DOCSLIB.ORG

Fayette County, Alabama Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan I

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fayette County, Alabama Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2014 Fayette County, Alabama Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan I. Comprehensive Plan A multi-jurisdiction plan Town of Belk Town of Berry City of Fayette Town of Glen Allen Fayette County Cover photo by James Sanders of EF-1 tornado damage in Fayette County on April 28, 2014 with underground safe room in foreground. Prepared under the direction of the Fayette County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee With the support of the Fayette County EMA by: Funding provided by the Alabama EMA through the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Program February 4, 2015 2014 Fayette County, Alabama, Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Town of Belk, Town of Berry, City of Fayette, Town of Glen Allen, and Fayette County Fayette County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee James Sanders, Fayette County EMA Director John Ray Gordon, Fayette County Commission Treasa Blake, Fayette County 911 Tony Ellis, Chief, Fayette Fire Department Jason Cowart, Director, Fayette County DHR Dewayne Roby, City Eng/Bldg Inspector, City of Fayette Wade Shipman, Superintendent, Fayette County BOE Gerald Dedeaux, Town of Berry Ronald Stouch, Fayette Police Department Marie McClurky, Town of Berry Allen J. Dunavant, Town of Glen Allen Contacts James Sanders James E. Lehe, AICP Director Manager Fayette County EMA Lehe Planning, LLC http://www.fcema.org/ leheplanning.com 118 First Avenue, NE 300 Century Park S, Suite 216 Fayette, AL 35555 Birmingham, AL 35226 205-932-6113 205-978-3633 [email protected] [email protected] The preparation and publication of this plan was funded in part by a FEMA grant under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program awarded by the Alabama EMA to the Fayette County Commission. Copyright © 2015 by Lehe Planning, LLC. All Rights Reserved. This document contains proprietary materials and methods copyrighted by Lehe Planning, LLC. Permission is granted to the Fayette County Emergency Management Agency (EMA) for its internal use. Use by anyone other than the Fayette County EMA requires the express written permission of Lehe Planning, LLC. You may not copy, modify, publicly display, distribute, reverse engineer, or incorporate into your products or services this document (or any of the information or data structures contained herein) without the express written authorization of Lehe Planning, LLC. February 4, 2015 CONTENTS 2014 Fayette County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Contents Volume I. Comprehensive Plan Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... ix Chapter 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Background ................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Authority ........................................................................................................ 1-1 1.3 Funding ......................................................................................................... 1-2 1.4 Eligibility for FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance Grants .............................. 1-2 1.5 Fayette County Hazard Mitigation Plan (2005) .............................................. 1-4 1.6 Fayette County Hazard Mitigation Plan 2009 Plan Update ............................ 1-4 1.7 The 2014 Fayette Co. Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update .......................... 1-4 Chapter 2 Prerequisites………………………………………………………………… ................ 2-1 2.1 Federal Prerequisites .................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Plan Approval Required for Mitigation Grants Eligibility ................................. 2-1 2.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Participation .................................................................... 2-2 2.4 Multi-Jurisdictional Plan Adoption .................................................................. 2-3 Chapter 3 Community Profiles ............................................................................................. 3-1 3.1 Federal Advisory Guidance for Community Profiles....................................... 3-1 3.2 Summary of Plan Updates ............................................................................. 3-1 3.3 Geographic Setting and History ..................................................................... 3-2 3.4 Government .................................................................................................. 3-4 3.5 Physical Features .......................................................................................... 3-5 3.6 Climate .......................................................................................................... 3-7 3.7 Demographics ............................................................................................... 3-7 3.8 Economy ..................................................................................................... 3-13 3.9 Utilities ........................................................................................................ 3-17 3.10 Media .......................................................................................................... 3-18 3.11 Transportation ............................................................................................. 