Contents SECTION I - PLAN SUMMARY ...... 6 Planning Authority and Guidance ...... 6 Goals of the All Hazard Mitigation Plan ...... 6 Relationship to Emergency Operations Plan ...... 7 Relationship to Comprehensive Plans and Capital Improvement Plans ...... 7 Plan Scope and Adoption ...... 8 Organization of the Plan ...... 8 SECTION II – COMMUNITY PROFILE ...... 10 General County Overview ...... 10 Historical Setting ...... 10 Physical Characteristics of Olmsted County ...... 13 Climate ...... 13 Annual Climate ...... 13 Seasonal Variations ...... 14 Winter Weather ...... 14 Spring Weather ...... 15 Summer Weather ...... 15 Fall Weather ...... 15 Geology ...... 17 Karst Geology ...... 17 Bedrock Geology ...... 19 Depth to Bedrock ...... 20 Hydrology ...... 22 Topography ...... 24 Soils...... 26 Land Cover ...... 29 Future Land Use ...... 30 SECTION III – COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE ...... 33 Water Supply ...... 33 Wastewater Treatment ...... 33 Transportation ...... 34

Olmsted County, MN Page 2

Electrical Service, Production and Transmission ...... 36 Telecommunications ...... 38 Pipelines ...... 40 SECTION IV – POPULATION TRENDS ...... 41 Population Density ...... 41 Aging Population...... 47 Vulnerable Populations ...... 47 Youth ...... 48 Child Care Facilities...... 48 Aged ...... 48 Nursing Homes ...... 49 Infirmed or Special Needs ...... 49 Non-English Speaking Population ...... 50 Transient Populations ...... 50 SECTION V – PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE CAPABILITIES 53 Medical Facilities ...... 53 Fire Services ...... 54 Law Enforcement ...... 56 Emergency Warning System and Emergency Operations Center ...... 57 Heavy Equipment Inventory ...... 58 Temporary Shelters ...... 59 SECTION VI- HAZARDS FACING THE COUNTY ...... 62 Natural Hazards ...... 62 Drought ...... 62 Earthquakes ...... 65 Extreme Temperatures ...... 68 Floods ...... 71 KARST – Subsidence and Landslides ...... 81 Severe Storms ...... 84 Thunderstorms ...... 84 Lightning ...... 84 Hail ...... 85 Windstorms ...... 85 Tornadoes ...... 86 Snow and Ice ...... 89

Olmsted County, MN Page 3

Wildfire ...... 91 Technological Hazards ...... 94 Fire ...... 94 Hazardous Materials/Waste ...... 96 Dam Failure ...... 101 Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment ...... 103 Water Supply ...... 103 Wastewater Treatment ...... 106 Terrorism ...... 107 Infectious Diseases ...... 110 SECTION VII – RISK ASSESSMENT ...... 118 SECTION VIII – MITIGATION STRATEGIES ...... 123 General Planning/Communications Strategies ...... 125 Drought ...... 127 Extreme Temperatures ...... 128 Flooding ...... 129 Landslides/Karst ...... 131 Violent Storms ...... 132 Wildfires ...... 133 Fire (building, vehicle) ...... 134 Hazardous Waste/Materials ...... 135 Dam Failure ...... 136 Water Supply ...... 137 Waste Water Treatment ...... 138 Infectious Disease ...... 139 SECTION IX – PLANNING PROCESS ...... 142 Planning Approach and Public Participation ...... 142 Plan Adoption ...... 142 Plan Implementation ...... 143 Plan Evaluation ...... 144 Mitigation Plan Updating ...... 144 APPENDICES ...... 146 APPENDIX 1 ...... 147 APPENDIX 2 ...... 150 APPENDIX 3 ...... 153

Olmsted County, MN Page 4

APPENDIX 4 ...... 161 APPENDIX 5 ...... 165 APPENDIX 6 ...... 170 APPENDIX 7 ...... 172 APPENDIX 8 ...... 173 APPENDIX 9 ...... 175

Olmsted County, MN Page 5

SECTION I - PLAN SUMMARY

Planning Authority and Guidance

This plan has been prepared in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 104 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000), Public Law 106-390, codified at 42 USC Sections 5121 et seq. Hazard Mitigation Planning, 44 CFR Part 201, established criteria for State and local hazard mitigation planning as authorized by DMA 2000.

The Minnesota Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (MN HSEM) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency provided guidance documents and other resources that were instructive in establishing the planning process, the plan scope and content, and assessment methods.

This plan has been prepared under the direction of the Olmsted County Board of Commissioners.

Goals of the All Hazard Mitigation Plan

The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 states that,

“The goal of hazard mitigation is to eliminate or reduce vulnerability to significant damage and/or repetitive damage from one or more hazards.”

A hazard is described as “an act or phenomenon that has the potential to produce harm or other undesirable consequences to persons, structures, or infrastructure”. The hazard can be a local phenomenon or it can be multi-jurisdictional in nature, regional, or statewide. This plan focuses on those hazards that may affect persons, structures, or infrastructure within Olmsted County.

The purpose of the Olmsted County All Hazard Mitigation Plan is to identify and develop a long term view of natural and human–caused hazards and to identify strategies to reduce or eliminate the loss of life and damage to property and infrastructure in Olmsted County. The proposed goals of this plan are:

1. To protect lives and property within all of Olmsted County. 2. To develop a comprehensive list of hazards identified by the county and an understanding of the impact and strategies that are currently applied, and to develop new strategies where feasible. 3. To reduce economic losses to residents, businesses, and government. 4. To identify appropriate natural resource management and pollution prevention strategies where needed. 5. To create public awareness of the plan and also of the need for and opportunities for hazard mitigation as the county grows. 6. To protect emergency response personnel and resources. Olmsted County, MN Page 6

7. To provide basic information to the public and private entities on resources, strategies, and opportunities that will assist in plan implementation. 8. Meet the requirements established by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, and to eliminate or reduce vulnerability to significant or repetitive damage from one or more hazards determined to have potential in Olmsted County, Minnesota.

Relationship to Emergency Operations Plan

Olmsted County prepared an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP), last updated in 2005, as part of its overall preparedness strategy. Individual cities have also prepared and adopted plans in the past and will need to update their plans. The Olmsted County EOP addresses response training and all aspects of response from an actual disaster event in the future. The All-Hazard Mitigation Plan is complementary to the EOP and seeks to reduce hazard risks and impacts on a pre-event basis, through:

Structural hazard control or protection measures; Retrofitting of facilities; Acquisition and relocation of repetitive loss structures; Development of mitigation standards, regulations, policies, and programs; Review, updating, and enforcement of building codes; Public awareness and education programs; Development or improvement of warning systems.

Other emergency response plans have been developed that address health concerns, wellhead protection, and the operations of the dams and reservoirs in the county. These plans are periodically reviewed and updated as required by state or federal law, or by policies set by the community. Relationship to Comprehensive Plans and Capital Improvement Plans

Olmsted County and every city have prepared comprehensive land use plans over the past 25 years. The plans have been updated at various times since the 1980’s. Olmsted County through the Rochester Council of Governments has prepared and updated the ROCOG Transportation Plan on a five year basis. Capital Improvement Programs are updated annually by each jurisdiction.

The plans listed in the appendix are updated as required by state or federal rules, or as the need arises for local plans such as the comprehensive land use plans. Implementation measures such as zoning and subdivision ordinances are amended as needed by each city or other political jurisdiction.

Some of the hazards identified in this plan are addressed in existing capital improvement programs and planning documents for Olmsted County and/or each city. For example, floodplain and stormwater hazards are addressed in each comprehensive land use plan and zoning ordinance within the county. Building codes are applied by all jurisdictions in the county. These and other ordinances, programs (state, federal and local), and public investment in infrastructure are available to the county and cities for implementation of the mitigation strategies identified in this plan.

Olmsted County, MN Page 7

Plan Scope and Adoption

The plan is prepared under the auspices of the Olmsted County Board of Commissioners and is considered a multi-jurisdictional plan. The plan will cover the unincorporated areas of Olmsted County, the townships, and cities within the county. Local units of government have been involved in the planning process.

Olmsted County has sought the approval and adoption of the plan by all of the cities within Olmsted County including:

Byron Chatfield Dover Eyota Oronoco Pine Island Rochester Stewartville

Organization of the Plan

Plan Summary: This section identifies the authority, scope, goals, and organization of the plan document.

Community Profile: These sections of the plan provide a general overview of the physical, social, economic, demographic, and governmental characteristics of Olmsted County.

Hazards Facing the Community: Descriptions of natural and technological hazards are provided in this section of the plan. These hazards are modeled after the Minnesota All Hazard Mitigation Plan elements and documents the potential localized impacts of these hazards. The hazards establish the basis for the risk assessment in the following section of the plan.

Risk Assessment: This section describes the vulnerabilities of the county to potential hazards. It is the source of establishing future mitigation efforts.

Mitigation Strategies: The tables within this section list possible hazard mitigation strategies, their priority, and the lead agency and possible funding source for the strategy.

Planning Process: This section explains the planning process used to develop the plan and plan implementation, evaluation, and updating.

Appendices: Provides background information and resources pertinent to the various sections of the plan.

Olmsted County, MN Page 8

Maps: Numerous maps are included within this plan that provide additional information and/or help explain information or data used in the analysis of community hazards and vulnerability. Maps were obtained from:

1. state or federal government sources, 2. studies or data sources generated specifically for Olmsted County and/or individual communities, 3. data generated by Olmsted County and individual cities.

The maps available to Olmsted County from the second and third sources listed above are updated when new data becomes available or new maps are generated through community adoption. These maps represent data that is available to the county and others for use in a variety of ways including immediate use in the revisions to the Emergency Operations Plan, in direct response to an emergency, or in an update to this plan.

Olmsted County, MN Page 9

SECTION II – COMMUNITY PROFILE

General County Overview

Olmsted County is located in Southeastern Minnesota, approximately 70 miles southeast of the Minneapolis – Saint Paul metropolitan area via TH 52, 30 miles west of the Mississippi River, and 36 miles north of the Iowa border. Olmsted County is the eighth most populous county in Minnesota, with an estimated population of 139,418 in 2007. Most of the county population, approximately 81%, is concentrated in the center of the county where the City of Rochester is located and the five unincorporated adjacent townships. The county contains 18 unincorporated townships, seven incorporated cities in addition to Rochester- they are Byron, Chatfield (part also in Fillmore County), Dover, Eyota, Pine Island (part in Goodhue County), Oronoco and Stewartville. Approximately 66 square miles, or 10% of the area, of the county is in incorporated areas.

Historical Setting

Olmsted County lies within the Mississippi River watershed just one county west of the Mississippi. Three different sub-watersheds are found in the county- the north flowing Zumbro River, the northeasterly flowing Whitewater River and the easterly flowing Root River. The county’s development and history have been greatly influenced by its proximity to these rivers.

Olmsted County is part of the Upper Mississippi lands inhabited at the time of European settlement by the Dakota, Ojibway and Winnebago Native American tribes. The area of Olmsted County was part of the Louisiana Purchase acquired from France in 1803. In 1849, the Minnesota Territory was established by the federal government. It is suggested that the first European settler in the area was Hirman Thompson who staked a land claim near the now City of Dover in 1853. On July 12, 1854 George Head and his family laid claim to lands that would become a part of the downtown of Rochester. When George Head arrived, his property was at the crossroads camping spot for wagon trains rolling into the area. Within 2 years the village that became Rochester had 50 inhabitants and in two more years more than 1,500 people populated the spot.

On February 20, 1855, the Territorial Legislators created the 660 square mile Olmsted County out of land that was then part of Winona, Fillmore and Wabasha counties. The Commissioners of Olmsted County met for the first time later that year in the village of Oronoco. Olmsted County is named for David Olmsted who first came to the Minnesota area in 1848, was elected to the Territorial Legislature and in 1854 became the first Mayor of Saint Paul and never lived in Olmsted County. Olmsted County became a part of the State of Minnesota when it entered the Union on May 11, 1858.

In 1863, Dr. William Worrall Mayo came to Olmsted County as a Civil War draft examining surgeon; he stayed and took up life as a country doctor. Mayo had two sons, Will and Charles. A devastating

Olmsted County, MN Page 10

tornado ripped through Rochester in 1883, killing 26 people and injuring many more. Dr. Mayo and his sons attended to the injured but with inadequate hospital facilities. After the tornado, The Sisters of Saint Francis in Rochester proposed building a proper hospital to meet the needs of the people of southeastern Minnesota. They offered to build a hospital on the condition that W.W. Mayo and his sons staff the facility. Mayo agreed, and in 1889 Saint Mary’s Hospital opened.

Olmsted County continued to grow, with Rochester as the county seat, based on a strong agricultural, medical, hospitality and commercial economy. In 1956, IBM president Thomas Watson Jr. announced plans to build a manufacturing, engineering and educational facility on 397 acre site in Rochester. IBM grew as a company world-wide and in Rochester and changed the face of the local economy by bringing Rochester into the high-tech arena before many other parts of the country.

A second natural catastrophe changed the physical appearance of Rochester. A flashflood in July of 1978 on the small streams such as Bear Creek/Badger Run, Willow Creek, Silver Creek and to a lesser extent Cascade Creek caused the South Fork of the Zumbro River in Rochester to crest at a record height of 23.36 feet. Over a third of the area of Rochester was affected by this flood. The 1978 flood became a catalyst for renewed efforts to construct a flood control project to protect property along the streams and river. Federal assistance was received and the U.S. Corp of Engineers designed a channelization project and the NRCS (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) laid out a series of seven flood control dam structures on the tributaries to the Zumbro River in 1976- 77. The project required the acquisition of approximately 2000 homes, businesses or portions thereof in Rochester and 2500 acres of land for the reservoir system. It was completed in 1995 and its long lasting effects, besides flood protection, were the major expansion of a bicycle/pedestrian trail system along the stream corridors and a regional park system at the reservoir sites. The expansion of the trail system continued and still goes on today.

Olmsted County, MN Page 11

Olmsted County, MN Page 12

Physical Characteristics of Olmsted County

Climate

Data for this section was provided by the 2002 Central Region Applied Research Paper 26-04, Rochester, Minnesota Climate, by Todd Rieck of the National Weather Service Forecast Office, LaCrosse, Wisconsin.

Annual Climate

Olmsted County has a “continental” climate; that is, because of the distance from the oceans’ climate- moderating effects, the seasonal temperature variation is quite large. Winters are long and cold, summers are warm. With an average annual temperature of 43.4 °F, July is the warmest month with an average temperature of 70.1 degrees and January is the coldest at 11.8 degrees. The average growing season is about 140 days, sufficient for production of corn, soybeans, small grains, and hay.

Normal Mean Temperature Annual Normal Annual Precipitation

46 45 44 35 43 34 42 33 32 41 31 40 30 29 39 28 38 27 26 37 25 36 24 23 35 22 degrees F 21 20 19 18 inches State Climatology Office - DNR Waters May 2003

State Climatology Office - DNR Waters Annual precipitation in Olmsted County July 2003 averages just over 30 inches per year with almost 70% of this falling from April to August. Annual precipitation has ranged from a maximum of 43.94 inches in 1990 to a minimum of 11.65 inches in 1910.

Average winter snowfall for Olmsted County is 48.1 inches. While measurable snow has been observed from early October to as late as early May, December is, on average, the snowiest month with about 11 inches. The winter of 1996-1997 saw the highest seasonal snowfall with 84.6 inches. Olmsted County, MN Page 13

The snowiest month on record is December of 2000 with 35.3 inches and the snowiest day was January 22, 1982 with 15.4 inches. The least snowfall was recorded for the winter of 1967-1968 with only 9.1 inches falling.

Olmsted County Monthly Average Temperatures, Precipitation (1971-2000) Temperature (°F) Precipitation (Inches) Month Avg. High Avg. Low Avg. Avg. Snowfall January 19.9 3.7 0.94 9.9 February 26.2 10.6 0.75 7.9 March 38.7 22.6 1.88 9.5 April 54.8 34.6 3.01 4.0 May 67.7 46.1 3.53 Trace June 76.6 55.6 4.00 0 July 80.1 60.1 4.61 0 August 77.5 58.0 4.33 0 September 69.2 48.7 3.12 Trace October 56.9 37.1 2.20 0.6 November 38.7 23.7 2.01 5.3 December 24.5 10.1 1.02 10.9

Seasonal Variations

Seasonal changes in Olmsted County are typically sharply defined. They do not correspond very well, however, to either the official “calendar seasons” or the “meteorological seasons” of winter (December through February), spring (March through May), summer (June through August), and fall (September through November). Winter is definitely the longest season of the year, while summer typically lasts longer than either spring or fall.

Seasonal Variation in Temperature, Precipitation – Olmsted County Season Avg. Temperature (°F) Avg. Precipitation (in) Winter 16.4 2.57 Spring 43.7 8.00 Summer 68.7 12.01 Fall 46.7 6.75

Winter Weather

True winter weather in Olmsted County begins in mid to late November and extends into late March. Periods of cold weather are very likely both before and after these dates, but this is when the average temperatures are at or below freezing and most precipitation falls as snow. The majority of midwinter days have highs from the mid-teens to about 30, though Arctic weather patterns may bring days of below zero temperatures. Olmsted County averages 36 nights per winter of zero to below zero temperatures, most occurring in January. Olmsted County, MN Page 14

There are several tracks that winter storms tend to take through Olmsted County. The heaviest snows (6-10 inches) usually fall when low pressure systems develop in the southern plains states and move northeastward. More common are the lows called “Alberta Clippers” that bring lighter, drier snowfalls of 1 to 4 inches with widespread blowing and drifting. Freezing or mixed precipitation, while not a common occurrence, can occur a few times a winter, typically at the beginning or end of the season.

Winter is typically the cloudiest season in Olmsted County, when low clouds hang in the sky for lengthy periods of time. Clear weather is most likely to come with a dry Arctic air mass.

The prevailing winds during most of the winter are from the northwest, with speeds averaging around 13 miles per hour.

Spring Weather

Spring weather normally begins around the end of March, extending into early June. Thus, a typical spring lasts about two months, but may seem much shorter when cold weather lasts until late April and May. While average high temperatures rise from 50 degrees in early April to the lower 70s by the end of May, freezing temperatures are common in early April and significant snows are still possible. Severe thunderstorms become more likely later in the spring when low pressure systems begin to track further to the north of Olmsted County.

On average, spring is the windiest season of the year, largely due to the strong temperature differences at this time of year. April is Olmsted County’s windiest month.

Summer Weather

Olmsted County summers typically last from early June through the first week in September. Summer is characterized by consistently mild to warm temperatures, with an average summer high temperature of about 80 degrees; in fact, a typical Olmsted County summer averages 8 days of temperatures of 90+ degrees. Southerly prevailing winds are much calmer than in spring, with an average speed of 10 mph.

Due to the increased frequency of thunderstorms, summer is generally the wettest season of the year. There are usually 20 days with thunderstorms, with June and July being the most active storm months. Despite this level of precipitation, summer is probably the sunniest season in Olmsted County, with clear to partly cloudy skies 63% of the time compared to 50% the rest of the year.

Fall Weather

The second week in September ushers in fall in Olmsted County, lasting until the first part of November. The average high temperatures drop rapidly from the low 70s in September to 40 degrees in November. In general, the first frost occurs during the end of September to early October.

Olmsted County, MN Page 15

The first snowflakes typically fall in October as does the first measurable snowfall. November sees a greater chance of accumulating snowfalls, with average monthly snowfalls of 5 inches. Wind speeds increase in the fall and change direction from the south to the northwest.

Olmsted County, MN Page 16

Geology

Olmsted County’s bedrock and surficial geology was initially described in the Olmsted County Geologic Atlas (Minnesota Geological Survey, 1988). Various studies by the MGS and Minnesota DNR have served to update some of this data.

Karst Geology

According to the Minnesota Geological Survey, mildly acid groundwater is slowly dissolving the carbonate bedrock that lies beneath Olmsted County, producing distinctive groundwater conditions and landforms called karst. Karst aquifers are very susceptible to groundwater contamination because fractures in the rock and sinkholes become conduits for pollutants from the surface to the groundwater.

As shown on the map above, this susceptibility is increased by the fact that most of Olmsted County has less than 50 feet of unconsolidated cover. The Depth to Bedrock Map that appears in this section will provide more detail for Olmsted County.

According to the Geologic Atlas for Olmsted County (1988) the effects of karst extend over a much greater area than that directly underlain by carbonate rock. Ground water flowing through the karst

Olmsted County, MN Page 17

aquifer eventually moves into lower aquifers and discharges from springs near the bottom of valleys, and into the streams and rivers throughout Olmsted County.

Sinkholes, springs, and stream sinks/sieves are surface manifestations of karst. 2005 MGS data account for 910 known sinkholes, 505 known springs, and 6 known stream sieves. The carbonate rock in various formations is the primary control on sinkhole formation according to the Geologic Atlas. The distribution of sinkholes is strongly influenced by the presence or absence of at least 50 feet of surficial cover over the carbonate rock. Topographic relief, hydrologic gradient, and water table are secondary controls.

In addition to karst features, improperly constructed or sealed wells may also act as direct routes for surface to groundwater contamination. Protection of these sensitive areas is crucial to the County’s health and vitality.

Olmsted County, MN Page 18

Bedrock Geology

The rock formations underlying Olmsted County are the major reservoirs for the county’s water supply. The St. Peter Sandstone, Prairie du Chien Group (Shakopee Formation and Oneota Dolomite), and Jordan Sandstone provide the bulk of the County’s water.

The Decorah – Platteville – Glenwood Formations consist primarily of shale protect these aquifers from surface and upper aquifer contaminants in many parts of the County. In other areas, however, these drinking water aquifers are the first encountered bedrock formations and do not benefit from this natural protection. The Decorah – Platteville – Glenwood Formation where it is the first encountered bedrock is a highly sensitive area throughout Olmsted County. This sequence of formations is 80 feet thick and hydrologically separated, and is considered a confining unit between, the Upper Carbonate aquifer and the underlying St. Peter-Prairie du Chien-Jordan (Middle) aquifer which provides most of the drinking water for the communities in the county.

Not only does this geologic formation protect against the movement of polluted water from the Upper Carbonate aquifer and streams, at its terminus along stream valleys it is an area of concentrated groundwater recharge where approximately 50% of the annual groundwater recharge from the Upper

Olmsted County, MN Page 19

to the Middle aquifer occurs (about 13 inches/year). In addition, recent studies have shown that the contaminate levels of the Upper Carbonate aquifer water is reduced significantly along this Decorah Edge and before it enters the Middle aquifer.

Depth to Bedrock

The report Safe Drinking Water in Minnesota: A Summary of Drinking Water Protection Activities in Minnesota for 2008 states that

“Compared to surface water systems, groundwater systems tend to be less vulnerable to certain types of contamination. Water tends to be naturally filtered as it moves downward through the earth, making its way from the surface to the underground aquifers tapped by water wells. That process tends to remove certain kinds of contaminants, including bacteria and parasites such as Cryptosporidium. For that reason many groundwater systems do not routinely include disinfection as part of their normal water treatment procedures.”

However, most of Olmsted County has 25 feet or less of unconsolidated deposits covering the underlying bedrock. With little soil for contaminants to filter through, these areas may be particularly vulnerable to groundwater degradation especially if the Decorah – Platteville – Glenwood Formation is absent.

Olmsted County, MN Page 20

Sensitivity of the Groundwater System to Pollution

The combination of these and other factors led the MGS to develop a map that describes the sensitivity of the groundwater system to pollution. This sensitivity represents the sensitivity of the first encountered bedrock formation and aquifer . In areas characterized as “Very High”, contaminants will almost certainly reach the water table in hours to months, while in areas of “Low” sensitivity, contaminants will likely take decades to reach the first encountered groundwater.

Olmsted County, MN Page 21

Hydrology

There are three major watersheds in Olmsted County, all of which drain to the Mississippi River: the Zumbro, the Root, and the Whitewater. While there are no natural lakes in Olmsted County, there are a number of reservoirs and manmade lakes controlled by dams. In addition, there are a number of former and existing sand/gravel mining operations and city stormwater facilities that have created ponds or small lakes within floodplains or along drainageways.

The Olmsted County Soil Survey (1980) states that the county is characterized by a mature landscape and dissected in a very intricate pattern by numerous drainageways that lead to the three major rivers. The major stream valleys have very steep sideslopes that are as deep as 300 feet in some areas. (This topographic relief is covered later in this section of the plan.)

There are a number of factors that contribute to hydrology of southeast Minnesota and Olmsted County. Annual moisture, topography, relatively shallow soils over bedrock, relatively well drained soils, lack of lakes and wetlands, geology, stream channel characteristics, and land use and land cover all have an effect on the hydrology in the county in each of the watersheds. According to the Geologic Atlas, the Holocene, or recent epoch of geologic time, has seen a time of leaching, soil formation and slow rates of erosion. However, after European settlement and resulting farming

Olmsted County, MN Page 22

practices, erosion and flooding (severity and frequency) increased dramatically. Soil conservation practices have reduced the rate of erosion so the excess silty alluvium that has filled the floodplains is now being eroded to former levels. Several cities are located within the floodplains of the major rivers. However, Rochester is located at the base of the steep valleys on an alluvial plain that has made it susceptible to widespread flooding in the past.

Numerous wetlands, both those identified on the National Wetlands Inventory and potential wetlands based on hydric soil types, are found across the County. Wetlands are associated with depressions in glacial till, floodplain corridors, and in some areas of the county along the hillsides where the Decorah shale outcropping is the first encountered bedrock.

Olmsted County, MN Page 23

Topography

Olmsted County has a varied topography, with elevations ranging from a high of 1370’ MSL in the southwestern corner of the county to a low of 800’ MSL in the river valleys. Large expanses of relatively flat to mildly rolling lands dominate the County’s landscape between the river valleys, in the upper reaches of the Root River watershed and in the lower portion of the Zumbro River valley. Steep slopes and blufflands are found along the South Fork Zumbro River, North Fork Root River, and North Fork Whitewater River.

