Warren County Hazard Mitigation Plan July 2017

Transcription

1 Warren County Hazard Mitigation Plan July 2017

2 Hazard Mitigation Planning Team NAME TITLE Troy Bass Warren County, Emergency Management Coordinator Crystal McIntyre Warren County, Supervisor Lindsey Baughman Warren County, Zoning Administrator Andy Lent City of Carlisle, City Administrator Tom Becker City of Cumming, Mayor Bradley Herrold City of Hartford, Clerk/Treasurer Rob Stangel City of Indianola, General Manager Municipal Utilities Diane Hall City of Milo, Mayor Brent Baughman City of New Virginia, Clerk Jodie Eddleman City of Norwalk, Clerk Chris Frerichs Simpson College, Director of Security *Jim Marwedel Iowa Homeland Security & Emergency Management, State Mitigation Planner *Jeff Henson JEO Consulting Group, Inc. *Rebecca Appleford JEO Consulting Group, Inc. *Ellana Haakenstad JEO Consulting Group, Inc. *Served as an advisory or consultant role Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 I

3 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... I Introduction... i Goals and Objectives... iii Summary of Changes... iv Plan Implementation... iv Hazard Profiles... iv Drought... vi Flooding... vii Severe Winter Storms... vii Severe Thunderstorms... viii Tornadoes... ix SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION... 1 Hazard Mitigation Planning... 1 Summary of Changes... 1 Disaster Mitigation Act of Hazard Mitigation Assistance... 2 Plan Financing and Preparation... 2 SECTION TWO: PLANNING PROCESS... 3 Introduction... 3 Summary of Changes... 3 Multi-Jurisdictional Approach... 3 Hazard Mitigation Planning Process... 4 Organization of Resources... 4 Plan Update Process... 4 Regional Planning Team... 5 HMP Workshop... 6 Public Involvement and Outreach... 7 Neighboring Jurisdictions... 8 Participant Involvement... 8 Assessment of Risk Round 1 Meetings: Hazard Identification Mitigation Plan Development Round 2 Meetings: Mitigation Strategies Public Review and Project Funding Funding Workshop Plan Integration II Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

4 Table of Contents Plan Adoption Plan Implementation and Progress Monitoring SECTION THREE: DEMOGRAPHICS AND ASSET INVENTORY Introduction Summary of Changes Demographic Changes At-Risk Populations Built Environment Housing Statistics State and Federally Owned Properties Agricultural Asset Inventory Crop Inventory Livestock Inventory Agricultural Valuation per County SECTION FOUR: RISK ASSESSMENT Introduction Summary of Changes Methodology Average Annual Damages and Frequency Hazard Identification Hazard Elimination Hazard Assessment Summary Tables Historical Disaster Declarations Farm Service Agency Small Business Administration Disasters Presidential Disaster Declarations Climate Adaptation Hazard Profiles Agricultural Animal and Plant Disease Dam Failure Drought Earthquakes Expansive Soils Extreme Heat Flood (Flash Flooding and River Flooding) Grass/Wildfire Hail Hazardous Materials Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 III

5 Table of Contents Human Disease Infrastructure Failure Levee Failure Severe Thunderstorms and Lightning Severe Winter Storms Sinkholes Terrorism Tornadoes Transportation Incidents Windstorm SECTION FIVE: MITIGATION STRATEGY Introduction Summary of Changes Goals and Objectives Mitigation Alternatives (Action Items) Participant Mitigation Alternatives Mitigation Alternative Project Matrix Completed Mitigation Efforts SECTION SIX: PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE Summary of Changes Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the Plan Continued Public Involvement Unforeseen Opportunities Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms SECTION SEVEN: PARTICIPANT SECTIONS Purpose of Participant Sections Warren County Appendix Warren County City of Carlisle City of Cumming City of Hartford City of Indianola City of Lacona City of Martensdale City of Milo City New Virginia City of Norwalk Indianola Community School District Martensdale-St. Marys Community School District Norwalk Community School District Southeast Warren Community School District Simpson College IV Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

6 Table of Contents PROCEDURAL APPENDICES Appendix A: Resolutions Appendix B: Documents of Public Involvement Appendix C: Public Meeting Materials and Worksheets Appendix D: Worksheets to Assist Community in Review and Updates Appendix E: Hazard Mitigation Project Funding Guidebook Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 V

7 List of Figures LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Map of Planning Area... ii Figure 2: Project Timeline... 5 Figure 3: WC HMP Workshop... 6 Figure 4: Community Survey Poster... 9 Figure 5: Planning Area Population Trends Figure 6: Population by Age in the Planning Area Figure 7: Regional School Districts Figure 8: Billion Dollar Disasters Figure 9: Land Use in Warren County Figure 10: Dam Locations Figure 11: Sequence and Impacts of Drought Types Figure 12: Palmer Drought Severity Index Figure 13: U.S. Seasonal Drought Outlook Figure 14: Midcontinental Rift Figure 15: United States Earthquake Hazard Map (PGA, 2% in 50 years) Figure 16: Earthquake Probability Figure 17: NRCS Iowa Soil Regions Figure 18: U.S. Geological Survey Swelling Clays Maps of Iowa Figure 19: Number of Days Above 90 F in Indianola Figure 20: NOAA Heat Index Figure 21: 1% Annual Chance Flood Risk Area Figure 22: Average Monthly Precipitation Figure 23: Monthly Trend for Floods in Warren County ( ) Figure 24: Mean Fire Return Interval Figure 25: Wildfires by Cause for Warren County, Figure 26: Number of Wildfires by Year for Warren County, Figure 27: Hail Events by Size Figure 28: Hazardous Chemical Fixed Sites Figure 29: Major Transportation Routes Figure 30: Pipelines Located in Warren County Figure 31: Outbreak Types in Iowa (2015) Figure 32: Leveed Areas in Warren County Figure 33: Average Annual Number of Thunderstorms Figure 34: Average Annual Flash Density, Figure 35: Severe Thunderstorms by Month Figure 36: SPIA Index Figure 37: Wind Chill Index Chart Figure 38: Monthly Normal ( ) and Record Temperatures, Indianola Figure 39: Monthly Normal ( ) Snowfall Figure 40: Historic Coal Mining Areas Figure 41: Tornado Activity in the United States Figure 42: Historic Tornado Tracks with Population Density ( ) Figure 43: Tornadoes by Month in the Planning Area Figure 44: Roadway Transportation Incidents in Warren County Figure 45: Wind Zones in the U.S Figure 46: High Wind Events by Month VI Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

8 List of Tables LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Participating Jurisdictions... i Table 2: Hazard Occurrence... v Table 3: Hazard Loss History... v Table 4: Hazard Mitigation Regional Planning Team... 5 Table 5: Meeting Locations and Times... 6 Table 6: Notified Stakeholder Groups... 7 Table 7: Neighboring Jurisdictions Notified... 8 Table 8: Outreach Activity Summary... 8 Table 9: Round 1 Meeting Dates and Locations Table 10: Round 1 Meeting Attendees Table 11: Round 1 One-On-One Meetings Table 12: Round 2 Meeting Dates and Locations Table 13: Round 2 Meeting Attendees Table 14: Round 2 One-On-One Meetings Table 15: Jurisdictional Involvement and Meeting Summary Table 16: Funding Agencies Present at Workshop Table 17: Funding Workshop Attendees Table 18: General Plans, Documents, and Information Table 19: Section Three Summary of Changes Table 20: School Inventory Table 21: Inventory of Care Facilities Table 22: At-Risk Populations in Warren County Table 23: Selected Housing Characteristics Table 24: State and Federally-Owned Facilities Table 25: Regional Farm Data Table 26: Crops by Acre in Warren County Table 27: Livestock Inventory in Warren County Table 28: Market Value of Agricultural Products Sold Table 29: Term Definitions Table 30: Changes to Profiled Hazards Table 31: Risk Assessment Data Sources Table 32: Hazards Addressed in the Plan Table 33: Regional Risk Assessment Table 34: Loss Estimation for the Planning Area Table 35: SBA Declarations Table 36: Presidential Disaster Declarations Table 37: Livestock Inventory for Warren County Table 38: Land and Value of Farms in Warren County Table 39: Crop Values Table 40: Land Use Types Table 41: Common Crop Diseases by Crop Types Table 42: Agricultural Plant Disease Losses Table 43: Regional Agricultural Vulnerabilities Table 44: Dam Hazard Classification Definitions Table 45: Dams in Warren County Table 46: High Hazard Dam Table 47: Regional Dam Failure Vulnerabilities Table 48: Palmer Drought Severity Index Classification Table 49: Loss Estimate for Drought Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 VII

9 Table of Contents Table 50: Drought Magnitude and Probability Table 51: Regional Drought Vulnerabilities Table 52: Richter Scale Table 53: Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale Table 54: Regional Earthquake Vulnerabilities Table 55: Regional Expanding Soils Vulnerabilities Table 56: Extreme Heat Loss Estimation Table 57: Loss of Electricity - Assumed Damage by Jurisdiction Table 58: Regional Extreme Heat Vulnerabilities Table 59: NFIP Participants Table 60: NFIP Polices in Place and Total Payments Table 61: Number of Flood Events Table 62: Flood Loss Estimate Table 63: Flooding Stages Table 64: Regional Flooding Vulnerabilities Table 65: Reported Wildfires by Fire Department Table 66: Wildfire Loss Estimation Table 67: Regional Wildfire Vulnerabilities Table 68: Hail Loss Estimate Table 69: TORRO Hail Scale Table 70: Regional Hail Vulnerabilities Table 71: Hazardous Material Classes Table 72: Fixed Site Chemical Spills Table 73: Transportation Chemical Spills Table 74: Chemical Spill Average Annual Losses Table 75: Regional Chemical and Radiological Fixed Site Vulnerabilities Table 76: Cases of Reportable Diseases in Warren County (2014) Table 77: Regional Vulnerabilities Table 78: Regional Vulnerabilities Table 79: Planning Area Levees Table 80: Potential Losses in Levee Breach Area Table 81: USACE Levee Rating Categories Table 82: Regional Levee Failure Vulnerabilities Table 83: Thunderstorm and Lightning Events by Participating Jurisdiction Table 84: Severe Thunderstorms Loss Estimate Table 85: Regional Vulnerabilities Table 86: Severe Winter Storm Loss Estimate Table 87: Regional Vulnerabilities Table 88: Regional Vulnerabilities Table 89: Regional Vulnerabilities Table 90: Enhanced Fujita Scale Table 91: Enhanced Fujita Scale Damage Indicator Table 92: Tornado Loss Estimate Table 93: Regional Vulnerabilities Table 94: Air Transportation Accidents Table 95: Regional Chemical Transportation Vulnerabilities Table 96: Wind Events Table 97: High Wind Loss Estimate Table 98: Beaufort Wind Ranking Table 99: Regional Vulnerabilities Table 100: Mitigation Alternatives Selected by Each Jurisdiction VIII Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

10 List of Acronyms LIST OF ACRONYMS ACS American Community Survey CFR Code of Federal Regulations CIKR Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources CRS Community Rating System CWD Chronic Wasting Disease DFIRM Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map DHS Department of Homeland Security DMA 2000 Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 EAP Emergency Action Plan FBI Federal Bureau of Investigations FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map FMA Flood Mitigation Assistance Program FR FEMA s Final Rule GIS Geographic Information Systems HMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance HMGP Hazard Mitigation Grant Program HMP Hazard Mitigation Plan HSAS Homeland Security Advisory System IDALS Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship IDNR Iowa Department of Natural Resources IHSEM Iowa Homeland Security & Emergency Management JEO JEO Consulting Group, Inc. LGA Liquid Gallon MRCC Midwestern Regional Climate Center NCEI National Centers for Environmental Information NDMC National Drought Mitigation Center NFIP National Flood Insurance Program NIPP National Infrastructure Protection Plan NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NTAS National Terrorism Advisory System NTSB National Transportation Safety Board NWS National Weather Service PAL Provisionally Accredited Levee PDM Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program PDSI Palmer Drought Severity Index PHMSA U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration RMA Risk Management Agency SBA Small Business Administration SFHA Special Flood Hazard Area SPIA Sperry-Piltz Ice Accumulation Index SSA Sector-Specific Agency START National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism USDA United States Department of Agriculture USGS United States Geological Survey WC Warren County Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 IX

11 Table of Contents THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK X Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

12 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION This plan is an update to the Warren County (WC) Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP), approved in The plan update was developed in compliance with the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000). Hazard mitigation planning is a process in which hazards are identified and profiled, people and facilities at risk are identified and assessed for threats and potential vulnerabilities, and strategies and mitigation measures are identified. The goal of the process is to reduce risk and vulnerability to lessen impacts to life, the economy, and infrastructure. Hazard mitigation planning increases the ability of communities to effectively function in the face of natural and manmade disasters. Fifteen jurisdictions participated directly in the planning process. This includes one county, nine cities, four school districts, and one college. Table 1: Participating Jurisdictions Participating Jurisdictions Warren County City of Carlisle City of Cumming City of Hartford City of Indianola City of Lacona City of Martensdale City of Milo City of New Virginia City of Norwalk Special Districts Indianola Community School District Martensdale-St. Marys Community School District Norwalk Community School District Simpson College Southeast Warren Community School District Warren County is located in southcentral Iowa, just south of Des Moines and is considered to be part of the greater Des Moines metropolitan area (Figure 1). Warren County is bordered by Dallas, Polk, Jasper, Madison, Marion, Clarke, and Lucas Counties. The total area of Warren County is 573 square miles. According to the 2014 American Community Survey, Warren County has a population of 47,058 and has displayed a growth trend over many decades. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 i

13 Executive Summary Figure 1: Map of Planning Area ii Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

14 Executive Summary GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The potential for disaster losses and the probability of occurrence of natural and manmade hazards present a significant concern for the communities participating in this plan update. The driving motivation behind the update of this hazard mitigation plan is to reduce vulnerability and the likelihood of impacts to the health, safety, and welfare of all citizens in the planning area. To this end, the Regional Planning Team reviewed, updated, and approved goals and objectives which helped guide the process of identifying both broad-based and community-specific mitigation strategies and projects that will, if implemented, reduce their vulnerability and help build stronger, more resilient communities. The Regional Planning Team and participating jurisdictions agreed with the changes and the identified goals and objectives. The goals and objectives for this plan update are as follows: Goal 1: Reduce the extent of fatalities and injuries due to hazards Objective 1.1: Improve countywide warning capabilities against hazards Objective 1.2: Provide education programs and exercises to first responders and general public about hazards and how to respond Objective 1.3: Implement non-structural projects that will result in protection of life and safety Objective 1.4: Implement structural projects that will result in protection of life and safety Objective 1.5: Ensure proper and adequate equipment for first responders Goal 2: Reduce the extent of property losses due to hazards on existing properties Objective 2.1: Improve public infrastructure and critical assets in hazard impact areas Objective 2.2: Use the most effective approaches to protect buildings from flooding, including acquisition or relocation where warranted Objective 2.3: Use the most effective approaches to protect buildings from other hazards using both structural and non-structural projects Goal 3: Improve public response to hazards and make recovery easier Objective 3.1: Enhance the continuity of government during and after storms Objective 3.2: Enhance cross-agency and intra- and inter-county communications Objective 3.3: Review and then either continue, enhance, or establish mutual aid agreements, training, and exercises Objective 3.4: Ensure the mitigation plan is reviewed and updated as needed Goal 4: Improve quality of life in the community Objective 4.1: Investigate and plan for how mitigation can improve public services and recreation opportunities Objective 4.2: Ensure that current owners can maintain and improve their properties Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 iii

15 Executive Summary Goal 5: Be as efficient as possible with government funding Objective 5.1: Prioritize mitigation projects, starting with sites facing the greatest threat of life, health, and property, and for critical assets Objective 5.2: Use public funding on private property only when the benefits exceed the costs Objective 5.3: Maximize the use of outside sources of funding Objective 5.4: Maximize owner participation in mitigation efforts to protect their own properties and encourage property-owner self-protection measures Goal 6: Reduce the extent of property losses due to hazards on future properties Objective 6.1: Increase stringency of building codes to protect against fire, severe storms, and other hazards Objective 6.2: Update maps and ordinances and educate the public on development policies that prevent development where it should not be located SUMMARY OF CHANGES Several changes were made to the 2012 Hazard Mitigation Plan and planning process, including: condensing and combining sections (i.e. chapters); condensing the hazards profiled from 40 individual hazards to 20; greater efforts to reach out to and include stakeholder groups; a more concise HMP, which allows for better implementation; and the inclusion of additional mitigation strategies. This update also works to unify the various planning mechanisms in place throughout the participating communities (i.e. Comprehensive Plans, Zoning Ordinances, Building Codes, etc.) to ensure that the goals and objectives identified in those planning mechanisms are consistent with the strategies and projects included in this HMP. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Various jurisdictions across Warren County have implemented hazard mitigation projects following the 2012 HMP. Many of these projects are related to hazard monitoring, first responder preparations/communications, and/or updating ordinances. Examples include, but are not limited to: protection of city records; developing secondary alert systems; public information dispersal; first responder interagency operability and training; harden infrastructure; tree trimming maintenance; and updating building codes. In order to build upon these prior successes and to continue to implement mitigation projects, despite limited resources, jurisdictions will need to continue relying upon multi-agency coordination as a means of leveraging resources. Jurisdictions across the County have been able to work with a range of entities to complete projects; potential partners for future project implementation include, but are not limited to: WC; Silver Jackets; Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR); Iowa Homeland Security & Emergency Management (IHSEM); local industry; and others. HAZARD PROFILES This Hazard Mitigation Plan includes a description of the hazards considered, including a risk and vulnerability assessment. Data considered during the risk assessment process includes: historic occurrence and recurrence interval, historic losses (physical and monetary), impacts to the built environment (including privately owned structures as well as critical facilities), and the local risk assessment. These components were used to develop a balanced and well-rounded risk assessment. The following tables provide an overview of the risk assessment for each hazard and the losses associated with each hazard. iv Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

16 Executive Summary Table 2: Hazard Occurrence Hazard Regional Risk Assessment Previous Occurrence Events/Years Approximate Annual Probability Likely Extent Agricultural Animal Disease Unavailable ~100% Unavailable Agricultural Plant Disease 43/16 100% Unavailable Dam Failure 0 <1% Varies Drought 467/1,464* 32% Mild Drought Earthquake 0 <1% <4.0 Expansive Soils Unknown ~100% Isolated to streets, parking lots, and structures Extreme Heat 27/1 100% >90 F Flooding River Flood: 91/21 100% Some inundation of structures** (<1% of structures) and roads near streams. Flash Flood: 34/21 100% Some evacuations of people may be necessary (<1% of population) Grass/Wildfires 54/8 100% <20 acres Hail 198/21 100% H3 H6 ( inches) Hazardous Materials Fixed Site: 67/17 100% Transportation: 14/46 30% Limited (<0.5 mile from release site) Human Disease 143/1 100% Varies Infrastructure Failure Unknown Unknown Unknown Levee Failure 0 1% 19 parcels located in leveed area Severe Thunderstorms and Lightning Severe Winter Storms 58/21 100% 136/21 100% Wind 58 mph and/or Hail 1.00 inch 0.25 ice F below zero (wind chills) 4 8 snow mph winds Sinkholes Unknown ~10% Isolated Terrorism 0/47 <1% Varies Tornadoes 24/21 100% EF0 - EF1 Transportation Incidents 2,463/5 100% Isolated Windstorm 21/21 100% 9 BWF (47 54 mph) *Number of months rather than years **Quantification of vulnerable structures provided in Section Seven: Participant Sections Table 3: Hazard Loss History Hazard Type Total Property Loss 1 Average Annual Property Loss 1 Total Crop Loss 2 Average Annual Crop Loss 2 Agricultural Animal Disease N/A N/A Unknown Unknown Agricultural Plant Disease N/A N/A $164,875 $10,305 Dam Failure $0 $0 $0 $0 Drought $12,650,000* $602,381 $15,605,052 $975,316 Earthquake $0 $0 $0 $0 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 v

17 Executive Summary Hazard Type Total Property Loss 1 Average Annual Property Loss 1 Total Crop Loss 2 Average Annual Crop Loss 2 Expansive Soils $70,000 N/A N/A N/A Extreme Heat $135,000 $6,429 $945,987 $59,124 Flooding River: $6,616,500 $315,071 Flash: $2,540,000 $120,952 $5,499,328 $323,490 Grass/Wildfires 3 $0 $0 Unknown Unknown Hail Events $1,483,000 $70,619 $481,578 $20,066 Hazardous Materials Fixed: Unknown Unknown Transport: $194,435 $4,137 Unknown Unknown Human Disease N/A N/A N/A N/A Infrastructure Failure Unknown Unknown N/A N/A Levee Failure $0 $0 $0 $0 Severe Thunderstorms $2,645,500 $125,976 $23,325,517 $1,4547,845 Severe Winter Storms $5,108,230 $243,249 $603,880 $37,743 Sinkholes Unknown Unknown N/A N/A Terrorism $0 $0 N/A N/A Tornadoes $2,637,500 $125,595 $0 $0 Transportation Incidents N/A N/A N/A N/A Windstorm $815,110 $38,815 $351,386 $21,961 1 Indicates data is from NCEI ( ) 2 Indicates data is from USDA RMA ( ) 3 Indicates data is from IDNR ( ) *Regional damages includes WC and 50 other Iowa counties Many natural hazards (e.g. agricultural disease, flooding, extreme heat, grass and wildfires, severe thunderstorms, severe winter storms, and tornadoes) can be expected to occur annually within the planning area. Other natural hazards, like drought or earthquakes, will occur less often. What is not known regarding hazard occurrences is the scope of events, how they will manifest themselves locally, and how the occurrence or probability will change in the future. Historically, drought, flooding, severe winter storms, severe thunderstorms, and tornadoes have resulted in the most significant damages within the planning area. These five hazards are summarized below. DROUGHT Drought is a regular and reoccurring phenomenon in Warren County and the State of Iowa. Historic data shows that droughts have occurred with regularity, and recent research indicates that trend will continue and potentially intensify. The most common impacts resulting from drought are focused on the agricultural industry. Over $23 million in total crop loss has been reported for the planning area since In August 2003, the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) reports that $12.65 million in property damages for over 51 Iowa counties, however it is not clear from the NCEI database what property was damaged during this drought. Prolonged drought events can have a profound effect on the planning area and the individual communities. Expected impacts from prolonged drought events include (but are not limited to): economic loss in the agricultural sector, loss of employment in the agricultural sector, and limited water supplies (drinking and fire suppression). vi Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

18 Executive Summary Mitigation Strategies Identified: The following list includes strategies identified by participating jurisdictions to address local needs and vulnerabilities. A complete list for each jurisdiction is included in each participant section. Increase water capacity Well maintenance Enhance or formalize efforts for public education about hazards, including drought FLOODING Flash flooding and riverine flooding are common for the County due to the regular occurrence of severe thunderstorms in spring and summer, and the proximity of many communities to rivers. Within the planning area, flooding can occur on a local level, only affecting a few streets, but can also extend throughout an entire district, affecting whole drainage basins. The most damaging event since 1996 occurred on June 25, 2015 when a severe thunderstorm caused a flash flood and eventually river flooding over central Iowa, including Warren County. Three to six inches of rain fell across the region. Due to the large amount of rainfall, a significant portion of Highway 92 was closed. Three bridges were destroyed across Warren County and numerous culverts washed out. Furthermore, numerous farm to market roads sustained damage including bridge approaches and several structures were damaged. Property damages from this flood event are estimated at $1 million. Vulnerable populations within the planning area include the elderly that have decreased mobility, residents living in low-lying areas or the floodplain, and low income and minority populations, which may lack the resources needed for evacuation, response, or to mitigate the potential for flooding The planning area expects loss inducing floods to occur on an annual basis with 125 flooding events being recorded by the NCEI over 21 years. These 125 events have resulted in approximately $9,156,500 in property losses. Mitigation Strategies Identified: The following list includes strategies identified by participating jurisdictions to address local needs and vulnerabilities. A complete list for each jurisdiction is included in each participant section. Stormwater system improvements and maintenance Develop watershed studies and plans Update floodplain information Reduce property damage by improving sanitary and storm sewer systems Rehabilitate flood control structures Update/enhance floodplain regulations Improve drainage structures Bank stabilization project SEVERE WINTER STORMS Severe winter storms are an annual occurrence for the planning area. Winter storms can bring extreme cold temperatures, freezing rain and ice, and heavy or drifting snow. Blizzards are particularly dangerous and can have significant impacts throughout the planning area. Severe winter storms typically occur between December and March, but early and late season storms have occurred in the past and can have dramatic impacts in the planning area. Impacts resulting from severe winter storms include, but are not limited to: hypothermia and frost bite, death to those trapped outdoors, closure of transportation routes, downed power lines and prolonged power outages, collapse of roofs from heavy snow loads, death of livestock, and closure of critical facilities. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 vii

19 Executive Summary The most vulnerable citizens within the planning area are children (14.9 percent of the total population), the elderly (13.5 percent of the total population), individuals and families below the poverty line (12.3 percent of the total population), and those new to the area or state. Given the probability of occurrence and potential impacts, participating jurisdictions identified many strategies that can help reduce the level of vulnerability related to severe winter storms. Mitigation Strategies Identified: The following list includes strategies identified by participating jurisdictions to address local needs and vulnerabilities. A complete list for each jurisdiction is included in each participant section. Implementing hazardous tree removal programs Installing backup generators Removal of unhealthy trees or trees threatening critical facilities and infrastructure Public awareness Develop snow removal plans and designate snow routes SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS Thunderstorms differ from many other hazards in that they are generally large-scale events, have a long duration, and travel across large areas and through multiple jurisdictions. Additionally, thunderstorms often occur in a series, with one area having the potential to be impacted multiple times in one day. Severe thunderstorms are most likely to occur between the months of April and September with the highest number of events occurring in June. Typical impacts resulting from severe thunderstorms include, but are not limited to: loss of power; obstruction to transportation routes; grass/wildfires starting from lightning strikes; localized flooding; and damages discussed in the hazard profiles for hail and windstorms as these are typical components of severe thunderstorms. Vulnerable populations related to severe thunderstorms include: residents of mobile homes; citizens with decreased mobility; and those caught outside during storm events. Most residents within the planning area are familiar with severe thunderstorms and know how to appropriately prepare and respond to events. Most participating jurisdictions have reported updates or improvements to risk communication and outdoor warning systems. In addition, the use of text notifications has helped decrease the human vulnerability to this hazard. Mitigation Strategies Identified: The following list includes strategies identified by participating jurisdictions to address local needs and vulnerabilities. A complete list for each jurisdiction is included in each participant section. Installing backup generators Implementing hazardous tree removal programs Upgrading/improving warning systems Installing surge protectors for critical jurisdictional equipment viii Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

20 Executive Summary TORNADOES Tornadoes occur in the planning area on a near annual basis. The NCEI reports 24 tornadoes in the County since Of the reported events, all were ranked between an F/EF0 and F/EF2 and all but two of the events reported damages. The most damaging tornado since 1996 began west of Indianola and impacted the far western side of the community on July 23, The EF1 tornado had a path length of 3.3 miles and damaged many homes and barns. Most the damage was reported in northwest Indianola where it damaged residences north and west of Euclid Avenue. 22 homes sustained some sort of damage and five of those homes sustained major damage. The major damage included uplift of the roof decks, significant loss of roofing material and structures, collapse of garage walls, and damage to the walls of the homes. Multiple trees and power poles were also snapped or blown over. Approximately $750,000 in damages were reported. Vulnerable populations within the planning area include residents living in mobile homes, facilities without storm shelters which house large numbers of people (such as nursing homes, schools, factories, etc.), homeowners without storm shelters or basements, and residents with decreased mobility. All participating municipalities have outdoor warning sirens as well as access to voluntary AlertIowa messaging to their phones and/or . Mitigation Strategies Identified: The following list includes strategies identified by participating jurisdictions to address local needs and vulnerabilities. A complete list for each jurisdiction is included in each participant section. Implementing hazardous tree removal programs Constructing storm shelters Installing backup generators Improve notification and warning systems Develop a training and exercise plan for first responders Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 ix