3-18 Chapter 4 The Planning Process.......................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 Federal Requirements for the Planning Process ........................................... 4-1 4.2 Summary of Plan Updates ............................................................................. 4-2 4.3 Opportunities for Public Comment on the Plan .............................................. 4-2 4.4 Opportunities for Involvement in the Planning Process .................................. 4-4 4.5 Review and Incorporation of Applicable Plans and Documents ..................... 4-5 4.6 How the Plan was Prepared .......................................................................... 4-5 4.7 Who was Involved in the Planning Process ................................................... 4-6 4.7.1 The Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee ....................................... 4-6 4.7.2 The Guidelines of the Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee............ 4-7 4.7.3 Preparation of the Plan Update .......................................................... 4-7 4.8 How the Public was Involved in the Planning Process ................................... 4-7 4.9 The Plan Review and Update Process .......................................................... 4-8 Chapter 5 Risk Assessment ................................................................................................. 5-1 5.1 Federal Requirements for Risk Assessments ................................................ 5-1 i CONTENTS 2014 Fayette County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan 5.2 Summary of Plan Updates ............................................................................. 5-2 5.3 Identification and Description of Hazards ...................................................... 5-2 5.3.1 Types of Hazards ............................................................................... 5-2 5.3.2 Sources for Identifying Fayette County Hazards ................................ 5-5 5.4 Hazard Profiles .............................................................................................. 5-8 5.4.1 Severe Storms Profile ........................................................................ 5-8 5.4.2 Tornadoes Profile ............................................................................ 5-12 5.4.3 Floods Profile ................................................................................... 5-19 5.4.4 Droughts/Heat Waves Profile ........................................................... 5-22 5.4.5 Winter Storms/Freezes Profile ......................................................... 5-24 5.4.6 Hurricanes Profile ............................................................................ 5-30 5.4.7 Sinkholes (Land Subsidence) Profile ............................................... 5-34 5.4.8 Landslides Profile ............................................................................ 5-39 5.4.9 Earthquakes Profile ......................................................................... 5-42 5.4.10 Wildfires Profile ................................................................................ 5-49 5.4.11 Dam/Levee Failures Profile .............................................................. 5-58 5.4.12 Man-Made and Technological Hazards Profile ................................. 5-61 5.5 Vulnerability of Structures within Each Jurisdiction ...................................... 5-64 5.5.1 Scope of Structure Inventory ............................................................. 5-64 5.5.2 Inventory Methodology ...................................................................... 5-64 5.5.3 HAZUS-MH Structure Inventory ........................................................ 5-67 5.5.4 Existing and Future Structure Vulnerabilities by Hazard .................... 5-70 5.6 Estimate of Dollar Losses to Vulnerable Structures ..................................... 5-91 5.6.1 Scope and Purpose of Loss Estimates .............................................. 5-91 5.6.2 Loss Estimate Methodology .............................................................. 5-91 5.6.3 HAZUS-MH Loss Estimates .............................................................. 5-92 5.6.4 Loss Estimates Based
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FINAL Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
    FINAL Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) For Organic Enrichment & Dissolved Oxygen Tombigbee River (Aliceville Reservoir) AL/03160106-0402-102 Pickens County, Alabama Prepared by: US EPA Region 4 61 Forsyth Street SW Atlanta, Georgia 30303 October 2008 Tombigbee River (Aliceville Reservoir) FINAL – Organic Enrichment/Dissolved Oxygen Table of Contents List of Figures .............................................................................................................. iv List of Tables ................................................................................................................ iv List of Abbreviations..................................................................................................... v 1.0 Executive Summary.................................................................................... 1 2.0 Basis for the §303(d) Listing...................................................................... 4 3.0 Technical Basis for TMDL Development................................................... 7 3.1 Applicable Water Quality Criterion....................................................................... 7 3.2 Source Assessment.................................................................................................... 7 3.2.1 Nonpoint Sources........................................................................................................ 9 3.2.2 Point Sources............................................................................................................ 10 3.3 Data Availability