Olmsted County, MN Page 24

Olmsted County, MN Page 25

Soils

The Soil Survey of Olmsted County, Minnesota, was issued in March 1980 by the US Department of Agriculture’s Soil Conservation Service. Detailed soils data will be found in that document.

A significant portion of Olmsted County’s soils are classified as “highly erodible” based on their tendencies to erode from wind or water movement. Extra care must be taken in these areas to ensure that proper planting and cover techniques are employed to protect the rich topsoil.

Olmsted County, MN Page 26

Much of Olmsted County is shallow to the water table, providing potential interfaces for contaminants to reach the groundwater, and the potential for localized structure and road damage. Some of these soils are also listed by the USDA as Hydric soils, they are indicative of wetlands throughout the County.

Many other areas are characterized by floodplain soils along the perennial rivers and streams, and also along intermittent streams and in depressional areas. They may lead to hazardous and costly damages to adjacent structures and safety concerns for people, especially where flooding is relatively frequent.

Olmsted County, MN Page 27

Olmsted County, MN Page 28

Land Cover

Olmsted County’s land cover data was originally derived in 2000 using aerial photography and the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System. Other data sets were also used to interpret land cover, such as the Olmsted County Soil Survey, the Olmsted County Biological Survey, and Conservation Reserve Program data from the Olmsted Soil and Water Conservation District. Changes to this data can be made as new information is made available.

Land Cover Area (acres) Artificial Surfaces and Associated Areas 50394.72 Agriculture 240024.99 Forest 54323.55 Woodland 1941.25 Shrubland 2348.30 Grassland 67049.87 Sparse Vegetation 57.72 Open Water 2946.44 Not Identified 0.00

Olmsted County, MN Page 29

Future Land Use

The State Demographer, in projections released in 2007, estimated that the 2015 population of Olmsted County would be 158,940 persons. That figure suggests approximately 18,400 new persons will be added to the County population in the next 7 years.

The recent downturn in housing construction has allowed the creation of a larger than normal supply of vacant developed residential lots in all the developing areas of the County. The existing supply of vacant lots, approximately 4,300 parcels, would support an estimated growth in population of some 11,800 persons. This existing supply is at least five years of growth at the projected rates prepared prior to the recent economic recession.

The recent County population growth rate has declined according to the demographer’s yearly estimates to around 1,200 persons per year, a decline due to restrictions in the growth of the job market. It would be plausible to suggest that the existing supply of undeveloped lots could approach the demand needed by 2015. The geographic distribution of the vacant parcels suggests that approximately 28% of the near-term County growth will happen in the small cities and the suburban area around Rochester with the remainder of the County growth taking place in Rochester. Some suburban development may be lost to more competitive urban growth areas that can support transportation choices thereby shifting more growth to Rochester proper and the small municipalities.

A larger than proportional share of non-residential development exists in the City of Rochester because all of the Mayo Clinic facilities that support almost half of the jobs in the entire County are located in the City of Rochester. There are approximately 37 million square feet of commercial (not including hotel/motels), medical and industrial buildings in the Rochester and its immediate area. The Mayo Clinic has recently slowed its growth in job creation with the final fit-up of the Gonda building and as they slow so do all other economic segments.

Stewartville has the next largest non-residential job base with several manufacturing companies within its borders. Byron has one major private employer, but all other major employers in the small cities are associated with the public school systems.

The majority of new commercial growth in the near future will take place in Rochester. The largest new, non-residential projects in Rochester will be focused in the downtown area. A 75 million dollar expansion to the Mayo Civic Center is planned by the City as well as a new parking ramp. The University of Minnesota Rochester will be announcing their preferred location for an expanded downtown campus that will grow in phases but in the near future is planned to triple its enrollment to 1500 students. Downtown mixed use projects that provide housing and temporary educational space for the growing university presence will most likely proceed to development, as well as a constant commercial growth segment for Rochester, the addition of new lodging projects in downtown as part of redevelopment projects. The small municipalities all have undeveloped lands that can provide areas for substantial commercial and industrial growth, but there will continue to be a glut of non- residential land in these areas. Pine Island is in the process of greatly expanding its area serviced by municipal utilities in support of a 2300 acre development that is known as Elk Run, a development which is based around a potential yet undefined bio-business component as a job generator. A corn- based ethanol plant (MinnErgy, LLC) is seeking permits and financing to construct a facility immediately west of the City of Eyota (south of TH 14 and west of Highway 42). Any projected non-

Olmsted County, MN Page 30

residential development will be located in the identified urban growth areas of the cities in Olmsted County.

The Olmsted County General Land Use Plan, Future Land Use map illustrates the application of policies in the plan and growth projections, and indicates the areas of growth as well as areas where resource activities such as farming and other land uses related to natural resources in the county will be located. Some natural hazards identified in this plan have geographic locations, such as floodplains, karst, Decorah Edge, and landslides. (Individual city future land use plan maps are located in the appendices section of the plan.)

Olmsted County, MN Page 31

Because of the existing patterns of development, existing public infrastructure and infrastructure plans, future growth will be oriented to areas that may include natural hazards. Where natural hazards do occur within city limits or development areas in the unincorporated areas of the county the policies in the applicable city or county land use plans and in the development codes (zoning and subdivision ordinances, building codes) for each jurisdiction will address these hazards as many do now.

Jurisdiction Zoning Subdivision Building Code Well and Ordinance Ordinance Septic Codes Olmsted County Yes Yes Yes Delegation agreement - MN Dept of Health Townships Townships covered by Yes Yes Septic –Yes, their own ordinance or Well – County the county ordinance Byron, Chatfield, All cities have a zoning All cities have a All cities apply the Control in some Dover, Eyota, ordinance (includes subdivision building code form recognizing Oronoco, Pine floodplain regulations) ordinance service by Island, Rochester, centralized systems Stewartville

Olmsted County, MN Page 32

SECTION III – COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE

Water Supply

In Olmsted County proper all cities have a public water supply system except the City of Oronoco. There are 38 municipal wells managed by five different cities. The wells of Chatfield and Pine Island are not located in Olmsted County. During 2009 the City of Oronoco started the construction of the first phase of their new potable water supply system that will serve approximately 75% of the developed area of the city. Later phases will extend water to most of the remaining properties in the city. The city will have access to two wells and a reservoir that are part of the system.

There are another 88 wells classified as “public water supply” by the Minnesota Department of Health because the well serves at least 25 persons or 15 service connections year-round. These wells are concentrated around and within the City of Rochester for the most part. Several “public water supply” wells are scattered around the county serving outlying manufactured home parks or commercial businesses.

The Olmsted County Community Needs Assessment – 2007 (Olmsted County Public Health Services) reported the following information.

“In 1957, Olmsted County passed a water well ordinance calling for inspections at the time of well grouting and abandoned well sealing; setting standards and providing for review of water system plans at the time of subdivision platting; and setting standards for new wells, well abandonment, water systems, the use of existing wells, and the continued maintenance of wells that are not in use. The Rochester-Olmsted County Planning Department carries out these duties under a delegation agreement with the Minnesota Department of Health.

. The actual number of wells that have penetrated the groundwater aquifers of Olmsted County is unknown, but it is probably in the range of 8,000 to 10,000 wells, or an average of 12-15 wells per square mile. Olmsted County comprises 422,400 acres or 660 mi2. . About 5,900 households in rural and suburban Olmsted County today are not served by public water supplies and rely on private drinking water supplies.”

Wastewater Treatment

There are three public wastewater treatment facilities located within the bounds of Olmsted County. The wastewater treatment facilities for the cities of Dover and Eyota are located in St. Charles in Winona County and the treatment facility for Chatfield is located in Fillmore County. All discharges from these plants eventually enter the Mississippi River.

Olmsted County, MN Page 33

The Rochester Wastewater Treatment Plant has a capacity of 23.85 million gallons per day and discharges directly to the South Fork of the Zumbro River. The Rochester facility receives sewage from the Chester Heights manufactured home subdivision in the unincorporated village of Chester in Marion Township as well as other portions of unincorporated Marion and Rochester Townships subject to Orderly Annexation Agreements. Byron has a capacity of 520,000 GPD and discharges via an unnamed stream to the South Branch of the Middle Fork of the Zumbro River. Stewartville has a plant capacity of 1.16 million GPD and is discharged directly to the North Branch of the Root River.

The plant in St. Charles that provides sanitary sewer service to Eyota, Dover and St. Charles under a cooperative sewer district agreement has a daily capacity of 800,000 gallons and discharges into the South Fork of the Whitewater River. The Chatfield wastewater plant has a capacity of 272,500 GPD and discharges to an unnamed stream into the North Branch of the Root River.

The City of Oronoco provides no public wastewater treatment relying on private sewage disposal systems.

There are two private community wastewater treatment pond facilities serving manufactured home parks north of Rochester called Oronoco Estates and Hallmark Terrace/Zumbro Ridge Estates.

Transportation

According to the 2035 ROCOG Transportation Plan, as of June 2003 there were 1,691 centerline miles or 3,610 miles of lane miles of roads in Olmsted County. As of 2008 there are now more lane miles due to the expansion of TH 52 to a 6-lane configuration and the new local streets added because of new developments. There are 500 bridges in the county supporting this road network (211 County, 136 State, 119 Township and 28 in Rochester).

There are 163 miles of Interstate and State highways in the county. Olmsted County is connected to the region by TH 52 Northwest to Southeast; TH 14 East to West; TH 63 North to South and Interstate 90 East to Southwest intersecting with TH 52 and TH 63. TH 52 ranges in daily trip usage from 8,100 trips at Chatfield, 67,000 in Rochester at the TH 14 interchange to 25,000 trips near Pine Island. TH 14 has 4,350 trips east of Dover, 26,000 trips in Rochester just west of TH 52 and 18,700 trips near Byron. TH 63 trips vary from 3,900 at the north county line, 37,000 in Rochester south of the TH 52 interchange and 7,400 south of Stewartville. Interstate 90 carries 13,600 trips east of the Dover exit and 12,400 trips west of Stewartville (Data from the 2006 MNDOT Traffic Volume Map). All of the major populations centers, the cities are served by at least one federal roadway – TH 14, 52, 63 and/or I-90. Each city is also served by at least one state or county-state aid highway. Nine or ten ton county roads serve Byron, Chatfield, Dover, Eyota, and Oronoco. These roads serve as a secondary access for passenger and commercial traffic.

The City of Rochester operates a fixed route bus service (36 routes) utilizing 27 city-owned buses in the City and a portion of Marion Township through a contract with a private company called Rochester City Lines. The City-owned fleet of buses that can only be used for the fixed route service should be at 44 this year. Six “Park and Ride” lots located around the periphery are also operated by the City. Rochester City Lines operates a workweek commuter bus service to downtown Rochester from 39 cities, mostly those within a 45 minute drive however one bus arrives all the way from the Twin Cities. A privately operated, but City contracted para-transit dial-a-ride service called ZIPS Olmsted County, MN Page 34

(Zumbro Independent Passenger Service) provides curb to curb service for residents in Rochester and four adjacent townships with a fleet of 8 vans. The City of Stewartville contracts to operate a similar service called Heartland Express for the residents of their city and the townships of High Forest and Pleasant Grove. Two private taxicab services are operated out of Rochester.

There is a single east-west railroad across the County with three active spur lines in Rochester operated under the name Dakota, Minnesota and Eastern Railroad (DM&E). This rail line was recently approved to be acquired by the Canadian Pacific Railroad. This railroad follows along the TH 14 alignment and presently carries, on average, three trains per day through the county at relatively low speed. The Rochester Public Utilities Silver Lake Power Plant receives its coal supply from this railroad. Major rail upgrade (welded rail) plans have been proposed for this line to potentially facilitate the eastern movement of coal from the Powder River Basin in Wyoming. The rail upgrade has been completed within the City of Rochester and immediate area. Final decisions on this expansion project have not been completed, but estimates are that up to 40 high-speed coal trains a day could use this route to deliver coal to the Mississippi River transportation system or other rail destinations in the eastern United States.

Olmsted County has one public airfield. Rochester International Airport, along TH 63 South north of State Highway 30 operates at a level of approximately 60,000 commercial, air express and general aviation operations yearly (takeoff and landings) providing service to 160,000 boarded passengers. The airport has 2 category C-III runways of 9,033 and 7,300 feet in length with an estimated capacity of 311,640 operations. A new master plan has been adopted that identifies future expansion. Thomas Field Airport, a 2000 foot long grass runway, just west of Eyota supports single engine general aviation aircraft and is in the process of being licensed for public use by the Minnesota Department of Transportation in 2009.

Olmsted County, MN Page 35

Electrical Service, Production and Transmission

In Olmsted County there are five electrical service providers. In the City of Rochester, Rochester Public Utilities, a municipally owned company, provides electrical service to residents of Rochester. People’s Cooperative Services, headquartered in Rochester, provides electric service to almost all of the unincorporated townships in Olmsted County and parts of the cities of Byron, Eyota and Stewartville. Tri-County Electric Cooperative from Rushford, Minnesota, has a very small service area in the southeast corner of the county. Alliant Energy, Madison Wisconsin, is the service provider for most of the customers in Chatfield, Dover, Eyota and Stewartville. Xcel Energy from the Twin Cities is the major provider of electrical service to Byron.

Rochester Public Utilities is a member of a generation and transmission cooperative called Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency (SMMPA) that supplies wholesale electrical power to RPU and other municipal members from a coal-fired generating facility called Sherco 3 located in Becker, Minnesota. RPU generates a portion of its own electricity (up to 100 megawatts) at the Silver Lake coal-fired Power Plant in Rochester and 2.6 megawatts at the hydro-electric power plant at the Lake Zumbro Dam located in Wabasha County. RPU also has a back-up/peak power generating capabilities (83 megawatts) at the Cascade Creek Combustion Turbines facility in Rochester that burns natural gas and/or fuel oil. The wholesale provider of electricity for People’s Cooperative Services and Tri-County Electric Cooperative is Dairyland Power headquartered in Lacrosse, Wisconsin. Dairyland owns and operates several coal-fired power plants along the Wisconsin side of the Mississippi River as well as other sources that can produce up to 1,136 megawatts of power. Olmsted County, MN Page 36

Alliant Energy produces 3,539 megawatts of power from various sources in the Upper Midwest and has a 54,000 square mile service area in Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin and Illinois. Xcel Energy serves eight states including parts of Minnesota, Wisconsin and the Dakotas and has almost 16,000 Megawatts of power production capabilities.

Mayo Foundation has the capability to produce electricity at its Prospect Plant Facility, Franklin Heating Station and Saint Marys Power Plant all located in Rochester. The Olmsted County Waste to Energy Facility, also located in Rochester can produce up to 3 megawatts of electricity used by the nearby county government buildings or sold to the power grid.

There are approximately 210 miles of high voltage transmission lines (69 KV or above) in Olmsted County. 25 miles of a 345 KV major distribution line that extends northerly to the Prairie Island Power Plant runs along the entire west line of the county southerly across the state line. The other high voltage lines in the county consist of 72 miles of 161 KV line (40 miles operated by RPU) with lines running westerly to Faribault, northeasterly to the Mississippi River and southwesterly into Iowa and 112 miles of 69 KV lines. Additional lines have been proposed (CapX 2020 and Xcel Energy) and are under review by the MN Public Utilities Board, including a line that would run to the Mississippi River within the Olmsted County or the adjacent counties, and a line from new wind farms located west of Olmsted County.

Olmsted County, MN Page 37

Telecommunications

In Olmsted County there are 16 public telephone service exchanges operated by a total of six exchange service providers (companies). There are many other wireless telecommunication and internet based communication providers operating in the county. Five radio broadcaster companies operate out of locations in Rochester. There are 91 towers or co-located antennas for either radio or wireless communications located in the county.

Olmsted County, MN Page 38

Olmsted County, MN Page 39

Pipelines

Olmsted County has two “Hazardous Liquid” pipelines that total approximately 44 miles in length. One pipeline, operated by Magellan Pipeline Company, enters from Wabasha County west of TH 63 and terminates at the break out tanks at Eyota along Highway 42 north of TH 14. This refined petroleum product pipeline brings product from the Flint Hills Resources- Pine Bend Refinery located to the north in Rosemount/Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota. The other “Hazardous Liquid” pipeline traverses the entire length of the County from Pine Island to south of Stewartville and is operated by Amoco Oil-BP. This pipeline is located in residentially developed areas in both Pine Island and Stewartville.

There are approximately 71 miles of natural gas transmission pipelines located in six different corridors in Olmsted County. These pipelines are operated by Minnesota Energy Resources or Northern Natural Gas. Natural gas pipelines are found in residentially developed areas in Pine Island and Byron.

Olmsted County, MN Page 40

SECTION IV – POPULATION TRENDS

The Rochester Olmsted Planning Department regularly compiles report to analyze and summarize changes in selected measurement areas of demographic trends:

Population Density

The 2000 US Census indicates that the County’s population is concentrated mainly in and around the cities of Olmsted County.

The urban population density generally ranges between 1,000 and 10,000 people per square mile.

Olmsted County, MN Page 41

Legend

Byron Stewartville

Olmsted County, MN Page 42

Urban population densities of census blocks shown in dark brown exceed 10,000 people per square mile as in the Rochester area below. The census blocks in red indicate population density exceeding 20,000 people per square mile.

Olmsted County, MN Page 43

New growth is concentrated within the cities of Olmsted County. Olmsted County has grown by 15,141 people since the 2000 Census. 83% of the County’s estimated population of 139,418 people resided within a city in 2007. The city population has grown by 17,547 people (17.7%) since the 2000 Census, while the township population declined by 2,406 people (-9.5%). The decline in the township population is mainly due to annexations of homes to adjoining cities.

2000-2007 Population Olmsted County, Minnesota

Cities in Population Population Percent

Olmsted County 2000 2007 Change Change

Byron 3,500 4,721 1,221 34.9%

Chatfield (Part) 1,137 1,185 48 4.2%

Dover 438 570 132 30.1%

Eyota 1,644 1,825 181 11.0%

Oronoco 883 1,049 166 18.8%

Pine Island (Part) 118 505 387 328.0%

Rochester 85,806 100,845 15,039 17.5%

Stewartville 5,411 5,784 373 6.9%

Total – Cities 98,937 116,484 17,547 17.7% Percent of County 80% 83%

Olmsted County, MN Page 44

Townships in Population Population Percent

Olmsted County 2000 2007 Change Change

Cascade 3,183 3,151 -32 -1.0%

Dover 440 419 -21 -4.8%

Elmira 352 351 -1 -0.3%

Eyota 448 410 -38 -8.5%

Farmington 516 471 -45 -8.7%

Haverhill 1,601 1,627 26 1.6%

High Forest 1,085 1,069 -16 -1.5%

Kalmar 1,196 1,140 -56 -4.7%

Marion 6,159 4,800 -1,359 -22.1%

New Haven 1,205 1,199 -6 -0.5%

Orion 614 592 -22 -3.6%

Oronoco 2,239 2,329 90 4.0%

Pleasant Grove 787 788 1 0.1%

Quincy 356 333 -23 -6.5%

Rochester 2,916 2,046 -870 -29.8%

Rock Dell 627 628 1 0.2%

Salem 1,061 1,065 4 0.4%

Viola 555 516 -39 -7.0%

Total – Townships 25,340 22,934 -2,406 -9.5% Percent of County 20% 17%

Olmsted County 124,277 139,418 15,141 12.2% Source: US Census and Minnesota Demographic Center (2007 Estimate)

Olmsted County, MN Page 45

Olmsted County’s population is expected to grow by 59,013 people (47%) by 2030 to 183,290 people. Both the State Demographers Office and the Rochester Council of Governments project that the majority of the growth in population will continue to locate within the County’s cities. The largest share of the county’s growth will occur within the City of Rochester.

Population Projections – Incorporated Cities

Jurisdiction 2020 2030 Byron 7,385 9,060 Chatfield 2,553 2,621 Dover 892 1,087 Eyota 2,203 2,445 Oronoco 1,077 1,161 Pine Island 5,639 7,063 Rochester 120,860 135,974 Stewartville 6,545 7,034

200,000 Year Olmsted Population Percent 180,000 County within Cities City 160,000

140,000 1980 92,006 66,564 72%

120,000 1990 106,470 81,274 76%

100,000 2000 124,277 98,937 80%

80,000 2010 148,130 124,429 84%

60,000 City 2020 168,400 146,508 87%

40,000 Population 2030 183,290 164,961 90% Source: US Census and Minnesota Demographic Center 20,000

- 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

Olmsted County, MN Page 46

Aging Population

The County’s population 45+ will notably increase by 2030 as a result of the aging baby boomers as reflected by the following chart. While the County’s workforce population ages 20-65 is expected to increase by 18,600 people, the 65+ age group will increase by 20,100 people by 2030.

7,000

5,985 6,000 5,786

5,000 4,479

4,000 3,841 3,479

3,000 2,786 2,543 2,406 2,022 2,003 2,080 2,000 1,750 1,754

1,161 965 1,000 643 527 389

0 0-4 5-9 10- 15- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85+ 14 19 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 64 69 74 79 84

The effect of aging population is represented on the following charts. The first chart represent the age of the County’s population in 2000 with the baby boomers located in the mid-section of the chart. By 2030, most baby boomer will have reached the retirement age of 65.

2000 2030

85+ 85+ 80-84 80-84 75-79 75-79 70-74 70-74 65-69 female 65-69 60-64 male 60-64 Female 55-59 55-59 Male 50-54 50-54 45-49 45-49

40-44 40-44 Age Group Age Age Age Group 36-39 35-39 30-34 30-34 25-29 25-29 20-24 20-24 15-19 15-19 10-14 10-14 5-9 5-9 0-4 0-4

-6,000 -4,000 -2,000 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 -8000 -6000 -4000 -2000 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Number of Persons Number of Persons

Vulnerable Populations

Olmsted County, MN Page 47

Youth

The physical distribution of the young population during for at least three-quarters of the year and half of each day is altered by the institutional assembly of children and young people into schools and care centers. In Olmsted County this happens for the most part in our cities. There are approximately 600 buildings – homes, schools, colleges and businesses that are collection points for the vast majority of the youth on any given day. These 600 sites (64 educational facilities and 41 professional daycare sites) serve as the temporary residence for almost 38,000 children, youth and young adults. Approximately 81% of these populations are located in Rochester with the remainder distributed among the smaller cities.

Child Care Facilities

Child care facilities are important because children can be a vulnerable population to some of the hazards identified in this plan. Child care facilities like schools are a concentration of a less mobile population. The Minnesota Department of Human Services licenses and inspects these facilities. Olmsted County licenses and inspects family child care facilities located in homes. There are in Olmsted County, 110 child care facilities licensed by the Minnesota Department of Human Services with an approved population of 2,939 children, and 553 day care facilities with a capacity of 6,158 licensed by Olmsted County

Aged

Olmsted County, MN Page 48

The distribution of housing specific to elderly tenants is almost solely found in the cities of Olmsted County. There are few examples of adult daycare or hospice type housing in the immediate vicinity of Rochester outside the municipal limits. There are 38 senior only or barrier free required housing projects in the cities of Olmsted County containing a total of 3,063 units, including the capacities of nursing homes which are mostly single occupant rooming units. Approximately 93% of these known facilities are in Rochester. There is a high level of elderly persons concentrated in certain multi-family housing projects and townhome-style developments, but since they are not specifically age restricted their locations are not monitored.

Nursing Homes

Rochester: Maple Manor – 1875 19th St., NW Madonna Towers – 4001 19th Ave., NW Madonna Meadows Assisted Living Beverly Living Center-Rochester – 501 8th Ave., SE Rochester Health Care West – 2215 Hwy 52 N Samaritan Bethany Homes on 8th – 24 8th St., NW Samaritan Bethany Heights – 1530 Assisi Dr., NW Shalom Estates – 2070 Century Hills Dr., NE Sunrise Cottages of Rochester – 4220 55th St., NW Meadow Lakes Senior Living – 22 45th Ave., NW 1050 Plummer Place – 1050 Plummer Circle, SW Rochester VOA Elderly Housing – 1800 High Pointe Ln., NW and area Shorewood Commons Assisted Living - 2115 2nd St., SE

Stewartville: Stewartville Care Center – 120 4th St., NE

Chatfield: Chatfield Nursing Home – 1102 Liberty St., SE Chosen Valley Care Center – 1102 Liberty St., SE

Pine Island: Pine Haven Care Center – 210 3rd St., NW

Infirmed or Special Needs

Olmsted County, and specifically the City of Rochester, has a uniquely high level of population at any time in a hospital setting or in a transient accommodation awaiting treatment or in recovery from a medical procedure. There are six hospitals in Rochester. Saint Mary’s Hospital, Methodist Hospital and Olmsted Medical Center Hospital are conventional hospitals that contain 2,193 beds. The Federal Medical Center (prison) has a population of 935 male prisoners, some requiring specialized medical and mental health services. The Community Behavioral Health Hospital has 16 beds and the Olmsted County, MN Page 49

Zumbro Valley Mental Health Center Connections and Referral Detoxification Unit has 22 beds. The Mayo Clinic downtown campus has eight buildings that are the daily destination of patients for health diagnostic and treatment activities.

There are 20, non-family setting, housing facilities in the County that provide a place to stay for people with some level of treatment or special needs. These facilities can accommodate up to 346 tenants. There are also seven habilitation workshops in Rochester that provide employment to as many as 276 persons with varying levels of special needs.

Non-English Speaking Population

The U.S. Census Bureau provides an annual estimate of population including population characteristics through the American Community Survey. The latest data compiled is for the year 2007. This information is of importance due to the need to communicate with people to alert them of emergencies, so there is a higher safety risk for that population that cannot understand the language in a local or community wide emergency.