21 Executive Summary THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK x Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

22 SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING Hazard events are inevitable; it is just a matter of when they happen and how well a community is prepared for such events. Mitigation reduces risk and is a socially and economically responsible action to prevent long term risks from natural and manmade hazard events. Natural hazards, such as severe winter storms, tornadoes and windstorms, severe thunderstorms, flooding, extreme heat, drought, agriculture diseases (plant and animal), earthquakes, and wildfires are a part of the world around us. Their occurrence is natural and inevitable, and there is little that can be done to control their force and intensity. Manmade hazards are a product of society and can occur with significant impacts to communities. Manmade hazards include levee failure, dam failure, hazardous materials, infrastructure failure, transportation incidents, and terrorism. These hazard events can occur naturally or because of human error. All FEMA definition of Hazard Mitigation Any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property from [natural] hazards. jurisdictions participating in this planning process are vulnerable to a wide range of natural and manmade hazards that threaten the safety of residents, and have the potential to damage or destroy both public and private property, cause environmental degradation, or disrupt the local economy and overall quality of life. WC prepared this HMP in an effort to reduce impacts from natural and manmade hazards and to better protect the people and property of the region from the effects of hazards. This plan demonstrates the communities commitment to reducing risks from hazards and serves as a tool to help decision makers establish mitigation activities and resources. This plan was developed to make WC and participating jurisdictions eligible for federal pre-disaster funding programs and to accomplish the following objectives: Minimize the disruption to each jurisdiction following a disaster Establish actions to reduce or eliminate future damages in order to efficiently recover from disasters Investigate, review, and implement activities or actions to ensure disaster-related hazards are addressed by the most efficient and appropriate solution Educate citizens about potential hazards Facilitate development and implementation of hazard mitigation management activities to ensure a sustainable community SUMMARY OF CHANGES A few changes were made to Section One for the update of this HMP. Overall, Section One was simplified from the 2012 plan to primarily act as an introduction to hazard mitigation planning, an explanation of rules and regulations, and plan financing. Changes that were made included moving the discussion on the HMP process, utilization of a multi-jurisdictional plan approach, and project timeline from this section to Section Two. The Executive Summary was also removed, but was brought to the beginning of the plan and expanded to include a thorough summary of the updated HMP. DISASTER MITIGATION ACT OF 2000 The U.S. Congress passed the DMA 2000 to amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. Section 322 of the DMA 2000 requires that state and local governments develop, adopt, and routinely update a hazard mitigation plan in order to remain eligible for pre- and post-disaster mitigation funding. These funds include the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP), Pre-Disaster Mitigation Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

23 Section One: Introduction Program (PDM), and the Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (FMA). These programs are administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). This plan was developed in accordance with current state and federal rules and regulations governing local hazard mitigation plans. The plan shall be monitored and updated on a routine basis to maintain compliance with the legislation Section 322, Mitigation Planning, of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as enacted by Section 104 of the DMA 2000 (P.L ) and by FEMA s Final Rule (FR) published in the Federal Register on November 30, 2007, at 44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 201. HAZARD MITIGATION ASSISTANCE On June 1, 2009, FEMA initiated the Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) program integration, which aligned certain policies and timelines of the various mitigation programs. These HMA programs present a critical opportunity to minimize the risk to individuals and property from hazards while simultaneously reducing the reliance on federal disaster funds. Each HMA program was authorized by separate legislative action, and as such, each program differs slightly in scope and intent. Mitigation is the cornerstone of emergency management. Mitigation focuses on breaking the cycle of disaster damage, reconstruction, and repeated damage. Mitigation lessens the impact disasters have on people's lives and property through damage prevention, appropriate development standards, and affordable flood insurance. Through measures such as avoiding building in damage-prone areas, stringent building codes, and floodplain management regulations, the impact on lives and communities is lessened. - FEMA Mitigation Directorate HMGP: To qualify for post-disaster mitigation funds, local jurisdictions must have adopted a mitigation plan that is approved by FEMA. HMGP provides funds to states, territories, Indian tribal governments, local governments, and eligible private non-profits following a presidential disaster declaration. The DMA 2000 authorizes up to seven percent of HMGP funds available to a state after a disaster to be used for the development of state, tribal, and local mitigation plans. FMA: To qualify to receive grant funds to implement projects such as acquisition or elevation of flood-prone homes, local jurisdictions must prepare a mitigation plan. Furthermore, local jurisdictions must be participating communities in the NFIP. The goal of FMA is to reduce or eliminate claims under the NFIP. PDM: To qualify for pre-disaster mitigation funds, local jurisdictions must adopt a mitigation plan that is approved by FEMA. PDM assists states, territories, Indian tribal governments, and local governments in implementing a sustained pre-disaster hazard mitigation program. PLAN FINANCING AND PREPARATION In regards to plan financing and preparation, in general, the local government of WC is the sub-applicant that is the eligible entity that submits a sub-application for FEMA assistance to the Applicant. The Applicant, in this case is the State of Iowa. If HMA funding is awarded, the sub-applicant becomes the sub-grantee and is responsible for managing the sub-grant and complying with program requirements and other applicable federal, state, territorial, tribal, and local laws and regulation. 2 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

24 SECTION TWO: PLANNING PROCESS INTRODUCTION The process utilized to develop a hazard mitigation plan is often as important as the final planning document. For this planning process, WC adapted the four-step hazard mitigation planning process outlined by FEMA to fit the needs of the participating jurisdictions. The following pages will outline how the Regional Planning Team was established; the function of the Regional Planning Team; key project meetings and community representatives; outreach efforts to the general public; key stakeholders and neighboring jurisdictions; general information relative to the risk assessment process; general information relative to local/regional capabilities; plan review and adoption; and ongoing plan maintenance. SUMMARY OF CHANGES Section Two was expanded from the 2012 HMP to include a discussion on several additional items. The following subsections were added to this plan update: Multi-jurisdictional approach HMP process Project timeline HMP Workshop Funding Workshop Plan Integration The first three bullets were originally in Section One in the 2012 plan. The workshops were a new addition to this planning process, and plan integration indicates the resources utilized in the making of this plan with additional discussion provided for each jurisdiction in Section Seven: Participant Sections. Requirement 201.6(b): Planning process. An open public involvement process is essential to the development of an effective plan. In order to develop a more comprehensive approach to reducing the effects of natural disasters, the planning process shall include: (1) An opportunity for the public to comment on the plan during the drafting stage and prior to plan approval; (2) An opportunity for neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, and agencies that have the authority to regulate development, as well as businesses, academia and other private and nonprofit interests to be involved in the planning process; and (3) Review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information. Requirement 201.6(c)(1): [The plan shall document] the planning process used to develop the plan, including how it was prepared, who was involved in the process, and how the public was involved. MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL APPROACH According to FEMA, A multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan is a plan jointly prepared by more than one jurisdiction. The term jurisdiction means local government. Title 44 Part 201, Mitigation Planning in the CFR, defines a local government as any county, municipality, city, town, township, public authority, school district, special district, intrastate district, council of governments, regional or interstate government entity, or agency or instrumentality of a local government; any Indian tribe or authorized tribal organization, any rural community, unincorporated town or village, or other public entity. For the purposes of this plan, a taxing authority was utilized as the qualifier for jurisdictional participation. FEMA recommends the multi-jurisdictional approach under the DMA 2000 for the following reasons: It provides a comprehensive approach to the mitigation of hazards that affect multiple jurisdictions; It allows economies of scale by leveraging individual capabilities and sharing cost and resources; It avoids duplication of efforts; and It imposes an external discipline on the process. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

25 Section Two: Planning Process WC utilized the multi-jurisdictional planning process recommended by FEMA (Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide [October 2011], Local Mitigation Planning Handbook [March 2013], and Mitigation Ideas: A Resource for Reducing Risk to Natural Hazards [January 2013]) to develop this plan. HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING PROCESS The hazard mitigation planning process as outlined by FEMA has four general steps, which include: organization of resources; assessment of risks; development of mitigation strategies; and, implementation and annual monitoring of the plan s progress. The mitigation planning process is rarely a linear process. It is characteristic of the process that ideas developed during the initial assessment of risks may need revision later in the process, or that additional information may be identified while developing the mitigation plan or during the implementation of the plan that may result in new goals or additional risk assessments. Organization of Resources o Focus on the resources needed for a successful mitigation planning process. Essential steps include: Organizing interested community members Identifying technical expertise needed Assessment of Risks o Identify the characteristics and potential consequences of hazards. Identify how much of the jurisdiction can be affected by specific hazards and the impacts they could have on local assets. Mitigation Plan Development o Determine priorities and identify possible solutions to avoid or minimize the undesired effects. The result is a hazard mitigation plan and strategy for implementation. Plan Implementation and Progress Monitoring o Bring the plan to life by implementing specific mitigation projects and changing day-today operations. It is critical that the plan remains relevant to succeed. Thus, it is important to conduct periodic evaluations and revisions, as needed. ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCES PLAN UPDATE PROCESS WC began the process of securing funding and sending out requests for proposals for their multijurisdictional hazard mitigation plan update in the spring of JEO Consulting Group, Inc. (JEO) was contracted in July 2016 to guide and facilitate the planning process and assemble the HMP. For the planning area, Troy Bass (Emergency Management Coordinator for WC) led the development of the plan and served as the primary point-of-contact throughout the project. The first activity in the development process for the WC HMP update was coordination of efforts with local, state, and federal agencies and organizations. WC and JEO worked together to identify elected officials and key stakeholders to lead the planning effort. A clear timeline of this plan update progress is provided in Figure 2, Project Timeline. 4 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

26 Section Two: Planning Process Figure 2: Project Timeline REGIONAL PLANNING TEAM At the beginning of the planning process, the Regional Planning Team, comprised of local participants and the consultant, was established to guide the planning process, review the existing plan, and serve as a liaison to plan participants throughout the planning area. A list of Regional Planning Team members can be found in Table 4. Additional technical support was provided to the Regional Planning Team by staff from IHSEM. Table 4: Hazard Mitigation Regional Planning Team Name Title Jurisdiction Troy Bass Emergency Management Coordinator Warren County Crystal McIntyre Supervisor Warren County Lindsey Baughman Zoning Administrator Warren County Andy Lent City Administrator City of Carlisle Tom Becker Mayor City of Cumming Bradley Herrold Clerk/Treasurer City of Hartford Rob Stangel General Manager Municipal Utilities City of Indianola Diane Hall Mayor City of Milo Brent Baughman Clerk City of New Virginia Jodie Eddleman Clerk City of Norwalk Chris Frerichs Director of Security Simpson College Jim Marwedel* State Mitigation Planner IHSEM Jeff Henson* Senior Planner JEO Rebecca Appleford* Project Coordinator/Planner JEO Ellana Haakenstad* Intern Planner JEO *Served as a consultant or advisory role A Regional Planning Team meeting and project kickoff was held July 11, The meeting provided an overview and discussion of the work to be completed over the next several months, including: whether to host a hazard mitigation workshop and a funding workshop for plan participants; when and where to host public meetings; plan goals and objectives; discussion of what types of information would be needed to be collected for the HMP; and public outreach methods. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

27 Section Two: Planning Process The Regional Planning Team was also kept up to date on the status of the HMP via s and phone calls throughout the planning process. Meeting attendance, community engagement, collected data, and plan timeline updates were all provided and discussed during these notifications. Table 5 shows the information and location of meetings held for the Regional Planning Team. Table 5: Meeting Locations and Times Location and Time Warren County Administration Building 301 N. Buxton, Indianola, IA 10:00 AM s and phone calls Agenda Items July 11, 2016 Planning Team responsibilities, dates and locations for meetings, plan goals and objectives, workshop details, public involvement Various Dates Review progress to date, meeting attendance and worksheets collected from communities, public outreach, next steps HMP WORKSHOP A Hazard Mitigation Planning Workshop was held a few weeks prior to the start of Round 1 meetings on September 14, All jurisdictions within the planning area were invited to attend. The workshop enabled plan participants to better understand the hazard mitigation planning process. A tornado scenario table-top exercise kicked off the workshop where attendees were put into small groups for discussion on the response and impacts a tornado may have on their jurisdiction. Questions presented during the exercise focused on identifying critical facilities and infrastructure, vulnerable populations, and strategies to reduce vulnerabilities to futures events. The exercise was followed by an introduction to hazard mitigation, the risk assessment process, identifying mitigation actions, and the importance of public outreach. Figure 3: WC HMP Workshop Source: JEO photo 6 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

28 Section Two: Planning Process PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT AND OUTREACH At the beginning of the planning process, the Regional Planning Team worked to identify stakeholder groups that could serve as hubs of communication throughout the planning process. A wide range of stakeholder groups were contacted and encouraged to participate. The following groups were invited to participate in the planning process. Six stakeholders attended meetings. Table 6: Notified Stakeholder Groups American Red Cross Organization Name Title Joe Solem Volunteer Disaster Services Department Participation Summary Participated Warren County Mental Health & - - Did not participate Disability Services Warren County Environmental Environmental Health Kate Honer Participated Health Coordinator Warren County Board of Health Dr. Dennis Zachary Chair Did not participate Warren County Conservation Board Jim Priebe Director Did not participate Warren County Economic Development Corp. Hollie Askey Executive Director Did not participate Greenfield Plaza Water District Marlin Sims - Did not participate Warren County Water District Stan Ripperger Systems Manager Did not participate Indianola Fire Department Mark McCurdy Deputy Chief Participated Carlisle Fire & Rescue Department Cory Glover Chief Did not participate Norwalk Fire Department Dr. Patricia Newland Medical Director Did not participate Martensdale Fire Department Bob Symour Assistant Fire Chief Participated Lacona Fire Department - - Did not participate Hartford Fire Department - - Did not participate Indianola Police Department Rob Hawkins Lieutenant Participated Norwalk Police Department Brad Criswell Police Officer Participated Carlisle Police Department Eric Spring Chief Did not participate Warren County Sheriff s Office Brian Vos Sheriff Did not participate Wee Wisdom Preschool - - Did not participate Wildcat ABC - - Did not participate Warren County Headstart Joyce Howard - Did not participate Indianola Preschool - - Did not participate Little Miracles - - Did not participate Mt. Calvary Preschool - - Did not participate Apple Tree Children s Center - - Did not participate Carol s Child Care - - Did not participate New Life Preschool - - Did not participate Norwalk Headstart - - Did not participate Serendipity Preschool - - Did not participate Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

29 Section Two: Planning Process NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS Neighboring jurisdictions were notified and invited as well. The following table indicates which neighboring counties were notified of the planning process. Letters were sent to county emergency managers at their respective jurisdictions and disseminated appropriately. Madison County s Coordinator of Emergency Management attended the Round 1 meeting. Table 7: Neighboring Jurisdictions Notified Notified Neighboring Jurisdictions Polk County Madison County Lucas County Marion County Clarke County PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT Elected officials, key stakeholders, and residents within WC experience the area hazards firsthand and play a key role in providing local information necessary to complete the plan. Participants are vital in reviewing goals and objectives; identification of hazards; providing a record of historical disaster occurrences and localized impacts; identification and prioritization of potential mitigation projects and strategies; and, the development of annual review procedures. In order to be a participant in the development of this plan update, jurisdictions were required to have, at a minimum, one representative present at the Round 1 and Round 2 meetings. Some jurisdictions were able to send multiple representatives to meetings. Jurisdictions were encouraged to invite stakeholder groups from within their communities to participate in the public meetings. Jurisdictions that were unable to attend the scheduled public meetings could request a meeting with members of the Regional Planning Team to satisfy the meeting attendance requirement. This effort enabled jurisdictions, which could not attend a scheduled public meeting, to participate in the planning process. Sign-in sheets from all public meetings can be found in Appendix B. Outreach to eligible jurisdictions included notification (letters and postcards) prior to all public meetings, a phone call reminder of upcoming meetings, and reminders to complete worksheets required for the planning process. Table 8 provides a summary of outreach activities utilized in this process. Table 8: Outreach Activity Summary Project Website Action Posting of 2012 WC HMP Project Announcement Regional Planning Team Letter (30/15-day notification) Round 1 Meeting Letters or Postcards (30/15-day notification) Round 2 Meeting Letters or Postcards (30/15-day notification) Neighboring Jurisdictions Letter Stakeholder Group Letters Notification Phone Calls Intent To inform the public and local/regional planning team members of past, current, and future activities ( Current HMP posted for public viewing on JEO Hazard Mitigation Planning project website ( Project announcement posted on project website ( and on WC emergency management website ( Informed the Regional Planning Team of upcoming meetings Sent to participants to discuss the agenda/dates/times/locations of the first round of public meetings Sent to participants to discuss the agenda/dates/times/locations of the second round of public meetings Informed neighboring jurisdictions about the planning effort Notification regarding the planning process and project meeting dates and locations Potential participants were called to remind them about upcoming meetings 8 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

30 Section Two: Planning Process Action Follow-up s and Phone Calls Project Flyer Community Survey Word-of-Mouth Intent Correspondence was provided to remind and assist participating jurisdictions with the collection and submission of required local data Flyers were posted about the WC HMP and how to get involved; flyers were posted at multiple locations throughout the county Participants and general public were invited to complete an online survey, which had questions about hazards and preparedness in their community; flyers were posted throughout the County and were handed out at the 2016 County Fair Staff discussed the plan with jurisdictions throughout the planning process Figure 4: Community Survey Poster Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

31 Section Two: Planning Process Community Survey SurveyMonkey, an online survey development tool, was utilized to generate and share a survey titled How do you prepare for a potential disaster event? A poster advertising the survey (Figure 4) was posted in several locations across the County and was also shared at the Warren County Fair. The survey asked six questions about the hazards of concern, preparedness, warning notification, and education. Thirty respondents took the survey with nine of them from the City of Carlisle and the other 21 from the City of Indianola. The hazards identified of greatest concern are tornadoes, severe winter storms, transportation incidents, terrorism, and human disease. Over half of the respondents are signed up for text notifications but also utilize backup notification methods such as television alerts, tornado sirens, and social media. For additional results from the survey, please see Appendix B. ASSESSMENT OF RISK ROUND 1 MEETINGS: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION At the Round 1 meeting, jurisdictional representatives (i.e. the local planning team) reviewed the hazards included in the 2013 Iowa State Hazard Mitigation Plan (for a complete list of hazards reviewed, see Section Four: Risk Assessment.) Table 9 shows the date and location of the Round 1 meeting. Table 9: Round 1 Meeting Dates and Locations Agenda Items General overview of the HMP planning process, discuss participation requirements, begin the process of risk assessment and impact reporting, update critical facilities, capabilities assessment, and status update on current mitigation projects Location and Time Date Indianola, IA 6:30 PM October 6, 2016 The intent of this meeting was to provide the public and jurisdictional representatives with an overview of the work to be completed over the next several months, discuss what types of information that would need to be provided to complete the plan, and preliminary data collection. Information regarding the completion of project worksheets, data that would be required for the update process, and the project schedule was provided to each jurisdiction. This information was distributed to provide an opportunity to gather input on the identification of hazards of greatest concern for each participating jurisdiction, records of historical occurrences, and potential mitigation projects from jurisdictional representatives (refer to Appendices B and C). The local planning teams for each jurisdiction completed worksheets to identify or update their jurisdiction s critical facilities, a capabilities assessment, and a status update on the mitigation projects from the 2012 HMP, if applicable. Meeting attendees are identified in Table 10. Table 10: Round 1 Meeting Attendees Name Title Jurisdiction Joe Solem Volunteer - Disaster Services Department American Red Cross Tom Becker Mayor City of Cumming Brad Herrold Clerk/Treasurer City of Hartford Mark McCurdy Deputy Chief - Indianola Fire Department City of Indianola Rob Hawkins Lieutenant - Indianola Police Department City of Indianola Todd Brown Emergency Manager Madison County Bob Symour Assistant Fire Chief - Martensdale Fire Dept City of Martensdale Brent Baughman City Clerk City of New Virginia Larry Dittmer Mayor Pro Tem City of New Virginia 10 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

32 Section Two: Planning Process Name Title Jurisdiction Brad Criswell Police Officer City of Norwalk Richard Sleeth Superintendent Norwalk Community Schools Tom Scallon Student Advocate/Safety Norwalk Community Schools Michael Harris Mayor City of Spring Hill Lindsey Baughman Zoning Administrator Warren County Crystal McIntyre Warren County Supervisor Warren County Dean Yordi Warren County Supervisor Warren County Kate Honer Environmental Health Coordinator Warren County Troy Bass Emergency Management Coordinator Warren County Jeff Henson Senior Planner JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Rebecca Appleford Project Coordinator JEO Consulting Group, Inc. As noted earlier, jurisdictional representatives that were unable to attend a public meeting met with a member of the Regional Planning Team one-on-one. Representatives that attended these one-on-one meetings are listed in the following table. Table 11: Round 1 One-On-One Meetings Name Title Jurisdiction Indianola Community Schools: October 6, 2016 Ron Swartz Transportation Director Indianola Community Schools Cindy Slauson Director Curriculum Indianola Community Schools Mark Timmerman Emerson Elementary Principal Indianola Community Schools Craig Sexton Wilder Elementary Principal Indianola Community Schools Art Sathoff Superintendent Indianola Community Schools Steve Kaster I-35 Secondary Principal Indianola Community Schools Amy Jo Naughton Irving Elementary Principal Indianola Community Schools Kristy Ellis High School Assistant Principal Indianola Community Schools Kim Post Child Care Director Indianola Community Schools Ron Lorenz Assistant Superintendent Indianola Community Schools Ed Johnson Whittier Elementary Principal Indianola Community Schools Ray Coffey Director of Technology Indianola Community Schools Annette Jauron Middle School Principal Indianola Community Schools Rick Branson Facilities Director Indianola Community Schools Jim Rupp Food Services Indianola Community Schools Johna Clancy School Business Manager Indianola Community Schools Martha Condon Regional Director Heartland Area Education Agency 11 Jeff Henson Senior Planner JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Simpson College: October 6, 2016 Brenda Wickett Assistant to the President Simpson College Chris Frerichs Director of Security Simpson College Luke Behaunek Dean of Students Simpson College Logan Edel Controller Simpson College Gary Dooley Maintenance Simpson College John E. Harris Campus Services Simpson College Jill Johnson VP of Marketing/PR Simpson College Jeff Henson Senior Planner JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Rebecca Appleford Project Coordinator JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

33 Section Two: Planning Process Name Title Jurisdiction City of Carlisle: October 7, 2016 Andy Lent City Administrator City of Carlisle Ruth Randleman Mayor City of Carlisle Cory Glover Chief Fire Department City of Carlisle Eric Spring Chief Police Department City of Carlisle Jeff Henson Senior Planner JEO Consulting Group, Inc. City of Norwalk: October 7, 2016 Chet Darst Captain Fire Department City of Norwalk Tim Hoskins Public Works Director City of Norwalk Jodi Eddleman City Clerk City of Norwalk Jeff Henson Senior Planner JEO Consulting Group, Inc. City of Milo: November 9, 2016 Diane Hall Mayor City of Milo Rebecca Appleford Project Coordinator JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Martensdale-St. Marys Community Schools: November 9, 2016 Tom Wood Superintendent Martensdale-St. Marys Community Schools Beth Happe Principal Martensdale-St. Marys Community Schools Jill Gavin Business Manager Martensdale-St. Marys Community Schools Rebecca Appleford Project Coordinator JEO Consulting Group, Inc. City of Lacona: January 24, 2017 Staci Catron City Clerk City of Lacona Rebecca Appleford Project Coordinator JEO Consulting Group, Inc. MITIGATION PLAN DEVELOPMENT ROUND 2 MEETINGS: MITIGATION STRATEGIES At the Round 2 meetings, participating jurisdictions identified new mitigation actions in addition to the mitigation actions continued from the 2012 HMP to address the hazards of concern for their jurisdiction. They also completed a plan integration worksheet to identify ways in which their community plans discuss hazard mitigation. Participating jurisdictions were also asked to review the information collected from the Round 1 meeting related to their jurisdiction through this planning process. Local planning teams were asked to ensure all information included was up-to-date and accurate. Information and data reviewed included, but was not limited to: local risk assessment results; identified critical facilities and their location within the community; future development areas; and expected growth trends (refer to Appendix C). There was also a brief discussion about the final months of the planning process, when the plan would be available for public review and comment, annual review of the plan, and the grant application process once the plan was approved. Table 12 shows the date and location of meetings held for the Mitigation Strategies phase of this project. Table 12: Round 2 Meeting Dates and Locations Agenda Items Identify new mitigation actions, plan integration, review of local data, annual review process, and applying for grants Location and Time Date Indianola, IA 6:30 PM January 12, Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

34 Section Two: Planning Process Meeting attendees are identified in Tables 13 and 14. Table 13: Round 2 Meeting Attendees Name Title Jurisdiction Tom Becker Mayor City of Cumming David Kragskow Resident City of Indianola Mark McCurdy Deputy Chief - Indianola Fire Department City of Indianola Rob Hawkins Lieutenant - Indianola Police Department City of Indianola Scott Henson Fire Chief Martensdale Fire Dept. City of Martensdale Brent Baughman City Clerk City of New Virginia Larry Dittmer Mayor Pro Tem City of New Virginia Diane Hall Mayor City of Milo Rick Branson Facilities Director Indianola Community Schools Jeff Lukehart Resident Warren County Jodene DeVault Public Health Administrator Warren County Lindsey Baughman Zoning Administrator Warren County Crystal McIntyre Warren County Supervisor Warren County Troy Bass Emergency Management Coordinator Warren County Jeff Henson Senior Planner JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Rebecca Appleford Project Coordinator JEO Consulting Group, Inc. The following table provides information regarding meetings held one-on-one with jurisdictions for Round 2. Table 14: Round 2 One-On-One Meetings Name Title Jurisdiction Norwalk Community Schools: January 12, 2017 Brad Criswell School Resource Officer Norwalk Community Schools Tom Scallon Student Advocate Norwalk Community Schools Jeff Henson Senior Planner JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Simpson College: January 12, 2017 Brenda Wickett Assistant to the President Simpson College Chris Frerichs Director of Security Simpson College Luke Behaunek Dean of Students Simpson College Logan Edel Controller Simpson College Gary Dooley Maintenance Simpson College John E. Harris Campus Services Simpson College Paul Crittenden Computer Systems Manager Simpson College Jody Ragan Registrar Simpson College Jeff Henson Senior Planner JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Rebecca Appleford Project Coordinator JEO Consulting Group, Inc. City of Carlisle: January 13, 2017 Andy Lent City Administrator City of Carlisle Don Miller Electric Superintendent City of Carlisle Tommy Thompson Water/Wastewater Operator City of Carlisle Eric Spring Chief Police Department City of Carlisle Steven J. O Braza Public Works Director City of Carlisle Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

35 Section Two: Planning Process Name Title Jurisdiction Rebecca Appleford Project Coordinator JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Southeast Warren Community Schools: January 19, 2017 Delane Galvin Superintendent/Secondary Principal Southeast Warren Schools Rebecca Appleford Project Coordinator JEO Consulting Group, Inc. City of Norwalk: January 26, 2017 Tim Hoskins Public Works Director City of Norwalk Jodi Eddleman City Clerk City of Norwalk Rebecca Appleford Project Coordinator JEO Consulting Group, Inc. City of Lacona: January 26, 2017 Staci Catron City Clerk City of Lacona Rebecca Appleford Project Coordinator JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Martensdale-St. Marys Community Schools: February 10, 2017 Tom Wood Superintendent Martensdale-St. Marys Schools Rebecca Appleford Project Coordinator JEO Consulting Group, Inc. City of Hartford: March 27, 2017 Brad Herrold City Clerk City of Hartford Rebecca Appleford Project Coordinator JEO Consulting Group, Inc. The following table is a summary of jurisdictions eligible to participate in the HMP along with their attendance for each meeting and whether at least one mitigation project has been identified for the plan. If a jurisdiction attended Round 1 and 2 meetings, completed the required worksheets, and submitted at least one mitigation project, they are considered eligible to adopt the HMP following FEMA approval. Table 15: Jurisdictional Involvement and Meeting Summary Attended Round Attended Round 2 1 and/or and/or Completed Jurisdiction Completed Required Required Worksheets Worksheets Submitted One or More Mitigation Projects Jurisdiction Eligible to Adopt HMP Warren County X X X X City of Ackworth City of Carlisle X X X X City of Cumming X X X X City of Hartford X X X X City of Indianola X X X X City of Lacona X X X X City of Martensdale X X X X City of Milo X X X X City of New Virginia X X X X City of Norwalk X X X X City of Sandyville City of Spring Hill City of St. Marys Carlisle Community School District Indianola Community School District X Special Districts X X X X 14 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