    [Show full text]
  • By Larry J. Slack and Elizabeth A. Meadows U.S. GEOLOGICAL
    CURRENT WATER RESOURCES ACTIVITIES IN ALABAMA, FISCAL YEAR 1986 By Larry J. Slack and Elizabeth A. Meadows U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Open-File Report 86-131 Tuscaloosa, Alabama 1986 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DONALD PAUL HODEL, Secretary GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Dallas L. Peck, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey Op<m-File Services Section 520 19th Avenue Western Distribution Branch Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35401 U.!3. Geological Survey Box 25425, Federal Center Denver, Colorado 80225 CONTENTS Page Abstract............................................................. 1 Introduction......................................................... 1 Responsibilities and objectives of the U.S. Geological Survey........ 2 Organization of the U.S. Geological Survey........................... 3 Organization of the Alabama District................................. 3 District Chief's Office.......................................... 3 Functions and responsibilities............................... 3 Administrative services section.................................. 4 Functions and responsibilities............................... 4 Computer Services Section........................................ 4 Functions and responsibilities............................... 4 Hydrologic surveillance section.................................. 4 Functions and responsibilities............................... 4 Field headquarters - Cullman................................. 5 Functions and
    [Show full text]
  • Flood Insurance Study Number 28087Cv000a
    LOWNDES COUNTY, LOWNDES MISSISSIPPI COUNTY AND INCORPORATED AREAS Community Community Name Number ARTESIA, TOWN OF 280310 CALEDOINIA, TOWN OF 280347 COLUMBUS, CITY OF 280108 CRAWFORD, TOWN OF* 280346 LOWNDES COUNTY 280193 (UNINCORPORATED AREAS) * Non-floodprone community EFFECTIVE Month Day, 2010 Federal Emergency Management Agency FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY NUMBER 28087CV000A NOTICE TO FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY USERS Communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) have established repositories of flood hazard data for floodplain management and flood insurance purposes. This Flood Insurance Study (FIS) may not contain all data available within the repository. It is advisable to contact the community repository for any additional data. Part or all of this FIS may be revised and republished at any time. In addition, part of this FIS may be revised by the Letter of Map Revision process, which does not involve republication or redistribution of the FIS. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the user to consult with community officials and to check the community repository to obtain the most current FIS components. Initial Countywide FIS Effective Date: September 7, 1998 First Revised Countywide FIS Revision Date: To Be Determined TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose of Study ....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C: Status and Life History of the Eight Assessed Mussels
    Appendix C: Status and Life History of the Eight Assessed Mussels General information on the habitat requirements, designated critical habitat, food habits, growth and longevity, reproduction, and past and current threats of eight assessed mussels is provided below in Section C.1. Species-specific information for the following eight assessed mussels is provided in Sections C.2 through C.9: • Pink mucket pearly mussel • Rough pigtoe mussel • Shiny pigtoe pearly mussel • Fine-rayed pigtoe mussel • Heavy pigtoe mussel • Ovate clubshell mussel • Southern clubshell mussel • Stirrupshell mussel C.1 General Information C.1.1 Habitat Adult mussels are usually found in localized stream patches (beds) almost completely burrowed in the substrate with only the area around the siphons exposed (Balfour and Smock, 1995). The composition and abundance of mussels are directly linked to bed sediment distributions (Neves and Widlak, 1987; Leff et al., 1990) and physical qualities of the sediments (e.g., texture, particle size) may be important in allowing the mussels to firmly burrow in the substrate (Lewis and Riebel, 1984). In addition, other aspects of substrate composition, including bulk density (mass/volume), porosity (ratio of void space to volume), sediment sorting, and the percentage of fine sediments, may also influence mussel densities (Brim Box, 1999; Brim Box and Mossa, 1999). According to Huehner (1987), water velocity may be a better predictor than substrate for determining where certain mussel species are found in streams. In general, heavy-shelled species occur in stream channels with stronger currents, while thin-shelled species occur in more backwater areas. Stream geomorphic and substrate stability is especially crucial for the maintenance of diverse, viable mussel beds (Vannote and Minshall, 1982; Hartfield, 1993; Di Maio and Corkum, 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service