In 2007 the Census Bureau estimated population above 4 years in age for the county was 129,007. Of that number, 89.9 percent speak English while the remaining 10.1 percent (13,074 people) speak a variety of languages, and some speak more than one language. Native and foreign born who speak English at home are a part of that population. Of the native population the vast majority speak English “very well”; the exception being the population that speaks Spanish, where 49.6 percent speak English less than “very well”. However, for the foreign born population the number of people 5 and above in age who speak English less than “very well” is much higher as a percentage of the population although the number of people is much lower. Of the foreign born population of approximately 12,398, 5535 people or 44.6 percent speak English less than “very well”. (Fifty two separate languages are spoken in the Rochester public school system.)

The estimated total number of households in Olmsted County in 2007 was 55,560. Of that total 5,475 households or 9.85 percent were non-English speaking households. Linguistically isolated households is defined as “one in which no member 14 years old and over (1) speaks only English, or (2) speaks a non-English language and speaks English “very well”. Of the 5,475 households where English is not the primary language spoken at home, 1,730 or 3.1 percent of all the households in the county were linguistically isolated. Poverty status does not appear to be a major element characteristic of this population.

The population of linguistically isolated households is dispersed throughout Olmsted County. However, a majority are projected to live within the City of Rochester, given the wider housing choices available. Based on the census tract data from 2000, it appears that this isolated population is located in areas where apartment buildings or complexes exist.

Transient Populations

Olmsted County, MN Page 50

65 hotels, motels or rooming houses support 5,268 rooms for let in Olmsted County. 12 campgrounds or RV parks with 648 spaces are also found in the County. Eight to ten thousand visitors may be in Olmsted County at any given time.

Olmsted County, MN Page 51

Olmsted County, MN Page 52

SECTION V – PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE CAPABILITIES

Olmsted County has trained emergency response personnel, equipment and facilities to cover the full range of disaster situations. The emergency response capabilities are shared between fire services through mutual aid agreements. The Emergency Operations Center for Olmsted County is located at the Rochester International Airport, while the 911 Public Answering Point (PSAP) is located at the Law Enforcement Center in Rochester.

Medical Facilities

Olmsted County is served by the full range of medical facilities. These facilities are located primarily within city limits.

Hospitals: (all hospitals are located within Rochester)

Methodist Hospital – Mayo Clinic: Level 3 Trauma Center – 794 licensed beds Saint Mary’s Hospital – Mayo Clinic: only Level 1 Trauma Center – 1157 beds Generose Hospital – Mayo Clinic: Level 4 Trauma Center (In and out patient psychiatric hospital – 108 licensed beds Olmsted Community Hospital – Olmsted Medical Center: Level 3 Trauma Center – 61 licensed beds, 22 acute care beds

The Mayo Clinic system and Olmsted Medical hospitals include emergency rooms. The Mayo Clinic offers air transport capability.

Federal Medical Center Hospital – Federal Bureau of Prisons: approximately 900 licensed beds

Clinics:

Olmsted Medical Center Byron Chatfield Pine Island Rochester (2 locations) Stewartville Mayo Clinic (Rochester locations) Downtown

Olmsted County, MN Page 53

Northeast Northwest

Ambulance/Emergency Response Services:

Gold Cross Ambulance Rochester Fire Department (First Responder service) Eyota Ambulance Service Hayfield Community Ambulance Chatfield Ambulance St. Charles Ambulance Elgin Volunteer Ambulance Airmed International Mayo Medair Charter First

Fire Services

Olmsted County has one full time fire department. The remaining departments located in each of the small cities located in the county and volunteer departments. There is a mutual aid agreement that covers the entire county and some departments are a part of multiple mutual aid agreements. Fire services are also provided by nearby communities located outside of Olmsted County based on Mutual Aid Agreements.

Olmsted County, MN Page 54

Fire Department: Byron Volunteer Fire

Personnel: 32 volunteers Equipment: (1) Main Line pumper (1500 GPM pump), (1) Mini Pumper (500 GPM), (1) 75 foot ladder truck with pump (1250 GPM), (1) 1800 gallon tanker, (1) 2000 Gallon tanker, (1) Rescue Truck, (1) Utility pickup Ambulance Service: No Mutual Aid Agreement: Olmsted County, Zumbro Valley

Fire Department: Chatfield Fire

Personnel: 24 volunteers Equipment: (2) engines/pumper rigs, (1) grass/brush truck, (1) rescue truck, (2) tanker trucks Ambulance Service: Yes, separate organization Mutual Aid Agreement: Tri-County Mutual Aid Agreement (Winona, Houston, Fillmore)

Fire Department: Dover Fire

Personnel: 24 volunteers Equipment: (2) engines, (1) grass/brush truck, (1) rescue truck, (3) other vehicles Ambulance Service: No Mutual Aid Agreement: Olmsted County, Tri-County Mutual Aid Agreement, and additional agreement with Eyota

Fire Department: Eyota Fire

Personnel: 23 volunteers Equipment: (2) engine pumpers, (1) grass/brush truck, (2) tankers Ambulance Service: No, provided through a separate volunteer ambulance service Mutual Aid Agreement: Olmsted County Mutual Aid and additional Mutual Aid with Dover Fire Department

Fire Department: Oronoco Fire

Personnel: 22 volunteers Equipment: (1) engines, (1) grass/brush truck, (2) rescue truck, (2) tankers Ambulance Service: Yes Mutual Aid Agreement: Zumbro Valley Mutual Aid

Fire Department: Rochester Fire

Personnel: 103 sworn full time staff (firefighters and chief officers) Equipment: (5) front line fire engines, (2) backup engines, (2) aerial trucks, (2) tanker trucks, (2) light rescue, (2) boats, (1) State Collapse Rescue Vehicle (regional Response), (1) State Hazmat Chemical Assessment Team (CAT) (Regional Response), (1) Public Safety (Fire Police EMS) Command Vehicle (Regional Response) Ambulance Service: Yes Olmsted County, MN Page 55

Mutual Aid Agreement: Olmsted County Mutual Aid, regional responsibility by the state contracts for the Collapse Rescue, CAT and Command Vehicle.

Fire Department: Stewartville Fire

Personnel: 32 volunteers Equipment: (2) engines, (1) aerial truck, (2) grass/brush truck, (1) rescue truck, (2) tanker trucks, (1) utility truck Ambulance Service: Yes, First Responder (Gold Cross, Spring Valley, Chatfield and grand Meadow Ambulances Services) Mutual Aid Agreement: Zumbro Valley Mutual Aid

Law Enforcement

There is one police department and the County Sheriff’s Office that provide services in Olmsted County. Outside of the City of Rochester the County Sheriff provides services to the 18 townships and the 6 cities located within the county. Pine Island is provided law enforcement services by the Sheriff’s Department. The Minnesota State Patrol has a Rochester office and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources also has two Conservation Officers who cover Olmsted County.

Olmsted County, MN Page 56

Department Personnel Marked Other Equipment Squads Rochester 130 sworn 31 marked 1 Incident Command 50 non-sworn Vehicle 16 non-sworn 1 Emergency Response Community Unit Service 4 Community Service vehicles, 3 Parking Control vehicles Sheriff’s Office 59 licensed 41 marked 1 motorboat, 1 Zodiac 15 reserve deputies City of Chatfield 5 full time officers 2 marked 1 speed trailer 8 sworn officers cars, 1 marked SUV

The City and County share a communications/dispatch center for emergency response in Olmsted County. The dispatch center is the 911 answering center.

Emergency Warning System and Emergency Operations Center

The Emergency Operations Center is located at the Rochester International Airport. The Warning Point (source of all local warnings and emergency messages after notice by NOAA for weather related emergencies) is located at the Emergency Operations Center Law Enforcement Center in Rochester. Olmsted County’s outdoor warning system, consisting of 64 sirens, provides coverage to the most populated areas of the county and is used for impending severe weather to warn people to take the necessary precautions. The system is activated for very severe thunderstorm warnings, tornado warnings, flash flood warnings, winter storm or blizzard warnings, and serious technological emergencies caused by chemical spills, train derailments, large scale sabotage incidents, and other immediate and direct threats to life in the county. The locations are as follows:

New Haven Township – 1 Village of Marion – 1 City of Byron – 2 City of Stewartville – 3 City of Chatfield – 4 (one additional siren to be constructed) City of Dover – 1 City of Eyota – 4 City of Oronoco – 4 City of Pine Island – 7 (6 for weather and city wide emergencies, one for fire/EMT) City of Rochester – 46 Oxbow Park – 1 Chesterwoods Park – 1

Olmsted County, MN Page 57

The county is also served by an Emergency broadcast Network, an interactive VHF radio communications network licensed to Olmsted County emergency management under the radio repeater station call sign: WNKI-511.

Heavy Equipment Inventory

Olmsted County, the City of Rochester (Public Works Department and Public Utilities) and other cities, Minnesota Department of Transportation, and private contractors all have inventories of heavy equipment that could be resources for specific emergency responses. The equipment available from Olmsted County is housed at several shop locations throughout the county including the City of Rochester (main shop), Eyota, Byron, Rock Dell, and Dover. All Rochester equipment is located within the city limits. City of Rochester Public Works Department, Park and Recreation, and Public Utilities have inventories of heavy equipment. Olmsted County has maintenance agreements with all cities within the county and all townships thereby allowing for sharing of heavy equipment. The Minnesota National Guard has equipment for use in natural and manmade disasters that is available to Olmsted County and other local units of government.

There are a number of private companies that have equipment that are located within Olmsted County. Those companies on a list maintained by the Olmsted County Public Works Department include:

Elcor Construction Olmsted County, MN Page 58

Fraser Construction Griffin Construction Paulson Rock Products Wharton Construction Friedrich Construction, Inc. Swenke Co., Inc. Shamrock Enterprises Holm Bros. Construction, Inc. Micahel Wood, LLC Braaten Sand & Gravel, Inc.

Temporary Shelters

Temporary shelters are facilities that provide overnight lodging and sanitary facilities that are designed for stays of short duration. Temporary shelters are important resources for emergencies and disasters when a significant number of persons have been displaced from their place of residence.

The Red Cross of Southeastern Minnesota has established 58 separate facilities in Olmsted County that are located in Byron, Dover, Oronoco, Rochester, Stewartville, and High Forest Township. The capacity of the entire system is listed at 10,820 people. The attached table identifies each site, address, phone number, contact and capacity as of September, 2009.

Capacity 40 Zip Sq Ft per City Company Address Code person Byron Byron Elementary School 501 10th Ave NE 55920 750 Dover Dover Community Center 221 N Chatfield Street 55929 Oronoco Community Oronoco Center 115 2nd St NW 55960 103 Southeast MN Chapter Rochester ARC 310 14th Street SE 55904 Rochester Army Reserve Center 1715 Marion Road SE 55904 150 1001 14th St NW, Suite Rochester Assisi Height 100 55901 250 Rochester Bethel Lutheran Church 810 Third Ave SE 55904 400

Olmsted County, MN Page 59

Rochester Christ Community Church 4400 55th St NW 55901 750 Evangel United Methodist Rochester Church 2645 North Broadway 55906 40 Rochester Grace Lutheran Church 800 Silver Lake Dr NE 55906 75 Heinz Center – Rochester Community & Technical Rochester College 851 30th Avenue SE 55904 University Center Rochester – Regional Rochester Sports Center 2900 UCR Place 55904 Rochester Hosanna Lutheran Church 2815 57th Street NW 55901 Meadow Park Church of Rochester Christ 1315 6th Avenue SE 55904 50 Mount Olive Lutheran Rochester Church 2830 18th Ave NW 55901 50 Our Saviors Lutheran Rochester Church 2124 NE Viola RD 55906 50 Redeemer Lutheran Rochester Church 869 7th Ave SE 55904 25 Seventh Day Adventist Rochester Church 1100 37th St NW 55901 38 St. Lukes Episcopal Rochester Church 1884 22nd Street NW 55901 25 Rochester Zumbro Lutheran Church 624 Third Ave SW 55902 38 Rochester Rochester Area Family Y 1st AVE SW 55932 50 Rochester Bamber Valley 2001 Bamber Valley RD SW 55902 132 Rochester Churchill 2240 7th Ave NE 55906 50 Rochester Elton Hills 2240 7th Ave NE 55901 50 Rochester Folwell 603 15th Ave SW 55902 125 Rochester Franklin 1801 9th Ave SE 55904 132 Rochester Gage 1300 40th St NW 55901 140 Rochester Gage East 930 40th St NW 55902 50 Rochester Golden Hill 2220 3rd Ave SE 55904 75 Rochester Harriet Bishop 406 36th Ave NW 55901 50 Rochester Hoover 369 Elton Hills Dr NW 55901 50 Rochester Jefferson 1201 10th Ave NE 55906 205 Rochester Lincoln at Mann 1122 8th Ave SE 55904 100 Rochester Longfellow 1615 Marion Road SE 55904 250 Rochester Pinewood 1900 Pinewood Road SE 55904 250 Rochester Riverside Elementary 506 6th Avenue SE 55904 128 Rochester Sunset Terrace 1707 19th Ave NW 55901 114 Rochester Washington 1200 11th Ave NW 55901 100 Rochester Century 2525 Viola Road NE 55906 1375 Rochester National Volleyball Center 2525 Viola Road NE 55906 Rochester John Marshal 1510 14th St NW 55901 468 Rochester Mayo 1420 11th Ave SE 55904 1250 Rochester Friedell Middle School 1200 South Broadway 55904 113 Rochester John Adams 1525 31st St NW 55901 256 Rochester Kellogg 503 17th St NE 55906 277 Rochester Willow Creek 2425 11th Ave SE 55904 290 Stewartville Church of St Bernard 116 Fourth Ave SE 55976

Olmsted County, MN Page 60

Stewartville First Baptist Church 100 Fifth St SE 55976 38 Stewartville Grace Evangelical Free Hwy 30 East 55976 25 High Forest Community Village of High Forest Stewartville Church 12036 Oak Ave SW 55976 33 Pleasant Grove Church of Stewartville Christ 4713 County Road 140 SE 55976 25 Stewartville St Johns Lutheran Church 111 2nd Ave NE 55976 25 Stewartville Assembly of Stewartville God 101 Third Ave NW 55976 25 Stewartville Christian 751 Co RD 106 SE Stewartville Church PO BOX 244 55976 25 Stewartville United Stewartville Methodist 900 John Wesley Ave NW 55976 25 Stewartville Middle/High Stewartville School 500 4th St SW 55976 1625 Stewartville Elementary Stewartville School 500 4th St SW 55976 Stewartville Zion Lutheran Church 400 5th Avenue NE 55976 100

Olmsted County, MN Page 61

SECTION VI- HAZARDS FACING THE COUNTY

Hazards have been identified and described in the Minnesota state All Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Olmsted County plan does the same and also profiles the hazards as they apply at the local level. Hazards are divided between into two categories, natural hazards and technological hazards or human-induced hazards. The county is rated for its vulnerability to each hazard through a review of frequency, intensity, location, geographic extent, duration, seasonal pattern, and warning time. (Vulnerability is defined as susceptibility to physical injury, harm, damage, or economic loss.)

Natural Hazards

LOWEST Drought PRECIPITATION FOR ONE YEAR A drought may be described as a long period of abnormally low (INCHES) rainfall, especially one that adversely affects growing or living 11.65 1910 conditions. The NCDC does not have any drought events posted 15.44 1976 for Olmsted County from the period of 1950 to the present; however, 19.91 1964 the NWS-LaCrosse office lists the following as lowest precipitation 20.21 1958 records for a single year: 20.32 1955 21.19 1936 21.39 1988 21.92 1939 The U.S. Drought Monitor keeps daily track of drought across the 1932 nation, categorizing drought severity into the following categories 22.47 1944

DROUGHT SEVERITY CLASSIFICATION Category Description Possible Impacts D0 Abnormally Dry Going into drought: short-term dryness slowing planting, growth of crops or pastures. Coming out of drought: some lingering water deficits; pastures or crops not fully recovered

D1 Moderate Some damage to crops, pastures; streams, reservoirs, or wells low, some water shortages Drought developing or imminent; voluntary water-use restrictions requested D2 Severe Drought Crop or pasture losses likely; water shortages common; water restrictions imposed

D3 Extreme Major crop/pasture losses; widespread water shortages or restrictions Drought D4 Exceptional Exceptional and widespread crop/pasture losses; shortages of water in reservoirs, streams, Drought and wells creating water emergencies

The August, 2008 U.S. Drought Monitor for Minnesota indicates that Olmsted County is at Stage D0. The June, 2009 U.S. Drought Monitor for Minnesota indicates Olmsted County is at Stage D1.

Olmsted County, MN Page 62

Currently all drinking water supplies, public or private, are obtained through wells drilled into the St. Peter/Prairie du Chien, Jordan, and St. Lawrence geologic formations/aquifers. Agricultural and industrial water use also is obtained through wells from the same sources. The groundwater system is less likely to be affected by short term droughts unlike surface water systems.

Olmsted County, MN Page 63

Vulnerability

The following table summarizes the overall vulnerability to drought.

VULNERABILITY TO DROUGHT Frequency Likely Impact/damage Slight to Moderate Location County-wide Geographic Extent County-wide Duration Weeks to months Seasonal Pattern Winter and Summer Warning Time More than 12 hours

Olmsted County, MN Page 64

Earthquakes

The Minnesota Geological Survey describes an earthquake as a movement of rock in the earth’s interior. Most of these occur when solid rock masses move past one another along fracture planes called “faults”. While Minnesota is far from any plate margin, the New Madrid seismic zone, located between St. Louis, Missouri and Memphis, Tennessee, has the potential for generating major earthquakes.

According to the MGS publication “Earthquakes in Minnesota”, Minnesota has one of the lowest occurrence levels of earthquakes in the United States, though 19 small to moderate earthquakes have been documented since 1860. These are attributed to minor reactivation of ancient faults in response to modern stresses. The occurrence of a severe earthquake in Minnesota is deemed to be unlikely.

Olmsted County, MN Page 65

Historical Seismicity of Minnesota (Minnesota Geological Survey)

Epicenter locations. The numbers are keyed to the table below. Information on the 1881 New Ulm earthquake was only recently provided by the Mankato Free Press and the Brown County Historical Society.

Epicenter Felt area Mo/day/yr Lat. Long. Intensity Magnitude Nearest Town (km2)

1 Long Prairie 1860-61 46.1 94.9 --- VI-VII 5.0

2 New Prague 12/16/1860 44.6 93.5 --- VI 4.7

3 St. Vincent 12/28/1880 49.0 97.2 --- II-IV 3.6 2/5- 4 New Ulm 44.3 94.5 v.local VI 3.0-4.0? 2/12/1881 5 Red Lake 2/6/1917 47.9 95.0 --- V 3.8 6 Staples 9/3/1917 46.34 94.63 48000 VI-VII 4.3 7 Bowstring 12/23/1928 47.5 93.8 --- IV 3.8

8 Detroit Lakes 1/28/1939 46.9 96.0 8000 IV 3.9-3

9 Alexandria 2/15/1950 46.1 95.2 3000 V 3.6 10 Pipestone* 9/28/1964 44.0 96.4 ------3.4 11 Morris* 7/9/1975 45.50 96.10 82000 VI 4.8-4.6 12 Milaca* 3/5/1979 45.85 93.75 ------1.0 13 Evergreen* 4/16/1979 46.78 95.55 ------3.1 14 Rush City* 5/14/1979 45.72 92.9 ------0.1 15 Nisswa* 7/26/1979 46.50 94.33 v.local III 1.0

16 Cottage Grove 4/24/1981 44.84 92.93 v.local III-IV 3.6

17 Walker 9/27/1982 47.10 97.6 v.local II 2.0 18 Dumont* 6/4/1993 45.67 96.29 69500 V-VI 4.1 19 Granite Falls* 2/9/1994 44.86 95.56 11600 V 3.1 [Asterisks denote earthquakes that were recorded instrumentally. All others and associated magnitudes based solely on intensity data from felt reports.]

Olmsted County, MN Page 66

Vulnerability

The following table summarizes the overall vulnerability to earthquakes.

VULNERABILITY TO EARTHQUAKES Frequency Unlikely Impact/damage Slight Location County-wide Geographic Extent Localized-regional Duration Minutes to hours Seasonal Pattern Year-round Warning Time None-Minimal

Olmsted County, MN Page 67

Extreme Temperatures

Definition: According to the National Weather Service (NWS), extreme temperatures in Minnesota are characterized by the issuance of Wind Chill Warnings or Advisories in the winter months, and by the issuance of Excessive Heat Warnings or Heat Advisories in the summer months.

Excessive Cold

The NWS La Crosse office issues a Wind Chill Advisory when widespread wind chill readings of -20° to -34°, are expected accompanied by at least a 10 mph wind.

Consecutive Days Not Reaching above Freezing A Wind Chill Warning is issued when wind (32° F) chills of -35° or lower are expected with winds of 10 mph or greater. 65 Days December 19, 1978 – February 21, 1979

51 Days January 3 – February 22, 1936

50 Days December 8, 1981 – January 26, 1982

47 Days January 8 – February 23, 1978

45 Days December 14, 1969 – January 27, 1970

Consecutive Days Not Reaching above 0° F

6 Days January 22-27, 1936 5 Days January 30 – February 3, 1996 January 1-5, 1970 January 17-21, 1970 Excessive Heat

The NWS La Crosse office issues a Heat Advisory when daytime heat indices of 105° or above are expected along with nighttime heat index minimums of 80° or above for two or more consecutive days, creating problems for a minor portion of the population.

Consecutive Days with 90°F or Higher Temperatures An Excessive Heat Warning is issued when 14 Days July 5-18, 1936 the heat index equals or exceeds 120° for 3 12 Days July 21-August 1, 1941 or more hours; this level of heat is 10 Days June 18-27, 1943 dangerous for a large portion of the July 21-30, 1916 population. 9 Days June 22-30, 1934 Consecutive Days with 100°F or Higher Temperatures 9 Days July 9-17, 1936 3 Days July 21-23, 1934

Olmsted County, MN Page 68

History

Number of Days with Number of Days with the 90°F or Higher Temperatures HIGH Temperature AT or BELOW 0°F

38 1934 14 1936

33 1916 1917

32 1936 13 1979

31 1955 12 1963

30 1988 11 1982

29 1948 10 1994

26 1941 1972

25 1937 1970

24 1939 9 1996

23 1964 1971

1949 1965

1947 1918

Olmsted County has a “continental” climate; that is, because of the distance from the oceans’ climate- moderating effects, the seasonal temperature variation is quite large. Winters are long and cold, summers are warm. With an average annual temperature of 43.4 degrees Fahrenheit, July is the warmest month with an average temperature of 70.1 degrees and January is the coldest at 11.8 degrees.

Number of Days with Number of Days with the 100°F or Higher Temperatures LOW Temperature AT or BELOW 0°F 12 1936 63 1978 5 1934 56 1937 2 1955 54 1917 1948 53 1985 1940 1950 52 1951 50 1972 49 1963 1936 48 1977

Olmsted County, MN Page 69

Vulnerability

The following table summarizes the overall vulnerability to extreme temperatures.

VULNERABILITY TO EXTREME TEMPERATURES Frequency Likely Impact/damage Slight to Moderate Location County-wide Geographic Extent County-wide Duration Days to weeks Seasonal Pattern Winter and Summer Warning Time More than 12 hours

Olmsted County, MN Page 70

Floods

Definition: A flood is the rising and overflowing of a water body, especially onto what is normally dry land. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has studied and mapped the major flood prone areas of Olmsted County. For those flood prone areas not mapped by Federal Emergency Management Agency and covered by the Flood Insurance Rate Maps, the Olmsted County Soil Survey is used to locate flood plain soils.

It should be noted in this section that FEMA’s term “100 year floodplain” is rather misleading and often misunderstood. The 100 year floodplain is NOT an area which will be flooded every 100 years; it is the flood elevation that has a 1- percent chance of being equaled or exceeded each year. Thus, the 100-year flood could occur more than once in a relatively short period of time, as has been witnessed in Olmsted County over recent years. The 100-year floodplain, which is the standard used by most Federal and state agencies, is used by the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) as the standard for floodplain management and to determine the need for flood insurance. It is shown on the map as the A, AE, and AO zones.

Olmsted County, MN Page 71

Olmsted County, MN Page 72

History

Flooding in Olmsted County primarily occurs as a result of spring runoff, though the topography of Olmsted County and much of southeastern Minnesota makes it prone to flooding and flash flooding during significant rain events.

Major floods are a large part of Olmsted County’s history. According to the latest Flood Insurance Study for Olmsted County, the earliest historical flood record for the City of Rochester goes back to October 1855, when water overflowed the west banks of the South Fork Zumbro River and flowed down Broadway Avenue. Other notable flood events include

June 1908: The National Weather Service station at Rochester reported 4.1 inches of rain in 24 hours at Grand Meadow, 24 miles south of Rochester. 4.25 inches of rain fell in 24 hours and was preceded by 2.78 inches of rainfall 2 days earlier.

June 1942: The largest known flood on Cascade Creek approximated a 125-year frequency event. A major local flood occurred on Cascade Creek on June 4 and 5 1942. Floodwaters on Cascade Creek were up to 4 feet higher than any other known flood, while the South Fork Zumbro River and other tributaries experienced only moderate rises. Rainfall at the Rochester Weather Service station amounted to 2.33 inches on June 4. 1942 and totaled 3.76 inches on June 3-5 1942. Hourly records show that 1.11 inches fell in 1 hour on June 4. 1942, and 0.97 inch of additional rain fell in the next 2 hours. The relative variation of runoff on the nearby streams indicates that much heavier rainfall occurred on the Cascade Creek watershed than on other nearby areas.