36 Section Two: Planning Process Jurisdiction Martensdale-St. Marys Community School District Norwalk Community School District Southeast Warren Community School District Attended Round 1 and/or Completed Required Worksheets Attended Round 2 and/or Completed Required Worksheets Submitted One or More Mitigation Projects Jurisdiction Eligible to Adopt HMP X X X X X X X X X X X X Simpson College X X X X PUBLIC REVIEW AND PROJECT FUNDING Once the draft of the HMP was completed, a public review period was opened to allow for participants and community members at large to review the plan and provide comments and changes, if any at that time. The public review period was open from June 1 through July 3, Participating jurisdictions were ed and mailed a letter notifying them of this public review period. The HMP was also made available on the project website ( for download. Received comments and changes were incorporated into the plan. FUNDING WORKSHOP The focus of the Funding Workshop, held on May 9 th, 2017 at the Warren County Administration Building in Indianola, was to provide participating jurisdictions with information on potential funding sources that could be accessed in implementing the mitigation actions identified by each jurisdiction. To discuss funding strategies, multiple agencies were asked to provide information to local officials regarding grant, loan, and other funding programs that might be appropriate to assist with project mitigation action implementation. The following table provides a list of agencies and entities that shared funding information. Table 16: Funding Agencies Present at Workshop Name Randy Campbell Lori Beary Dan Schmitz Agency USDA Rural Development Iowa Finance Authority Iowa Homeland Security and Emergency Management Department Table 17 provides a list of attendees, their titles and the jurisdictions they represent. Table 17: Funding Workshop Attendees Name Title Jurisdiction Randy Campbell Area Director USDA Rural Development Lori Beary Community Development Director Iowa Finance Authority Rob Hawkins Lieutenant Indianola PD Dan Schmitz State Mitigation Officer State of Iowa Brad Herrold Clerk/Treasurer City of Hartford, IA Jodi Eddleman City Clerk City of Norwalk Joseph Ballard Asst Director of Public Works City of Norwalk Johna Clancy School Business Manager Indianola Schools Brent Baughman City Clerk New Virginia Jennifer Baughman Assistant City Clerk New Virginia Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

37 Section Two: Planning Process Name Title Jurisdiction Diane Hall Mayor City of Milo Tom Scallon Student Advocate/Safety Norwalk High School Audrey Klein Student Simpson College Mark McCurdy Fireman Indianola Fire Andy Lent City Administrator Carlisle Lindsey Baughman Zoning Administrator Warren County Troy Bass Emergency Management Director Warren County Rebecca Appleford Project Coordinator JEO PLAN INTEGRATION The following table identifies many of the sources utilized during this planning process. Table 18: General Plans, Documents, and Information Documents Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 DMA Final Rule (2007) Local Multi-Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance (Blue Book) (2008) Local Mitigation Planning Handbook (2013) Hazard Mitigation Assistance Unified Guidance (2013) What is a Benefit: Guidance on Benefit- Cost Analysis on Hazard Mitigation Projects The Census of Agriculture (2012) National Flood Insurance Program Community Status Book (2014) Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide (2011) Plans/Studies Iowa State Water Plan (1985) Flood Insurance Studies (where applicable) Iowa Hazard Mitigation Plan (2013) Community Comprehensive Plans/Zoning and Subdivision regulations Data Sources/Technical Resources Federal Emergency Management Agency United States Department of Commerce National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service National Centers for Environmental Information Storm Prediction Center Statistics United States Geological Survey Source Source From respective communities Source Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

38 Section Two: Planning Process Documents United States Department of Agriculture United States Department of Agriculture Risk Assessment Agency US DOT Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration National Pipeline Mapping System National Agricultural Statistics Service National Transportation Safety Board Aviation Accident Database Midwestern Regional Climate Center United States Census Bureau National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) (2013) National Flood Insurance Program National Flood Insurance Program Bureau and Statistical Agent FEMA Map Service Center National Drought Mitigation Center Drought Monitor National Historic Registry United States Small Business Administration Iowa Homeland Security & Emergency Management Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship Iowa Department of Education Iowa Department of Natural Resources Iowa Department of Natural Resources GIS Iowa Department of Natural Resources Dam Safety and Inventory Natural Resources Conservation Service Iowa DNR Forestry Bureau Iowa DNR Environmental Services (Hazardous Material Release Database) Iowa State University Forestry Extension Iowa Department of Revenue Iowa Department of Public Health Trust for America s Health 2015 Report Outbreaks: Protecting Americans from Infectious Diseases Center for Disease Control and Prevention Warren County Community Health Needs Assessment & Health Improvement Plan 2015 Source Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

39 Section Two: Planning Process Documents Stanford University s National Performance of Dams Program Source PLAN ADOPTION Based on FEMA requirements, this Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan must be formally adopted by each participant through approval of a resolution. This approval will create individual ownership of the plan by each participant. Formal adoption provides evidence of a participant s full commitment to implement the plan s goals and objectives and action items. Requirement 201.6(c)(5): For multijurisdictional plans, each jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan must document that it has been formally adopted. In addition, the plan will need to be reviewed annually or when a hazard event occurs that significantly affects the area or individual participants and updated as appropriate at those times. Copies of resolutions approved by each participant are in Appendix A. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AND PROGRESS MONITORING Section Six describes the system that participating jurisdictions in WC have established to monitor the plan; provides a description of how, when, and by whom the HMP process and mitigation actions will be evaluated; presents the criteria used to evaluate the plan; and explains how the plan will be maintained and updated. 18 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

40 SECTION THREE: DEMOGRAPHICS AND ASSET INVENTORY INTRODUCTION This section includes information on: changes in demographics within the planning area; a summary of atrisk populations for the planning area; housing statistics; government-owned lands; and an inventory of agricultural assets. It is a summary for the planning area, so specific information with individual demographics (e.g. structural inventory, total housing units, properties on the National Historic Registry, etc.) for each participating jurisdiction can be found in their participant sections in Section Seven. SUMMARY OF CHANGES To simplify and condense the 2012 HMP for this update, many of the subsections were moved to other parts of this HMP, such as Section Four: Risk Assessment or Section Seven: Participant Sections. The following table lists the subsections that were removed or where they can be found in this update. Table 19: Section Three Summary of Changes Subsections from 2012 HMP Changes Made to HMP Update Brief History of Development Removed from plan update Form of Government Individual participant sections (Section 7) Transportation Individual participant sections Solid Waste Removed from plan update Geography and Geology Section 4 Expansive Soils and Flooding; individual participant sections NFIP Participation Section 4 Flooding Climatology Section 4 Extreme Heat and Severe Winter Storms; Warren County participant section Land Use Patterns Section 4 Agricultural Disease; individual participant sections Historic Places/Districts/Archeological Sites Individual participant sections Community Partnerships Individual participant sections Social and Cultural Issues Discussed in sub-section At-Risk Populations Population and Demographics Updated. Additional discussion in participant sections Housing Statistics Updated. Additional discussion in participant sections Education and Health Updated and discussed in At-Risk Populations Economic Statistics of the Population Individual participant sections Agricultural Statistics Updated Other General Jurisdictional Information Pertinent community information provided in participant sections Other Jurisdictions Relevant to Mitigation Planning School data discussed in sub-section At-Risk Populations Community Facilities, Services, and Infrastructure Parcel valuations and critical facilities listed in individual participant sections Emergency Services Capabilities provided in participant sections DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES As populations change, either growing or declining, the vulnerability of the community is impacted. If a community experiences rapid growth it may lack sufficient resources to adequately provide services for all members of the community in a reasonable timeframe. Examples of potential growth-related complications include: insufficient snow removal and roadway maintenance; lack of emergency storm shelters in vulnerable areas; inability to complete repairs to damaged infrastructure; and tracking the location of vulnerable populations. Communities experiencing population decline may be more vulnerable to hazards due to: vacant and/or dilapidated structures; an inability to properly maintain critical facilities and/or Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

41 Section Three: Demographics and Asset Inventory infrastructure; and higher levels of unemployment and populations living in poverty. It is important for communities to monitor their population changes and ensure that those issues are incorporated into hazard mitigation plans, as well as into other planning mechanisms within the community. In general, the planning area is more rural in nature, but is seeing areas of rapid growth particularly on the northern side of the County near the Des Moines metropolitan area. According to the US Census, the County population for 2014 (estimated) is 47,058 persons. This represents an increase of 1.8 percent from the 2010 census and nearly 14 percent since The percent change was calculated to determine the growth and decline in population of communities across the planning area. The following figure provides a summary of the percent changes from 2000 to 2010 and from 2010 to For percent change between 2010 and 2014 across the planning area, seven of the nine jurisdictions experienced growth in population. Of the seven, one had population growth greater than ten percent, which was the City of Lacona. From 2000 to 2014, the cities of Cumming and Norwalk saw incredible growth due in part to their proximity to Des Moines. The City of Cumming has seen a 58 percent growth during this time and has been adding housing developments in the last decade to attract new families. A new interstate interchange along with a new commercial development near the community has contributed to the growth. The City of Norwalk has grown by 27 percent and is also adding new housing developments along with commercial retail development that are attracting new residents to the community. For the two jurisdictions that experienced decline in population, neither had a decline greater than ten percent between 2010 and The local planning teams for Hartford and Milo were not sure as to the reason for the decline in population, but suspects it may be attributed to the lack of employment opportunities for residents. 20 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

42 Section Three: Demographics and Asset Inventory Figure 5: Planning Area Population Trends Population Trends Warren County City of Carlisle City of Cumming City of Hartford City of Indianola City of Lacona City of Martensdale City of Milo City of New Virginia City of Norwalk Percent Population Change Percent Population Change Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2000, 2010, 2014 (ACS Estimates) AT-RISK POPULATIONS In general, at-risk populations may have difficulty with medical issues, poverty, extremes in age, and communication due to language barriers. Several outliers may be considered when discussing potentially at-risk populations, including: Not all people who are considered at-risk are at-risk Outward appearance does not necessarily mark a person as at-risk A hazard event will, in many cases, impact at-risk populations in different ways Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

43 Section Three: Demographics and Asset Inventory The National Response Framework defines at-risk populations as populations whose members may have additional needs before, during, and after an incident in functional areas, including but not limited to: maintaining independence, communication, transportation, supervision, and medical care. Figure 6 provides a breakdown of the population by age for the planning area. The figure shows that the largest demographic cohort for the planning area is that of residents 19 and younger at 28.8 percent. Adults between the ages of 35 and 54 years constitute an estimated 27.5 percent of the population while seniors (65 and over) comprise approximately 14.2 percent of the total population. Figure 6: Population by Age in the Planning Area Percentage of Population by Age 1.9% 12.3% 13.5% 12.5% 15.3% 27.5% 17.2% < >85 Source: U.S. Census Bureau ACS year estimate Residents under the age of 19 experience higher levels of vulnerability related to hazards for a range of reasons. General vulnerabilities that can be identified for this group include: lack of independent transportation; significant concentrations of the demographic during daytime hours (attending schools); and the potential for greater impacts resulting from environmental stimuli (chemical release, extreme temperatures, contamination of air/water). Thus, this demographic group experiences increased vulnerability to the following list of hazards: tornadoes (especially daytime events), severe thunderstorms, severe winter storms, extreme heat, water shortage created by drought, and chemical releases. Lack of awareness can at times be a concern for people in this age range, as well as an inability to recognize and respond to environmental stimuli, which could lead to increased vulnerability to flooding (especially flash flooding), severe thunderstorms, tornadoes, and severe winter storms. Furthermore, there are several school districts within the planning area. Schools house a high number of atrisk residents within the planning area during the daytime hours of weekdays, as well as during special events on evenings and weekends. Figure 7 is a map of the school district boundaries, and Table 20 identifies the various school districts located within the planning area. 22 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

44 Section Three: Demographics and Asset Inventory Figure 7: Regional School Districts Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

45 Section Three: Demographics and Asset Inventory Table 20: School Inventory School District Total Enrollment ( ) Total Enrollment ( ) Indianola Community School District 3,641 3,523 Martensdale-St. Marys Community School District Norwalk Community School District 2,759 2,703 Southeast Warren Community School District Simpson College N/A 1,650 Carlisle Community School District* 2,121 2,011 Source: Iowa Department of Education *School district not participating in plan Like minors, seniors (age 65 and greater) are often more significantly impacted by temperature extremes. During prolonged heat waves, seniors may lack resources to effectively address the hazards and thus may incur injury or potentially death. Prolonged power outages (either standalone events or as the result of other contributing factors) can have significant impacts on any citizen relying on medical devices for bodily functions. One study conducted by the Center for Injury Research and Policy found that increases in vulnerability related to severe winter storms (with significant snow accumulations) begin at age 55. The 2011 study found that on average there are 11,500 injuries and 100 deaths annually related to snow removal. People, especially males, over the age of 55 are 4.25 times more likely to experience cardiac symptoms during snow removal. While the previously identified populations do live throughout the planning area, there is the potential that they will be located in higher concentrations at care facilities. The following table identifies the location of care facilities throughout Warren County. Table 21: Inventory of Care Facilities Name Facility Type Address Murphy s Guest Home Assisted Living 1009 Ann Park Indianola, IA Windsor Manor Indianola Assisted Living 608 S 15 th St Indianola, IA CLC Norwalk Assisted Living 921 Sunset Drive Norwalk IA Regency Care Center Assisted Living 815 High Road Norwalk IA Carlisle Care Center Nursing Home 680 Cole St Carlisle, IA Indianola Good Samaritan Center Nursing Home 708 S Jefferson Way Indianola, IA The Village Nursing Home 1203 N E St Indianola, IA Westview of Indianola Care Center Nursing Home 1900 W 3 rd Pl Indianola IA Norwalk Nursing and Rehabilitation Center Nursing Home 921 Sunset Drive Norwalk, IA Regency Care Center Nursing Home 815 High Rd Norwalk, IA Warren County Health Services Hospice Care 301 N Buxton St #203 Indianola, IA Mercy Indianola Family Medicine and 307 E Scenic Valley Ave Urgent Care Clinic Urgent Care Indianola, IA Source: Iowa Department of Health and Human Services 24 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

46 Section Three: Demographics and Asset Inventory In addition to residents being classified as at-risk by age, there are other specific groups within the planning area that experience vulnerabilities related to their ability to communicate or their economic status. Table 22 provides statistics at a county-level regarding households with English as a second language (ESL) and population reported as living below the poverty level within the past 12 months. Warren County has about a third of its population identified as ESL. According the US Census, the majority (around 46 percent) of the ESL population speak Spanish. It is important the County also craft messages for the Spanish speaking communities to better convey the risk of hazards. Table 22: At-Risk Populations in Warren County Population that speaks English as Second Language Percent of Total Population Population Below Poverty Level Percent of Total Population % 1, % Source: Language Spoken at Home: 2015 ACS 5-year estimate, Selected Economic Characteristics: 2015 ACS 5-year estimate Resident who speak English as a second language may struggle with a range of issues before, during, and after hazard events. General vulnerabilities revolve around what could be an inability to effectively communicate with others or an inability to comprehend materials aimed at notification and/or education. When presented with a hazardous situation it is important that all community members be able to receive, decipher, and act on relevant information. An inability to understand warnings and notifications may prevent not native English speakers from reacting in a timely manner. Further, educational materials related to regional hazards are most often developed in the dominant language for the area, for the planning area that would most likely be English. Residents who struggle with English in the written form may not have sufficient information related to local concerns to effectively mitigate potential impacts. Residents with limited English proficiency would be at an increased vulnerability to all hazards within the planning area. Residents below the poverty line may lack resources to prepare for, respond to, or recover from hazard events. Residents with limited economic resources will struggle to prioritize the implementation of mitigation measures over more immediate needs. Further, residents with limited economic resources are more likely to live in older, more vulnerable structures. These structures could be: mobile homes; located in the floodplain; located near know hazard sites (i.e. chemical storage areas); or older poorly maintained structures. Residents below the poverty line will be more vulnerable to all hazards within the planning area. BUILT ENVIRONMENT Data related to the built environment is an important component of a hazard mitigation plan. It is essential that during the planning process communities and participating jurisdictions display an understanding of their built environment and work to identify needs that may exist within their planning area. This section includes: selected housing characteristics; state and federally-owned properties. Additional information specific to each jurisdiction can be found in the Participant Sections. HOUSING STATISTICS The US Census provides some additional information related to housing units and potential areas of vulnerability. This information is taken from the ACS 5-year estimate data regarding selected housing characteristics. The selected characteristic examined in Table 23 include: lack of complete plumbing facilities; lacking complete kitchen facilities; no telephone service available; housing units that are mobile homes; and housing units with no vehicles. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

47 Section Three: Demographics and Asset Inventory Table 23: Selected Housing Characteristics Occupied housing units Lacking complete plumbing facilities Lacking complete kitchen facilities No telephone service available Housing Unit with No vehicles available Warren County 18, Carlisle 1, Cumming Hartford Indianola 5, Lacona Martensdale Milo New Virginia Norwalk 3, Source: Selected Housing Characteristics: 2015 ACS 5-year estimate Approximately 1.5 percent of housing units lack access to landline telephone service. This does not necessarily indicate that there is not a phone in the housing unit, as cellular telephones are increasingly a primary form of telephone service. However, this lack of access to landline telephone service does represent a population at increased risk to disaster impacts. Reverse 911 systems are designed to contact households via landline services and thus, some homes in hazard prone areas may not receive notification of potential impacts in time to take protective actions. Emergency managers should work to promote the registration of cell phone numbers with Reverse 911 systems or other notification systems, such as SMS text messaging (e.g. AlertIowa). Furthermore, approximately 2.9 percent of all occupied housing units do not have a vehicle available. Households without vehicles may have greater difficulty evacuating during a hazardous event and a reduced ability to access resources in time of need. STATE AND FEDERALLY OWNED PROPERTIES The following table provides an inventory of state-owned properties within the County. There are no known federally owned properties in the County. Table 24: State and Federally-Owned Facilities Facility Nearest Community Owner Lake Ahquabi State Park Indianola IDNR Hooper State Game Area Milo IDNR Banner Lakes at Sumerset State Park Indianola IDNR Sources: IDNR AGRICULTURAL ASSET INVENTORY Agriculture is a major component of the economy for the planning area and all of Iowa. Per the Iowa Department of Agriculture: The livestock industry contributes more than $13 billion annually to the state s economy Farmlands across the state accounted for 85 percent of the state s total land area More than 24 million acres of cropland were harvested in 2012 Four percent of all jobs are related to agriculture 26 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

48 Section Three: Demographics and Asset Inventory The following tables present information from the USDA 2007 and 2012 Agricultural Census. Table 25: Regional Farm Data Number of Farms, 2007 Number of Farms, 2012 Percent Change Farm Acreage, 2007 Farm Acreage, 2012 Percent Change 1,189 1, % 241, , % Source: USDA 2007 and 2012 Agricultural Census CROP INVENTORY The following table provides information related to the crops grown within the planning area. The data was collected from the 2012 USDA Agricultural Census. Table 26: Crops by Acre in Warren County Wheat (acres) Soybeans (acres) Forage (acres) Corn (acres) N/A 64,762 21,073 71,219 Source: 2012 USDA Agricultural Census N/A: Data withheld LIVESTOCK INVENTORY The following table provides information related to the livestock within the planning area. The data was collected from the 2012 USDA Agricultural Census. Table 27: Livestock Inventory in Warren County Cattle and Horses and Poultry Egg Poultry Sheep and Hogs and Pigs Calves Ponies Layers Broilers Lambs 23,748 10,020 1,888 2, Source: 2012 USDA Agricultural Census AGRICULTURAL VALUATION PER COUNTY The following table provides information related to the market value of agricultural resources located within the planning area. The data was collected from the 2007 and 2012 USDA Agricultural Census. Table 28: Market Value of Agricultural Products Sold Market Value of Products Sold, 2007 Market Value of Products Sold, 2012 Percent Change $75,158,000 $110,111, % Source: USDA 2007 and 2012 Agricultural Census Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

49 Section Three: Demographics and Asset Inventory THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK 28 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

50 SECTION FOUR: RISK ASSESSMENT INTRODUCTION The ultimate purpose of this Hazard Mitigation Plan is to minimize the loss of life and property across the planning area. The basis for the planning process is the regional and local risk assessment. This section contains a description of potential hazards, regional vulnerabilities and exposures, probability of future occurrences, and potential impacts and losses. By conducting a regional and local risk assessment, participating jurisdictions are able to develop specific strategies to address areas of concern identified through this process. The following table defines terms that will be used throughout this section of the plan. Table 29: Term Definitions Term Hazard Asset Risk Vulnerability Impact Historical Occurrence Extent Probability Definition A potential source of injury, death, or damages People, structures, facilities, and systems that have value to the community The potential for damages, loss, or other impacts created by the interaction of hazards and assets Susceptibility to injury, death, or damages to a specific hazard The consequence or effect of a hazard on the community or assets The number of hazard events reported during a defined period of time The strength or magnitude relative to a specific hazard Likelihood of a hazard occurring in the future SUMMARY OF CHANGES From the 2012 HMP, Sections 4, 5, and 7 were combined and are included in this updated Section Four: Risk Assessment. Section 6: Inventory of Assets from 2012 is primarily discussed in the participant sections, however regional vulnerabilities are summarized under each profiled hazard in this updated Section Four. One significant change made to this plan update is the reduction in the number of profiled hazards from 40 in 2012 to 20 in this plan update. To be more consistent with the State of Iowa s 2013 HMP, the Regional Planning Team agreed that this plan update should reflect similar changes. Terrorism, for example, originally was profiled as six separate hazards, however in this update, it was simplified down to one hazard. The following table provides a summary of the changes made to profiled hazards for this plan update. Requirement 201.6(c)(2): Risk assessment. The plan shall include a risk assessment that provides the factual basis for activities proposed in the strategy to reduce losses from identified hazards. Local risk assessments must provide sufficient information to enable the jurisdiction to identify and prioritize appropriate mitigation actions to reduce losses from identified hazards. Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(i): The risk assessment shall include a] description of the type of all natural hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(i): The risk assessment shall include a] description of the location and extent of all natural hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. The plan shall include information on previous occurrences of hazard events and on the probability of future hazard events. Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii): The risk assessment shall include a] description of the jurisdiction s vulnerability to the hazards described in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section. This description shall include an overall summary of each hazard and its impact on the community. Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii): The risk assessment] must also address National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) insured structures that have been repetitively damaged floods. Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii)(A): The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of the types and numbers of existing and future buildings, infrastructure, and critical facilities located in the identified hazard area. Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(iii): For multi-jurisdictional plans, the risk assessment must assess each jurisdiction s risks where they vary from the risks facing the entire planning area. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

51 Table 30: Changes to Profiled Hazards 2012 Profiled Hazards 2017 Profiled Hazards Animal/Crop/Plant Disease Agricultural Animal and Plant Disease Communications Failure Removed Discussed within other hazards Dam Failure Dam Failure Drought Drought Earthquake Earthquake Energy Failure Removed Discussed within other hazards Expansive Soils Expansive Soils Extreme Heat Extreme Heat Fixed Hazardous Materials Incident Transportation Hazardous Materials Incident Hazardous Materials Transportation: Pipeline Incident Fixed Radiological Incident Removed no known fixed locations in or near the planning area Flash Flood River Flood Flood (Flash Flooding and River Flooding) Grass and Wildland Fire Grass/Wildfire Hailstorm Hail Highway Transportation Incident Transportation: Air Incident Transportation: Rail Incident Transportation Incidents Waterway/waterbody Incident Human Disease Incident Human Disease Pandemic Human Disease Landslide Removed no known incidences within planning area Levee Failure Levee Failure Severe Winter Storm Severe Winter Storms Sinkhole Sinkholes Structural Failure Structural Fire Infrastructure Failure Enemy Attack Public Disorder Terrorism: Agro-Terrorism Terrorism: Biological Terrorism: Chemical Terrorism Terrorism: Conventional Terrorism: Cyber Terrorism: Radiological Thunderstorm and Lightning Severe Thunderstorms and Lightning Tornado Tornadoes Transportation: Radiological Incident Removed heavily regulated Windstorm Windstorm Another change to this HMP during the update process included utilizing the risk assessment methodology as outlined in the FEMA Local Mitigation Planning Handbook. The 2012 HMP used a hybrid scoring system based on scientific and historical data about the hazard along with input from the planning team. Lastly, a brief discussion on climate adaptation was added to this section, which was not originally discussed in Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

52 METHODOLOGY The risk assessment methodology utilized for this plan follows the risk assessment methodology outlined in the FEMA Local Mitigation Planning Handbook (March 2013). This process consists of four primary steps: 1) describe the hazard; 2) identify vulnerable community assets; 3) analyze risk; and 4) summarize vulnerability. When describing the hazard, this plan will examine the following items: previous occurrences of the hazard within the planning area; locations where the hazard has occurred in the past or is likely to occur in the future; extent of past events and likely extent for future occurrences; and probability of future occurrences. The identification of vulnerable assets will be across the entire planning area, Section Seven will include discussion of community-specific assets at risk for relevant hazards. Analysis for regional risk will examine historic impacts and losses and what is possible should the hazard occur in the future. Risk analysis will include both qualitative (i.e. description of historic or potential impacts) and quantitative data (i.e. assigning values and measurements for potential loss of assets). Finally, for each hazard identified, the plan will provide a summary statement encapsulating the information provided during each of the previous steps of the risk assessment process. For each of the hazards profiled, the best and most appropriate data available will be considered. The following table outlines the data sources utilized to examine each individual hazard. Further discussion relative to each hazard is discussed in the hazard profile portion of this section. Table 31: Risk Assessment Data Sources Type of Data Property Damage* Crop Damage Sperry-Piltz Ice Accumulation Index (SPIA) Temperature, Precipitation, Snowfall, TORRO Hailstone Scale Monthly Tornado Averages Tornado Time of Occurrence Tornado Activity in the United States Wind Zones in the United States Beaufort Wind Force Rankings Historical Drought Impacts Palmer Drought Severity Index USDA Secretarial Disaster Designations Heat Index Number of Wildfires by Cause, Number of Wildfires by Year, Mean Fire Return Interval NFIP Status NFIP Policies NFIP Claims Statistics High Hazard Dams in Warren County Midcontinental Rift US Earthquake Hazard Map Richter Scale Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale Earthquake Probability Data Source NCEI Storm Events Database USDA RMA National Weather Service (NWS) Midwestern Regional Climate Center (MRCC) The Tornado and Storm Research Organization National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) NOAA NOAA FEMA NWS National Drought Mitigation Center, University of Nebraska-Lincoln NOAA NCEI U.S. Department of Agriculture NOAA IDNR Fire Supervisor IDNR Fire Supervisor USGS LANDFIRE Database National Flood Insurance Program National Flood Insurance Program National Flood Insurance Program Loss Statistics IDNR Iowa Geological Survey USGS FEMA FEMA USGS 2009 PSHA Model Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