    Thursday, July 1, 2004 Part III Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Three Threatened Mussels and Eight Endangered Mussels in the Mobile River Basin; Final Rule VerDate jul<14>2003 17:10 Jun 30, 2004 Jkt 203001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\01JYR3.SGM 01JYR3 40084 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 126 / Thursday, July 1, 2004 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR or from our Web site at http:// the habitat needs of all 1,244 listed southeast.fws.gov/hotissue. species through conservation Fish and Wildlife Service If you would like copies of the mechanisms such as listing, section 7 regulations on listed wildlife or have consultations, the section 4 recovery 50 CFR Part 17 questions about prohibitions and planning process, the section 9 permits, please contact the appropriate protective prohibitions of unauthorized RIN 1018–AI73 State Ecological Services Field Office: take, section 6 funding to the States, and Alabama Field Office, U.S. Fish and the section 10 incidental take permit Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Wildlife Service, PO Box 1190, Daphne, process. The Service believes it is these and Plants; Designation of Critical AL 36526 (telephone 251–441–5181); measures that may make the difference Habitat for Three Threatened Mussels Georgia Field Office, USFWS, 247 South between extinction and survival for and Eight Endangered Mussels in the Milledge Ave., Athens, GA 30605 (706– many species. Mobile River Basin 613–9493); Mississippi Field Office (see Procedural and Resource Difficulties in ADDRESSES section above); Tennessee AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Designating Critical Habitat Field Office, USFWS, 446 Neal Street, Interior.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogeology and Ground-Water Quality in the Black Belt Area of West-Central Alabama, And
    HYDROGEOLOGY AND GROUND-WATER QUALITY IN THE BLACK BELT AREA OF WEST-CENTRAL ALABAMA, AND ESTIMATED WATER USE FOR AQUACULTURE, 1990 By Robert E. Kidd and Darrell S. Lambeth U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Water-Resources Investigations Report 94-4074 Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SOIL AND CONSERVATION SERVICE and the ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY AFFAIRS Tuscaloosa, Alabama 1995 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY GORDON P. EATON, Director For additional information write to: Copies of this report can be purchased from: District Chief U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Geological Survey Earth Science Information Center 520 19th Avenue Open-File Reports Section Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35401 Box 25286, MS 517, Federal Center Denver, Colorado 80225 CONTENTS Abstract.................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction............................................................................................................................ 2 Description of the study area........................................................................................ 2 Methods of study........................................................................................................... 5 Previous investigations................................................................................................. 5 Acknowledgments........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Tombigbee River and Tributaries, Luxapalila Creek Segment, Alabama and Mississippi
    FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT. TOMBIGBEE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES LUXAPALILA CREEK SEGMENT, ALABAMA AND MISSISSIPPI Prepared by U. S. Army Engineer District, Mobile , December 1974. SUMMARY Tombigbee River and Tributaries, Luxapalila Creek Segment, Alabama and Mississippi □ Draft Final Environmental Statement Responsible Office: District Engineer, U. S. Army Engineer District, P. 0. Box 2288, Mobile, Alabama 36628, 205-690-2511 1. Name of Action: Administrative £ J Legislative 2. Description of Action: The proposed flood control work on Luxapalila Creek analyzed in this environmental statement involves channel excavation and the clearing of the banks along a total of 19.9 miles of Luxapalila Creek beginning at the mouth, representing a reduction of 6.3 miles in the natural channel mileage of 26.2. Work on the lowermost 2.1 miles has already been completed. The lower 15.2 miles of construction would be in Lowndes County, Mississippi, and the upper 4.7 miles in Lamar County, Alabama. A total of 1,258 acres would be cleared, which would consist of the removal of all growth except selected trees, from a strip 300 feet to 900 feet in width. All snags, drift, and other debris would also be removed from the channel. The work consists of 6.6 miles of new channel and 13.3 miles of channel enlargement. The excavated material would be placed in mounds intermittently along both banks of the modified channel at least 25 feet from the top of the cut slope. No excavated material would be placed across the mouths of tributary streams entering the channel, and frequent gaps would be left in the mounds to provide for lateral drainage and prevent local ponding along the stream.
    [Show full text]