March 1965: As the result of runoff from spring snowmelt and generally light rainfall, a major flood occurred in March 1965 with the crest stage approximately 0.7 foot higher than the March 1962 flood at the USGS gauging station near Rochester. Another flood occurred in the spring of 1965, which peaked on April 6, 1965, at Rochester, with a crest stage almost 6 feet lower than the flood of March 1965.

July 1978: The largest known or recorded flood in Rochester occurred on July 6, 1978. The largest known flood on Badger Run occurred in July, 1978. Floods exceeding a 100-year frequency occurred on Silver and Bear Creeks in July 1978. This flood was caused by an intense thunderstorm that produced a peak discharge of 30,500 cfs on the South Fork Zumbro River. This flash flood that claimed five lives and caused property losses to thousands of homes hundreds of businesses, and numerous public properties resulted from heavy rains of 6 inches or more. The National Weather Service station at the Rochester airport recorded 4.99 inches of rain in 3 hours. Total rain at the airport for this 8-hour storm was 6.74 inches, whereas the average weighted rain over the 304 square mile drainage area was calculated to be 5.65 inches. At the USGS gauging station at Rochester, the South Fork Zumbro River rose to its crest in 15 hours at an average rate of 1.3 feet per hour and a maximum rate of 3.25 feet per hour. The river remained above bank-full stage for 35 hours. Peak discharges on the tributaries were published by the USGS as follows: Cascade Creek estimated 1,000 cfs; Silver

Olmsted County, MN Page 73

Creek, 9,290 cfs; Bear Creek at the TH 14 bridge, 24,900 cfs; and the South Fork Zumbro River at the TH 14 bridge 20,500 cfs.

Flooding in the Cities of Dover and Eyota occurred in June of both 1974 and 1978 as a result of abnormally heavy rainfall. Homes experienced some minor flooding problems caused by these storms. According to the Eyota City utility superintendent the intersection of Center Street and U.S. Highway 14 was inundated during both storms and the box culvert on Center Street was overtopped. The culverts carrying Tributary A under 5th Street, Madison Street, and 2nd Street were also overtopped during both storms. The culvert under County Road 7 (now State Highway 42) near 2nd Street was washed out in the 1974 storm, causing damage to the road bed. Some of the businesses on Center and Front Streets suffered damage from basement seepage, but this was due to street runoff rather than flooding effects from the creek.

For the City of Dover, rainfall records from a National Weather Service station in Rochester (located 17 miles west of Dover) indicate that the frequency of the 1974 storm was greater than a 500-year event.

Floods such as the storm of July 1978 have passed through the Cities of Chatfield and Stewartville however water damage has been limited by relatively steep banks or wide floodplain and the lack of development in the floodplain.

The City of Oronoco has not experienced a severe flood and has no significant flooding problems. Some homes occasionally experience wet basements but this appears to be a water table situation rather than flooding from surface runoff. The problem in not having experienced high floods is that the fringes of the floodplain along Shady Lake are very attractive for residential development but the rise anticipated in Shady Lake during a 100-year flood is 10 feet. The lowlands adjacent to the river and Shady Lake are subject to overflow from the usual spring snowmelt or heavy spring and summer rains though nothing approaching a 100-year flood has been experienced.

June 2004: Heavy rains fell in two waves over southeast Minnesota on June 8 and 9, 2004. The remnants of the torrential rains that caused flooding and mudslides in the Mankato area drifted east over southeast Minnesota late on June 8 and into the early morning hours of June 9. Later in the morning of June 9, thunderstorms redeveloped over south central and southeast Minnesota and continued throughout the afternoon and early evening. The Rochester airport recorded 4.06 inches of rain on June 9, setting a record for the date. Another 0.20 inch had fallen on June 8, leading to a two-day total of 4.26 inches. The rains fell upon soil already saturated from the heavy rains of May 2004.

The deluge led to street flooding and wet basements in Rochester. One apartment building in Rochester had water flowing through the lowest floor. In scattered areas of the City of

Olmsted County, MN Page 74

Rochester sanitary sewer backups occurred. Numerous accounts of water overtopping roads were reported throughout the region. Mudslides were reported within the City of Rochester.

September 2004: On September 14-15, 2004 a series of disturbances along a stalled frontal boundary dropped heavy rains in southern Minnesota. The southeast and southwest corners of Olmsted County received 6 inches of rainfall, 5 inches over the center of the county and less than that over the northern portion of the county over a 24 hour period. There were numerous reports in southern Minnesota of stream flooding, urban flooding, mudslides, and road closures. Flash flood warnings were issued for 13 Minnesota counties including all counties within the Zumbro and Root River watersheds.

August 2007: A very moist warm air mass provided the fuel for showers and thunderstorms along a warm front extending from northern Iowa to central Illinois from August 18th to 19th. Thunderstorms developed moving west to east along this line through southern Minnesota. Heavy rain persisted with rainfall rates of 1 to 2 inches per hour common in southeastern Minnesota. Rochester International Airport received 7.05 inches of rain over the period of the storm from Saturday night into Sunday morning. Cascade Creek crested at 16.52 feet on Sunday morning above the flood stage of 13.0 feet. Over a 24 hour period, Cascade Creek received 10.45 inches, Silver Creek 10.17 inches, and Bear Creek 9.86 inches. This amount of rain surpasses the 6 inch rainfall for a given location for a 24 hour period that is said to be a “100 year” (1% probability) storm.

This storm event was one of the most extraordinary precipitation events in Minnesota’s modern history according to the State Climatologist. During the event a new Minnesota 24-hour rainfall record was broken. The State Climate Extremes Committee agreed that the 15.10 inches total recorded on Sunday August 19, 2007 at Hokah in Houston County is the largest 24-hour total ever measured at an official National Weather Service observing station in Minnesota.

The effectiveness of the Rochester flood control project was evident as the city saw some street flooding, water seepage and sewer backups into basements, some mudslides in the City of Rochester and in the unincorporated areas, and road closures but not large scale flooding of portions of the city as happened in 1978.

The City of Eyota experienced basement flooding on a large scale that appears not to have been due to overland flows of floodwater but saturated soils and a high groundwater table. During the August, 2007 flood Dover, Eyota and Rochester sustained damage to homes and other buildings due to sewer backup into basements. About one third of the homes in Dover experienced sewer backup during this flood event, according to the Mayor. The City of Dover reported that there are several reasons for the sewer backup damages that occurred during the 2007 storm and are all related to infiltration in the system upgradient of Dover including: 1. infiltration in the main line between Eyota and Dover due to its location in the floodplain and location on the Decorah Shale geologic formation, 2. infiltration in the system within the City of Eyota due to a high water table 3. infiltration into the main line between Eyota and Dover due to manhole elevations which are mostly below grade.

Olmsted County, MN Page 75

Stream bank damage occurred on Cascade Creek within the City of Rochester that threatened the loss of accessory buildings but no residences were directly affected. Severe stream channel and agricultural land erosion, landslides, and resulting sedimentation occurred throughout the region. Landslides occurred in scattered areas along stream channels, roads, and in developed areas in the rural portions of Olmsted County and in the City of Rochester.

Flood Protection Measures

Floodplain development in the City of Rochester is controlled by the Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual. The ordinance requires that plans for proposed structures in the floodplain meet regulations set by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and in Flood Plain Information, Supplemental Report on South Fork Zumbro River and Tributaries in the Vicinity of Rochester, Minnesota. Floodplain development in Olmsted County is controlled by the Olmsted County Zoning Ordinance. The ordinance has four floodplain districts that set standards for grading and development within the floodplain. The ordinance requires that plans for proposed fill and structures in the flood fringe, and flood prone soils, as defined by the NRCS’s soil survey for Olmsted County, be reviewed as a conditional use permits by the County Planning Advisory Committee. The other cities with FEMA designated floodplain also have zoning ordinance provisions that establish standards for development within the regulated floodplain.

The USACE has developed a local flood control plan for the City of Rochester, the Rochester Flood Control Project, which is designed to reduce flood stages on the South Fork Zumbro River, Cascade Creek, and Bear Creek through the construction of a levee and floodwalls; alterations to bridges, sewers, and utilities in the floodplains; and channel modifications. The USACE project was completed prior to the publication of the 1995 FIS report. The Rochester Flood Control Project is multifaceted and includes the construction of seven Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) reservoirs on Silver, Bear, Willow, and Cascade Creeks that impound water and reduce downstream peak flows in the City of Rochester. All of the NRCS reservoirs have been constructed and are operable.

The USACE’s portion of the flood control project consisted of channel improvements and construction of floodwalls, a levee, and hydraulic structures. The USACE work was segmented into several stages and was completed in September 1995. FEMA specifies that all levees must have a minimum of 3- foot freeboard against 100-year flooding to be considered a safe flood protection structure. The Bear Creek levee meets FEMA freeboard requirements. The February 4, 1998 FIS accounted for the following features of the Rochester Flood Control Project: modifications to the South Fork Zumbro River, Bear Creek, Cascade Creek, including widening and deepening the channel, low flow channel reaches, riprap lined channel and slope protection, vertical concrete walls, bridge modifications, drop structures, and U.S. Highway 14 bridge replacement; dam rehabilitation on Silver Lake; seven reservoirs located on Bear Creek, Silver Creek, Cascade Creek, Willow Creek, East Fork of Willow Creek, and South Run North Fork Cascade Creek; a completed levee along Bear Creek upstream of U.S. Highway 14.

Olmsted County, MN Page 76

In the City of Stewartville, Lake Florence a 70 acre lake, was small in relation to the 114 square mile drainage area of the North Branch Root River watershed at the dam. Therefore, the dam at the outlet of Lake Florence had little to no effect on the flood flow peaks that pass through the City of Stewartville. The dam was removed due to a severe flood after the publication of the 1998 FIS report and the lake bottom is now a public park and the channel for the North Branch Root River.

There are no permanent flood protection structures in the City of Oronoco and none are proposed at this time. The volume available for floodwater storage in Shady Lake is insignificant in comparison to the runoff volume of significant flood events and no attenuation of the larger flood peaks occurs.

A holding pond on the West Fork of Willow Creek, approximately 1,000 feet west of County Road 147, provides some flood protection during the lower frequency floods. A small check darn on Cascade Creek near its confluence with the South Fork Zumbro River. A small check dam on Cascade Creek near the confluence with the South Fork Zumbro River and dams on the South Fork Zumbro River in the City of Rochester do not serve as a flood protection structures.

There are no other permanent flood protection structures in the county, and none are proposed at this time.

Another means of protection for communities is adoption of their Flood Insurance Rate Map and participation in the National Flood Insurance Protection program. All of the cities, except Byron, and Olmsted County have adopted floodplain regulations as a part of their zoning ordinance and administer the ordinance standards. Byron is located on the watershed divide and has no Public Waters based on Minnesota Department of Natural Resources maps, and has no FIRM study. Therefore it does not participate in the flood insurance program. However, there are provisions within their zoning ordinance that allow for regulation of stormwater and flood prone areas. (The table below lists the status of the cities and the County.)

With a grant from FEMA through the MN DNR, Olmsted County initiated a restudy and development of new Flood Insurance Rate Maps for Olmsted County in 2006. The product of the study will be new digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The draft maps were presented to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for review through the FEMA system (MIP) in the summer of 2009. That review was completed and the FEMA contractor is now reviewing the final draft maps. Final DFIRM’s may be presented by FEMA at public meetings as early as late 2009 or in early 2010 with adoption by each jurisdiction following the FEMA decision on the draft maps. Sometime during 2010 each jurisdiction is expected to adopt the new DFIRM’s.

In 2009 the MNDNR notified communities that all communities with adopted floodplain maps must amend their zoning ordinance and map whenever there is an approved Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) by FEMA. Olmsted County and the City of Rochester require that all FEMA applicants for a Letter of Map Revision also apply for and receive approval of an amendment to the zoning map.

Community/City NFIP Status Byron Not a Participant – No FEMA floodplain Chatfield Participant Dover Participant Eyota Participant

Olmsted County, MN Page 77

Oronoco Participant Olmsted County Participant Pine Island Participant Rochester Participant Stewartville Participant

Repetitive Loss Structures

While there are numerous structures in the floodplains of Olmsted County, many of these are floodproofed and none are considered to be “repetitive loss structures” at this time. Repetitive loss structures are those structures which have sustained damages on two or more separate occasions within a 10-year time span for which the cost of repairs at the time of the flood meets or exceeds 25 percent of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred. Olmsted County had four repetitive loss structures, all in Rochester. One building is nonresidential, while the others are single- family residences. All four of these structures have been mitigated according to the most recent data (2009) from the Minnesota Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management.

Floodplain Impacts – Structures Located in Floodplains

A comparison of property records and Flood Insurance Rate Maps for mapped areas in Olmsted County was completed through the county Geographic Information System. The study product was a list of properties and specifically buildings located within the floodplain – Zones AE, A, and AO. This list does not idenfity if the structures are elevated or otherwise protected from a 100 year storm event. The values for properties and structures are based on the Olmsted County Propterty Records Department tax information for 2009.

The floodplain maps used to determine the impacts noted in each table are from the early 1980’s for all but Rochester for which the 1995 FIRM was used. The Rochester FIRM and FIS were reissued in 1998 after the completion of the flood control project. The impact of the 1998 maps and maps that include Letters of Map Revision has been to lower significantly the number of parcels, acres, land and building values within the floodplain in the immediate Rochester area.

Unincorporated Olmsted County – Structures in Floodplain Tax Class Parcels Total Acres Total Land Value Total Building Value AG – Son/Dau-Moth/Fath 1 30.67 $106,600 $55,300 Agricultural 33 1712.1 $11,215,500 $5,355,200 Comm Land & Bldgs 12 49.6 $728,000 $1,820,200 County Public Serv Oth 1 2.01 $55,000 $192,000 Inds Land & Bldgs 2 28.06 $466,100 $420,600 Pub Util – Atth Mach 2 3.7 $66,300 $92,900 Quality Golf Courses 2 154.92 $545,300 $432,900 Res 1-3 Units 1 0.58 $32,100 $700 Residential 184 567.88 $11,613,100 $29,424,000 Seasonal Res Rec 6 35.76 $362,800 $472,500 Total 244 2585.28 $25,190,800 $38,266,300

City of Chatfield – Structures in Floodplain Tax Class Parcels Total Acres Total Land Value Total Building Value Comm Land & Bldgs 11 12.18 $1,038,400 $2,728,800 Residential 1 1.4 $22,000 $125,100 Total 12 13.58 $1,060,400 $2,853,900

Olmsted County, MN Page 78

City of Dover – Structures in Floodplain Tax Class Parcels Total Acres Total Land Value Total Building Value K-12 School Public 1 0.96 $30,000 $27,000 Res/Ag 1 0.48 $26,000 $123,000 Residential 8 4.93 $210,000 $907,500 Total 10 6.37 $266,000 $1,057,900

City of Eyota – Structures in Floodplain Tax Class Parcels Total Acres Total Land Value Total Building Value Charitable Ins 1 0.7 $91,300 $295,100 Comm Land & Bldgs 3 3.6 $156,800 $543,900 Res Duplex/Triplex 1 0.25 $20,000 $108,200 Residential 4 2.33 $121,000 $340,900 Total 9 6.88 $389,100 $1,288,100

City of Oronoco – Structures in Floodplain Tax Class Parcels Total Acres Total Land Value Total Building Value Residential 23 46.36 $1,584,100 $3,312,500

City of Pine Island – Structures in Floodplain Tax Class Parcels Total Acres Total Land Value Total Building Value Res/Ag 1 0.52 $35,300 $131,100 Residential 70 17.3 $2,301,200 $10,718,400 Total 71 17.82 $2,336,500 $10,849,500

City of Rochester – Structures in Floodplain Tax Class Parcels Total Acres Total Land Value Total Building Value Agricultural 2 65.57 $1,053,000 $20,700 Charitable Ins 7 7.59 $2,509,300 $8,911,900 Comm Land & bldgs 128 186.64 $33,561,400 $69,790,100 County Public Serv 1 46.92 $1,280,400 $12,051,800 Federal Property 1 45.63 $650,800 $37,620,000 In Lieu of Taxes 8 0.9 $100,100 $546,000 Inds Land & Bldgs 8 12.24 $2,140,900 $5,427,100 K-12 School Public 1 48.26 $556,500 $7,552,700 Mfr Home Park 1 3.95 $55,000 $133,100 Municipal Pub Other 1 5.58 $13,000 $213,800 Municipal Pub Zserv 4 99.65 $916,600 $4,649,600 Res 1-3 Units 25 3.79 $472,000 $3,127,100 Res 4 or More Units 35 65.22 $11,879,700 $61,153,800 Res 4+ Owners Value 4 1.16 $25,100 $111,100 Res Duplex/Triplex 24 3.81 $449,100 $3,104,700 Residential 854 273.21 $21,446,700 $118,753,400 State Property 2 6.02 $50,500 $243,800 Total 1106 876.14 $77,160,100 $333,410,700

City of Stewartville – Structures in Floodplain Tax Class Parcels Total Acres Total Land Value Total Building Value Comm Land & Bldgs 1 2.95 $411,000 $1,042,000 K-12 School Public 2 65.23 $5,188,700 $34,076,700 Municipal Pub Serv 2 17.68 $20,900 $118,700 Residential 10 4.40 $194,500 $1,456,700 Total 15 90.26 $5,815,100 $36,694,100

Olmsted County, MN Page 79

Vulnerability

The following table summarizes the overall vulnerability to flooding.

VULNERABILITY TO FLOODING Frequency Likely Impact/damage Slight to Very Severe Location Each city and portions of Olmsted County in floodplains/river corridors and areas with inadequate stormwater systems. Byron can experience localized flooding but does not have FEMA floodplains. Geographic Extent County-wide Duration Hours to days Seasonal Pattern Spring and Summer Warning Time 3-6 hours

Olmsted County, MN Page 80

KARST – Subsidence and Landslides

According to the Minnesota Geological Survey’s “Geologic Atlas – Olmsted County, Minnesota”, the mildly acid groundwater of Olmsted County is slowly dissolving the carbonate bedrock that underlies the County, producing distinctive groundwater conditions and landforms called “karst”. Common features of Karst geology include cracks/crevices that allow rapid groundwater movement, caves, sinkholes, numerous springs, and oftentimes overlain by only thin layers of soil. The Geologic Atlas of Olmsted County notes that karst terrains are subject to several kinds of environmental problems. Karst aquifers are very susceptibl e to groundwat er contamina tion because solution- enlarged cracks and sinkholes create direct passagew ays that funnel water from the surface into the groundwat er. Contamin ants originate from agricultural, urban and industrial land uses on the thin soils or in proximity to karst features such as sinkholes.

Physical problems also exist with karst geology. At the surface, the collapse of unconsolidated rock material into sinkholes can cause damage to buildings, roads, sewer lines, wells, and other structures including water retention facilities. Such facilities may hold contaminants that if released through a chronic or catastrophic failure would cause pollution of the groundwater system. The Geologic Atlas reported that the rate of sinkhole formation had appeared to have increased in the last few decades. See the Community Profile for more details on karst and erodible soils, as well as the Geologic Atlas.

Olmsted County, MN Page 81

Landslides are the movement of slopes that occur through various events including: slides, flows, lateral spreads, falls and topples. Landslides can occur in areas of steep slopes and slopes destabilized by natural (rainfall, channel erosion and seismic activity) or manmade actions (construction activity or site grading, mining, etc.). Landslides occur often with or after other major disasters such as extreme storm events, flooding, seismic events, and wildfire. Debris flows also may often be a part of the event that causes landslides.

Landslides occurred throughout southeastern Minnesota during the record breaking storm in August, 2007. These landslides occurred along waterways, roads, and in developed areas. The blockage of stream flow could have significant impact on flood potential is topographic settings that constrict the flow of floodwaters during high flow events. Landslides also can affect access and traffic safety during these same storm events in addition to costs of repair of infrastructure. Landslides in developed areas can cause significant damage to buildings and property.

Olmsted County, MN Page 82

Vulnerability

The following table summarizes the overall vulnerability to karst and landslides.

VULNERABILITY TO KARST AND LANDSLIDES Frequency Likely Impact/damage Slight to Moderate Location Karst-primarily in the eastern half of Olmsted County. Landslides-Steeper sloping areas primarily along river corridors, and in developing areas graded to steeper slopes. Geographic Extent County-wide, less likely in the southwestern portion of the county including the City of Byron. Duration Minutes to years Seasonal Pattern Year-round Warning Time None-Minimal

Olmsted County, MN Page 83

Severe Storms

Thunderstorms

Thunderstorms are localized storms that are always accompanied by lightning. Strong wind gusts, heavy rain, hail, and tornadoes may also occur as part of a thunderstorm. A thunderstorm is classified as “severe” by the NWS in La Crosse if it produces large hail (1” or larger), straight line winds of 58 MPH or higher, and/or a tornado. Severe thunderstorms can occur any time of the year, day or night, though the peak time for severe thunderstorms in Olmsted County is from April through September in the afternoon and evening hours.

A Severe Thunderstorm Watch is issued by the NWS’s Storm Prediction Center when there is a potential for severe thunderstorms to develop or move into the area. A Watch is typically in effect for about 6 hours and covers a region of the state. A Severe Thunderstorm Warning is issued when either severe weather has been reported or the thunderstorm looks severe based on Doppler Radar. A Warning is generally in effect for 30-60 minutes and usually covers a county.

Since 1950, 195 thunderstorms with strong winds were recorded by the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) in Olmsted County. These have resulted in $2.8 million of property damage and $340,000 in crop damage.

Lightning

Lightning may be described as any and all of the various forms of visible electrical discharge caused by thunderstorms. A person or object does not have to be directly under the storm, or where the heaviest rain is falling, to get struck. Lightning strikes can occur many miles away from its parent thunderstorm. If you are near a storm or can hear thunder, you are close enough to be struck.

According to the NWS, an average of 62 people are killed each year by lightning. So far in 2008, 24 people have died in the U.S. due to lightning strikes and 45 died in 2007. Of those killed in 2007, 98% were outside 89% were male 30% were males between the ages of 20-25

Olmsted County, MN Page 84

25% were standing under a tree 25% occurred on or near the water

In analyzing the number of cloud-to-ground flashes for the state of Minnesota from 1996-2005, the NOAA reported an average of 391,573 flashes per year at a density of 4.6 flashes per square mile. This figure puts Minnesota 33rd in the ranking of cloud-to-ground flash densities by state. Olmsted County has recorded four lightning strikes since 1995 that have resulted in property damages of $1.6 million. Fortunately, no injuries or deaths were associated with these occurrences.

Hail

Hail is a form of precipitation that occurs when updrafts in thunderstorms carry raindrops upward into extremely cold areas of the atmosphere where they freeze into ice. Most of this hail has been an inch or less in diameter, though hail as large as 3 inches was reported in August 1963. NCDC statistics indicate that from 1950 to the present, 225 hail events in Olmsted County have accounted for $6.2 million in property damage and $398,000 in crop damage.

Windstorms

High winds in Olmsted County are considered to be those that exceed 58 mph, excluding tornadoes.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) places Olmsted County in Wind Zone IV as winds can reach as high as 250 mph. NCDC records for Olmsted County dating back to 1950 have recorded 172 high wind events, most of which were accompanied by thunderstorms.

Olmsted County, MN Page 85

Tornadoes

EF SCALE EF Rating 3 Second Gust (mph) 0 65-85

Olmsted County, MN Page 86

A tornado is a violently rotating column of air in contact with the 1 86-110 ground. The peak tornado months in Olmsted County are May 2 111-135 through July, but tornadoes can occur any time of year if the conditions are right. Tornadoes usually occur between 3:00 PM 3 136-165 and 9:00 PM, but they can occur any time of day or night. 4 166-200 Tornadoes are not always visible and can form with little 5 Over 200 advance warning.

A Tornado Watch is issued by the NWS if atmospheric conditions are favorable for the development of severe thunderstorms that are capable of producing tornadoes. A Tornado Warning is issued when a severe thunderstorm has developed and has either produced a tornado or radar has indicated intense low level rotation in the presence of atmospheric conditions conducive to tornado development.

The Enhanced Fujita (EF) Scale is used to assign a tornado a “rating” based on estimated wind speeds and related damage. When tornado-related damage is assessed, it is compared to a list of Damage Indicators and Degrees of Damage which aid in the estimation of wind speeds the tornado likely produced. From that, a rating is assigned.

According to the NWS, Olmsted County has witnessed 42 tornadoes from 1850-2006. One of the most powerful tornadoes (F5) occurred in August 1883; the large numbers and seriousness of the injuries from this storm led to the development of the Mayo Clinic. Since 1950, 28 tornadoes in Olmsted County have resulted in 1 death, 45 injuries, $33.8 million in property damage and $25,000 in crop damage.

Tornado Statistics for Olmsted County 1850-Present

Not Ranked F-0 F-1 F-2 F-3 F-4 F-5 Total

0 15 7 13 1 5 1 42

Olmsted County, MN Page 87

Olmsted County, MN Page 88

Snow and Ice

The following winter weather watches, warnings, and advisories are issued by the NWS when conditions warrant:

WATCHES: Conditions are favorable or expected but not occurring or imminent Blizzard 35 mph or greater wind speeds, considerable falling or blowing snow, and visibilities frequently below a quarter mile are expected to prevail for 3 hours or more. Winter Severe winter storm conditions are expected to occur, including heavy snow, Storm significant ice or sleet accumulations, and any of the above accompanied by strong winds that may lead to significant visibility reductions. WARNINGS: Conditions are occurring or imminent Blizzard 35 mph or greater wind speeds, considerable falling or blowing snow, and visibilities frequently below a quarter mile are expected to prevail for 3 hours or more. Winter Snow amounts of 6 inches or more in 12 hours or 8 inches or more in 24 hours are Storm expected, accompanied by wind or other phenomena. A warning may also be issued if conditions will be approaching blizzard criteria, even if snow amounts are not expected to reach the aforementioned thresholds. Heavy Snow Snow amounts of 6 inches or more in 12 hours or 8 inches or more in 24 hours are expected. Ice Storm Ice accumulations of a quarter inch or more. Sleet Sleet accumulations of a half inch or more. ADVISORIES Winter Any combination of winter weather elements is expected during an event, such as Weather freezing rain changing to snow or freezing drizzle occurring with freezing fog.