53 Type of Data Data Source Chemical Spills from 1980 to 2015 Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Global Terrorism Database ( ) National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism Database of Dam Failures Stanford University s National Performance of Dams Program *NCEI data was used for property damage, unless otherwise noted. AVERAGE ANNUAL DAMAGES AND FREQUENCY FEMA Requirement 201.6(c)(2)(ii) (B) suggests that when the appropriate data is available, hazard mitigation plans should also provide an estimate of potential dollar losses for structures in vulnerable areas. This risk assessment methodology includes an overview of assets at risk and provides historic average annual dollar losses for all hazards for which historic event data is available. Additional loss estimates are provided separately for those hazards for which sufficient data is available. These estimates can be found within the relevant hazard profiles. Average annual losses from historical occurrences can be calculated for those hazards for which there is a robust historic record and for which monetary damages are recorded. There are three main pieces of data used throughout this formula. Total Damages in Dollars: This is the total dollar amount of all property damages and crop damages as recorded in federal, state, and local data sources. The limitation to these data sources is that dollar figures usually are estimates and often do not include all damages from every event, but rather only officially recorded damages from reported events. Total Years of Record: This is the span of years there is data available for recorded events. Vetted and cleaned up NCEI data is available for January 1996 to December Although some data is available back to 1950, this plan update utilizes only the more current and more accurate data available. Wildfire data is available from IDNR from 2009 to Number of Hazard Event: This shows how often an event occurs. The frequency of a hazard event will affect how a community responds. A thunderstorm may not cause much damage each time, but multiple storms can have an incremental effect on housing and utilities. In contrast, a rare tornado can have a widespread effect on a city. An example of the Event Damage Estimate is found below: Annual Frequency (#) = Annual Damages ($) = Total Events Recorded (#) Total Years of Record (#) Total Damages in Dollars ($) Total Years Recorded (#) Each hazard will be included, while those which have caused significant damages or in significant numbers are discussed in detail. It should be noted NCEI data is not all inclusive and it provides very limited information on crop losses. To provide a better picture of the crop losses associated with the hazards within the planning area, crop loss information provided by the Risk Management Agency (RMA) of the USDA was also utilized for this update of the plan. The collected data was from 2000 to Data for all the hazards are not always available, so only those with an available dataset are included in the loss estimation table (Table 34). 32 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

54 HAZARD IDENTIFICATION The identification of relevant hazards for the planning area began with a review of the 2013 State of Iowa Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Regional Planning Team and participating jurisdictions reviewed the list of hazards addressed in the state mitigation plan and determined which hazards were appropriate for discussion relative to the planning area. The hazards for which a risk assessment was completed for this planning process are included in the following table. Table 32: Hazards Addressed in the Plan Hazards Addressed in the Plan Agricultural Animal Thunderstorms and Extreme Heat Human Disease Disease* Lightning Agricultural Plant Disease* Flash Flooding** Infrastructure Failure Tornado Dam Failure River Flooding** Levee Failure Transportation Incidents Drought Grass or Wildland Fire Severe Winter Storms Windstorm Earthquake Hail Sinkholes Expansive Soils Hazardous Materials Terrorism *Discussed under one profile Agricultural Animal and Plant Disease **Discussed under one profile Flood (Flash Flooding and River Flooding) HAZARD ELIMINATION Given the location and history of the planning area, the following hazards were eliminated from further review. An explanation of how and why the hazards were eliminated is provided. Avalanche: No historic occurrence; due to topography of the planning area, this type of hazard has a very low probability of future occurrence. Coastal Erosion: While it is likely that the planning area will be impacted by a changing climate, there is no coast line located in the planning area. For this reason, this hazard has been eliminated. Hurricane: Given the central plains location of the planning area, hurricanes are not expected to occur. This is supported by the historical record. Landslides: There is no known database of landslide occurrences in the State of Iowa. Furthermore, the Planning Team did not report any incidences of landslides in the County, and no jurisdiction has identified landslides as a hazard of concern. Radiological Incident: There have been no transportation incidents reported in the planning area or the state that have required assistance beyond what is considered regular roadside services. Furthermore, the transportation of radiological materials is heavily regulated and monitored. Additionally, there are no nuclear power plants in the County, nor does the planning area reside within the 50-mile radius from a nuclear power plant. There are other plans across the state that have thoroughly addressed this threat, therefore it will not be profiled further for this plan. Tsunami: Given the central plains location of the planning area, tsunami is not expected to occur. This is supported by the historical record. Volcano: Given the location of the planning area, volcanos are not expected to occur. This is supported by the historical record. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

55 HAZARD ASSESSMENT SUMMARY TABLES The following table provides an overview of the data contained in the hazard profiles. Hazards listed in this table and throughout the section are in alphabetical order. This table is intended to be a quick reference for people using the plan and does not contain source information. Source information and full discussion of individual hazards are included in their respective sections. Table 33: Regional Risk Assessment Hazard Regional Risk Assessment Previous Occurrence Events/Years Approximate Annual Probability Likely Extent Agricultural Animal Disease Unavailable ~100% Unavailable Agricultural Plant Disease 43/16 100% Unavailable Dam Failure 0 <1% Varies Drought 467/1,464* 32% Mild Drought Earthquake 0 <1% <4.0 Expansive Soils Unknown ~100% Isolated to streets, parking lots, and structures Extreme Heat 27/1 100% >90 F Flooding River Flood: 91/21 100% Some inundation of structures** (<1% of structures) and roads near streams. Flash Flood: 34/21 100% Some evacuations of people may be necessary (<1% of population) Grass/Wildfires 54/8 100% <20 acres Hail 198/21 100% H3 H6 ( inches) Hazardous Materials Fixed Site: 67/17 100% Transportation: 14/46 30% Limited (<0.5 mile from release site) Human Disease 143/1 100% Varies Infrastructure Failure Unknown Unknown Unknown Levee Failure 0 1% 19 parcels located in leveed area Severe Thunderstorms and Lightning Severe Winter Storms 58/21 100% 136/21 100% Wind 58 mph and/or Hail 1.00 inch 0.25 ice F below zero (wind chills) 4 8 snow mph winds Sinkholes Unknown ~10% Isolated Terrorism 0/47 <1% Varies Tornadoes 24/21 100% EF0 - EF1 Transportation Incidents 2,463/5 100% Isolated Windstorm 21/21 100% 9 BWF (47 54 mph) *Number of months rather than years **Quantification of vulnerable structures provided in Section Seven: Participant Sections The following table provides loss estimates for hazards with sufficient data. Description of major events are included in the individual hazard profiles later in this section. 34 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

56 Table 34: Loss Estimation for the Planning Area Hazard Type Total Property Loss 1 Average Annual Property Loss 1 Total Crop Loss 2 Average Annual Crop Loss 2 Agricultural Animal Disease N/A N/A Unknown Unknown Agricultural Plant Disease N/A N/A $164,875 $10,305 Dam Failure $0 $0 $0 $0 Drought $12,650,000* $602,381 $15,605,052 $975,316 Earthquake $0 $0 $0 $0 Expansive Soils $70,000 N/A N/A N/A Extreme Heat $135,000 $6,429 $945,987 $59,124 Flooding River: $6,616,500 $315,071 Flash: $2,540,000 $120,952 $5,499,328 $323,490 Grass/Wildfires 3 $0 $0 Unknown Unknown Hail Events $1,483,000 $70,619 $481,578 $20,066 Hazardous Materials Fixed: Unknown Unknown Transport: $194,435 $4,137 Unknown Unknown Human Disease N/A N/A N/A N/A Infrastructure Failure Unknown Unknown N/A N/A Levee Failure $0 $0 $0 $0 Severe Thunderstorms $2,645,500 $125,976 $23,325,517 $1,4547,845 Severe Winter Storms $5,108,230 $243,249 $603,880 $37,743 Sinkholes Unknown Unknown N/A N/A Terrorism $0 $0 N/A N/A Tornadoes $2,637,500 $125,595 $0 $0 Transportation Incidents N/A N/A N/A N/A Windstorm $815,110 $38,815 $351,386 $21,961 1 Indicates data is from NCEI ( ) 2 Indicates data is from USDA RMA (2000 to 2015) 3 Indicates data is from IDNR (2009 to 2016) *Regional damages include WC and 50 other Iowa counties HISTORICAL DISASTER DECLARATIONS The following tables show disaster declarations that have been granted within WC in the past. FARM SERVICE AGENCY SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION DISASTERS The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) was created in 1953 as an independent agency of the federal government to aid, counsel, assist, and protect the interests of small business concerns, to preserve free competitive enterprise, and maintain and strengthen the overall economy of our nation. A program of the SBA includes disaster assistance for those affected by major natural disasters. The following table summarizes the SBA disasters involving the planning area from 2004 through Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

57 Table 35: SBA Declarations Disaster Declaration Number Declaration Date Description IA /14/2010 Storms and Flooding IA /27/2008 Severe Storms, Tornadoes, Flooding IA-L0145 5/25/2004 Severe Storms, Tornadoes, Flooding Source: SBA ( ) PRESIDENTIAL DISASTER DECLARATIONS The presidential disaster declarations involving WC through December 2016 are summarized in the following table. Declarations prior to 1965 are available on the FEMA website, but do not list designated counties. Table 36: Presidential Disaster Declarations Disaster Declaration Declaration Disaster Type Date Number Total Individual Assistance Total Public Assistance Grants 386 5/23/1973 Severe Storms, Flooding N/A N/A 443 6/24/1974 Severe Storms, Flooding N/A N/A 868 5/26/1990 Flooding, Severe Storm N/A N/A 879 9/6/1990 Flooding, Severe Storm N/A N/A 911 7/12/1991 Flooding, Severe Storm N/A N/A /26/1991 Ice Storm N/A N/A /2/1992 Flooding, Severe Storm N/A N/A 986 4/26/1993 Flooding, Severe Storm N/A N/A 996 7/9/1193 Flooding, Severe Storm N/A N/A /24/1996 Flooding N/A N/A /21/1996 Flooding N/A N/A /20/1997 Severe Snow Storms N/A N/A /2/1998 Severe Weather, Tornadoes, Flooding N/A N/A /25/2004 Severe Storms, Tornadoes, Flooding $6,190,449 $14,795, /10/2007 Severe Winter Storm -- $28,052, /27/2008 Severe Storms, Tornadoes, Flooding $138,749,927 $1,196,822, /29/2010 Severe Storms, Flooding, Tornadoes $26,438,630 $52,178, Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

58 Disaster Declaration Number Declaration Date Disaster Type Total Individual Assistance Total Public Assistance Grants /6/1979 Severe Storms, Tornadoes N/A N/A /10/2005 Hurricane Katrina Evacuation -- $244, /31/2013 Severe Storms, Straight-line Winds, Flooding /31/2015 Severe Storms, Tornadoes, Straight-line Winds, Flooding Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency ( ) -- $7,702, $7,723,277 CLIMATE ADAPTATION Long term climate trends have and will continue to increase the risk to hazards within Warren County. Since 1895, Iowa s overall average temperature has increased by about 1 F. This trend will lead to an increase in the frequency and intensity of hazardous events, which will cause several significant economic, social, and environmental impacts on Iowans. As seen in Figure 8, the United States is experiencing an increase in the number of billion dollar natural disasters. Regardless of whether this trend is due to a change in weather patterns or due to increased development, the trend exists. Figure 8: Billion Dollar Disasters Source: NOAA Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

59 According to a report from the Iowa Climate Change Impacts Committee to the Governor (Climate Change Impacts on Iowa, 2010), the following climate changes have occurred and are expected to continue in the State of Iowa: Increased Precipitation Increased frequency of precipitation extremes that lead to flooding Increase of eight percent more precipitation from 1873 to 2008 A larger increase in precipitation in eastern Iowa than in western Iowa Higher Temperatures Long-term winter temperatures have increased six times more than summer temperatures Nighttime temperatures have increased more than daytime temperatures since 1970 Iowa s humidity has risen substantially, especially in summer, which now has 13 percent more atmospheric moisture than 35 years ago, as indicated by a 3-4 F rise in dew-point temperature; this fuels convective thunderstorms that provide more summer precipitation Agricultural Challenges Climate extremes, not averages, have greater impact on crop and livestock productivity Increased soil erosion and water runoff Increased challenges associated with manure applications Favorable conditions for survival and spread of many unwanted pests and pathogens Habitat Changes Plants are leafing out and flowering sooner Birds are arriving earlier in the spring Particular animals are now being sighted farther north than in the past Public Health Effects Increases in heart and lung programs from increasing air pollutants of ozone and fine particles enhanced by higher temperatures Increases in infectious diseases transmitted by insects that require a warmer, wetter climate An increase prevalence of asthma and allergies These trends will have a direct impact on water and energy demands. As the number of 100 F days increase along with warming nights, the stress placed on the energy grid will likely increase possibly leading to more power outages. Critical facilities and vulnerable populations that are not prepared to handle periods of power outages, particularly during heat waves, will be at risk. Furthermore, the agricultural sector will experience an increase in droughts, changes in the growth cycle as winters warm, and changes in the timing and magnitude of rainfall. These added stressors on agriculture could have devastating economic effects if new agricultural and livestock management practices are not adopted. The planning area needs to adapt to these changes, or will experience an increase in economic losses, loss of life, property damages, and crop damages. HMPs have typically been informed by past events in order to be more resilient to future events, and this HMP includes strategies for the planning area to address these changes and increase resilience. However, future updates to this plan should consider including adaptation as a core strategy to be better informed by future projections on the frequency, intensity, and distribution of hazards as well. 38 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

60 HAZARD PROFILES Based on research and the experiences of the participating jurisdictions, the hazards profiled were determined to either have a historical record of occurrence or the potential for occurrence in the future. As the planning area is generally uniform in climate, topography, building characteristics, and development trends, overall hazards and vulnerability do not vary greatly across the planning area. The following profiles will examine the identified hazards across WC, local concerns or deviations from the regional risk assessment will be addressed in Section Seven of this plan. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

61 AGRICULTURAL ANIMAL AND PLANT DISEASE HAZARD PROFILE Agriculture disease is any biological disease or infection that can reduce the quality or quantity of either livestock or vegetative crops. This section looks at both animal disease and plant disease, as both make up a significant portion of Iowa s and the planning area s economy. The State of Iowa has one of the country s largest economies that is vested in both livestock and crop sales. According to the USDA Census of Agriculture from 2012, the market value of agricultural products sold was estimated at more than $30.8 billion. This total is split between crops (estimated $17.4 billion) and livestock (estimated $13.4 billion). For Warren County, sold agricultural products were estimated at $110,111,000 with the cost split at $89,811,000 for crops and $20,300,000 for livestock. Table 37 shows the population of livestock within the planning area. This count does not include wild populations that are also at risk from animal diseases. Table 37: Livestock Inventory for Warren County Market Value of 2012 Livestock Sales Cattle and Calves Hogs and Pigs Horses and Ponies Poultry Egg Layers Poultry Broilers Sheep and Lambs $20,300,000 23,748 10,020 1,888 2, Source: 2012 U.S. Census of Agriculture According to the USDA, the primary crops grown throughout the state include corn, soybeans, barley, oats, and wheat. The following table provides the value and acres of land in farms for the planning area. Table 38: Land and Value of Farms in Warren County Market Value of 2012 Crop Sales Number of Farms Land in Farms (acres) Percent of Land Area Used by Farms $89,811,000 1, , % Source: 2012 U.S. Census of Agriculture The crops in Table 39 make up the bulk of the crop portion of the planning area s agricultural product. Table 39: Crop Values Corn Soybeans Barley Acres Planted Value (2012) Acres Planted Value (2012) Acres Planted Value (2012) 73,183 $50,728,000 64,762 $35, N/A Source: 2012 U.S. Census of Agriculture - Data not available LOCATION Given the agricultural presence in the planning area, animal and plant disease have the potential to occur across the entire planning area. If a major infestation event were to occur, the economy in the entire planning area would be affected, including urban areas. Table 40 shows that the highest percentage of land use type is planted/cultivated (70.4 percent) with about seven percent of lands as developed. The following figure demonstrates the land use types across Warren County. 40 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

62 Figure 9: Land Use in Warren County Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

63 The land use data is from a 2011 dataset, and while some of the uses may have changed since 2011, it is the most recent data available. The main land uses where animal and plant disease will be observed include: planted/cultivated lands; grassland/herbaceous; and forests. It is possible for animal or plant disease to occur in domestic animals or crops in urban areas. The following table provides a tabulation of land use by type across the planning area. Table 40: Land Use Types Type of Land Use Total Area in the Planning Area (Acres) Percent of Total Lands Open Water 3, % Developed 25, % Barren Land % Forest 57, % Shrubland % Grassland/Herbaceous 10, % Planted/Cultivated 257, % Wetlands 10, % Total 366, % EXTENT All of Warren County is subject to animal/livestock incidents and agricultural infestations. According to 2012 data published by the USDA Census of Agriculture, there are 1,334 farms in the County, which cover 263,540 acres of land, and account for about 70 percent of available land in the County. Presently, the extent of animal and plant diseases have been local impacts. HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES Animal Disease Agricultural incidents are a naturally occurring infection of livestock with insects, vermin, or diseases that render the livestock unfit for consumption or use. In 2009, the state of Iowa ranked number one in the U.S. for livestock inventory of poultry egg layers with 52,218,870 and for hogs and pigs inventory of 20,455,666. Iowa is also ranked number ten in the U.S. for 165,815 sheep/lambs and ranked number seven for 3,893,683 cattle and calves. With this substantial agricultural industry and related facilities throughout Iowa, the potential for infestation of livestock poses a significant risk to the Iowa economy. Although specific reports by county are not publicly available, the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship (IDALS) monitors the following animal reportable diseases in Iowa: Avian Influenza Avian influenza continues to be of concern in Iowa as the State is number one in poultry egg layers (over 52 million). The last case of avian influenza occurred in June (IDALS 2017 Newsletter) Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) Disease Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE) mad cow disease, is a chronic, degenerative disease affecting the central nervous system of cattle. Cases have been found world-wide since 1986, but in Canada and the U.S. only a single cow was reported with BSE in Chronic Wasting Disease Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) is a fatal, neurological disease of farmed and wild deer and elk. The disease has been identified in wild and captive mule deer, white-tailed deer and North American elk, and in captive black-tailed deer. CWD belongs to the family of diseases known as transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs). Recently from 1996 to June 2002, it was diagnosed in farmed elk herds in Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Iowa, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and the Canadian Provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan. Then from 2000 to June 2002, CWD has 42 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

64 also been found in wild deer in northwestern Iowa, southern New Mexico, southwestern South Dakota, south central Wisconsin, northwestern Colorado, and the Canadian Province of Saskatchewan. Source: Exotic Newcastle Disease Exotic Newcastle disease (END) is a contagious and fatal viral disease affecting all species of birds. There was an epidemic of END in California in 2003 that is resulting in the death of millions of chickens and other birds, and costing millions of dollars. END is probably one of the most infectious poultry diseases in the world. END is so virulent that many birds die without showing any clinical signs. Foot and Mouth Disease Foot-and-mouth disease or hoof-and-mouth disease (Aphthae epizooticae) is an infectious and sometimes fatal viral disease that affects cloven-hoofed animals, including domestic and wild bovids. The virus causes a high fever for two or three days, followed by blisters inside the mouth and on the feet that may rupture and cause lameness. North America has been free of FMD for many years. Johne s Disease Johne s (yo-knees) disease is a contagious, chronic and eventually fatal infection that affects the small intestine of ruminants, including cattle, sheep and goats. Johne s, also called Para tuberculosis, is a slow progressive wasting disease with an incubation period of usually 2 or more years. Johne s is a reportable disease, but not a quarantinable disease. Pseudorabies Pseudorabies is a viral disease most prevalent in swine, often causing newborn piglets to die. Older pigs can survive infection, becoming carriers of the pseudorabies virus for life. Other animals infected from swine die from pseudorabies, which is also known as Aujeszky's disease and "mad itch." Infected cattle and sheep can first show signs of pseudorabies by scratching and biting themselves. In dogs and cats, pseudorabies can cause sudden death. The virus does not cause illness in humans. Due to an extensive eradication program, Iowa & the U.S. are free of pseudorabies. Scrapie Scrapie is a fatal, degenerative disease affecting the central nervous system of sheep and goats that is very similar to BSE (mad cow disease), although it does not cause disease in humans, and has been present in the U.S. for over 50 years. Infected flocks that contain a high percentage of susceptible animals can experience significant production losses. In these flocks over a period of several years, the number of infected animals increases and the age at onset of clinical signs decreases making these flocks economically unviable. Animals sold from infected flocks spread scrapie to other flocks. The presence of scrapie in the U.S. also prevents the export of breeding stock, semen, and embryos to many other countries. Currently there is a national program underway to eradicate scrapie in the U.S. The last case of Scrapie detected in Iowa was in a goat herd in January (2017 IDALS Newsletter) Trichomoniasis Trichomoniasis is a venereal disease of cattle caused by a protozoa organism. This small, motile organism is found only in the reproductive tract of infected bulls and cows. Infected cattle can lead to major economic losses due to infertility, low pregnancy rates, an extended calving season, diminished calf crops, and occasional abortions in pregnant cows and heifers. It can also be very costly to eradicate from a herd. The first positive bulls were reported in Iowa in There have been 25 positive herds diagnosed since 2012 with 6 new herds diagnosed in Five farms are still under quarantine at this time. (2017 IDALS Newsletter) Producers are required by state law to report any of the reportable animal diseases to the IDALS s Bureau of Animal Industry. The IDALS s Bureau of The Center for Agriculture Security is the lead coordinating bureau for any emergency response for an agriculture incident. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

65 According to the 2012 Warren County Hazard Mitigation Plan, animal disease outbreaks have been isolated and are described as a minor issue. This is consistent with the qualitative information provided during this plan update. Plant Disease A variety of diseases can impact crops and often vary from year to year. The Department of Agriculture provides information on some of the most common, being: Table 41: Common Crop Diseases by Crop Types Crop Corn Anthracnose Bacterial Stalk Rot Common Rust Fusarium Stalk Rot Fusarium Root Rot Gray Leaf Spot Maize Chlorotic Mottle Virus Diseases Southern Rust Stewart s Wilt Common Smut Goss s Wilt Head Smut Physoderma Soybeans Anthracnose Bacterial Blight Bean Pod Mottle Brown Spot Brown Stem Rot Charcoal Rot Frogeye Leaf Spot Phytophthora Root and Stem Rot Pod and Stem Blight Purple Seed Stain Rhizoctonia Root Rot Sclerotinia Stem Rot Soybean Mosaic Virus Soybean Rust Stem Canker Sudden Death Syndrome Wheat Barley Yellow Dwarf Black Chaff Crown and Root Rot Fusarium Head Blight Leaf Rust Tan Spot Wheat Soil-borne Mosaic Wheat Streak Mosaic Sorghum Ergot Sooty Stripe Zonate Leaf Spot Source: Department of Agriculture In addition to the viral and bacterial diseases that could impact crops, pests can also result in crop loss or detract from the quality of crop. Those pests are: Grasshoppers Western Bean Cutworm European Corn Borer Corn Rootworm Corn Nematodes, Bean Weevil Mexican Bean Beatle Soybean Aphids Rootworm Beatles 44 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

66 Iowa farmers also lose a significant amount of crops each year as a result of wildlife foraging. This can be particularly problematic in areas where natural habitat has been diminished or in years where weather patterns such as early or late frost, deep snow, or drought have caused the wild food sources to be limited. AVERAGE ANNUAL LOSSES Using data from the USDA RMA ( ), annual crop losses from plant disease, insects, and wildlife can be estimated. However, the RMA does not track losses for livestock, so it is not possible to estimate losses due to animal disease. Table 42: Agricultural Plant Disease Losses Average Annual Crop Hazard Type Number of Events Total Crop Loss Loss Plant Disease 8 $75,115 $4,695 Insects 12 $19,741 $1,234 Wildlife 23 $70,019 $4,376 Total 43 $164,875 $10,305 Source: USDA RMA, PROBABILITY Warren County experiences agricultural losses nearly every year as a result of naturally-occurring diseases that impact livestock. There are three reportable diseases that could become a problem in Iowa at any time: Avian Influenza, Exotic Newcastle Disease, and Scrapie. The IDALS is constantly monitoring livestock and extensive eradication programs in the U.S. have already wiped out several of these reportable diseases. The historic occurrence of plant disease is 43 reported diseases in 16 years, which has an annual probability of 100 percent. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Table 43: Regional Agricultural Vulnerabilities People Economic Sector Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Vulnerability -Those in direct contact with infected livestock -Potential food shortage during prolonged events -Residents in poverty if food prices increase -Loss of employment or economic difficulties -1.7% of people are employed in the agricultural industry -Large scale or prolonged events may impact tax revenues and local capabilities None -Transportation routes can be closed during quarantine None Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

67 DAM FAILURE HAZARD PROFILE A dam is defined as a barrier constructed across a water course for the purpose of storage, control, or diversion of water. Dams are typically constructed of earth, rock, concrete, or mine tailings. Dam failure is the uncontrolled release of impounded water resulting in downstream flooding, affecting both life and property. Structural failure can occur during extreme conditions, which include, but are not limited to: Reservoir inflows in excess of design flows Flood pools higher than previously attained Unexpected drop in pool level Pool near maximum level and rising Excessive rainfall or snowmelt Large discharge through spillway Erosion, landslide, seepage, settlement, and cracks in the dam or area Earthquakes Vandalism Terrorism The thresholds for what constitutes a dam falls under State regulation and are outlined in Iowa Administrative Code They are listed below. The thresholds are primarily based on both dam height and water storage volumes. State-regulated dams are those dams that meet the following: In rural areas: a) Any dam designed to provide a sum of permanent and temporary storage exceeding 50 acre-feet at the top of dam elevation, or 25 acre-feet if the dam does not have an emergency spillway, and which has a height of 5 feet or more. b) Any dam designed to provide permanent storage in excess of 18 acre-feet and which has a height of 5 feet or more. c) Any dam across a stream draining more than ten square miles. d) Any dam located within 1 mile of an incorporated municipality, if the dam has a height of ten feet or more, stores ten acre-feet or more at the top of dam elevation, and is situated such that the discharge from the dam will flow through the incorporated area. In urban areas: Any dam which exceeds the thresholds from above in a, b, or d. Low head dams: Any low head dam on a stream draining 2 or more square miles in an urban area, or 10 or more square miles in a rural area. Dams are classified by the State of Iowa into three categories based on the potential risk to people and property in the event of failure. The classification can change over time due to changes in development downstream from the dam. In addition, older dams may not have been built to the standards of their updated classification when this occurs. The Iowa Department of Natural Resources performs inspections on a twoyear cycle. 46 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

68 Table 44: Dam Hazard Classification Definitions Hazard Class Definition A structure shall be classified as high hazard if located in an area where failure may create a serious threat of loss of human life or result in serious damage to residential, High industrial, or commercial areas, important public utilities, public buildings, or major transportation facilities. A structure shall be classified as moderate hazard if located in an area where failure may damage isolated homes or cabins, industrial or commercial buildings, moderately traveled roads or railroads, interrupt major utility services, but without substantial risk of loss of human life. In addition, structures where the dam and its impoundment are of Moderate themselves of public importance, such as dams associated with public water supply systems, industrial water supply or public recreation, or which are an integral feature of a private development complex, shall be considered moderate hazard for design and regulatory purposes unless a higher hazard class is warranted by downstream conditions. Low Source: IDNR A structure shall be classified as low hazard if located in an area where damages from a failure would be limited to loss of the dam, loss of livestock, damages to farm outbuildings, agricultural lands, and lesser used roads, and where loss of human live is considered unlikely. In total, there are 103 dams located within Warren County with classifications ranging from low hazard to high hazard. Most of the dams (100) are rated low, two are moderate, and one is rated a high hazard dam. Figure 10 maps the location of these dams in the County. Table 45: Dams in Warren County Low Hazard Moderate Hazard High Hazard Number of Dams Warren County Source: IDNR Dams that are classified as high hazard require the creation of an Emergency Action Plan (EAP). The EAP defines responsibilities and provides procedures designed to identify unusual and unlikely conditions which may endanger the structural integrity of the dam within sufficient time to take mitigating actions and to notify the appropriate emergency management officials of possible, impending, or actual failure of the dam. The EAP may also be used to provide notification when flood releases will create major flooding. An emergency situation can occur at any time; however, emergencies are more likely to happen when extreme conditions are present. The following table identifies the dam classified as a high hazard dam, which is located west Cumming in far northwestern Warren County. Table 46: High Hazard Dam NIDID Dam Name Owner Location IA03523 Source: IDNR Twin Ponds West Dam Fred Knosby and Jeff Campbell Name of Stream Maximum Storage (acrefeet) West Cumming Tr-Cherry Creek 20.5 The 2012 HMP also listed Lake Colchester Dam as a high hazard dam. However, according to IDNR, a dam breach analysis was completed in 2010 and determined that no downstream homes would be significantly flooded in the event of a dam failure, which lead to the revised hazard classification to moderate hazard. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

