. Center 1950's Flood Platteville/Gilcrest/Evans Trailer Parks May 15, 1952 Tornado $25K F3, 5 injuries NCDC 1960 Tornado May 8, 1965 Tornado $25K F2 NCDC May 22, 1965 Tornado $25K Fl NCDC May 23, 1968 Tornado $25K F1, 1 injury NCDC 1973 Dam Failure Kersey >S1M Latham Dam Town Fed. Dec. Latham Dam FEMA June 4, 1976 Tornado $25K F2 NCDC July 4, 1976 Tornado $25K Fl NCDC Late 1970's Sheet Flow Milliken Flooding 1979 Blizzard May 29, 1980 Tornado $250K F1, 1 mile wide NCDC 1980 Grasshoppers State Dec CO-OEM 1980 Dam Failure Prospect Dam O-OEM June, 1981 Tornado Fort Lupton $500K Buildings Ft. Lupton Police Dept. 174 `Dale,'= .j`_ E enter ,.. 4 ,4 a Location ° 4 ,= Damages, .f ; , ,;,,I! = ' iOtherInfo .t,y -,'• Data Soutr 1982 Winter Storm State Dec CO-OEM July 10, 1983 Tornado $25K Fl NCDC April 19, 1984 Tornado $25k F NCDC May 18, 1984 Tornado $25K F2 NCDC July26, 1985 Tornado $25K Fl, 3 injuries NCDC 1986 Snow State Dec O-OEM July 7, 1987 Tornado $25K F2 NCDC April 19, 1988 Tornado $25K F1 NCDC June 5, 1988 Tornado $250K F2, 50 yards wide NCDC June 9, 1990 Tornado $25K F2 NCDC August 17, 1993 T-Strm/Wind Fort Lupton $5K NCDC March 23, 1994 High Winds Front Range $5K 77 MPH NCDC June 4, 1994 T-Strm/Wind Fort Lupton $5K NCDC July 16, 1994 Hail Eaton $500K to property 2.5"hail, Buildings, NCDC $50K to crops Crops, Vehicles July 24, 1994 Flash Flood Nunn $5K Basements NCDC August 16, 1994 Microburst Hudson-Keenesburg $450K Mobile Homes, 20 power NCDC poles, 2 Public Service 115K volt Towers February 2, 1995 High Winds Larimer/Weld line $20K 100MPH, 2 injuries NCDC June, 1995 Flood LaSalle $15,300 Town Hall CWCB/CO-OEM Gilcrest $8,000 Evans $16,000 pumping County $360,046 Roads/culverts 85 roads PW Hail dam. $50,000 June 6, 1997 Flood Weld Co (PA only) $7,600,862 24,250 acres (corn, FEMA/CO-OEM (Fed. # 1186) Ag Damage onions, sugar beets) FEMA PA paid $382,709 June 15, 1997 Tornado Dacono $50K F1, Hit Colo. Nat'l NCDC Speedway; Damaged grandstands/concessions July 8, 1997 Lightning Roggen $100K Fire burned truck& shed NCDC July, 1997 1 Dead, 175 ;a r* Date,a Event .4 t I"ocation = :4 ;AIDa1 lies, : '1,f w Other I igo, W*I h r;,Data'SOS:e 4000 cattle killed 9/20/1998 Lightning Windsor $500K Fire burned ranch/home NCDC 1998 Flooding Poudre River February 2, 1999 High Winds Front Range $3M 127 MPH NCDC April 8, 1999 High Winds Front Range $7.2M 115 MPH NCDC April 9, 1999 High Winds Front Range $$13.8M 98 MPH, 76 @ Raymer NCDC 1999 Floods $471,866 public $ 55 homes CO-OEM Fed#1276 $95,110 PA CWCB $36,825 TH FEMA says $165,310 FEMA $18,479 IFG w/o Greeley $64,200 SBA $33,868 FhwA EWP $101,751 NRCS July 27, 1999 Lightning Hudson $100K Farm equipment burned NCDC April 20, 2000 Lightning Windsor $200K NCDC 2000 Drought (USDA Dec) April 2001 Winter $3.1M PA only FEMA &NCDC Storms REA Damage Fed#1374 May 20, 2001 High Winds $3.4M 82 MPH, 6 injuries NCDC July 13-14, 2001 Severe Greeley, Evans, Berthoud 16 homes, 3 Flood/hail Weather Businesses, $1M Ag Damage 4/23-8/6/02 Wildfires Weld Co FEMA/IA $5,896 TH 2002 Drought Statewide $1 Billion 2003 West Nile County-wide 328 human cases CDPHE Virus reported 176 WELD COUNTY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TOTAL VALUES AT RISK FROM HAZARDS: (2002 Assessor Data) Town of Ault: $ 8.339M in Total Assessed Value City ofDacona: $ 15.542M in Total Assessed Value City of Evans: $ 69.711M in Total Assessed Value Town of Firestone: $ 47.234M in Total Assessed Value City of Fort Lupton: $ 64.216M in Total Assessed Value Town of Frederick: $ 69.2I3M in Total Assessed Value Town of Garden City: $ 4.155M in Total Assessed Value Town of Gilcrest: $ 4.450M in Total Assessed Value Town of Hudson: $ 9.211M in Total Assessed Value Town of Johnstown: $ 37.780M in Total Assessed Value Town of Keenesburg: $ 5.941M in Total Assessed Value Town of Kersey: $ 8.696M in Total Assessed Value Town of LaSalle: $ 10.429M in Total Assessed Value Town of Mead: $ 28.990M in Total Assessed Value Town of Milliken: $ 28.702M in Total Assessed Value Town of New Raymer $ .648M in Total Assessed Value Town of Platteville: $ 17.070M in Total Assessed Value Town of Severance: $ 7.582M in Total Assessed Value Town of Windsor: $ 97.382M in Total Assessed Value County: $736.752M in Residential Property $376.485M in Commercial Property $159.191M in Industrial Property $159.479M in Agricultural Property Weld County School District RE-8 has $61,582,641 (in Buildings, contents, Modulars, and land) 177 FLOODPLAIN INVENTORYNULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT AND ASSOCIATED NFIP DATA: NFIP Mapping Information: The following Communities DO participate in the NFIP(Community ID#, Date of Current/Official Map): Weld County, (#080266, 9/22/99) Hudson (#080249,joined 8/20/97,but never mapped) Ault(#080179, 6/10/80; No SFHA) Keenesburg(#080251, 8/24/81; No SFHA) Dacono (#08236, 7/16/79) LaSalle(#080186, 5/25/78; No SFHA) Inventory: 79 Buildings in Floodplain, Valued—$5,972,215 Milliken (#080187, 8/1/79) Eaton (#080180, 9/1/82) Inventory:_1 building in the floodplain Evans (#080182, 4/2/79) Nunn (#080188, 2/1/79) Firestone(#080241, 12/18/79) Pierce(#080189, 11/15/79) Ft. Lupton (#080183, 4/2/79) Platteville (#080190, 2/29/80; No SFHA) Inventory: 1 ball field @$250K Severance(#080317, 9/22/99) Frederick (#080244, 7/13/82) Windsor(#080264, 9/27/91; no buildings in the floodplain) Gilcrest(# 080213, 6/10/80; No SFHA) Communities with Mapped Floodplains that are still conducting