Snow Three to six inches of snow is expected.

Blowing Significant visibility reductions are expected to occur from only blowing snow (i.e. – no Snow snow is falling).

Snow and Significant visibility reductions are expected to occur from light snow and blowing Blowing snow. Snow Sleet Sleet accumulation of less than a half inch is expected.

Freezing Very light ice accumulation is expected from freezing fog. Fog

According to the NCDC, 47 significant snow and ice events were reported for Olmsted County from 1994 to the present.

Olmsted County, MN Page 89

TYPE # OF EVENTS Heavy Snow 13 Heavy Snow/Ice 2 Winter Storm 26 Ice Storm 5 Winter Weather 1

Record One-Day Snowfall For Olmsted County (NWS) 19.8” March 18, 2005 15.4” January 22, 1982 13.0” April 26, 1988 10.8” March 10, 1956 10.6” November 25, 1952 10.5” November 10, 2006 March 13, 1997

10.3” December 25, 1955 10.2” March 22, 1952 9.7” November 18, 1957

Vulnerability

The following table summarizes the overall vulnerability to severe storms.

VULNERABILITY TO SEVERE STORMS

Frequency Highly Likely

Impact/damage Slight –Moderate Location County-wide Geographic Extent County-wide Duration Minutes to hours Seasonal Pattern Year-round Warning Time 3-6 hours

Olmsted County, MN Page 90

Wildfire

MN Statute Section 88.01 Definitions Subd. 24. Wildfire. “Wildfire” means a fire requiring suppression action, burning any forest, brush, grassland, cropland, or any other vegetative material.

The Fire Danger Rating level takes into account weather patterns, fuel types, and both live and dead fuel moisture. The U.S. Forest Service breaks the ratings into five classes:

Fire Danger Rating Description and Color Code Low (L) Fuels do not ignite readily from small firebrands although a more intense heat (Dark Green) source, such as lightning, may start fires in duff or punky wood. Fires in open cured grasslands may bum freely a few hours after rain, but woods fires spread slowly by creeping or smoldering, and burn in irregular fingers. There is little danger of spotting. Moderate (M) Fires can start from most accidental causes, but with the exception of lightning (Light Green or fires in some areas, the number of starts is generally low. Fires in open cured Blue) grasslands will burn briskly and spread rapidly on windy days. Timber fires spread slowly to moderately fast. The average fire is of moderate intensity, although heavy concentrations of fuel, especially draped fuel, may burn hot.

Olmsted County, MN Page 91

Short-distance spotting may occur, but is not persistent. Fires are not likely to become serious and control is relatively easy. High (H) All fine dead fuels ignite readily and fires start easily from most causes. (Yellow) Unattended brush and campfires are likely to escape. Fires spread rapidly and short-distance spotting is common. High-intensity burning may develop on slopes or in concentrations of fine fuels. Fires may become serious and their control difficult unless they are attacked successfully while small. Very High (VH) Fires start easily from all causes and, immediately after ignition, spread rapidly (Orange) and increase quickly in intensity. Spot fires are a constant danger. Fires burning in light fuels may quickly develop high intensity characteristics such as long- distance spotting and fire whirlwinds when they burn into heavier fuels. Extreme (E) Fires start quickly, spread furiously, and burn intensely. All fires are potentially (Red) serious. Development into high intensity burning will usually be faster and occur from smaller fires than in the very high fire danger class. Direct attack is rarely possible and may be dangerous except immediately after ignition. Fires that develop headway in heavy slash or in conifer stands may be unmanageable while the extreme burning condition lasts. Under these conditions the only effective and safe control action is on the flanks until the weather changes or the fuel supply lessens.

The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources’ Wildfire website reports that as of August 2008, there were 621 wildfires in the State of Minnesota affecting 16,754 acres. Thus far in 2008, Olmsted County has been relatively fire free as described in the table below.

New (reported in the last 24 hours) Acres Residences Residences Outbuildings Outbuildings Fires Burned Injuries Fatalities Damaged Destroyed Damaged Destroyed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Calendar Year-to-date Acres Residences Residences Outbuildings Outbuildings Fires Burned Injuries Fatalities Damaged Destroyed Damaged Destroyed 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Olmsted County, MN Page 92

The risk of wildfire is dependent upon several factors, the three main ones being fuel, topography, and weather. Fuel (ground cover) and topography are fairly constant factors; weather patterns, therefore, determine the fluctuations in wildfire occurrence.

Up to the minute wildfire risk and burning restrictions for the State of Minnesota are available on the MnDNR’s website at http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/forestry/fire/ Currently, Olmsted County has a “Low” Fire Danger Rating.

Vulnerability

VULNERABILITY TO WILDFIRE Frequency Occasional Impact/damage Low Location County-wide Geographic Extent Localized Duration Hours to days Seasonal Pattern Summer and Fall Warning Time None-Minimal

Olmsted County, MN Page 93

Technological Hazards

Fire

Fire as defined in this section of the plan relates primarily to fire in structures and on developed properties or fire in agricultural settings. These fires can occur in any community, at any site, and at any time of the year. Wildfire, by comparison, is in many cases a natural hazard and is covered in a separate part of the plan. The State Fire Marshall produces an annual report that classifies fire as structural (residential, public, commerce, industrial and other buildings), vehicle (aircraft, automobiles, trucks, trains, buses, boats) or other fires. In Minnesota during 2007 over 42% of fires were structural fires, while about 19% were vehicle fires, and 39% were fires classified as other incidents. Fires, in descending order of frequency, occur most frequently on residential property, than, fires in storage structures, public assembly/commercial facilities, industrial/manufacturing facilities, special/other locations, educational/institutional facilities and unclassified property during 2006 and 2007. The dollar loss for Minnesota from 2004-2006 occurred on residential property, followed by fires on storage property, public assembly/commercial, industrial/manufacturing and other property types. Most fire incidents on farms occur in livestock production or storage with fewer incidents in crop/orchard facilities or grain elevators/silos. Most civilian fire deaths occur on residential property with far fewer in outdoors settings or in vehicles. Fire deaths decreased 19% in the 1980’s and a further 25% in the 1990’s even though the state population grew from 3.8 to 4.9 million people in the same time period. In Olmsted County there were 26 fire related deaths between 1983 and 2006.

The following table contains the dollar losses and fire deaths in Olmsted County that are reported in the State Fire Marshall’s reports of 2002 to 2006. The population reported for these years except two was 133,283 and those years are labeled as “not complete reporting”.

Year Total Fire Total Total Fire Rate Average Fire Runs Other County (fire per Dollar Deaths Runs Dollar persons) Loss/Fire Loss 2006 302 6,548 1,511,295 458 (Ave. for 5,193 2 state is 292) 2005 250 6,474 3,684,892 587(Ave. for 16,233 0 state is 313) 2004(not 384 5,453 2,571,600 343(Ave. for 7,104 0 complete state is 241) reporting) 2003 328 6,022 2,322,453 429(Ave. for 7,468 0 state is 296) 2002(not 297 5,500 1,579,769 433(Ave. for 5,504 0 complete state is 293) reporting)

The Rochester Fire Department reported vegetation fires (grass, brush, other natural vegetation fires) as follows:

Olmsted County, MN Page 94

Grass fire: 2008 (year to date) – 5; 2007-12 Brush or brash/grass mix: 2008 (year to date) – 6; 2007 – 13 Natural vegetation fire, other: 2008 (year to date) – 2; 2007 – 10

Agricultural fires are not separated from the list of vehicle or structure fires by the State Fire Marshal. Based on the annual report by the State Fire Marshal agricultural fires amount to a very small number and dollar loss compared to fires reported in urban areas. However, agricultural structure fires are of importance because of the potential for the creation of serious chemical releases due to farm chemical storage and due to the potential for the creation of waste material that can produce waste disposal and health related impacts. Fires of housing facilities for animals can cause large numbers of animal deaths which also creates an immediate disposal problem for the landowner, Olmsted County and the Board of Animal Health. Fires that occur in product storage facilities also create a need for disposal of burned crop commodities. According to a 1999 report of fire in rural areas by the State Fire Marshal, rural fires are slightly more likely to occur in non-residential than in residential structures and are more likely to spread beyond the immediate spot of ignition to the entire building and beyond than are urban fires.

Catastrophic events can occur from fires at industrial facilities such as manufacturing plants, hazardous material/waste storage facilities, and transportation sector accidents on roadways, railroad or pipeline facilities. Related impacts can include the spread of fires to off-site properties and the release of hazardous materials into the community. Pipeline fires and explosions are an example of such an event.

The fire departments in Olmsted County regularly include educational programs for school children and for the general public. Olmsted County, the townships and municipalities all have adopted and administer the Minnesota version of the International Building Code which includes safety requirements that address fire in structures. The Rochester Fire Department also reviews all development proposals and building plans for conformance with local fire related regulations.

Vulnerability

VULNERABILITY TO STRUCTURE AND VEHICLE FIRES Frequency Highly Likely Impact/damage Slight to Severe Warning Time None-minimal Location County-wide, primarily within city limits and along major transportation corridors Geographic Extent County-wide – Localized impact Consequences (Likely Majority are limited, small number can be Adverse Impact) critical to catastrophic due to fire intensity, numbers of people in a building, or due to the related impacts that may occur from a commercial/industrial accident.

Olmsted County, MN Page 95

Hazardous Materials/Waste

Facilities that handle hazardous materials, release hazardous materials and pipelines are included in this hazard category. Hazardous materials are chemical substances, which if released, or misused can pose a threat to the environment or health of a individuals and the community. These chemicals are used in industry, agriculture, medicine, research and consumer goods throughout Olmsted County. By law hazardous materials consist of explosives, flammable and combustible substances, corrosive substances, poisons and radioactive materials.

Hazardous materials and waste are generated locally and traverse the County by truck and train. The Minnesota All Hazard Mitigation Plan reports that hazardous material releases may occur from:

Fixed site facilities (such as refineries, chemical plants manufacturing facilities, wastewater treatment plant, gas stations, medical facilities, farm chemical storage facilities, etc.); Highway and rail transportation (such as tanker trucks, chemical trucks and railroad tankers); Marine transportation (does not apply in Olmsted County); Air transportation (cargo packages, fuel handling/storage facilities); Pipeline transportation (liquid petroleum, natural gas, other chemicals).

Olmsted County is traversed by four federal highways including Interstate 90, TH’s 14, 52 and 63. It also is crossed east-west by the Dakota, Minnesota, and Eastern Railroad, now owned by the Canadian Pacific Railroad. These transportation facilities present potential locations for transportation related incidents that can affect concentrated population centers. The Rochester International Airport located adjacent to Interstate 90 and TH 63 is also a transportation related source of hazardous materials as part of the fixed facility and in the possible shipping of hazardous materials.

The Minnesota Department of Health reported hazardous substances emergency events between the years 1995 and 2006. In Olmsted County there were 88 events at fixed facilities, and 28 transportation events with four evacuation events and five victims. According to the Department of Health, in the metropolitan areas of Minnesota including Rochester events at manufacturing facilities are the most prevalent. Olmsted County ranks slightly higher than the median number of events per 100,000 people at 7.8 events compared to the statewide median of 7.2 events.

Olmsted County, MN Page 96

Olmsted County, MN Page 97

More hazard events occur in agriculture than in manufacturing in Olmsted County.

Olmsted County, MN Page 98

As reported in the original Environmental Impact Statement for the Powder River Basin (expansion of the DME Railroad) recently purchased by the Canadian Pacific Railroad, during 1997 and 1998, DM&E transported a variety of hazardous materials, many of which are associated with rural agricultural activities. Hazardous materials transported included liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), anhydrous ammonia, phosphoric acid, ferric chloride, fuel oil, and ethylene acetyl (flammable gas). DM&E currently transports approximately 200-250 carloads of these materials, per year, throughout their system. The majority of the carloads contain LPG, phosphoric acid, and anhydrous ammonia. DM&E operates key trains. . The county is not aware of changes to the materials shipped or the amount at this time due to a change in the ownership.

(Key trains – any train with five or more tank carloads of chemicals classified as a Poison Inhalation Hazard (PIH), or with a total of 20 rail cars with any combination of PIHs, flammable gases, explosives or environmentally sensitive chemicals.)

Olmsted County, MN Page 99

Vulnerability

VULNERABILITY TO HAZARDOUS MATERIALS/WASTE RELEASE Frequency Likely Impact/damage Slight to Very Severe Warning Time None-minimal Location County-wide, primarily in within city limits and along major transportation corridors Geographic Extent Localized-community wide dependent on material Consequences (Likely Majority are limited, small number can be Adverse Impact) critical to catastrophic

Olmsted County, MN Page 100

Dam Failure

A “dam” is an artificial barrier that has the ability to impound water, wastewater, or any liquid borne material for the purpose of storage or the control of water. Dams can fail for one or a combination of the following reasons: Overtopping caused by floods that exceed the capacity of the dam. Deliberate acts of sabotage Structural failure of materials used in dam construction. Movement and/or failure of the foundation supporting the dam. Settlement and cracking of concrete of embankment dams. Piping and internal erosion of soil in embankment dams. Inadequate maintenance and upkeep

The hazard classifications for dams as identified in MR 6115.0300 are as follows: Class I – any loss of life or serious hazard, or damage to health, main highways, high-value industrial or commercial properties, major public utilities, or serious direct or indirect, economic loss to the public(high hazard); Class II – possible health hazard or probable loss of high-value property, damage to secondary highways, railroads or other public utilities, or limited direct or indirect economic loss to the public other than that described in Class III (Significant hazard); and Class III – property losses restricted mainly to rural buildings and local county and township roads which are an essential part of the rural transportation system serving the area involved (low hazard). The Minnesota Dam Safety Program is administered through the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Emergency Action Plans (EAP) are required for all Class I dams in the state. The Department administers the dam inventory program for Minnesota and has identified 17 structures in the inventory for Olmsted County. Seven of the 17 structures are flood control reservoir dams built in the early 1990’s for the Rochester flood control project by the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service. These structures are covered by an EAP. Other dams of significance include the Lake Shady Dam, the Silver Lake Dam and the new dam constructed for a stormwater pond along 50th Ave., NW in Rochester. The Lake Shady dam in Oronoco can withstand only a 50 year storm event. As a result it is the #18 dam on the MN DNR list for dams in need of repair or removal.

The other dams listed are considered Low hazard dams, including the Mayowood Lake dam, and are located in less developed or rural areas of the county. The only recent dam failure in Olmsted County was the Stewartville dam that formed Lake Florence, on the Root River, that failed in a storm in the 1990’s and was not rebuilt. It is now the site of a city park.

Olmsted County, MN Page 101

List of Dams in Olmsted County Dam Owner River BR-1 CITY OF ROCHESTER BEAR CREEK CITY OF ROCHESTER 50TH AVENUE NW CITY OF ROCHESTER DRESSER VALLEY WATERSHED DREHER, JOHN ZUMBRO R – OFFSTREAM TRIB HOEHNE BROS. POND HOEHNE BROS ZUMBRO R – OFFSTREAM TRIB KR-3 CITY OF ROCHESTER CASCADE CREEK NORTH FORK KR-6 CITY OF ROCHESTER CASCADE CREEK – TRIB KR-7 CITY OF ROCHESTER CASCADE CREEK N FORK – TRIB LA MOYNE DETENTION LA MOYNE, BRUCE ZUMBRO R – OFFSTREAM TRIB MAYOWOOD LAKE COUNTY OF OLMSTED ZUMBRO RIVER SOUTH FORK OLMSTED COUNTY RD 10 COUNTY OF OLMSTED LYNCH CREEK – TRIB SHADY LAKE COUNTY OF OLMSTED ZUMBRO RIVER MIDDLE FORK SIMONSON DETENTION POLAN, JACK ZUMBRO R – OFFSTREAM TRIB SOUTH BRANCH ZUMBRO RIVER CITY OF ROCHESTER ZUMBRO RIVER SOUTH FORK SR-2 CITY OF ROCHESTER SILVER CREEK STEWARTVILLE CITY OF STEWARTVILLE ROOT RIVER NORTH BRANCH WR-4 CITY OF ROCHESTER WILLOW CREEK – TRIB WR-6A CITY OF ROCHESTER WILLOW CREEK

Vulnerability

VULNERABILITY TO DAM FAILURE Frequency Unlikely Impact/damage Severe Warning Time None-minimal Location Rochester urbanized area, City of Oronoco Geographic Extent Localized to river corridors below reservoirs Consequences (Likely Critical to catastrophic Adverse Impact)

Olmsted County, MN Page 102

Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment

Water Supply

The State of Minnesota has been regulating public water supply systems since 1976 under the provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974. “Public water supply systems” consists of water supply systems that have their own water source and provide water to 25 or more people, or have 15 or more service connections. These systems are either community or non-community systems, such as resorts, businesses outside city limits, manufactured home parks, etc. The Department of Health requires testing of all public water supply systems.

Water supply is becoming a more critical resource worldwide and in certain regions of the United States. Water supply for potable water purposes is determined by the source availability, in our case within the aquifers within geologic units in Olmsted County, and by water quality. Water pollution can reduce the sources of water or require tremendous public investment in water treatment in order to meet the needs of growth in Olmsted County. For example, the “Upper Carbonate Aquifer” in Olmsted County is no longer available as a well water source due to the existing contaminants in the groundwater system.

The St. Peter-Prairie du Chien-Jordan Aquifer is the groundwater system that is the predominant aquifer utilized as the primary potable and industrial water supply in Olmsted County. The Decorah Shale-Glenwood-Platteville formation is identified as an aquaclude –retards the downward movement of water and pollutants – and provides some level of protection for this aquifer. This Decorah Shale formation has been eroded away in the northern portion of the county, including portions of the City of Rochester, Oronoco and Pine Island, and in the river valleys including Chatfield. The edge of the Decorah Shale formation, as noted earlier, is a narrow band in the landscape that is the location of a concentrated groundwater flow into the St. Peter-Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer. Portions of this aquifer not protected by the Decorah Shale formation are vulnerable to groundwater pollution but the water supply systems to date do not generally have contamination problems. The karst geology of the southeastern Minnesota counties is very sensitive to pollutants and chemicals applied to the soils in the county.

All of the public water supply systems and individual water systems for dwellings, farms and businesses in Olmsted County are dependent on the groundwater system for potable water. No private or public systems for potable water use the surface waters of Olmsted County due to the existing water quality and the variable quantity throughout the county. No public water supply systems were cited in the annual report by the Minnesota Department of Health (2006, 2008) for exceeding the water quality standards. One non-community system in Olmsted County was identified with violations of water quality standards in 2006, five non-community wells in 2005, and one in 2004 all from coliform bacteria contamination. Violations can be caused by operating procedures, chronic problems related to natural or manmade groundwater pollution, or significant short term events such as flooding of wells, or polluted runoff from fires or other significant events.

According to the report Safe Drinking Water in Minnesota: A Summary of Drinking Water Protection Activities in Minnesota for 2008, the Minnesota Department of Health has identified three basic strategies to safeguard the quality of our drinking water in Minnesota including:

Olmsted County, MN Page 103

Prevention. Preventing contamination of the source water used by public water supply systems—lakes, rivers, and water wells—is an important component of drinking water protection. This aspect of drinking water protection includes measures such as regulating land use, regulating the construction of water treatment facilities, and controlling potential sources of pollution. Treatment. Most community water supply systems use some form of treatment, so the water will be palatable and safe to drink. Many systems require routine disinfection as a safeguard against potential problems with bacterial contamination. Groundwater systems are less likely to require disinfection, because contaminants tend to be filtered out of the water as it moves downward through the earth from the surface to the underground sources tapped by wells. Monitoring. Monitoring is the critical element of compliance activities under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). Under provisions of the act, public water supply systems are required to sample treated— or “finished”—water on a regular basis, and submit the samples to the MDH laboratory for analysis. The samples are tested for a broad range of potential contaminants. If unacceptable levels of contaminants are found, the water supply owner or operator is legally responsible for informing the people who use the water and for taking steps to eliminate potential health hazards.

Under the provisions of the SDWA, the individual public water supply system is responsible for taking water samples and submitting them to certified laboratories for analysis. To lessen the burden on water supply operators, most of the required samples are collected by field staff from MDH. Minnesota’s public water supply operators have one of the best records in the nation regarding compliance with these sampling and testing requirements.

One of the steps that the Minnesota Department of Health has taken for communities (public and private community systems) to protect their water supply is to require the development of wellhead protection plans. Rochester has the capability and need to conduct detailed studies of emergency response zones and drinking water supply management areas, or areas affected by the 50 year time of travel for groundwater flow for each well in the city system. The figure below illustrates the regional groundwater flow and well contribution zones for city wells in Rochester, as presented by the Rochester Public Utilities in the City of Rochester Wellhead Protection Plan. Separate plans have been developed for each city with a centralized water system and for private community systems.

The map of below illustrates the groundwater divide (red line) and groundwater flow direction of the St. Peter-Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer (red arrows). Wellhead areas as determined by the Rochester Wellhead Plan are marked by the well location (red dot) and the wellhead protection area based on the 50 year time of travel of groundwater to the well. This map is based on the Olmsted County Geologic Atlas (1980) and two studies by the U.S. Geological Survey both published in 1991.

Olmsted County, MN Page 104

The federal Safe Drinking Water Act as amended in 2002 requires the development of a Water Emergency and Conservation Plan for communities over 3,300 population. The plan requires review of emergency response and conservation programs.

“Water conservation programs are intended to reduce demand for water, improve the efficiency in use and reduce losses and waste of water. Long-term conservation measures that improve overall water use efficiencies can help reduce the need for short-term conservation measures. Water conservation is an important part of water resource management and can also help utility managers satisfy the ever- increasing demands being placed on water resources.”

The City of Rochester Public Utilities Department has prepared such a plan and submitted the plan to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.

Olmsted County, MN Page 105

Vulnerability

VULNERABILITY TO WATER SUPPLY CONTAMINATION Frequency Occasional when inclusive of the entire county and entire water systems Impact/damage Slight to Moderate Warning Time More than 12 hours Location County-wide Geographic Extent Localized to individual wells-community wide in Byron, Chatfield, Dover, Eyota, Pine Island, and Stewartville due to the small number of wells in each community. In Rochester portions of the water supply system may be affected by water supply contamination due to the number of wells Consequences (Likely Limited Adverse Impact)

Wastewater Treatment

Six of the seven cities with sizable areas located within Olmsted County are served by a centralized wastewater treatment system. There are five wastewater treatment plants with three located within the limits of Olmsted County. Two of the systems are located within the Root River watershed, one in the Whitewater watershed and two in the Zumbro River watershed. The plants are located in Byron, Chatfield, Rochester, St. Charles (serving Eyota, Dover, and St. Charles), and Stewartville. All of the systems discharge their flow to a surface water body and land apply the sludge created by the treatment process. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency enforces the treatment standards that are applied to each plant. The reported treatment capacities are listed in the table.

Plant Annual Monthly Discharge Body of Water Average Average Capacity Capacity Byron 0.52 mgd 1.4 mgd South Branch Middle Fork Zumbro River Chatfield 0.475 mgd 0.475 North Branch Root River Rochester 19.1 mgd 23.85 mgd South Branch Zumbro River Whitewater (Eyota, 2.184 mgd 1.12 mgd South Fork Whitewater Dover, St. Charles) River Stewartville 1.1 mgd 1.1 mgd North Branch Root River

The agricultural areas and suburban subdivisions and rural businesses utilize on-site sewage treatment systems. Olmsted County and 13 townships are responsible for permitting and inspecting the on-site systems. In a 2008 report on southeastern Minnesota small community wastewater needs 13 subdivisions, unincorporated villages, and the City of Oronoco were identified as in some level of

Olmsted County, MN Page 106

need and listed as low to high priorities. The City of Oronoco was the only community listed as a high priority for further study. All of the centralized facilities are permitted and monitored by the treatment facility and by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.

In August , 2007 during the major flood event, discussed in the Floods subsection of Section VI of this plan, several cities experienced infiltration of groundwater into wastewater pipes and the wastewater treatment plant, and also backflows of sewage into homes and businesses. This problem is of particular concern for the Dover/Eyota/St. Charles system. The City of Rochester has conducted studies that have identified problems and possible improvements to their system. The backflow problem appears more widespread in Dover and Eyota. (See discussion in Floods subsection of Section VI)

A more recent concern as reported in the CURA Reporter (Center for Urban and Regional Affairs, University of Minnesota) in the Fall, 2006 issue is antibiotic resistant bacteria that survive wastewater treatment and are discharged into waterbodies. The wastewater treatment system transports/discharges antibiotics and other pharmaceuticals used by industry and people. Treatment plants can be used to reduce/control the release of antibiotic resistant bacteria into the surface water system of southeast Minnesota according to the researchers from the University of Minnesota. Research continues on pharmaceuticals in community wastewater systems.

Vulnerability

VULNERABILITY TO WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM FAILURE Frequency Unlikely. Occasionally exceeding permit requirements when inclusive of the entire county and all of the treatment systems. There are no known complete failures of the modern facilities. Backflow of sewage into basements occurs during large storm events. Impact/damage Slight to Moderate Warning Time None-minimal Location Within city limits – cities with centralized systems. City of Oronoco and suburban and rural areas – community or individual sewage treatment system failures Geographic Extent Localized-community wide Consequences (Likely Limited. Major failure would have a temporary Adverse Impact) massive impact on any of the river systems. The most sensitive waterbodies are Lake Zumbro and the Whitewater River (trout waters) Terrorism

Olmsted County, MN Page 107

According to the Minnesota All-Hazard Mitigation Plan, to discuss terrorism in the proper context it needs to be defined. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) categorizes terrorism in the United States as one of two types, i.e., domestic terrorism or international terrorism. Domestic terrorism involves groups or individuals whose terrorist activities are directed at elements of our government or population without foreign direction. International terrorism involves groups or individuals whose terrorist activities are foreign- based and/or directed by countries or groups outside of the United States or whose activities transcend national boundaries.

The FBI divides terrorist-related activity into three categories: 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. A suspect terrorist incident is a potential act of terrorism to which responsibility cannot be attributed at the time to known or suspected terrorist group or individual. Terrorism prevention is a document 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.

While Olmsted County is a predominately rural county by geographic area, there is substantial urban and infrastructure investment in Rochester and Olmsted County that may be significant potential targets and vulnerable facilities.

Olmsted County prepared an asset-specific assessment to identify potentially at-risk critical facilities, since Acts of terrorism are random and cannot be predicted. The assessment drew on the county’s Emergency Operations Plan, Domestic Preparedness Assessment and assets identified through Y2K planning, as well as the Minnesota Department of Transportation’s identification of critical bridges. It considered the primary mode of a possible disaster: contamination (chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear), energy (explosive, arson) or failure/denial of services (sabotage, infrastructure breakdown and disruption). It considered eight critical infrastructure categories: telecommunications, electrical power systems, gas and oil facilities, financial institutions, transportation networks, water supply systems, government services and emergency services. Finally, it considered the vulnerability of the county’s assets, both with respect to its “attractiveness,” for example, is it highly visible or it draws large crowds and its current level of protection from an attack.

POTENTIAL TARGETS IN OLMSTED COUNTY Assets Level of protection Attractiveness Rochester Silver Lake Power Plant , Fenced, controlled access Disruption of power generation in and gas generating facility, and substations beyond Olmsted County and other electricity system components of service providers in county Dams Open access Damage to property within breach area including some populated areas Highway bridges and major highways Open access by person and vehicle Disruption of state/national transportation routes Hospitals and other medical facilities Open access Damage to buildings and limited to (Mayo Foundation and Olmsted immediate population Medical Center facilities) including

Olmsted County, MN Page 108

power facilities Federal Medical Center Fenced, controlled access Damage to buildings, prisoner release School buildings – K-12 and colleges Open access Damage to buildings and limited to immediate population Government buildings Open access Damage to buildings and limited to immediate population City wastewater treatment plants Fenced, controlled access Disruption of service for highly populated areas of county Pipelines and powerlines Open access Disruption of service at regional level Rochester International Airport Open access to terminal and related Damage to facilities in immediate area, buildings. Air field is fenced, disruption to airline service controlled access City and county parks and county Open access Damage to buildings and limited to fairgrounds, civic center, recreation immediate population centers, libraries Water towers and well houses Open access to structures Disruption to portions of the population connect to the water supply system in cities Telecommunications facilities Fenced, scattered locations Disruption in television, radio cell throughout the county phone systems, and emergency communications systems Major commercial facilities – IBM, Open access for shopping centers, Damage to buildings and population in Crenlo, Mayo Clinic offices, shopping controlled access to buildings and in buildings centers, etc. some cases grounds Agricultural chemical distribution Open access to site and facilities Release of chemicals to the air and businesses water and health impact to nearby population

No serious terrorism threats have occurred within Olmsted County. Minor occurrences have been documented those being related to minor protests, gang activity and threats to school populations.

Vulnerability

VULNERABILITY TO TERRORISM Frequency Unlikely. Impact/damage Slight to Very Severe Warning Time None Location County-wide Geographic Extent Localized-community wide Consequences (Likely Limited – catastrophic Adverse Impact)

Olmsted County, MN Page 109

Infectious Diseases

Hazards, Risks, Vulnerabilities

Increased risks of pandemic influenza due to the emerging H1N1 swine influenza pandemic and the ongoing H5N1 bird influenza epidemic

The swine flu novel virus first appeared in Mexico in March, 2009, and then quickly spread to the United States. As of June 3, 2009, the United States had reported 11,054 confirmed cases and 17 deaths in 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico; and, the World Health Organization had reported 19,273 cases in 66 countries with 117 deaths. Most of the cases had occurred in the North American countries of Mexico, the United States and Canada, but the numbers were growing quickly in Southern Hemisphere countries such as Australia (501 cases) and Argentina (131 cases). This is the first novel influenza virus since 1968 that has spread rapidly. Though the severity of H1N1 is mild thus far, the suddenness of its appearance and its current history of attacking young, healthy persons has awakened the world to the enormity of a potential pandemic and what could happen should the H1N1 virus increase in virulence.

We must also be aware that the H5N1 avian influenza has not disappeared. As of June 2, 2009, the World Health Organization reported that there had been 433 confirmed cases of H5N1 avian influenza diagnosed in humans from 15 different countries since 2003, and 262 (62%) of those individuals died. This virus is now endemic in many countries. The longer it lingers the greater the risk that it will mutate sufficiently to efficiently transmit human-to-human. The following historical record from the Minneapolis Morning Tribune archives how rapidly the 1918 pandemic moved through the Twin Cities once it arrived in Minnesota

Minneapolis Morning Tribune Records: 1918

• Oct 2 – “Influenza Spread Held Slight Here” • Oct 3 – “Epidemic in City Shows Slight Gain” • Oct 5 – “Influenza Halts U Opening” • Oct 8 – “8 Deaths from Influenza Here” • Oct 11- “Doctors Propose Drastic Lid Be Clamped on City” • Oct 12 – Hundreds of new cases, many deaths/d • Oct 13 – City Health Commissioner ordered all churches, schools, dance halls and theaters closed • Ultimately - More than 10,000 Minnesotans died

Increased reports of antibiotic or antiviral resistance to life-threatening illnesses due to inappropriate use of antibiotics in humans and/or ill-advised use in animals and an ever-growing number of individuals with immature or impaired immune systems complicate the control of some serious infectious diseases. (e.g. MRSA, VRE, tuberculosis, HIV)

In 2007, 3,495 cases of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections were reported by 12 sentinel hospital laboratories positioned around the state of Minnesota. Fifty

Olmsted County, MN Page 110

percent (1,761 cases) were classified as community-acquired MRSA, 47% (1,644 cases) were classified as hospital-acquired MRSA and 3% could not be classified. In recent years the ratio of community-acquired vs. hospital-acquired MRSA has been steadily increasing.

Fourteen (19%) of the 74 active TB cases managed by Olmsted County Public Health Services from 2004 to 2007 were resistant to one or more first line tuberculosis drugs.

Reduced immunization protection levels due to fear of adverse side effects and vaccine access issues have lead to preventable outbreaks of specific immunizable diseases and risk the reintroduction of old infectious diseases (e.g. measles, influenza)

According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in Atlanta, 20 million cases of measles still occur around the world each year, and in 2006, about 242,000 children died from the disease.

Due to excellent immunization levels, Minnesota reported only 18 measles cases from 1997 to 2007 and 15 of those cases were imported into Minnesota through international travel or immigration. Likewise, in the year 2000, the CDC declared that measles was no longer spreading in the United States, but an average of 61 cases was imported each year from foreign countries.

However, it is important not to lower our immunization guard! On August 22, 2008, CDC reported in the MMWR that 131 cases had already been reported through July of 2008, but unlike previous years, 123 of those cases were U.S. residents. One hundred twelve (112) of the 123 were not properly immunized, and “among these 112 patients, 95 (85%) were eligible for vaccination, and 63 (66%) of those were unvaccinated because of philosophical or religious beliefs” (see figure 2 below).

Olmsted County, MN Page 111

Increased exposure to exotic illnesses or exposure to diseases that are no longer common in the US are possible risks to Olmsted County residents who work, study or vacation in regions where these diseases are endemic, and when immigrants, visitors, students, patients and workers from endemic areas are also attracted to Olmsted County due to work, study and health care opportunities.

Access to Olmsted County is facilitated by the presence of an international airport and interstate highway; and, our guests are made comfortable in a city that has more hotel rooms per capita than any other city in Minnesota. These attributes not only increase the allure and vitality of the community, they also enhance the risk of introducing diseases such as SARS and tuberculosis.

Most Americans remember the SARS epidemic and the impact it had on Canada, our very close neighbor to the north, but few people probably realize that most of the worldwide spread of SARS started in one Hong Kong hotel:

Olmsted County, MN Page 112

Although tuberculosis has largely been controlled in the United States, more than 8.8 million people were infected and 1.6 million people died worldwide due to tuberculosis in 2005 according to the World Health Organization (WHO). In Olmsted County, the TB case rate per 100,000 population exceeded that of most counties in the state in the years 1999 thru 2007.

Active TB Disease Cases Olmsted County, 1996-2007

25 22 19 20 20 17 15 15 11 13 11 10 9 10 10

4 5

0 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Increased risk of exposure to vector-borne diseases such as Lyme disease, West Nile Virus and LaCrosse Encephalitis is occurring due to easier work/recreation access into endemic areas. Although Olmsted County is not yet considered an endemic area for these diseases, many of our Olmsted County, MN Page 113

residents travel to the endemic areas. Recently, the Minnesota Department of Health set up surveillance sites in counties that border areas known to be endemic for tick-borne diseases. One of those areas is in Olmsted County where investigators have found ticks capable of carrying tick- borne diseases in all three stages of development (see figure below). On June 2, 2009, the Minnesota Department of Health reported that the Japanese Rock Pool mosquito had taken up residence in Minnesota and was capable of transmitting the viruses that cause LaCrosse Encephalitis and West Nile Virus diseases.

Other zoonotic diseases such as the variant form of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (“mad cow disease”), bovine tuberculosis and chronic wasting disease can present special challenges to animal health and subsequent economic risk if not quickly detected and controlled. Bovine TB has become endemic in northern Minnesota, while a case of chronic wasting disease was recently diagnosed in an Olmsted County elk herd.

Tick-borne Disease Endemic Region and Tick Surveillance Sites

Olmsted County, MN Page 114

Reported Cases of LaCrosse Encephalitis by County of Residence, Minnesota, 1985-2007

Sherburne n = 123 cases*

Anoka

Wright 71 1 Wash- ing- Hennepin 6 Ram- ton sey 1

Carver 18 McLeod 1

8 Scott Dakota Sibley 5 5 1 Rice Goodhue Nicollet 2 Wabasha Le Sueur 2 13 1 Brown 5 Dodge Blue Earth Olmsted Waseca Steele Winona 2 2 7 14

Faribault Freeborn Mower Fillmore Houston 1 7 21

*Cases include confirmed and probable cases

An increasing demand for fresh and processed foods, and the ability to rapidly import them from all over the world has introduced an enormous need to monitor and control production and distribution processes that may introduce or fail to remove contaminants (e.g. E.coli 0157:H7 or Salmonella) .

Complex, World-Wide System of Food Production and Distribution

Farm Food can be contaminated at any point, from Transport farm to fork. Mill / Slaughter / Food Processor Transport/Imports

Restaurant/Retail

Consumer

Photo: www.bcsalmon.ca/bcsmc/ffact2.htm

Olmsted County continues to be at increased risk for foodborne illnesses due to an estimated 30,000 persons who commute each day to Rochester to work, and 1000’s of visitors who come to Olmsted County, MN Page 115

conferences, conventions, community celebrations and other events that increase food service opportunities. Foodborne Illness Reports and Outbreaks , Olmsted County 1999-2008

Total illness reports Number of outbreaks 97

84 83

75 70 63 63 57 54 51

5 3 4 4 4 3 1 2 1 1

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Increased risk of attacks with biological weapons (e.g. anthrax, plague, small pox) because of easier access to supplies and the information necessary to develop and grow organisms and create effective delivery systems is also a risk to Olmsted County. Even the threat of attack can have devastating consequences such as the thousands of phone calls, investigations and ER visits that were precipitated by reports of “white powder” following the anthrax attack on public officials and the news media (see below). The presence of the Federal Medical Center, an international airport, two college campuses and the Mayo Clinic are just a few reasons why Olmsted County/Rochester is a potential target.

Olmsted County, MN Page 116

USA Anthrax, 2001

Vulnerability

VULNERABILITY TO INFECTIOUS DISEASES Frequency Unlikely – Likely. Dependant on disease Impact/damage Slight to Very Severe Warning Time More than 12 hours Location County-wide Geographic Extent Localized-community wide Consequences (Likely Negligible – catastrophic Adverse Impact)

Olmsted County, MN Page 117

SECTION VII – RISK ASSESSMENT

The risk assessment is an evaluation of the “potential for loss associated with a given hazard”. The risks identified and described in the previous sections and the impact must be analyzed to determine future effective planning and the development of cost effective programs. The list of hazards is exhaustive and identifies some natural and technological hazards that are unlikely to occur in Olmsted County. Therefore, the plan includes a detailed risk assessment for those that have the highest probability of affecting the county and the greatest potential for mitigation at the local level.

The Olmsted County Homeland Security and Emergency Management Policy Committee conducted a hazard vulnerability analysis in May, 2008. The assessment was based on the requirements of the US Department of Homeland Security and did not include some of the natural hazards of the All- Hazard Mitigation Plan, while including some technological hazards not included in this plan. The risk assessment included the likelihood of occurrence, the consequences of the hazard, and the vulnerability of the community to the hazard. The analysis was based on a countywide view of the hazard event rather than determining localized impacts of the event. The risk was determined by the committee at 1, 3 and 5 years from 2008. A general summary of this risk assessment is included in the appendices.

The list of critical facilities, economic assets, areas of population concentration, and resources of special concern are identified and that may be affected by natural or technological hazards or both. Vulnerability is the “susceptibility to physical injury, harm, damage, or economic loss”. The table below summarizes these facilities.

Facility Name and Location Vulnerability Description – Risk Description Mayo Clinic – downtown Rochester Major concentration of people; technological hazards impacts Methodist Hospital – downtown Rochester Major concentration of people; technological hazards impacts; loss of critical care facility St. Mary’s Hospital – downtown Rochester Major concentration of people; technological hazards impacts; loss of critical care facility Silver Lake Power Plant, gas generating Disruption of energy supply to regional power facility, power facilities for Mayo Clinic campus grid or to the Mayo Clinic – Rochester and other electric system services campus(heating/cooling also) Community wastewater treatment plants – Disruption of wastewater treatment system; Byron, Rochester, St. Charles, Pine Island, water supply contamination; hazardous Stewartville chemical spills RCTC/Winona State, and University of MN Large gathering site; potential for mass campuses in Rochester casualties, spread of communicable diseases High school campuses – Byron, Chatfield, Large gathering site; potential for mass Eyota, Pine Island, Rochester, Stewartville casualties, spread of communicable diseases Government Center and county jail – Interruption of government services, inmate Rochester population, dispatch center, concentration of

Olmsted County, MN Page 118

employees Magellan Pipeline Co. storage facility – Eyota Hazardous chemical spills, explosion/fire Rochester International Airport Loss of regional airport facility; disruption of some mail service; disruption of access to Mayo Clinic and other major businesses in region DME railroad right of way Derailment; hazardous chemical releases in high population areas; disruption of rail shipments Interstate-90 and TH 52 bridges Disruption of highway access in county and on a regional basis beyond Minnesota Chesterwoods Park Dam and other flood Downstream flooding in case of breach; public control reservoirs safety impact; infrastructure impact Major hotels and office buildings – Rochester Large gathering site; potential for mass downtown casualties IBM plant- Rochester Large gathering site; potential for mass casualties; hazardous materials release poses a public health threat Pipelines and major powerlines crossing the Hazardous chemical spills, explosion/fire; loss county of electric power grid on a regional basis Federal Medical Center Concentrated population of inmates Agricultural chemical distribution businesses Large scale release of hazardous materials, impact to the air or water and nearby population Olmsted Medical Center Hospital Major concentration of people; technological hazards impacts; loss of critical care facility Olmsted County Human Services Campus Interruption of county government services, concentration of employees adjacent to the Federal Medical Center Olmsted Waste to Energy Facility Disruption of energy supply, heating/cooling supply, to numerous buildings near the plant and in the downtown area, and processing of solid waste.

There are other facilities, buildings or infrastructure that are vulnerable but may not be considered critical facilities for the economic or support facilities in the county.

Facility Risk Description Elementary and middle schools Concentrated vulnerable population Elderly housing facilities Concentrated vulnerable population Rochester Civic Center Large gathering site; potential for mass casualties Major shopping centers – Rochester Large gathering site; potential for mass casualties Well houses and water towers Loss of potable water supply to large populations Recreation centers, county fairgrounds Large gathering site; potential for mass casualties Nursery schools, day care facilities Concentrated vulnerable population

Olmsted County, MN Page 119

(All of these facilities have been mapped in some form for various comprehensive planning and emergency operations projects.)

The plan identifies a number of countywide hazards both natural and technological. Those hazards are listed in the table and rated for vulnerability and priorities for mitigation at the county/community level.

Natural and Hazard Probability Mitigation Potential Priority Technological Ranking Hazards to County Violent storms – High Low Low hail, lightning, winter storms Tornadoes and High Low High straight line winds Extreme Medium Low Low temperatures and drought Flooding Medium Medium Medium Wildfire Low Medium Low Drought Low Low Low Landslides Low Medium Low Sinkholes High Medium Low Infectious diseases Medium High Medium Fire High High High (structure/vehicle) Hazardous Medium High High materials/waste Groundwater supply Low Medium Medium Dam failure Low High Medium Wastewater Low High High treatment system failure Terrorism Low High Medium

Hazards that were not reviewed further due to the low probability of occurrence in Olmsted County or southeastern Minnesota and low level of need to address mitigation measures included,

snow avalanches, expansive soils, tsunamis, volcanoes, earthquakes.

The probability ranking for the table is described as follows (based on a similar system used in the Minnesota plan)

Olmsted County, MN Page 120

Ranking Criteria High The hazard impacts the county annually, or more frequently. The hazard is widespread, generally affecting more than one community in each event. There is reliable methodology for identifying events and locations. Medium The hazard impacts the county occasionally, but not annually. The hazard is localized, affecting small areas. The methodology for identifying events is not well-established, or not applied countywide. Low The hazard occurs infrequently, generally less than every five years on a large scale. Localized events may occur more frequently on a small scale. A methodology for identifying events or severity is poorly understood or only available on a local basis.

Mitigation potential ranking is described by the following terms.

Ranking Criteria High Methods for reducing risk are technically reliable. The County or cities have experience implementing mitigation measures. There are multiple measures that are cost effective. Mitigation measures protect lives and property over the long term. Medium Mitigation methods are established. The county and cities have limited experience with the measures. There is a limited range of effective mitigation that is cost effective in limited circumstances Low Methods of mitigation are not well established or proven. The county and cities have little experience in implementation. There are a limited range of measures that are proven to be cost effective. Long term effectiveness is not known.

Elected Officials Survey

The survey of elected officials indicated somewhat different perceived threat levels posed by the hazards listed in the survey. The table below lists the hazards from the highest threat to the lowest. The respondents ranked each by the likelihood of occurrence and the severity of impacts. Not all hazards are listed but can be seen in Appendix #3. The ranking is on a scale of 4 being very concerned to 1 no concern. The “T” represents township response and “C” represents city response.

Hazard Threat Ranking Hazardous waste/materials releases T – 2.8, C – 3.1 Infectious disease T – 2.6, C – 3.1 Violent Storms T – 2.4, C – 3.2 Karst geology T – 2.7, C – 2.9 Wastewater Treatment T – 2.4, C – 2.7 Fire (buildings, vehicles) T – 2.5, C – 2.4

Olmsted County, MN Page 121

Terrorism T – 2.2, C – 2.4 Water supply contamination T – 3, C – 1.5 Flooding T – 2.3, C – 1.5

Individual city and township rankings were not listed separately due to the small number of elected officials and also due to the level of response from each city and township.

Olmsted County, MN Page 122

SECTION VIII – MITIGATION STRATEGIES

The plan has identified and described the hazards that affect Olmsted County. The risks and vulnerabilities have been assessed. This section of the plan identifies and describes strategies focused on natural and technological hazards.

The overall goals of the plan are to reduce the loss of life and damages to properties from both natural and technological hazards. The goals can be organized into several implementation approaches. Those implementation approaches include:

Prevention – local government taking steps to minimize the impact of hazards (planning, regulations, capital improvement programs) Protection of critical facilities – certain public and private facilities are critical for daily activities in communities and for emergency response Protect private property – local government and property owners can apply best management practices to reduce the vulnerability of private property Public education – an informed public will have the information to take appropriate steps to reduce vulnerability Protect natural resources – natural resources are important for our economic activities and are critical green infrastructure Structural projects – the construction of structures that mitigates a hazard Emergency services – public and private sector capabilities to respond to a disaster Coordination/cooperation – local governments taking steps to implement mitigation strategies and strengthen emergency response

The strategies are listed by hazard category and described by MA or mitigation action, priority, lead agency, funding source, and time frame. Mitigation Action is categorized as follows:

Prevention (P) Property/facility protection (PP) Public education and awareness (PE) Natural resources protection (N) Structural projects (S) Emergency services (E) Coordination/cooperation (C)

The priority column is based on several factors that, in part, are an identification of the feasibility of the strategy. The costs for each strategy are not a part of this plan but must be developed at the time that the strategy is considered for implementation. The feasibility of each strategy is based on

Olmsted County, MN Page 123

several factors that will need to be updated at the time that the strategy is reviewed for implementation. Those factors considered as the strategies were developed include:

Legality of the strategy based on state law/rules; Resource availability – staff, funding, ongoing program or activity, capabilities of the community; Cost of the strategy; Effectiveness of the strategy; Capacity for implementation – community understanding and acceptance.

For each column the designations are classified as follows:

Priority: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L) New program (N), Ongoing program (O)

Funding: Not funded (N), Partially funded (P), Currently funded (F), and a time frame for implementation of 1-5 years (ST), 5-10 years (MT), and more than 10 years (LT)

Olmsted County, MN Page 124

General Planning/Communications Strategies MA Strategy Priority Lead Funding Agency P, N Encourage all communities within Olmsted H, O Olmsted County P, ST County to address natural hazards in their HSEM, ROPD, comprehensive plans. (Each city will need to Byron, Chatfield, Dover, Eyota, utilize information from the plan during plan Olmsted County updates over the next five years. The Olmsted Oronoco, Pine HSEM and ROPD will be available to provide Island, Rochester, assistance where requested.) Stewartville P,N Conduct a climate change vulnerability M, N ROPD N, ST assessment and apply the knowledge to this plan and all other community comprehensive plan elements. E Complete the gap analysis for all hazards listed H, O Responsible P, ST in the plan and others identified by the HSEM agencies Policy Committee. P All cities and Olmsted County develop an M, N Byron, Chatfield, P, MT energy element to their comprehensive plans Dover, Eyota, Olmsted County that identifies vulnerabilities and strategies to Oronoco, Pine address changes in energy resources. Island, Rochester, Stewartville PE Redesign the existing web page on the H, O Olmsted N, ST Olmsted County website to include the hazard County HSEM plan, resources, and information on emergency preparedness. E Examine alternative methods and technology M, O Olmsted N, MT to allow direct notification of citizens in the County HSEM event of an emergency (City-Watch, Code Red, Reverse 911, or federal systems). E Develop a program directed to the population H, O City of N,ST in the county that is vulnerable to hazards due Rochester to language barriers. The City of Rochester is Emergency developing a program with the immigrant Management, community to address the need for improved Mayo Clinic communications in local emergencies PE Develop and distribute emergency response M, O Olmsted N, ST information for visitors to Rochester. HSEM and Distribution could be through the Convention Rochester and Visitors Bureau and Amateur Sports HSEM Commission E Coordinate emergency response between the H, O City of P, ST City of Stewartville and the Rochester Stewartville, International Airport in the case of airport Rochester Int. emergencies through the existing airport Airport emergency operations plan. E Address communications coordination for H, O Olmsted F, ST Chatfield and Pine Island, the two cities split by HSEM, county boundaries, in the updated Emergency Chatfield, Pine Operations Plan. Coordinate with Goodhue Island and Fillmore Counties. E Continue to collect and update critical data of H, O Olmsted F, ST use during an emergency and develop the HSEM means for inclusion in the Emergency Operations Plan.

Olmsted County, MN Page 125

Prevention (P) Priority: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L), Property/facility protection (PP) New program (N), Ongoing program (O) Public education and awareness (PE) Funding: Not funded (N), Partially funded (P), Natural resources protection (N) Currently funded (F), and a time frame for Structural projects (S) implementation of 1-5 years (ST), 5-10 years (MT), and Emergency services (E) more than 10 years (LT) Coordination/cooperation (C)

Olmsted County, MN Page 126

Drought MA Strategy Priority Lead Funding Agency E Develop a section of the emergency response M, N Olmsted P, MT plan for Olmsted County that covers severe County drought. The plan should address all community HSEM water systems and shared wells in suburban subdivisions. E Encourage each city to develop a drought M, N Olmsted P, MT response plan for their city water system. (The County City of Rochester has developed a plan – DNR HSEM Water Emergency and Conservation Plan) PE Enforce water conservation measures in the H, O Building P, MT building code for each jurisdiction by educating Code the public and contractors. officials E Encourage the development of a response plan L, N Olmsted N, MT that addresses the needs of agriculture during a SWCD, severe drought. Extension N Develop a countywide program for the use of M, N Olmsted N, MT Stormwater best management practices that SWCD, includes the use native plant species, stormwater Extension capture and other measures by public agencies Service and the private sector.