69 Figure 10: Dam Locations 48 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

70 Upstream Dams Outside the Planning Area There are approximately 20 high hazard dams upstream of Warren County, which could impact the County adversely if they were to fail. The largest of these dams is the Saylorville Dam located north of Des Moines in Polk County on the Des Moines River. Its reservoir holds a significant volume of water, and a failure of this dam would likely result in flooding along the northeastern portion of Warren County. All dams are inspected on a regular basis and after area flash flood events. If problems are found during an inspection, the proper course of action is taken to ensure the structural integrity of the dam is preserved. In the event that dam failure is imminent, the EAP for the dam governs the course of action. For more information, a request can be made to the county emergency managers, IDNR, or dam owner(s). LOCATION Communities or areas downstream of a dam, especially high hazard dams, are at greatest risk of dam failure. Figure 10 shows the location of the dams. EXTENT While a breach of a high hazard dam would certainly impact those in inundation areas, the total number of people and property exposed to this threat would vary based on the dam location. The area impacted following a dam failure would be limited to those areas in and near the annual one percent annual chance floodplain. People and property outside the floodplain could also be impacted depending on the proximity to the dam and the height above the normal stream level. Northeast Warren County along the Des Moines River would be inundated if the Saylorville Dam was to fail. Additionally, areas downstream of the Twins Pond West Dam would affect people and property located in western Cumming. HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES To determine previous occurrences of dam failure, the previous mitigation plan was referenced as well as the 2013 Iowa HMP and the Stanford University s National Performance of Dams Program. There is no record of dam failure within the County. However, per the 2012 HMP, some water topped Colchester Lake Dam (moderate hazard dam) in Norwalk in No damages were reported. The 2013 Iowa HMP noted that there was concern during the very wet periods of 1993 and 2008 that water would over top Saylorville dam, but with the outfall flowing at full capacity and water flowing out the spillway, the reservoir did not overtop the dam. AVERAGE ANNUAL DAMAGES Due to lack of data and the sensitive nature of this hazard, potential losses are not calculated for this hazard. Community members in the planning area that wish to quantify the threat of dam failure should contact their County Emergency Management or the IDNR. PROBABILITY Dam failure has a low probability of occurring in the future. The plan recognizes that while there have not been occurrences in the past, that is not necessarily indicative of future occurrences. For the purpose of this plan, the probability of dam failure will be stated as less than one percent annually. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

71 Table 47: Regional Dam Failure Vulnerabilities People Economic Sector Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Vulnerability -Those living downstream of high hazard dams -Evacuation likely with high hazard dams -Hospitals, nursing homes, and the elderly at greater risk due to low mobility -Businesses located in the inundation areas would be impacted and closed for an extended period of time -Employees working in the inundation area may be out of work for an extended period of time -Damage to homes and buildings -Transportation routes could be closed for extended period of time -Critical facilities in inundation areas are vulnerable to damages 50 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

72 DROUGHT HAZARD PROFILE Drought is generally defined as a natural hazard that results from a substantial period of below normal precipitation. Although many erroneously consider it a rare and random event, drought is a normal, recurrent feature of climate. It occurs in virtually all climatic zones, but its characteristics vary significantly from one region to another. A drought often coexists with periods of extreme heat, which together can cause significant social stress, economic losses, and environmental degradation. Drought is a slow-onset, creeping phenomenon that can affect a wide range of people and industries. While many drought impacts are nonstructural, there is the potential that during extreme or prolonged drought events structural impacts can occur. Drought normally affects more people than other natural hazards, and its impacts According to the National Drought Mitigation Center, drought is a normal, recurrent feature of climate, although many erroneously consider it a rare and random event. It occurs in virtually all climatic zones, but its characteristics vary significantly from one region to another. are spread over a larger geographical area. Thus, the detection and early warning signs of drought conditions and assessment of impacts are more difficult to identify than that of quick-onset natural hazards (e.g., flood) that results in more visible impacts. According to the National Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC), droughts are classified into four major types: Meteorological Drought is defined based on the degree of dryness and the duration of the dry period. Meteorological drought is often the first type of drought to be identified and should be defined regionally as precipitation rates and frequencies ( norms ) vary. Agricultural Drought occurs when there is deficient moisture that hinders planting germination, leading to low plant population per hectare and a reduction of final yield. Agricultural drought is closely linked with meteorological and hydrological drought, as agricultural water supplies are contingent upon the two sectors. Hydrologic Drought occurs when water available in aquifers, lakes, and reservoirs falls below the statistical average. This situation can arise even when the area of interest receives average precipitation. This is due to the reserves diminishing from increased water usage, usually from agricultural use or high levels of evapotranspiration, resulting from prolonged high temperatures. Hydrological drought often is identified later than meteorological and agricultural drought. Impacts from hydrological drought may manifest themselves in decreased hydropower production and loss of water based recreation. Socioeconomic Drought occurs when the demand for an economic good exceeds supply due to a weather-related shortfall in water supply. The supply of many economic goods includes, but are not limited to, water, forage, food grains, fish, and hydroelectric power. The following figure indicates different types of droughts, their temporal sequence, and the various types of effects that they can have on a community. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

73 Figure 11: Sequence and Impacts of Drought Types Source: National Drought Mitigation Center, University of Nebraska-Lincoln HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES The Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) is utilized by climatologists to standardize global long-term drought analysis. The data for Warren County was collected from Climate Division 8 South Central Iowa between the years of 1895 and Figure 12 shows the data from this time period. The negative Y axis represents a drought, for which -2 indicates a moderate drought, -3 a severe drought, and -4 an extreme drought. Table 48 shows the details of the Palmer classifications. According to this dataset, extreme droughts were recorded every years dating back to 1895 and major events include the Dust Bowl in the 1930s, 1950s, and 1980s and the recent 2012 drought. Table 48: Palmer Drought Severity Index Classification Numerical Value Description Numerical Value Description 4.0 or more Extremely wet -0.5 to Incipient dry spell 3.0 to 3.99 Very wet -1.0 to Mild drought 2.0 to 2.99 Moderately wet -2.0 to Moderate drought 1.0 to 1.99 Slightly wet -3.0 to Severe drought 0.5 to 0.99 Incipient wet spell -4.0 or less Extreme drought 0.49 to Near normal Source: Climate Prediction Center 52 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

74 Figure 12: Palmer Drought Severity Index Mild Drought Moderate Drought Severe Drought Extreme Drought Source: NCEI LOCATION The entire planning area is susceptible to the impacts resulting from drought. EXTENT Using the data presented in Figure 12 (PDSI), it is reasonable to expect extreme drought to occur in almost five percent of months for the County (72 extreme drought months in 1,464 months). Severe drought occurred in approximately 90 months of the 1,464 months of record (6.1 percent). Moderate drought occurred in approximately 127 months of the period reviewed (8.7 percent), and mild drought occurred in approximately 178 of the 1,464 months recorded (12.2 percent). Non-drought conditions (incipient dry spell, near normal, or wet spell conditions) occurred in 997 months or 68 percent of months. These statistics show that the drought conditions for the County are highly variable. AVERAGE ANNUAL LOSSES The annual property estimate was determined based upon NCEI Storm Events Database since The annual crop loss was determined based upon the RMA Cause of Loss Historical Database since This does not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

75 Table 49: Loss Estimate for Drought Total Property Average Annual Hazard Type Loss 1 Property Loss 1 Total Crop Loss 2 Average Annual Crop Loss 2 Drought $12,650,000* $602,381 $15,605,052 $975,316 1 Indicates the data is from NCEI ( ); 2 Indicates data is from USDA RMA ( ) * Regional damages includes WC and 50 other Iowa counties PROBABILITY The following table summarizes the magnitude of drought and annual probability of occurrence. Table 50: Drought Magnitude and Probability Magnitude Drought Occurrences by Month Monthly Probability No Drought 997/1, % Mild Drought 178/1, % Moderate Drought 127/1, % Severe Drought 90/1, % Extreme Drought 72/1, % Source: NCEI Data Online Tool, The U.S. Seasonal Drought Outlook provides a short-term drought forecast that can be utilized by local officials and residents to examine the likelihood of drought developing or continuing depending on the current situation. The following figure provides the drought outlook for May 18, 2017 through August According to the U.S. Seasonal Drought Outlook, the planning area should experience seasonal norms relative to precipitation and temperatures. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities. For jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Table 51: Regional Drought Vulnerabilities People Economic Sector Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Other Vulnerability -Insufficient water supply -Loss of jobs in agricultural sector -Residents in poverty if food prices increase -Closure of water intensive businesses (carwashes, pools, etc.) -Loss of tourism dollars -Cracking of foundations (residential and commercial structures) -Damages to landscapes -Damages to waterlines below ground -Damages to roadways (prolonged extreme events) -Stressing of electrical systems (brownouts during peak usage) None -Increase in wildfires and wildfire intensity 54 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

76 Figure 13: U.S. Seasonal Drought Outlook Source: NOAA CPC Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

77 EARTHQUAKES HAZARD PROFILE An earthquake is the result of a sudden release of energy in the Earth s tectonic plates that creates seismic waves. The seismic activity of an area refers to the frequency, type, and size of earthquakes experienced over a period of time. Although rather uncommon, earthquakes do occur in Iowa and are usually small, generally not felt, and cause little to no damage. Earthquakes are measured by magnitude and intensity. Magnitude is measured by the Richter Scale, a base-10 logarithmic scale, which uses seismographs around the world to measure the amount of energy released by an earthquake. Intensity is measured by the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale, which determines the intensity of an earthquake by comparing actual damage against damage patterns of earthquakes with known intensities. The following figures show the major fault line in Iowa (Figure 14) and the earthquake hazard map for the United States (Figure 15). Warren County is at the lowest hazard level for earthquakes. The following tables summarize the Richter Scale and Modified Mercalli Scale. Figure 14: Midcontinental Rift Source: Iowa Geological Survey 56 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

78 Figure 15: United States Earthquake Hazard Map (PGA, 2% in 50 years) Table 52: Richter Scale Richter Magnitudes Less than 3.5 Source: USGS Generally, not felt, but recorded. Earthquake Effects Often felt, but rarely causes damage. Under 6.0 At most, slight damage to well-designed buildings. Can cause major damage to poorly constructed buildings over small regions Can be destructive in areas up to about 100 kilometers across where people live Major earthquake. Can cause serious damage over larger areas. Great earthquake. Can cause serious damage in areas several hundred kilometers 8 or greater across. Source: FEMA Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

79 Table 53: Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale Scale Intensity Description of Effects Corresponding Richter Scale Magnitude I Instrumental Detected only on seismographs II Feeble Some people feel it < 4.2 III Slight Felt by people resting, like a truck rumbling by IV Moderate Felt by people walking V Slightly Strong Sleepers awake; church bells ring < 4.8 VI Strong Trees sway; suspended objects swing, objects fall off shelves < 5.4 VII Very Strong Mild Alarm; walls crack; plaster falls < 6.1 VIII Destructive Moving cars uncontrollable; masonry fractures, poorly constructed buildings damaged IX Ruinous Some houses collapse; ground cracks; pipes break open < 6.9 X Disastrous Ground cracks profusely; many buildings destroyed; liquefaction and landslides < 7.3 widespread XI Very Disastrous Most buildings and bridges collapse; roads, railways, pipes and cables destroyed; < 8.1 general triggering of other hazards XII Catastrophic Total destruction; trees fall; ground rises and falls in waves > 8.1 Source: FEMA LOCATION Warren County is located on the Midcontinental Rift Basin, a stable geological rift (Figure 14). The nearest major seismic zone is the New Madrid Fault Line, located in the American South on the boarders of Missouri, Illinois, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Arkansas. EXTENT If an earthquake were to occur in the planning area, it would likely measure 3.5 or less on the Richter Scale. HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES Per the Iowa Geological Survey, there have been thirteen recorded earthquakes that originated within Iowa State lines. The latest occurred about five miles north of Hamburg in the far southwestern corner of Iowa in July of 2004, approximately 100 miles from Warren County. This earthquake measured 3.5 on the Richter Scale. The largest earthquake to occur in Iowa was near Davenport in 1934, measuring VI on the Mercalli Intensity Scale (Table 53). Davenport is on the far east side of Iowa, approximately 150 miles from Warren County. No earthquakes have originated in or caused damage to Warren County. AVERAGE ANNUAL LOSSES Due to the extremely low earthquake risk for the area, and zero reports of historical occurrences with recorded damages, it is not feasible to utilize the event damage estimate formula to estimate potential losses for the planning area. 58 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

80 PROBABILITY The following figure summarizes the probability of a 5.0 or greater earthquake occurring in the planning area within 100 years, which is less than 0.01 percent. Figure 16: Earthquake Probability Source: USGS 2009 PSHA Model REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Table 54: Regional Earthquake Vulnerabilities People Economic Sector Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Vulnerability -Falling objects -Short-term interruption of business -Cracking of foundations (residential and commercial structures) -Damage to structures -Damages to subterranean infrastructure (e.g. waterlines, gas lines, etc.) -Damages to roadways -Same as all other structures Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

81 EXPANSIVE SOILS HAZARD PROFILE A relatively widespread geologic hazard for Iowa is the presence of soils that expand and shrink in relation to their water content. Expansive soils can cause physical damage to building foundations, roadways, and other components of the infrastructure when clay soils swell and shrink due to changes in moisture content. For Iowa, the vulnerability to this hazard most frequently is associated with soils shrinking during periods of drought. LOCATION The following figure shows a map of the soil types in Iowa. Warren County is mainly located in Loess, Shale, Glacial Till, and Alluvium soil regions. Loess is a compressive soil comprised mainly of silt. Shale and Alluvium soils typically consist of a mixture of silt and clay. Glacial Till is a high-clay content soil that is prone to expansion. HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES There is no official data pertaining to damages from expansive soils; however, the frequency of damage from expansive soils can be associated with the cycles of drought and heavy rainfall which reflect changes in moisture content. Streets and parking lots throughout Warren County are damaged every year by expansive soils. Similarly, building foundations, patios, and underground utilities are damaged as the soil expands and contracts to varying degrees and depths depending on hydrological conditions. Norwalk and the Southeast Warren Community School District both report a history of infrastructure damage from expansive soils. Damage in Norwalk occurs annually to roadways, sidewalks, driveways, and subterranean infrastructure. The Southeast Warren CSD suffered damages from soil expansion in 1972 and 2010 to the gym at Liberty Center. AVERAGE ANNUAL DAMAGES There is no data available to determine damage estimates for this hazard. In most cases, individual property owners, local governments, and businesses pay for repairs for damages caused by this hazard. However, the Southeast Warren CSD reports estimated damages from expansive soils to the Liberty Center gym facilities totaling $70,000 since its construction. 60 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

82 Figure 17: NRCS Iowa Soil Regions Source: NRCS Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

83 EXTENT The following map indicates that the soil in Warren County is less than 50 percent clay, giving it a slight to moderate risk of expansion. Figure 18: U.S. Geological Survey Swelling Clays Maps of Iowa Warren County Source: Swelling clays map of the conterminous United States by W.W. Olive, et al., 1989 PROBABILITY Damage to paved areas and foundations in Warren County will continue due to swelling soils. Norwalk and the Southeast Warren CSD have noted damages attributed to expansive soil, indicating that these areas are at higher risk of experiencing this hazard and will experience ongoing damage. Certain building and construction practices can alleviate these impacts. For the purpose of this plan, the probability of expansive soils will be stated as 100 percent annually. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Table 55: Regional Expanding Soils Vulnerabilities People Economic Sector Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Vulnerability None -Damages to buildings and property can cause significant losses to business owners and divert tax revenue from social and economic improvement programs -Basements and subterranean infrastructure can incur damage -Roadways, sidewalks, driveways, and bridges can be damaged -Property damages to basements and subterranean infrastructure 62 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

84 EXTREME HEAT HAZARD PROFILE Extreme heat is often associated with periods of drought, but can also be characterized by long periods of high temperatures in combination with high humidity. During these conditions, the human body has difficulty cooling through the normal method of the evaporation of perspiration. Health risks arise when a person is overexposed to heat. Extreme heat can also cause people to overuse air conditioners, which can lead to power failures. Power outages for prolonged periods increase the risk of heat stroke and subsequent fatalities due to loss of cooling and proper ventilation. Along with humans, animals also can be affected by high temperatures and humidity. For instance, cattle and other farm animals respond to heat by reducing feed intake, increasing their respiration rate, and increasing their body temperature. These responses assist the animal in cooling itself, but this is usually not sufficient. The hotter the animal is, the more it will begin to shut down body processes not vital to its survival, such as milk production, reproduction, and muscle building. Other secondary concerns that are connected to extreme heat include water shortages brought on by drought-like conditions and high demand. Government authorities report that civil disturbances and riots are also more likely to occur during heat waves. In cities, pollution becomes a problem because the heat traps pollutants in densely populated urban areas. Adding pollution to the stresses associated with the heat magnifies the health threat to urban populations. For the planning area, the months with the highest temperatures are May, June, July, August, and September. The NWS is responsible for issuing excessive heat outlooks, excessive heat watches, and excessive heat warnings. Excessive heat outlooks are issued when the potential exists for an excessive heat event in the next three to seven days. Excessive heat outlooks can be utilized by public utility staffs, emergency managers, and public health officials to plan for extreme heat events. Excessive heat watches are issued when conditions are favorable for an excessive heat event in the next 24 to 72 hours. Finally, excessive heat warnings are issued when an excessive heat event is expected in the next 36 hours. Excessive heat warnings are issued when an extreme heat event is occurring, is imminent, or has a very high probability of occurring. LOCATION This hazard may occur anywhere in the planning area. HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES The MRCC reports an average of 14 days annually where maximum temperatures are 90 Fahrenheit or greater, which generally occur from June through September but are most prevalent in the months of July and August. The year with the highest number of days of 90 F or greater on record occurred during the Dust Bowl in 1934 with 82 days. Conversely, the years with the lowest number of days on record were 1915, 1992, 1996, and 2004 with three days each year of temperatures reaching 90 F or greater (Figure 19). Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

85 Section Four: Risk Assessment 90 Figure 19: Number of Days Above 90 F in Indianola Days Greater Than or Equal To 90 F for Indianola Source: NOAA, MRCC ( ) AVERAGE ANNUAL LOSSES The direct and indirect effects of extreme heat are difficult to quantify, and there is no way to place a value on the loss of human life. Potential losses such as power outages could affect businesses, homes, and critical facilities. High demand and intense use of air conditioning can overload the electrical systems and cause damages to infrastructure. It is estimated from the NCEI database that over $135,000 in property damages were reported from three events. The majority of these property damages were a result of the loss of livestock during extreme heat. Table 56: Extreme Heat Loss Estimation Number of Average Average Annual Property Total Crop Annual Crop Hazard Type Days Per Year at 90 F 1 Damages 2 Property Loss Damage 3 Loss 3 Extreme Heat 27 $135,000 $6,429 $945,987 $59,124 Source: 1 indicates the data is from MRCC; 2 NCEI ( ); 3 USDA RMA ( ) 64 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

86 Estimated Loss of Electricity According to the FEMA publication What is a Benefit: Guidance on Benefit-Cost Analysis of Hazard Mitigation Project (June 2009), if an extreme heat event occurred within the planning area, the following table assumes the event could potentially cause a loss of electricity for ten percent of the population at a cost of $126 per person per day. In rural areas, the percent of the population affected and the duration may increase during extreme events. The assumed damages do not account for physical damages to utility equipment and infrastructure. Table 57: Loss of Electricity - Assumed Damage by Jurisdiction Population Electric Loss of Use Assumed Jurisdiction 2014 Population Affected Damage Per Day (Assumed) City of Carlisle 4, $51,181 City of Cumming $4,826 City of Hartford $8,883 City of Indianola 15,014 1,501 $189,176 City of Lacona $5,380 City of Martensdale $6,073 City of Milo $9,551 City of New Virginia $6,187 City of Norwalk 9, $118,994 EXTENT A key factor to consider in regards to extreme heat situations is the humidity level relative to the temperature. As is indicated in the following figure, as the Relative Humidity increases, the temperature needed to cause a dangerous situation decreases. For example, for 100 percent Relative Humidity, dangerous levels of heat begin at 86 F where as a Relative Humidity of 50 percent, requires 94 F. The combination of Relative Humidity and Temperature result in a Heat Index: 100 percent Relative Humidity + 86 F = 112 Heat Index. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

87 Figure 20: NOAA Heat Index Source: NOAA For the purpose of this plan, extreme heat is being defined as temperatures of 90 F or greater. PROBABILITY Extreme heat is a regular part of the climate for the planning area. Therefore, there is a 100 percent probability that temperatures greater than 90 F will occur annually. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Table 58: Regional Extreme Heat Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability -Heat exhaustion -Heat stroke -Vulnerable populations include: People -People working outdoors -People without air conditioning -Young children outdoors or without air conditioning -Elderly outdoors or without air conditioning -Short-term interruption of business Economic -Loss of power -Agricultural losses Built Environment None -Overload of electrical systems Infrastructure -Damages to roadways Critical Facilities -Loss of power 66 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

88 FLOOD (FLASH FLOODING AND RIVER FLOODING) HAZARD PROFILE Flooding can occur on a local level, sometimes affecting only a few streets, but can also extend throughout an entire region, affecting whole drainage basins and impacting property in multiple states. Heavy accumulations of ice or snow can also cause flooding during the melting stage. These events are complicated by the freeze/thaw cycles characterized by moisture thawing during the day and freezing at night. There are three main types of flooding in the planning area: riverine flooding, flash flooding, and sheet flooding. Riverine Flooding Riverine flooding, slower in nature, is defined as the overflow of rivers, streams, drains, and lakes due to excessive rainfall, rapid snowmelt or ice melt. The areas adjacent to rivers and stream banks that carry excess floodwater during rapid runoff are called floodplains. A floodplain is defined as the lowland and relatively flat area adjoining a river or stream. The terms base flood and 100-year flood refer to the area in the floodplain that is subject to a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. Floodplains are part of a larger entity called a basin or watershed, which is defined as all the land drained by a river and its tributaries. Flash Flooding Flash floods, faster in nature, result from convective precipitation, usually due to intense thunderstorms or sudden release from an upstream impoundment created behind a dam, landslide, or levee. Flash floods are distinguished from regular floods by a timescale less than six hours and cause the most flood-related deaths as a result of this shorter timescale. Flooding from excessive rainfall in Nebraska usually occurs between late spring and early fall. Sheet Flooding In some cases, flooding may not be directly attributable to a river, stream, or lake overflowing its banks. Rather, it may simply be the combination of excessive rainfall or snowmelt, saturated ground, and inadequate drainage. With no place to go, the water will find the lowest elevations areas that are often not in a floodplain. This type of flooding, often referred to as sheet flooding, is becoming increasingly prevalent as development exceeds the capacity of the drainage infrastructure, therefore limiting its ability to properly carry and disburse the water flow. Flooding also occurs due to combined storm and sanitary sewers being overwhelmed by the tremendous flow of water that often accompanies storm events. LOCATION Flash flooding is possible anywhere in the County. Riverine flooding is considered, for the purposes of this hazard profile, to be those areas at risk to the one percent annual chance flood (Figure 21). Effective Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM) were available for the County as shown in Figure 21. For jurisdictional-specific maps as well as an inventory of structures in the floodplain, please refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

89 Figure 21: 1% Annual Chance Flood Risk Area 68 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

90 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP) The following table summarizes NFIP participation and active policies within the planning area. Table 59: NFIP Participants Jurisdiction Current Effective Map Date Participation in NFIP Warren County 10/16/2014 Yes Carlisle 10/16/2014 Yes Cumming 10/16/2014 Yes Hartford 3/2/2009 Yes Indianola 3/2/2009 Yes Lacona 3/2/2009 Yes Martensdale 3/2/2009 Yes Milo NSFHA* Yes New Virginia 3/2/2009 No Norwalk 10/16/2014 Yes Source: FEMA NFIP Community Status Book *No Special Flood Hazard Area All Zone C Table 60: NFIP Polices in Place and Total Payments Policies Inforce Payments Total Jurisdiction Total Coverage Total Premium Closed Losses* Warren County 14 $2,658,400 $9,653 9 $208,181 Carlisle Cumming Hartford Indianola 6 $1,680,000 $2, Lacona Martensdale 1 $193,000 $ Milo New Virginia Norwalk 4 $1,092,000 $1, Total 25 $5,623,400 $13,807 9 $208,181 Source: NFIP Community Status Book; NFIP Claim Statistics *Closed Losses are those flood insurance claims that resulted in payment This plan highly recommends and strongly encourages each plan participant to remain in good standing and continue involvement with the NFIP. Compliance with the NFIP should remain a top priority for each participant, regardless of whether or not a flooding hazard area map has been delineated for the jurisdiction. Jurisdictions are encouraged to initiate activities above the minimum participation requirements, which are described in the CRS Coordinator s Manual (FIA-15/2017). Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

91 NFIP REPETITIVE LOSS STRUCTURES IDNR was contacted to determine if any existing buildings, infrastructure, or critical facilities are classified as NFIP Repetitive Loss Structures. There is one severe repetitive loss property in unincorporated Warren County and no other repetitive loss properties were identified as of February HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES According to the NCEI, since 1996, flash flooding has resulted in $2,540,000 in property damage, while riverine flooding has caused $6,616,500 in property damage. USDA RMA data does not distinguish the difference between riverine flooding damages and flash flooding damages. The total crop loss according to the RMA is $5,499,328. Table 61: Number of Flood Events County Flooding Events Flash Flooding Events Warren County Carlisle 1 0 Cumming 5 3 Hartford 16 1 Indianola 10 7 Lacona 0 0 Martensdale 0 1 Milo 3 1 New Virginia 1 2 Norwalk 3 6 Totals Source: NCEI (January 1996 to December 2016) AVERAGE ANNUAL DAMAGES The average damage per event estimate was determined from the NCEI Storm Events Database since 1996, the RMA databases from 2000 to 2016, and the number of historical occurrences. This does not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. Flooding causes an average of $436,023 in property damages and $323,490 in crop losses per year for Warren County. Table 62: Flood Loss Estimate Hazard Type Number of Events 1 Number of Events Per Year Total Property Loss 1 Average Annual Property Loss 1 Total Crop Loss 2 Average Annual Crop Loss 2 Flood $6,616,500 $315,071 $5,499,328 $323,490 Flash Flood $2,540,000 $120,952 Total $9,156,500 $436,023 $5,499,328 $323,490 1 Indicates data from NCEI ( ) 2 Indicates data from USDA RMA ( ) EXTENT The NWS has three categories to define the severity of a flood once a river reaches flood stage, as indicated in Table Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

92 Precipitation (inches) Section Four: Risk Assessment Table 63: Flooding Stages Flood Stage Description of flood impacts Minor Flooding Minimal or no property damage, but possible some public threat or inconvenience Moderate Flooding Major Flooding Source: NOAA Some inundation of structures and roads near streams. Some evacuations of people and/or transfer of property to higher elevations are necessary Extensive inundation of structures and roads. Significant evacuations of people and/or transfer of property to higher elevations Figure 22 shows the normal average monthly precipitation for the County, which is helpful in determining whether a given month is above, below, or near normal in precipitation. As indicated in Figure 23, the most common months for riverine flooding within the planning area are March, May, June, and July. The most common time for flash flooding is from May through September. While it is possible that major flood events will occur, the likely extent of flood events within the County is classified as moderate (Table 63). 6 Figure 22: Average Monthly Precipitation Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month Source: MRCC PROBABILITY The NCEI reports a total of 125 flood and flash flood events from January 1996 to December Of these events, 34 were flash flooding and 91 were riverine flooding. Based on the historic record and reported incidents by participating communities, there is a 100 percent probability of flooding will occur annually in the County. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