their floodplain inventory(underlined above): Eaton, Evans, Firestone, Frederick, Mead,Nunn, Pierce, Severance, Weld County The following Communities DO NOT participate in the NFIP: Garden City(Never Mapped) Grover(Never Mapped) Johnstown (Never Mapped) Kersey(No SFHA) Lochbuie(Never Mapped) Mead(Never Mapped, but annexed mapped land from County—Needs to Join NFIP) New Raymer(Never Mapped) Policies and Claims Information: For ALL participating communities: (# of A-Zone policies/Total Policies/Claims/Amount Paid) Weld County(150/225/24/$61,684) Hudson (but never mapped) (0/0/0/0) Ault(No SFHA) Keenesburg(No SFHA) (0/0/0/0) Dacono (16/20/1/$0) LaSalle(No SFHA) (0/2/0/$0) Eaton (2/3/1/$0) Milliken (0/2/0/$0) Evans (0/1/0/$0) Nunn (2/2/0/$) Firestone(8/11/0/$0) Pierce(14/23/1/$312) Ft. Lupton (6/9/0/$0); 1 ball field P/$250K??? Platteville(No SFHA) (0/1/0/$0) Frederick(72/79/5/$10,350) Severance(0/0/0/0) Gilcrest(No SFHA) (0/2/0/$0) Windsor(3/10/1/$0) 178 Floodplain Population Information: The state estimates that there are 4,494 people, 1,734 1-4 family structures in the county floodplains (1997). Weld County was identified in the State flood risk assessment as High Risk, based upon the floodplain population, the number of structures at risk, and the number of dams. This is the only county within the planning area assessed as High Risk. Critical Facilities in the Floodplains: It is a recommendation of this plan that communities with mapped floodplains inventory their critical facilities that are at risk from flooding, regardless of whether the community participates in the NFIP. CROP LOSS DATA for the years 1980-2001, from the Federal Crop Insurance Services: $ 1,151,262/year in crop insurance payments (average of claims paid: 1980-2001) $60,645,570 in coverage over the 21-year period $ 5,673,363 collected in premiums over the 21-year period $24,176,262 paid in claims over the 21-year period: Receiving over a 4:1 return on investment OTHER HAZARDS IN WELD COUNTY: Tornadoes: 192 reported between 1950-1997 (avg. =4/year). Tornadoes are the most frequently occurring hazard in county. Grass Fires: Nunn? Between Highways 85 & 1-25? West Nile: 23 confirmed cases in mosquitoes, 9 in humans as of 8/3/03. County has allocated $500,000 for spraying. Dams: 9 Class 1 Dams; 17 Class 2 Dams (There have been 3 dam failures in Weld County) Earthquake: Earthquake hazard is mentioned on Weld County Web-page, USGS identifies area as Low Risk. Landslide: No risk(OEM map) Severe windstorms: Frequent: due to proximity to Front Range and downslope Chinook winds. Heat: Highest Recorded Temperature in County, NA Cold: Lowest Recorded Temperature in County, NA 179 HISTORIC SITES IN WELD COUNTY: Ault: Ault High School Eaton: Eaton High School Fort Lupton: Ottesen Grain Company Fed Mill Greeley: (Many—but not listed because they are not participating with our planning group) Grover: Depot/Museum, Grover Grain Elevator, Hotel Grover Johnstown: Brush Barn, Parish House Keenesburg: Prospect Valley School Kersey: Jurgens Site Mead: United Church of Christ of Highland ark Nunn: Municipal Hall Northern Drylanders Museum) Platteville: Fort St. Vrain Monument, Fort Vasquez Site Windsor: Windsor Mill & Elevator Company Building, Windsor Town Hall Weld County: Briggsdale: Ball Ranch Dearfield Townsite (CO 34, 11 miles west of Wiggins) Keota Stone Circles Archaeological District Lucerne: Milne Farm SLW Ranch(WCR 58 'A, near Greeley) (West) Stoneham Archaeological Site DEVELOPMENT TRENDS IN WELD COUNTY: Steady Growth along the I-25, Hwy 85, and Hwy 34 corridors. The Weld County Planning Department has approved an average of 30 new subdivisions each year for the past 3 years in the unincorporated areas of the county. 180 WELD COUNTY CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT (page 1) WELD Ault Dacono Eaton Erie Evans Firestone Ft. Lupton Frederick Garden City Gilcrest Grover Hudson Comp Plan Y('02) Y Y Y Y Y Land Use Plan Y Y Y Y Y Y Subdivision Ord Y Y Y Y Y Y Zoning Ord Y Y Y Y Y Y NFIP/FPM Ord Y Y Y Y Y/Bldr Y Y Y Y Never Y Never Y/Not NSFHA Mapped NSFHA Mapped Mapped -Sub.Damage? Y Y Y Y -Administrator? Y Y Y Y Y -#of FP Bldgs? 584 79 0 60 1 0 -#of policies 16 1 6+3 0 -#of RL's? 0 0 0 CRS Rating N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Stormwater Prgrm Y Y N Y V Y Building Code Y Y Y Y Y Y Building Official. Y Y Y Y Y Y - Inspections? Y-12 Y Y Y Y Y BCEGS Rating Unk. Unk. 5C LEOP Y C C C C C C C C C C C C HM Plan IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP Warning Y Y Storm Ready? Y C C C C C C C C C C C C Weather Radio? Y Unk. Y Y Y Y Sirens? N 1 untested Y Y Y N Emerg.Notification Y Y C C N Other? NWS link N GIS System Y N C Y N N Structural Projects Y N Y Y Y Property Protection N N N Crit.Fac.Protection Y Y Y N Y N Natural Res. Inv. Y N Y Y Y N Cultural Res. Inv. Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y N Erosion Control Y N Y Y Y Y Sediment Control Y N Y Y Y Y Pub. Info Prgrm Y-Web N Y N Y Y Env. Ed Prgrm Y N Y N Y Y 181 WELD COUNTY CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT (continued, page 2) Johnstown Keenesburg Kersey LaSalle Lochbuie Mead Milliken New Raymer Nunn Pierce Platteville Comp Plan Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Land Use Plan V V Y Y Y Y Y Subdivision Ord V Y Y Y Y Y Y Zoning Ord Y Y Y Y Y Y Y NFIP/FPM Ord Never Mapped Y/NSFHA N/NSFHA Y/NSFHA Never Never y Never Mapped y Y Y/NSFHA Y 8/22/03!!! Mapped Mapped -Sub.Damage? Y N/A Y N Y Y -Administrator? Y N N/A Y UNK Y Y -#of FP Bldgs? 0 0 0 sewer 0 1 0 -#of policies 0 0 N/A 0 0 UNK UNK -#of RL's? 0 0 N/A 0 N/A 0 0 CRS Rating. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Stormwater Prgrm Y N Y Y Y Y Y Building Code Y N Y Y Y Y Y Building Official. Y N Y Y Y Y Y - Inspections? Y N Y Y Y Y Y BCEGS Rating IP LEOP C C C C C C C C C C C HM Plan IP IP IP IP IP IP IP IP Warning Storm Ready? C C C C C C C C C C C Weather Radio? Y N Y Y Y Sirens? N Y N N N Y-1 Emergency Warning C N C C N C Notification? Other? Cable N N Cable Override Override GIS System C N N C N Structural Projects N Y Y N Y Y Y Property Protection N N N N N Y Y Crit.Fac.Protection N/A N N/A sewer N Y Y Natural Res. Inv. N N N Y N Y Y Cultural Res. Inv. Y Y Y Y N Y Y N Y N Y Erosion Control Y N N Y Y Y V Sediment Control Y N N Y Y Y Y Pub. Info Prgrm Y N Y Y Y Y Y Env. Ed Prgrm N N N Y Y Y Y 182 WELD COUNTY CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT (continued, page 3) Severance Windsor Comp Plan Y Land Use Plan Y Subdivision Ord Y Zoning Ord Y NFIP/FPM Ord Y Y -Sub.Damage? -Administrator? Y -#of FP Bldgs? 0 -#of policies 0 -#of RL's? 0 CRS Rating N/A Stormwater Prgrm Y Building Code Y Building Official. Y - Inspections? Y BCEGS Rating LEOP C C HM Plan IP IP Warning Storm Ready? C C Weather Radio? Y Sirens? N Emergency Warning C Notification? Other? N GIS System C Structural Projects Y Property Protection Y Crit.Fac.Protection Y Natural Res. Inv. Y Cultural Res. Inv. N Y Erosion Control Y Sediment Control Y Pub. Info Prqrm Y Env. Ed Prqrm Y 183 WELD COUNTY RECOMMENDATIONS: Action Item#1: Establish an ongoing or annual Public Education campaign regarding Hazards and Emergency Management Issue Statement: There are many emergency management issues that need to reinforced with public education so that citizens know what risks they face, what protective actions they can take, and what government programs are in place to assist them. Included in these information needs is information pertaining to: • Dam Safety: Weld has had 3 failures! Teach owners about inspecting dams. Exercise EAPs • Seismic Risk: USGS says you have a low risk to ground-shaking, but you had an earthquake near Kersey. • Tornado Safety(You have 4 per year on average!) • Flood Insurance Program and Insurance Coverage o Only 16 of 79 floodplain buildings in Dacono are insured against flooding o Ft. Lupton has 9 policies, 6 in A-Zone, but say they only have one building—the ball field??? o Mead has annexed mapped county land and needs to join program o Weld County is the only county within planning area rated by the State as having a High Risk of flooding Implementation Manager and strategy: County Emergency Manager in conjunction with appropriate County/Town Departments and State/Federal Agencies. Monitor grants, and seek private partners for cost-share opportunities. Priority: High Cost Estimate: $2,500 for printing and distribution costs. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: The potential for saving just one life, and providing time for individuals and businesses to take effective protective actions, outweighs the potential cost of the public education program. Public Education may be the most effective and least-expensive way to reduce disaster losses by changing human behavior to promote appropriate actions. 184 Action Item#2: Each incorporated community with a mapped jloodplain should inventory critical facilities within the floodplain to determine if they should be protected Facilities would include power substations, water sources such as wellheads, sewage treatment facilities,police and fire stations, hospitals, and nursing homes. Issue Statement: In floodplains there is a known risk. Not having critical facilities protected against such risks can severely handicap a community's ability to respond and recover from a flood. Potential losses should be estimated for the failure f each critical facility. Then a cost estimate should be calculated for the favored method of protection. Then a benefit-cost comparison will indicate whether or not the facility is worth protecting. Implementation Manager and strategy: County Emergency Manager in conjunction with appropriate County/Town Departments. Technical Assistance is available from state agencies if help in making these determinations is needed. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Staff time only for initial inventory and discussion of protection methods, and cost-benefit analysis. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is not cost for the initial inventory and decision-making. Protective measures should be taken where cost-effective. Action Item#3: Communities with NSFHA or Never Mapped should consider joining NFIP for the availability of insurance, especially if growing/annexing rapidly. Issue Statement: The following communities within Weld County have never been mapped for flood hazards: Garden City, Grover, Kersey(no SFHA), Lochbuie, Mead, and New Raymer. As such, they chose not to join the NFIP. Currently, because these communities do not participate in the NFIP, flood insurance is unavailable to building owners. However, as communities grow and annex land from the County, they may be acquiring land that is floodprone or subject to drainage problems. A community can join the NFIP by adopting an ordinance and agreeing to regulate development in floodprone areas, as indicate on a FEMA-provided map. Where there is no map, no enforcement is necessary---- but ---- having adopted the ordinance will allow building owners to purchase flood insurance if they so choose. This is what the Town of Johnstown just did. As a result of this planning process, Johnstown joined the NFIP on 08/22/2003. In cases where there is a known watercourse within the existing or expanding community boundaries, the community should request CWCB and/or FEMA to develop a floodplain map that can be used for regulatory and insurance purposes. 185 Implementation Manager and strategy: Communities should contact the CWCB and ask to join the NFIP. CWCB will visit the community and explain all the requirements. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Staff time only for initial inventory and discussion of protection methods, and cost-benefit analysis. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is no cost for the initial inventory and decision-making. Protective measures should be taken where cost-effective. Action Item#4: Implement the high priority actions of the City of Evans' Comprehensive Master Drainage Plan. Issue Statement: The City of Evans has a Comprehensive Master Drainage Plan that identifies over$22 Million in drainage improvements that necessary throughout the community. The City does have its own stormwater utility program which generates revenue to manage a stormwater m The plan is a multi-volume engineering document that delineates the problems, designs solutions, and calculates the cost-effectiveness of the recommended actions. The Public Works Department intends, over time, to implement the entire plan. For the purposes of this plan, however, Evans has prioritized the work to be accomplished first and submitted the following projects for inclusion in this plan. • Storm sewer improvements in the vicinity of US85 and 3151 St. $ 950,000 • Improve existing detention facilities/Construct storm sewer improvements in the vicinity of US85 and 37`h St. $ 236,000 • Construct a large diameter storm sewer in 37`h St.,just east of US85 eastward to the Platte River. $1,905,000 • Construct a storm sewer and drainage structures in W. Service Rd, from 42"d St. to the Platte River. $ 335,000 Implementation Manager and strategy: Evans Public Works. Stormwater utility fees and in-kind labor serve as match for grants. Priority: As funding becomes available. Cost Estimate: Included above. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: Described in Comprehensive Master Drainage Plan. 186 ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION: Dacono: Purchase a back-up generator for the Police Department and City Hall. Public works and Police Department co project managers. Project cost; $29,330. Bid on file with NCEM/CO-EM Regional Coordinator. Johnstown/Milliken:4sirens/towers in Johnstown and 3 in Milliken. ($12,500 each, $62,500 total) NOAA Weather Radios for commercial and government buildings 100 in Johnstown, 40 in Milliken ($20 each, $2,800 total) 2,300 and 1,200 respectively for residences($35,000 total) Entire package= $103,000 Platteville: Portable generator for Police Department/Town Hall($5,000) Back-up power generator for Police Department/Town Hall($15,000) Countywide: Safe Room Projects for Tornado Safety 187 YUMA COUNTY PLANNING ELEMENT z q y ' e'.y ----'m J .( if �. "` t � .� `�^y tJ ,i: �, � " `° ,,. Yuma feediat ,,. .x. Y ..µ tt Ir 4 188 Yuma County Planning Subcommittee and General Description The following entities participated in the DMA planning process through the Yuma County Planning Subcommittee(CPS): • Yuma County • Town of Eckley • City of Wray ▪ City of Yuma • Liberty School District • Wray Public Schools • Yuma Public Schools • Highline Electric Association • Y-W Electric Association The land area of Yuma County is 2,370 square miles, and is located along the eastern border of Colorado. The population (2000 census) for Yuma County was 9,841--- an average density of 4.2 people per square mile. Yuma County grew at a rate of 9.9%between 1990-2000. The county is predominantly rural. k Ow � x 189 Yuma County History of Recorded Natural Hazard Losses 441 events listed by NCDC between 1950-2002 (NCDC Filters Applied: Tornadoes ≥ Fl; Damage ≥ $3,000; Hail ≥ 2"; Wind ≥ 75 MPH) ' Date. : Event Location ' ' t" ", s''=Damages Other°Ii fo' 'it F . . . �t.}�,Dafa<k So July 21, 1932 Flood 3.5" of rain Yuma County FIS May 30, 1935 Flood N. Fork of 9" in 2 hrs. S. of Wray DOPUSGS Republican R. (led to Bonny Reservoir) 1930's Drought Dust Bowl Farms abandoned July 11, 1941 Flood 1.6" in Yuma Yuma County FIS September 1-2, Flood 2.68" Yuma County FIS 1941 5" in adjacent basins April 27, 1947 Flood Wray Buildings and crops downstream 6.6", 6-8"of hail Yuma County FIS of Wray. Cars&homes in Wray Water 5-6 feet deep in town May 14, 1951 Flood Bridge @ Adams out 3.56" in 30 minutes Yuma County FIS Water over lower Main St. Mostly street damage September 7, Flood 1.25": Water reached buildings, 6"west and south NCDC 1951 but did not enter August 11, 1956 1.55" NCDC May 1, 1958 3.10" NCDC July 31, 1962 City park flooded 4.88" NCDC May 31, 1965 Flood Arickaree R. Most damage in Kansas& NCDC S. County Nebraska June 17, 1965 Flood 1.47" Extreme 14"in basin to NCDC west July 29, 1966 3.61" NCDC May 8, 1969 Flood S. Platte Fed.Dec. 15 counties NCDC Early '70's Tornado 1977 Blizzard Highline&Y-W REA's (80%of poles in Yuma) REA Lost 5500 poles 1981 Grasshoppers State Dec CO-OEM July, 1990 Drought 20 counties $1 billion(USDA) USDA August 11, 1982 Tomado/Hail Roof damage, 1 trailer Planning Team 1999 Grass fire BLM land Some equipment burned 6,500 acres Planning Team 2000 Drought (USDA Dec) Planning Team Spring 2001 Wind Grain Elevator/Sprinkler damage Planning Team April 2001 Winter Storm Ice damage: HEA lost 262 power FEMA paid 75%of$19K CO-OEM Fed#1374 poles @ $386,238 warning(Eckley siren) FEMA 190 YUMA COUNTY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT TOTAL VALUES AT RISK FROM HAZARDS: Eckley: $ .575M Total Tax Valuation(2001 data) Wray: $10.095M Total Tax Valuation (2001 data) Yuma: $14.691M Total Tax Valuation (2001 data) Unincorporated County: $33.058M in Residential, Commercial, & Industrial Property(2001 data) FLOODPLAIN INVENTORYNULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT AND ASSOCIATED NFIP DATA: NFIP Mapping Information: Eckley, Never mapped Wray, Panel #080191 001 (FHBM), 6/19/85 Inventory: There are 36 buildings within the mapped floodplain of Wray, with a total assessed value of$3 Million. 26 Residential Buildings valued @ $ 605,304 8 Commercial Buildings valued @$2.346M 2 Public Buildings valued @ $ 49,500 (tax exempt) BFE is approximately 2-feet deep, equating to about 20%damage, and thus a 1% annual chance of$600K in damage Yuma, Panel#: NSFHA County, Panels#0802910630/35/40/55/60/80 (FIRM), 6/19/85, Very rural, no inventory conducted Policies and Claims Information: Wray: There are 9 A-Zone policies, and another 6 outside the A-Zone (75% of the floodprone buildings are uninsured) There has been one reported claim, but no payment was made. County: There are no policies, and thus no claims reported within the County. Floodplain Population Information: The state estimates that there are 715 people, 389 1-4 family structures, and 15 other structures in the county floodplains (1997). Yuma County was identified in the State flood risk assessment as Moderate Risk, based upon the floodplain population, the number of structures at risk, and the number of dams. Critical Facilities in the Floodplains: The Wray Fire Dept. is in floodplain (It is currently being moved to a flood free location). No other critical facilities are in the mapped floodplains. 191 CROP LOSS DATA (for the years 1980-2001, from the Federal Crop Insurance Services): $ 1,604,690/year in crop insurance payments (average of claims paid: 1980-2001) $76,348,828 in coverage over the 21-year period $ 6,559,521 collected in premiums over the 21-year period $33,698,482 paid in claims over the 21-year period: Receiving over a 5:1 return on investment OTHER HAZARDS IN YUMA COUNTY: Tornadoes: 62 between 1950-1997 (over 1 per year [1.3]) Grass Fires: average occurrence: most fires are started by lightning and sparks from railroad wheels and brakes West Nile: 9 infected horses, (2002), 10 reported human cases as of 10/02/2003 Dams: 1 Class 1 Dam; (Bonny Reservoir) 6 Class 2 Dams; (Dry dams, impoundments: #1-6, each has EAP, annual inspections) Earthquake: None on record Landslide risk: Suspected moderate hazard in ESE County; natural gas pipeline crosses area(based on OEM map) This is primarily BLM land and no one is living there. There is an 18"high pressure, wrapped line, in the vicinity that is continuously monitored. In addition there is a"pipeline group"charged with notification and safety. Severe wind storms: Average # Heat: Highest Recorded Temperature in County, N/A Cold: Lowest Recorded Temperature in County, N/A Foot& Mouth disease: Livestock vulnerable to disasters and disease, creating potential economic & Livestock disposal problems. Largest Feedlot is 130,000 head. There are 58 other feedlots, and 27 Commercial Hog Farms HISTORIC SITES IN YUMA COUNTY: Boggs Lumber& Hardware Building, Eckley Vernon School Lett Hotel, Yuma(The "Tumbleweed") Yuma Public Library(vacant) Beecher Island Battleground, Wray DEVELOPMENT TRENDS IN YUMA COUNTY: There has been scattered residential growth across county in the past decade, but not in any specific concentrated area. There has been some recent growth just west of Yuma. If there is one trend in development, it is in Commercial Hog Farms. There are currently 27, where there were none 10 years ago. 192 YUMA COUNTY CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT YUMA COUNTY Eckley Wray Yuma Comp Plan Y Y Land Use Plan Y N Y Y Subdivision Ord Y-with Comp Plan Y Y Zoning Ord Y-with Comp Plan Y Y NFIP/FPM Ord Y N Y N - Map Date 6/85-7 FIRMS Never Mapped 6/85-FIRM NSFHA -Sub.Damage? N/A N/A -Administrator? N/A N/A -#of FP Bldgs? Did not inventory N/A N/A -#of policies ? N/A 15: 9 in A-Zone N/A -#of RL's? 0 N/A 0 N/A CRS Rating N/A N/A N/A N/A Stormwater Prgrm N Y Building Code N Y Building Official. N N - Inspections? Y N BCEGS Rating N N N LEOP Y County County County HM Plan In process County County County Warning Y Y Y Y Storm Ready? Y County County County Weather Radio? Y Y Y Y Sirens? Y Y-1 Y Y-3 Emergency Y Y Y Y Warning Notification? Other? Y-EAS Y underway GIS System In Process N underway N Structural Projects N Y Y Property Protection N Y N Crit.Fac.Protection N N N Natural Res. Inv. Y N Y Cultural Res. Inv. Y N Y Erosion Control N Y N Sediment Control N Y N Pub. Info Prgrm Y Y N Env. Ed Prgrm Y N N 193 OTHER EXISTING MITIGATION CAPABILITIES: Certified as Storm-Ready by National Weather Service Current cadre of weather spotters (most recent training, April, 2003) 6 dry flood-control dams above Wray, in Wray Watershed District Emergency Action Plans in place for Bonny Dam and 6 flood control dams (dated 1-22-03) County Land-Use Code updated April 2003 194 YUMA COUNTY RECOMMENDATIONS: Action Item #1: Upgrade the siren systems in Yuma County so that they are all radio activated. Issue Statement: Currently some sirens must be activated manually, which can cause delays in their activation. Radio activation would allow for the County Emergency Manager and/or Sheriff to activate all, or select sirens, from a single location, such as the Yuma County Public Safety Center. Implementation Manager and strategy: County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with Sheriff and NWS. The first step is to identify the cost of the project and potential sources of funding. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Unknown. Grants should be examined. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: The potential for saving just one life, and providing time for individuals and businesses to take effective actions to save their lives and protect their property, far outweighs the potential cost. Action Item#2: Promote the benefits of tornado shelters,particularly in manufactured housing parks. Issue Statement: On average, over the past 47 years, Yuma County has experienced at least one tornado each year. While damage has been minimal to date, it is merely a matter of time before a more serious event occurs. Manufactured housing is the most vulnerable type of structure to tornado and other wind damage, as well as to flood and fire. A public education effort should be undertaken to publicize and emphasize the value of constructing tornado or multi-hazard shelters on-site within manufactured housing parks—whether they be individual "safe-rooms"or group shelters. Implementation Manager and strategy: County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with the NWS, CO-OEM and FEMA. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Approximately$500 to print brochures and mail. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: Public Education efforts for hazards are often the most direct and least expensive method of informing people of the risks they are subject to, and of effective actions to minimize their exposure. Preventing one loss of life or serious injury from wind or other hazards would be worth the expense. 195 Action Item#3: Conduct a countywide public awareness campaign regarding West Nile Virus and "Meth"Labs. Issue Statement: Two significant and current issues facing Yuma County Emergency Management and Emergency Services, though very different from each other, are the increasing incidences of both West Nile Virus and illegal methamphetimine labs. Both pose a significant threat and expense to the Yuma County public. Public education can inform citizens of what to look for, and what preventative measures to take, for both instances. These two hazards are currently the #1 and#2 most frequent hazard threats in Colorado, and are occurring far too frequently within Yuma County. Implementation Manager and strategy: County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with the Sheriff and regional coordinator for the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment(CDPHE). Priority: High Cost Estimate: Approximately$1,000 to print brochures and mail. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: Public Education efforts for hazards are often the most direct and least expensive method of informing people of the risks they are subject to, and of effective actions to minimize their exposure. Preventing one loss of life, one explosion from a"Meth cook"or one case of West Nile Virus would be worth the expense. Action Item#4: Wray should provide "Refresher Training"for local lenders and insurance agents regarding the NFIP,publicize the NFIP, and promote the purchase of insurance for structures in the floodplain. Issue Statement: 75% percent of the structures in the floodplain in Wray are not insured against flood losses. Statistically, there is a 1% chance in any given year of incurring$600K in damages. Property owners should be afforded the opportunity to protect against these losses if they so choose. Implementation Manager and strategy: County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with the Wray Manager and City Council should invite the CWCB to conduct "Refresher Training" for both lenders and insurance agents. CWCB and FEMA can also provide public information brochures describing the benefits of purchasing flood insurance. The city should annually notify floodprone occupants of their location and of the availability of flood insurance. Priority: High Cost Estimate: Can be accomplished within existing budgets or with minimal expense. Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is little or no increased cost to the Town. The benefits are to floodprone building owners who choose to insure against flood losses, and to taxpayers who no longer would be faced with subsidizing those potential losses. 196 Action Item#5: Wray should conduct the one-day flood recovery & mitigation exercise as an awareness tool for local officials Issue Statement: The Town of Wray is built in and around the floodplain, and a flood would cause considerable damage and hardship within the community. Conducting this FEMA-developed, one-day flood exercise would allow local officials to identify and react to the many problems they would likely encounter, thus providing a pre-flood"to-do" list, as well as an increased awareness of what emergency actions to take in an actual post-flood situation. This also would reinforce existing policies and procedures within the community, which would support the basic ideas of the Yuma County Planning Subcommittee. First, for future planning, insure that no emergency services (fire, ambulance, etc.) are located in a floodplain. Second, it would reinforce the existing rules about how building in floodplains should occur. Implementation Manager and strategy: County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with CWCB and FEMA. Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: Can be accomplished within existing budgets Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is little cost associated with this project. The benefits are to the community in being more prepared to realistically address the emergency management concerns of a flood in their community. Action Item#6: Promote the benefits of the crop insurance to the County agricultural community Issue Statement: Agricultural losses are the #1 annual dollar loss in Yuma County. Over the past 20-years, policyholders have, on average, received a 5-to-1 return on their investment in this loss protection mechanism. Implementation Manager and strategy: County Emergency Manager, in conjunction with USDA and NRCS. Priority: Medium Cost Estimate: Can be accomplished within existing budgets Cost-Effectiveness Explanation: There is little cost associated with this project. The benefits are in receiving compensation for otherwise lost agricultural revenue, which in turn, contributes significantly to the county economy. 197 Plan Adoption, Implementation & Maintenance (note: this is written as if the adoptions have already occurred) Step 9: Formal Plan Adoption Over 100 "local governments," as defined by the DMA regulations have participated in this planning process and formally adopted this plan by resolution of their governing Board, be it elected or appointed. The adoption process itself took several months, as massive coordination was necessary in order to get the plan review and adoption on the agendas, produce and provide copies in official meeting packets, provide, facilitate the actual adoption, collect the Adoption Resolutions, scan the resolutions, transfer the scanned documents to Compact Disc, and then reproduce the CDs. Copies of the Adoption Resolutions are on the CD included in this plan as Appendix B. The Northeast Colorado Emergency Management Association appreciates the flexibility and willingness that both Colorado's Office of Emergency Management and FEMA Region VIII demonstrated by reviewing this plan concurrently and providing comments for revision prior to the adoption process. Not having done so would clearly have added even more months to the adoption process. Step 10: Implement and Maintain the Plan Implementation: Upon adoption, the plan faces the truest test of its worth: implementation. Implementation implies two concepts: action and priority. These are closely related. While this plan puts forth many worthwhile and "High"priority recommendations, the decision of which action to undertake first will be the first issue that the NCEM faces. Fortunately, there are two factors that will help make that decision. First, there are high priority items for each participating county, so each county can pursue an action simultaneously, and eleven recommendations will begin to be addressed. Second, funding is always an issue. Thus, pursuing low or no-cost high-priority recommendations will have the greatest likelihood for succeeding. An example would be to pursue the education efforts necessary for elected officials and the general public as they relate to participation in the NFIP. Some communities need to join the NFIP and others need to significantly increase the existing amount of flood insurance coverage. Another example would be to pursue the Regional Goal of achieving "Storm Ready Certification"by the National Weather Service, by each county identifying the particular activities they need to undertake. These initial efforts will lead to long- standing changes in vulnerability and can be initiated at very little cost, while promoting public education through their relative "visibility" in the community. Another important implementation mechanism that is highly effective but low-cost, is to take steps to incorporate the recommendations, and equally important, the underlying principles of this Hazard Mitigation Plan into other community plans and mechanisms, 198 such as Comprehensive Planning, Capital Improvement budgeting, Economic Development goals and incentives, or regional plans such as those put forth by the State Department of Transportation. Mitigation is most successful when it is incorporated within the day-to-day functions and priorities of government and development --- and so the best opportunity to be successful is to maintain a vigilance to do this. This integration is accomplished by a constant, pervasive and energetic effort to network and to identify and highlight the multi-objective, "win-win"benefits to each program, the community and the constituents. This effort is achieved through the mundane actions of monitoring agendas, attending meetings, sending memos, and promoting safe, sustainable communities. Simultaneous to these efforts, it is important to maintain a constant monitoring of funding opportunities that can be leveraged to implement some of the more costly recommended actions. This will include creating and maintaining a bank of ideas on how any required local match or participation requirement can be met. Then, when funding does become available, NCEM and the appropriate counties and municipalities will be in a position to capitalize upon the opportunity. Funding opportunities that can be monitored include special pre- and post-disaster funds, special district budgeted funds, state or federal ear- marked funds, and grant programs, including those that can serve or support multi- objective applications. With adoption of this plan, NCEM commits to: • Pursuing the implementation of the high priority, low/no-cost Recommended Actions, • Keeping the concept of Mitigation in the forefront of community decision- making by identifying recommendations of this plan when other community goals, plans and activities they overlap, influence, or directly affect increased community vulnerability to disasters, and • Maintaining a vigilant monitoring of multi-objective cost-share opportunities to assist the participating communities in implementing the Recommended Actions of this plan for which o current funding or support exists. Maintenance: Plan maintenance implies an ongoing effort to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the plan, and to update the plan as progress, roadblocks, or changing circumstances are recognized. This monitoring and updating will take place through a semi-annual review by each CPS, an annual review through the standing NCEM/MCPC organization, and a 5-year written update to be submitted to the state and FEMA Region VIII, unless disaster or other circumstances (e.g., changing regulations) lead to a different time frame. When each CPS reconvenes for the review they will coordinate with each jurisdiction that participated in the planning process—or that has joined the CPS since the inception 199 of the planning process -- to update and revise the plan. Public notice will be given and public participation will be invited, at a minimum, through available web-postings and press releases to the local media outlets, primarily newspapers and AM radio stations. The evaluation of the progress can be achieved by monitoring changes in the vulnerability identified in the plan. Changes in vulnerability can be identified by noting: • Lessened vulnerability as a result of implementing Recommended Actions, • Increased vulnerability as a result of failed or ineffective mitigation actions, and/or, • Increased vulnerability as a result of new development (and/or annexation). The updating of the plan will be by written changes and submissions, as the NCEM deems appropriate and necessary. 200 APPENDIX A: ACRONYMS USED IN THIS PLAN APA American Planning Association ARC American Red Cross BFE Base Flood Elevation (The 100-year-flood, the 1% event) BOR Bureau of Reclamation CDBG Community Development Bock Grants CDOT Colorado Department of Transportation CFM Certified Floodplain Manager CGS Colorado Geological Survey CO-OEM Colorado Office of Emergency Management CO-DODES Colorado Division of Disaster & Emergency Services (OEM predecessor agency) CDPHE Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment CERT Community Emergency Response team CPS County Planning Subcommittee CRS Community Rating System CSU Colorado State University CWCB Colorado Water Conservation Board DHS Department of Homeland Security DMA Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 DNR Department of Natural Resources DOLA Department of Local Affairs DOI Department of the Interior DOW Division of Wildlife A-1 EAPs Emergency Action Plans EOC Emergency Operations Center EOP Emergency Operations Procedures EPA Environmental Protection Agency FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FFA Future Farmers of America FHBM Flood Hazard Boundary Map FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map FMA Flood Mitigation Assistance (FEMA/NFIP Program) FSA Farm Service Agency(part of USDA) H&H Hydraulics and Hydrology HMGP Hazard Mitigation Grant Program IFG Individual & Family Grant Program (FEMA Program) LCWCD Logan County Water Conservancy District LEOP Local Emergency Operations Plan LEPC Local Emergency Planning Committee LOMR Letter of Map Revision MCPC Multi-County Planning Committee NCDC National Climatic Data Center(part of NOAA) NCEM Northeastern Colorado Emergency Managers (Association) NCIS National Crop Insurance Services (part of USDA) NFIP National Flood Insurance Program (FEMA Program) NKC Nebraska-Kansas-Colorado (Railroad) A-2 NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NRCS Natural Resource Conservation Services (part of USDA) (formerly the Soil Conservation Service [SCS]) NSFHA No Special Flood Hazard Area NWS National Weather Service (Part of NOAA) OEM Office of Emergency Management PDM Pre-Disaster Mitigation (Program) REA Rural Electric Association RETAC Regional Emergency Trauma Advisory Council SARA Superfund Reauthorization Act SFHA Special Flood Hazard Area SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer TH Temporary Housing (FEMA Program) TMAC The Mitigation Assistance Corporation UPRR Union Pacific Railroad USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers USDA United States Department of Agriculture USGS United Sates Geological Survey(part of DOI) WNV West Nile Virus WAPA Western Area Power Association WPA Works Projects Administration A-3 Hello