Prevention (P) Priority: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L), Property/facility protection (PP) New program (N), Ongoing program (O) Public education and awareness (PE) Funding: Not funded (N), Partially funded (P), Natural resources protection (N) Currently funded (F), and a time frame for Structural projects (S) implementation of 1-5 years (ST), 5-10 years (MT), and Emergency services (E) more than 10 years (LT) Coordination/cooperation (C)

Olmsted County, MN Page 127

Extreme Temperatures MA Strategy Priority Lead Funding Agency E Ensure that the emergency response plan for H, O Olmsted P, ST Olmsted County includes response actions for HSEM both winter and summer events. Include the identification of vulnerable populations and location in the county. N Encourage communities to study the use of M, N Each city N, MT vegetation for reducing the impacts of extreme temperatures including tree planting and windbreak development. E Investigate requiring the development of a M, N Olmsted N, MT response plan for all feedlot owners/operators for SWCD, feedlots of 500 or more animal units. (regulation Olmsted applied to all feedlots) HSEM E Identify and map the locations of all vulnerable H, N Olmsted P, ST populations for emergency response, and develop HSEM, a communications plan to notify vulnerable ROPD populations.

Prevention (P) Priority: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L), Property/facility protection (PP) New program (N), Ongoing program (O) Public education and awareness (PE) Funding: Not funded (N), Partially funded (P), Natural resources protection (N) Currently funded (F), and a time frame for Structural projects (S) implementation of 1-5 years (ST), 5-10 years (MT), and Emergency services (E) more than 10 years (LT) Coordination/cooperation (C)

Olmsted County, MN Page 128

Flooding MA Strategy Priority Lead Funding Agency C Improve monitoring of the reservoirs and H, O Olmsted P, ST watersheds in the county during severe HSEM, storms and flood events. SZJPB PP Investigate participation in the Community M, N Chatfield, Dover, N, ST Rating System (CRS) that would affect flood Eyota, Olmsted County Oronoco, insurance rates Pine Island, Rochester, Stewartville P Conduct an inventory and identify the highest M, N Public Works N, MT risk roads/bridges for flooding in the county. Departments Determine what measures to improve safety on those roads/bridges P, C Complete and implement the DFIRM project H, O Chatfield, Dover, F, ST in Olmsted County. Each community will Eyota, Olmsted County Oronoco, need to adopt the revised floodplain maps. Pine Island, Each community will need to update their Rochester, floodplain ordinance. Stewartville PP, Conduct an inventory and identify the highest L, N Public Works N, MT N, S risk streambank/waterbody shoreline erosion Departments (Chatfield, Dover, areas. Determine measures needed to Eyota, Oronoco, mitigate property damage. Pine Island, Rochester, Stewartville), SWCD P Study recent climate change impacts on M, O Rochester N, MT-LT storm events and flood frequency and Public Works inundation. Amend the storm water Department management plan for Rochester to reflect these changes. P Map all properties covered by Letters of Map M, O Chatfield, Dover, F(current),N Amendment and Letters of Map Revision Eyota, Olmsted (future), ST- County Oronoco, (those LOMR’s that list properties but do not Pine Island, LT amend the FIRM panel). Rochester, (continuous) Stewartville P Examine the use of Low Impact Development H, N Public Works P(Rochester), (LID) techniques in road and development Departments N, ST projects to more effectively manage (city, stormwater runoff during heavy rain events. township, and county), ROPD E Improve communications between units of M, O Olmsted N, ST government to control travel on HSEM transportation routes during major floods. P Encourage all cities to develop stormwater L, N Olmsted N, LT management plans. HSEM, each city N, C Investigate conducting watershed level L, N Olmsted N, LT stormwater management plans. County Water Identification of Best Management Practices Coor. and projects that reduce flood flows would be a primary goal of the plan. PE Develop educational materials and promote M, O ROPD, P, ST shoreland buffer vegetation Best Olmsted Management Practices, and monitoring. SWCD Olmsted County, MN Page 129

PE Continue to provide resources for the H,O Rochester F, ST Rochester stormwater program for Public Works educational materials and the use of Best Department Management Practices. PP Conduct a study of areas in cities that have H, N Dover, Eyota, N, ST reoccurring basement flooding and develop Rochester mitigation strategies. Identify measures to limit infiltration to the Dover and Eyota portions of the Dover/Eyota/St. Charles sewer system. S Through land acquisition, develop H, N City of Eyota N. ST stormwater control structures to retain and slow the flow of surface water runoff, preventing flooding damage to private and public property in Eyota PP, Implement the capital improvements H, N City of P, ST S identified by the city that will mitigate flood Rochester and stormwater impacts and stabilize facilties and stream/river channels.

Prevention (P) Priority: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L), Property/facility protection (PP) New program (N), Ongoing program (O) Public education and awareness (PE) Funding: Not funded (N), Partially funded (P), Natural resources protection (N) Currently funded (F), and a time frame for Structural projects (S) implementation of 1-5 years (ST), 5-10 years (MT), and Emergency services (E) more than 10 years (LT) Coordination/cooperation (C)

Olmsted County, MN Page 130

Landslides/Karst MA Strategy Priority Lead Funding Agency P Develop a model ordinance for use in every L, N ROPD N, MT community in the county that will minimize disturbance and avoid the development of certain areas that are unstable due to soils and/or geologic formation. N Conduct a study of unstable slopes and an L, N ROPD, Public N, ST inventory of areas in the county. Develop a Works plan to address unstable slopes particularly Departments near public roads and other critical facilities. P Create new standards in the Olmsted County H, N ROPD P, ST Zoning Ordinance to address karst features and protection of the groundwater system in the county.

Prevention (P) Priority: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L), Property/facility protection (PP) New program (N), Ongoing program (O) Public education and awareness (PE) Funding: Not funded (N), Partially funded (P), Natural resources protection (N) Currently funded (F), and a time frame for Structural projects (S) implementation of 1-5 years (ST), 5-10 years (MT), and Emergency services (E) more than 10 years (LT) Coordination/cooperation (C)

Olmsted County, MN Page 131

Violent Storms (straight line winds, hail, tornadoes, blizzards, ice and sleet, lightning) MA Strategy Priority Lead Funding Agency E Determine if there is an effective warning H, O Olmsted P, ST system (sirens) for violent storms in each area HSEM of the county. Make investments in the warning system if gaps are found. E Increase the number of warning sirens within the H, O City of Byron N, ST City of Byron from one to four due to city growth and expansion beyond current coverage. P Study incorporating storm shelter regulations in M, N Byron, Chatfield, N, MT each community’s code of ordinances. Dover, Eyota, Olmsted County Oronoco, Pine Island, Rochester, Stewartville E Conduct an inventory of storm shelters in the M, N Olmsted N, ST county and determine where additional facilities HSEM are needed. P Investigate requiring the incorporation into the M, N Olmsted N, MT feedlot permit of a response plan for all feedlot SWCD owners/operators for feedlots of 500 or more animal units. (determine adequate power backup) E Develop storm debris management guidelines H, O Olmsted N, ST for the county. Make sure it is a part of the Public Works emergency response plan. Department E Study the need for communications backup and M, N Olmsted N, MT auxiliary power generators in all school buildings (Low for HSEM, in the county. (in case of electrical or other aux. School failures) power) Districts E Maintain and update the safe shelter plan for M, N Olmsted N, ST residents of manufactured home and HSEM recreational vehicle parks, and campgrounds in the county. E Encourage more individuals to become M, O Olmsted P, ST-LT volunteers active in the severe storm network. HSEM (storm spotters) P Conduct an inventory of roadways in Olmsted L, O Olmsted N, LT County that regularly experience travel problems County Public during blizzard conditions. The purpose would Works be to determine where to construct “living snow fence”. S Investigate burying of existing power lines within L, O RPU, other N, ST-MT city limits. The focus would be in the older power neighborhoods. providers E, S Develop a facility for motor fuel dispensing H, N Byron, Chatfield, N, ST during power outages for emergency responder Dover, Eyota, Olmsted County and other public vehicles. Oronoco, Pine Island, Rochester, Stewartville E, Develop alternative methods of providing H, N City of Eyota N, ST PP emergency power to city facilities including wells and controls during outages; generator; emergency bypass pump.

Olmsted County, MN Page 132

Wildfires MA Strategy Priority Lead Funding Agency PE Identify and collect existing information or L, N Fire N, ST develop information for distribution to rural Departments, residents/property owners Olmsted HSEM PE Investigate the need for an education program L, O Fire N, MT for the public regarding the dangers/prevention Departments of wildfires.

Prevention (P) Priority: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L), Property/facility protection (PP) New program (N), Ongoing program (O) Public education and awareness (PE) Funding: Not funded (N), Partially funded (P), Natural resources protection (N) Currently funded (F), and a time frame for Structural projects (S) implementation of 1-5 years (ST), 5-10 years (MT), and Emergency services (E) more than 10 years (LT) Coordination/cooperation (C)

Olmsted County, MN Page 133

Fire (building, vehicle) MA Strategy Priority Lead Funding Agency PE Continue educational programs for school aged L, O Fire P, ST-LT children and each community. Departments PP Continue to administer/enforce the building/ H, O Olmsted F, ST electrical/ plumbing codes throughout Olmsted County, cities, County and each City. Continue inspections of townships rental housing through the housing code. S Study possible corridors for creating an H, O City of N, ST interconnected road system in portions of Chatfield Chatfield with limited access and determine funding alternatives. (The Burr Oak Ave and west Chatfield areas are of concern due to emergency response and flooding issues.) S Determine how to repair/replace the existing H, O City of N, ST fire department building in the City of Stewartville Stewartville. Construct a command center for emergency response needs E, Develop and implement strategies to provide H, N City of Eyota N, ST PP, adequate water pressure and volume to the S northwest quadrant of the city for fire protection.

Prevention (P) Priority: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L), Property/facility protection (PP) New program (N), Ongoing program (O) Public education and awareness (PE) Funding: Not funded (N), Partially funded (P), Natural resources protection (N) Currently funded (F), and a time frame for Structural projects (S) implementation of 1-5 years (ST), 5-10 years (MT), and Emergency services (E) more than 10 years (LT) Coordination/cooperation (C)

Olmsted County, MN Page 134

Hazardous Waste/Materials MA Strategy Priority Lead Funding Agency N Continue to improve on current capabilities to L, O RPU, Olmsted P, LT predict groundwater movement. County Water Coor. C Develop a Rochester and Olmsted County H, N ROPD N, ST Geographic Information System (GIS) to map and update locations of fixed facilities storing/generating/disposing of hazardous waste/materials. P Study regulatory approaches related to land use M, N ROPD, RPU N, MT – location – of such facilities for application to the wellhead protection areas and adjacency to sensitive/vulnerable sites such as schools and other vulnerable populations. P Update community comprehensive plans and L, N ROPD, Byron, N, MT ordinances to include policies and regulations on Chatfield, Dover, Eyota, Oronoco, wellhead protection that also address land use Pine Island, and hazardous waste/materials Rochester, use/storage/deposit. Stewartville P Investigate the concept and language of local M, N Public Works N, ST ordinance provisions that would address the Departments transport routes for hazardous materials within population centers. C Participate in regional exercises that test local H, O Olmsted P, ST-LT plans and interaction between local agencies. HSEM

Prevention (P) Priority: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L), Property/facility protection (PP) New program (N), Ongoing program (O) Public education and awareness (PE) Funding: Not funded (N), Partially funded (P), Natural resources protection (N) Currently funded (F), and a time frame for Structural projects (S) implementation of 1-5 years (ST), 5-10 years (MT), and Emergency services (E) more than 10 years (LT) Coordination/cooperation (C)

Olmsted County, MN Page 135

Dam Failure MA Strategy Priority Leading Funding Agency E Update the emergency response plan for each M, N Rochester N, MT-LT flood control reservoir to reflect changes in the HSEM watershed and changes in climate. P Develop/adopt floodplain policies for lands H, O ROPD F, ST located downgradient of all flood control reservoirs that address dam breach. (These policies should be applied at the state level by the MNDNR.)

Prevention (P) Priority: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L), Property/facility protection (PP) New program (N), Ongoing program (O) Public education and awareness (PE) Funding: Not funded (N), Partially funded (P), Natural resources protection (N) Currently funded (F), and a time frame for Structural projects (S) implementation of 1-5 years (ST), 5-10 years (MT), and Emergency services (E) more than 10 years (LT) Coordination/cooperation (C)

Olmsted County, MN Page 136

Water Supply MA Strategy Priority Leading Funding Agency P Update the county land use plan and city land M, O ROPD, cities P, MT use plans to provide additional policies on development/land uses within the highly sensitive areas to groundwater pollution. Follow up with any necessary changes to the local zoning ordinances. P Continue to regulate well construction and H, O ROPD, F, ST-LT sealing in the county. Townships. P Continue to regulate individual sewage H, O ROPD, F, ST-LT treatment systems (septic systems). Update the Townships county ordinance if new regulations are developed by the state. P Continue to conduct an inspection program for M, O Olmsted N, ST all feedlots and manure storage facilities in the SWCD county. Investigate adopting feedlot rules. P Continue to provide a well water testing program H, O Health Dept. F, ST-LT for all well owners in the county. PP Require the review of well sealing disclosure M, N ROPD N, ST documents at the time of sale of properties. S Investigate creating a coordinated cost share L, N ROPD, N, ST program for well sealing. Olmsted SWCD P Implement all the measures identified in the H, O RPU P, ST-LT Wellhead Protection Plan and Water Emergency and Conservation Plan for Rochester. PE Develop educational materials for well owners to H, O ROPD N, ST address flooding and well impact. If material exists determine means for distribution. PE Provide educational materials on well L, O ROPD N, ST maintenance and monitoring. If material exists determine means for distribution. S Develop a program for the clean-up of sinkhole M, N Olmsted N, MT and ravine dumps. County Public Works

Prevention (P) Priority: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L), Property/facility protection (PP) New program (N), Ongoing program (O) Public education and awareness (PE) Funding: Not funded (N), Partially funded (P), Natural resources protection (N) Currently funded (F), and a time frame for Structural projects (S) implementation of 1-5 years (ST), 5-10 years (MT), and Emergency services (E) more than 10 years (LT) Coordination/cooperation (C)

Olmsted County, MN Page 137

Waste Water Treatment MA Strategy Priority Leading Funding Agency P Continue to properly enforce the septic system H, O ROPD, F, ST ordinance and state rules within the county. Townships P Develop regulations to require inspection of H, O ROPD, P, ST septic systems at the time of sale, inspection Townships program requirements/ pumping requirements, and other Best Management Practices. S Initiate a study of sewer backflow problems and H, N Dover, Eyota, N, ST develop a plan to address backflow prevention. Rochester

Prevention (P) Priority: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L), Property/facility protection (PP) New program (N), Ongoing program (O) Public education and awareness (PE) Funding: Not funded (N), Partially funded (P), Natural resources protection (N) Currently funded (F), and a time frame for Structural projects (S) implementation of 1-5 years (ST), 5-10 years (MT), and Emergency services (E) more than 10 years (LT) Coordination/cooperation (C)

Olmsted County, MN Page 138

Infectious Disease MA Strategy Priority Lead Funding Agency Source E Develop and/or sustain methods and assets H Local & State P, ST-LT necessary to quickly detect and report emerging PH & Local infectious disease threats. Health Care Providers P Develop an active disease surveillance plan that H Local & State N, ST includes the necessary staff, just-in-time training Public Health and logistical support to daily assess new cases, hospitalizations, pharmaceutical impact, medical supply impact, mortality and other epidemiology data necessary during an ongoing epidemic, and be prepared to implement when needed. P Assure access to laboratory services capable of H State & Local F, ST quickly identifying/ typing high risk infectious PH & Health diseases and also determining drug sensitivities Care Providers

P Assure that policies, systems and capacities are H State & Local P, ST in place to screen and treat immigrants, PH & Local workers, students and others for infectious Health Care diseases routinely or on an as-needed basis per Providers CDC/WHO guidelines. E Develop agreements/contracts with hotels, H Olmsted N, ST dormitories or other suitable housing for small County/ City groups or possibly large numbers of persons Government who need to be quarantined following exposure to a dangerous infectious disease. E Increase capacity to monitor large numbers of H Local and N, persons placed in community isolation and/or State PH quarantine during an infectious disease epidemic E Develop and maintain a system to support basic H Olmsted P*, MT needs (e.g. food, medications) for County/City individuals/families that are placed in isolation or Government, quarantine, or are following recommendations to Non-profits & self-isolate/quarantine. Businesses

P Maintain high childhood and adult immunization H Local & State P, ST-LT levels against influenza, measles and other PH, Health serious infectious diseases. Care Providers & Schools E Develop and sustain capability to preventively H Local & State P*, ST immunize or medicate very large numbers of PH, Health selected populations in a short period of time, Care Providers including provisions for clinic staffing, storage and preparation of biologics, staging areas and security (e.g. mass clinics). E Identify individuals who may be at increased risk H Local & State P*, ST of direct exposure to infectious diseases while PH, Local implementing emergency response plans and Healthcare assure that appropriate personal protective Providers equipment (e.g. respirators, masks, gowns etc.) are available in adequate supply, serviceable and fit tested if necessary.

Olmsted County, MN Page 139

E Assure that policy, funds, staffing and adequate H Local & State N, ST facilities are in place to establish “flu centers” for PH, Local the purposes of triage, treatment and possibly Health Care short term care during a pandemic Providers S Identify clinics, hospitals, triage sites, and other H Local & State N, ST locations where there exists an increased risk of PH acquiring/transmitting a dangerous respiratory disease (e.g. pandemic influenza or SARS), and acquire/install the appropriate equipment and/or building designs necessary to reduce or eliminate risk of contaminated air (e.g. filtration systems, air exchange enhancements, negative pressure rooms etc.) P Assure that a plan is in place to provide safe H Local & State P*, ST drinking water and food supplies when normal PH delivery systems are disrupted due to shortages or contamination P Assure policy and operational structure is in H Local & State P*, ST place to provide education, consultation and PH regulation as needed to help assure prevention and control of infectious diseases during an epidemic P Assure that state or local government agencies M Local & State N, ST have the ability and resources necessary to PH conduct on-going surveillance for vector-borne and other zoonotic diseases that may threaten Olmsted County residents due to illness or economic repercussions. S Formalize and be prepared to deliver regional H Local & State N, ST emergency preparedness and response roles PH and Health such as communication, mass dispensing, flu Care Providers centers, antiviral/vaccine/supplies storage and distribution capacity

* Subject to the availability of CDC Emergency Preparedness dollars

Prevention (P) Priority: High (H), Medium (M), Low (L), Property/facility protection (PP) New program (N), Ongoing program (O) Public education and awareness (PE) Funding: Not funded (N), Partially funded (P), Natural resources protection (N) Currently funded (F), and a time frame for Structural projects (S) implementation of 1-5 years (ST), 5-10 years (MT), and Emergency services (E) more than 10 years (LT) Coordination/cooperation (C)

Olmsted County, MN Page 140

Agency/Organization Names Listed

Extension – University of Minnesota Extension Service (Olmsted County)

HSEM – Homeland Security and Emergency Management

PH – Olmsted County Public Health Services or Minnesota Department of Health

ROPD – Rochester-Olmsted Planning Department

RPU – Rochester Public Utilities

SWCD – Olmsted County Soil and Water Conservation District

SZJPB – South Zumbro Joint Powers Board

Water Coor. – Olmsted County Environmental Services

Olmsted County, MN Page 141

SECTION IX – PLANNING PROCESS

Planning Approach and Public Participation

The Olmsted County Board of Commissioners approved the grant agreement and authorized the Rochester-Olmsted Planning Department and the Homeland Security and Emergency Management office to initiate the planning process in 2008. The two agencies developed a multi-step planning process that involved local elected and appointed officials from all of the political jurisdictions and government agencies (including emergency responders, city officials, school officials, etc.) that may have an interest in the plan due to their own planning or public safety responsibilities. The Olmsted County Homeland Security and Emergency Policy Committee conducted a separate hazard vulnerability assessment and gap analysis during the development of this plan and that material is included in the appendix and in the hazards and risk assessment sections of the plan.

The public involvement consisted of:

1. A stakeholder meeting to introduce the process after approval of the grant by FEMA, 2. a written survey of elected and appointed officials during the development of the vulnerability assessment stage, 3. a public notice flyer was posted in the city halls of all cities within Olmsted County during the development of the draft document. 4. The Homeland Security and Emergency Policy Committee met and conducted its own vulnerability assessment and also to review the draft plan. 5. placement of the draft final plan on the Olmsted County webpage for public review (notice was given to the stakeholders invited to the kickoff meeting in April, 2008), 6. Meetings with city administration of each city in the county, 7. Council Meetings – Elected and appointed officials meet to review the plan and adopt a resolution of participation and support. 8. Olmsted County Board meeting to approve a resolution adopting the plan.

The appendices include public participation material used during the development of the plan.

Plan Adoption

The plan will go into effect after approval by the Olmsted County Board of Commissioners approval and adoption and approval by the Minnesota Department of Public safety, Homeland Security and Emergency Management Division (MN HSEM) and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The plan is multi-jurisdictional therefore the county will seek resolutions of plan adoption from all of the cities within Olmsted County cited below in lieu of separate plans being prepared:

Olmsted County, MN Page 142

Byron Chatfield Dover Eyota Oronoco Pine Island Rochester Stewartville

The townships within the county will be covered by the county approval and adoption of the plan.

Plan Implementation

The Olmsted County Homeland Security and Emergency Management Director will work with state agencies, county departments and appointed bodies, cities and townships and other implementation partners:

To develop detailed implementation strategies To identify needed resources To identify responsible agencies and staff To update the adopted plan.

Olmsted County’s Homeland Security and Emergency Response Director will work with county agencies and other units of government and implementation partners to initiate work and implementation of each strategy. Implementation will include:

Determining feasibility of the strategy; Developing a detailed implementation strategy; Identifying required and available resources, and obtaining necessary funding; Assigning specific staff roles/responsibilities; Determining a schedule.

One of the strategies that appears under the General Planning/Communications section applies to Olmsted County and all of the cities and is the need to incorporate the applicable plan information and strategies into the various local plan updates. With a few exceptions most local plans are not tied to a specific timetable for updates. The Olmsted County HSEM will need to work with each jurisdiction as plan updates or new planning efforts are initiated so that mitigation strategies are incorporated into the planning process and plan document.

The implementation of the plan strategies will depend on outside and internal County and city resources available (including staffing and outside funding support), priority ranking, and detailed cost-benefit analyses where necessary. Cities that adopt the plan by resolution will be responsible for implementing specific mitigation strategies identified in this plan.

Olmsted County, MN Page 143

Plan Evaluation

The Olmsted County Homeland Security and Emergency Management Director will work with county entities, townships, cities, and other implementation partners to evaluate the progress of plan implementation on an annual basis. The director will compile a progress report outlining strategies that have been completed, in process, ongoing, deferred, or deleted from the plan and report to the policy committee. Annual progress reports will be developed by the director to allow for policy committee and implementation partner review and for the five year update process. The Olmsted County HSEM Policy Committee along with adopting jurisdictions will be asked to:

Review strategies currently listed in the plan for effectiveness and feasibility, and; Identify new strategies for implementation.

Mitigation Plan Updating

The mitigation planning regulation (44 CFR §201.6(d)(3)) states:

A local jurisdiction must review and revise its plan to reflect changes in development, progress in local mitigation efforts, and changes in priorities, and resubmit it for approval within five (5) years in order to continue to be eligible for mitigation project grant funding.

The plan shall be updated on a five year basis by the Olmsted County Homeland Security and Emergency Management Director. The update will involve a review of the goals and strategies and progress on implementation of the strategies.

New hazards identified by participants will require the development of a vulnerability assessment and mitigation strategies by the Homeland Security and Emergency Policy Committee and the director. Critical areas of study to determine community vulnerability that should be studied by Olmsted County under this plan and through other levels of government include:

Climate change impacts on the southeast Minnesota and Olmsted County infrastructure and critical facilities. The hazards affecting climate change may include extreme weather, floods, drought, water supply, and infectious disease. Sustainability and “Peak energy” susceptibility with resulting possible impacts on the economy of Olmsted County and strategies for addressing these impacts. The results of “Peak energy” may affect the county economy, transportation of people and products into and from the county, infrastructure use, expansion, and maintenance.

The plan will need to be reviewed by the affected jurisdictions and implementation partners with time provided for public comment. Public review and comment is a necessary component of the planning process and periodic updates. The plan review will include steps to involve the public by:

Requiring the HSEM Policy Committee to review the update and revised strategies; Placing the revised plan on the Olmsted County website for review;

Olmsted County, MN Page 144

Notifying each city council, mayor and administrative staff of the opportunity for review. Meeting with individual city emergency managers.

Final approval of all changes will be the responsibility of the Olmsted County Board of Commissioners. The revised plan will be submitted to the MN HSEM and FEMA for review and approval every five years.

Olmsted County, MN Page 145

APPENDICES

Olmsted County, MN Page 146

APPENDIX 1

Olmsted County, MN Page 147

RELATED ADOPTED PLANS AND RESOURCE DOCUMENTS

This plan was prepared in part by referring to existing data, reports, and adopted plans, ordinances, and permits of existing federal, state and local jurisdictions. The plans and ordinances listed in many cases include policies and implementation measures that are consistent with and support the purpose and intent of this All Hazard Mitigation Plan, and moreover implement mitigation strategies.

State and Federal Data, Reports, and Plans:

1. US Census Bureau – 2000 Population and Housing Profile; American Community Survey 2005, 2006, 2007; County Business Patterns; 2. Survey of Agriculture 3. Minnesota Department of Administration State Demographic Center 2000-2007, Population and Household Estimates by Minor Civil Division and County 4. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources – land cover, ground and surface water, biological survey, land acquisition plans and related forest resources plans, dam safety inventory 5. USGS and MGS – geological data (Geologic Atlas, Olmsted County, Minnesota, 1988 (MGS); Delineation of Recharge Areas for Selected Wells in the St. Peter-Prairie du Chien-Jordan Aquifer, Rochester, Minnesota, 1991 (USGS); Hydrogeology and Simulation of Ground-Water Flow in the Rochester Area, Southeastern Minnesota, 1987-88, 1991 (USGS); Ground-Water Recharge and Flowpaths Near the Edge of the Decorah-Platteville-Glenwood Confining Unit, Rochester, Minnesota, 2001, (USGS)) 6. USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service – soils mapping 7. Federal Emergency Management Agency – regulations and floodplain mapping, federal disaster information 8. Minnesota Department of Public Safety – State Fire Marshall, pipeline safety 9. Minnesota Department of Health – drinking water protection program, hazardous substances report 10. US Environmental Protection Agency – hazardous waste facilities inventory 11. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency – feedlot, hazardous materials, wastewater, stormwater program data

Local/County Data, Plans, Ordinances: Olmsted County Plans and multi-jurisdictional plans

1. Southeast Minnesota Emergency Alert System Plan 2. Olmsted County Population Projections 3. Olmsted County Emergency Operations Plan 4. Olmsted County General Land Use Plan 5. Olmsted County Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance 6. ROCOG Long Range Transportation Plan 7. Olmsted County Solid Waste Ordinance #10 8. Emergency Action Plans for the seven flood control reservoirs – each reservoir has a plan 9. Dam Emergency Warning and Preparedness Plan – Lake Zumbro Dam 10. Olmsted County Pandemic Flu Plan, Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza Plan (goose plan) 11. Housing Plan for the Rochester-Olmsted County Area Olmsted County, MN Page 148

12. Olmsted County Disaster Recovery Plan for the Olmsted County Public Works Department 13. Rochester Olmsted Planning Department a. GIS Division – Emergency Operations/Homeland Security – GIS data and maps b. Inspections Division – well inventory; septic system inventory c. Long Range Planning Division – land use inventory 14. Olmsted County Water Management Plan as amended 15. Olmsted County Community Needs Assessment -2007 (Olmsted County Public Health Services)

Local Jurisdictional Plans

1. Rochester Urban Service Area Land Use Plan, and other city land use plans 2. A Plan for Acquisition of Public Lands – City of Rochester 3. City of Rochester – Water Emergency and Conservation Plan submitted to the MNDNR 4. Rochester Zoning Ordinance and Land Development Manual 5. In addition to Rochester, the Cities of Byron, Chatfield, Dover, Eyota, Oronoco, Pine Island, and Stewartville have zoning ordinances that includes floodplain where applicable, and shoreland provisions. 6. Individual township subdivision ordinances 7. Rochester Stormwater Management Plan and supplements 8. All communities in the county have adopted a building code per state rules. 9. Wellhead Protection Plans for all cities and community wells 10. City of Rochester – Water Emergency and Conservation Plans (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources – Division of Waters and Metropolitan Council)

Olmsted County, MN Page 149

APPENDIX 2

Olmsted County, MN Page 150

Distribution List Name: Hazardous Mitigation Planning Group – The individuals listed below were invited to the kickoff meeting, many were included in the opinion survey, notified of the draft plan for review, and notified of the final draft plan. Those associated with city administration and elected officials also are involved in the final adoption process.

Members:

Abraham Algadi – Pine Island Administrator [email protected] Bill Schimmel – Stewartville City Administrator [email protected] Brede Ardell – Rochester Mayor [email protected] Bruce Klaehn – Eyota Superintendent [email protected] Cheryl Nymann – Oronoco City Administrator [email protected] Chris Bates – Pine Island Superintendent [email protected] Chris Fogarty – Rochester School District [email protected] Chuck Murphy – Stewartville Mayor [email protected] Curt Sorenson – Chatfield Mayor [email protected] Dave Thompson – Stewartville Superintendent [email protected] Dave Vogen – Chatfield Emergency Manager [email protected] Dennis Blanck – Oronoco Emergency Manager [email protected] Don Hainlen – Chatfield Superintendent [email protected] Gary Neumann – Rochester Asst. City Administrator [email protected] Gary Pederson – Township Cooperative Planning [email protected] Agency Gerald Henricks – Byron City Administrator [email protected] Greg Brandt – Byron Mayor [email protected] Jeff Thorpe – Byron Emergency Manager [email protected] Joel Young – Chatfield Chief Administrative Officer [email protected] Kendig, Marla R. – Mayo Clinic [email protected] Kvenvold Steve- Rochester City Administrator [email protected] Marlis Knowlton – City of Eyota [email protected] Mary Blaire – City of Byron [email protected] Paul Perry – Pine Island Mayor [email protected] Peterson Roger – Rochester Police Chief [email protected] Richard Freese – Rochester Public Works Director [email protected] Roger Ihrke – Dover Mayor [email protected] Scott Keigley – Oronoco Mayor [email protected] Sheehan Michael – Olmsted County Highway [email protected] Engineer D.MN.US Slavin Dan – Rochester Fire Department [email protected] Smith, Thomas [email protected] Steve Wolf – Stewartville Emergency Manager [email protected] Tony Nelson – Eyota Emergency Manager [email protected] Turk Jon – Rochester Homeland Security and [email protected] Emergency Management Vonwald Steve – Olmsted County Sheriff [email protected]. MN.US Wendy Shannon – Byron Superintendent [email protected] Wesley Bussel – Eyota Mayor [email protected]

The Olmsted County Homeland Security and Emergency Management Policy Committee were involved in separate emergency management activities that related in part to this plan. They also were asked to review and comment on the draft plan. During the development of this plan they initiated a gap analysis that is separate from this plan, but listed in the appendices. That gap analysis continues.

Olmsted County, MN Page 151

Members:

James McNeil – Mayo Clinic [email protected] Brenda Ziebell – SE Minnesota Chapter, [email protected] Red Cross Mike Bromberg – Olmsted County [email protected] Tom Graham – Olmsted Medical Group [email protected] Greg Martin – City of Rochester [email protected] Lois Till-Tarara – Olmsted Medical Group [email protected] Michelle Ridd – Olmsted County [email protected] Teresa Wegner – City of Rochester [email protected] Jon Turk – City of Rochester [email protected] Steve Vonwald – Olmsted County [email protected] Terry Waletski – Olmsted County(2008- [email protected] 2009), Kevin Torgerson (2009-2010) [email protected] Mary Wellik – Olmsted County [email protected]

Olmsted County, MN Page 152

APPENDIX 3

Olmsted County, MN Page 153

COMMUNITY SURVEY COVER LETTER

DATE: OCTOBER 20, 2008

RE: ALL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN FOR OLMSTED COUNTY – SURVEY

Attached is a survey that is being sent to all elected officials in Olmsted County including City Councils and Township Officers. The survey is a means for the staff and the County Board of Commissioners to gauge your opinions and concern about a number of natural and technological hazards that must be addressed in the plan. The survey will be tabulated and included with other data collected for this plan to determine localized hazard issues that can be studied as part of the risk assessment portion of the plan and/or as a part of the mitigation strategies that must be developed for the plan.

Please complete the survey and mail back to or drop off the survey form at the Planning Department in the enclosed envelope. If you have questions about the survey or the plan feel free to contact Terry Waletski, Olmsted County Homeland Security and Emergency Management at 285-8103 or John Harford, Rochester-Olmsted Planning Department at 328-7124. Thank you in advance for participating in the survey.

Sincerely,

John Harford Senior Planner

Olmsted County, MN Page 154

OLMSTED COUNTY ALL-HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING SURVEY

A survey of Olmsted County elected officials was conducted in October, 2008. There were a total of 41 respondents from both townships and cities. The summary of responses is listed below as it appeared in the questionnaire. 1. Respondent Communities:

Townships: Cascade, Dover, Elmira, Eyota, Haverhill, High Forest, Kalmar, Marion, New Haven, Orion, Oronoco, Pleasant Grove, Quincy, Rochester, Rock Dell, Salem, Viola. Cities: Byron, Chatfield, Dover, Eyota, Oronoco, Pine Island, Rochester, Stewartville. Insufficient number of respondents by community did not allow for a listing of the high priority hazards by community.

2. Please rate the following natural and human-caused hazards by checking the appropriate box. The rating should reflect both the likelihood and the severity of impacts. These hazards are identified by the State of Minnesota as necessary elements of the plan. Please check only one box for each hazard. (very concerned=4, moderately concerned=3, somewhat concerned=2, not concerned=1)

Type of Hazard Average of Reponses Natural Drought Twps:2 Cities: 1.8 Extreme Seasonal Twps:1.9 Temperatures (hot and cold) Cities:2 Flooding Twps:2.3 Cities:2.9 Landslides Twps:1.5 Cities:1.5 Karst geology (groundwater Twps:2.7 resources) Cities:2.9 Violent storms (tornadoes, Twps:2.4 straight line winds, lightning, Cities:3.2 hail, blizzard, etc.) Wildfire (agricultural and Twps:2 woodland areas) Cities:1.8 Human-caused/Technological Fire (vehicles, buildings) Twps:2.5 Cities:2.4 Hazardous waste/materials Twps:2.8 releases (fixed facilities and Cities:3.1 transport) Dam failure Twps:1.7 Cities:1.5 Water supply contamination Twps:3

Olmsted County, MN Page 155

Cities:1.5 Wastewater treatment Twps:2.4 Cities:2.7 Infectious disease Twps:2.6 (domestic/farm animals, Cities:3.1 humans) Terrorism Twps:2.2 Cities:2.4

3. Community planning by the public sector can reduce the effects of disasters. Please indicate what level of priority you would give to these planning efforts. Please check only one box for each item listed. (High priority=4, moderate priority=3, low priority=2, Not a priority=1)

Average of Responses Protecting critical facilities Twps:3.4 (schools, hospitals, utilities, Cities:3.8 transportation network, etc.) Preventing development in high Twps:3.2 hazard areas such as floodplains Cities:2.5 Protecting the natural resources Twps:3.1 of/use of best management Cities:3.1 practices in the county Protecting private property Twps:2.9 Cities:2.9 Promoting cooperation among Twps:2.9 public agencies, citizens, non- Cities:3.5 profit organizations, educational institutions, and businesses Strengthening emergency Twps:3 response services(police, sheriff, Cities:3.5 ambulance, fire) Public education measures to Twps:3 alert residences to potential Cities:3.4 hazards and improve preparedness

4. Please select your level of support for the following kinds of public strategies to reduce the risk and impact of disasters. Please check only one box for each strategy. (The number shows the number of people who support the strategy. The response choices included support, neutral, do not support, and not sure. The total number of respondents=40; 23 township and 17 city)

Number of People

Olmsted County, MN Page 156

Develop new regulations to reduce risk Twps:9 (zoning, floodplain, building codes, other Cities:7 codes) Non-regulatory approaches to risk Twps:15 reduction (incentives, education) Cities:5 Use of local tax dollars to reduce Twps:7 risks/losses from natural hazards Cities:7 Public/private sector application of best Twps:15 management practices to reduce risk Cities:10 (conservation practices, stormwater controls Continuing to improve the disaster Twps:15 preparedness of various sectors (schools, Cities:13 public buildings, etc.) Invest in emergency response systems Twps:15 (public utilities, fire, police/sheriff, sirens, Cities:15 etc.) Use of public funds to safeguard the local Twps:5 economy after a disaster Cities:8

Olmsted County, MN Page 157

OLMSTED COUNTY ALL-HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING SURVEY

Olmsted County is preparing an all hazard mitigation plan. In order to determine the importance of potential hazards in your community we are requesting your comments provided through this survey. Your responses will assist the county in developing strategies that will address the most important hazards and the vulnerability of your community to these hazards. The survey will take less than five minutes to complete. Your answers will be kept completely confidential. They will be combined with the answers from other respondents for your community.

1. In what community do you live: ______(city or township)

2. Please rank the following natural and technological (human caused) hazards. These hazards are identified by the State of Minnesota as necessary elements of the plan. Please check only one box for each hazard.

Type of Hazard Very Moderately Somewhat Not Concerned Concerned Concerned Concerned Natural Drought Extreme Seasonal Temperatures (hot and cold) Flooding Landslides Karst geology (groundwater resources) Violent storms (tornadoes, etc.) Wildfire (agricultural and woodland areas) Technological Fire (vehicles, buildings) Hazardous waste/materials releases Dam failure Water supply contamination Wastewater treatment Infectious disease (domestic/farm animals, humans) Terrorism Please identify other hazards that may lead to disasters that you believe to be important in Olmsted County. ______

3. Community planning by the public sector can reduce the effects of disasters. Please indicate what level of priority you would give to these planning efforts. Please check only one box for each item listed.

Olmsted County, MN Page 158

High Moderate Low Priority Not a Priority Priority Priority Protecting critical facilities (schools, hospitals, utilities, transportation network, etc.) Preventing development in high hazard areas such as floodplains Protecting the natural resources of/use of best management practices in the county Protecting private property Promoting cooperation among public agencies, citizens, non- profit organizations, educational institutions, and businesses Strengthening emergency response services(police, sheriff, ambulance, fire) Public education measures to alert residences to potential hazards and improve preparedness

4. Please select your level of support for the following kinds of public strategies to reduce the risk and impact of disasters. Please check only one box for each strategy.

Support Neutral Do not Not sure support Develop new regulations to reduce risk (zoning, floodplain, building codes, other codes) Non-regulatory approaches to risk reduction (incentives, education) Use of local tax dollars to reduce risks/losses from natural hazards Public/private sector application of best management practices to reduce risk (conservation practices, stormwater controls Continuing to improve the disaster preparedness of various sectors (schools, public buildings, etc.) Invest in emergency response systems (public utilities, fire, police/sheriff,

Olmsted County, MN Page 159

sirens, etc.) Use of public funds to safeguard the local economy after a disaster

Olmsted County, MN Page 160

APPENDIX 4

Olmsted County, MN Page 161

Steering/Technical Committee/Staff Meetings and Public Meetings

November 13, 2007 County Board approves grant application December, 2007 Letter sent to local jurisdictions requesting their participation. Letter sent by County Emergency Management December 20, 2007 Grant application, resolution and letter of commitment sent to MN Department of Public Safety March 14, 2008 Planning Department staff meeting to discuss role in development of plan and identify responsibilities. March 17, 2008 Meeting with Olmsted County Emergency Management and Homeland Security staff April 25, 2008 Emergency Management Policy Committee meeting. Conducted a vulnerability assessment exercise. April 30, 2008 Kickoff Meeting with attendees from each jurisdiction. Jennifer Nelson and Jim McCloskey presented a review of the planning process. May 14, 2008 Emergency Management Policy Committee reviewed the vulnerability assessment July 23, 2008 Planning Department staff meeting to review community profile and other data. October 17, 2008 Presentation to the Rochester Planning and Zoning Commission to present a progress report and ask for comments. November 7, 2008 Joint Emergency Management Commission meeting. Progress report. November 20, 2008 Presentation to the Olmsted County Planning Advisory Commission to present a progress report and ask for comments. December 10, 2008 Staff meeting between the Planning Department and the Olmsted County Health Department to discuss the Infectious Diseases section of the plan. March 20, 2009 Staff meeting involving Terry Waletski Emergency Services Director to

Olmsted County, MN Page 162

discuss the plan and future public meetings. April 6, 2009 Emergency Management Policy Committee meeting. Update the committee on the development of the plan and the process for public review and completion. September 2, 2009 Staff meeting with City of Rochester Public Works Department Director, Assistant City Administrator and several staff to review the draft plan. October 6, 2009 Meeting with the City of Byron administration to discuss the plan, process, public meetings, specific strategies for the city. October 7, 2009 Meeting with the City of Stewartville administration to discuss the plan, process, public meetings, specific strategies for the city. October 12, 2009 Meeting with the City of Chatfield administration, police chief, ambulance service to discuss the plan process, public meetings, specific strategies for the city. October 28, 2009 Meeting with the City of Eyota Mayor, administration, ambulance service to discuss the plan process, public meetings, specific strategies for the city. November 12, 2009 Meeting with the City of Dover Mayor, council member, emergency management to discuss the plan process, public meetings, specific strategies for the city. November 16, 2009 Meeting with Olmsted County Solid Waste staff to discuss the plan and ask for additional input. November 19. 2009 Meeting with the City of Pine Island administrator and fire department to discuss the plan process, ;public meetings, specific strategies for the city. November 20, 2009 Meeting with the City of Oronoco city clerk and fire chief to discuss the plan process, public meetings, specific strategies for the city. December 14, 2009 Meeting with the Joint Emergency

Olmsted County, MN Page 163

Management Commission to update members on the plan development.

Olmsted County, MN Page 164

APPENDIX 5

Olmsted County, MN Page 165

HAZARD VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT

The Olmsted County Homeland Security and Emergency Management Policy Committee met during the spring of 2008. The committee developed a list of hazards, both natural and technological. A ranking system was developed that allowed the committee as a group to conduct a hazard vulnerability assessment. The tables developed Allowed the committee to rank the likelihood of occurrence, consequences of the hazard, and a vulnerability ranking based on these two criteria. Ranking were generated for occurrence within one, three or five years from the date of the meeting.

The ranking system consisted of an estimate on the likelihood of occurrence, and the consequences of the hazard. A ranking was determined on a scale of one to five with five being of high importance (high likelihood and critical impacts) and one being the least important (low likelihood or minimal impact). The hazard vulnerability assessment is confidential therefore is not included in the plan.

A gap analysis has been conducted for hazardous material rail event, hazardous material evacuation, and for a pandemic flu event. The analyses are included on the pages following the vulnerability assessment. Additional gap analysis will be completed as time and resources permit by the responsible agencies represented on the policy committee.

Olmsted County, MN Page 166

Issue: Hazardous Materials Incident Rail Event__ Gaps Analysis for the Olmsted County Hazard Vulnerability Assessment Draft – September, 2008

Basis for Analysis: Exercise after action reports, consultation with key local topic experts, review with HSEM Operations committee, other (______)

Opportunities to Reduce Opportunities to Mitigate the Likelihood the Consequence

Area Analyzed Key Work Done Significant Key Work Significant Recommended Next To-Date Gaps Done To-Date Gaps Steps Remaining Remaining Planning Overall Planning 2008 Continue updates updates to annually State Haz Mat SOP’s Equipment 2008/09 Purchase new equipment equipment as purchases to updates are update provided detection and mitigation equipment

Training Chemical Monthly Multi agency Increase budgets to Assessment Team CAT training allow realistic Training Training numbers of participants

Exercises Chemical 3 day Inclusion of Increase planning Assessment Team exercise other and funding for Exercise training agencies in exercises with 55th exercises CST 2007 Chemical Exercise Larger event Assessment Team with exercise with Mankato multiple Haz Mat CAT (Sept Teams on a Rail 08) Event Multi- agency Create Define and tabletop exercise exercise with area agencies K:\Cross Division\Disaster Response\IEMS\gaps analysis template.doc

Olmsted County, MN Page 167

Issue: Hazardous Materials Incident Requiring Evacuation_ __ Gaps Analysis for the Olmsted County Hazard Vulnerability Assessment Draft – September, 2008

Basis for Analysis: Exercise after action reports, consultation with key local topic experts, review with HSEM Operations committee, other (______)

Opportunities to Reduce Opportunities to Mitigate the Likelihood the Consequence

Area Analyzed Key Work Significant Key Work Done To- Significant Recommended Next Done To-Date Gaps Date Gaps Steps Remaining Remaining Planning Overall Planning 2008 updates to Continue updates State Haz Mat annually SOP’s Equipment 2008/09 equipment Purchase new purchases to update equipment as detection and updates are mitigation equipment provided

Training Chemical Assessment Monthly CAT Multi Increase budgets Team Training Training agency to allow realistic training numbers of participants

Exercises 3 day exercise Inclusion of Increase Chemical Assessment th Team Exercise training with 55 other planning and CST 2007 agencies in funding for exercises exercises Chemical Assessment Exercise with Larger event Team Mankato CAT exercise with (Sept 08) multiple Haz Mat Teams Multi- agency tabletop Create exercise Define and exercise with area agencies K:\Cross Division\Disaster Response\IEMS\gaps analysis template.doc

Olmsted County, MN Page 168

Pandemic Influenza Gaps Analysis for the Olmsted County Hazard Vulnerability Assessment Draft – September, 2008

Basis for Analysis: Exercise after action reports (including 2006 tabletop, 2008 state exercise), review at PHDRAG, review at HSEM Operations committee, and consultation with key local topic experts

Opportunities to Reduce the Opportunities to Mitigate Likelihood the Consequence

Significant Gaps Recommended Key Work Done To-Date Remaining Next Steps Planning Overall Planning Pandemic Flu Plan, June Needs OCPHS to 2006 review/updates review HPAI Plan, Feb, 2007 Not well integrated HSEM to with County EOP coordinate update of EOP Public Education Presentations (#) Ethical concerns Create CodeReady Campaign coordinated messages/public Pamphlet/Natl Night Out info campaign Communications Public information Hotline/phone bank Update hotline strategies capacity unclear protocols/test 800 MHz MNTrac training Isolation/ Quarantine Drafted RST Airport Comm Disease plan IQ support services protocol Mass Clinics (including Updated OCPHS plan, MOUs needed Establish MOUs vaccine and antiviral issues) 2007 “Mission Critical” plans/exercises at Mayo/OMC Surge Capacity (patients, Discussions/plan ideas for staff and related issues) patient surge Regional VOAD - impact on coordination homebound Volunteer mgmt – MRC Service Continuation/ County: Plans not complete Continuity of Operations City:

Key Organizations: Training FEMA Incident Command Some key local HSEM to Training provided for some agencies lack basic coordinate addl IC training IC training Exercises TTX, June 2006 Operationalizing With partners, Mass Vacc Clinic FSE, Nov IC/UC plan another 2007 (Oct 2008) Integration leadership w/County EOP tabletop based Vaccine Prioritization on plans Exercise, July 2008 developed – 2010? K:\Cross Division\Disaster Response\IEMS\Pandemic Influenza gaps analysis 92008.doc

Olmsted County, MN Page 169

APPENDIX 6

Olmsted County, MN Page 170

Olmsted County, MN Page 171

APPENDIX 7

Olmsted County, MN Page 172

Homeland Security and Emergency Operation Center 7300 Brataas Drive SW Rochester Minnesota 55902 Business Phone 507.285.8103 FAX 507.287.2187

Terry Waletzki - Director 11/30/2007

RE: All Hazard Mitigation Plan

To All:

Natural and manmade disasters can have a devastating impact on communities, as we all witnessed this past August. In order to help communities reduce the impacts of such events, Congress passed legislation several years ago enabling communities to receive special mitigation assistance, provided they complete an All-Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Olmsted County Board of Commissioners recently approved a grant application for work to begin on an All-Hazard Mitigation Plan for Olmsted County.

The Olmsted County Emergency Operations Center and the Rochester/Olmsted Planning Department are beginning the process of creating an All Hazards Mitigation Plan for Olmsted County. Once completed, this plan will allow for State/Federal funding for mitigation projects throughout Olmsted County. We are anticipating this plan to take between 12-18 months for completion. In order to complete the plan, we need the assistance of you and your communities.

Each community will need to adopt a resolution stating your participation in the creation of the All Hazard Mitigation Plan. If you choose not to participate in its development, then you will not be eligible for the funding of any projects through the mitigation program. We will be scheduling a meeting to discuss the purpose, process, resolution, and participation we are seeking. You will need to assign at least one contact person to assist as needed.

The Minnesota Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (HSEM) has scheduled a training workshop in Rochester on December 11th from 8:00AM -4:00PM at RCTC. Please read the attachment containing a brief explanation of Hazard Mitigation. Determine who you would like to attend the class and fill out a registration if you are able to attend.

Again, it is imperative that we have your representation and assistance in developing this plan for Olmsted County. This plan is an All Hazard All County plan so that each governmental agency within the county does not have to expend the resources, both financial and time to complete.

Please feel free to contact me with any questions or concerns you may have.

Thank you,

Terry Waletzki

APPENDIX 8

Olmsted County, MN Page 173

CITY OF ROCHESTER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM 2010-2015 – ELEMENTS RELATED TO ADDRESSING HAZARD MITIGATION

Project Description Estimated Cost A Rehabiliate Zumbro River Equalization Basin – located $500,000 north of the city Recreation Center B Wimbeldon Hills Storm water improvement – phase 1 & 2 $200,000 C Baihley Ponds rehabilitation and retrofit – prevent $160,000 localized flooding D Riverview Hts Drive stabilization and surface drainage $500,000 improvements E Stabilize Cascade Creek from 16th Ave NW east to Civic $1,500,000 Center Dr F Stabilize Zumbro River from 19th St to 37th St NW $1,500,000 G Construct Regional Stormwater Detention Facility on $2,000,000 Cascade Creek H Construct Flood Control facility krp1.1 – west of 60th Ave $2,000,000 NW I Expand water storage capacity at Flood Control $5,000,000 Reserviors J Stabilize Bear Creek/Willow Creek from south of Mayo $1,500,000 High School to Marion Rd K Stabilize Kings Run from TH52 to Zumbro River $1,500,000 L Interlachen Lake Shoreline Stabilization and Channel $500,000 Reinforcement M Flood Mitigation – various areas within City limits $1,000,000

The projects listed above are existing capital improvement projects that will provide flood hazard mitigation for various portions of the City of Rochester. Projects will be undertaken as funding is made available through local, state, and/or federal sources.

Olmsted County, MN Page 174

APPENDIX 9

Olmsted County, MN Page 175

Future Land Use Plan Maps by Juridiction

Chatfield Future land Use

Olmsted County, MN Page 176

Olmsted County, MN Page 177

Olmsted County, MN Page 178

Olmsted County, MN Page 179

Olmsted County, MN Page 180