93 Number of Flood Events Section Four: Risk Assessment Figure 23: Monthly Trend for Floods in Warren County ( ) Flash Flood Riverine Flood Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month Source: NCEI REGIONAL VULNERABILITY A 2008 study examining social vulnerability as it relates to flood events found that low-income and minority populations are disproportionately vulnerable to flood events. These groups may lack resources for evacuation and response. In addition, low-income residents are more likely to live in areas vulnerable to the threat of flooding, and lack the resources necessary to purchase flood insurance. Also, elderly residents may suffer from a decreased or complete lack of mobility and as a result, be caught in flood-prone areas. The following table is a summary of regional vulnerabilities. For jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Table 64: Regional Flooding Vulnerabilities People Economic Sector Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Vulnerability -Low-income and minority populations may lack the resources needed for evacuation, response, or to mitigate the potential for flooding -The elderly have decreased mobility -Residents in low-lying areas, especially campgrounds, are vulnerable during flash flood events -Residents living in the floodplain may need to evacuate for extended periods -Business closures or damages may have significant impacts -Agricultural losses from flooded fields -Closed roads and railways would impact commercial transportation of goods -Buildings damages -Damages to roadways and railways -Wastewater facilities are at risk, particularly those in the floodplain -Critical facilities, especially those in the floodplain, are at risk to damage 72 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

94 GRASS/WILDFIRE HAZARD PROFILE Wildfires, also known as brushfires, forest fires, or wildland fires, are any uncontrolled fire that occurs in the countryside or wildland. Wildland areas may include, but are not limited to: grasslands; forests; woodlands; agricultural fields; and other vegetated areas. Wildfires differ from other fires by their extensive size, the speed at which they can spread out from the original source, their ability to change direction unexpectedly, and their ability to jump gaps, such as roads, rivers, and fire breaks. While some wildfires burn in remote forested regions, others can cause extensive destruction of homes and other property located in the wildland-urban interface, the zone of transition between developed areas and undeveloped wilderness. Wildfires are a growing hazard in most regions of the United States, posing a threat to life and property, particularly where native ecosystems meet urban developed areas. Although fire is a natural and often beneficial process, fire suppression can lead to more severe fires due to the buildup of vegetation, which creates more fuel and increases the intensity and devastation of future fires. Lightning starts approximately 10,000 forest fires each year, yet ninety percent of forest fires are started by humans. -National Park Service Wildfires are characterized in terms of their physical properties including topography, weather, and fuels. Wildfire behavior is often complex and variably dependent on factors such as fuel type, moisture content in the fuel, humidity, wind speed, topography, geographic location, ambient temperature, the effect of weather on the fire, and the cause of ignition. Fuel is the only physical property humans can control and is the target of most mitigation efforts. The NWS monitors the risk factors including high temperature, high wind speed, fuel moisture (greenness of vegetation), low humidity, and cloud cover in the state daily. LOCATION Figure 24 shows the USGS Mean Fire Return Interval. This model considers a variety of factors, including landscape, fire dynamics, fire spread, fire effects and spatial context. These values show how often fires occur in each area, under natural conditions. It is important to recognize that in a natural environment some areas experience higher levels of vulnerability to grass and wildfires. According to the map, much of the County is within the 6-10-year or the year fire regime. The following table shows the reported wildfires by fire departments within Warren County. The table only displays fire departments that reported a wildfire to IDNR between 2009 and Over 557 acres were burned over an eight-year period. Table 65: Reported Wildfires by Fire Department Fire Department Reported Wildfires Acres Burned Jackson Township/St Marys Fire Department New Virginia - Virginia Township Fire Department Norwalk Fire Department 2 5 Pleasantville Emergency Services Total Source: IDNR Fire Supervisor, Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

95 Figure 24: Mean Fire Return Interval Source: USGS LANDFIRE Database 74 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

96 Number of Fires Section Four: Risk Assessment HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES For the planning area, there were 54 reported wildfires by four different fire departments according to the IDNR from , and burned acres of land. Wildfires are most likely to be started by debris burning (72 percent). Miscellaneous (nine percent) and equipment use (seven percent) are the second and third leading causes of fires in the County. Based on the average number of acres consumed per wildfire, most wildfires that occur in the planning area will likely be kept to under 20 acres Figure 25: Wildfires by Cause for Warren County, Lightning Children Smoking Debris Burning Equipment Use Miscellaneous Source: IDNR Fire Supervisor Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

97 Number of Fires Section Four: Risk Assessment 30 Figure 26: Number of Wildfires by Year for Warren County, Source: IDNR Fire Supervisor AVERAGE ANNUAL DAMAGES No damages were reported by NCEI or from IDNR, so it is not possible to calculate the average annual damages for wildfire. Table 66: Wildfire Loss Estimation Hazard Type Number of Events 2 Events Per Year Total Property Loss 1 Total Crop Loss 1 Total Acres Consumed by Fire 2 Average Acres Consumed per Fire 2 Grass/Wildfires N/A N/A Indicates data is from NCEI ( ); 2 Indicates data is from IDNR (2009 to 2016) EXTENT Figure 25 illustrates the number of wildfires by cause in the planning area from 2009 to 2016, which burned acres in total. There were 54 reported wildfires in the planning area between during this time. Twenty-one of the fires burned ten acres or more, with the largest wildfire burning 50 acres near New Virginia in January of 2015 after a session of debris burning went out of control. PROBABILITY Probability of grass/wildfire occurrence is based on the historic record provided by the IDNR and reported potential by participating jurisdictions. Based on the historic record, there is a 100 percent annual probability or about seven wildfires happening in the County each year. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. 76 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

98 Table 67: Regional Wildfire Vulnerabilities People Sector Economic Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Other Vulnerability -Risk of injury or death -Displacement of people and loss of homes -Lack of transportation poses risk to low income individuals, families, and elderly -Loss of businesses -Property damages -Transportation routes may be closed -Damage to power lines -Risk of damages -Increase chance of landslides and erosion -May lead to poor water quality Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

99 HAIL HAZARD PROFILE According to the NWS, hail is defined as a showery precipitation in the form of irregular pellets or balls of ice more than five millimeters in diameter, falling from a cumulonimbus cloud (NWS, 2005). Early in the developmental stages of a hailstorm, ice crystals form within a low pressure front due to the rapid rising of warm air into the upper atmosphere and the subsequent cooling of the air mass. Frozen droplets gradually accumulate on the ice crystals until, having developed sufficient weight; they fall as precipitation, in the form of balls or irregularly shaped masses of ice. The size of hailstones is a direct function of the size and severity of the storm. High velocity updraft winds are required to keep hail in suspension in thunderclouds. The strength of the updraft is a function of the intensity of heating at the Earth s surface. Higher temperature gradients relative to elevation above the surface result in increased suspension time and hailstone size. Hail causes over $1 billion in crop and property damages each year in the U.S., making hailstorms one of the costliest natural disasters (Federal Alliance for Safe Homes, Inc., 2006). LOCATION The entire planning area is at risk to hail due to the regional nature of this type of event. HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES The NCEI reports events as they occur in each community. A single hail event can affect multiple communities and counties at a time; the NCEI reports these large scale, multi-county events as separate events. The result is a single hail event covering a large portion of the planning area that could be reported by the NCEI as several events. The NCEI reports a total of 198 hail events in the planning area between 1996 and These events were responsible for $1,483,000 in property damages and $481,578 in crop damages. These events resulted in no injuries or fatalities. AVERAGE ANNUAL DAMAGES The average damage per event estimate was based on the NCEI Storm Events Database since 1996 and number of historical occurrences as described above. This does not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. Table 68: Hail Loss Estimate Hazard Type Number of Events 1 Events Per Year Total Property Loss 1 Average Annual Property Loss 1 Total Crop Loss 2 Average Annual Crop Loss 2 Hail Events $1,483,000 $70,619 $481,578 $20,066 1 Indicates the data is from NCEI ( ); 2 Indicates data is from USDA RMA ( ) EXTENT The TORRO scale is used to classify hailstones and provides some detail related to the potential impacts from hail. Table 69 outlines the TORRO Hailstone Scale. 78 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

100 Table 69: TORRO Hail Scale TORRO Classification / Intensity Typical Hail Diameter Typical Damage Impacts H0: Hard Hail 5 mm; Pea size; 0.2 in No damage H1: Potentially 5-15 mm (marble); Damaging in Slight general damage to plants and crops H2: Significant mm (grape); in. Significant damage to fruit, crops, and vegetation H3: Severe mm (Walnut); Severe damage to fruit and crops, damage to glass and plastic in structures H4: Severe mm (Squash Ball); in Widespread damage to glass, vehicle bodywork damaged H5: Destructive mm (Golf Wholesale destruction of glass, damage to tiled roofs; ball); in. significant risk or injury H6: Destructive mm (chicken Grounded aircrafts damaged, brick walls pitted; significant egg); in risk of injury H7: Destructive mm (Tennis ball); in Severe roof damage; risk of serious injuries H8: Destructive mm (Large Severe damage to structures, vehicles, airplanes; risk of orange); in. serious injuries H9: Super Hail mm Extensive structural damage; risk of severe or even fatal (Grapefruit); injuries to persons outdoors in H10: Super Hail Source: TORRO >100 mm (Melon); > 4.0 in Extensive structural damage; risk or severe or even fatal injuries to persons outdoors Of the 198 hail events reported for the planning area, the average hailstone size was 1.15 inches. Events of this magnitude correlate to an H3 classification. It is reasonable to expect H3 classified events to occur several times in a year throughout the planning area. Additionally, it is reasonable, based on the number of occurrences, to expect larger hailstones to occur in the planning area annually. The planning area has endured one H8 hail event ( inches) during the period of record. For this area, it is realistic to expect an H5 event ( inches) or larger to occur approximately every year in the planning area. Figure 27 shows hail events based on the size of the hail. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

101 Figure 27: Hail Events by Size Source: NCEI, PROBABILITY Based on historic records and reported events, severe thunderstorms with hail are likely to occur several times annually within the planning area. The NCEI reported 198 hail events between 1996 and 2016, or on average, nine hail occurrences per year. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Table 70: Regional Hail Vulnerabilities People Sector Economic Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Other Vulnerability -Injuries can occur from: not seeking shelter, standing near windows, and shattered windshields in vehicles -Damages to buildings and property can cause significant losses to business owners -Roofs, siding, windows, gutters, HVAC systems, etc. can incur damage -Power lines and utilities can be damaged -Property damages and power outages -High winds, lightning, heavy rain, and possibly tornadoes can occur with this hazard 80 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

102 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HAZARD PROFILE The following description for hazardous materials is provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA): Chemicals are found everywhere. They purify drinking water, are used in agriculture and industrial production, fuel our vehicles and machines, and simplify household chores. But chemicals also can be hazardous to humans or the environment if used or released improperly. Hazards can occur during production, storage, transportation, use, or disposal. The community is at risk if a chemical is used unsafely or released in harmful amounts. Hazardous materials in various forms can cause fatalities, serious injury, long-lasting health effects, and damage to buildings, homes, and other property. Many products containing hazardous chemicals are used and stored in homes routinely. Chemicals posing a health hazard include carcinogens, toxic agents, reproductive toxins, irritants, and many other substances that can harm human organs or vital biological processes. Chemical manufacturers are one source of hazardous materials, but there are many others, including service stations, hospitals, and hazardous materials waste sites. Varying quantities of hazardous materials are manufactured, used, or stored at an estimated 4.5 million facilities in the United States from major industrial plants to local dry cleaning establishments or gardening supply stores. Hazardous materials come in the form of explosives, flammable and combustible substances, poisons, and radioactive materials. Hazardous material incidents are technological (meaning non-natural hazards created or influenced by humans) events that involve large-scale releases of chemical, biological or radiological materials. Hazardous materials incidents generally involve releases at fixed-site facilities that manufacture, store, process or otherwise handle hazardous materials or along transportation routes such as major highways, railways, navigable waterways and pipelines. The EPA requires the submission of the types and locations of hazardous chemicals being stored at any facility within the state over the previous calendar year. This is completed by submitting a Tier II form to the EPA as a requirement of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of Fixed-sites are those that involve chemical manufacturing sites and stationary storage facilities. Table 71 demonstrates the nine classes of hazardous material according to the 2016 Emergency Response Guidebook. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

103 Table 71: Hazardous Material Classes Class Type of Material Divisions 1 Explosives 2 Gases 3 4 Flammable liquids (and Combustible liquids) Flammable solids; Spontaneously combustible materials Oxidizing substances and Organic 5 peroxides Toxic substances and infections 6 substances 7 Radioactive materials 8 Corrosive materials Miscellaneous hazardous 9 materials/products, substances, or organisms Source: Emergency Response Guidebook, 2016 Division 1.1 Explosives with a mass explosion hazard Division 1.2 Explosives with a projection hazard Division 1.3 Explosives predominantly a fire hazard Division 1.4 Explosives with no significant blast hazard Division 1.5 Very insensitive explosives with a mass explosion hazard Division 1.6 Extremely insensitive articles Division 2.1 Flammable gases Division 2.2 Non-flammable, non-toxic gases Division 2.3 Toxic gases Division 4.1 Flammable solids Division 4.2 Spontaneously combustible materials Division 4.3 Water-reactive substances Division 5.1 Oxidizing substances Division 5.2 Organic peroxides Division 6.1 Toxic substances Division 6.2 Infectious substances LOCATION There are twelve locations across the planning area that house hazardous materials, according to the IDNR. The following map illustrates the location of each fixed site chemical storage location in Warren County. A listing of chemical storage sites with addresses can be found in Section Seven: Participant Sections for each jurisdiction. Figure 29 is a map of the major transportation routes through Warren County. Chemicals are transported on these routes to, from, and past the fixed chemical storage sites, allowing for the possibility of chemical spills during transportation. Figure 30 is a map of gas transmission pipelines and hazardous liquid pipelines located in Warren County according to the National Pipeline Mapping System Public Map Viewer. 82 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

104 Figure 28: Hazardous Chemical Fixed Sites Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

105 Figure 29: Major Transportation Routes 84 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

106 Figure 30: Pipelines Located in Warren County Source: National Pipeline Mapping System - Public Map Viewer EXTENT The extent of chemical spills at fixed sites varies and depends on the type of chemical that is released with a majority of events localized to the facility. 67 releases have occurred in the planning area, and the total amount spilled ranged from <1 to 14,000 gallons. Most of the chemical spills are localized and are quickly contained or stabilized by the fire departments and hazardous materials teams. Most of the chemical storage facilities are located along major transportation routes within Warren County, indicating that many chemicals are transported along these routes. Based on historic records, it is likely that any spill involving hazardous materials will not affect an area larger than a quarter mile from the spill location. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

107 HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES Fixed Site Chemical Spills According to the IDNR Environmental Services, there have been 67 fixed site chemical spills from 2000 through 2016 in the planning area. The data did not include information regarding property damage or if there were injuries. Those spills associated with a chemical release of 20 or more units (e.g. gallons or pounds) are listed in Table 72. Table 72: Fixed Site Chemical Spills Date of Event Location of Release Quantity Spilled Material Involved 6/7/2000 Indianola 30 gallons Ethylene glycol 7/16/2000 Indianola 20 lbs Propane 7/19/2000 Indianola 100 lbs Anhydrous Ammonia 8/13/2000 Indianola 300 gallons Diesel Fuel 9/13/2000 Indianola 156 gallons Gasoline 12/18/2000 Rural Warren County 200 gallons Propane 3/14/2001 Martensdale 20 gallons Hydraulic Oil 7/7/2001 Hartford 100 gallons Gasoline 1/15/2002 Martensdale 1,000 gallons Brine 5/22/2002 Norwalk 30 gallons Hydraulic Oil 9/23/2002 Rural Warren County 700 gallons Diesel Fuel 7/1/2004 Indianola 250 gallons Anhydrous Ammonia 4/13/2006 Indianola 30 lbs Anhydrous Ammonia 4/16/2006 Indianola 100 lbs Anhydrous Ammonia 4/24/2006 Indianola 25 lbs Anhydrous Ammonia 2/16/2007 New Virginia 30 gallons Diesel Fuel 5/1/2007 Indianola 2,000 gallons Oil and water 11/11/2007 Carlisle 14,000 gallons Mineral Oil 12/12/2009 Carlisle 1,440 gallons Propane 5/10/2010 New Virginia 20 gallons Gasoline 9/25/2010 Carlisle 20 gallons Gasoline 12/2/2010 Norwalk 40 gallons Diesel Fuel 3/29/2011 Norwalk 21 gallons Gasoline 6/5/2012 Norwalk 1,500 gallons Transformer Oil 4/17/2013 Rural Warren County 27 gallons Transformer Oil 1/27/2014 Cumming 130 gallons Diesel Fuel 7/3/2014 Rural Warren County 81 gallons Transformer Oil Source: IDNR Environmental Services ( ) Transportation Chemical Spills According to the Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHSMA) HazMat Incidence Report database, there have been 14 chemical spills during transport from in the planning area. Property damages were reported for six separate chemical spill events totaling $194,435. Each incident was caused by either a vehicular accident or equipment failure during loading. The following table displays the spills that resulted in injury, property damage, or a chemical release greater than ten gallons that have occurred throughout the planning area. 86 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

108 Table 73: Transportation Chemical Spills Location of Date of Event Quantity Spilled Release Material Involved Number of Injuries Property Damage 5/4/1973 Indianola 2 gallons Fuel Oil 1 $0 11/8/1976 Carlisle 30 gallons Fuel Oil 0 $0 12/10/1980 Indianola 100 gallons Fuel Oil 0 $0 11/23/1988 Lacona 3,427 gallons Gasoline 0 $0 4/16/1990 Indianola 2 gallons Combustible Liquid 0 $10 2/23/1996 Carlisle 5 gallons Gasoline 0 $50,106 12/10/2004 Norwalk 8 gallons Petroleum 0 $36,019 1/30/2007 Harford 0 gallons Petroleum 0 $30,000 9/28/2008 New Virginia 2,800 pounds Potassium Nitrate 0 $65,300 11/7/2015 Norwalk 80 pounds Battery Acid 0 $13,000 Source: PHMSA ( ) Totals 1 $194,435 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAMAGES By utilizing data from PHMSA and IDNR, a total of 81 chemical spills have occurred in the County. This hazard causes an average of $4,137 per year in property damages during transportation spills, but damage data is not available for fixed spills. Furthermore, this does not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. Table 74: Chemical Spill Average Annual Losses Hazard Type Number of Events Events Per Year Total Damages Chemical Spill Average Annual Loss Spills at Fixed Storage Facilities Unknown Unknown Spills in Transport $194,435 $4,137 Total $194,435 $4,137 1 Indicates the data is from IDNR ( ); 2 Indicates data is from PHMSA ( ) PROBABILITY Chemical releases at fixed site storage areas are likely in the future. Given the historic record of occurrence, the annual probability of occurrence for one chemical spill, either at a fixed storage facility or in transport is 100 percent. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

109 Table 75: Regional Chemical and Radiological Fixed Site Vulnerabilities People Economic Sector Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Vulnerability -Those in close proximity could have minor to moderate health impacts -Possible evacuation -Hospitals, nursing homes, and the elderly at greater risk due to low mobility -A chemical plant shutdown in smaller communities would have significant impacts to the local economy -Transportation route closures due to chemical spills could interrupt normal business interactions -Risk of fire or explosion -Transportation routes can be closed during evacuations -Critical facilities at risk of evacuation 88 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

110 HUMAN DISEASE HAZARD PROFILE The Iowa Hazard Mitigation Plan (2013) defines a human disease incident as a medical, health or sanitation threat to the general public including contamination, epidemics, plagues, or infestations. With the advent of sanitation sewer systems and other improvements in hygiene since the 19 th century, the spread of infectious disease has greatly diminished. Furthermore, the discovery of antibiotics and the implementation of universal childhood vaccination programs have played a major role in reducing human disease impacts. Today, human disease incidences are carefully tracked by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Iowa Department of Public Health (IDPH) for possible epidemics and to implement control systems. According to the CDC, an epidemic refers to an increase, often sudden, in the number of cases of a disease above what is normally expected in a given population and area. The number of cases that qualifies disease rates as epidemic depends on the prevalence of that specific disease: common diseases are epidemics when their incidence rates surpass normal seasonal levels (called the epidemic threshold), while rare or previously unknown disease occurrences may qualify as epidemics after only one case of infection. Both chronic and infectious diseases can become epidemic in a population, but for the purposes of this plan, infectious diseases, (including contamination, plague, and infestations,) are of more concern because of their generally acute effects resulting in higher mortality and morbidity rates. IDPH requires that healthcare providers report cases of any of 45 specified diseases so that IDPH s Center for Acute Disease Epidemiology (CADE) can monitor disease rates for epidemic events. These illnesses include animal-related diseases, antibiotic resistant infections, food- and waterborne illnesses, health-care associated infections, influenza, West Nile Virus, HIV/AIDS, bioterror agents, STDs, and vaccine-preventable diseases. LOCATION Epidemic threshold levels are dependent on disease, location, and season. Normal infectious disease patterns are changing due to increasing human mobility globally and climate change. Rural areas of Iowa, including much of Warren County, are particularly at risk for animal-related diseases, West Nile Virus, and influenza. Urban areas of Iowa, including Indianola and Simpson College, are particularly at risk from influenza, mumps, vaccine-preventable diseases, HIV/AIDS, and STDs. EXTENT Those most affected by communicable diseases are typically the very young, the very old, the unvaccinated, and those with immunodeficiency disorders. Refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections for jurisdictionspecific age vulnerabilities, but information about immunodeficient-persons is not publicly available. The extent to which these populations are affected by communicable diseases depends greatly on the attack rate and duration of the disease, and the extent to which herd immunity has been established by the community through effective vaccination programs. The State of Iowa has implemented a rigorous vaccination program primarily aimed at children. Iowa state law requires children enrolled in licensed child care centers or enrolled in elementary or secondary school to be vaccinated for polio, hepatitis B, varicella, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, haemophilus influenza type B, pneumococcal, measles, meningococcal and rubella with the option to waive the requirements for religious objections. The HPV vaccination series is recommended for teenagers. Influenza vaccinations are recommended yearly for those over six months old. Warren County has six Vaccines for Children program providers to provide vaccines at no cost to eligible children. IDPH provides a hepatitis B vaccination program for high risk adults and their perinatal children. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

111 HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES In 2015, CADE investigated 5,917 cases of infectious disease for signs of an epidemic and identified 118 outbreaks in Iowa (Figure 31). County-specific counts of common reportable disease counts were available only for Percent change refers to the difference in disease occurrence in 2014 compared to the average disease rates of Of the common reportable diseases found in Warren County, only chlamydia (7.1 percent), E. coli illnesses (24.4 percent), syphilis (64.8 percent), and legionellosis (175.0 percent) occurrences increased in 2014 (Table 76) Figure 31: Outbreak Types in Iowa (2015) Source: Iowa Department of Public Health, Center for Acute Disease Epidemiology 2016 Report Table 76: Cases of Reportable Diseases in Warren County (2014) Disease Cases in Warren County Percent Change in Iowa (%) HIV (diagnosis) Campylobacteriosis Chlamydia Cryptosporidiosis E. coli Infection Giardiasis Gonorrhea Hepatitis B Legionellosis Pertussis Salmonellosis Syphilis Tuberculosis 1 * Source: Iowa Department of Public Health, Center for Acute Disease Epidemiology Iowa Surveillance of Notifiable and Other Diseases Annual Report Amended 5/2/2016 * Percent change was not calculated for tuberculosis 90 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

112 PROBABILITY Based on historical records, it is likely that human disease will occur annually within the planning area. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES Health care access is critical for those exposed to acute infectious diseases. In Warren County, there are four healthcare providers in Indianola, one in Norwalk, and one in Carlisle. The nearest intensive care and hospital facilities are in Des Moines, just north of Warren County in Polk County. The 2015 annual IDPH report on the Iowa Immunization Program indicates that 76 percent of the two-yearolds in Warren County are up to date on their vaccinations. Vaccination rates in thirteen to fifteen-yearolds were 62 percent for required immunizations and 17 percent for HPV vaccinations in Warren County in In Iowa, 58.1 percent of the population was covered by the influenza vaccination in 2016, as reported by the CDC. An independent study conducted in 2015 by Trust for America s Health gave Iowa a score of six out of ten for their efforts to reduce vulnerability to the spread of infectious diseases. This score is based on Iowa s public health department funding, vaccination efforts, climate change adaptation plan, infectious disease reporting requirements, public health food safety laboratory testing capabilities and laboratory biosafety capabilities, syringe exchange programs, and rate of central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs). This high score suggests that Iowa is slightly vulnerable to epidemic outbreaks. The following table provides information related to state and county vulnerabilities; for jurisdictionalspecific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Table 77: Regional Vulnerabilities People Economic Sector Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Vulnerability - Vulnerable populations include: the very young, the very old, the unvaccinated, and those with immunodeficiency disorders. - The nearest intensive care and hospital facilities to Warren County are in Des Moines, reducing access to patients in southern Warren County - At higher risk of Hepatitis C and HIV/AIDS infections due to the rise in injected opioid use and the lack of an authorized syringe exchange program (SEP) - Large scale or prolonged events may cause businesses to close temporarily, which could lead to significant revenue loss and loss of income for workers None - Transportation routes may be closed if a quarantine is put in place None Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

113 INFRASTRUCTURE FAILURE HAZARD PROFILE The Iowa Hazard Mitigation Plan notes a variety of different occurrences which may be classified as infrastructure failure; including communication failure, energy failure, structural failure, and structural failure. The plan goes on to note that one potential cause of infrastructure failure is space weather/solar flares. Any sort of disruption in cell, electric, radio or other service may be considered a form of infrastructure failure. Vulnerability can largely be measured as a result of aging infrastructure. According to FEMA s Strategic Foresight Initiative published in June 2011, infrastructure in the United States is becoming more prone to failure as the average age of structures increases. The publication goes on to state that many necessary updates to infrastructure failure may be considered cost prohibitive due to rising construction costs. According to the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 2017 Infrastructure Report Card, Iowa received an overall grade of C-. The Infrastructure Report Card is updated every four years with the goal of depicting the condition and performance of infrastructure systems. The Report Card utilizes letter grades similar to those used for school report cards. Using this classification, an A would indicate a state is exceeding expectations; an F is failing to meet expectations. Thus, a C- indicates slightly below expected standards. Specifically, for Iowa, bridges, dams, inland waterways, wastewater, roads, and levees received a below expected score (C- to D-). This is largely consistent with reports from local planning teams. Some jurisdictions have mentioned concerns of infrastructure failure, such as Indianola, New Virginia, Milo, Norwalk, and the Norwalk Community School District. These concerns range from crumbling roadways and bridges, to inadequate sewer systems, and an unreliable electrical grid. LOCATION Infrastructure failure is not correlated to a specific geographic area. EXTENT The extent of infrastructure failure events is hard to quantify given the lack of recorded events. Potential losses will likely be related to aging structures. HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES There is no known database for recording infrastructure failure, and thus, previous occurrences may not be calculated. PROBABILITY With no recorded past events, future occurrences may not be calculated. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES Vulnerability is largely correlated to the age of structures. Older structures tend to be more vulnerable to failure. The following table provides information related to state and county vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. 92 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

114 Table 78: Regional Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Vulnerable populations including the very young and the very old may not have the capability to properly care for their aging private infrastructure Economic -Building, bridge, or road closures may cause businesses to close temporarily, which could lead to significant revenue loss and loss of income for workers Built Environment -Aging fixtures such as roofs and siding make buildings vulnerable to failure Infrastructure -Aging infrastructure is particularly vulnerable Critical Facilities -Critical facilities may close if they are not properly maintained Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

