2015 All-Hazards Mitigation Plan Update Kent County, Delaware Prepared for: Prepared by: Kent County Department of Public Safety Vision Planning and Consulting, LLC Emergency Management Division 7572 Morris Street 911 Public Safety Boulevard Fulton, MD 20759 Dover, DE 19901 May 2015 T A B L E O F C ONTENTS 1. I NTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Background 1 1.3 Purpose 3 1.4 Scope 4 1.5 Authority 5 1.6 Organization of the Plan 5 2. P L A N N I N G P ROCESS 2.1 Plan Update Summary 6 2.2 Overview of Hazard Mitigation Planning 6 2.3 Preparing the Plan Update 6 2.4 Hazard Mitigation Steering Committee 8 2.5 Community Meetings and Workshops 9 2.6 Involving the Public 11 2.7 Involving Stakeholders 12 2.8 Multi-jurisdictional Participation 15 3. C O M M U N I T Y P ROFILE 3.1 Introduction 18 3.2 Geography and the Environment 18 3.3 Population and Demographics 19 3.4 Housing, Infrastructure and Land Use 21 3.5 Land Use Development Trends 22 3.6 Employment and Industry 23 3.7 Disaster Declarations 24 4 . 1 H AZARD IDENTIFICATION 4.1.1 Introduction 26 4.1.2 Flood 27 T A B L E O F C ONTENTS 4.1.3 Hurricanes and Coastal Storms 29 4.1.4 Severe Thunderstorms and Tornadoes 33 4.1.5 Wildfire 39 4.1.6 Drought/Extreme Heat 40 4.1.7 Hail 42 4.1.8 Winter Storms and Freezes 43 4.1.9 Erosion 43 4.1.10 Dam/Levee Failure 44 4.1.11 Earthquakes, Sinkholes and Landslides 45 4.1.12 Tsunami 51 4.1.13 Volcanoes 52 4.1.14 Terrorism 53 4.1.15 Contamination 53 4.1.16 Energy Release 54 4.1.17 Disruption of Service 54 4.1.18 Weapons of Mass Destruction 54 4.1.19 Hazardous Materials (HazMat) 55 4.1.20 Energy Pipeline Failure 55 4 . 2 H A Z A R D A NALYSIS 4.2.1 Introduction 58 4.2.2 Flood 59 4.2.3 Hurricanes and Tropical Storms 62 4.2.4 Thunderstorms 69 4.2.5 Tornadoes 77 4.2.6 Wildfire 80 4.2.7 Drought 80 4.2.8 Extreme Temperature 80 4.2.9 Hail 84 4.2.10 Winter Storms 84 4.2.11 Coastal Erosion 90 4.2.12 Dam/Levee Failure 91 4.2.13 Earthquakes 92 T A B L E O F C ONTENTS 4.2.14 Landslides and Sinkholes 94 4.2.15 Tsunami 94 4.2.16 Volcanoes 94 4.2.17 Terrorism 94 4.2.18 Hazardous Materials (HazMat) 95 4.2.19 Energy Pipeline Failure 95 4.2.20 Probability of Future Events in Kent County 95 4 . 3 V ULNERABILITY A SSESSMENT 4.3.1 Introduction 98 4.3.2 Explanation of HAZUS-MH Risk Assessment Methodology 98 4.3.3 Explanation of Regional Vulnerability Assessment Methodology 99 4.3.4 County Overview 102 4.3.5 Flood 104 4.3.6 Coastal Winds 112 4.3.7 Severe Thunderstorm/Wind 115 4.3.8 Tornado 118 4.3.9 Drought 121 4.3.10 Hail 121 4.3.11 Winter Storms 124 4.3.12 Earthquake 126 4.3.13 Dam/ Levee Failure 129 4.3.14 Weapons of Mass Destruction 131 4.3.15 Energy Pipelines 136 4.3.16 Hazardous Materials 138 4.3.17 Other Hazards 140 4.3.18 Conclusions on Hazard Risk 140 5. C A P A B I L I T Y A SSESSMENT 5.1 Plan Update Summary 143 5.2 What is a Municipal Capability Assessment? 143 5.3 Capability Assessment Update 144 T A B L E O F C ONTENTS 5.4 Capability Assessment Findings 144 5.5 Conclusions on Local Capability 160 5.6 Document Review 163 6 . 1 M I T I G A T I O N S TRATEGY 6.1.1 Plan Update Summary 171 6.1.2 Introduction 171 6.1.3 Planning Approach 171 6.1.4 Mitigation Goals 172 6.1.5 Identification and Analysis of Mitigation Measures 173 6.1.6 Mitigation Techniques in the Kent County Planning Area 175 6 . 2 L OCALLY - S P E C I F I C M I T I G A T I O N A CTIONS 6.2.1 Introduction 178 6.2.2 The Cost-Benefit Review and Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) 178 6.2.3 Mitigation Action Plan 187 6.2.4 Prioritization 240 7. P L A N M AINTENANCE P ROCEDURES 7.1 Introduction 249 7.2 Implementation 249 7.3 Evaluation and Enhancement 250 7.4 Continued Public Involvement 252 8 . A PPENDIX 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction In an effort to reduce the Nation's mounting natural disaster losses, the United States Congress passed the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) to provide new and revitalized approaches to mitigation planning. Section 322 of DMA 2000 emphasizes the need for state and local entities to closely coordinate mitigation planning and makes the development of a hazard mitigation plan a specific eligibility requirement for any local government applying for Federal mitigation grant funds. These funds include the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and the Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program, both of which are administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Communities with an adopted and Federally approved hazard mitigation plan thereby become pre-positioned and more apt to receive available mitigation funds before and after the next disaster strikes. This 2015 Plan Update is conducted in coordination with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Delaware Emergency Management Agency (DEMA) to ensure that it meets all applicable DMA 2000 planning requirements. A Local Mitigation Plan Review Tool, included in the Plan Update, provides a summary of FEMA’s current minimum standards of acceptability and notes the location within the Plan where each planning requirement is met. This Chapter provides a general introduction to the 2015 Kent County Multi-jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update. It is comprised of the following sections: Background, Purpose, Scope, Authority, and Organization of the Plan. 1.2 Background The occurrence of natural hazards, such as floods, tornadoes and severe winter storms is inevitable, and while there is little that can be done to control their force and intensity, a lot can be done to be better prepared to face these hazards. Kent County is vulnerable to a wide range of natural hazards, including flooding, drought, tropical storms and hurricanes, and winter storms. It is also vulnerable to a variety of human-caused hazards, including chemical releases, spills or explosions associated with the fixed storage or mobile transport of hazardous materials. These hazards threaten the life and safety of county residents, and have the potential to damage or destroy both public and private property and disrupt the local economy and overall quality of life. While the threat from hazardous events can never be fully eliminated, there is much we can do to lessen their potential impact upon our community and our citizens. By minimizing the impact of hazards upon our built environment, we can prevent such events from resulting in disasters. The concept and practice of reducing risks to people and property from known hazards is generally referred to as hazard mitigation. Chapter 1: Page 1 I NTRODUCTION 2015 K ENT C OUNTY H A Z A R D M I T I G A T I O N P LAN U PDATE Hazard Mitigation is defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as “sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from hazards and their effects”. The hazard mitigation planning process involves the coordination of actions taken to reduce injuries, deaths, property damage, economic losses, and degradation of natural resources caused by natural and man-made disasters. Hazard mitigation is considered one of four phases in the emergency management cycle. Others include: emergency preparedness, emergency response, and recovery. Hazard mitigation activities involve actions that reduce or eliminate the probability of an occurrence or reduce the impact of a disaster. The goal of the mitigation phase is to make communities more resistant to disasters and thereby decrease the need for a response. Mitigation occurs long before a disaster. Preparedness activities include planning and preparing for when a disaster strikes and includes response capability actions to ensure an effective and efficient use of resources and efforts to minimize damage. Preparedness occurs just before a disaster. Emergency response activities include providing emergency assistance to victims and minimizing property loss. The response phase begins during or immediately after the onset of a disaster. Recovery activities include short and long-term projects that help return individuals and communities to normalcy as soon as possible. Recovery actions involve clean-up efforts, temporary housing, and replacement of infrastructure. Recovery activities typically commence several days or weeks after a disaster and are long-term. Hazard mitigation techniques include both structural measures, such as strengthening or protecting buildings and infrastructure from the destructive forces of potential hazards, and non-structural measures, such as the adoption of sound land use policies and the creation of public awareness programs. It is widely accepted that the most effective mitigation measures are implemented at the local government level, where decisions on the regulation and control of development are ultimately made. A comprehensive mitigation approach addresses hazard vulnerabilities that exist today and in the foreseeable future.