115 LEVEE FAILURE HAZARD PROFILE According to FEMA: The United States has thousands of miles of levee systems. These manmade structures are most commonly earthen embankments designed and constructed in accordance with sound engineering practices to contain, control, or divert the flow of water to provide some level of protection from flooding. Some levee systems date back as far as 150 years. Some levee systems were built for agricultural purposes. Those levee systems designed to protect urban areas have typically been built to higher standards. Levee systems are designed to provide a specific level of flood protection. No levee system provides full protection from all flooding events to the people and structures located behind it. Thus, some level of flood risk exists in these levee-impacted areas. Levee failure can occur several ways. A breach of a levee is when part of the levee breaks away, leaving a large opening for floodwaters to flow through. A levee breach can be gradual by surface or subsurface erosion, or it can be sudden. A sudden breach of a levee often occurs when there are soil pores in the levee that allow water to flow through causing an upward pressure greater than the downward pressure from the weight of the soil of the levee. This under seepage can then resurface on the backside of the levee and can quickly erode a hole to cause a breach. Sometimes the levee actually sinks into a liquefied subsurface below. Another way a levee failure can occur is when the water overtops the crest of the levee. This happens when the flood waters simply exceed the lowest crest elevation of the levee. An overtopping can lead to significant erosion of the backside of the levee and can result to a breach and thus a levee failure. LOCATION There is one federal levee located within Warren County as reported in USACE s National Levee Database. It is located in Carlisle. See Figure 32 and Table 79 for information on the levee-protected area. Beyond the USACE s National Levee Database, there is no known comprehensive list of levees that exists in the planning area especially for private agricultural levees. Thus, it is not possible at this time to document the location of non-federal levees, the areas they protect, nor the potential impact of these levees. Table 79: Planning Area Levees Name Sponsor City River Carlisle IA - Red Rock Remedial Works USACE Carlisle Source: USACE Levee Database Des Moines River Length (miles) Type of Protection Protected Area (sq miles) 1.33 Urban 5 24 Approximate Level of Protection year flood Inspection Rating Minimally Acceptable HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES There is no history of levee failure for this levee system. As there is no formal database of historical levee failures, the following sources were consulted: members of the Planning Team, 2013 State HMP, 2012 Warren County HMP, and the USACE. 94 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

116 Figure 32: Leveed Areas in Warren County Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

117 POTENTIAL LOSSES To determine potential losses from levee failure, a parcel inventory from the levee breach area was utilized. Based on the nature of the assessor s parcel data, it is not possible to do a true structural inventory with structure-specific impacts. Instead, inundated parcels were used as a proxy for structural data. The following tables show the number of parcels included in the leveed area for Carlisle. A total of 19 parcels are within the leveed area, which are valued at $1,238,700 with a mean value of $65,195 per parcel. Table 80: Potential Losses in Levee Breach Area Number of Parcels with Dwellings, within Leveed Area 1 Value of Parcels with Dwellings in Leveed Area 1 Mean Value of Parcels with Dwellings in Leveed Area 19 $1,238,700 $65,195 Source: Warren County Assessor (Updated 9/14/2016) EXTENT The USACE, who is responsible for federal levee oversight and inspection of levees, has three ratings for levee inspections. Table 81: USACE Levee Rating Categories Ratings Description Acceptable All inspection items are rated as Acceptable One or more inspection items are rated as Minimally Acceptable or one or more items are rated as Unacceptable and an engineering determination concludes that the Minimally Acceptable Unacceptable inspection items would not prevent the segment/system from performing as intended during the next flood event. One or more items are rated as Unacceptable and would prevent the segment/system Unacceptable from performing as intended, or a serious deficiency noted in past inspections has not been corrected within the established timeframe, not to exceed two years. Source: USACE The levee system located in Carlisle is rated as Minimally Acceptable. If the levee was to fail, approximately 15 percent of Carlisle could be flooded. PROBABILITY The Red Rock Remedial Works Levee System has never been breached. While it is possible for levee failure to occur in the future, this is considered a low probability of occurring in the future. For the purposes of this plan, the probability of levee failure will be stated as one percent annually. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Table 82: Regional Levee Failure Vulnerabilities Sector People Economic Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Vulnerability -Those living in federal levee-protected areas -Residents with low mobility or with no access to a vehicle are more vulnerable during a levee failure -Business and industry protected by levees are at risk -All buildings within levee protected areas are at risk to damages -Major transportation corridors and bridges at risk to levee failure Critical facilities including the following: - Jefferson Street Lift Station 96 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

118 SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS AND LIGHTNING HAZARD PROFILE Severe thunderstorms are common and unpredictable seasonal events throughout Iowa. A thunderstorm is defined as a storm that contains lightning and thunder, caused by unstable atmospheric conditions. When the cold upper air sinks and the warm, moist air rises, storm clouds or thunderheads develop resulting in thunderstorms. This can occur singularly, in clusters, or in lines. Thunderstorms can develop in less than 30 minutes, and can grow to an elevation of eight miles into the atmosphere. Lightning, by definition, is present in all thunderstorms and can be harmful to humans and animals, cause fires to buildings and agricultural lands, and cause electrical outages in municipal electrical systems. Lightning can strike up to ten miles from the portion of the storm depositing precipitation. There are three primary types of lightning: intra-cloud; inter-cloud; and cloud to ground. While intra and intercloud lightning are more common, when lightning meets the ground society is potentially impacted. Lightning generally occurs when warm air is mixed with colder air masses resulting in atmospheric disturbances necessary for polarizing the atmosphere. Between 2006 and 2013, an average of 33 people were killed each year by lightning in the United States. According to NCEI, one fatality and seven injuries were attributed to lightning and severe thunderstorms between 1996 and 2017 in Warren County. Economically, thunderstorms are generally beneficial in that they provide moisture necessary to support Iowa s largest industry, agriculture. The majority of thunderstorms do not cause damage, but when they escalate to the point of becoming severe, the potential for damages include crop losses from wind and hail, property losses due to building and automobile damages due to hail, wind, or flash flooding, and death or injury to humans and animals from lightning, drowning, or getting struck by falling or flying debris. Figure 33 displays the average number of days with thunderstorms across the country each year. The planning area experiences an average of 50 thunderstorms over the course of one year. Figure 34 shows the average flash density from to be an average of 4-8 flashes/km 2 /year in the majority of Warren County, with a few areas experiencing 8-12 flashes/km 2 /year. Figure 33: Average Annual Number of Thunderstorms Source: NWS Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

119 Figure 34: Average Annual Flash Density, Source: VAISALA, 2017 LOCATION The entire planning area is at risk of severe thunderstorms. HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES Severe thunderstorms and their accompanying lightning in the planning area usually occur in the afternoon and evening during the spring and summer months. They are especially prevalent in June (Figure 35). The NCEI reports events as they occur in each community. A single severe thunderstorm event can affect multiple communities and counties at a time; the NCEI reports these large scale, multi-county events as separate events. The result is a single thunderstorm event covering the entire region could be reported by the NCEI as several events. The NCEI reports a total of 134 thunderstorm (wind) and 5 lightning events in Warren County from January 1996 to January of There was one death and seven injuries from these storms. The following table recounts the number of thunderstorm and lightning events that have occurred just in the participating cities within Warren County. Table 83: Thunderstorm and Lightning Events by Participating Jurisdiction City Severe Thunderstorm Events Lightning Events City of Carlisle 10 0 City of Cumming 9 0 City of Hartford 12 0 City of Indianola 21 2 City of Lacona 11 0 City of Martensdale 8 0 City of Milo 7 1 City of New Virginia 12 1 City of Norwalk 21 0 Data is from NCEI ( ) 98 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

120 Number of Events Section Four: Risk Assessment Figure 35: Severe Thunderstorms by Month Source: NCEI, AVERAGE ANNUAL DAMAGES The average damage per event estimate was determined based upon NCEI Storm Events Database since 1996 and number of historical occurrences. This does not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. Severe thunderstorms and lightning cause an average of $125,976 per year in property damages. Table 84: Severe Thunderstorms Loss Estimate Hazard Type Number of Events 1 Events Per Year Total Property Loss 1 Average Annual Property Loss 1 Total Crop Loss 2 Average Annual Crop Loss 2 Severe Thunderstorms $2,454,000 $116,857 $23,325,517 $1,457,845 Lightning $191,500 $9, Total $2,645,500 $125,976 $23,325,517 $1,457,845 1 Indicates the data is from NCEI ( ); 2 Indicates data is from USDA RMA ( ); Crop loss from lightning data is not available EXTENT The geographic extent of a severe thunderstorm event may be large enough to impact the entire planning area (such as in the case of a squall line, derecho, or long-lived supercell) or just a few square miles, in the case of a single cell that marginally meets severe criteria. The NWS defines a thunderstorm as severe if it contains hail that is one inch in diameter or capable of wind gusts of 58 mph or higher. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

121 PROBABILITY Based on historical records and reported events, severe thunderstorms and lightning are likely to occur on an annual basis. The NCEI reported 134 severe thunderstorms between 1996 and 2016; this results in a 100 percent chance annually for thunderstorms and lightning. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Table 85: Regional Vulnerabilities People Economic Sector Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Vulnerability -The elderly are vulnerable as they are less mobile than other members of the community -Mobile home residents are risk of injury and damage to their property if the mobile home is not anchored properly -Closed businesses from damage or closed roads are likely to lose revenue and loss of income to workers -Buildings are at risk to hail damage -Downed trees and tree limbs -High winds and lightning can cause power outages and down power lines -Roads may wash out from heavy rains and become blocked from downed tree limbs -Power outages are possible -Critical facilities may sustain damage from hail, lightning, and wind 100 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

122 SEVERE WINTER STORMS HAZARD PROFILE Severe winter storms occur annually in Warren County. Winter storms can bring extreme cold, freezing rain, heavy or drifting snow, and blizzards. Blizzards are particularly dangerous due to drifting snow and the potential for rapidly occurring whiteout conditions which greatly inhibit vehicular traffic. Generally, winter storms occur between the months of November and March, but may occur as early as October and as late as April. Heavy snow is usually the most defining element of a winter storm. Large snow events can cripple an entire jurisdiction by hindering transportation, knocking down tree limbs and utility lines, and causing structural damage to buildings. Extreme Cold Along with snow and ice storm events, extreme cold can be dangerous to the well-being of people and animals. What constitutes extreme cold varies from region to region, but is generally accepted as being temperatures that are significantly lower than the average low temperature. For the planning area, the coldest months of the year are January, February, March, November, and December. The average low temperature for these months are all below freezing (average low for the five months 19.8 F). The average high temperatures for the months of January, February, March, November, and December are near 39.9 F. Record lows for the region range from -32 F in January, -35 F in February, -20 F in March, -11 F in November, and -26 F in December. Freezing Rain Along with snow events, winter storms also have the potential to deposit significant amounts of ice. Ice buildup on tree limbs and power lines can cause them to collapse. This is most likely to occur when ice falls in the form of rain that freezes upon contact, especially in the presence of wind. Freezing rain is the name given to rain that falls when surface temperatures are below freezing. Unlike a mixture of rain and snow, ice pellets or hail, freezing rail is made entirely of liquid droplets. Freezing rain can also lead to many problems on the roads, as it makes them slick, causing automobile accidents, and making vehicle travel difficult. Blizzards Blizzards are particularly dangerous due to drifting snow and the potential for rapidly occurring whiteout conditions, which greatly inhibit vehicular traffic. Heavy snow is usually the most defining element of a winter storm. Large snow events can cripple an entire jurisdiction for several days by hindering transportation, knocking down tree limbs and utility lines, and causing structural damage to buildings. LOCATION The entire planning area is at risk of severe winter storms. EXTENT The Sperry-Piltz Ice Accumulation Index (SPIA) was developed by the NWS to predict the accumulation of ice and resulting damages. The SPIA looks at total precipitation, wind, and temperatures to predict the intensity of ice storms. Figure 36 shows the SPIA index. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

123 Figure 36: SPIA Index Source: Reviews of historical severe winter storms across the planning area show that there is a range of events that can occur. Ice Storm Warnings are issued when accumulation of at least 0.25 inches is expected from a storm, which controlling for high winds, would tend to classify ice storms in Warren County as SPIA Level 2 or higher. The most common accumulation during ice storms was 0.38 inches. The Wind Chill Index was developed by the NWS to determine the decrease in air temperature felt by the body on exposed skin due to wind. The wind chill is always lower than the air temperature and can quicken the effects of hypothermia or frost bite as it lowers. Figure 37 shows the Wind Chill Index used by the NWS. 102 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

124 Temperature ( F) Section Four: Risk Assessment Figure 37: Wind Chill Index Chart Source: NWS 140 Figure 38: Monthly Normal ( ) and Record Temperatures, Indianola Mean Max Temp ( F) Mean Min Temp ( F) Mean Avg Temp ( F) Record High ( F) Record Low ( F) Source: MRCC Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

125 The coldest months of the year are January, February, March, November, and December and normal lows for these months average around 19 F as shown in Figure 38. HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES Due to the regional scale of severe winter storms, the NCEI reports events as they occur in each county. According to the NCEI, there were a combined 58 severe winter storm events for Warren County from January 1996 to January These recorded events caused a total of $5,108,230 in property damages. USDA RMA data also reported $603,880 in crop damages between 2000 and The NCEI recorded a total of ten blizzard events, causing $360,000 in property damages; 18 heavy snow events, causing $3,855,000 in property damages; 11 ice storm events, causing $393,330 in property damages; one winter weather event with no reported property damages; and 18 winter storm events, causing $499,900 in property damages. Additional information from these events from NCEI and reports by each community are listed in each participant section in Section Seven: Participant Sections. AVERAGE ANNUAL DAMAGES The average damage per event estimate was determined based upon NCEI Storm Events Database since 1996 and includes aggregated calculations for each of the five types of winter weather as provided in the database. This does not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. Severe winter storms have caused an average of $243,249 per year in property damage, and an average of $37,743 per year in crop damage for the planning area. It should be noted that the crop loss data from the USDA RMA only specifies cold wet weather, cold winter, freeze, and frost as the cause of loss during the winter events. These events were summed together into one group and placed with the winter weather row below. Table 86: Severe Winter Storm Loss Estimate Average Hazard Type Number of Events 1 Number of Events Per Year 1 Total Property Loss 1 Average Annual Property Loss 1 Total Crop Loss 2 Average Annual Crop Loss 2 Blizzard $360,000 $17,143 N/A N/A Heavy Snow $3,855,000 $183,571 N/A N/A Ice storm $393,330 $18,730 N/A N/A Winter $0 $0 $603,880 $37,743 Weather Winter Storm $499,900 $23,805 N/A N/A Total $5,108,230 $243,249 $603,880 $37,743 1 Indicates the data is from NCEI ( ); 2 Indicates data is from USDA RMA (2000 to 2015) PROBABILITY Average monthly snowfall for the planning area is shown in Figure 39, which shows the snowiest months are between December and March. A common snow event (likely to occur annually) will result in accumulation totals between four and eight inches. Often these snow events are accompanied by high winds. It is reasonable to expect wind speeds of 25 to 35 mph with gusts reaching 50 mph or higher. Strong winds and low temperatures can combine to produce extreme wind chills of 20 F to 40 F below zero. 104 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

126 Snowfal (in) Section Four: Risk Assessment 8 Figure 39: Monthly Normal ( ) Snowfall Source: MRCC Based on historical records, it is likely that severe winter storms will occur annually within the planning area. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Table 87: Regional Vulnerabilities People Economic Sector Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Vulnerability -Elderly citizens at higher risk of injury or death, especially during extreme cold and heavy snow accumulations -Citizens without adequate heat and shelter at higher risk of injury or death -Closed roads and power outages can cripple a region for days, leading to significant revenue loss and loss of income for workers -Heavy snow loads can cause roofs to collapse -Significant tree damage possible, downing power lines and blocking roads -Heavy snow and ice accumulation can lead to downed power lines and prolonged power outages -Transportation may be difficult or impossible during blizzards, heavy snow, and ice events -Emergency response and recovery operations, communications, water treatment plants, and others are at risk to power outages, impassable roads, and other damages. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

127 SINKHOLES HAZARD PROFILE A sinkhole is defined as the loss of surface elevation due to the removal of subsurface support. Sinkholes can range from broad, regional lowering of the land surface to localized collapse. The primary causes of most subsidence are human activities such as: underground mining of coal, groundwater or petroleum withdraw, and drainage of organic soils. Sinkholes can also be due to erosion of limestone of the subsurface. As a result of Iowa s former mining operations and unique geology, sinkholes are found throughout much of the state, but the majority of the sinkholes are located in the northeast quadrant of the state. The vulnerability of sinkholes in Warren County primarily stems from the existence of old mines. LOCATION The following map (Figure 40) shows historic coal mining areas reported by IDNR, which are located in the northern half of the County. These documented coal mines may be prone to a sinkhole event. The 2012 Warren County HMP notes that there have been previous sinkhole disturbances primarily in Indianola and Carlisle due to improperly filled wells, poor construction methods, or underground utilities. EXTENT Any sinkhole that might occur would be isolated to a small area. HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES The only occurrences of previous sinkhole events may be found in the 2012 Warren County HMP. It notes that a limited number of small sinkholes have occurred on private property, including residential yards, where wells have been improperly filled or structures have been built upon them. Several years ago, the Indianola Wal-Mart parking lot began to sink in what some attributed to construction using fill over a small stream bed. Additionally, a small sinkhole appeared several years ago, near one of the Carlisle School buildings. Lastly, the County has numerous old sewer lines that have collapsed, causing minor sinkholes near streets and sidewalks. No major damages or injuries have been reported in the County. AVERAGE ANNUAL DAMAGES There is no data available to determine damage estimates for this hazard. In most cases, individual property owners, local governments, and businesses pay for repairs for damages caused by this hazard. PROBABILITY Future occurrences of sinkholes are possible, but without a well-documented record of events, it is difficult to determine the overall probability of this hazard. However, for the purposes of this plan, the probability of sinkholes will be estimated as ten percent annually. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities. No jurisdiction has identified sinkholes as a hazard of top concern. Sinkholes are not discussed further in Section Seven: Participant Sections. 106 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

128 Table 88: Regional Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Citizens living near old mining operations in the northern half of the Country are at risk Economic -If a business is impacted, employees may be temporarily out of work Built Environment -All building stock has a small risk of damage Infrastructure -All underground infrastructure at risk to damages -Roadways may be damaged Critical Facilities -All critical facilities have a small risk of damage Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

129 Figure 40: Historic Coal Mining Areas 108 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

130 TERRORISM HAZARD PROFILE According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), there is no single, universally accepted definition of terrorism. Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of a political or social objective (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85). The FBI further describes terrorism as either domestic or international, depending on the origin, base, and objectives of the terrorist organization. For the purpose of this report, the following definitions from the FBI will be used: Domestic terrorism is the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or Puerto Rico without foreign direction committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives. International terrorism involves violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or any state, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or any state. These acts appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of a government by assassination or kidnapping. International terrorist acts occur outside the United States or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to coerce or intimidate, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum. There are different types of terrorism depending on the target of attack, which are: Political terrorism Bio-terrorism Cyber-terrorism Eco-terrorism Nuclear-terrorism Narco-terrorism Agro-terrorism Terrorist activities are also classified based on motivation behind the event such as ideology (i.e. religious fundamentalism, national separatist movements, and social revolutionary movements). Terrorism can also be random with no ties to ideological reasoning. The FBI also provides clear definitions of terrorist incidents and prevention: A terrorist incident is a violent act or an act dangerous to human life, in violation of the criminal laws of the United States, or of any state, to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives. Terrorism prevention is a documented instance in which a violent act by a known or suspected terrorist group or individual with the means and a proven propensity for violence is successfully interdicted through investigative activity. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

131 Note: The FBI investigates terrorism-related matters without regard to race, religion, national origin, or gender. Reference to individual members of any political, ethnic, or religious group in this report is not meant to imply that all members of that group are terrorists. Terrorists represent a small criminal minority in any larger social context. Threat assessment, mitigation, and response to terrorism are federal and state directives that work primarily with local law enforcement. The Office of Infrastructure Protection within the Federal Department of Homeland Security is a component of the National Programs and Protection Directorate. The Office of Infrastructure Protection leads the coordinated national program to reduce and mitigate risk within 18 national critical infrastructure and key resource (CIKR) sectors from acts of terrorism and natural disasters, and to strengthen sectors ability to respond and quickly recover from an attack or other emergency. This is done through the National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP). Under the NIPP, a Sector-Specific Agency (SSA) is the federal agency assigned to lead a collaborative process for infrastructure protection for each of the 18 sectors. The NIPP s comprehensive framework allows the Office of Infrastructure Protection to provide the cross-sector coordination and collaboration needed to set national priorities, goals, and requirements for effective allocation of resources. More importantly, the NIPP framework integrates a broad range of public and private CIKR protection activities. The SSAs provide guidance about the NIPP framework to state, tribal, territorial and local homeland security agencies and personnel. They coordinate NIPP implementation within the sector, which involves developing and sustaining partnerships and information-sharing processes, as well as assisting with contingency planning and incident management. The Office of Infrastructure Protection has SSA responsibility for six of the 18 CIKR sectors. Those six are: Chemical Commercial Facilities Critical Manufacturing Dams Emergency Services Nuclear Reactors, Materials and Waste SSA responsibility for the other 12 CIKR sectors is held by other Department of Homeland Security components and other federal agencies. Those 12 are: Agriculture and Food Department of Agriculture; Food and Drug Administration Banking and Finance Department of the Treasury Communications Department of Homeland Security Defense Industrial Base Department of Defense Energy Department of Energy Government Facilities Department of Homeland Security Information Technology Department of Homeland Security National Monuments and Icons Department of the Interior Postal and Shipping Transportation Security Administration Healthcare and Public Health Department of Health and Human Services Transportation Systems Transportation Security Administration; U.S. Coast Guard Water Environmental Protection Agency 110 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

132 The NIPP requires that each SSA prepares a Sector-Specific Plan, reviews it annually, and updates it as appropriate. The Department of Homeland Security and its affiliated agencies are responsible for disseminating any information regarding terrorist activities in the country. The system in place is the National Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS). NTAS replaced the Homeland Security Advisory System (HSAS) which was the color-coded system put in place after the September 11 th attacks by Presidential Directive 5 and 8 in March of NTAS replaced HSAS in NTAS is based on a system of analyzing threat levels and providing either an imminent threat alert or an elevated threat alert. An Imminent Threat Alert warns of a credible, specific and impending terrorist threat against the United States. An Elevated Threat Alert warns of a credible terrorist threat against the United States. The Department of Homeland Security, in conjunction with other federal agencies, will decide whether a threat alert of either kind should be issued if credible information is available. Each alert provides a statement summarizing the potential threat and what, if anything should be done to ensure public safety. The NTAS Alerts will be based on the nature of the threat: in some cases, alerts will be sent directly to law enforcement or affected areas of the private sector, while in others, alerts will be issued more broadly to the American people through both official and media channels. An individual threat alert is issued for a specific time period and then automatically expires. It may be extended if new information becomes available or the threat evolves. The sunset provision contains a specific date when the alert expires as there will not be a constant NTAS Alert or blanket warning. If threat information changes for an alert, the Secretary of Homeland Security may announce an updated NTAS Alert. All changes, including the announcement that cancels an NTAS Alert, will be distributed the same way as the original alert. LOCATION Terrorist activities could occur throughout the entire planning area. In rural areas, concerns are primarily related to agro-terrorism and tampering with water supplies. In urban areas, concerns are related to political unrest, activists groups, and others that may be targeting businesses, police, and federal buildings. In schools, concerns center on political terrorism and are generally perpetrated erratically by loners. HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES Previous accounts of terrorism in the planning area were gathered from the Global Terrorism Database, maintained by the University of Maryland and the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START). This database contains information for over 140,000 terrorist attacks. According to this database, there have been no terrorist attacks in Warren County since The Carlisle Community School District has had two bomb threats and one incidence of an incomplete bomb placed between the school and highway boundary. The Indianola Community School District has also experienced a terrorism incident. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

133 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAMAGES The average damage per event estimate was not determined because the Global Terrorism Database does not have record of any terrorism incidents in Warren County. The Carlisle and Indianola Community School Districts did not report any damage attributable to their terror threat incidents. EXTENT Previous terrorism threats in the planning area have been limited to school buildings. However, terrorist attacks can vary greatly in scale and magnitude. PROBABILITY Given that no terrorism events have occurred in the past, the annual probability for terrorism in the planning area is low. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Table 89: Regional Vulnerabilities People Economic Sector Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Vulnerability -Police offices and first responders at risk of injury or death -Damaged businesses can cause loss of revenue and loss of income for workers -Agricultural attacks could cause significant economic losses for the region -Targeted buildings may sustain heavy damage -Water supply, power plants, utilities -Police stations, government offices, and schools are at a higher risk 112 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

134 TORNADOES HAZARD PROFILE A tornado is typically associated with a supercell thunderstorm. For a rotation to be classified as a tornado, three characteristics must be met: There must be a microscale rotating area of wind, ranging in size from a few feet to a few miles wide; The rotating wind, or vortex, must be attached to a convective cloud base and must be in contact with the ground; and, The spinning vortex of air must have caused enough damage to be classified by the Fujita Scale as a tornado. Once tornadoes are formed, they can be extremely violent and destructive. They have been recorded all over the world, but are most prevalent in the American Midwest and South, in an area known as Tornado Alley. Approximately 1,000 tornadoes are reported annually in the contiguous United States (NOAA 2012). Tornadoes can travel distances over 100 miles and reach over 11 miles above ground. Tornadoes usually stay on the ground no more than 20 minutes. Nationally, the tornado season typically occurs between April and July. On average, 80 percent of tornadoes occur between noon and midnight. In Iowa, 55 percent of tornadoes occur in May and June. Iowa is ranked sixth in the nation for tornado frequency with an annual average of 46 tornadoes between 1980 and The following figure shows the tornado activity in the United States as a summary of recorded EF3, EF4, and EF5 tornadoes per 2,470 square miles form Figure 41: Tornado Activity in the United States Planning Area Source: Storm Prediction Center Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

135 LOCATION Tornadoes can occur anywhere in the planning area. The impacts would likely be greater in more densely populated areas such as Indianola. The following map shows the historical track locations across the region since 1950 along with the population density in each census tract in the County. EXTENT After a tornado passes through an area, an official rating category is determined, which provides a common benchmark that allows comparisons to be made between different tornadoes. The magnitude of tornadoes is measured by the Enhanced Fujita Scale. The Enhanced Fujita Scale does not measure tornadoes by their size or width, but rather the amount of damage caused to human-built structures and trees. The Enhanced Fujita Scale replaced the Fujita Scale in The enhanced scale classifies EF0-EF5 damage as determined by engineers and meteorologists across 28 different types of damage indicators, including different types of building and tree damage. To establish a rating, engineers and meteorologists examine the damage, analyze the ground-swirl patterns, review damage imagery, collect media reports, and sometimes utilize photogrammetry and videogrammetry. Based on the most severe damage to any wellbuilt frame house, or any comparable damage as determined by an engineer, an EF-Scale number is assigned to the tornado. Tables 90 and 91 summarize the Enhanced Fujita Scale and damage indicators. According to a recent report from the National Institute of Science and Technology on the Joplin Tornado, tornadoes rated EF3 or lower account for around 96 percent of all tornado damages. Table 90: Enhanced Fujita Scale Storm Category 3 Second Gust (mph) Damage Level EF mph Gale EF mph Weak EF mph Strong EF mph Severe EF mph Devastating EF mph Incredible EF No rating -- Inconceivable Damage Description Some damages to chimneys; breaks branches off trees; pushes over shallowrooted trees; damages to sign boards. The lower limit is the beginning of hurricane wind speed; peels surface off roofs; mobile homes pushed off foundations or overturned; moving autos pushed off the roads; attached garages might be destroyed. Considerable damage. Roofs torn off frame houses; mobile homes demolished; boxcars pushed over; large trees snapped or uprooted; light object missiles generated. Roof and some walls torn off well-constructed houses; trains overturned; most trees in forest uprooted. Well-constructed houses leveled; structures with weak foundations blown off some distance; cars thrown and large missiles generated. Strong frame houses lifted off foundations and carried considerable distances to disintegrate; automobile sized missiles fly through the air in excess of 100 meters; trees debarked; steel re-enforced concrete structures badly damaged. Should a tornado with the maximum wind speed in excess of EF5 occur, the extent and types of damage may not be conceived. A number of missiles such as iceboxes, water heaters, storage tanks, automobiles, etc. will create serious secondary damage on structures. Source: NOAA; FEMA 114 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

136 Figure 42: Historic Tornado Tracks with Population Density ( ) Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

137 Table 91: Enhanced Fujita Scale Damage Indicator Number Source: NOAA; FEMA Damage Indicator 1 Small barns, farm outbuildings 2 One- or two-family residences 3 Single-wide mobile home (MHSW) 4 Double-wide mobile home 5 Apartment, condo, townhouse (3 stories or less) 6 Motel 7 Masonry apartment or motel 8 Small retail bldg. (fast food) 9 Small professional (doctor office, branch bank) 10 Strip mall 11 Large shopping mall 12 Large, isolated ("big box") retail bldg. 13 Automobile showroom 14 Automotive service building 15 School - 1-story elementary (interior or exterior halls) 16 School - Junior or Senior high school 17 Low-rise (1-4 story) bldg. 18 Mid-rise (5-20 story) bldg. 19 High-rise (over 20 stories) 20 Institutional bldg. (hospital, govt. or university) 21 Metal building system 22 Service station canopy 23 Warehouse (tilt-up walls or heavy timber) 24 Transmission line tower 25 Free-standing tower 26 Free standing pole (light, flag, luminary) 27 Tree - hardwood 28 Tree - softwood Based on the NCEI record from 1996 to 2016, it is most likely that tornadoes that do occur within the planning area will be of EF0 or EF1 strength. Of the 24 reported events, 11 were F/EF0, 10 F/EF1 tornadoes, and three were F/EF2 tornadoes. These counts are according to the NCEI database, and list tornado magnitudes based on their behavior within Warren County. The tornado tracks map differs slightly in this accounting because it utilizes data from , and categorizes tornadoes based on the highest magnitude along their path, which may have taken it outside of the County. HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES NCEI cites 24 tornado events ranging from a magnitude of EF0 to EF2 between 1996 and These events were responsible for $2,637,500 in property damages. No deaths or injuries were cited. The jurisdiction-specific events from NCEI and reported by each community are listed in each participant section in Section Seven: Participant Sections. The following figure shows that the month of June is the busiest month of the year with the highest number of tornadoes in the planning area. 116 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

138 Number of Events Section Four: Risk Assessment Figure 43: Tornadoes by Month in the Planning Area Source: NCEI, AVERAGE ANNUAL DAMAGES The average damage per event estimate was determined based upon NCEI Storm Events Database since 1996 and number of historical occurrences. This does not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. Tornadoes cause an average of $2,637,500 per year in property damage. The RMA reports no damage to crops from tornadoes between 2000 to Table 92: Tornado Loss Estimate Hazard Type Number of Events 1 Average Number of Events Per Year Total Property Loss 1 Average Annual Property Loss 1 Total Crop Loss 2 Average Annual Crop Loss 2 Tornadoes $2,637,500 $125,595 $0 $0 1 Indicates the data is from NCEI ( ); 2 Indicates data is from USDA RMA ( ) PROBABILITY Given the 24 events over the course of 21 years, there is a 100 percent probability that a tornado event will occur in the planning area in any given year. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Table 93: Regional Vulnerabilities People Sector Economic Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Vulnerability -Citizens living in mobile homes are at risk to death or injury -Citizens without access to shelter below ground or in safe room -Elderly with decreased mobility or poor hearing may be higher risk -Lack of multiple ways of receiving weather warnings, especially at night -Significant economic losses possible, especially with EF3 tornadoes or greater -All building stock are at risk of significant damages -All above ground infrastructure at risk to damages -Impassable roads due to debris blocking roadways -All critical facilities at risk to significant damages and power outages Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

139 TRANSPORTATION INCIDENTS HAZARD PROFILE Transportation incidents may involve air, roadway, railway, and waterway transportation. The 2013 Iowa State HMP describes transportation incidents as an accident involving any mode of transportation that directly threatens life, property, damage, injury, or adversely impacts a community s capabilities to provide emergency services. LOCATION Transportation incidents are likely to occur among major transportation routes, railway stations, big cities, and airports, where large numbers of vehicles converge. Several interstates and highways intersect Warren County. Interstates 65 and 69 meet in southcentral Warren County, from which point Interstate 65 continues north, bisecting the County. Highway 92 also bisects the County, moving from east to west. Interstates 65 and 92 cross in Indianola. Interstate 35 runs along the entire western edge of the County. Highway 5 briefly passes through the northwest corner of the County. A stretch of railroad accompanies part of this stretch of Highway 5, though it turns farther south at Hartford. For a map of the Highways, Interstates, and railways in Warren County, see the Section Four: Risk Assessment coverage of Hazardous Materials. There are four private airports and three heliports in Warren County, all located in and around Indianola. Two of these heliports are associated with local hospitals Iowa Methodist Medical Center and Iowa Lutheran Hospital. It should also be noted that the Des Moines International Airport is only two miles northeast of Norwalk in Polk County. Des Moines International Airport, Iowa s largest airport, serves over 1 million passengers per year plus 120,000+ tons of cargo and some military use. Additionally, Indianola hosts the National Balloon Classic every summer when about 100 hot air balloons take flight over a nineday period. There are no major transportation routes on waterways in Warren County. EXTENT The probable extent of transportation incidents is difficult to anticipate. Residents and critical facilities near Indianola are at the greatest risk of experiencing injuries, fatalities, and damage from transportation incidents because of the heavy traffic through the area where Interstates 65 and 92, and several airports and helipads convene. HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES The Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) maintains a public database of car accidents by county from The data indicates that there have been 2,463 crashes between 2007 and 2011 (Figure 44). These have caused 1,534 injuries and 25 fatalities. The Federal Railroad Administration reports no railway incidents from January 2006 December 2016 in Warren County. According to the National Transportation Safety Board s (NTSB) Aviation Accident Database, there have been 21 air transportation accidents in Warren County since 1965 that caused three fatalities and six injuries. Table 94 lists the accidents along with the number of injuries and fatalities. There has been at least one hot air balloon accident when it crashed in rural Warren County into power lines and then hit the ground. 118 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

140 Number of Incidents Section Four: Risk Assessment 700 Figure 44: Roadway Transportation Incidents in Warren County Crashes Injuries Fatalities Source: Iowa Department of Transportation, Table 94: Air Transportation Accidents Date Location Purpose of Flight Number of Number of Fatalities Injuries 7/27/1965 Indianola Unknown /3/1967 Indianola Unknown 0 0 2/16/1968 Indianola Unknown 0 0 6/3/1969 Cumming Unknown 0 0 1/24/1970 Carlisle Unknown 0 0 4/29/1976 Carlisle Unknown 0 0 9/9/1977 Indianola Unknown 0 0 4/23/1981 Norwalk Unknown 0 0 8/3/1981 Indianola Unknown 0 0 1/2/1983 Indianola Personal 0 1 8/30/1983 Indianola Personal /16/1983 Carlisle Business 0 0 3/14/1985 Norwalk Instructional 0 0 6/9/1985 Carlisle Personal 1 0 8/8/1989 Indianola Unknown 0 3 8/4/1991 Indianola Personal 0 0 6/5/1993 Indianola Personal /28/1999 Indianola Personal 0 1 8/1/2005 Indianola Personal 0 0 8/5/2016 Indianola Personal 2 0 4/17/2017 Indianola Personal 0 0 Total: 3 6 Source: NTSB (1965 May 2017) Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

141 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAMAGES There is no data available to determine the amount of property damage caused by transportation incidents. PROBABILITY The historical record indicates that transportation incidents have a 100 percent chance of occurring annually in the County with 2,463 roadway incidents occurring over a five-year period. Air transportation incidents have a lower probability at 40 percent with 21 accidents over a 54-year period. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Table 95: Regional Chemical Transportation Vulnerabilities People Economic Sector Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Vulnerability -Those in close proximity to transportation corridors -Closed transportation routes could impact businesses by preventing movements of workers, goods, and employees -Risk of fire or explosion -Transportation routes can be closed -Critical facilities near major transportation corridors at risk 120 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

142 WINDSTORM HAZARD PROFILE High winds typically accompany severe thunderstorms, severe winter storms, and other large low pressure systems, which can cause significant property and crop damage, downed power lines, loss of electricity, obstruction to traffic flow, and significant damage to trees and center-pivot irrigation systems. The NWS defines high winds as sustained winds speeds of 40 mph or greater lasting for 1 hour or longer, or winds of 58 mph or greater for any duration. The NWS issues High Wind Advisories when there are sustained winds of 25 to 39 mph and/or gusts to 57 mph. Figure 45 shows the wind zones in the United States. The wind zones are based on the maximum wind speeds that can occur from a tornado or hurricane event. The planning area is located in Zone IV which has maximum winds of 250 mph equivalent to an EF5 tornado. Figure 45: Wind Zones in the U.S. Source: FEMA LOCATION High winds commonly occur throughout the planning area. Rural, agricultural areas are at a greater risk of damages than the developed areas based on total crop damages versus property damages (see Historical Occurrences). Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

143 Number of Events Section Four: Risk Assessment HISTORICAL OCCURRENCES Due to the regional scale of high winds, the NCEI reports events as they occur in each county. While a single event can affect two or more counties at a time, the NCEI reports them as separate events. In Warren County, there were 21 high wind events that occurred between January 1996 and December Table 96: Wind Events Number of Wind Events Warren County 21 Data is from NCEI ( ) As seen in Figure 46, most high wind events occur in the fall, winter, and early spring months. The events identified by NCEI are listed in Section Seven: Participant Sections for each county. 8 7 Figure 46: High Wind Events by Month Source: NCEI, AVERAGE ANNUAL DAMAGES The average damage per event estimate was determined based upon NCEI Storm Events Database since 1996 and number of historical occurrences. This does not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. It is estimated that high wind events can cause an average of $38,815 per year in property damage, and an average of $21,961 per year in crop damage for the planning area. 122 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

144 Table 97: High Wind Loss Estimate Hazar d Type Number of Events 1 Events Per Year Total Property Loss 1 Average Annual Property Loss 1 Total Crop Loss 2 Average Annual Crop Loss 2 High $815,110 $38,815 $351,386 $21,961 Winds 1 Indicates the data is from NCEI ( ); 2 Indicates data is from USDA RMA ( ) EXTENT The NWS defines high winds as sustained wind speeds of 40 mph or greater lasting for one hour or longer, or winds of 58 mph or greater for any duration. The NWS issues High Wind Advisories when there are sustained winds of 25 to 39 miles per hour and/or gusts to 57 mph. The Beaufort Wind Scale can be used to classify wind strength. Table 98 outlines the scale, providing wind speed ranking, range of wind speeds per ranking, and a brief description of conditions for each ranking. Table 98: Beaufort Wind Ranking Beaufort Wind Range of Wind Force Ranking Speeds Conditions 0 <1 mph Smoke rises vertically mph Direction shown by smoke but not wind vanes mph Wind felt on face; leaves rustle; wind vanes move mph Leaves and small twigs in constant motion mph Raises dust and loose paper; small branches move mph Small trees in leaf begin to move mph Large branches in motion; umbrellas used with difficulty mph Whole trees in motion; inconvenience felt when walking against the wind mph Breaks twigs off tree; generally impedes progress mph Slight structural damage; chimneypots and slates removed mph Trees uprooted; considerable structural damages; improperly or mobiles homes with no anchors turned over mph Widespread damages; very rarely experienced >200 mph Hurricane; devastation Source: Storm Prediction Center Using the NCEI reported events, the most common high wind event is a level 9. The reported high wind events had an average of 48 mph winds. PROBABILITY Based on historical records and reported events, it is likely that high winds will occur within the planning area at least once annually. REGIONAL VULNERABILITIES The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Participant Sections. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

145 Table 99: Regional Vulnerabilities People Economic Sector Built Environment Infrastructure Critical Facilities Vulnerability -Vulnerable populations include those living in mobile homes, especially if they are not anchored properly -People outdoors during events -Agricultural losses -Damages to businesses and prolonged power outages can cause significant impacts to the local economy -All building stock are at risk to damages from high winds -Downed power lines and power outages -Downed trees blocking road access -All critical facilities are at risk to damages from high winds 124 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

146 SECTION FIVE: MITIGATION STRATEGY INTRODUCTION The primary focus of the mitigation strategy is to establish goals and objectives, and identify action items to reduce the effects of hazards on existing infrastructure and property in a cost effective and technically feasible manner. The development of goals and objectives took place during the Planning Team meetings. Meeting participants reviewed the goals from the 2012 HMP and discussed recommended additions and modifications. The intent of each goal and set of objectives is to develop strategies to account for risks associated with hazards and identify ways to reduce or eliminate those risks. Each goal and set of objectives is followed by mitigation alternatives, or actions. A preliminary list of goals and objectives was provided to the Planning Team and participants at the Round 1 public meetings. Each participant was asked to review all of the goals and objectives and comment on possible improvements or suggest how to make them meet the needs of their jurisdiction. Each participating jurisdiction decided to utilize the same goals and objectives. SUMMARY OF CHANGES Section 9 and parts of Sections 10 and 11 from the 2012 HMP were condensed and combined into this updated Section Five: Mitigation Strategy. Additional details from Sections 10 and 11 were updated and included in Section Seven: Participant Sections. Requirement 201.6(c)(3)(i): [The hazard mitigation strategy shall include a] description of mitigation goals to reduce or avoid longterm vulnerabilities to the identified hazards. Requirement 201.6(c)(3)(ii): [The mitigation strategy shall include a] section that identifies and analyzes a comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions and projects being considered to reduce the effects of each hazard, with particular emphasis on new and existing buildings and infrastructure. Requirement: 201.6(c)(3)(ii): [The mitigation strategy] must also address the jurisdiction s participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), and continued compliance with NFIP requirements, as appropriate. Requirement: 201.6(c)(3)(iii): [The mitigation strategy section shall include] an action plan describing how the actions identified in section (c)(3)(ii) will be prioritized, implemented, and administered by the local jurisdiction. Prioritization shall include a special emphasis on the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost benefit review of the proposed projects and their associated costs. Requirement 201.6(c)(3)(iv): For multijurisdictional plans, there must be identifiable action items specific to the jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval or credit of the plan. The Goals and Objectives for this plan update were reviewed and minor revisions were made for clarity. Additionally, the development of the mitigation strategy for this plan update includes the addition of several mitigation actions, revisions to the mitigation alternative selection process, and the incorporation of mitigation actions for the additional hazards addressed in the update. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The Regional Planning Team reviewed, updated, and approved goals and objectives, which helped guide the process of identifying both broad-based and community-specific mitigation strategies and projects that will, if implemented, reduce their vulnerability and help build stronger, more resilient communities. Minor revisions were made to the list, and two objectives were removed for clarity. They are: Objective 2.4: Ensure proper and adequate equipment for first responders o This was repeated from Objective 1.5 Objective 2.5: Provide training and education for homeowners, landlords, and first responders as to building protection Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

147 Section Five: Mitigation Strategy o This objective is similar to Objective 1.2 and was combined to simplify and clarify the objectives Below is the final list of goals and objectives as determined by the participants and Planning Team. Goals and objectives provide specific direction to guide participants in reducing future hazard-related losses. The goals and objectives were numbered to assist in the development and organization of mitigation alternatives or action items, as discussed in Section Seven: Participant Sections. Goal 1: Reduce the extent of fatalities and injuries due to hazards Objective 1.1: Improve countywide warning capabilities against hazards Objective 1.2: Provide education programs and exercises to first responders and general public about hazards and how to respond Objective 1.3: Implement non-structural projects that will result in protection of life and safety Objective 1.4: Implement structural projects that will result in protection of life and safety Objective 1.5: Ensure proper and adequate equipment for first responders Goal 2: Reduce the extent of property losses due to hazards on existing properties Objective 2.1: Improve public infrastructure and critical assets in hazard impact areas Objective 2.2: Use the most effective approaches to protect buildings from flooding, including acquisition or relocation where warranted Objective 2.3: Use the most effective approaches to protect buildings from other hazards using both structural and non-structural projects Goal 3: Improve public response to hazards and make recovery easier Objective 3.1: Enhance the continuity of government during and after storms Objective 3.2: Enhance cross-agency and intra- and inter-county communications Objective 3.3: Review and then either continue, enhance, or establish mutual aid agreements, training, and exercises Objective 3.4: Ensure the mitigation plan is reviewed and updated as needed Goal 4: Improve quality of life in the community Objective 4.1: Investigate and plan for how mitigation can improve public services and recreation opportunities Objective 4.2: Ensure that current owners can maintain and improve their properties Goal 5: Be as efficient as possible with government funding Objective 5.1: Prioritize mitigation projects, starting with sites facing the greatest threat of life, health, and property and for critical assets Objective 5.2: Use public funding on private property only when the benefits exceed the costs 126 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

148 Section Five: Mitigation Strategy Objective 5.3: Maximize the use of outside sources of funding Objective 5.4: Maximize owner participation in mitigation efforts to protect their own properties and encourage property-owner self-protection measures Goal 6: Reduce the extent of property losses due to hazards on future properties Objective 6.1: Increase stringency of building codes to protect against fire, severe storms, and other hazards Objective 6.2: Update maps and ordinances and educate the public on development policies that prevent development where it should not be located MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES (ACTION ITEMS) After the establishment of the goals and objectives, mitigation alternatives were prioritized. The alternatives considered included: the mitigation actions in the previous plan; additional mitigation actions discussed during the planning process; and recommendations from JEO for additional mitigation actions. In addition, JEO provided each participant a preliminary list of mitigation alternatives to be used as a starting point. The prioritized list of alternatives helped participants determine which actions will best assist their respective jurisdiction in alleviating damages in the event of a disaster. The listed priority does not indicate which actions will be implemented first, but will serve as a guide in determining the order at which each action should be implemented. These projects are the core of a hazard mitigation plan. The group was instructed that each alternative must be directly related to the goals and objectives. Alternatives must be specific activities that are concise and can be implemented individually. Mitigation alternatives were evaluated based on referencing the community s risk assessment and capability assessment. Communities were encouraged to choose mitigation actions that were realistic and relevant to the concerns identified. A final list of alternatives was established including: information on the associated hazard mitigated; description of the action; responsible party; priority; cost estimate; potential funding sources; and timeline. It is important to note that not all mitigation actions identified by a community may ultimately be implemented due to limited capabilities, prohibitive costs, low benefit/cost ratio, or other concerns. The cost estimates, priority ranking, potential funding, and identified agencies are used to give communities an idea of what actions may be the most feasible over the next five years. This information will serve as a guide for the participants to assist in hazard mitigation for the future. PARTICIPANT MITIGATION ALTERNATIVES The following are specific actions listed by participants of the Warren County HMP intended to be utilized in the implementation of mitigation alternatives. Each action is described by the following: Description general summary of the action item Hazard(s) Addressed which hazard the mitigation action aims to address Estimated Cost the projected cost of the mitigation action Potential funding a list of any potential funding mechanism used to fund the action Status a description of what has been done, if anything, to implement the action item Timeline a general timeline as established by planning participants Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

149 Section Five: Mitigation Strategy Priority a general description of the importance and workability in which an action may be implemented (high/medium/low). Priority may vary between each community, mostly dependent on funding capabilities and the size of the local tax base Lead Agency listing of agencies or departments, which may lead or oversee the implementation of the action item Implementation of the actions will vary between individual plan participants based upon the availability of existing information, funding opportunities and limitations, and administrative capabilities of smaller communities. Establishment of a cost-benefit analysis is out of the scope of this plan and could be completed prior to submittal of a project grant application or as part of a five-year update. Completed, ongoing and new mitigation alternatives for each participating jurisdiction can be found in Section Seven: Participant Sections. MITIGATION ALTERNATIVE PROJECT MATRIX Each participant reviewed mitigation projects listed in the 2012 HMP and also review a list of potential mitigation alternatives which would lead to action items to reduce the effects of hazards. Projects selected varied from community to community depending upon the significance of each hazard present. The information listed in Table 100 is a compilation of the mitigation alternatives identified by jurisdiction and organized by the goal and objective to be met. 128 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

150 Warren County Carlisle Cumming Hartford Indianola Lacona Martensdale Milo New Virginia Norwalk Indianola Schools Martensdale-St. Marys School District Norwalk School District Simpson College Southeast Warren School District Section Five: Mitigation Strategy Table 100: Mitigation Alternatives Selected by Each Jurisdiction Goal 1 Objective 1.1 Objective 1.2 Objective 1.3 Mitigation Actions Develop Secondary Alert Systems X X X X X X Evaluate Alert Systems X Warning Siren Installation X X X Annually Train Local Leaders on Hazard Mitigation Issues X X X X X Enhance or Formalize Effort for Public Education about Hazards X First Responder Interagency Operability and Training X X X Hazard Education and Mitigation Involvement X X X X X X X X Public Awareness and Education for Schools X Public Evacuation and Public Hazard Response Plans X Training for Chemical Spills X Transportation Plan X Tree Trimming Ordinances X Anti-virus Software X Data Collection X Electronic Resource Directory X GPS Units X Protect City Records X X X Remove Chemicals X X Restricted Access Procedures X Reunification Plan X Road Barricades and Signage X School Entry Control X Terrorism Response Plan X Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

151 Warren County Carlisle Cumming Hartford Indianola Lacona Martensdale Milo New Virginia Norwalk Indianola Schools Martensdale-St. Marys School District Norwalk School District Simpson College Southeast Warren School District Section Five: Mitigation Strategy Objective 1.4 Objective 1.5 Mitigation Actions Transportation Safety X X Tree Maintenance X Vulnerable Population Registration Program X X X X X Animal Control X Campus Lighting X Campus Safe Rooms X X Community Safe Rooms X X X X X X X X Community Shelter Rooms X X X X X X Harden Fiber Communications Lines X Improve Facility Security X X X X X X X Increase Water Capacity X Install Hazard Signs X Lightning Preparedness and Protection X X X Maintain City Streets X Purchase Snow Trucks, Plows, and Sanders X X X X X Signage for Bridges X Well Maintenance X Windbreaks X X Emergency Guidebooks in All Emergency Vehicles X Equipment and Facilities Upgrade X First Responder and Public Works Equipment Upgrade X X X Improve Police and Fire Department Infrastructure and Equipment Install New and Upgraded Communication Technology for First Responders Purchase Trailers X X X X X X X 130 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

152 Warren County Carlisle Cumming Hartford Indianola Lacona Martensdale Milo New Virginia Norwalk Indianola Schools Martensdale-St. Marys School District Norwalk School District Simpson College Southeast Warren School District Section Five: Mitigation Strategy Objective 2.1 Objective 2.2 Objective 2.3 Mitigation Actions Update Fire Fighting and First Responder Assets X Goal 2 Backup Power Generators X Debris Collection and Management X Demolition and Destruction Program X X X Harden Infrastructure X X X X Improve Bridges and Culverts X X Improve Electrical System X X X X X X Improve Reliability of Electrical System X X X Improve Roads X Infrastructure Retrofits X Overhead Utility Lines X Protect Power at Critical Facilities X X X X Sanitary Sewer System Improvements X X 100-Year Floodplain Mitigation X Community Rating System X Improve Water Supply X Prevent Flooding in Main Floodway X Property Acquisition X Protect Buildings Against Flooding X Raise Grade X Sewer System Upgrade X X Stormwater Control X Stormwater System Improvement and Upkeep X X X X Facilities for Vulnerable Populations X Fire Preparedness X X X Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

153 Warren County Carlisle Cumming Hartford Indianola Lacona Martensdale Milo New Virginia Norwalk Indianola Schools Martensdale-St. Marys School District Norwalk School District Simpson College Southeast Warren School District Section Five: Mitigation Strategy Goal 3 Objective 3.1 Objective 3.2 Objective 3.3 Mitigation Actions Fire Retardant Curtains Guard Vulnerable Facilities X HAZMAT Response X X Improve Sewer System X X X X Improve Stormwater System X X X X Increase Landscaping Efforts X X Inspect Water Lines X Intruder Defense Tools X Lake Upkeep X Develop GIS Maps of Municipal Infrastructure X Debris Disposal X X Designate a Snow Storage Site X Disaster and Continuity Planning X X X X X X X X Emergency Fuel Supply Plan X Establish Disaster Response Agreements and Assets X Improve Snow Removal Plan X School Continuity Plan X Contact List in School Vehicles X Inter-Campus Communication X Legislation Through Partnerships X Utility Provider Collaboration X Aid Agreements X X Aid Agreements and Community Drills X X X Prepare and Adopt an EOP X X Prepare for Extreme Heat and Power Failure Events X X X X 132 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

154 Warren County Carlisle Cumming Hartford Indianola Lacona Martensdale Milo New Virginia Norwalk Indianola Schools Martensdale-St. Marys School District Norwalk School District Simpson College Southeast Warren School District Section Five: Mitigation Strategy Mitigation Actions Training and Exercise Plan X X Hazard Mitigation Plans and Legislation X X X X X X X X X X X Objective 3.4 Maintain and Update Mitigation Plan X X X X Promote Mitigation Plan X X X X Goal 4 Objective 4.1 Accessible Public Facilities X X X Improve Private Residences X X Objective 4.2 X X Promote Private Mitigation and Disaster Preparedness Vegetation Maintenance X X Goal 5 Objective 5.4 Hazard Mitigation Planning Involvement X X Goal 6 Building Codes X X Objective 6.1 Housing Fire Codes X Safe Room Design Information X County GIS Participation X X X Objective 6.2 Map Chemical Storage Fixed Sites X COMPLETED MITIGATION EFFORTS Previously completed mitigation actions identified by the communities can be found in their specific participant section in Section Seven: Participant Sections. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan

155 Section Five: Mitigation Strategy THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK 134 Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017

156 SECTION SIX: PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AND MAINTENANCE SUMMARY OF CHANGES This section is similar to Section 12 of the 2012 plan, however the discussion on funding mitigation alternatives is provided with each listed mitigation action in the individual participant sections. One new addition from 2012, is a discussion on the review of plan integration with existing planning mechanisms. MONITORING, EVALUATING, AND UPDATING THE PLAN Participants of the Warren County HMP will be responsible for monitoring (annually at a minimum), evaluating, and updating of the plan. Hazard mitigation projects will be prioritized by each participant s governing body with support and suggestions from the public and business owners. Unless otherwise specified by each participant s governing body, the governing body will be responsible for implementation of the recommended projects. The responsible party for the various implementation actions will report on the status of all projects and include which implementation processes worked well, any difficulties encountered, how coordination efforts are proceeding, and which strategies could be revised. To assist with monitoring of the plan, as each recommended project is completed, a detailed timeline of how that project was completed will be written and attached to the plan in a format selected by the governing body. Information that should be included will address project timelines, agencies involved, area(s) benefited, total funding (if complete), etc. At the discretion of each governing body, a local task force may be used to review the original draft of the mitigation plan and to recommend changes. Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(i): [The plan maintenance process shall include a] section describing the method and schedule of monitoring, evaluating, and updating the mitigation plan within a fiveyear cycle. Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(ii): [The plan shall include a] process by which local governments incorporate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms such as comprehensive or capital improvement plans, when appropriate. Requirement 201.6(c)(4)(iii): [The plan maintenance process shall include a] discussion on how the community will continue public participation in the plan maintenance process. Review and updating of this plan will occur at least every five years. At the discretion of each governing body, updates may be incorporated more frequently, especially in the event of a major hazard. The governing body shall start meeting to discuss mitigation updates at least six months prior to the deadline for completing the plan review. The persons overseeing the evaluation process will review the goals and objectives of the previous plan and evaluate them to determine whether they are still pertinent and current. Among other questions, they may want to consider the following: Do the goals and objectives address current and expected conditions? If any of the recommended projects have been completed, did they have the desired impact on the goal for which they were identified? If not, what was the reason it was not successful (lack of funds/resources, lack of political/popular support, underestimation of the amount of time needed, etc.)? Has the nature, magnitude, and/or type of risks changed? Are there implementation problems? Are current resources appropriate to implement the plan? Were the outcomes as expected? Did the plan partners participate as originally planned? Are there other agencies which should be included in the revision process? Worksheets in Appendix D may also be used to assist with plan updates. Warren County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan