Tuscarawas 2017 Hazard Mitigation Plan

An Update to the 2011 Plan

March 2017

Prepared For:

Prepared by:

Michael Baker International | 250 West Street, Suite 420 | Columbus, OH

Phone: 614-538-7610 | Fax: 614-538-7602| www.mbakerintl.com

Record of Changes Date Changes Name

Table of Contents

Section 1. Executive Summary ...... 1 1.1 Background and Purpose ...... 1 1.2 Scope and Authority...... 3 1.3 Plan Organization ...... 4 1.3.1 Overview of Hazard Mitigation Planning ...... 4 1.3.2 Local Methodology and Update Process ...... 4 Section 2. Community Profile ...... 8 2.1 Tuscarawas County History ...... 8 2.2 Geography, Topography, and Climate ...... 10 2.2.1 Geography ...... 10 2.2.2 Topography ...... 10 2.2.3 Climate ...... 10 2.3 Socioeconomic Factors ...... 11 2.3.1 Population ...... 11 2.3.2 Employment ...... 12 2.3.3 Housing ...... 12 2.4 County Utilities ...... 13 2.4.1 Electric, Telephone and Gas ...... 13 2.4.2 Drinking Water and Wastewater ...... 13 2.5 Land Use and Future Development Areas ...... 14 2.5.1 Single-Family New House Construction Building Permits ...... 17 2.5.2 Future Land Use ...... 17 2.6 Jurisdictions ...... 17 2.6.1 City of Dover ...... 17 2.6.2 City of New Philadelphia ...... 18 2.6.3 City of Uhrichsville ...... 18 2.6.4 Village of Baltic ...... 18 2.6.5 Village of Barnhill ...... 19 2.6.6 Village of Bolivar ...... 19 2.6.7 Village of Dennison ...... 19 2.6.8 Village of Gnadenhutten ...... 20 2.6.9 Village of Midvale...... 20 2.6.10 Village of Mineral City ...... 20 2.6.11 Village of Newcomerstown ...... 20 2.6.12 Village of Parral ...... 21 2.6.13 Village of Port Washington ...... 21 2.6.14 Village of Roswell ...... 21

2.6.15 Village of Stone Creek ...... 21 2.6.16 Village of Strasburg ...... 22 2.6.17 Village of Sugarcreek ...... 22 2.6.18 Village of Tuscarawas ...... 22 2.6.19 Village of Zoar ...... 23 Section 3. Plan Updates ...... 25 3.1 2011 HMP and 2017 HMP Update Background ...... 25 3.2 Successful Mitigation Activities Since 2011 ...... 25 3.2.1 Repetitive Loss Property Buyouts ...... 25 3.2.2 Brush Fire Education Campaign ...... 26 3.2.3 Additional and Improved Tornado Sirens ...... 26 3.3 What’s New in the HMP Update ...... 26 Section 4. The Planning Process ...... 27 4.1 Planning Process ...... 27 4.2 Organize Resources ...... 28 4.2.1 Building the Planning Team ...... 28 4.2.2 Planning Outreach ...... 33 4.2.3 Review and Incorporate Existing Information ...... 35 4.2.4 Assess Risks ...... 36 4.2.5 Develop Mitigation Plan...... 36 Section 5. Risk Assessment ...... 39 5.1 Identifying the Hazards ...... 39 5.2 Hazard Profiles ...... 45 5.3 Extreme Temperatures ...... 46 5.3.1 Hazard Identification ...... 46 5.3.2 Regulatory Environment ...... 47 5.3.3 Hazard Events ...... 47 5.3.4 Historical Occurrences ...... 47 5.3.5 Magnitude/Severity ...... 48 5.3.6 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences ...... 50 5.3.7 Inventory Assets Exposed to Extreme Temperatures ...... 50 5.3.8 Potential Losses from Temperature Extremes ...... 50 5.3.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences ...... 51 5.3.10 Land Use & Development Trends ...... 52 5.3.11 Temperature Extreme HIRA Summary...... 52 5.4 Severe Thunderstorms ...... 53 5.4.1 Hazard Identification ...... 53 5.4.2 Regulatory Environment ...... 54 5.4.3 Hazard Events ...... 54 5.4.4 Historical Occurrences ...... 57

5.4.5 Magnitude/Severity ...... 58 5.4.6 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences ...... 59 5.4.7 Inventory Assets Exposed to Thunderstorms ...... 60 5.4.8 Potential Losses from Thunderstorms ...... 60 5.4.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences ...... 61 5.4.10 Land Use & Development Trends ...... 61 5.4.11 Thunderstorm HIRA Summary ...... 61 5.5 Severe Winter Storms ...... 62 5.5.1 Hazard Identification ...... 62 5.5.2 Regulatory Environment ...... 63 5.5.3 Hazard Events ...... 63 5.5.4 Historical Occurrences ...... 63 5.5.5 Magnitude/Severity ...... 64 5.5.6 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences ...... 67 5.5.7 Inventory Assets Exposed to Winter Storms ...... 67 5.5.8 Potential Losses from Winter Storms ...... 68 5.5.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences ...... 68 5.5.10 Land Use & Development Trends ...... 68 5.5.11 Winter Storm HIRA Summary ...... 69 5.6 Flooding ...... 69 5.6.1 Hazard Identification ...... 69 5.6.2 Regulatory Environment ...... 71 5.6.3 Hazard Events ...... 77 5.6.4 Historical Occurrences ...... 79 5.6.5 Magnitude/Severity ...... 80 5.6.6 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences ...... 81 5.6.7 Inventory Assets Exposed to Flooding / Potential Losses from Flooding ...... 84 5.6.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences ...... 108 5.6.9 Land Use & Development Trends ...... 108 5.6.10 Flooding HIRA Summary ...... 108 5.7 Tornado ...... 109 5.7.1 Hazard Identification ...... 109 5.7.2 Regulatory Environment ...... 110 5.7.3 Hazard Events ...... 110 5.7.4 Historical Occurrences ...... 111 5.7.5 Magnitude/Severity ...... 111 5.7.6 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences ...... 113 5.7.7 Inventory Assets Exposed to Tornadoes ...... 114 5.7.8 Potential Losses from Tornadoes ...... 114 5.7.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences ...... 114 5.7.10 Land Use & Development Trends ...... 117 5.7.11 Tornadoes Hira Summary ...... 117 5.8 Drought ...... 118

5.8.1 Hazard Identification ...... 118 5.8.2 Regulatory Environment ...... 118 5.8.3 Hazard Events ...... 119 5.8.4 Historical Occurrences ...... 119 5.8.5 Magnitude/Severity ...... 119 5.8.6 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences ...... 120 5.8.7 Inventory Assets and Potential Losses Due to Drought ...... 121 5.8.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences ...... 122 5.8.9 Land Use & Development Trends ...... 122 5.8.10 Drought HIRA Summary ...... 122 5.9 Earthquake/Seismic ...... 123 5.9.1 Hazard Identification ...... 123 5.9.2 Regulatory Environment ...... 125 5.9.3 Hazard Events ...... 125 5.9.4 Historical Occurrences ...... 125 5.9.5 Magnitude/Severity ...... 127 5.9.6 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences ...... 131 5.9.7 Inventory Assets Exposed to Seismic/Earthquake Activity ...... 132 5.9.8 Potential Losses from Seismic Events ...... 135 5.9.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences ...... 135 5.9.10 Land Use & Development Trends ...... 135 5.9.11 Earthquake HIRA Summary ...... 135 5.10 Dam Failure (Internal/External) ...... 136 5.10.1 Hazard Identification ...... 136 5.10.2 Regulatory Environment ...... 140 5.10.3 Hazard Events/Historical Occurrences ...... 140 5.10.4 Magnitude/Severity ...... 140 5.10.5 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences ...... 141 5.10.6 Inventory Assets Exposed To Dam Failure ...... 141 5.10.7 Potential Losses ...... 142 5.10.8 Land Use & Development Trends ...... 142 5.10.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences ...... 142 5.10.10 Dam Failure HIRA Summary ...... 143 5.11 Hazardous Material Incidents ...... 144 5.11.1 Hazard Identification ...... 144 5.11.2 Regulatory Environment ...... 144 5.11.3 Hazard Events/Historical Occurrences ...... 144 5.11.4 Magnitude/Severity ...... 148 5.11.5 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences ...... 149 5.11.6 Inventory Assets Exposed to/Potential Losses to Hazardous Material Incidents ...... 149 5.11.7 Land Use & Development Trends ...... 150 5.11.8 Hazardous Material Incidents HIRA Summary ...... 150 5.12 Mine Subsidence/Abandoned Wells ...... 151

5.12.1 Hazard Identification ...... 151 5.12.2 Regulatory Environment ...... 151 5.12.3 Hazard Events/Historical Occurrences ...... 151 5.12.4 Magnitude/Severity ...... 152 5.12.5 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences ...... 152 5.12.6 Inventory Assets Exposed to/Potential Losses to Mine Subsidence/Abandoned Wells .. 152 5.12.7 Land Use & Development Trends ...... 154 5.12.8 Mine Subsidence/Abandoned Well HIRA Summary ...... 154 5.13 Natural Resource Extraction ...... 155 5.13.1 Hazard Identification ...... 155 5.13.2 Regulatory Environment ...... 156 5.13.3 Hazard Events/Historical Occurrences ...... 156 5.13.4 Magnitude/Severity ...... 156 5.13.5 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences ...... 157 5.13.6 Inventory Assets Exposed to/Potential Losses to Natural Resource Extraction ...... 157 5.13.7 Potential Losses ...... 157 5.13.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences ...... 157 5.13.9 Land Use & Development Trends ...... 159 5.13.10 Natural Resource Extraction HIRA Summary ...... 159 Section 6. Mitigation Strategy ...... 160 6.1 Planning Process for Setting Hazard Mitigation Goals and Objectives ...... 163 6.2 Capabilities Assessment ...... 163 6.2.1 Administrative and Technical Capabilities ...... 164 6.2.2 Fiscal Capabilities ...... 165 6.2.3 Education and Outreach ...... 165 6.2.4 Degree of Capability ...... 166 6.2.5 Ability to Expand on Existing Capabilities ...... 166 6.3 Community Values, Historic and Special Considerations ...... 167 6.4 Mitigation Goals, Objectives and Actions ...... 167 6.4.1 Goals and Objectives ...... 168 6.4.2 Mitigation Action Development ...... 169 6.4.3 2011 Mitigation Action Review ...... 169 6.5 Mitigation Strategies ...... 193 6.5.1 Flood Mitigation Strategy ...... 193 6.5.2 Drought Mitigation Strategy ...... 196 6.5.3 Severe Thunderstorm Mitigation Strategy ...... 197 6.5.4 Tornado Mitigation Strategy ...... 198 6.5.5 Earthquake Mitigation Strategy ...... 199 6.5.6 Dam Failure Mitigation Strategy ...... 199 6.5.7 Natural Resource Extraction Mitigation Strategy ...... 201 6.5.8 Severe Winter Weather Mitigation Strategy ...... 202 6.5.9 Extreme Temperature Mitigation Strategy ...... 203

6.5.10 Hazardous Material Incident Mitigation Strategy...... 204 6.5.11 Land Subsidence/Abandoned Well Mitigation Strategy ...... 205 Section 7. Plan Implementation and Maintenance ...... 206 7.1 Plan Adoption ...... 206 7.2 Implementation ...... 206 7.3 Evaluation, Monitoring, and Updating ...... 206 7.4 Plan Update and Maintenance ...... 208 7.4.1 Schedule ...... 208 7.4.2 Process ...... 208 7.5 Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms ...... 209 Appendix A. Annual Review Form ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. Appendix B. Meeting Minutes ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 7.6 Meeting 1 ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 7.7 Meeting 2 ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 7.8 Meeting 3 ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. 7.9 Individual Jurisdiction Meeting Sign-In Sheets ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. Appendix C. All Severe Storm Events ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. Appendix D. Capability Assessments ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. Appendix E. STAPLEE Rankings ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. Appendix F. Adoption Resolutions ...... Error! Bookmark not defined.

List of Tables

Table 2-1 Tuscarawas County, and its Cities and Villages ...... 9 Table 2-2 Tuscarawas County Climate Summary Table ...... 11 Table 2-3 Largest Employers in Tuscarawas County ...... 12 Table 2-4 Home Built Per Decade in Tuscarawas County ...... 12 Table 2-5 Single-Family Construction Permit Summary ...... 17 Table 4-1 DMA 2000 CFR Crosswalk ...... 27 Table 4-2 2017 HMP Planning Committee ...... 29 Table 4-3 HMP Consultant Team ...... 31 Table 4-4 Original text and a newspaper clipping from the Times Reporter showing the public notices.. 34 Table 5-1 Tuscarawas Profiled Hazards ...... 40 Table 5-2 Presidential Disaster Declaration in Tuscarawas County ...... 41 Table 5-3 Risk Factor Criteria ...... 43 Table 5-4 Risk Factor Table ...... 44 Table 5-5 Risk Ranking ...... 45 Table 5-6 Extreme Temperature Events ...... 47 Table 5-7 Four Categories of Heat Stress (FEMA, 1997) ...... 48 Table 5-8 Homes in Tuscarawas County by Year of Construction ...... 51 Table 5-9 Probability of Thunderstorm Events in Tuscarawas County ...... 60 Table 5-10 Potential Losses from Thunderstorms ...... 60 Table 5-11 Winter Storm Events in Tuscarawas County ...... 63 Table 5-12 Potential Losses from Winter Storms ...... 68 Table 5-13 Tuscarawas County Community Status in the NFIP ...... 71 Table 5-14 Projects Identified during the RiskMAP Discovery Process ...... 73 Table 5-15: Tuscarawas County In-Force Policies ...... 76 Table 5-16 Tuscarawas County Repetitive Loss Properties ...... 76 Table 5-17 Tuscarawas County Flood Events ...... 77 Table 5-18 Disaster Declarations Involving Flooding ...... 79 Table 5-19 Discharge Values for Largest Floods along the Tuscarawas River ...... 80 Table 5-20 Flood Categories for the Tuscarawas River at New Philadelphia ...... 81 Table 5-21 HAZUS-MH Flood Scenario Expected Building Damage by Building Type ...... 85 Table 5-22 Percent Building Loss with the 100-year floodplain ...... 86 Table 5-23 HAZUS-MH Flood Scenario Expected Building Damage by Building Type ...... 87 Table 5-24 Critical Facilities in Tuscarawas County that are Flood Prone ...... 87 Table 5-25: Tornado History Since 1950 ...... 110 Table 5-26 Disaster Declarations Involving Tornadoes ...... 110 Table 5-27: Enhanced Fujita Scale and Associated Damage ...... 112 Table 5-28: Institutional Buildings ...... 112 Table 5-29: Educational Institutions (Elementary & High Schools) ...... 113 Table 5-30: Metal Building Systems ...... 113 Table 5-31: Electric Transmission Lines ...... 113 Table 5-32 County Inventory Exposed to Tornadoes ...... 114

Table 5-33: Drought Events in Tuscarawas County Since 1950 ...... 119 Table 5-34 Palmer Drought Severity Index ...... 120 Table 5-35 Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale with Associated Impacts ...... 127 Table 5-36: Location and Info on Class I Dams in Tuscarawas County ...... 141 Table 5-37 Areas in the County susceptible to Dam Failure ...... 142 Table 5-38 Inventory Exposed to Hazardous Materials ...... 149 Table 5-39 Abandoned Mine Claims in Tuscarawas County ...... 151 Table 6-1 Planning and Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Summary ...... 163 Table 6-2: Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities ...... 164 Table 6-3: Fiscal Capabilities Table ...... 165 Table 6-4 Education and Outreach Table ...... 165 Table 6-5 Degree of Capability ...... 166

List of Figures

Figure 2-1 Tuscarawas County and its Jurisdictions ...... 9 Figure 2-2 Land use in Tuscarawas County ...... 16 Figure 4-1 Mitigation Planning Process ...... 28 Figure 5-1 Extreme Cold Temperature and Associated Threat Level ...... 49 Figure 5-2 EPA Urban Heat Island Image ...... 52 Figure 5-3 Wind Zones in the United States...... 54 Figure 5-4 National Weather Service Watch vs Warning ...... 58 Figure 5-5 Hail Size Chart ...... 59 Figure 5-6 Flash Density associated with Lightning Strikes...... 59 Figure 5-7 Winter Storm Watch Definitions ...... 65 Figure 5-8 Winter Storm Warning Definitions ...... 66 Figure 5-9 Winter Storm Advisory Definitions ...... 67 Figure 5-10 Diagram identifying Special Flood Hazard Area, 1% annual chance (100-Year) floodplain, floodway and flood fringe, FEMA...... 69 Figure 5-11 Mitigation Projects from RiskMAP Discvoery Report ...... 74 Figure 5-12 Flood Areas in Tuscarawas County ...... 82 Figure 5-13 Tuscarawas Depth Grid ...... 83 Figure 5-14 Building Losses by Percent ...... 86 Figure 5-15 Flood Zones in Tuscarawas County ...... 88 Figure 5-16 Flood Zones in the Village of Baltic ...... 89 Figure 5-17 Flood Zones in the Village of Barnhill ...... 90 Figure 5-18 Flood Zones in the Village of Bolivar...... 91 Figure 5-19 Flood Zones in the Village of Dennison ...... 92 Figure 5-20 Flood Zones in the City of Dover ...... 93 Figure 5-21 Flood Zones in the Village of Gnadenhutten ...... 94 Figure 5-22 Flood Zones in the Village of Midvale ...... 95 Figure 5-23 Flood Zones in the Village of Mineral City ...... 96 Figure 5-24 Flood Zones in the City of New Philadelphia ...... 97 Figure 5-25 Flood Zones in the Village of Newcomerstown ...... 98 Figure 5-26 Flood Zones in the Village of Parral ...... 99 Figure 5-27 Flood Zones in the Village of Port Washington ...... 100 Figure 5-28 Flood Zones in the Village of Roswell ...... 101 Figure 5-29 Flood Zones in the Village of Stone Creek ...... 102 Figure 5-30 Flood Zones in the Village of Strasburg ...... 103 Figure 5-31 Flood Zones in the Village of Sugarcreek ...... 104 Figure 5-32 Flood Zones in the Village of Tuscarawas ...... 105 Figure 5-33 Flood Zones in the City of Uhrichsville ...... 106 Figure 5-34 Flood Zones in the Village of Zoar ...... 107 Figure 5-35 Example of a Tornado Funnel Cloud ...... 109 Figure 5-36 Tornado Tracks in Tuscarawas County ...... 116 Figure 5-37 Earthquakes throughout Ohio ...... 126

Figure 5-38 Peak Ground Acceleration ...... 129 Figure 5-39 Fault lines in Ohio ...... 130 Figure 5-40 Debris Generation from an Earthquake ...... 133 Figure 5-41 Economic Losses from an Earthquake ...... 134 Figure 5-42 Dam Location in Tuscarawas County ...... 138 Figure 5-43 Map of hazardous materials releases throughout Tuscarawas County ...... 147 Figure 5-44 The damage to a home from mine subsidence ...... 152 Figure 5-45 Location of known mines throughout Tuscarawas County...... 153 Figure 5-46 Location of Oil and Gas Wells ...... 158 Figure 6-1 Example STAPLEE tool ...... 162

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Section 1. Executive Summary The intention of this Plan update is to serve as a blueprint for coordinating and implementing hazard mitigation policies, programs, and projects. It provides a list of mitigation goals, objectives, and related actions that may assist Tuscarawas County in reducing risk and preventing loss from future natural and technological hazard events. The impacts of hazards can be lessened and sometimes avoided altogether if appropriate actions are taken before hazardous events occur. By avoiding unnecessary exposure to known hazard risks, communities will save lives and property and minimize the social, economic, and environmental disruptions that commonly follow hazard events. Tuscarawas County and its municipalities agree that hazard mitigation makes sense. Through the identification of vulnerable areas and the implementation of measures aimed at minimizing exposure, the negative impacts of both natural and technological hazards may be reduced for Tuscarawas County.

Some portions of Tuscarawas County were developed long before natural hazards were fully understood. Therefore, some sections of our community are vulnerable to flooding, tornadoes and high wind, severe storms and lightning, wildfire, and other hazards. Working through the cycle of hazard mitigation can help ensure that vulnerabilities will not increase. Encouraging acquisition, relocation, or retrofitting of existing vulnerable structures, along with the protection of valuable natural resources, can minimize damages and help make sure that our community is built back better and stronger than before.

Communities face significant challenges during post-disaster redevelopment in balancing the driving need for rapid recovery with implementing long-term hazard mitigation. The necessity to meet basic needs and resettle displaced populations immediately following a disaster often overshadows the more abstract, longer-term sustainability considerations. Once full-scale reconstruction is initiated, it is difficult to modify projects in progress to meet sustainability objectives. This trend highlights the need for pre-disaster mitigation planning that incorporates principles of sustainable development within the context of reconstruction, so that communities can more easily rebuild in a manner that will make them less vulnerable to future hazard events while improving the quality of life.

It is imperative that local decision makers become and stay involved in this planning process to provide new ideas and insight for future updates to the Hazard Mitigation Plan for Tuscarawas County. Because the Mitigation Strategy has been developed and updated, initially in 2005, and again in 2011, it will remain a challenge for Tuscarawas County to provide updates as mitigation projects are implemented. It will remain imperative that all local agencies, units of government, non-profit organizations, businesses and industries, and private citizens continue their involvement and dedication to hazard mitigation.

It is the long-term goal that the Hazard Mitigation Plan and the strategies identified will be fully integrated into daily decisions and routines of government and business. This will continue to require dedication and hard work. To this end, this Plan update will continue to lay the building blocks in order to further strengthen the sustainability of Tuscarawas County. 1.1 Background and Purpose

Background:

Emergency Management is the discipline of identifying, managing, and avoiding risks. It is a discipline that involves preparing for a disaster before it occurs, supporting those affected by the disaster, as well as rebuilding after the natural or man-made disaster event. Emergency Management is an ever changing

process by which all individuals, groups, and communities attempt to manage hazards in an effort to avoid or reduce the impact of disasters. One method to attempt to prevent hazards from developing into disasters all together is Hazard Mitigation Planning. Hazard Mitigation Planning is a process to identify policies, capabilities, activities, and tools necessary to implement successful and sustainable mitigation actions.

Why undertake mitigation planning? Mitigation planning offers many benefits, including:

 Saving lives and property;  Saving money;  Quick and effective recovery following disasters;  Reducing future vulnerability through wise development and post-disaster recovery and reconstruction;  Enhancing coordination within and across participating jurisdictions;  Expediting the receipt of pre-disaster and post-disaster grant funding; and demonstrating a firm commitment to improving community health and safety.

Typically, mitigation planning is described as having the potential to produce long-term and recurring benefits by breaking the repetitive cycle of disaster loss. A core assumption of hazard mitigation is that pre-disaster investments will significantly reduce the demand for post-disaster assistance by lessening the need for emergency response, repair, recovery and reconstruction. Furthermore, mitigation practices will enable local residents, businesses and industries to re-establish themselves in the wake of a disaster, getting the community economy back on track sooner and with less interruption.

The benefits of mitigation planning go beyond reducing hazard vulnerability. Measures such as the acquisition or regulation of land in known hazard areas can help achieve multiple community goals, such as preserving open space, improving water quality, maintaining environmental health and enhancing recreational opportunities. Thus, it is vitally important that any local mitigation planning process be integrated with other concurrent local planning efforts, and any proposed mitigation strategies must take into account other existing community goals or initiatives that will help complement or hinder their future implementation. Tuscarawas County and its municipalities have embraced this approach, identifying multiple opportunities to link the Plan with pre-existing programs, policies, plans and initiatives.

During the last two decades, the approach to the emergency management cycle has evolved considerably. A renewed emphasis has been placed on planning for disasters before they occur as a complement to effective response and recovery. As a result, hazard mitigation has gained increasing prominence as a critical part of emergency management. By mitigating hazards through sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property from hazards, risks can be proactively combated in a systematic manner, rather than being reacted to once they occur.

This 2017 Tuscarawas Hazard Mitigation Plan Update is the result of continuing work by the citizens of the County to update a pre-disaster multi-hazard mitigation plan that will not only continue to guide the County towards greater disaster resistance, but will also respect the character and needs of the community.

Purpose:

Tuscarawas County developed its initial hazard mitigation plan in January 2003 (approved September 7, 2005) which provided momentum for making homes, businesses, and communities as safe as possible

against the impacts of floods, tornadoes, winter weather, and other natural hazards. The initial Plan assessed the effectiveness of prior and current programs and activities in the community and identified shortfalls; mitigation measures were further developed to help reduce Tuscarawas County’s exposure to these natural hazards.

Tuscarawas County has remained dedicated in continuing the work started in 2003 by updating this Plan in 2011 and in 2017 in order to:

 Protect life and property by reducing the potential for future damages and economic losses that result from natural hazards;  Qualify for additional grant funding, in both the pre-disaster and post-disaster environment;  Provide quick recovery and redevelopment following future disasters;  Integrate existing flood mitigation documents;  Demonstrate a firm local commitment to hazard mitigation principles; and  Comply with state and federal legislative requirements tied to local hazard mitigation planning 1.2 Scope and Authority

Scope:

This Plan update has been prepared to meet requirements set forth by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Ohio Emergency Management Agency (OEMA) in order for Tuscarawas County to be eligible for funding and technical assistance from state and federal hazard mitigation programs. It will continue to be updated and maintained to continually address those natural hazards determined to be of high and moderate risk as defined by the updated results of the local hazard, risk, and vulnerability summary. Other natural hazards will continue to be evaluated during future updates to the Plan in order to determine if they warrant additional attention, including the development of specific mitigation measures intended to reduce their impact. This Plan will be updated and FEMA approved within its five-year expiration date.

Authority:

This Hazard Mitigation Plan has been adopted by Tuscarawas County in accordance with the authority granted to counties by the State of Ohio.

This Plan was updated in accordance with current state and federal rules and regulations governing local hazard mitigation plans. The Plan shall be monitored and updated on a routine basis to maintain compliance with the following legislation and guidance:

 Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C., Section 322, Mitigation Planning, as enacted by Section 104 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (P.L. 106- 390) and by FEMA’s Interim Final Rule published in the Federal Register on February 26, 2002, at 44 CFR Part 201  Chapter 5502, Ohio Revised Code (specifically Section 5502.26, 5502.27, and 5502.271 require the establishment of county emergency management agencies and plan development).  Authorized the Tuscarawas County Emergency Management Agency

The following Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) guides and reference documents were used to prepare this document:

 FEMA. 386-1: Getting Started. September 2002.  FEMA. 386-2: Understanding Your Risks: Identifying Hazards and Estimating Losses. August 2001.  FEMA. 386-3: Developing the Mitigation Plan. April 2003.  FEMA. 386-4: Bringing the Plan to Life. August 2003.  FEMA. 386-5: Using Benefit-Cost Review in Mitigation Planning. May 2007.  FEMA. 386-6: Integrating Historic Property and Cultural Resource Considerations into Hazard Mitigation Planning. May 2005.  FEMA. 386-7: Integrating Manmade Hazards into Mitigation Planning. September 2003.  FEMA. 386-8: Multi-Municipality Mitigation Planning. August 2006.  FEMA. 386-9: Using the Hazard Mitigation Plan to Prepare Successful Mitigation Projects. August 2008.  FEMA. Local Multi-Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance. July 1, 2008.

1.3 Plan Organization

1.3.1 Overview of Hazard Mitigation Planning Local hazard mitigation planning is the process of organizing community resources, identifying and assessing hazard risks, and determining how to best minimize or manage those risks. This process results in a hazard mitigation plan that identifies specific mitigation actions, each designed to achieve both short term planning objectives and a long-term community vision. To ensure the functionality of each mitigation action, responsibility is assigned to a specific individual, department or agency along with a schedule for its implementation. Plan maintenance procedures are established to implement, as well as evaluate and enhance the Plan as necessary. Developing clear plan maintenance procedures ensures that Tuscarawas County’s Hazard Mitigation Plan remains a current, dynamic and effective planning document over time.

1.3.2 Local Methodology and Update Process This updated Plan contains a narrative description of the process followed to prepare it. All municipalities were notified in October 2015 of the requirement concerning the MPC and process. Subsequent meetings were held to ensure that all information is correct, and that all agencies, organizations and the public’s input were included as presented. In all, the plan update process was conducted over the course of fourteen months, from October 2015 to December 2016. Throughout the planning update process, the Tuscarawas County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee reviewed and analyzed each section of the plan. In preparing the updated Plan, documentation indicates that the committee utilized a multi-jurisdictional planning process consistent with the one recommended by FEMA (Publication Series 386).

1.3.2.1 Initial Plan The first Tuscarawas County Hazard Mitigation Plan was adopted on September 7, 2005. In January 2003, the Tuscarawas County Hazard Mitigation Committee started preparing the Plan to fulfill the requirements of DMA 2000. Development of the plan was a concerted effort on the part of Tuscarawas County and its municipalities. The Tuscarawas County EMA Director invited directors and staff from public agencies, private businesses and organizations, and community representatives to participate in this recent planning committee.

The 2005 Plan addressed seven natural hazards and one technological hazard and each of those hazards were assessed by previous occurrences, vulnerability and exposure to County and municipal assets, and

potential loss estimates (if applicable). In addition, the 2005 Plan defined those hazards that were considered to have the highest probability of occurrence.

1.3.2.2 First Plan Update An update to the 2005 Plan was initiated in December of 2010 with funding support from Ohio Emergency Management Agency and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Michael Baker Jr., Inc. (Columbus, Ohio location) provided planning support and guidance to Tuscarawas County throughout the update process. This plan was completed in September of 2011, receiving final approval in December, and adopted shortly thereafter.

1.3.2.3 Second Plan Update The second update to the Tuscarawas Hazard Mitigation Plan began in October 2015, once again with the help of Michael Baker International (formerly Michael Baker Jr., Inc.). The planning process used for the 2017 HMP update was based on Section 322 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 and supporting guidance developed by FEMA. The planning process followed these steps:

 Conduct kickoff meeting and reestablish the Mitigation Planning Committee/Team  Conduct a 5-year Plan review  Review and update the local hazard, risk, and vulnerability summary  Determine capability for the county and each municipality  Update the mitigation strategy Update the Plan maintenance procedures  Complete a draft plan for review by Tuscarawas County  Advertise opportunity/hold public meeting for comment on final draft  Provide final draft to OEMA for review  Provide final draft to FEMA for review  Present Plan to municipalities for adoption  Present Plan to Tuscarawas County for adoption

Each of the planning steps described above resulted in key products and outcomes that collectively make up the Hazard Mitigation Plan. These work elements are further discussed below for introductory purposes.

As part of the research with this most recent plan update, the 2004 Tuscarawas County Comprehensive Plan, the Tuscarawas County Trail and Green Space Master Plan, the County Emergency Operations Plan, the 2011 Tuscarawas County Hazard Mitigation Plan, and the current State of Ohio Hazard Mitigation Plan were reviewed for incorporation into the 2017 Tuscarawas County Hazard Mitigation Plan. Portions of the Tuscarawas County Comprehensive Plan were used to develop the general land use patterns and development trends section of this 2017 Plan update.

The Community Profile, located later in Section 2, describes the general makeup of Tuscarawas County and its municipalities, including prevalent geographic, demographic, and economic characteristics. This baseline information provides a snapshot of the Countywide planning area and thereby assists participating officials in recognizing those social, environmental, and economic factors that ultimately play a role in determining community vulnerability to natural hazards.

The Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (HIRA), found in Section 5, is presented as three different elements: Hazard Identification/Profile, Hazard Analysis and a Vulnerability Assessment. Together, these elements serve to identify, analyze, and assess Tuscarawas County’s overall risk to natural hazards. The HIRA builds on available historical data from previous occurrences, establishes hazard-by-hazard

profiles, and culminates in a hazard risk priority or ranking based on conclusions about the frequency of occurrence, potential impact, spatial extent, warning time, and duration of each hazard. FEMA’s HAZUS- MH loss estimation methodology was also used in evaluating known flood risks according to their relative long-term cost, measured in expected damages. The HIRA is designed to assist communities in seeking the most appropriate mitigation actions to pursue and implement by focusing their efforts on those hazards of greatest concern and those structures or planning areas facing the greatest risk(s).

The Community Profile and HIRA collectively serve as a basis for updating goals for this Plan update, each contributing to the development, adoption, and implementation of a meaningful Mitigation Strategy update that is based on accurate background information.

The Mitigation Strategy, located in Section 6, consists of broad goal statements as well as specific mitigation actions for each jurisdiction participating in the planning process. This updated strategy provides the foundation for detailed Mitigation Action Plans that link jurisdictionally specific mitigation actions to locally assigned implementation mechanisms and target completion dates. Together, these sections are designed to make the Plan more strategic and functional through the identification of both long-term goals and near-term actions that will guide day-to-day decision-making and project implementation.

In addition to the identification and prioritization of possible mitigation projects, emphasis is placed on the use of program and policy alternatives to help make Tuscarawas County and participating municipalities less vulnerable to the damaging forces of nature while improving the economic, social, and environmental health of the community. The concept of multi-objective planning is emphasized throughout this Plan update, identifying ways to link hazard mitigation policies and programs with complimentary community goals that may be related to housing, economic development, community revitalization, recreational opportunities, transportation improvements, environmental quality, land development, and public health and safety. This Hazard Mitigation Plan update should be seen as a proactive document that represents a concerted effort to make Tuscarawas County and participating jurisdictions more livable communities.

Plan Maintenance procedures, found in Section 7, includes the measures Tuscarawas County and participating jurisdictions will take to ensure the Plan’s continuous long-term implementation. The procedures also include the manner in which the Plan will be regularly monitored, reported upon, evaluated and updated to remain a current and meaningful planning document.

The Mitigation Planning Committee reviewed the current plan, identified new information that needed to be included in the Plan update and incorporated it as required by state and federal guidelines. The planning committee was also tasked with collecting all accurate data from plan participants and provided outreach to the public and business stakeholders to ensure that everyone’s information is included in this Plan update.

Section 2. Community Profile The Community Profile summarizes the County’s history and existing environmental and socioeconomic conditions. Environmental and socioeconomic factors include geography, topography, climate, population, economic, housing, and land use and development trends. 2.1 Tuscarawas County History Tuscarawas County’s history begins even before the formation of the United States. In 1750, the Ohio Land Company sent an explorer by the name of Christopher Gist to the Tuscarawas Valley. When he returned from his expedition, his reports indicated it was an area with natural resources, as well as friendly American Indians.

A decade later, Moravian missionaries were sent on a mission to the region in 1761 where they were invited by the Delaware Indians to the tribal town of Gekelemukpechunk. This town was located in the same location that is now Newcomerstown. In 1763, the mission was scrapped due to the outbreak of the French and Indian War.

Through the 1770s and 1780s, the area continued to gain Christian settlements, including Gnadenhutten. This village was the site for the Gnadenhutten Massacre, in which a lieutenant-colonel accused a group of Delaware Indians of having participated in raids in Pennsylvania. Though the Indians denied the charges, they were tied up and murdered. In all, 28 men, 29 women, and 39 children were killed.

In 1798, the original missionary who had founded many of the original missions twenty years prior, returned to form new missions. Over another ten years, settlers trickled in from Pennsylvania, with the first permanent settlement being named New Philadelphia.

Tuscarawas County was officially formed in 1808, splitting off from the original Muskingum County.

Table 2-1 Tuscarawas County, and its Cities and Villages

Figure 2-1 Tuscarawas County and its Jurisdictions

2.2 Geography, Topography, and Climate

2.2.1 Geography Tuscarawas County is located in east central Ohio and is bordered by Stark County to the north, Carroll and Harrison Counties to the east, Guernsey County to the south, and Holmes and Coshocton Counties to the west. The county contains 19 municipalities: including the Villages of Baltic, Barnhill, Bolivar, Dennison, Gnadenhutten, Midvale, Mineral City, Newcomerstown, Parral, Port Washington, Roswell, Stone Creek, Strasburg, Sugar Creek, Tuscarawas, and Zoar, and the Cities of Dover, New Philadelphia, and Uhrichsville.

Tuscarawas County contains approximately 35 miles of Interstate, 39 miles of U.S. highway, and 141 miles of state highway. The major east west roadways in the county include U.S. Route 36 and State Routes 39, 183, and 258; the major north south roadways include Interstate highway 77, U.S. Route 250, and State Routes 21, 93, 212, 416, and 800. Also, vital to the transportation system is a small non- commercial airport. Tuscarawas County was named for the Native American word meaning “open mouth”. The County encompasses approximately 571 square miles. The Tuscarawas River flows through the county.

Land use patterns described in general terms within Tuscarawas County are consistent with typical rural counties in the Midwestern part of the U.S. as development has primarily taken place within and immediately surrounding existing incorporated areas, with the exception of several primarily residential settlements in unincorporated areas (Townships) throughout the County.

2.2.2 Topography The County is vastly covered by forestland; roughly half (52.5%). About 16% of the County (59,920 acres) was classified as prime farmland in the 1986 USDA soil survey and much of this land lies in the valleys along the Tuscarawas River and other streams. Agriculture competes for this land in these areas, which have attracted urban development due to their flat terrain, suitable conditions for buildings and septic systems, and proximity to rivers. In recent years, conversion of farmland for residential and industrial development has become a growing concern in the County. Approximately 17,000 acres of farmland were converted to non-agricultural uses between 1980 and 2002, representing an average loss of 739 acres per year.

2.2.3 Climate Tuscarawas County receives approximately 39.6 inches of rain per year; the U.S. average is 39.2. Average snowfall is 24.4 inches. The number of days with any measurable precipitation is approximately 132 days a year, and on average there are 167 sunny days per year in Tuscarawas County. The July average high temperature is around 83.6 degrees and the January average low temperature is 19 degrees. The Tuscarawas County comfort index1, which is based on humidity during the hot months, is

1 This comfort index provides a general idea for how comfortable your time outdoors will be. The index is calculated on a number of weather factors, including temperature, probability of precipitation, humidity, wind speed, and cloud cover. The higher the comfort index, the more comfortable the climate is perceived by general populations across the U.S. One would expect to see a higher index with shirt-sleeve temperatures, minimal

48 out of 100, while the average comfort index for the U.S. is 54. See Table 2-2 for a complete summary of average climate information.

Table 2-2 Tuscarawas County Climate Summary Table

Climate Measurements Tuscarawas County, Ohio United States Avg. Rainfall (in.) 39.6 39.2 Avg. Snowfall (in.) 24.4 25.8 Avg. Precipitation Days 132 102 Avg. Sunny Days 167 205 Avg. July High 83.6 86.1 Avg. Jan. Low 19 22.6 Comfort Index (higher=better) 48 54 UV Index 3.7 4.3 Avg. Elevation FT. 1,020 1,443 Source: http://www.bestplaces.net/climate/county/ohio/tuscarawas

2.3 Socioeconomic Factors The population, economic, and housing factors of Tuscarawas County are described in this section. Understanding these socioeconomic factors is imperative to determining the potential impacts a natural hazard event can have on the community’s population and economy.

2.3.1 Population

2.3.1.1 State Population The State of Ohio’s population in 2010 was 11,536,504 and it is projected to climb to 11,615,100 by 2030, an increase of 0.68%. However, it appears that the rate at which Ohio’s population is growing is actually slowly increasing per projected years.

Several factors may be contributing to this slow increase. The birth to death ratio is much smaller than in faster growing states, with Ohio expected to have 4.4 million births and 3.6 million deaths. Net migration is a factor as well. Ohio may gain approximately 247,000 people through in-migration but may lose about 758,000 people through out-migration.

The projected percentage of population change by county in Ohio from 1990 to 2030 is reflected on the map in this section. Counties surrounding a major metropolitan area – Cincinnati, Columbus, and Cleveland – generally will experience higher growth rates. Counties in the north central and eastern region of the State are projected to experience a decline.

2.3.1.2 County Population According to the 2015 American Community Survey, the total population of Tuscarawas County is 92,697. Tuscarawas County is rural in nature. The rural nature is shown by comparing the County’s inhabitants per square mile to the State’s inhabitants per square mile, 163 versus 277 respectively. The area of highest population is the City of New Philadelphia with 17,484 people.

chances of rainfall, relatively low humidity, light winds, and fair skies. On the contrary, the lower the index values one would see cool, damp, and windy conditions.

The population of Tuscarawas County steadily increased since 1820. Tuscarawas County is expected to maintain its level of population, decreasing slightly by 2030 to 91,890, but increasingly by 2040 to 92,940.

According to the U.S. Census, Tuscarawas County is the 30th most populated county in the state.

2.3.2 Employment According to the 2015 American Community Surveys, U.S. Census Data, there are 73,723 people over 16 years of age, of which 46,076 are in the labor force. Out of the 46,076 people in the labor force, 42,907 are employed, and 5,160 are unemployed. Approximately 24.2% of workers are employed in manufacturing, 21.3% are employed in Health Care and Social Assistance, and 8.8% are employed in Accommodation and Food Services.

The median household income in Tuscarawas County is $29,730. The major employers are Union Hospital, the County government, Belden Brick, Gradall, and Allied Machine & Engineering. A list of the top nine employers by their number of employees is found in Table 2-3.

Table 2-3 Largest Employers in Tuscarawas County

Company Number of Employees Union Hospital 950 Government (City / County) 870 Belden Brick 474 Gradall 545 Allied Machine and Engineering 383 Marlite 305 Zimmer Orthopedic 300 Trinity Hospital Twin City 260 Tastee Apple (Peak Season) 250

2.3.3 Housing According to the Tuscarawas County Profile prepared by the Office of Policy, Research and Strategic Planning, there are 40,007 housing units in Tuscarawas County. Of the total housing units, 36,713 are occupied and 3,294 are vacant. The majority of homes in Tuscarawas County are also owner-occupied (70.3 %), with the remaining 29.7 % categorized as renter-occupied units. 45% of all homes in the County were built prior to 1960, with 29% occurring before 1939. Construction from 1990 until 2015 accounts for only 24% of all homes.

Table 2-4 Home Built Per Decade in Tuscarawas County

Year Built # of Homes Percentage Built 2014 or later 0 0% 2010 to 2013 256 1% 2000 to 2009 4,336 11% 1990 to 1999 4,718 12% 1980 to 1989 3,820 10% 1970 to 1979 5,028 13%

1960 to 1969 3,765 9% 1950 to 1959 4,528 11% 1940 to 1949 1,891 5% 1939 or earlier 11,665 29% TOTAL 40,007

2.4 County Utilities

2.4.1 Electric, Telephone and Gas Electricity in Tuscarawas County is primarily provided by American Electric Power. In addition to these large companies, municipal electric and not-for-profit co-ops also exist in Tuscarawas County.

Dover Light and Power (DLP) provides electricity to the nearly 14,000 residents, and almost 1,000 businesses in Dover. They have provided power to the areas for nearly a century. The Carroll Electric Cooperative is a not-for-profit cooperative that was founded in 1937 to provide electricity to rural areas in Carroll, Columbiana, Harrison, Jefferson, Tuscarawas, and Stark counties. Their mission is to safely and responsibly provide reliable and competitively-priced electric service on a not-for-profit basis.

Phone companies that service Tuscarawas County include AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint for mobile service, and Moores Communication INC. for landlines.

Natural gas services are primarily provided by Dominion East Ohio.

2.4.2 Drinking Water and Wastewater The Tuscarawas County Metropolitan Sewer District (TCMSD) was formed in 1973 by the Board of County Commissioners under the provisions of Ohio Revised Code (ORC) 6117 and provides water service under the provisions of ORC 6103. The District provides drinking water and sanitary service to select municipalities and unincorporated areas of Tuscarawas County, as well as portions of Stark County.

2.4.2.1 Wastewater The TCMSD provides sanitary sewer service to approximately 10,000 County residents in the following areas:  Wilkshire Hills Wastewater Treatment Plant (750,000 GPD Capacity) o Bolivar o Hunters Green o Lawrence Township Industrial Park o Wilkshire Hills o Zoar  Sandyville/East Sparta Wastewater Treatment Plant (500,000 GPD Capacity)  Mineral City Wastewater Treatment Plant (150,000 GPD Capacity)  Stonecreek Wastewater Treatment Plant (30,000 GPD Capacity)  Kerr Subdivision Wastewater Treatment Plant 8,000 GPD Capacity)  Port Washington (sewage is pumped to the Village of Newcomerstown for treatment)  Midvale/Barnhill (sewage flows to the Twin City Water & Sewer District for treatment)  Village of Parral (sewage flows to the City of Dover for treatment)

 Willow Glens/Ridgewood Sewer System (sewage is pumped to the City of Dover for treatment)  Wainwright Sewer System (sewage is pumped to the Village of Tuscarawas for treatment)  Lowden Area (Dover Twp)

Overall, the TCMSD are responsible for operation and maintenance of 73 miles of sewers, 24 major pump stations, numerous grinder pump stations, 550 septic tank systems and five wastewater treatment plants. The residents in the rural sections of the County must rely on septic system for waste water. The larger municipalities such as Dover, New Philadelphia, and Uhrichsville have their own water and wastewater facilities.

2.4.2.2 Drinking Water The Tuscarawas County Metropolitan Sewer District provides water service to approximately 6,000 County residents in the following areas:  Wilkshire Hills Public Water System o Crossroads Area o Hunters Green o Lawrence Township Industrial Park o Jennie Brick Road Area o Mineral City o Sandyville Area  Dundee Public Water System o Serves the community of Dundee and surrounding unincorporated areas of Wayne Township  Ridgewood Public Water System o Ridgewood Subdivision in Dover Township  Wainwright Public Water System o Unincorporated community of Wainwright and surrounding areas of Warwick Township

Overall, the TCMSD is responsible for operation and maintenance of 42 miles of water mains, 9 water storage tanks, 4 booster pump stations, and 3 water treatment plants. The residents in the rural sections of the County must rely on wells for drinking water. The larger municipalities such as Dover, New Philadelphia, and Uhrichsville have their own water and wastewater facilities. 2.5 Land Use and Future Development Areas Tuscarawas County is predominantly rural, with deciduous forests covering the vast majority of the land. Farm land also covers a great deal of land throughout the County, but is most prevalent within the northeast portion, surrounding the Village of Sugarcreek. This takes on the form of cultivated crops and hay pastures. Further development in these areas is not likely, as mentioned by the Green Space Master Plan. The goal of that plan is to preserve and connect green and open spaces so as to promote healthy living and tourism within the County.

Almost none of the County is covered by high intensity development, with this particular type of land use only occurring in the downtowns of the larger cities. For the rest of what urban development is present, medium and low-intensity is the common land use.

Development since the previous plan has not significantly altered the risk that the County faces from hazards.

A detailed map showing the land uses as of 2014 can be seen below in Figure 2-2.

Figure 2-2 Land use in Tuscarawas County

2.5.1 Single-Family New House Construction Building Permits Construction permits can often provide a valuable snapshot into the health of the housing market of a community. Tuscarawas County has maintained a sizeable number of building permits per year, decreasingly rapidly after the 2008 market crash. It was only in 2013 that the number of permits issued rose above 50. The average cost of single-family homes built has remained fairly consistent, remaining within the mid-$100,000s. See Table 2-5 for a summary of single family home construction permits.

Table 2-5 Single-Family Construction Permit Summary

Year Buildings Permits Average Cost 2007 94 $163,000 2008 63 $160,400 2009 47 $173,300 2010 38 $158,900 2011 28 $157,900 2012 48 $163,000 2013 62 $156,100 2014 53 $173,000 Source: http://www.city-data.com/county/Tuscarawas_County-OH.html

2.5.2 Future Land Use Land use is thus expected to remain predominantly agricultural, with the cities maintaining around their current size. Much of the development that will take place, according to the County Trail and Green Space Master Plan, will focus on connecting the different parts of the County through the creation of a network of trails and green infrastructure. This will improve the overall quality of life for residents of the County, as well as their visitors, and provide a boost to the overall economy.

2.6 Jurisdictions

2.6.1 City of Dover The City of Dover is located in the Dover Township along the Tuscarawas River, near the mouth of Sugar Creek. In 1806, two brothers-in-law from Maryland, Jesse Slingluff and Christian Deardorff bought 2,000 acres of land after traveling through the area. The City of Dover was originally known as the Town of Canal Dover until it was incorporated in 1901. After completion of the Ohio-Erie Canal, the population grew rapidly from 46 in 1820 to almost 600 in 1840.

2015 American Community Survey Information for Dover, Ohio Population 12,899 Housing Units* 5,578 Population Density* 2,256.1 Land Area in Square Miles* 5.69 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.2 City of New Philadelphia The City of New Philadelphia is located in the Goshen Township along the Tuscarawas River. It lies within the ecoregion of the Western Allegheny Plateau. In 1804, John Knisely established the area just west of Schoenbrunn, a Moravian Indian missionary town. New Philadelphia was incorporated in February 12th, 1833 as a village and then changed to the status of a city in 1895. New Philadelphia became a focal point for travelers and settlers from the east. With the completion of the Ohio-Eric Canal and Railroads, New Philadelphia became an important area for agricultural, manufacturing, and trading.

2015 American Community Survey Information for New Philadelphia, Ohio Population 5,404 Housing Units* 2,426 Population Density* 1,925.6 Land Area in Square Miles* 2.81 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.3 City of Uhrichsville The City of Uhrichsville is located in the Mill Township. Michael Uhrich established Uhrichsville in 1833, but was originally named Waterford before being renamed to Uhrichsville in 1839. Uhrichsville was incorporated in 1866. Michael Uhrich was a mill operator along the banks of Stillwater Creek. The area thrived on corn and grain trade. Although, miles from the Ohio-Eric Canal, it was an important canal town for trade. Stillwater Creek was able to handle flatboats with access to the Tuscarawas River and the Canal systems.

2015 American Community Survey Information for Uhrichsville, Ohio Population 17,484 Housing Units* 7,909 Population Density* 2,104.2 Land Area in Square Miles* 8.22 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.4 Village of Baltic The Village of Baltic is located in the Bucks Township. As pioneers migrated westward from Pennsylvania, they came upon an area with excellent water supply and settled. With population growing, the decision was made to form a town. The Village of Baltic was first known as Rowville followed by Buena Vista in 1847 and then finally Baltic in 1848. In 1903, the village was incorporated as the Village of Baltic. The completion of both the Wheeling and Lake Erie Railroad in 1880 led to an economy of flour and feed mills. It is also home to the first cheese factory established in Ohio.

2015 American Community Survey Information for The Village of Baltic Population 789 Housing Units* 278 Population Density* 1569.2 Land Area in Square Miles* 0.41 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.5 Village of Barnhill The Village of Barnhill is located in the Goshen Township. The Village of Barnhill is named after Judge J. Barnhill, who helped the community obtain a post office.

2015 American Community Survey Information for the Village of Barnhill Population 387 Housing Units* 157 Population Density* 1,093.6 Land Area in Square Miles* 0.36 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.6 Village of Bolivar The Village of Bolivar is located in the Lawrence Township. The Village of Bolivar is home to Fort Laurens, the only American Revolutionary War-era Fort in Ohio. Fort Laurens was constructed in 1778 as a strategic location to attack Fort Detroit. The Fort was abandoned in 1779, losing a total 21 American soldiers in that stretch. The Village of Bolivar was established in 1825 and platted in 1830. The development and growth of Bolivar occurred after the completion of the Ohio-Eric Canal. When rail transportation replaced canal operations, growth in Bolivar started to slow, leaving a wide range of mix housing from older homes to newer developments being rejuvenated by the Bolivar community.

2015 American Community Survey Information for the Village of Bolivar Population 992 Housing Units* 396 Population Density* 1,431.8 Land Area in Square Miles* 0.69 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.7 Village of Dennison The Village of Dennison is located in both the Mill and Union Townships. The Village of Dennison benefited from the growth of coal and railroads in America. Dennison is located in the middle of Pittsburgh, PA and Columbus, OH roughly 100 miles from both. Locomotives needed water every 100 miles so it made Dennison a perfect location for refilling. It was such a desired location that the Pittsburgh, Cincinnati & St. Louis Railway located some of the country’s largest railroad shops and yards in Dennison. The Village was incorporated in 1873. The same year that the Dennison Depot was built, making it home for passenger and freight trains to stop. Now a National Historic Landmark, the Dennison Depot Museum showcases the area’s vast railroad heritage.

2015 American Community Survey Information for the Village of Dennison Population 2,640 Housing Units* 1,194 Population Density* 1,968.2 Land Area in Square Miles* 1.35 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.8 Village of Gnadenhutten The Village of Gnadenhutten is located in Clay, Rush, and Warwick Townships. In 1772, after David Zeisberger, a missionary of the Moravian Church, established the Village of Schoenbrunn, he founded a second village named Gnadenhutten. During the American Revolutionary War, the Christian Indians and missionaries of Gnadenhutten tried to stay neutral but occupying British forces feared that Gnadenhutten and surrounding communities helped the revolutionaries. In 1781, British authorities ordered them to abandon their current villages and relocate to northern Ohio. While David Zeisberger was imprisoned at Fort Detroit, authorities allowed some of them to come back to harvest crops and collect food but while they were there, Pennsylvania militia accused them of taking part in raids within Pennsylvania. They attacked the village, captured them, and then murdered them. This event is known as the Gnadenhutten Massacre.

2015 American Community Survey Information for the Village of Gnadenhutten Population 1,289 Housing Units* 553 Population Density* 1,333.6 Land Area in Square Miles* 0.97 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.9 Village of Midvale The Village of Midvale is located in both the Goshen and Mill Townships.

2015 American Community Survey Information for the Village of Midvale Population 749 Housing Units* 291 Population Density* 993.1 Land Area in Square Miles* 0.76 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.10 Village of Mineral City The Village of Mineral City is located in the Sandy Township.

2015 American Community Survey Information for the Village of Mineral City Population 723 Housing Units* 322 Population Density* 888.6 Land Area in Square Miles* 0.82 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.11 Village of Newcomerstown The Village of Newcomerstown is located in the Oxford Township. The Village of Newcomerstown was the largest Delaware Indian village along the Tuscarawas River. The Delaware Indians had called the village Gekelmukpechunk. English settlers would name the village Newcomerstown after Chief Newcomer (Netawatwes).

2015 American Community Survey Information for the Village of Newcomerstown Population 3,794 Housing Units* 1,798 Population Density* 1,344.5 Land Area in Square Miles* 2.84 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.12 Village of Parral The Village of Parral is located in the Dover Township.

2015 American Community Survey Information for the Village of Parral Population 220 Housing Units* 106 Population Density* 1,210.6 Land Area in Square Miles* 0.18 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.13 Village of Port Washington The Village of Port Washington is located in the Salem Township. The Village of Port Washington is home to Ohio’s First State Road. This road was used by farmers who brought their produce and grain by wagon to Port Washington to be shipped on the canal.

2015 American Community Survey Information for the Village of Port Washington Population 570 Housing Units* 232 Population Density* 1,106.8 Land Area in Square Miles* 0.51 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.14 Village of Roswell The Village of Roswell is located in both the Goshen and Union Townships.

2015 American Community Survey Information for the Village of Roswell Population 221 Housing Units* 98 Population Density* 835.9 Land Area in Square Miles* 0.26 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.15 Village of Stone Creek The Village of Stone Creek is located in the Jefferson Township.

2015 American Community Survey Information for the Village of Stone Creek Population 179 Housing Units* 69 Population Density* 412.7 Land Area in Square Miles* 0.43 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.16 Village of Strasburg The Village of Strasburg is located in the Franklin Township. The Village of Strasburg was first laid out from a total of 47 lots, by a man named Jonathon Folck in February, 1828. By 1872, the Lakeshore and Tuscarawas Valley Railroad was built through Strasburg, which brought a business boom to the area.

2015 American Community Survey Information for the Village of Strasburg Population 2,679 Housing Units* 1,187 Population Density* 1,879.0 Land Area in Square Miles* 1.39 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.17 Village of Sugarcreek The Village of Sugarcreek is located in the Sugar Creek Township. The Village of Sugarcreek was founded by Abraham Shane in 1814 but was originally named the Village of Shanesville. The Village of Shanesville was developed around the intersection of two Indian trails. Those Indian trails are now Ohio State Routes 93 and 39. The Village of Shanesville attracted both German and Swiss descendants due to the climate and countryside. Nicknamed “The Little Switzerland of Ohio.” Population increased when railroads were completed in what was then known as East Shanesville. As East Shanesville grew, the name was changed to Sugar Creek due to the proximity to Sugar Creek. By 1969, the Village of Shanesville merged with the Village of Sugarcreek.

2015 American Community Survey Information for the Village of Sugarcreek Population 2,234 Housing Units* 967 Population Density* 585.7 Land Area in Square Miles* 3.79 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.18 Village of Tuscarawas The Village of Tuscarawas is located in the Warwick Township. The Village of Tuscarawas was originally known as the Village of Trenton. It was laid out from land owned by a man named Eberhard Freytag in 1816 and continued to grow with annexed allotments. Population didn’t grow until the completion of the canals in 1825. Settlers were able to sell their produce, grains, stocks, and coal. The Village was incorporated in 1887.

2015 American Community Survey Information for the Village of Tuscarawas Population 1,056 Housing Units* 475 Population Density* 1,484.6 Land Area in Square Miles* 0.71 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

2.6.19 Village of Zoar The Village of Zoar is located in the Lawrence Township. The Village of Zoar was founded by German religious dissenters and established the area as a communal settlement. In 1817, a group of 200 German immigrants who were wanting to escape from religious persecution in their homeland. They established the Society of Separatists of Zoar that thrived for nearly 80 years, which made it one of the most successful communal settlements in American history. Joseph Bimeler was the leader of the society. The Zoarities used loans to pay for 5,000 acres of land for the village. The digging of the Ohio- Erie Canal helped them pay off those loans. After Bimeler’s death in 1853, there was a decline in the cohesion of the village and by 1898, the village voted to disband the communal society.

2015 American Community Survey Information for the Village of Zoar Population 181 Housing Units* 85 Population Density* 290 Land Area in Square Miles* 0.25 *Denotes Data from 2010 Census

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Section 3. Plan Updates This section of the plan includes background information on what has changed between the 2011 Hazard Mitigation Plan and the 2017 HMP Update. The 2011 Mitigation Actions were reviewed and have been changed, updated, and revised to reflect new priorities in the 2017 HMP. The sections below describe the background and planning process for changes and updates. 3.1 2011 HMP and 2017 HMP Update Background In early 2012, Tuscarawas County adopted its 2011 HMP, as required by the DMA 2000. The 2011 HMP provided a high-level overview of the hazards affecting the community. The hazards identified in the HMP included wildland urban interface fires, drought, extreme temperatures, dam inundation, severe storms, and flooding. The plan also included a vulnerability assessment and mitigation actions to decrease the impacts of these hazards to the community.

The update planning process began on October 20th, 2015 with the initial Planning Committee meeting held in Tuscarawas County at the Tuscarawas County Homeland Security & Emergency Management Agency. A series of three meetings were conducted to lead the Planning Committee through the planning process and to gather the information required to develop this plan update.

The 2017 HMP contains many of the same elements as the 2011 HMP. However, instead of simply updating the data, the Planning Committee has taken this opportunity to strengthen the plan through the use of new research methods and information systems. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) mapping has provided the committee with the tools to develop data sets which are much more comprehensive than featured in the 2011 HMP.

The 2017 HMP focuses on natural hazards. The 2017 HMP features new mitigation actions which focus on four different classifications. These classifications include:

1. Local Plans and Regulations – intended to reduce the County’s vulnerability to future hazard events through the implementation of codes and regulations. 2. Structure and Infrastructure Projects – intended to protect existing structures by retrofitting, relocating, or modifying the structure to withstand a hazard event. 3. Natural Systems – to reduce the effects of hazards on the natural resources within a region by preserving and/or restoring natural areas along with their mitigation functions. 4. Public Information and Awareness – to advise residents, potential buyers, and visitors about hazards, potentially hazardous areas, and mitigation techniques. 3.2 Successful Mitigation Activities Since 2011 The 2011 HMP, adopted and approved by the Tuscarawas County, has been implemented through various on-going projects, plans, and programs. Some of these are listed below as mitigation “success stories.” With respect to the mitigation action items and strategy developed, Tuscarawas County has been making improvements toward lowering natural hazard risk to life and property within the County. Significant risk reduction efforts have been made for floodplain management, flood damage prevention, and fire hazard abatement. These successful policies, programs, and projects are summarized below.

3.2.1 Repetitive Loss Property Buyouts The County was able to use their FEMA approved hazard mitigation plan to apply for HMGP funds following a presidential disaster declaration in 2012. They were awarded approximately $900,000 in Federal funds to buyout 9 repetitive loss properties. Identifying this action during the planning process,

and being prepared to move forward when funding became available allowed the County to assist homeowners who were subject to repetitive flood losses.

3.2.2 Brush Fire Education Campaign The Village of Bolivar carried out one of their hazard mitigation actions, which was to develop a public awareness campaign to raise awareness about how to prevent brush fires. This included tips on preventative home maintenance.

3.2.3 Additional and Improved Tornado Sirens Tuscarawas County has worked to improve the early warning systems within the County following the development of the 2011 HMP. In that time, the County has improved the tornado siren coverage. The City of Uhrichsville, and the Villages of Tuscarawas and Zoar successfully completed its previous mitigation action of installing additional tornado sirens. In addition to the new sirens installed in the Village of Tuscarawas, existing sirens were retrofitted with upgrades. 3.3 What’s New in the HMP Update For the 2017 HMP, the Tuscarawas County HMP Planning Committee reviewed and analyzed the 2011 HMP. This included a review of the planning process, historical disasters, hazard and risk assessment, mitigation goals, mitigation actions, plan maintenance, and updating process sections.

The 2017 HMP has been completely revamped to included Tuscarawas County-specific hazard information to fully capture the unique hazard environment and focus limited resources on relevant mitigation efforts. These changes include an expanded community profile, specific mitigation actions, and a specific maintenance and updating process for the next five years.

Section 4. The Planning Process This section describes each stage of the planning process used to develop the 2017 HMP. The planning process provides a framework for document development and follows the FEMA recommended steps. The 2017 HMP follows a prescribed series of planning steps which includes organizing resources, assessing risk, developing the mitigation plan, drafting the plan, reviewing and revising the plan, and adopting and submitting the plan for approval. Each is described in this section. 4.1 Planning Process Hazard mitigation planning in the United States is guided by the statutory regulations described in the DMA 2000 and implemented through 44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 201 and 206. FEMA’s HMP guidelines outline a four-step planning process for the development and approval of HMPs. Table 4-1 lists the specific CFR excerpts that identify the requirements for approval.

Table 4-1 DMA 2000 CFR Crosswalk

DMA 2000 (44 CFR 201.6) [YEAR] HMP Plan Section (1) Organize Resources Section 4 201.6(c)(1) Organize to prepare the plan 201.6(b)(1) Involve the public 201.6(b)(2) and (3) Coordinate with other agencies (2) Assess Risks Section 5 201.6(c)(2)(i) Assess the hazard 201.6(c)(2)(ii) and (iii) Assess the problem (3) Develop the Mitigation Plan Section 6 201.6(c)(3)(i) Set goals 201.6(c)(3)(ii) Review possible activities (actions) 201.6(c)(3)(iii) Draft an action plan (4) Plan Maintenance Section 7 201.6(c)(5) Adopt the plan 201.6(c)(4) Implement, evaluate, and revise

For the development of the 2017 HMP, a planning process was customized to address the unique population and demographic. All basic federal guidance documents and regulations are met through the customized process. As shown in Figure 4-1 the HMP planning process (and documented in the corresponding sections) included organizing resources, assessing risk, developing the mitigation action strategy, drafting the plan, reviewing and revising the plan, and adopting and submitting the plan.

Figure 4-1 Mitigation Planning Process 4.2 Organize Resources This section describes the first step of the 2017 HMP planning process – Organizing Resources. Organizing the resources consists of planning team development Public Input and document review tasks.

4.2.1 Building the Planning Team Planning A well-rounded community-based planning team Committee contributed heavily to the development of this Plan update. Tuscarawas County engaged past Mitigation Planning Committee (MPC) members, local government officials, stakeholders, and the general Steering public in local meetings and planning workshops to Committee discuss and complete tasks associated with preparing the Plan update.

The participants listed in Table 4-2 represent the members of the HMPC who were responsible for participating in the updating of this Plan.

4.2.1.1 Steering Committee At the core of the 2017 HMP planning process is the HMP Steering Committee. The HMP Steering Committee was integral in ensuring the success of the planning process, its implementation, and future maintenance. The community developed a professional services agreement with a HMP consultant, Michael Baker International (Baker) to provide direction for the development of the 2017 update. Members of the Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan (MHMP) Steering Committee were also a part of the MHMP Planning Committee discussed below.

4.2.1.2 Planning Committee The 2017 HMP Planning Committee consisted of key decision makers in specific government functions representing County, Regional, and Federal government organizations. The committee included stakeholders who actively participated in the planning process. Planning processes included:

. A series of structured coordination meetings . Collection of valuable local information and other requested data . Decision on plan process and content . Development of mitigation actions for the HMP . Review and comment on plan drafts . Coordination of the public input process

The preparation of the 2017 HMP required a series of meetings and workshops intended to facilitate discussion and initiate data collection efforts with local community officials. More importantly, the meetings and workshops prompted continuous input and feedback from local officials throughout the update process.

A range of stakeholders, including agencies, businesses, academia, nonprofits, and other interested parties were invited and encouraged to participate in the development of the HMP. These stakeholders included the Ohio Emergency Management Agency (EMA), Holmes County EMA, Stark County EMA, Carroll County EMA, Harrison County EMA, Guernsey County EMA, and Coshocton County EMA. In addition, the Red Cross, local companies, and the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District were invited. Stakeholder involvement was encouraged through the County’s invitations to agencies and individuals to participate in Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee meetings and to provide feedback for the plan. These invitations were sent to businesses and other potential stakeholders. They include: GE Water and Process Technology, Union Hospital, Arizona Chemical, the Tuscarawas County Regional Planning Commission, the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District, the American Red Cross, and the mayors of all cities and villages within Tuscarawas County.

Table 4-2 provides a list of the 2017 HMP Planning Committee members for all those who participated in the planning process.

Table 4-2 2017 HMP Planning Committee

Representative Title/Position Stakeholder Agency / Jurisdiction Meeting Attended Kimberly Kroh Executive Director American Red Cross Meeting 2 Tim Reichel Disaster Program Manager American Red Cross Meeting 2, Meeting 3 Daniel Dummermuth Engineer City of Dover Meeting 1 Rick Homrighausen Mayor City of Dover Meeting 2 Dave Johnson Mayor City of New Philadelphia Meeting 1 James Zucal Service Director City of New Philadelphia Meeting 1

Ron McAbier Service Director City of New Philadelphia Meeting 3 Joe Bollon Director of City Services City of Uhrichsville Meeting 3 Rick Dorland Mayor City of Uhrichsville Meeting 3 Terry Culbertson Mayor City of Uhrichsville Meeting 1 Rob McMasters Director Coshocton Co. EMA Meeting 2 Steve Brooks GIS Coordinator County Map Office Meeting 2 Eric Houze Assistant Chief Strasburg Fire Department Meeting 3 Bob Kutcher Chief of Police Strasburg Police Department Meeting 3 Belle Everett Commissioner Tuscarawas County Meeting 2 Chris Abbuhl Commissioner Tuscarawas County Meeting 1, Meeting 2 Meeting 1, Meeting 2, Gail Baldwin EMA Deputy Director Tuscarawas County Meeting 3, Individual Meetings (All) Kerry Metzger Commissioner Tuscarawas County Meeting 1, Meeting 2 Meeting 1, Meeting 2, Patty Levengood EMA Director Tuscarawas County Meeting 3 Tuscarawas County Regional Planning Meeting 1, Meeting 2, Jill Lengler Director Commission Meeting 3 Manager of Safety and Rick Mason Union Hospital Meeting 1 Security Lana Guisinger Mayor Village of Baltic Meeting 2 Scott Riffle Village Councilman Village of Baltic Meeting 2 Charles Thornton Mayor Village of Barnhill Individual Meeting (10/7) David Franks Administrator Village of Bolivar Meeting 1, Meeting 2 Tim Stin Mayor Village of Dennison Meeting 1 David Zimmerman Mayor Village of Gnadenhutten Meeting 2, Meeting 3 Meeting 2, Individual Larry Kopp Midvale Council Village of Midvale Meeting (10/17) Rick Cain Mayor Village of Mineral City Individual Meeting (9/22) Pat Cadle Mayor Village of Newcomerstown Meeting 2 Crystal Dilrenoro Mayor Village of Parral Meeting 2 Meeting 1, Meeting 2, Tom Gardner Mayor Village of Port Washington Meeting 3 William Lingo Councilmember Village of Roswell Meeting 3 Robert Spittle Council Member Village of Stone Creek Individual Meeting (10/19) Betty Dessecker Council Member Village of Stone Creek Individual Meeting (10/19) David Avon Council Member Village of Stone Creek Individual Meeting (10/19) Nick Campbell Mayor Village of Stone Creek Individual Meeting (10/19) Pam Mizer Fiscal Officer Village of Stone Creek Individual Meeting (10/19) Russell Kinsey Council President Village of Stone Creek Individual Meeting (10/19) James Ong Solicitor Village of Stone Creek Individual Meeting (10/19) Bill Theiss Village Administrator Village of Sugarcreek Meeting 2, Meeting 3 Chris Shamel Council President Village of Tuscarawas Meeting 3 Dana Moore Mayor Village of Tuscarawas Meeting 3 Shawn Gribble Patrolman Village of Tuscarawas Meeting 1

Scott Gordon Mayor Village of Zoar Meeting 3 Steve Wilson Zoar Council Village of Zoar Meeting 2

4.2.1.3 HMP Consultant Team To provide assistance to the HMP Planning Committee, Tuscarawas County enlisted Baker due to its expertise in assisting public sector entities with developing hazard mitigation plans and strategies for particular hazard prone areas. Baker supported the County through facilitation of the planning process, data collection, meeting material, and document development. The HMP Consultant Team, as shown in Table 4-3, consists of a variety of hazard mitigation professionals.

Table 4-3 HMP Consultant Team

HMP Update Project Team HMP Update Project Team Role Jason Farrell, CFM Project Manager Josh Vidmar Planner Carver Struve, CFM Technical Advisor Jason Isherwood, GISP GIS Specialist/Spatial Analyst

4.2.1.4 Planning Committee Meetings The preparation of the Plan update required a series of meetings and workshops intended to facilitate discussion and initiate data collection efforts with local community officials. More importantly, the meetings and workshops prompted continuous input and feedback from local officials throughout the update process.

Below is a summary of the key meetings and workshops conducted by the Tuscarawas County Mitigation Planning Committee. Full meeting minutes can be found in the Appendix.

Kickoff Meeting / First Mitigation Planning Update Meeting – October 20, 2015 The first meeting was held and advertised as an open/public forum on October 20, 2015 during which the mitigation planning update project was introduced to state and county officials, representatives of participating jurisdictions, stakeholders, and the general public. Prior to the meeting, an advertisement went out in the local newspaper, the Times Reporter, to inform the public that the County would be updating their Hazard Mitigation Plan.

The intent of this meeting was to educate local officials, stakeholders, and the general public on the mitigation planning process, being sponsored by Tuscarawas County, as well as to explain the DMA 2000 multi-jurisdictional planning requirements and the individual roles being required of selected planning committee members. The meeting also served to initiate data collection efforts for the HIRA summary associated with the Plan update.

The meeting began with introductions and a detailed presentation on the mitigation planning process led by Jason Farrell, Michael Baker International (Baker). Specific data collection needs were thoroughly explained, including the need for accurate GIS data as well as any unique local hazard risk data available for specific areas of concern.

During the presentation, the project team from Baker led discussion on a five year plan review exercise. Comments were received on which hazards, should be included in this version of the plan. After a discussion on what man-made hazards should be incorporated, it was ultimately decided that Hazardous Materials Incidents would be included, as well as Mine Subsidence and Natural Resource Extraction. Due to its unlikely nature within the County, Terrorism was not included. The group also decided to break

apart Drought/Extreme Heat/Wildfire into separate categories, removing Wildfire entirely from the plan due to the unlikelihood of this hazard to occur. There were no comments received by the general public.

Following the presentation on the planning process and the five year plan review, the project team from Baker addressed any questions and concerns raised by the committee. There were no comments from the general public provided at this time.

Second Mitigation Planning Committee Meeting – April 7, 2016 The second meeting was conducted on April 7, 2016 during which the Mitigation Planning Committee reached consensus on those natural hazards that should be addressed in the HIRA, and subsequently those that participating jurisdictions would possibly focus their mitigation efforts throughout the next five years of the Plan’s cycle.

An assessment was then conducted for ranking the top hazards affecting Tuscarawas County and discussions were held on the findings. The Mitigation Planning Committee reviewed current goals and objectives and evaluated whether they had been completed or whether they should be deferred into the 2011 Plan, deleted, or changed.

The planning committee also reviewed the hazards as discussed during the first meeting and came up with corresponding goals and objectives. It was determined that each goal should have a related public education and outreach objective. It was decided that a review of mitigation techniques would be conducted during the final planning meeting.

There were no comments from the general public provided at this time.

Third Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee Meeting: “Mitigation Solutions Workshop” – June 9, 2016 The third Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee meeting was held on June 9, 2016 in the form of a “Mitigation Solutions Workshop.” The workshop began with a detailed presentation by Michael Baker International on the findings of the local hazard, risk, and vulnerability update summary and capabilities for the county and each participating municipality. This data provided County and municipal officials with a more thorough understanding of the hazard risks in their communities, along with the varied levels of local capabilities available to address them. This information was to be used by participants in creating meaningful mitigation planning goals and specific, achievable mitigation actions that are designed to reduce the impacts of the identified hazards.

Following the presentation, an in-depth evaluation of the current mitigation actions was conducted by the Mitigation Planning Committee to review, whether since 2011, actions have been completed, were incomplete and needed to be deferred to the 2011 Plan, changed, or deleted from the Plan altogether. A summary of the evaluation can be found in Section 6 of this Plan.

Before the meeting concluded, Michael Baker International distributed and explained several handouts for workshop participants to use in identifying specific mitigation actions for incorporation into their own respective Mitigation Action Plans. This included Mitigation Action Templates (forms for proposing specific actions), along with a variety of planning tools and reference documents for considering and evaluating possible mitigation action alternatives. Workshop participants were instructed to take these materials back to their individual jurisdiction’s Mitigation Action Plan. The meeting also provided an opportunity for the County and participating municipalities to add new mitigation actions.

There were no comments from the general public provided at this time.

Individual Meetings In order to ensure that full community participation had taken place, a series of meetings with individual communities took place. Representatives from the Tuscarawas County EMA invited these communities directly, through phone calls and emails. During these meetings, representatives from communities that had not attended any of the previous three meetings were presented information on the mitigation planning process. This included going over the 2011 HMP’s goals and action, each community’s capabilities in regards to mitigation, and the creation of new actions. These meetings took place on September 22, October 7, October 17, and October 19 of 2016.

4.2.2 Planning Outreach Public and stakeholder outreach is a major and required component of the 2017 HMPU. The Tuscarawas County HMP Public Outreach Strategy was developed to maximize public involvement in the HMP planning process. The HMP Public Outreach Strategy details the utilization of websites, local media, and community-based services and establishments to engage the public throughout the HMP planning process. This section provides additional information on the project website and workshop process used during the HMP plan development.

4.2.2.1 Public Participation An important component of Tuscarawas County’s community-based mitigation planning process involves public, stakeholder, and jurisdiction participation. Individual citizen involvement provides the Mitigation Planning Committee with a greater understanding of local concerns and ensures a higher degree of mitigation success by developing community “buy-in” from those directly affected by the planning decisions of public officials.

County-level public meetings were at two stages of the planning process; during the kickoff presentation (development period) and following the completion of the draft Plan (draft period). The first meeting was advertised as a newspaper advertisement posted in the Times Reporter prior to the meeting (October 20, 2015). The intent of the meeting was to inform citizens about the importance of hazard mitigation, describe the mitigation planning process, and conduct a five year Plan review. The public was also invited to participate on the Mitigation Planning Committee.

During the public meetings, no comments were provided by the general public.

Public input was sought using two methods: (1) advertised open public meetings; (2) the posting of all development materials and a draft of the 2017 HMPU on a dedicated website that can be accessed from the Tuscarawas County website. This website was accessible by navigating to the following web address: http://www.co.tuscarawas.oh.us/ema/County.html . The updated Plan was also available for review and comment at the Tuscarawas County Emergency Management Agency prior to adoption. This was posted on March 20, 2017, through March 27, 2017. This provided citizens with the opportunity to review the content of each of the Plan’s sections, to ask questions and suggest possible final revisions.

No comments on the draft plan were received from the public during this review period.

Table 4-4 Original text and a newspaper clipping from the Times Reporter showing the public notices

4.2.2.2 Stakeholder Participation A range of stakeholders, including agencies, businesses, academia, nonprofits, and other interested parties were invited and encouraged to participate in the development of the Plan update. Stakeholder involvement was encouraged through Tuscarawas County’s invitations to agencies and individuals to participate in Mitigation Planning Committee meetings and the Mitigation Solutions Workshop. The invitation was sent to the following:  GE Water & Process Technology  Union Hospital  Arizona Chemical  Director of Regional Planning  Tuscarawas County GIS Coordinator  Tuscarawas County Commissioners  Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District  American Red Cross  Stark, Holmes, Coshocton, Guernsey, Carroll & Harrison County EMA’s  Mayors of every Village & City in Tuscarawas County

Those who attended one or more of the Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee meetings are detailed above in Table 4-2.

4.2.2.3 Multi-Jurisdictional Planning and Participation The 2017 Tuscarawas County Hazard Mitigation Plan is multi-jurisdictional and includes the participation of County officials and the following municipalities:  City of New Philadelphia  City of Dover  City of Uhrichsville

 Village of Baltic  Village of Barnhill  Village of Bolivar  Village of Dennison  Village of Gnadenhutten  Village of Midvale  Village of Mineral City  Village of Newcomerstown  Village of Parral  Village of Port Washington  Village of Roswell  Village of Stone Creek  Village of Strasburg  Village of Sugarcreek  Village of Tuscarawas  Village of Zoar

To satisfy multi-jurisdictional participation requirements, each of the local jurisdictions was required to perform the following tasks: (1) Designate a representative to serve on the Tuscarawas County Mitigation Planning Committee; (2) Participate in all Plan update meetings and workshops; (3) Provide best available data as required for the update to the local hazard, risk, and vulnerability summary section of the Plan; (4) Determine capability and provide copies of any mitigation or hazard-related documents for review and incorporation into the Plan; (5) Support the updating of the current countywide mitigation strategy, including the update, evaluation, design and adoption of general goal statements for all jurisdictions to pursue; (6) Review and provide timely comments on all draft components of the Plan update; (7) Adopt the 2017 Tuscarawas County Mitigation Plan, including the local mitigation action plan specific to their jurisdiction.

Through the completion of these tasks, all municipalities participated with Tuscarawas County in updating this Plan. Further, through the preparation of their own local mitigation action plans, the municipalities were responsible for addressing their most significant hazard concerns. This component of the Plan provides the opportunity for the jurisdiction to monitor and update their own specific action plan implementation responsibilities without necessarily having to meet with the Mitigation Planning Committee. It also enables each jurisdiction to be solely responsible and accountable for those actions that apply to their jurisdiction.

All jurisdictions participated in the Plan update, as well as reviewed and provided timely comments on all draft components of the Plan.

4.2.3 Review and Incorporate Existing Information There are numerous existing regulatory and planning mechanisms in place at the state, County, and municipal levels of government which support hazard mitigation planning efforts. These tools include the State of Ohio Hazard Mitigation Plan, local floodplain management ordinances, the Tuscarawas County Emergency Operation Plans, Tuscarawas County’s Comprehensive Land Use Plan, and local

ordinances. These mechanisms were discussed at planning meetings and the Tuscarawas County Mitigation Planning Committee reviewed all available technical information provided within these planning mechanisms and have incorporated them into this Plan update. This plan will also serve as a source document and be incorporated into local plans as they are updated or developed. These planning mechanisms enhance the County’s mitigation strategy and are therefore incorporated into several of the mitigation actions identified in this Plan.

4.2.4 Assess Risks In accordance with FEMA requirements, the 2017 HMPU Planning Committee identified and prioritized the natural hazards affecting Tuscarawas County and assessed the vulnerability from them. Results from this phase of the HMP planning process aided subsequent identification of appropriate mitigation actions to reduce risk in specific locations from hazards. This phase of the HMP planning process is detailed in Section 5.

4.2.4.1 Identify/Profile Hazards Based on a review of past hazards, as well as a review of the existing plans, reports, and other technical studies/data/information, the 2017 HMPU Planning Committee determined if the existing hazards were still valid, and identified new hazards that could affect Tuscarawas County. Updated content for each hazard profile is provided in Section 5.

4.2.4.2 Assess Vulnerabilities Hazard profiling exposes the unique characteristics of individual hazards and begins the process of determining which areas within Tuscarawas County are vulnerable to specific hazard events. Using these methodologies, vulnerable populations, infrastructure, and potential loss estimates impacted by natural hazards were determined. Detailed information on vulnerability assessment for each hazard is provided in Section 5.

4.2.5 Develop Mitigation Plan The 2017 HMPU was prepared in accordance with DMA 2000 and FEMA’s HMP guidance documents. This document provides an explicit strategy and blueprint for reducing the potential losses identified in the risk assessment, based on existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources, and Tuscarawas County ability to expand on and improve these existing tools. Developing the mitigation plan involved identifying goals, assessing existing capabilities, reviewing the 2011 mitigation actions, and identifying new mitigation actions. This step of the HMP planning process is detailed in Section 6 and summarized below.

4.2.5.1 Identify Goals The HMP Planning Committee reviewed the 2011 HMP goals, hazards profiles, and vulnerability assessments and developed new goals and objectives for the 2017 HMP based on current and revised information. The Goals and Objectives are presented in Section 6.

4.2.5.2 Develop Capabilities Assessment A capabilities assessment is a comprehensive review of all the various mitigation capabilities and tools currently available to Tuscarawas County and its jurisdictions to implement the mitigation actions that are prescribed in the 2017 HMP. The HMP Planning Committee identified the technical, financial, and administrative capabilities to implement mitigation actions, as detailed in Section 5.

4.2.5.3 Identify Mitigation Actions As part of the 2017 HMPU planning process, the HMP Planning Committee reviewed and analyzed the status of the mitigation actions identified in the 2011 HMP and provided data and information on the

status of the existing mitigation actions. Once the review and analysis of the 2011 HMP mitigation actions was complete, the HMP Consultant Team and HMP Planning Committee worked together to identify and develop new mitigation actions with implementation elements. Mitigation actions were prioritized and detailed implementation strategies were developed during Planning Committee Meeting #3. A detailed approach of the review of the existing mitigation actions, identification, prioritization of new mitigation actions, and the creation of the implementation strategy is provided in Section 6.

4.2.5.4 Draft HMP Update Once the risk assessment and mitigation strategy were completed, information, data, and associated narratives were compiled into the 2017 HMPU. Section 3 provides detailed information on “what’s new” and has been updated as part of the 2017 HMPU.

4.2.5.5 Plan Review and Revision Once the “Draft” 2017 HMPU was completed, a public and government review period was established for official review and revision. Public comments were accepted, reviewed, and incorporated into this update. Applicable comments from the public have been received and addressed prior to the “authorization to submit” to FEMA and Ohio EMA review parties.

4.2.5.6 Plan Adoption and Submittal This plan has been submitted and approved by FEMA and adopted by Tuscarawas County and its jurisdiction as the official statement of Tuscarawas County hazards. A copy of the resolution is provided in Appendix F. This section will be completed after approval by Ohio EMA and FEMA Region V.

4.2.5.7 Plan Maintenance Updated plan maintenance procedures, found in Section 7, include the measures Tuscarawas County and participating agencies will take to ensure the HMP’s continuous long‐term implementation. The procedures also include the manner in which the HMP will be regularly monitored, reported upon, evaluated, and updated to remain a current and meaningful planning document.

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Section 5. Risk Assessment Natural hazard risk assessment is the process of measuring the potential impact to life, property and economic impacts resulting from natural hazards. The intent of the risk assessment is to identify, as much as practicable given existing/available data, the qualitative and quantitative vulnerabilities of a community. The results of the risk assessment provide a framework for a better understanding of potential impacts to the community and a foundation on which to develop and prioritize mitigation actions (see Section 6). Mitigation actions can reduce damage from natural disasters and an implementation strategy can direct scarce resources to areas of greatest vulnerability described in this section.

This risk assessment follows the methodology described in FEMA publication, Understanding Your Risks—Identifying Hazards and Estimating Losses (FEMA 386-2, 2002), which outlines a four-step process: 1) Identify Hazards 2) Profile Hazard Events 3) Inventory Assets 4) Estimate Losses

Information gathered during the Tuscarawas County planning process related to the above four steps are incorporated into the following discussions in this section.

Section 5.1: Hazard Identification identifies and prioritizes the natural hazards that threaten the County. The reason for omitting some hazards from further consideration is also provided in this discussion.

Section 5.3 through Section 5.13: Hazard Profiles describe each of the hazards that pose a threat to the County. Information includes the location, extent/magnitude/severity, previous occurrences, and the likelihood of future occurrences.

Some of the hazard profiles do not contain historical occurrences for the given event. In these cases, there are no recorded events for the hazard through online searches, interviews with planning participants, or agencies that track those events. 5.1 Identifying the Hazards This section of the Plan describes the Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (HIRA) summary undertaken by Tuscarawas County and participating municipalities in the preparation of this Hazard Mitigation Plan Update. This section consists of the following subsections:  Introduction And Update Summary  Flooding  Severe Thunderstorms  Severe Winter Storms  Tornado  Extreme Temperatures  Drought  Earthquake/Seismic  Dam Failure (Internal/External)  Natural Resource Extraction  Mine Subsidence/Abandoned Wells  Hazardous Material Incidents

A key step in preventing disaster losses in Tuscarawas County is developing a comprehensive understanding of the hazards that pose risks to its communities.

The HIRA summary is a process or application of a methodology for evaluating risk as defined by probability and frequency of occurrence of a hazard event, exposure to people and property to the hazard, and consequences of that exposure. Different methodologies exist for assessing the risk of hazard events, ranging from qualitative to quantitative.

Tuscarawas County and its communities are vulnerable to a wide range of natural and technological hazards that threaten life and property. The hazards identified by the Tuscarawas County Mitigation Planning Committee for inclusion in this HIRA summary are those determined to be of actual potential threat to Tuscarawas County and its incorporated jurisdictions, and are consistent with the hazards identified by the State of Ohio and the Federal Emergency Management Agency for this part of the State and this region of the country. The hazards for this 2017 Plan update include:

NATURAL HAZARDS

 Flooding  Severe Thunderstorms  Severe Winter Storms  Tornado  Extreme Temperatures  Drought

TECHNOLOGICAL HAZARDS

 Dam Failure  Natural Resource Extraction  Mine Subsidence/Abandoned Wells  Hazardous Material Incidents

Some of these hazards can be interrelated (for example, severe storms can produce high wind/tornado activity and can cause flooding), and thus discussion of these hazards may overlap where necessary throughout the HIRA.

Of the 13 hazards profiled in the State of Ohio’s 2011 Hazard Mitigation Plan, 8 are addressed in this Plan. Additionally, 3 hazards not included in the State’s HMP are also profiled in this plan. These are Natural Resource Extraction, Mine Subsidence/Abandoned Wells, and Hazards Material Incidents. All three are technological hazards.

Table 5-1 Tuscarawas Profiled Hazards

Hazard State of Ohio HMP 2017 Tuscarawas 2011 Tuscarawas

HMPU HMP Coastal Erosion O X X Dam/Levee Failure O O Deferred to 2017 Drought O O Deferred to 2017 Earthquake O O Deferred to 2017 Extreme Temperatures X O Deferred to 2017 Flood O O Deferred to 2017 Hazardous Materials Incidents X O X Invasive Species O X X Land Subsidence* O O X Landslide O X X Mine Subsidence/Abandoned Wells X O X Natural Resource Extraction X O Deferred to 2017 Seiche/Coastal Flooding O X X Severe Thunderstorms O O Deferred to 2017 Tornado O O Deferred to 2017 Wildfire O X X Winter Storm O O Deferred to 2017 *Combined with mine subsidence in this plan.

Table 5-1 documents the review by the Tuscarawas County Mitigation Planning Committee to identify hazards from the State of Ohio Hazard Mitigation Plan, as well as the 2011 Tuscarawas HMP. Hazards were to be re-evaluated and/or identified, analyzed, and addressed through the updating of the Countywide HIRA summary. All hazards from the 2011 HMP were deferred into the 2017 update, with several more introduced as new into this plan.

Landslides, Wildfire, and Invasive Species are not profiled in this plan due to their lack of widespread effects in Tuscarawas County. Seiche/Coastal Flooding and Coastal Erosion are not included in this plan because there are no areas in Tuscarawas County that are near large bodies of water, including large lakes or oceans.

Once the hazards were identified and evaluated for inclusion into the 2017 HMPU, the Tuscarawas HMPC then ranked these based on a Risk Factor (RF) approach. To further focus on the list of identified hazards for this Plan, Table 5-2 presents a list of all federal disaster and emergency declarations that have occurred in Tuscarawas County since 1969, according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency. This list presents the foundation for identifying what hazards pose the greatest risk within the County and its jurisdictions.

Table 5-2 Presidential Disaster Declaration in Tuscarawas County

Disaster Declaration Number Date Title EM-3346 6/30/2012 Severe Storms DR-1805 10/24/2008 Severe Wind Storm associated with Tropical Depression Ike EM-3250 9/13/2005 Hurricane Katrina Evacuation DR-1580 2/15/2005 Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, And Mudslides DR-1556 9/19/2004 Severe Storms And Flooding DR-1519 6/3/2004 Severe Storms And Flooding DR-1507 1/26/2004 Severe Storms, Flooding, Mudslides, And Landslides DR-1227 6/30/1998 Severe Storms, Flooding, And Tornadoes

EM-3055 1/26/1978 Blizzards & Snowstorms EM-3029 2/2/1977 Snowstorms DR-266 7/15/1969 Tornadoes, Severe Storms & Flooding Hazards were ranked in order to provide structure and prioritize the mitigation goals and actions discussed in this plan. Ranking was both quantitative and qualitative. First, the quantitative analysis considered all the GIS and HAZUS data available. Then, a qualitative approach, the Risk Factor (RF) approach, was used to provide additional insights on the specific risks associated with each hazard. This process can also be a valuable cross-check or validation of the quantitative analysis performed.

The RF approach combines historical data, local knowledge, and consensus opinions to produce numerical values that allow identified hazards to be ranked against one another. During the planning process, the Tuscarawas County MPC compared the results of the hazard profile against their local knowledge to generate a set of ranking criteria. These criteria were used to evaluate hazards and identify the highest risk hazard.

RF values are obtained by assigning varying degrees of risk to five categories for each hazard: probability, impact, spatial extent, warning time, and duration. Each degree of risk is assigned a value ranging from 1 to 4 and a weighing factor for each category was agreed upon by the MPC. Based upon any unique concerns for the planning area, the MPC may also adjust the RF weighting scheme. To calculate the RF value for a given hazard, the assigned risk value for each category is multiplied by the weighting factor. The sum of all five categories equals the final RF value, as demonstrated in the example equation below:

RF Value = [(Probability x .30) + (Impact x .30) + (Spatial Extent x .20) + (Warning Time x .10) + (Duration x .10)]

Table 5-3 Risk Factor Criteria

Risk Assessment Category Level Degree Of Risk Level Index Weight Unlikely Less Than 1% Annual Probability 1

PROBABILITY Possible Between 1 & 10% Annual Probability 2 What is the likelihood of a hazard event 30% occurring in a given year? Likely Between 10 &100% Annual Probability 3

Highly Likely 100% Annual Probability 4

Very few injuries, if any. Only minor property damage & minimal disruption Minor 1 of quality of life. Temporary shutdown of critical facilities.

Minor injuries only. More than 10% of property in affected area damaged or Limited 2 destroyed. Complete shutdown of IMPACT critical facilities for more than one day. In terms of injuries, damage, or death, Multiple deaths/injuries possible. More would you anticipate impacts to be minor, 30% than 25% of property in affected area limited, critical, or catastrophic when a damaged or destroyed. Complete significant hazard event occurs? Critical 3 shutdown of critical facilities for more than one week.

High number of deaths/injuries possible. More than 50% of property in affected Catastrophic area damaged or destroyed. Complete 4 shutdown of critical facilities for 30 days or more.

Negligible Less than 1% of area affected 1 SPATIAL EXTENT Small Between 1 & 10% of area affected 2 How large of an area could be impacted by 20% a hazard event? Are impacts localized or Between 10 & 50% of area affected regional? Moderate 3 Large Between 50 & 100% of area affected 4

More Than 24 Hrs Self-Defined 1 WARNING TIME 12 To 24 Hrs Self-Defined 2 Is there usually some lead time associated 10% with the hazard event? Have warning 6 To 12 Hrs Self-Defined 3 measures been implemented? Less Than 6 Hrs Self-Defined 4

Less Than 6 Hrs Self-Defined 1

DURATION Less Than 24 Hrs Self-Defined 2 How long does the hazard event usually 10% last? Less Than 1 Week Self-Defined 3

More Than 1 Week Self-Defined 4

According to the default weighting scheme applied, the highest possible RF value is 4.0. The methodology illustrated above lists categories that are used to calculate the variables for the RF value.

RANKING RESULTS

Table 5-4 Risk Factor Table

Spatial Warning Risk Natural Hazards Probability Impact Duration Extent Time Factor 1 Extreme Temperatures 4 1.2 2 0.6 4 0.8 2 0.2 2 0.2 3.0 Severe 2 4 1.2 2 0.6 3 0.6 3 0.3 1 0.1 2.8 Thunderstorms Severe 3 3 0.9 2 0.6 3 0.6 2 0.2 1 0.1 2.4 Winter Storms 4 Flooding 3 0.9 2 0.6 2 0.4 2 0.2 2 0.2 2.3

5 Tornado 3 0.9 2 0.6 1 0.2 4 0.4 2 0.2 2.3

6 Drought 2 0.6 1 0.3 4 0.8 1 0.1 4 0.4 2.2

7 Earthquake/Seismic 2 0.6 1 0.3 2 0.4 4 0.4 1 0.1 1.8 Spatial Warning Risk Technological Hazards Probability Impact Duration Extent Time Factor 1 Dam Failure 2 0.6 4 1.2 4 0.8 4 0.4 2 0.2 3.2

2 Hazardous Material Incidents 3 0.9 3 0.9 2 0.4 4 0.4 1 0.1 2.7

Mine 3 3 0.9 1 0.3 1 0.2 3 0.3 2 0.2 1.9 Subsidence/Abandoned Wells Natural 4 2 0.6 1 0.3 1 0.2 4 0.4 2 0.2 1.7 Resource Extraction

Based on the RF analysis, the natural hazard with the highest risk potential is “Extreme Temperatures”, which has a value of 3.0. This is primarily due to the probability of the hazard occurring and the probability of occurrence throughout all areas of the county and the impact to infrastructure. “Severe Thunderstorms” was calculated as second in risk potential, with a risk factor value of 2.8, for similar reasons.

The technological or human-made hazard with the highest risk potential was found to be “Dam Failure”, with a value of 3.2. This is primarily due to a lack of warning time and a high level of impact and the vast spatial extent that could be impacted. Dover Dam is Tuscarawas County’s largest dam and with the City of Dover residing directly downstream, along with a vast network of roads, bridges, and critical infrastructure, if this dam were to fail, the impacts would be catastrophic.

The conclusions drawn from the qualitative and quantitative assessments, combined with final determinations from the Tuscarawas County MPC, were fitted into three categories for a final summary of hazard risk for Tuscarawas County and its participating jurisdictions based on High, Moderate or Low risk designations.

Table 5-5 Risk Ranking

Impact Level Hazard RF Score High Impact Dam Failure 3.2 (3.0 or higher) Extreme Temperatures 3.0 Severe Thunderstorms 2.8 Hazardous Materials Incidents 2.7 Medium Impact Severe Winter Storms 2.4 (2.0 to 2.9) Flooding 2.3 Tornado 2.3 Drought 2.2 Mine Subsidence / Abandoned Wells 1.9 Low Impact Earthquakes 1.8 (1.9 or lower) Natural Resource Extraction 1.7

5.2 Hazard Profiles Natural hazards are profiled individually in this section in order of priority. The profiles in this section provide a baseline definition and description in relation to Tuscarawas County. Hazard profiles are used to develop a vulnerability assessment, where natural hazard vulnerability to the community is quantified in terms of population and assets affected for each hazard deemed significant by the Planning Committee.

5.3 Extreme Temperatures Spatial Natural Hazards Probability Impact Warning Time Duration RF Rating Extent Extreme Temperatures 4 1.2 2 0.6 4 0.8 2 0.2 2 0.2 3 HIGH RISK HAZARD (3.0 – 3.9)

In the State Hazard Mitigation Plan (SHMP), climate change is treated as a condition that will occur and potentially exacerbate the impact of hazardous extreme temperatures. Heat is one of the leading weather-related killers in the United States, resulting in hundreds of fatalities each year (National Weather Service 2012). Extreme Cold can cause hazardous driving conditions, communications and electrical power failure, community isolation and can adversely affect business continuity. This section provides definitions and profiles for the hazard of extreme heat and extreme cold.

5.3.1 Hazard Identification

5.3.1.1 Extreme Heat Temperatures that remain at 10 degrees or more above the average high temperature for the region and last for several weeks are defined as extreme heat. The NWS issues an Excessive Heat Warning/Advisory when an extreme heat event (a "heat wave") is expected within 36 hours. The NWS issues these warnings based on a "Heat Index" - a combination of heat and humidity - that is predicted to be 105 degrees or greater for two or more consecutive days. Local weather forecast offices may use different criteria for Excessive Heat Warning/Advisories based on maximum temperatures, nighttime temperatures, and other methods.

Extreme Heat is the number one weather-related killer in the United States. It causes more fatalities each year than floods, lightning, tornadoes and hurricanes combined. In the Midwest, summers tend to combine both high temperature and high humidity. Heat disorders generally have to do with a reduction or collapse of the body’s ability to shed heat by circulatory changes and sweating or a chemical (salt) imbalance caused by too much sweating. When the body heats too quickly, to cool itself safely, or when too much fluid is lost through dehydration or sweating, the body temperature rises, and heat-related illnesses may develop.

Extreme temperatures can result in elevated utility costs to consumers and also can cause human risks. Extremely high temperatures cause heat stress which can be divided into four categories (see Table 5-1). Each category is defined by apparent temperature which is associated with a heat index value that captures the combined effects of dry air temperature and relative humidity on humans and animals. Major human risks for these temperatures include heat cramps, heat syncope, heat exhaustion, heatstroke, and death.

5.3.1.2 Extreme Cold Extreme Cold, in extended periods, although infrequent, could occur throughout the winter months in Tuscarawas County. Heating systems compensate for the cold outside. Most people limit their time outside during extreme cold conditions, but common complaints usually include pipes freezing and cars refusing to start. When cold temperatures and wind combine, dangerous wind chills can develop.

Wind chill is how cold it “feels” and is based on the rate of heat loss on exposed skin from wind and cold. As the wind increases, it draws heat from the body, driving down skin temperature, and eventually, internal body temperature. Therefore, the wind makes it feel much colder than the actual temperature. For example, if the temperature is 0°F and the wind is blowing at 15 mph, the wind chill is

-19°F. At this wind chill, exposed skin can freeze in 30 minutes. Wind chill does not affect inanimate objects. (National Weather Service)

Extreme Cold is also responsible for a number of fatalities each year. Threats, such as hypothermia and frostbite, can lead to loss of fingers and toes, cause permanent kidney, pancreas and liver injury and even death. Major winter storms can last for several days and be accompanied by high winds, freezing rain or sleet, heavy snowfall, and cold temperatures. Fifty percent of cold-related injuries happen to people over sixty years of age. More than seventy-five percent happen to males, and almost twenty percent occur within the home.

The dangers associated with extreme cold include frostbite and hypothermia. Frostbite is damage to body tissue caused by that tissue being frozen. Frostbite causes a loss of feeling in extremities, such as fingers, toes, ear lobes, or the tip of the nose. Hypothermia, or low body temperature can lead to uncontrollable shivering, memory loss, disorientation, slurred speech, drowsiness, and apparent exhaustion.

5.3.2 Regulatory Environment There are negligible formal regulations that pertain to generalized extreme temperature events.

5.3.3 Hazard Events For temperature extremes, Tuscarawas County has experienced 6 events according to NCDC since 2010. These events are associated with extremely cold temperatures.

Table 5-6 Extreme Temperature Events

Property Crop Date Type Deaths Injuries Damage Damage 1/2/2014 Cold/wind Chill 0 0 0 0 1/5/2014 Extreme Cold/wind Chill 0 0 0 0 2/14/2015 Extreme Cold/wind Chill 0 0 0 0 2/19/2015 Extreme Cold/wind Chill 0 0 0 0 2/24/2015 Extreme Cold/wind Chill 0 0 0 0 2/13/2016 Cold/wind Chill 0 0 0 0 TOTALS 6 EVENTS 0 0 0 0

5.3.4 Historical Occurrences January 5, 2014: An arctic cold front crossed the Upper Ohio Valley on the 6th, bringing record low temperatures and extreme wind chills the morning of the 7th. It was the coldest January 7th on record in Pittsburgh with a low temperature of 9 below zero, and a high temperature of 4 above zero. Across eastern Ohio, western Pennsylvania, northern West Virginia, and Garrett county Maryland, low temperatures ranged from 5 to 15 degrees below zero the morning of the 7th, with the lowest wind chill readings from 25 to 55 degrees below zero.

A low temperature of 11 degrees below zero with a wind chill of 37 degrees below zero was recorded near Sugarcreek the morning of the 7th.

February 14, 2015:

An arctic cold front crossed eastern Ohio, western Pennsylvania, northern West Virginia, and Garrett county Maryland the afternoon of the 14th, with snow squalls reducing visibility below one quarter mile at times. Wind gusts over 40 MPH occurred with the snow squalls, and thunder-snow was reported. Behind the front from the morning of the 15th into the 16th, temperatures dropped below zero, with extreme wind chills. The lowest wind chills reported were -37 degrees in Canaan Heights, WV, -33 near Strattanville, PA, -32 at Deep Creek Lake, MD, and -24 at East Palestine, OH. A wind chill of -22 was recorded the morning of the 15th at Sugarcreek, with a low temperature of -10 at Bolivar the morning of the 16th.

February 19, 2015: An arctic air mass moved across eastern Ohio, western Pennsylvania, northern West Virginia, and Garrett county Maryland on the 24th. Temperatures were well below zero with record lows across the region. A low temperature of -19 was recorded at Sugarcreek. A record low temperature of -15 was set at New Philadelphia.

February 13, 2016: Arctic air and strong winds produced wind chills from 10 to more than 20 degrees below zero the morning of the 13th across eastern Ohio, western Pennsylvania, northern West Virginia, and Garrett county Maryland. The New Philadelphia ASOS reported a wind chill of -10.

5.3.5 Magnitude/Severity While cold temperatures and power losses can render a structure uninhabitable for a time, they are unlikely to cause structural damages. Those people living in these older homes are more likely to need services offered in response to extreme cold.

Extremely high temperatures cause heat stress which can be divided into four categories (See Table 5-7). Each category is defined by apparent temperature. Apparent temperature is the general term for the perceived outdoor temperature, caused by the combined effects of air temperature, relative humidity, and wind speed. Apparent temperature is associated with a heat index value that captures the combined effects of dry air temperature and relative humidity on humans and animals. Major human risks for these temperatures include heat cramps, fainting, heat exhaustion, heatstroke, and death. Note that while the temperatures in Table 5-7 serve as a guide for various danger categories, the impacts of high temperatures will vary from person to person based on individual age, health, and other factors.

Temperature advisories, watches, and warnings are issued by the NWS relating the above impacts to the range of temperatures typically experienced in Ohio. Exact thresholds vary across the State, but in general Heat Advisories are issued when the heat index will be equal to or greater than 100°F, but less than 105°F, Excessive Heat Warnings are issued when heat indices will attain or exceed 105°F, and Excessive Heat Watches are issued when there is a possibility that excessive heat warning criteria may be experienced within twelve to forty-eight hours (NOAA NWS, 2010). See NOAA NWS Heat Index.

Table 5-7 Four Categories of Heat Stress (FEMA, 1997)

Danger Apparent Category Heat Disorders Temperature (°F) Fatigue possible with prolonged exposure and physical I (Caution) 80 to 90 activity.

II (Extreme Sunstroke, heat cramps, and heat exhaustion possible with 90 to 105 Caution) prolonged exposure and physical activity. Sunstroke, heat cramps, or heat exhaustion likely; heat stroke III (Danger) 105 to 130 possible with prolonged exposure and physical activity. IV (Extreme Heatstroke or sunstroke imminent. >130 Danger)

Excessive Cold Threat Level Threat Level Descriptions "An Extreme Threat to Life and Property from Excessive Cold." Extreme It is likely that wind chill values will drop to -35o F or below for 3 hours or more. Or, lowest air temperature less than or equal to -20o F. "A High Threat to Life and Property from Excessive Cold." High It is likely that wind chill values will drop to -28o F to -35 o F for 3 hours or more. Or, lowest air temperature -15o to -20o F. "A Moderate Threat to Life and Property from Excessive Cold." Moderate It is likely that wind chill values will drop to -20o F to -28 o F or below for 3 hours or more. Or, lowest air temperature -10o to -15o F. "A Low Threat to Life and Property from Excessive Cold." Low It is likely that wind chill values will drop to -15o F to -20 o F or below for 3 hours or more. Or, lowest air temperature -5o to -10o F. "A Very Low Threat to Life and Property from Excessive Cold." Very Low It is likely that that wind chill values will drop to -10o F to -15 o F or below for 3 hours or more. Or, lowest air temperature zero to -5o F. "No Discernable Threat to Life and Property from Excessive Cold." Non-Threatening Cold season weather conditions are non-threatening. Figure 5-1 Extreme Cold Temperature and Associated Threat Level

5.3.6 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences The probability of the County and its municipalities experiencing an extreme temperature event can be difficult to quantify; however, climate models suggest summer global temperatures are likely to increase while changes between temperature extremes would be more pronounced. The length of days above 100 degree will also extend significantly.

Reported extreme temperature events over the past 7 years provide an acceptable framework for determining the future occurrence in terms of frequency for such events. The probability of the County and its municipalities experiencing an extreme cold event can be difficult to quantify, but based on historical record of 6 extreme cold events since 2010, it can reasonably be assumed that this type of event has occurred once every 1.17 years from 2010 through 2017.

[(Current Year) 2017] subtracted by [(Historical Year) 2010] = 7 Years on Record

[(Years on Record) 7] divided by [(Number of Historical Events) 6] = 1.17 years between events

While the historic frequency calculates that there is an 86% chance of this type of event occurring each year, the planning committee felt that these events happen more frequently than what records indicate, thus assigning extreme temperatures a probability of a 100% chance per year.

5.3.7 Inventory Assets Exposed to Extreme Temperatures Vulnerability for extreme heat was classified as areas having a maximum average temperature over 85 degrees, according to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) study. This range falls within the upper limits of FEMA’s heat stress index, Caution Category 1. Extreme heat does not generally impact buildings; instead, they primarily impact people. Nonetheless, facilities need to be maintained to ensure that they operate in appropriate conditions for people.

Additionally, vulnerability for extreme cold was classified as areas having a minimum average temperature less than 14 degrees, according to the USDA NRCS study. Extreme cold does not generally impact buildings; instead, they primarily impact people. Nonetheless, facilities need to be maintained to ensure that they operate in appropriate conditions for people.

5.3.8 Potential Losses from Temperature Extremes As stated above, since 2010, the National Climate Data Center (NCDC) reported 6 extreme temperature events in Tuscarawas County. It’s evident that extreme temperatures are dangerous and can cause death. Therefore it’s important to understand how many people are exposed to such conditions, and how many buildings exist, where potential problems could arise should power be lost. Additionally, extreme cold can cause damage to structures; for example, burst pipes will damage buildings and will necessitate repairs. It is unlikely that an entire building would be impacted in an extreme cold event.

There is no way to predict an area that will be impacted by extreme temperatures. As a result, all property located within the County must be viewed as susceptible to the effects of extreme temperatures. While temperature extremes are not usually thought of as damaging to structures, they can make structures unusable. The 2015 American Community Survey (1-Year Estimates) indicates that 6.0% of Tuscarawas County’s population (92,916) was under the age of 5 in 2015, and that 18.3% was over the age of 65. These groups are likely to be the most susceptible to the effects of temperature extremes. The age of a structure is also important to consider when discussing temperature extremes. Older homes are more susceptible to the effects of temperature extremes, due to the prevalent construction methods used at the time.

Table 5-8 Homes in Tuscarawas County by Year of Construction

Year Built # of Homes Percentage Built 2014 or later 0 0% 2010 to 2013 256 1% 2000 to 2009 4,336 11% 1990 to 1999 4,718 12% 1980 to 1989 3,820 10% 1970 to 1979 5,028 13% 1960 to 1969 3,765 9% 1950 to 1959 4,528 11% 1940 to 1949 1,891 5% 1939 or earlier 11,665 29% TOTAL 40,007

5.3.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences Tuscarawas County is subject to temperature extremes. They are a countywide hazard and effect all areas of the county and its jurisdictions. The effect temperature extremes will have on the County will vary due to population density, age of population, and the age of structures. Older homes are generally less insulated than newer construction. In addition, the use of modern windows and doors can improve a structure’s ability to resist extreme temperatures. Older structures and infrastructure are likely to be more susceptible to both heat waves and freezes.

5.3.9.1 Urban Heat Island The urban heat island effect results from the change in surfaces. Those areas that were permeable and moist become dry. On a hot, sunny day, the sun can heat surfaces, such as roofs and pavement, to higher temperatures than the surrounding air. The heat island phenomenon is not only a daytime effect. At night, as the infrastructure releases the heat it has accumulated during the day, raising the air temperature.

Figure 5-2 EPA Urban Heat Island Image

Tuscarawas County’s most populous municipalities are New Philadelphia, Dover and Uhrichsville. That means that they are the most likely to suffer from heat island effects. Industrial complexes are also susceptible to these effects.

5.3.10 Land Use & Development Trends The elderly, just like small children, are more susceptible to temperature extremes. Additionally buildings of significant age may be more susceptible to temperature extremes. It is important to identify building stock and special needs populations so that those who have to respond to an emergency will be better prepared.

5.3.11 Temperature Extreme HIRA Summary Temporary periods of extreme hot or cold temperatures typically do not have significant environmental impact. However, prolonged periods of hot temperatures may be associated with drought conditions and can damage or destroy vegetation, dry up rivers and streams, and reduce water quality. Prolonged exposure to extremely cold temperatures can kill wildlife and vegetation.

5.4 Severe Thunderstorms Spatial Natural Hazards Probability Impact Warning Time Duration RF Rating Extent Severe Thunderstorms 4 1.2 2 0.6 3 0.6 3 0.3 1 0.1 2.8 MEDIUM RISK HAZARD (2.0 – 2.9)

5.4.1 Hazard Identification Extreme weather conditions can exist during any season in central Ohio. Thunderstorms, associated with strong winds, heavy precipitation, and lightning strikes can all be hazardous under the right conditions and locations. Strong winds and tornadoes can take down trees, damage structures, tip high profile vehicles, and create high velocity flying debris. Large hail can damage crops, dent vehicles, break windows, and injure or kill livestock, pets, and people. Coastal storms, which include hurricanes, tropical storms, and nor’easters, are among the most devastating naturally occurring hazards in the United States and its territories. Past events reveal the magnitude of damage that is possible. In 2005, Hurricane Katrina resulted in the highest total damage of any natural disaster in U.S. history, an estimated $90 billion, eclipsing many times the damage wrought by Hurricane Andrew in 1992.

Thunderstorms affect relatively small areas when compared with hurricanes and winter storms. Despite their small size, all thunderstorms are dangerous. The typical thunderstorm is 15 miles in diameter and lasts an average of 30 minutes. Of the estimated 100,000 thunderstorms that occur each year in the United States, about 10 percent are classified as severe. The National Weather Service considers a thunderstorm severe if it produces hail at least 3/4 inch in diameter, winds of 58 MPH or stronger, or a tornado. Every thunderstorm needs three basic components: (1) moisture to form clouds and rain (2) unstable air which is warm air that rises rapidly and (3) lift, which is a cold or warm front capable of lifting air to help form thunderstorms.

Lightning, although not considered severe by the National Weather Service definition, can accompany heavy rain during thunderstorms. Lightning develops when ice particles in a cloud move around, colliding with other particles. These collisions cause a separation of electrical charges. Positively charged ice particles rise to the top of the cloud and negatively charged ones fall to the middle and lower sections of the cloud. The negative charges at the base of the cloud attract positive charges at the surface of the Earth. Invisible to the human eye, the negatively charged area of the cloud sends a charge called a stepped leader toward the ground. Once it gets close enough, a channel develops between the cloud and the ground. Lightning is the electrical transfer through this channel. The channel rapidly heats to 50,000 degrees Fahrenheit and contains approximately 100 million electrical volts. The rapid expansion of the heated air causes thunder.

Hail develops when a super cooled droplet collects a layer of ice and continues to grow, sustained by the updraft. Once the hail stone cannot be held up any longer by the updraft, it falls to the ground. Nationally, hailstorms cause nearly $1 billion in property and crop damage annually, as peak activity coincides with peak agricultural seasons. Severe hailstorms also cause considerable damage to buildings and automobiles, but rarely result in loss of life. Hailstones are usually less than two inches in diameter and can fall at speeds of 120 miles per hour (mph), which can be destructive to roofs, buildings, automobiles, vegetation, and crops.

Dangerous and damaging aspects of a severe storm are tornadoes, hail, lightning strikes, flash flooding, and winds associated with downbursts and microbursts. Reported severe weather events over the past 57 years provide an acceptable framework for determining the magnitude of such storms that can be

expected and planned for accordingly. FEMA places this region in Zone IV (250 MPH) for structural wind design (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2004b

Figure 5-3 Wind Zones in the United States.

5.4.2 Regulatory Environment There are negligible formal regulations that pertain to thunderstorm events.

5.4.3 Hazard Events

5.4.3.1 Hail Events in Tuscarawas County Large hail can damage structures, break windows, dent vehicles, ruin crops, and kill or injure people and livestock. Based on past occurrences, hail sizes greater than 3 inches in diameter are possible and should be accounted for in future planning activities. Non-tornadic, thunderstorm and non-thunderstorm winds over 100 mph should also be considered in future planning initiatives. These types of winds can remove roofs, move mobile homes, topple trees, take down utility lines, and destroy poorly-built or weak structures.

Though records extend to the mid-1990s, only events from 2010 through 2017 were taken into account for the probability analysis. Since 2010, there have been 44 recorded hail events associated with thunderstorms that have either directly or indirectly impacted the County and its jurisdictions.

Property Crop Location Date Mag Deaths Injuries Damage Damage Dundee 5/1/1996 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 6/24/1996 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Stone Creek 8/15/1996 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 5/18/1997 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Gnadenhutten 6/26/1998 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 6/28/1998 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Sugar Creek 8/24/1998 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 8/24/1998 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 8/24/1998 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Stone Creek 8/24/1998 0.88 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Tuscarawas 8/24/1998 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Baltic 7/31/1999 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Zoar 7/14/2000 1.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 7/14/2000 0.88 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 4/9/2001 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Baltic 4/9/2001 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Gnadenhutten 4/9/2001 1.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 4/19/2002 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Strasburg 4/19/2002 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Baltic 4/28/2002 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 11/10/2002 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 11/10/2002 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 7/18/2003 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Strasburg 7/18/2003 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 8/27/2003 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Mineral City 8/18/2004 0.88 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Strasburg 8/19/2004 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 8/19/2004 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 8/19/2004 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 6/22/2006 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Newcomerstown 8/20/2007 0.88 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Gilmore 5/31/2010 0.88 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 6/2/2010 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Stone Creek 6/4/2010 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Uhrichsville 6/4/2010 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dennison 6/4/2010 1.25 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 3/23/2011 1.50 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Baltic 3/23/2011 1.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Bolivar 6/4/2011 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Bolivar 6/4/2011 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 6/4/2011 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 6/4/2011 1.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 6/4/2011 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 6/4/2011 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Bolivar 6/7/2011 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ -

Property Crop Location Date Mag Deaths Injuries Damage Damage Uhrichsville 6/19/2011 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Roswell 8/9/2011 1.25 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Roswell 8/19/2011 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 8/19/2011 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 7/26/2012 0.88 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 7/26/2012 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 4/10/2013 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 4/10/2013 1.50 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 4/10/2013 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Somerdale 4/10/2013 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Newcomerstown 6/12/2013 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Bolivar 6/25/2013 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 6/25/2013 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Bolivar 6/28/2013 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 6/28/2013 0.88 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 6/28/2013 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 7/9/2013 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 7/23/2013 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 8/7/2013 0.88 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 8/7/2013 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 5/14/2014 0.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 5/14/2014 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 5/14/2014 0.88 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 5/14/2014 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Booth 5/14/2014 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 5/2/2016 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Strasburg 5/2/2016 1.75 in. 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 5/2/2016 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Roswell 6/16/2016 1.25 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Roswell 6/16/2016 1.00 in. 0 0 $ - $ - Totals: 75 events $ 0.00 $ 0.00

5.4.3.2 Thunderstorm Wind Events in Tuscarawas County Non-tornadic, thunderstorm and non-thunderstorm winds over 100 mph should also be considered in future planning initiatives. These types of winds can remove roofs, move mobile homes, topple trees, take down utility lines, and destroy poorly-built or weak structures.

While records extent back to the mid-1990s, information from 2010 onward was used for the probability analysis. Since then, the NCDC reports that there have been 72 recorded thunderstorm events that have either directly or indirectly impacted Tuscarawas County. No injuries have been record within this timeframe. A list of all collected storm events can be found in Appendix C.

Date Range # Of Events Type Death Injury Property Damage Crop Damage Thunderstorm 2010-2017 72 0 0 $3,997,250 $0 Wind TOTALS: 0 0 $3,379,200 $0

Reported damages to infrastructure for each occurrence averaged around $28,000.

5.4.3.3 Lightning Events in Tuscarawas County

Date Type Death Injury Property Damage Crop Damage 7/1/2001 Lightning 0 1 $0 $0 TOTALS: 0 1 $0 $0

There have been no recorded lightning strike events between 2010 and 2017.

5.4.4 Historical Occurrences

5.4.4.1 Hail Occurrences March 23, 2011 – 1.75 inch: As a low pressure system tracked along a warm front across Ohio and Pennsylvania severe thunderstorms developed just south of the front in Ohio and progressed eastward. Large hail was reported with many of the storms, with hail up to the size of golf balls reported in both Ohio and Pennsylvania. A strong supercell thunderstorm produced an EF-2 tornado that crossed through Westmoreland County in Pennsylvania during rush hour.

May 2, 2016 – 1.75 inch: In the early morning hours of May 2, 2016, a low pressure center was moving east/northeast along a stalled boundary over the County Warning Area with a passing shortwave aloft. Only one severe thunderstorm (supercell) tracked along the low where greatest shear was observed and produced numerous reports of quarter size hail and larger across eastern OH thru Allegheny County in PA.

5.4.4.2 Thunderstorm Wind Occurrences There have also been accounts from local sources of some windstorms prior to major record keeping. Two (2) major wind events happened in 1954 and 1955. In the 1954 event, Uhrichsville, Dennison, Tuscarawas, and Gnadenhutten were all affected. The total amount of damage was estimated to be $500,000. In that event, power lines were downed and some cattle were reported killed by the effects of the wind. In 1955, Newcomerstown and other parts of the county experienced 80 mph winds, which caused estimated damages of $200,000.

April 8, 1998: A storm blew through Tuscarawas County. Strong winds knocked a sign over from on top of a department store in New Philadelphia, causing the roof to partially cave in. Four employees were injured, and a nearby tree was blown over onto a vehicle. Another tree fell onto power lines, causing a power outage. Property damage was estimated at $200,000.

June 26, 2008: Emergency management reported damage to the roof of a school, as well as trees and power lines down near Strasburg and across the County. Property damage was estimated at $200,000.

June 25, 2009: Scattered thunderstorms developed ahead of and along a cold front moving across the Upper Ohio Valley. Law enforcement reported trees down countywide. Damages were estimated at $100,000.

July 10, 2013: A powerful cold front and upper level trough pushed across the Upper Ohio Valley on July 10th producing widespread severe weather and flash flooding from eastern Ohio, northern West Virginia, and western Pennsylvania. This included 3 separate tornadoes.

5.4.4.3 Lightning Occurrences in Tuscarawas County Except in cases where significant forest or range fires are ignited, lightning generally does not result in disasters. Though records exist from the mid-1990s onward, only events between 2010 and 2017 were factored into the probability analysis. There have been no lightning strike occurrences since 2010.

The event happened on July 1, 2001, when a 19-year old woman was struck by lightning outside her home as she was attempting to move a large umbrella. She was taken to the local hospital and listed in satisfactory condition.

5.4.5 Magnitude/Severity Thunderstorm watches and warnings are issued by the NWS. There are no watches or warnings for lightning. Figure 5-4 explains the difference between watches and warnings, as used by the NWS.

Figure 5-4 National Weather Service Watch vs Warning

Common Object Size In Diameter Pea 0.25 Inch

Penny or Dime 0.75 Inch

Quarter 1.00 Inch

Half Dollar 1.25 Inch

Golf Ball 1.75 Inch

Tennis Ball 2.50 Inch

Baseball 2.75 Inch

Grapefruit 4.00 Inch Figure 5-5 Hail Size Chart

Figure 5-6 Flash Density associated with Lightning Strikes.

Source: www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov

5.4.6 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences Reported severe storms over the past 7 years provide an acceptable framework for determining the future occurrence in terms of frequency for such events. Records from the NCDC were obtained, with the probability analysis taking place between 2010 and 2017. The probability of the County and its jurisdictions experiencing a thunderstorm with damages or injury can be difficult to quantify, but based on historical record of 72 severe storm events that have either caused damages to buildings and infrastructure or resulted in an injury or death, it can reasonably be assumed that these types of events have occurred every year, with the exception of lightning strikes. There are not enough events to accurately determine how often lightning will cause injury or death within Tuscarawas County. Below is a probability breakdown of each thunderstorm-related event.

Table 5-9 Probability of Thunderstorm Events in Tuscarawas County

Number of Events in Number of Years in Historic Recurrence Historic Frequency Hazard Historic Record Historic Record Interval (years) (% chance/year) Thunderstorm Wind 72 7 0.10 100% Hail 44 7 0.16 100% Lightning 0 7 N/A N/A

5.4.7 Inventory Assets Exposed to Thunderstorms All assets located in Tuscarawas County can be considered at risk from severe weather. This includes 92,916 people, or 100 percent of the County’s population and all buildings and infrastructure within the County. Damages primarily occur as a result of high winds, lightning strikes, hail, and flooding. Most structures, including the county’s critical facilities, should be able to provide adequate protection from hail but the structures could suffer broken windows and dented exteriors. Those facilities with back-up generators are better equipped to handle a severe weather situation should the power go out.

5.4.8 Potential Losses from Thunderstorms A timely forecast may not be able to mitigate the property loss, but could reduce the casualties and associated injury. It appears possible to forecast these extreme events with some skill, but further research needs to be done to test the existing hypothesis about the interaction between the convective storm and its environment that produces the extensive swath of high winds. Severe thunderstorms will remain a highly likely occurrence for Tuscarawas County. Lightning and hail may also be experienced in the area due to such storms.

The majority of structures in the County are residential properties, which are predominantly single- family houses. Their combined total is nearly $2 billion. If 1% were lost, the resulting cost would be $19,955,218. A 5% loss would result in $99,776,089. There are an estimated 2,829 parcels of agricultural land within the County, with a total value of $177,979,870. A 1% loss would result in $1,779,798, and a 5% loss would represent $8,898,993. The total loss for critical facilities in the County would be $150,643,060. 1% would be $1,506,431. 5% would result in $7,532,153.

Table 5-10 Potential Losses from Thunderstorms

Fire Station - Volunteer 9 $ 554,840 $ 5,548 $ 27,742 Hospital 2 $ 9,788,220 $ 97,882 $ 489,411 Library 13 $ 2,864,760 $ 28,648 $ 143,238 Museum 3 $ 122,790 $ 1,228 $ 6,140 Post Office 13 $ 1,337,100 $ 13,371 $ 66,855 School 72 $ 57,291,590 $ 572,916 $ 2,864,580 Utilities 568 $ 4,273,680 $ 42,737 $ 213,684 Water Tanks 3 $ 631,950 $ 6,320 $ 31,598 Grand Total 923 $ 150,643,060 $ 1,506,431 $ 7,532,153

5.4.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences Each municipality in the County has an equal susceptibility to severe storms and lightning. Predictability again causes a great problem when discussing the probability of damage from high wind events. There is really no way to pinpoint exactly where, when, and to what extent a thunderstorm or other severe weather event will cause damage. However, we know that thunderstorm events, with high wind and dangerous lightning, are highly possible in the county. These storms are prominent in the early spring and continue through late fall. If located in a densely populated area of the county, it is easy to estimate damages in the millions of dollars from these events.

5.4.10 Land Use & Development Trends All future structures and infrastructure built in Tuscarawas County will likely be exposed to severe storms, lightning, and hail and may experience damage. Since the previous statement is assumed to be uniform countywide, the location of development does not increase or reduce the risk necessarily. Tuscarawas County and its jurisdiction need to adhere to building codes, and therefore, new development can be built to current standards for wind resistance. Additionally, as homes are built throughout the county, accessing the majority of residents may become difficult should sheltering or emergency services be needed in an extreme event.

5.4.11 Thunderstorm HIRA Summary Tuscarawas County is subject to severe storms ranging from thunderstorms to tropical storms which have the potential to cause flash flooding, tornadoes, downbursts, and debris. The severe storms profile is primarily concerned with past and future damages from high winds, lightning, heavy precipitation, and subsequent flooding.

Mitigation of building damage has been most successful where strict building codes for high-wind influence areas and designated special flood hazard areas have been adopted and enforced by local governments, and complied with by builders. Proven techniques are available to reduce lightning damage by grounding techniques for buildings.

Post-disaster mitigation efforts include buyout programs, relocations, structural elevations, improved open-space preservation, and land use planning within high-risk areas. Due to the significant risk from severe storms, Tuscarawas County will remain proactive in its mitigation efforts to help build sustainability throughout the County.

5.5 Severe Winter Storms Spatial Natural Hazards Probability Impact Warning Time Duration RF Rating Extent Severe Winter Storms 3 0.9 2 0.6 3 0.6 2 0.2 1 0.1 2.4 MEDIUM RISK HAZARD (2.0 – 2.9)

5.5.1 Hazard Identification Tuscarawas County has been impacted by varying degrees of Severe Winter Storms over the last century; however; the occurrence of Severe Winter Storms in the county is relatively infrequent, even during winter months. Severe Winter Storms can cause hazardous driving conditions, communications and electrical power failure, community isolation and can adversely affect business continuity. This type of severe weather may include one or more of the following winter factors:

Blizzards, as defined by the National Weather Service, are a combination of sustained winds or frequent gusts of 35 mph or greater and visibilities of less than a quarter mile from falling or blowing snow for 3 hours or more. A blizzard, by definition, does not indicate heavy amounts of snow, although they can happen together. The falling or blowing snow usually creates large drifts from the strong winds. The reduced visibilities make travel, even on foot, particularly treacherous. The strong winds may also support dangerous wind chills. Ground blizzards can develop when strong winds lift snow off the ground and severely reduce visibilities.

Heavy snow, in large quantities, may fall during winter storms. Six inches or more in 12 hours or eight inches or more in 24 hours constitutes conditions that may significantly hamper travel or create hazardous conditions. The National Weather Service issues warnings for such events. Smaller amounts can also make travel hazardous, but in most cases, only results in minor inconveniences. Heavy wet snow before the leaves fall from the trees in the fall or after the trees have leafed out in the spring may cause problems with broken tree branches and power outages.

Ice storms develop when a layer of warm (above freezing), moist air aloft coincides with a shallow cold (below freezing) pool of air at the surface. As snow falls into the warm layer of air, it melts to rain, and then freezes on contact when hitting the frozen ground or cold objects at the surface, creating a smooth layer of ice. This phenomenon is called freezing rain. Similarly, sleet occurs when the rain in the warm layer subsequently freezes into pellets while falling through a cold layer of air at or near the Earth’s surface. Extended periods of freezing rain can lead to accumulations of ice on roadways, walkways, power lines, trees, and buildings. Almost any accumulation can make driving and walking hazardous. Thick accumulations can bring down trees and power lines.

The science of meteorology and records of severe weather are not quite sophisticated enough to identify what areas of the county are at greater risk for damages. Therefore, all areas of the county are assumed to have the same Severe Winter Storms risk countywide.

Severe Winter Storms can result in the closing of primary and secondary roads, particularly in rural locations, loss of utility services, and depletion of oil heating supplies. Environmental impacts often include damage to shrubbery and trees due to heavy snow loading, ice build-up, and/or high winds which can break limbs or even bring down large trees. Gradual melting of snow and ice provides excellent groundwater recharge; however, high temperatures following a heavy snowfall can cause rapid surface water runoff and severe flash flooding.

5.5.2 Regulatory Environment There are negligible formal regulations that pertain to generalized severe winter weather events.

5.5.3 Hazard Events The State of Ohio does have an extensive history of Severe Winter Storms. In the winter of 1994, the state was hit by a severe winter storm and extreme cold temperatures. A mixture of snow, sleet, and freezing rain occurred with many areas averaging about 1/2 inch ice buildup. Snow accumulations averaged one to three inches. Numerous trees and power lines were downed by the weight of the ice and snow, some severely damaging homes and automobiles. A number of accidents were reported due to falls.

Seasonal Weather Extremes is a common occurrence in Ohio throughout the winter, and early spring months. According to the National Climatic Data Center, there have been 13 winter events in Tuscarawas County since 1996.

Table 5-11 Winter Storm Events in Tuscarawas County

Property Crop Date Type Deaths Injuries Damage Damage 1/2/1999 Winter Storm 0 0 $ - $ - 1/8/1999 Winter Storm 0 0 $ - $ - 1/13/1999 Winter Storm 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - 12/13/2000 Winter Storm 0 0 $ - $ - 3/7/2008 Winter Storm 0 0 $ - $ - 1/27/2009 Winter Storm 0 0 $ - $ - 12/13/2009 Winter Weather 0 0 $ - $ - 1/20/2012 Winter Storm 0 0 $ - $ - 11/26/2013 Winter Weather 0 0 $ - $ - 2/4/2014 Winter Storm 0 0 $ - $ - 12/1/2014 Winter Weather 0 0 $ - $ - 4/2/2016 Winter Weather 0 0 $ - $ - 4/8/2016 Winter Weather 0 0 $ - $ - TOTAL: 13 events 0 0 $ 5,000 $ -

5.5.4 Historical Occurrences

January 13, 1999: A powerful winter storm brought another combination of snow and freezing rain to all of east central Ohio. The precipitation began as snow, with between 1 and 3 inches of accumulation reported before the snow turned to freezing rain. All portions of east central Ohio reported at least 1/4 inch of ice accumulation, with some areas in Belmont and Harrison counties reporting over 1 inch of ice. The ice accumulation brought numerous power lines and large tree branches down, resulting in power outages to over 10,000 homes across the area.

January 20, 2012: A low pressure system moved across the Appalachians southeast of the Upper Ohio Valley and produced a mixed bag of heavy freezing rain, sleet and heavy snow across parts of the region. Freezing rain accumulations from one quarter to over one half inch occurred across eastern Ohio along Interstate 70 to southwest Pennsylvania, and extended south to the Mason Dixon line, and into Garrett county Maryland. North of this band heavy snow of 6 to 7 inches fell from New Philadelphia, Oh to Pittsburgh. Lighter snows of 3 to 6 inches fell from north of Pittsburgh to Interstate 80, and a small amount of freezing rain fell across portions of northern West Virginia.

April 2, 2016: Very cold air for early April followed low pressure across the region. This produced widespread snow showers, with light snow accumulations across much of eastern Ohio, western Pennsylvania, northern West Virginia, and Garret county Maryland. In lower elevations a trace to 2 inches of snow fell. In the Laurel Ridges of western Pennsylvania 2 to 5 inches of snow fell, and in the higher elevations of northern West Virginia and Garrett county Maryland 2 to 6 inches of snow fell, with isolated reports over 6 inches. The Ohio Department of Highways reported 2.5 inches of snow near New Philadelphia.

5.5.5 Magnitude/Severity The NWS uses different terminology for winter weather events, depending on the situation.

Outlook - Winter weather that may cause significant impact in the day 3 to 7 forecast time period and eventually lead to the issuance of a watch or warning is contained in the Hazardous Weather Outlook. More scientific discussion on the event can also be found in the Area Forecast Discussion. Forecasts in the day 3 to 7 time period typically have a lot of forecast uncertainty. Uncertainty is generally in the 30 to 50% range that the event will occur and reach warning criteria. It is intended to provide information to those who need considerable lead time to prepare for the event.

Watch - A watch is generally issued in the 24 to 72 hour forecast time frame when the risk of a hazardous winter weather event has increased (50 to 80% certainty that warning thresholds will be met). It is intended to provide enough lead time so those who need to set their plans in motion can do so. A watch is issued using the Winter Storm Warning (WSW) Winter Weather Message product and will appear as a headline in some text products such as the Zone Forecast. It will change the color, as shown in the table below, of the counties on the NWS front page map according to what type of watch has been issued.

Watch Type Description

Conditions are favorable for a blizzard event in the next 24 to 72 hours. Sustained wind or frequent gusts greater than or equal to 35 mph will accompany falling Blizzard Watch and/or blowing snow to frequently reduce visibility to less than 1/4 mile for three or more hours.

Conditions are favorable for a lake effect snow event to meet or exceed local lake Lake Effect Snow effect snow warning criteria in the next 24 to 72 hours. Widespread or localized Watch lake induced snow squalls or heavy snow showers which produce snowfall accumulation to 7 or more inches in 12 hours or less. Lake effect snow usually

develops in narrow bands and impacts a limited area within a county or forecast zone. Use "mid-point" of snowfall range to trigger a watch (i.e. 5 to 8 inches of snow = watch).

Conditions are favorable for wind chill temperatures to meet or exceed local wind Wind Chill Watch chill warning criteria in the next 24 to 72 hours. Wind chill temperatures may reach or exceed -25°F.

Conditions are favorable for a winter storm event (heavy sleet, heavy snow, ice storm, heavy snow and blowing snow or a combination of events) to meet or exceed local winter storm warning criteria in the next 24 to 72 hours. Criteria for Winter Storm snow is 7 inches or more in 12 hours or less; or 9 inches or more in 24 hours Watch covering at least 50 percent of the zone or encompassing most of the population. Use "mid-point" of snowfall range to trigger a watch (i.e. 5 to 8 inches of snow = watch). Criteria for ice is 1/2 inch or more over at least 50 percent of the zone or encompassing most of the population.

Figure 5-7 Winter Storm Watch Definitions

Warning - These products are issued when a hazardous winter weather event is occurring, is imminent, or has a very high probability of occurrence (generally greater than 80%). A warning is used for conditions posing a threat to life or property. Warnings are issued using the WSW Winter Weather Message product and will appear as a headline in some text products such as the Zone Forecast. It will change the color, as shown in the table below, of the counties on the NWS front page map according to what type of warning/advisory has been issued.

Warning Type Description

Blizzard event is imminent or expected in the next 12 to 36 hours. Sustained wind or frequent gusts greater than or equal to 35 mph will accompany falling and/or Blizzard Warning blowing snow to frequently reduce visibility to less than 1/4 mile for three or more hours.

An ice storm event is expected to meet or exceed local ice storm warning criteria in Ice Storm Warning the next 12 to 36 hours. Criteria for ice is 1/2 inch or more over at least 50 percent of the zone or encompassing most of the population.

A lake effect snow event is expected to meet or exceed local lake effect snow warning criteria in the next 12 to 36 hours. Widespread or localized lake induced Lake Effect Snow snow squalls or heavy snow showers which produce snowfall accumulation to 7 or Warning more inches in 12 hours or less. Lake effect snow usually develops in narrow bands and impacts a limited area within a county or forecast zone. Use "mid-point" of snowfall range to trigger warning (i.e. 5 to 8 inches of snow = warning).

Wind chill temperatures are expected to meet or exceed local wind chill warning Wind Chill Warning criteria in the next 12 to 36 hours. Wind chill temperatures may reach or exceed - 25°F.

A winter storm event (heavy sleet, heavy snow, ice storm, heavy snow and blowing snow or a combination of events) is expected to meet or exceed local winter storm warning criteria in the next 12 to 36 hours. Criteria for snow is 7 inches or more in Winter Storm 12 hours or less; or 9 inches or more in 24 hours covering at least 50 percent of the Warning zone or encompassing most of the population. Use "mid-point" of snowfall range to trigger warning (i.e. 5 to 8 inches of snow = warning). Criteria for ice is 1/2 inch or more over at least 50 percent of the zone or encompassing most of the population.

Figure 5-8 Winter Storm Warning Definitions

Advisory - These products are issued when a hazardous winter weather event is occurring, is imminent, or has a very high probability of occurrence (generally greater than 80%). An advisory is for less serious conditions that cause significant inconvenience and, if caution is not exercised, could lead to situations that may threaten life and/or property. Advisories are issued using the WSW Winter Weather Message product and will appear as a headline in some text products such as the Zone Forecast. It will change the color, as shown in the table below, of the counties on the NWS front page map according to what type of advisory has been issued.

Advisory Type Description

A winter storm event (sleet, snow, freezing rain, snow and blowing snow, or a combination of events) is expected to meet or exceed local winter weather advisory criteria in the next 12 to 36 hours but stay below warning criteria. Criteria for snow is 4 inches or more in 12 hours or less covering at least 50 percent of the Winter Weather zone or encompassing most of the population. Use "mid-point" of snowfall range Advisory to trigger advisory (i.e. 2 to 5 inches of snow = advisory). Criteria for ice is any ice accumulation less than 1/2 inch over at least 50 percent of the zone or encompassing most of the population. Winter Weather Advisory can also be issued for black ice. This is optional.

Any accumulation of freezing rain is expected in the next 12 to 36 hours (but will Freezing Rain remain below 1/2 inch) for at least 50 percent of the zone or encompassing most Advisory of the population.

A lake effect snow event is expected to meet or exceed local lake effect snow advisory criteria in the next 12 to 36 hours. Widespread or localized lake induced snow squalls or heavy snow showers which produce snowfall accumulating to 4 or Lake Effect Snow more inches in 12 hours or less, but remain less than 7 inches. Lake effect snow Advisory usually develops in narrow bands and impacts a limited area within a county or forecast zone. Use "mid-point" of snowfall range to trigger advisory (i.e. 2 to 5 inches of snow = advisory).

Wind chill temperatures are expected to meet or exceed local wind chill advisory Wind Chill Advisory criteria in the next 12 to 36 hours. Wind chill temperatures may reach or exceed - 15°F.

Figure 5-9 Winter Storm Advisory Definitions

5.5.6 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences Due to the nature of winter storms, it is extremely difficult to predict, but through identifying various indicators of weather systems, and tracking these indicators, it provides us with a crucial means of monitoring Seasonal Weather Extremes. Understanding the historical frequency, duration, and spatial extent of Seasonal Weather Extremes assists in determining the likelihood and potential severity of future occurrences. The characteristics of past severe winter events provide benchmarks for projecting similar conditions into the future. The probability of Tuscarawas County and its municipality experiencing a severe winter storm event can be difficult to quantify, but based on historical record of 6 events since 2010, it can reasonably be assumed that this type of event has occurred roughly once per year between 2010 through 2017.

[(Current Year) 2017] subtracted by [(Historical Year) 2010] = 7 Years on Record

[(Years on Record) 7] divided by [(Number of Historical Events) 6] = 1.16 years between events

Furthermore, the historic frequency calculates that there is an 85% chance of this type of event occurring each year.

5.5.7 Inventory Assets Exposed to Winter Storms Inventory assets exposed to Seasonal Weather Extremes is dependent on the age of the building, type, construction material used, and condition of the structure. Heavy snow loads on roofs, particularly large span roofs, can cause roofs to leak or even collapse depending on their construction. Extremely cold temperatures may cause pipes to freeze and subsequently burst, causing water damage.

Probably the greatest issue for critical facilities during significant Seasonal Weather Extremes is the inaccessibility of such facilities due to poor roadways, utility outages, or dangerous wind chills. During periods of heavy snow, ice, or blizzards, roads can quickly become impassable, stranding motorists and isolating communities. Long term road closures during an extended cold period may diminish and threaten propane and fuel supplies. Possible losses to critical infrastructure include:  Electric power disruption  Communication disruption  Water and fuel shortages  Road closures  Damaged infrastructure components, such as sewer lift stations and treatment plants

Debris may also block roadways making transportation and commerce difficult if not impossible. Those facilities with back-up generators are better equipped to handle a severe weather situation should the power go out.

An extended power outage during winter may make many homes and offices unbearably cold. Additionally, during extended winter-time power outages, people often make the mistake of bringing portable generators inside or not venting them properly, leading to carbon monoxide poisoning. With poor road conditions, sheltering residents may present significant logistical challenges with getting

people to heated facilities, feeding, and providing medical care. These situations, accompanied by stranded motorists that need to be rescued, represent significant threats to the population.

Additional information on construction type and building codes enforced at time of construction would allow a more thorough assessment of the vulnerability of structures to winter storm impacts such as severe wind and heavy snow loading. Based on the information available, all communities in Tuscarawas County are essentially equally vulnerable to the direct impacts of winter storms.

5.5.8 Potential Losses from Winter Storms Winter storms affect the entire planning area of Tuscarawas County and its jurisdictions including all above-ground structures and infrastructure. Although losses to structures are typically minimal and covered by insurance, there can be impacts with lost time, maintenance costs, and contents within structures.

Table 5-12 Potential Losses from Winter Storms

Non-Critical Facilities Type Count Total Value 1% Loss 5% Loss Residential 23,445 $ 1,995,521,770 $ 19,955,218 $ 99,776,089 Agriculture 2,829 $ 177,979,870 $ 1,779,798 $ 8,898,993 Grand Total 26,274 $ 2,173,501,640 $ 21,735,016 $ 108,675,082 Critical Facilities Type Count Total Value 1% Loss 5% Loss Church 195 $ 56,971,240 $ 569,712 $ 2,848,562 Day Care 5 $ 884,410 $ 8,844 $ 44,221 Government Buildings 30 $ 13,584,120 $ 135,841 $ 679,206 Fire Station - Staff 9 $ 2,005,240 $ 20,052 $ 100,262 Fire Station - Volunteer 9 $ 554,840 $ 5,548 $ 27,742 Hospital 2 $ 9,788,220 $ 97,882 $ 489,411 Library 13 $ 2,864,760 $ 28,648 $ 143,238 Museum 3 $ 122,790 $ 1,228 $ 6,140 Post Office 13 $ 1,337,100 $ 13,371 $ 66,855 School 72 $ 57,291,590 $ 572,916 $ 2,864,580 Utilities 568 $ 4,273,680 $ 42,737 $ 213,684 Water Tanks 3 $ 631,950 $ 6,320 $ 31,598 Grand Total 923 $ 150,643,060 $ 1,506,431 $ 7,532,153

5.5.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences Due to the nature of Seasonal Weather Extremes, all jurisdictions within Tuscarawas County are expected to be impacted equally due to severe winter conditions.

5.5.10 Land Use & Development Trends All future structures built in Tuscarawas County will likely be exposed to severe Seasonal Weather Extremes damage. Since the previous statement is assumed to be uniform countywide, the location of development does not increase or reduce the risk necessarily. Tuscarawas County and its jurisdictions need to adhere to building codes, and therefore, new development can be built to current standards to account for heavy snow loads. Additionally, as homes go up in more remote parts of the county, accessing those rural residents may become impossible should sheltering or emergency services be needed in an extreme event.

5.5.11 Winter Storm HIRA Summary Winter storms and severe Seasonal Weather Extremes are known to spawn other natural hazards, such as flash flooding, severe thunderstorms, tornadoes, and extreme winds. These effects disrupt commerce and transportation and often result in loss of life due to accidents or hypothermia. Mitigation measures may include enhanced building codes, planned deployment of resources, underground utility lines for critical facilities, and increased tree trimming along utilities. Weather data is limited by the observations reported; many events are never reported or recorded with the National Weather Service or other archiving agencies. 5.6 Flooding Spatial Natural Hazards Probability Impact Warning Time Duration RF Rating Extent Flooding 3 0.9 2 0.6 2 0.4 2 0.2 2 0.2 2.3 MEDIUM RISK HAZARD (2.0 – 2.9)

5.6.1 Hazard Identification A flood is a natural event for rivers and streams and occurs when a normally dry area is inundated with water. Excess water from snowmelt or rainfall accumulates and overflows onto the stream banks and adjacent floodplains. As illustrated in the figure below, floodplains are lowlands, adjacent to rivers, streams and creeks that are subject to recurring floods. Flash floods, usually resulting from heavy rains or rapid snowmelt, can flood areas not typically subject to flooding, including urban areas. Extreme cold temperatures can cause streams and rivers to freeze, causing ice jams and creating flood conditions.

Floodplain Terminology

Figure 5-10 Diagram identifying Special Flood Hazard Area, 1% annual chance (100-Year) floodplain, floodway and flood fringe, FEMA.

Floods are considered hazards when people and property are affected. Flooding has been part of Tuscarawas County’s history long before the first historical reference in 1883. Nationwide, hundreds of floods occur each year, making it one of the most common hazards in all 50 states and U.S. territories. In Ohio, flooding occurs commonly and can occur during any season of the year from a variety of sources. Most injuries and deaths from flooding happen when people are swept away by flood currents and most property damage results from inundation by sediment-filled water. Fast-moving water can wash

buildings off their foundations and sweep vehicles downstream. Pipelines, bridges, and other infrastructure can be damaged when high water combines with flood debris. Basement flooding can cause extensive damage. Flooding can cause extensive damage to crop lands and bring about the loss of livestock. Several factors determine the severity of floods, including rainfall intensity and duration, topography and ground cover.

Riverine flooding originates from a body of water, typically a river, creek, or stream, as water levels rise onto normally dry land. Water from snowmelt, rainfall, freezing streams, ice flows, or a combination thereof, causes the river or stream to overflow its banks into adjacent floodplains. Winter flooding usually occurs when ice in the rivers creates dams or streams freeze from the bottom up during extreme cold spells. Spring flooding is usually the direct result of melting winter snow packs, heavy spring rains, or a combination of the two.

Flash floods can occur anywhere when a large volume of water flows or melts over a short time period, usually from slow moving thunderstorms or rapid snowmelt. Because of the localized nature of flash floods, clear definitions of hazard areas do not exist. These types of floods often occur rapidly with significant impacts. Rapidly moving water, only a few inches deep, can lift people off their feet, and only a depth of a foot or two, is needed to sweep cars away. Most flood deaths result from flash floods.

Urban flooding is the result of development and the ground’s decreased ability to absorb excess water without adequate drainage systems in place. Typically, this type of flooding occurs when land uses change from fields or woodlands to roads and parking lots. Urbanization can increase runoff two to six times more than natural terrain. (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1992) The flooding of developed areas may occur when the amount of water generated from rainfall and runoff exceeds a storm water system's capability to remove it.

Ice Jams are stationary accumulations of ice that restrict flow. Ice jams can cause considerable increases in upstream water levels, while at the same time, downstream water levels may drop. Types of ice jams include freeze up jams, breakup jams, or combinations of both. When an ice jam releases, the effects downstream can be similar to that of a flash flood or dam failure. Ice jam flooding generally occurs in the late winter or spring.

5.6.2 Regulatory Environment Tuscarawas County and its 19 political subdivisions, which consist of incorporated villages and cities, continue to work together to enforce the local floodplain management ordinance requirements set forth by the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

Table 5-13 Tuscarawas County Community Status in the NFIP

Initial Firm Current Effective Cid Community Name County Identified Map Date 390886 Baltic, Village of Holmes/Tuscarawas County 06/15/1988 07/22/2010 Not Participating in NFIP – No Identified 390947 Barnhill, Village of Tuscarawas County Flood Hazard Areas 390643 Bolivar, Village of Tuscarawas County Participation underway with Ohio DNR 390542 Dennison, Village of Tuscarawas County 12/18/1986 07/22/2010 390543 Dover, City of Tuscarawas County 07/16/1987 07/22/2010 390613 Gnadenhutten, Village of Tuscarawas County 12/18/1986 07/22/2010 390715 Midvale, Village of Tuscarawas County 07/22/2010 07/22/2010 390842 Mineral City, Village of Tuscarawas County 07/22/2010 07/22/2010 390545 New Philadelphia, City of Tuscarawas County 03/15/1974 07/22/2010 390544 Newcomerstown, Village of Tuscarawas County 01/02/1987 07/22/2010 Not Participating in NFIP – No Identified 390946 Parral, Village of Tuscarawas County Flood Hazard Areas 390664 Port Washington, Village of Tuscarawas County 01/15/1988 07/22/2010 390813 Roswell, Village of Tuscarawas County 08/01/1987 07/22/2010 Not Participating in NFIP – No Identified 390945 Stone Creek, Village of Tuscarawas County Flood Hazard Areas 390631 Strasburg, Village of Tuscarawas County 08/04/1987 07/22/2010 390546 Sugarcreek, Village of Tuscarawas County 08/04/1987 07/22/2010 390782 Tuscarawas County* Tuscarawas County 09/30/1987 07/22/2010 390666 Tuscarawas, Village of Tuscarawas County 07/22/2010 07/22/2010 390547 Uhrichsville, City of Tuscarawas County 01/02/1987 07/22/2010 390752 Zoar, Village of Tuscarawas County 09/04/1987 07/22/2010

A basin-wide water development program for the Muskingum River basin, consisting of fourteen (14) flood control reservoirs and several local protection projects, was officially turned over to the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District (MWCD) by the USACE in July 1938. The reservoirs were substantially completed in time to be effective during the major flood that occurred in January 1937. This program was planned and initiated by the Conservancy District, with actual construction, operation, and maintenance of the completed projects performed by the USACE. The basin flood control plan is divided into three systems located on the Walhonding River, Wills Creek, and the Tuscarawas River.

The Tuscarawas River system includes the Dover, Bolivar, Atwood, Leesville, Beach City, Tappan, Clendening, and Piedmont Reservoirs. Dover Dam on the Tuscarawas River forms the key reservoir in this system. The largest portion of Dover Dam storage is reserved for flood control. Three of the projects, Bolivar, Atwood, and Leesville, are located on tributaries upstream of Dover while the remaining four, Beach City on Sugar Creek, Tappan on Little Stillwater Creek, and Clendening and

Piedmont in the upstream reaches of Stillwater Creek, are located below Dover Dam. Of the seven projects on tributaries, only Bolivar has no conservation pool and is used only for flood control.

These flood control projects provide a high degree of protection against main stem river flooding with lesser degrees of protection afforded along the lower reaches of tributary streams. A channel improvement project on Little Stillwater Creek between the Village of Dennison and Tappan Dam was accomplished by the USACE in 1946. The purpose of this project was to increase the channel capacity of Little Stillwater Creek. This modification reduced flood levels downstream from the dam and increased the operating efficiency of Tappan Reservoir.

The USGS recording gages below Dover Dam and on Stillwater Creek are classified as tail-water recording gages and serve as flow regulators below the upstream flood control structures. A USACE gage located on the Tuscarawas River, south of New Philadelphia at river mile 53.8, also serves as a control gage for reservoir discharges.

 Village of Dennison: Beach City Dam on Sugar Creek, Tappan Dam on Little Stillwater Creek, and the Dover Dam all provide protection for the Village of Dennison.  City of Dover: Atwood, Beach City, Bolivar, Dover and Leesville Dams provide protection for the City of Dover.  Village of Gnadenhutten: Gnadenhutten is provided with a high degree of protection against flooding primarily by the Dover, Tappan, Clendening, and Beach City Dams.  City of New Philadelphia: Four of the MWCD dams, Bolivar, Atwood, Leesville and Beach City, provide protection for New Philadelphia  Village of Newcomerstown: The Village of Newcomerstown is provided with a high degree of protection by the Dover, Beach City, Tappan and Piedmont Dams.  Village of Strasburg: The Beach City Dam provides a high degree of protection against flooding along Sugar Creek through the community of Strasburg.  Village of Sugarcreek: Flood protection measures are not known to exist within the study area.  City of Uhrichsville: Beach City Dam on Sugar Creek, Dover Dam, Tappan Dam on Little Stillwater Creek, Clendening Dam and Piedmont Dam, both on Stillwater Creek, provide the City of Uhrichsville with protection.  Village of Zoar: At the time of this countywide DFIRM update, FEMA determined that the Village of Zoar Levee does not meet requirements to comply with Code of Federal Regulations, Title 44, Section 65.10. On the previous Village of Zoar FIRM the levee had been shown as protecting from the 1-percent-annual-chance flood. Per FEMA guidance, the levee system is not shown as providing protection from the 1-percent-annual-chance flood on the countywide DFIRM.

5.6.2.1 Tuscarawas County Floodplain Regulations These regulations authorize a County Floodplain Manager/Administrator and duties to be performed. Duties include, but are not limited to, routine monitoring of the floodplains, enforcing floodplain regulations, and providing community assistance, such as encouraging owners to maintain flood insurance.

5.6.2.2 Local Building Codes There are no county-level building or zoning codes in Tuscarawas County. All building and zoning tasks are taken care of at the city or village level. All buildings must be in compliance with the Ohio Building Code.

5.6.2.3 RiskMAP Discovery The Tuscarawas River Watershed was designated for Discovery in 2015. This discovery process is used to document local needs that may be addressed through a RiskMap process. This discovery process began in August of 2015 with a series of Webinars. In-person meetings followed in September and December. The Tuscarawas County EMA hosted meetings during each session. These meetings were used to help develop the Discovery Report, and the Discovery Map, reflecting additional details about lical study, mitigation, risk, communication, and training needs. An analysis of the needs and data was performed to provide recommendations for RiskMap project funding. FEMA Region V and its State partners will review the compiled report and recommendations to consider future RiskMap project funding. The FEMA Regional Office reviews all Discovery documentation and initiates RiskMap projects as funds become available, and are based in part, on congressional guidance for national priorities. Additional information regarding this Discovery process can be found in the Tuscarawas River Discovery Report.

Table 5-14 Projects Identified during the RiskMAP Discovery Process

Mitigation Community Project Identified City of New Clean and clear woody debris from stream banks preventing possible Log Jam Philadelphia jams during flood events City of New Saferoom Identify a location and construct a community saferoom within the city Philadelphia City of Warning Install severe weather sirens for early warning capability Uhrichsville System City of Saferoom Identify a location and construct a community saferoom Uhrichsville Tuscarawas Acquire, retrofit, elevate, or relocate flood prone structures throughout Acquisition County Tuscarawas county Tuscarawas Acquire structures in identified repetitive loss areas throughout Repetitive Loss County Tuscarawas county Undertake projects to elevate roads with fill material, particularly Tuscarawas Roadway county and township roads that result in closures due to high water County flooding during flood events Village of Clean and clear woody debris from stream banks preventing possible Log Jam Dennison jams during flood events Village of Stream Conduct dredging operations on nearby waterways Dennison Maintenance Village of Zoar High Winds Install Tornado sirens for early warning capability

Village of Zoar Flooding Discharge around Bolivar Dam and Dover Dam

Figure 5-11 Mitigation Projects from RiskMAP Discvoery Report

5.6.2.3.1 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) The NFIP makes federally backed flood insurance available to homeowners, renters, and business owners in participating communities. As a participating member of the NFIP, Tuscarawas County NFIP administrators are dedicated to protecting homes with 432 NFIP policies currently in force. FEMA has prepared a detailed Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for areas of Tuscarawas County; the study presents water surface elevations for floods of various magnitudes, including the 1-percent annual chance flood (100-year flood, base flood) and the 0.2-percent annual chance flood (500-year flood). Base flood elevations and the boundaries of the 0.1% and 0.2% Annual Chance flood zones are shown on FIRMs. More information on location and geographic extent are provided in Section 5.3.3.

Tuscarawas County entered the NFIP on March 15, 1974. As a participant in the NFIP, Tuscarawas County is dedicated to regulating development in the FEMA floodplain areas in accordance with NFIP criteria. Structures permitted or built in Tuscarawas County before the NFIP regulatory requirements were incorporated into the ordinances (before the effective date of the County’s FIRM) and are called “pre-FIRM” structures.

A Repetitive Loss property is a FEMA designation defined as an insured property that has made two or more claims of more than $1,000 in any rolling 10-year period since 1978. The term “rolling 10-year period” means that a claim of $1,000 can be made in 1991 and another claim for $2,500 in 2000; or one claim in 2001 and another in 2007, as long as both qualifying claims happen within ten years of each other. Claims must be at least ten days apart but within ten years of each other. RL properties may be classified as a Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL) property under certain conditions. A SRL property has had four or more claims of at least $5,000, or at least two claims that cumulatively exceed the building’s reported value. A property that sustains repetitive flooding may or may not be on Tuscarawas County RL property list for a number of reasons:

. Not everyone is required to carry flood insurance. Structures carrying federally-backed mortgages that are in a SFHA are required to carry flood insurance in Tuscarawas County; . Owners who have completed the terms of the mortgage or who purchased their property outright may not choose to carry flood insurance and instead bear the costs of recovery on their own; . The owner of a flooded property that does carry flood insurance may choose not to file a claim; . Even insured properties that are flooded regularly with filed claims may not meet the $1,000 minimum threshold to be recognized as an RL property; or . The owner adopted mitigation measures that reduce the impact of flooding on the structure, removing it from the RL threat, and the RL list (in accordance with FEMA’s mitigation reporting requirements).

As of 2016, there are thirteen (13) repetitive loss properties located in Tuscarawas County. This number has increased from the previous HMP in 2011. In the previous HMP there were 10 repetitive loss properties listed. There are no severe repetitive loss properties in Tuscarawas County. A complete break-down of repetitive losses in Tuscarawas County by jurisdiction can be found in Table 5-16.

Extensive FEMA NFIP databases are used to track claims for every participating community. FEMA databases maintain all NFIP claims which allow for the examination of single-loss (SL) properties and RL properties.

NFIP Community Overview:

Table 5-15: Tuscarawas County In-Force Policies2

Community Policies In-Force Insurance In-Force Premium In-Force Dennison 8 $ 833,600 $ 4,044 Dover 23 $ 6448,000 $ 33,148 Gnadenhutten 2 $ 213,000 $ 2,470 Midvale 5 $ 736,600 $ 4,098 Mineral City 3 $ 397,000 $ 1,171 New Philadelphia 173 $ 30,672,200 $ 209,646 Newcomerstown 14 $ 3,074,500 $ 14,400 Port Washington 4 $ 399,000 $ 2,579 Roswell 1 $ 82,000 $ 981 Sugarcreek 6 $ 163,100 $ 16,671 Tuscarawas County 107 $ 19,630,800 $ 114,534 Tuscarawas Village 1 $ 105,000 $ 285 Uhrichsville 73 $ 9,443,100 $ 45,272 Zoar 12 $ 3,493,000 $ 7,849

Table 5-16 Tuscarawas County Repetitive Loss Properties

Community Building Contents Total Average Community ID Structure Type Payments Payments Payments Payment Losses Properties Tuscarawas Residential $ 68,468.07 $ 6,072.41 $ 74,540.48 $ 27,422.52 11 4 390782 County Non-Residential $ - $ - $ - $ - - -

Residential $ 40,504.43 $ 4,438.96 $ 44,943.39 $ 22,471.70 2 1 City of Dover 390543 Non-Residential $ - $ - $ - $ - - -

City of New Residential $ 102,926.45 $ 30,207.18 $ 133,133.63 $ 50,422.27 14 5 390545 Philadelphia Non-Residential $ - $ - $ - $ - - -

City of Residential $ 13,501.88 $ 4,059.84 $ 17,561.72 $ 8,780.86 4 2 390547 Uhrichsville Non-Residential $ - $ - $ - $ - - -

Village of Residential $ 14,647.64 $ 733.90 $ 15,381.54 $ 5,127.18 3 1 390542 Dennison Non-Residential $ - $ - $ - $ - - -

2 http://bsa.nfipstat.fema.gov/reports/1011.htm#OHT

5.6.2.4 Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District The Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District (MWCD) was created on June 3, 1933, in accordance with Ohio law to carry out a comprehensive flood control and water conservation project in the Muskingum River Watershed and to secure the necessary financial cooperation between and among individual property owners and the local, state and federal government.

As political subdivisions of the State of Ohio, conservancy districts can form at the initiative of local landowners or communities to solve water management problems, usually flooding. In addition to flood protection, other approved purposes of conservancy districts include conserving and developing water supplies, treating wastewater, and providing recreational opportunities.

5.6.3 Hazard Events Major flooding events occurred in the county on August 13, 1995 and June 28, 1998. According to a NOAA Storm Event Record description, on June 28, 1998, thunderstorms continued to move across Tuscarawas County during the day of the 28th. By that evening, major flash flooding problems were reported countywide. The City of Uhrichsville was especially hard hit, with 300 families forced to evacuate. The west side of town was reported to be mostly under water by the early morning hours of the 30th.

According to National Climatic Data Center, Tuscarawas County has been impacted by 75 flood events since 1996.

Table 5-17 Tuscarawas County Flood Events

Property Crop Location Date Type Deaths Injuries Damage Damage Dover 1/18/1996 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Dover 1/18/1996 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 1/19/1996 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Strasburg 5/11/1996 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 6/24/1996 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Newcomerstown 5/25/1997 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Mineral City 6/18/1997 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 1,000 $ - Countywide 1/7/1998 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Uhrichsville 1/9/1998 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Countywide 5/2/1998 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - Newcomerstown 6/26/1998 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - South Portion 6/26/1998 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Gnadenhutten 6/27/1998 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Newcomerstown 6/27/1998 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Countywide 6/27/1998 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Countywide 6/28/1998 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 20,000,000 $ - Countywide 7/1/1998 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Countywide 1/23/1999 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Countywide 4/4/2000 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 4/8/2000 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Newcomerstown 8/23/2000 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Southeast Portion 1/31/2001 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Newcomerstown 8/12/2001 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - Bolivar 8/4/2003 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Roswell 8/7/2003 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 8/30/2003 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 25,000 $ - Tuscarawas (Zone) 1/4/2004 Flood 0 0 $ - $ -

Property Crop Location Date Type Deaths Injuries Damage Damage Tuscarawas (Zone) 1/4/2004 Flood 0 0 $ 100,000 $ - Tuscarawas (Zone) 2/6/2004 Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Mineral City 5/18/2004 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 6/14/2004 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Tuscarawas (Zone) 6/14/2004 Flood 0 0 $ 3,000 $ - New Philadelphia 6/14/2004 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Strasburg 6/16/2004 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Tuscarawas (Zone) 6/17/2004 Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Tuscarawas (Zone) 7/11/2004 Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Zoar 8/19/2004 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Tuscarawas (Zone) 9/8/2004 Flood 1 0 $ 200,000 $ - Tuscarawas (Zone) 1/5/2005 Flood 0 0 $ 150,000 $ - New Philadelphia 6/22/2006 Flash Flood 0 0 $ - $ - New Philadelphia 6/22/2006 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 15,000 $ - New Philadelphia 6/22/2006 Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Uhrichsville 3/15/2007 Flood 0 0 $ - $ - Bolivar 8/9/2007 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 10,000 $ - Winfield 8/21/2007 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 25,000 $ - Dover 8/21/2007 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - Bolivar 8/21/2007 Flood 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - Bolivar 8/21/2007 Flood 0 0 $ 10,000 $ - Dover 3/4/2008 Flood 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - New Philadelphia 3/19/2008 Flood 0 0 $ 10,000 $ - New Philadelphia 6/26/2008 Flood 0 0 $ 35,000 $ - Roswell 6/17/2009 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 25,000 $ - Barrs Mills 6/2/2010 Flood 0 0 $ 75,000 $ - Newcomerstown 2/28/2011 Flood 0 0 $ 75,000 $ - New Philadelphia 3/1/2011 Flood 0 0 $ 25,000 $ - Valley Jct 3/11/2011 Flood 0 0 $ 8,000 $ - Dundee 3/11/2011 Flood 0 0 $ 2,000 $ - Newport 6/19/2011 Flood 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - Yorktown 1/27/2012 Flood 0 0 $ 25,000 $ - New Philadelphia 7/10/2013 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 25,000 $ - Valley Jct 7/11/2013 Flood 0 0 $ 35,000 $ - Dover 2/23/2014 Flood 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - Valley Jct 4/30/2014 Flood 0 0 $ 2,000 $ - Valley Jct 5/1/2014 Flood 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - Dundee 6/24/2014 Flood 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - Dundee 6/24/2014 Flood 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - New Philadelphia 6/24/2014 Flood 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - Uhrichsville 6/24/2014 Flood 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - Fiat 8/11/2014 Flood 0 0 $ 1,000 $ - Zoar 8/20/2014 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - Zoar 8/20/2014 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - Mineral City 8/20/2014 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 5,000 $ - Newport 4/9/2015 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 3,000 $ - Booth 4/9/2015 Flash Flood 0 0 $ 4,000 $ - Dennison 7/26/2015 Flood 0 0 $ 1,000 $ - Totals: 75 events 1 0 $ 20,965,000 $ - Tuscarawas County has been part of 6 Federal Disaster Declarations involving flooding. There have been no new disaster declarations involving flooding since 2005.

Table 5-18 Disaster Declarations Involving Flooding

Disaster Declaration Number Date Incident Type DR-1580 2/15/2005 Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, And Mudslides DR-1556 9/19/2004 Severe Storms And Flooding DR-1519 6/3/2004 Severe Storms And Flooding DR-1507 1/26/2004 Severe Storms, Flooding, Mudslides, And Landslides DR-1227 6/30/1998 Severe Storms, Flooding, And Tornadoes DR-266 7/15/1969 Tornadoes, Severe Storms & Flooding

5.6.4 Historical Occurrences June 28, 1998: Flash Flood Thunderstorm moved across Tuscarawas County during the day of the 28th. By that evening, major flash flooding problems were reported countywide. The city of Uhrichsville was especially hard hit, with 300 families forced to evacuate. The west side of town was reported to be mostly under water by the early morning hours of the 30th. Flooding problems continued across the county past the end of the month, as several roads in low-lying and flood control areas remained closed well into July. The estimated impact was $20,000,000.

January 4, 2004: Flooding Rivers began to rise on January 2nd because of snow melt and temperatures 20 degrees above normal. Two to three inches of rain fell January 3rd and 4th, causing rivers in Eastern Ohio to rise. Numerous small streams flooded first, followed by the rivers: Muskingum River at Coshocton rose above flood stage (15 feet) 6 AM on 4th; crested 18 feet at 6 AM on 5th; fell below flood stage 7 AM on 10th. Wills Creek at Cambridge rose above flood stage (15 feet) 6 PM on 4th; crested 20.1 feet at 6 AM on 5th; fell below flood stage 1 PM on 8th. Stillwater Creek at Uhrichsville rose above flood stage (5 feet) 5:30 PM on 4th; crested 9.6 feet 9 AM on 6th; fell below flood stage 1 AM on 9th. Tuscarawas River at New Philadelphia rose above flood stage (7 feet) 930 PM on 4th; crested 7.3 feet at 2 AM on 5th; fell below flood stage at 12 noon on the 5th. The Tuscarawas River at Newcomerstown crested 10.3 feet the early evening of the 5th. Flood stage is 11 feet. The estimated damage impact was $100,000.

September 8, 2004: Flooding By 4:45 PM on 8th, Horse Shoe Bend Rd. flooded east of Newcomerstown; a 9-year old girl was swept off the road by flood waters as she walked home from school resulting in her death. By 5 PM, Blizzard Rd. flooded in Uhrichsville. Before flooding ended, basements flooded in Uhrichsville and a few homes were evacuated in Dennison. Route 258 closed by mud slide. 14 structures suffered major damage; 19 had minor. Other roads flooded: 10, 43, 151, 331, 800. Most small stream flooding ended by 12 PM on the 9th, but flooding on Stillwater Creek at Uhrichsville continued. Stillwater Creek rose to flood stage (5 ft) at 4 AM EDT on 9th; crested 10.3 at 7 AM EDT 10th; and fell below flood stage 7 AM EDT on the 13th. Total rain: 6.2" at Gilmore; 4.8 Newcomerstown. There was a record flood on Huff Creek at Mineral City, which crested at 5.82 ft at 530 AM EDT on 9th (previous record 4.35). The estimated impact was $200,000.

January 26, 2005: Flooding By 5:45 PM on 5th, Little Stillwater Creek flooded Rte 250 near Dennison. By 9:30 PM on 5th, these routes flooded: 39 near Dover; 93 near Dundee; 212; 258 east of Newcomerstown; 800 near Stillwater. Roads were still flooded on the 12th. On the 13th, 6,400 people, in the areas of Mineral City, Wilkshire

Hills, and Zoar were asked to evacuate their homes because water was being released from Bolivar and Dover Dams. Water behind Bolivar Dam reached a record 950 feet above sea level; Dover Dam rose to a record of 909 feet, just 7 feet below the top of the dam. On Stillwater Creek, Uhrichsville was above flood stage (5 feet), from 11 PM on 5th to 11 AM on 10th; and from 6 PM on 12th to 4 PM on the 15th. Uhrichsville crested twice: 8.9 feet 10 AM on 7th; and 5.7 11 AM on 14th. On the Tuscarawas River, New Philadelphia was above flood stage (7 feet), from 11:45 AM on 11th to 3:30 PM on 17th; and from 730 PM on 17th to 8 PM on 26th. New Philadelphia crested twice: 8.4 feet 11 AM on 12th; and 8.3 feet 11 AM on 19th. The estimated damage impact was $150,000.

February 28, 2011: Flooding A strong low pressure system moved across the Upper Ohio Valley bringing heavy rain as well as a line of severe thunderstorms. Flooding of streams and creeks was widespread across eastern Ohio and western Pennsylvania. Isolated wind damage from severe thunderstorms occurred with a cold front in the morning. The estimated damage impact was $75,000.

5.6.5 Magnitude/Severity The severity of flooding in Tuscarawas County is determined by a number of local factors, including river basin topography , precipitation patterns, recent soil moisture conditions, and groundcover/vegetative state. Tuscarawas County and its municipalities have many streams and small tributaries that are highly susceptible to flooding. The properties in and near the identified floodplains of Tuscarawas County are subject to flooding events on an almost annual basis. Floodplain management, flood control structures, hazard mitigation, and flood relief funds are strategies that have reduced Tuscarawas County’s annual flood damages.

Large floods have occurred along the major streams in the basin during all seasons of the year. However, the most devastating floods have occurred between the months of December and March. The maximum flood of record occurred along the Tuscarawas River in March 1913. Along small tributaries, flood stages can rise from normal flow to extreme flood peaks, with accompanying high velocities, in a relatively short period. Along the main stem of the Tuscarawas River, floods rise to their crest over a longer period and remain out of banks for a more extended length of time.

Although many severe floods have occurred in the Muskingum River basin since the area was first settled, accurate records prior to 1913 are nonexistent. Considering the available records of all known floods in the basin, it is probable that the ten (10) largest floods in the Tuscarawas River basin occurred in 1913, twice in 1927, 1929, 1930, 1933, 1935, 1936, 1937, and 1939. A flood that occurred in 1959 probably would be ranked as the second largest flood of record in the basin, had not the upstream Muskingum basin reservoir system been in operation. Discharges for the five largest floods of record for the Tuscarawas River at Newcomerstown are shown below.

Table 5-19 Discharge Values for Largest Floods along the Tuscarawas River

Date of Crest Estimated Peak Discharge (CFS) 03/01/1913 83,000 cfs 02/28/1929 32,400 cfs 03/17/1933 32,900 cfs 08/09/1935 41,700 cfs 01/26/1937 46,800 cfs

Information on historical floods in Tuscarawas County along the main stem of the Tuscarawas River and along the lower reaches of its major tributaries was obtained from stream gauging stations maintained

by the USGS at several locations within the drainage basin. USGS recording gages within the study area are located at:

 Below Dover Dam, Tuscarawas River, river mile 60.3;  Newcomerstown, Tuscarawas River, river mile 21.3;  Home Creek near the City of New Philadelphia;  Stillwater Creek river mile 5.3 near Uhrichsville (FEMA FIS).

Table 5-20 Flood Categories for the Tuscarawas River at New Philadelphia

Flood Level Feet Major flood stage 11 Moderate flood stage 9 Flood Stage 7.5 Action Stage 4.1

5.6.6 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences Reported flood events over the past 20 years provide an acceptable framework for determining the future occurrence in terms of frequency for such events. The probability of the County and its municipalities experiencing a flood event can be difficult to quantify, but based on historical record of 58 flood events since 1994, it can reasonably be assumed that this type of event has occurred once every three months (0.27) from 1994 through 2015. See appendix for complete list of 62 events.

[(Current Year) 2017] subtracted by [(Historical Year) 2010] = 7 Years on Record

[(Years on Record) 7] divided by [(Number of Historical Events) 23] = 0.30 years between events

The historic frequency calculates that there is a 100% chance of this type of event occurring each year. However, due to a differing opinion, the planning committee felt that it is “likely” that a flood will occur each year, thus giving it a frequency probability of 10% to 100% per year.

Figure 5-12 Flood Areas in Tuscarawas County

Figure 5-13 Tuscarawas Depth Grid

5.6.7 Inventory Assets Exposed to Flooding / Potential Losses from Flooding The method used in determining the types and numbers of potential assets exposed to flooding was conducted using a loss estimation model called HAZUS-MH. HAZUS-MH is a regional multi-hazard loss estimation model that was developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the National Institute of Buildings Sciences (NIBS). For this Plan update, a 100-year flood scenario was modeled and the results are presented below.

5.6.7.1 HAZUS-MH 100-YEAR FLOOD SCENARIO HAZUS estimates that approximately 1,242 buildings will be at least moderately damaged and 477 buildings that will be completely destroyed. The tables below summarize the expected damage by general occupancy for the buildings and the expected building damage by building type in the study region.

Though the majority of this property is not in the floodplain, a significant amount is. All assets are considered at risk from flooding; however, losses may vary widely depending on the type and factors contributing to the flood. HAZUS-MH was used to determine the potential impacts of a 100-year flood in Tuscarawas County.

5.6.7.2 HAZUS-MH 100-YEAR FLOOD SCENARIO The total building-related losses were $187.75 million. Less than 1% of the estimated losses were related to the business interruption of the region. The residential occupancies made up 70.6% of the total loss. The table below provides a summary of the losses associated with the building damage.

The building related losses are broken into two categories: direct property damage losses and business interruption losses. The direct property damage losses are the estimated costs to repair or replace the damage caused to the building and its contents. The business interruption losses are the losses associated with the inability to operate a business because of the damage sustained during the flood. Business interruption losses also include the temporary living expenses for those people displaced from their homes because of the flood.

Building Loss Percent Building Row Labels Building Value Amount Loss Agriculture $ 1,294,560 $ 447,505 35% Commercial $ 41,891,460 $ 4,238,399 10% Education $ 242,890 $ 28,924 12% Government $ 28,673,040 $ 3,305,589 12% Industrial $ 23,801,500 $ 3,336,525 14% Religious $ 1,302,920 $ 205,015 16% Residential $ 90,538,860 $ 27,759,803 31% Grand Total $ 187,745,230 $ 39,321,760 21%

Table 5-21 HAZUS-MH Flood Scenario Expected Building Damage by Building Type

Type Building Loss Percent Total Loss Agriculture $ 447,505 1.1% Commercial $ 4,238,399 10.8% Education $ 28,924 0.1% Government $ 3,305,589 8.4% Industrial $ 3,336,525 8.5% Religious $ 205,015 0.5% Residential $ 27,759,803 70.6% Grand Total $ 39,321,760

The map on the next page depicts where HAZUS estimated most loss would occur throughout Tuscarawas County.

The number and value of structures within the 100 year floodplain is significant, as shown by the below map in Figure 5-14 map. A flooding event could occur in a highly developed area such as New Philadelphia, Dover, Uhrichsville, Dennison or Newcomerstown and cause substantial infrastructure damage resulting in high dollar losses. While flooding could certainly affect many facilities in the county, including critical facilities, it is safe to say that few critical facilities in the county are directly located in floodplains. Many first responder agencies throughout the County are located in the floodplain. Additionally, many measures have been taken to lessen the probability of flooding in the municipal areas, which is where many of the county’s critical facilities are located. Many residential structures may be affected by flooding outside of the municipalities. However, with the exception of repetitive loss properties (see discussion below); these structures are not directly located in floodplains either.

Table 5-22 Percent Building Loss with the 100-year floodplain

Figure 5-14 Building Losses by Percent

Table 5-23 HAZUS-MH Flood Scenario Expected Building Damage by Building Type

Type Building Affected by Type Number Damaged Number Destroyed Agriculture 63 41 22 Commercial 162 146 16 Education 3 3 0 Government 65 58 7 Industrial 31 27 4 Religious 8 7 1 Residential 1,387 962 425 Grand Total 1,719 1,242 477

5.6.7.3 HAZUS-MH 100-YEAR FLOOD CRITICAL FACILITIES The maps on the following pages show where critical and essential facilities are located throughout the County and each jurisdiction. This helps to inform how each individual Village and City will be affected by large flood events or dam breaches.

The following represents a summary of the critical facilities from across the County that are vulnerable to large flood events. These are broken up by the facility type. These types of critical facilities were chosen by the County and by the Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee to represent the types of infrastructures that are most important to the smooth continuity of operations within Tuscarawas County. It is estimated that there are approximately 129 critical facilities that can be affected by a 100- year flood event. The total value of these facilities is approximately $39,256,480. Because of their importance to the County, any interruption or loss of these buildings would result in a great economic loss.

Table 5-24 Critical Facilities in Tuscarawas County that are Flood Prone

Critical Facility Type Facility Count Critical Facility Value Church 11 $ 1,7043,020 Government 5 $ 2,819,620 Fire Station 1 $ 421,760 Hospital 1 $ 1,472,580 Post 1 $ 44,010 School 10 $ 16,843,110 Utility Building 100 $ 612,380 Grand Total 129 $ 39,256,480

Figure 5-15 Flood Zones in Tuscarawas County

Figure 5-16 Flood Zones in the Village of Baltic

Figure 5-17 Flood Zones in the Village of Barnhill

Figure 5-18 Flood Zones in the Village of Bolivar

Figure 5-19 Flood Zones in the Village of Dennison

Figure 5-20 Flood Zones in the City of Dover

Figure 5-21 Flood Zones in the Village of Gnadenhutten

Figure 5-22 Flood Zones in the Village of Midvale

Figure 5-23 Flood Zones in the Village of Mineral City

Figure 5-24 Flood Zones in the City of New Philadelphia

Figure 5-25 Flood Zones in the Village of Newcomerstown

Figure 5-26 Flood Zones in the Village of Parral

Figure 5-27 Flood Zones in the Village of Port Washington

100

Figure 5-28 Flood Zones in the Village of Roswell

101

Figure 5-29 Flood Zones in the Village of Stone Creek

102

Figure 5-30 Flood Zones in the Village of Strasburg

103

Figure 5-31 Flood Zones in the Village of Sugarcreek

104

Figure 5-32 Flood Zones in the Village of Tuscarawas

105

Figure 5-33 Flood Zones in the City of Uhrichsville

106

Figure 5-34 Flood Zones in the Village of Zoar

107

5.6.7.4 HAZUS-MH 100-Year Flood Scenario Residential Impacts 1,387 out of the total 1,719 buildings affected are homes. Approximately 31% of these units would be completely destroyed by a 100-year flood event for a total of 425 homes.

5.6.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences Maps that show the different levels of flood events are found above between Figure 5-15 and Figure 5-8.

A flooding event could occur in a built-up area such as New Philadelphia, Dover, Uhrichsville, Dennison or Newcomerstown and cause substantial structure damage resulting in high dollar losses. While flooding could certainly affect many facilities in the county, including critical facilities, it is safe to say that few critical facilities in the county are directly located in floodplains. The County as a whole should anticipate that there is an overall likelihood of being exposed to a flood annually.

5.6.9 Land Use & Development Trends Besides the localized flooding, there is also the great amount of property, both private and public that is at risk from flooding. As development grows within the county, there is added risk and probability for damage. It is essential that zoning and land use plans take into account not only the dollar amount of damage that buildings near waterways could incur, but also the added risk of flood debris and narrowing the floodplains by building close to the rivers.

5.6.10 Flooding HIRA Summary Severe flooding has the potential to inflict significant damage in Tuscarawas County. Assessing flood damage requires the communities throughout the County to remain alert and notify local officials of potential flood prone areas near infrastructure such as roads, bridges, and buildings. While flooding remains a highly likely occurrence throughout the identified flood hazard areas of Tuscarawas County, smaller floods caused by heavy rains and inadequate drainage capacity will be more frequent, but not as costly as the large-scale floods which may occur at much less frequent intervals. While the potential for flood is always present, Tuscarawas County does have policies and regulations for development that should help lessen potential damage due to floods.

108

5.7 Tornado Spatial Natural Hazards Probability Impact Warning Time Duration RF Rating Extent Tornado 3 0.9 2 .06 1 0.2 4 0.4 2 0.2 2.3 MEDIUM RISK HAZARD (2.0 – 2.9)

5.7.1 Hazard Identification Wind Can Be defined as the motion of air relative to the earth’s surface. The horizontal component of the three-dimensional flow and the near-surface wind phenomenon are the most significant aspects of the hazard. Extreme windstorm events are associated with extra tropical and tropical cyclones, winter cyclones, severe thunderstorms, and accompanying mesoscale offspring such as tornadoes and downbursts. Winds vary from zero at ground level to 200-mph in the upper atmospheric jet stream at 6 to 8 miles above the earth’s surface.

The damaging effects of windstorms associated with hurricanes may extend for distances in excess of 100 miles from the center of storm activity. For coastal areas from Texas to Maine, tropical cyclone winds may exceed 100 mph. Severe thunderstorms can produce wind downbursts and microbursts, as well as tornadoes.

Severe windstorms result in as many as 1,000 tornadoes annually across the United States. Figure 5-35 Example of a Tornado Funnel Cloud A tornado is a violent windstorm characterized by a twisting, funnel-shaped cloud extending to the ground. Tornadoes are most often generated by thunderstorm activity (but sometimes result from hurricanes or tropical storms) when cool, dry air intersects and overrides a layer of warm, moist air forcing the warm air to rise rapidly. The damage caused by a tornado is a result of high wind velocities and wind-blown debris. According to the NWS, tornado wind speeds can range between 30 to more than 300 miles per hour. They are more likely to occur during the spring and early summer months of March through June and are most likely to form in the late afternoon and early evening. Most tornadoes are a few dozen yards wide and touchdown briefly, but even small, short-lived tornadoes can inflict tremendous damage. Destruction ranges from minor to catastrophic depending on the intensity, size, and duration of the storm. Structures made of light materials such as mobile homes are most susceptible to damage. Each year, an average of over 800 tornadoes are reported nationwide, resulting in an average of 80 deaths and 1,500 injuries (NOAA, 2002).

Strong winds can also occur outside of tornadoes, severe thunderstorms, and winter storms. These winds typically develop with strong pressure gradients and gusty frontal passages. The closer and stronger two systems (one high pressure, one low pressure) are, the stronger the pressure gradient, and therefore, the stronger the winds are.

Downburst winds, which can cause more widespread damage than a tornado, occur when air is carried into a storm’s updraft, cools rapidly, and comes rushing to the ground. Cold air is denser than warm air, and therefore, wants to fall to the surface. On warm summer days, when the cold air can no longer be supported up by the storm’s updraft, or an exceptional downdraft develops, the air crashes to the

109

ground in the form of strong winds. These winds are forced horizontally when they reach the ground and can cause significant damage. These types of strong winds can also be referred to as straight-line winds. Downbursts with a diameter of less than 2.5 miles are called microbursts and those with a diameter of 2.5 miles or greater are called macrobursts. A derecho, or bow echo, is a series of downbursts associated with a line of thunderstorms. This type of phenomenon can extend for hundreds of miles and contain wind speeds in excess of 100MPH.

5.7.2 Regulatory Environment There are negligible formal regulations that pertain to tornadoes. While there are suggested protective measures, especially for mobile/modular homes, these are generally not required in local codes.

5.7.3 Hazard Events Tuscarawas County may experience intense winds from hurricanes and tropical storms and while tornadoes can occur any time of the year, peak tornado occurrences are in March through May as past records further indicate below. One such tornado struck Tuscarawas County on June 7, 1980. The EF-1 tornado caused $2,500,000 in damages. No injuries were recorded.

According to the University of South Carolina’s Hazards and Vulnerability Research Institute (SHELDUS) as well as the National Climatic Data Center, Tuscarawas County has been impacted by 12 tornado events since 1950.

Table 5-25: Tornado History Since 1950

Property Crop Location Date Type Magnitude Death Injury Damage Damage Tuscarawas 4/13/1952 Tornado F1 0 4 $250,000 $0 Tuscarawas 3/11/1955 Tornado F2 0 1 $250,000 $0 Tuscarawas 7/22/1958 Tornado F2 0 3 $25,000 $0 Tuscarawas 5/8/1961 Tornado F1 0 0 $25,000 $0 Tuscarawas 7/10/1973 Tornado F0 0 0 $0 $0 Tuscarawas 6/7/1978 Tornado F1 0 1 $250,000 $0 Tuscarawas 6/7/1980 Tornado F1 0 0 $2,500,000 $0 Sugar Creek 6/29/1998 Tornado F0 0 0 $5,000 $0 New Philadelphia 11/12/2003 Tornado F2 0 1 $160,000 $0 Strasburg 6/22/2006 Tornado F1 0 0 $50,000 $0 Shanesville 6/5/2010 Tornado EF1 0 0 $350,000 $0 Yorktown 9/16/2010 Tornado EF1 0 0 $75,000 $0 Bolivar 7/10/2013 Tornado EF1 0 0 $75,000 $0 TOTALS: 0 10 $4,015,000 $0

Tuscarawas County has been involved in two Federal Disaster Declarations involving tornadoes. There have been no new tornado declarations since 1998.

Table 5-26 Disaster Declarations Involving Tornadoes Disaster Declaration Number Date Title DR-1227 6/30/1998 Severe Storms, Flooding, And Tornadoes DR-266 7/15/1969 Tornadoes, Severe Storms & Flooding

110

5.7.4 Historical Occurrences June 07, 1980 – F1: An F-1 tornado 0.5 miles long and 50 yards wide touched down near the golf course in Sugarcreek. There were no injuries or fatalities, but the damages were estimated at $2.5 million.

November 12, 2003 – F2: An F2 tornado touched down near May Rd just off Route 52 southwest of New Philadelphia. It moved east northeast at 45 mph, damaging several homes along Crooked Run Rd. Several homes had significant damage with roofs taken completely off; some walls were toppled. Several garages and barns suffered significant damage. Few garages completely destroyed. A least one mobile home was knocked off its foundation. Many trees and power lines were downed. Tornado went across Interstate 77 and into New Philadelphia, where 12 homes had scattered damage. Crooked Run Rd had the most significant damage. Path length 3.5 miles; path width 175 yards; maximum winds estimated 120 mph. Damages were estimated at $160,000.

June 5, 2010 – EF1: An NWS storm survey found this tornado developed in Holmes county, Ohio around 2 miles south of Walnut Creek and moved into Tuscarawas county one half mile west of SR 93 near SR 39 (See Storm Data for Ohio, North for more information on the beginning portion of this tornado in Holmes county) at 1:55 PM. This supercell tornado was rated an EF1 with maximum winds of 95 MPH and a maximum width of 100 yards. The tornado dissipated about 3 miles east of Sugarcreek at 2:00 PM. Damage was found to 6 homes and 7 businesses with 2 businesses suffering moderate damage. Numerous trees were snapped, power lines and telephone poles were knocked down, and signs destroyed. A 12 foot aluminum boat was lifted one quarter mile and dropped in a tree. Damages were estimated to be $350,000.

July 10, 2013 – EF1: An NWS storm survey found an EF-1 tornado touched down in Tuscarawas County south of Bolivar and continued into Carroll County near Atwood Lake, before dissipating. EF-0 damage was found along SR 212 south of Bolivar where numerous large limbs were snapped and trees uprooted northwest of Zoar. EF-0 damage became more significant as the circulation descended the lee side of a hill west of Mineral City, where a broad swath of snapped trees was observed. EF-1 structural damage was noted in Mineral City where the roof of the fire house was lifted and cinder block walls collapsed. Several homes lost shingles, and windows were blown out on northwest facing walls. Thereafter damage was confined primarily to trees before the tornado dissipated. Maximum winds were estimated to be from 90 to 100 MPH, with a path length near 14 miles. The maximum path width was near 300 yards. See Storm Data for Carroll County, Ohio for the remainder of this tornado path. Estimated damages were $75,000.

5.7.5 Magnitude/Severity The Enhanced Fujita Scale, also known as the “EF-Scale,” measures tornado strength and associated damages. The EF-Scale is an update to the earlier Fujita scale that was published in 1971. It classifies United States tornadoes into six intensity categories, as shown in the table below, based upon the estimated maximum winds occurring within the wind vortex. The EF-Scale has become the definitive metric for estimating wind speeds within tornadoes based upon the damage done to buildings and structures since it was implemented through the National Weather Service in 2007.

111

Table 5-27: Enhanced Fujita Scale and Associated Damage

Wind Speed EF-Scale Number (Mph) Type Of Damage Possible Minor damage: Peels surface off some roofs; some damage to gutters or siding; branches broken off trees; shallow-rooted trees pushed over. Confirmed tornadoes with no reported damage (i.e., those that remain in open fields) are EFO 65-85 always rated EF0.

Moderate damage: Roofs severely stripped; mobile homes overturned or badly EF1 86-110 damaged; loss of exterior doors; windows and other glass broken.

Considerable damage: Roofs torn off well-constructed houses; foundations of frame homes shifted; mobile homes completely destroyed; large trees snapped EF2 111-135 or uprooted; light-object missiles generated; cars lifted off ground.

Severe damage: Entire stories of well-constructed houses destroyed; severe damage to large buildings such as shopping malls; trains overturned; trees EF3 136-165 debarked; heavy cars lifted off the ground and thrown; structures with weak foundations blown away some distance. Devastating damage: Well-constructed houses and whole frame houses EF4 166-200 completely leveled; cars thrown and small missiles generated.

Extreme damage: Strong frame houses leveled off foundations and swept away; automobile-sized missiles fly through the air in excess of 100 m (300 ft.); steel EF5 >200 reinforced concrete structure badly damaged; high-rise buildings have significant structural deformation.

The Storm Prediction Center has developed damage indicators to be used with the EF-Scale for different types of buildings but can be also be used to classify any high wind event. Some of the indicators for different building types are shown in tables below.

Table 5-28: Institutional Buildings

Damage Description Wind Speed Range (Expected In Parentheses) Threshold of visible damage 59-88 MPH (72 MPH) Loss of roof covering (<20%) 72-109 MPH (86 MPH) Damage to penthouse roof & walls, loss of rooftop 75-111 MPH (92 MPH) HVAC equipment Broken glass in windows or doors 78-115 MPH (95 MPH) Uplift of lightweight roof deck & insulation, significant 95-136 MPH (114 MPH) loss of roofing material (>20%) Façade components torn from structure 97-140 MPH (118 MPH) Damage to curtain walls or other wall cladding 110-152 MPH (131 MPH) Uplift of pre-cast concrete roof slabs 119-163 MPH (142 MPH)

112

Uplift of metal deck with concrete fill slab 118-170 MPH (146 MPH) Collapse of some top building envelope 127-172 MPH (148 MPH) Significant damage to building envelope 178-268 MPH (210 MPH) Source: Storm Prediction Center, 2009

Table 5-29: Educational Institutions (Elementary & High Schools)

Damage Description Wind Speed Range (Expected In Parentheses) Threshold of visible damage 55-83 MPH (68 MPH) Loss of roof covering (<20%) 66-99 MPH (79 MPH) Broken windows 71-106 MPH (87 MPH) Exterior door failures 83-121 MPH (101 MPH) Uplift of metal roof decking; significant loss of roofing 85-119 MPH (101 MPH) material (>20%); loss of rooftop HVAC Damage to or loss of wall cladding 92-127 MPH (108 MPH) Collapse of tall masonry walls at gym, cafeteria, or 94-136 MPH (114 MPH) auditorium Uplift or collapse of light steel roof structure 108-148 MPH (125 MPH) Collapse of exterior walls in top floor 121-153 MPH (139 MPH) Most interior walls of top floor collapsed 133-186 MPH (158 MPH) Total destruction of a large section of building 163-224 MPH (192 MPH) envelope Source: Storm Prediction Center, 2009

Table 5-30: Metal Building Systems

Damage Description Wind Speed Range (Expected In Parentheses) Threshold of visible damage 54-83 MPH (67 MPH) Inward or outward collapsed of overhead doors 75-108 MPH (89 MPH) Metal roof or wall panels pulled from the building 78-120 MPH (95 MPH) Column anchorage failed 96-135 MPH (117 MPH) Buckling of roof purlins 95-138 MPH (118 MPH) Failure of X-braces in the lateral load resisting system 118-158 MPH (138 MPH) Progressive collapse of rigid frames 120-168 MPH (143 MPH) Total destruction of building 132-178 MPH (155 MPH) Source: Storm Prediction Center, 2009

Table 5-31: Electric Transmission Lines

Damage Description Wind Speed Range (Expected In Parentheses) Threshold of visible damage 70-98 MPH (83 MPH) Broken wood cross member 80-114 MPH (99 MPH) Wood poles leaning 85-130 MPH (108 MPH) Broken wood poles 98-142 MPH (118 MPH)

5.7.6 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences Reported tornado events over the past 60 years provide an acceptable framework for determining the future occurrence in terms of frequency for such events. The probability of the County and its municipalities experiencing a tornado event, although infrequent, can be difficult to quantify, but based on historical record of 12 tornado events since 1950, it can reasonably be assumed that this type of event has occurred once every 5 years from 1951 through 2011.

113

[(Current Year) 2017] subtracted by [(Historical Year) 2010] = 7 Years on Record

[(Years on Record) 7] divided by [(Number of Historical Events) 3] = 2.33 years between events

Furthermore, the historic frequency calculates that there is a 43% chance of this type of event occurring each year.

5.7.7 Inventory Assets Exposed to Tornadoes All assets located in Tuscarawas County can be considered at risk from tornadoes and wind events. This includes 92,582 people, or 100% of the County’s population and all critical facilities, structures, and infrastructure.

5.7.8 Potential Losses from Tornadoes While all assets are considered at risk from this hazard, a particular tornado would only cause damages along its specific track.

Table 5-32 County Inventory Exposed to Tornadoes

5.7.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences Each municipality in the County has an equal susceptibility to high winds from tornadic activity. The deteriorating condition of older homes and the use of aluminum-clad mobile homes continue to remain highly susceptible to wind events. Please refer to the map below to see previous tornado tracks in Tuscarawas County. They have occurred across the County, targeting no area in particular.

114

115

Figure 5-36 Tornado Tracks in Tuscarawas County 116

5.7.10 Land Use & Development Trends Improved and consistent building codes have been considered as a key measure to mitigate life and property losses associated with tornadoes and wind events. All of Tuscarawas County is equally at risk and there are no locations of high risk exposure.

5.7.11 Tornadoes Hira Summary It’s difficult to separate the various wind components that cause damage throughout Tuscarawas County from other wind-related natural events that often occur to generate tornadoes. For example, hurricanes with intense winds often spawn numerous tornadoes or generate severe thunderstorms producing strong, localized downdrafts. Due to this difficulty, tornadoes/windstorms in Tuscarawas County are difficult to predict and the entire County is subject to all categories of windstorms.

In addition to improved construction standards, retrofitting to enhance design standards of infrastructure can limit exposure. Examples include structural cladding, shuttering systems, and materials that are resistant to the penetration of wind-blown debris and projectiles.

117

5.8 Drought Spatial Natural Hazards Probability Impact Warning Time Duration RF Rating Extent Drought 2 0.6 1 0.3 4 0.8 1 0.1 4 0.4 2.2 MEDIUM RISK HAZARD (2.0 – 3.9)

5.8.1 Hazard Identification Drought is a normal part of virtually all climates, including areas with high and low average rainfall. It is caused by a deficiency of precipitation and can be aggravated by other factors such as high temperatures, high winds, and low relative humidity.

Droughts can be grouped as meteorological, hydrologic, agricultural, and socioeconomic. Representative definitions commonly used to describe the types of drought are summarized below.

Meteorological drought is defined solely on the degrees of dryness, expressed as a departure of actual precipitation from an expected average or normal amount based on monthly, seasonal, or annual time scales.

Hydrologic drought is related to the effects of precipitation shortfalls on streamflows and reservoir, lake, and groundwater levels.

Agricultural drought is defined principally in terms of soil moisture deficiencies relative to water demands of plant life, usually crops.

Socioeconomic drought associates the supply and demand of economic goods or services with elements of meteorological, hydrologic, and agricultural drought. Socioeconomic drought occurs when the demand for water exceeds the supply as a result of a weather related supply shortfall. The incidence of this type of drought can increase because of a change in the amount of rainfall, a change in societal demands for water (or vulnerability to water shortages), or both.

5.8.2 Regulatory Environment There is no commonly accepted approach for assessing risk associated with droughts given the varying types and indices. Drought risk is based on a combination of the frequency, severity, and spatial extent (the physical nature of drought) and the degree to which a population or activity is vulnerable to the effects of drought. The degree of Tuscarawas County’s vulnerability to drought depends on the environmental and social characteristics of the region and is measured by its ability to anticipate, cope with, resist, and recover from drought.

Because drought is usually considered a regional hazard, it is not enhanced or analyzed by County-level mapping. All jurisdictions are assumed to have the same risk level within Tuscarawas County. Mapping of the current drought status is published by the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS): U.S. Drought Portal which can be found online at: www.drought.gov.

118

5.8.3 Hazard Events According to the National Climatic Data Center, since 1950, drought has resulted in no significant damages to property or agriculture.

Table 5-33: Drought Events in Tuscarawas County Since 1950

Agricultural Location Date Type Death Injury Damage Countywide 08/01/1999 Drought 0 0 $0 Countywide 09/01/1999 Drought 0 0 $0 TOTALS: 0 0 $0

5.8.4 Historical Occurrences August, 1999: The dry conditions that actually began in July 1998 continued through the month of August. On August 10, the U.S. Department of Agriculture declared all of Eastern Ohio an agricultural disaster area. Precipitation deficits for the period of May through August show the area to be anywhere between 2 and 8 inches below normal. Preliminary estimates predict a $600 million agricultural loss statewide from the drought.

September, 1999: September rainfall for Eastern Ohio again averaged below normal, with the Palmer Drought Severity Index keeping the entire area under a moderate to severe drought. The Crop Moisture Index also showed abnormally dry conditions continuing across all of Eastern Ohio.

2012-2013 - National Drought: In addition to the events listed by NOAA and its National Climatic Database, there was a nationwide drought observed from the spring of 2012, last through 2013. A lack of snow during the winter resulted in very little meltwater nationally. By June, most Ohio counties were under moderate drought conditions. Due to significant agricultural losses, the Governor of Ohio sent a memorandum to the USDA State Executive Director requesting Primary County Natural Disaster Designations for eligible counties. Upon review of this request, the USDA acknowledged that there was a sufficient loss of production in Ohio to warrant a Secretarial disaster designation.

5.8.5 Magnitude/Severity The Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI) is a drought index based on the probability of an observed precipitation deficit occurring over a given prior time period. The assessment periods considered range from 1 to 36 months. The variable time scale allows the SPI to describe drought conditions important for a range of meteorological, agricultural, and hydrological applications. For example, soil moisture conditions respond to precipitation deficits occurring on a relatively short time scale, whereas groundwater, streamflow, and reservoir storage respond to precipitation deficits arising over many months.

The Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) was developed by Wayne Palmer in the 1960s and uses temperature and rainfall information in a formula to determine dryness. It has become the semi-official drought index. PDSI is most effective in determining long term drought—a matter of several months— and is not as good with short-term forecasts (a matter of weeks). It uses a 0 as normal, and drought is

119

shown in terms of minus numbers; for example, minus 2 is moderate drought, minus 3 is severe drought, and minus 4 is extreme drought.

Table 5-34 Palmer Drought Severity Index

Drought Monitoring Indices Return Standardized NDMC* Palmer Drought Period Precipitation Drought Drought Severity (Years) Description Of Possible Impacts Index (SPI) Category Index Going into drought; short-term dryness slowing growth of crops or pastures; fire risk Minor 3 to 4 above average. Coming out of drought; some -0.5 to -0.7 D0 -1.0 to -1.9 Drought lingering water deficits; pastures or crops not fully recovered. Some damage to crops or pastures; fire risk Moderate high; streams, reservoirs, or wells low, some 5 to 9 -0.8 to -1.2 D1 -2.0 to -2.9 Drought water shortages developing or imminent, voluntary water use restrictions requested. Crop or pasture losses likely; fire risk very Severe 10 to 17 high; water shortages common; water -1.3 to -1.5 D2 -3.0 to -3.9 Drought restrictions imposed Major crop and pasture losses; extreme fire Extreme 18 to 43 danger; widespread water shortages or -1.6 to -1.9 D3 -4.0 to -4.9 Drought restrictions Exceptional and widespread crop and pasture Exceptional losses; exceptional fire risk; shortages of 44 + Less than -2 D4 -5.0 or less Drought water in reservoirs, streams, and wells creating water emergencies Source: National Drought Mitigation Center

Drought severity depends on numerous factors, including duration, intensity, and geographic extent, as well as regional water supply demands by humans and vegetation. The severity of drought can be aggravated by other climatic factors, such as prolonged high winds and low relative humidity. The magnitude of drought is usually measured in time and the severity of the hydrologic deficit.

Several resources are available to evaluate drought status and estimate future expected conditions. The NIDIS Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-430) prescribes an interagency approach for drought monitoring, forecasting, and early warning. The NIDIS maintains the U.S. Drought Portal (www.drought.gov), a web- based access point to several drought related resources. Resources include the U.S. Drought Monitor (USDM) and the U.S. Seasonal Drought Outlook (USSDO).

5.8.6 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences Due to the nature of drought, it is extremely difficult to predict, but through identifying various indicators of drought, and tracking these indicators, it provides us with a crucial means of monitoring drought. Understanding the historical frequency, duration, and spatial extent of drought assists in determining the likelihood and potential severity of future droughts. The characteristics of past droughts provide benchmarks for projecting similar conditions into the future. The NCDC reports no drought instances between 2010 and 2017.

120

[(Current Year) 2017] subtracted by [(Historical Year) 2010] = 7 Years on Record

[(Years on Record) 7] divided by [(Number of Historical Events) 0] = N/A

There have not been a sufficient number of events reported since 2010 to accurately determine the percent annual chance of this type of event occurring.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Paleoclimatology Program studies drought by analyzing records from tree rings, lake and dune sediments, archaeological remains, historical documents, and other environmental indicators to obtain a broader picture of the frequency of droughts in the United States. According to their research, “…paleoclimatic data suggest that droughts as severe as the 1950’s drought have occurred in central North America several times a century over the past 300-400 years, and thus we should expect (and plan for) similar droughts in the future. The paleoclimatic record also indicates that droughts of a much greater duration than any in the 20th century have occurred in parts of North America as recently as 500 years ago.” Based on this research, the 1950’s drought situation could be expected approximately once every 50 years or a 20% chance every ten years. An extreme drought, worse than the 1930’s “Dust Bowl,” has an approximate probability of occurring once every 500 years or a 2% chance of occurring each decade. (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2003). A 500-year drought with a magnitude similar to that of the 1930’s that destroys the agricultural economy and leads to wildfires is an example of a high magnitude event.

Impacts to vegetation and wildlife can include death from dehydration and spread of invasive species or disease because of stressed conditions. However, drought is a natural part of the environment in Ohio and native species are likely to be adapted to surviving periodic drought conditions. It is unlikely that drought would jeopardize the existence of rare species or vegetative communities.

Environmental impacts are more likely at the interface of the human and natural world. The loss of crops or livestock due to drought can have far-reaching economic effects. Wind and water erosion can alter the visual landscape and dust can damage property. Water-based recreational resources are affected by drought conditions. Indirect impacts from drought arise from wildfire, which may have additional effects on the landscape and sensitive resources such as historic or archeological sites.

5.8.7 Inventory Assets and Potential Losses Due to Drought Drought typically does not have a direct impact on critical facilities or structures. However, possible losses/impacts to critical facilities include the loss of critical function due to low water supplies. Severe droughts can negatively affect drinking water supplies. Should a public water system be affected, the losses could total into the millions of dollars if outside water is shipped in. Private springs/wells could also dry up. Possible losses to infrastructure include the loss of potable water.

But a drought evolves slowly over time and the population typically has ample time to prepare for its effects. Should a drought affect the water available for public water systems or individual wells, the availability of clean drinking water could be compromised. This situation would require emergency actions and could possibly overwhelm the local government and financial resources.

Non-Critical Facilities Type Count Total Value 1% Loss 5% Loss Agriculture 2,829 $ 177,979,870 $ 1,779,798 $ 8,898,993

121

Grand Total 2,829 $ 177,979,870 $ 1,779,798 $ 8,898,993

5.8.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences Due to the nature of drought, all jurisdictions within Tuscarawas County are expected to be impacted equally due to drought conditions. Agricultural areas located in the County townships will be hit hardest, as they rely on rain for their livelihood.

5.8.9 Land Use & Development Trends Society’s vulnerability to drought is affected by (among other things) population growth and shifts, urbanization, demographic characteristics, technology, water use trends, government policy, social behavior, and environmental awareness. These factors are continually changing, and society’s vulnerability to drought may rise or fall in response to these changes. For example, increasing and shifting populations put increasing pressure on water and other natural resources—more people need more water.

Future development’s greatest impact on the drought hazard would possibly be to ground water resources. New water and sewer systems or significant well and septic sites could use up more of the water available, particularly during periods of drought. Public water systems are monitored, but individual wells and septic systems are not as strictly regulated. Therefore, future development could have an impact on the drought vulnerabilities.

5.8.10 Drought HIRA Summary As stated prior, due to the nature of drought, it is extremely difficult to predict, but through identifying various indicators of drought, and tracking these indicators, it provides us with a crucial means of monitoring drought. Several mitigation measures will be reviewed and considered by Tuscarawas County for incorporation into future Plan updates.

 Assessment programs  Water supply augmentation and development of new supplies  Public awareness and education programs  Technical assistance on water conservation  Reduction and water conservation programs  Emergency response programs  Drought contingency plans

Some of these actions can have long-term impacts, such as contingency plan development, and the development of water conservation and public awareness programs. As Tuscarawas County gains more experience assessing and responding to drought, future actions will undoubtedly become more timely, effective, and less reactive.

122

5.9 Earthquake/Seismic Spatial Natural Hazards Probability Impact Warning Time Duration RF Rating Extent Earthquake/Seismic 2 0.6 1 0.3 2 0.4 4 0.4 1 0.1 1.8 LOW RISK HAZARD (0.1 – 1.9)

5.9.1 Hazard Identification An earthquake is the motion or trembling of the ground produced by sudden displacement of rock usually within the upper 10 – 20 miles of the Earth’s crust. Earthquakes can affect hundreds of thousands of square miles, cause damage to property measured in the tens of billions of dollars, result in loss of life and injury to hundreds of thousands of persons, and disrupt the social and economic functioning of the affected area. Most property damage and earthquake-related deaths are caused by the failure and collapse of structures due to ground shaking which is dependent upon amplitude and duration of the earthquake (FEMA, 1997).

Ohio lies on the outermost boundaries of the New Madrid fault, centrally located at New Madrid, Missouri. This particular fault has created significant activity over the last 200 years. The most intense activity occurred in the years 1811-1812. Two earthquakes estimated to be 7’s on the Richter scale hit the New Madrid Fault. Damage to chimneys was reported as far north as Cincinnati, Ohio. However, Tuscarawas County is located on the outermost region of the New Madrid fault area. Tuscarawas County would be in the transition area of registering minimal to no damage from an 8.0 magnitude earthquake on the New Madrid fault. Although not as severe as the New Madrid threat, localized activity should be mentioned.

Ohio has recorded 170 earthquakes with a magnitude of 2.0 or greater since 1776. Of these earthquakes, 15 were reported to have caused noticeable to moderate damage. Two (2) major centers of seismic activity in Ohio are 1) the Anna Seismogenic Area located in Shelby and Auglaize Counties, and 2) the northeast area of the state on the eastern side of Lake Erie, which is referred to as the Akron Magnetic Boundary. The Anna area has been home to 40 earthquakes since the late 1770’s while northeastern Ohio has recorded 60. None of these earthquakes were reported to cause major damage or loss of life. Most sources in the geology science predict that the largest magnitude earthquake that might occur in the state of Ohio would register no higher than five (5). However, some sources state that a magnitude of six (6), maybe higher, could be registered in the Anna region. An event of this intensity would most probably be felt in Tuscarawas County. However, predicting the amount of damage would be difficult due to lack of historic activity in the county.

5.9.1.1 Earthquake Mechanics Regardless of the source of the earthquake, the associated energy travels in waves radiating outward from the point of release. When these waves travel along the surface, the ground shakes and rolls, fractures form, and water waves may be generated. Earthquakes generally last a matter of seconds but the waves may travel for long distances and cause damage well after the initial shaking at the point of origin has subsided.

Breaks in the crust associated with seismic activity are known as “faults” and are classified as either active or inactive. Faults may be expressed on the surface by sharp cliffs or scarps or may be buried below surface deposits.

“Foreshocks,” minor releases of pressure or slippage, may occur months or minutes before the actual onset of the earthquake. “Aftershocks,” which range from minor to major, may occur for months after

123

the main earthquake. In some cases, strong aftershocks may cause significant additional damage, especially if the initial earthquake impacted emergency management and response functions or weakened structures.

5.9.1.2 Factors Contributing to Damage The damage associated with each earthquake is subject to four primary variables:  The nature of the seismic activity  The composition of the underlying geology and soils  The level and quality of development of the area struck by the earthquake  The time of day

Seismic Activity: The properties of earthquakes vary greatly from event to event. Some seismic activity is localized (a small point of energy release), while other activity is widespread (e.g., a major fault letting lose all at once). Earthquakes can be very brief (only a few seconds) or last for a minute or more. The depth of release and type of seismic waves generated also play roles in the nature and location of damage; shallow quakes will hit the area close to the epicenter harder, but tend to be felt across a smaller region than deep earthquakes.

Geology and Soils: The surface geology and soils of an area influence the propagation (conduction) of seismic waves and how strongly the energy is felt. Generally, stable areas (e.g., solid bedrock) experience less destructive shaking than unstable areas (e.g., fill soils). The siting of a community or even individual buildings plays a strong role in the nature and extent of damage from an event.

Development: A small earthquake in the center of a major city can have far greater consequences than a major event in a thinly populated place.

Time of Day: The time of day of an event controls the distribution of the population of an affected area. On work days, the majority of the community will transition between work, school, home, and the commute. The relative seismic vulnerability of each location can strongly influence the loss of life and injury resulting from an event.

5.9.1.3 Types of Damage While damage can occur by movement at the fault, most damage from earthquake events is the result of shaking. Shaking also produces a number of phenomena that can generate additional damage: • Ground displacement • Landslides and avalanches • Liquefaction and subsidence • Seiches

Shaking: In minor events, objects fall from shelves and dishes are rattled. In major events, large structures may be torn apart by the forces of the seismic waves. Structural damage is generally limited to older structures that are poorly maintained, constructed, or designed in all but the largest quakes. Un-reinforced masonry buildings and wood frame homes not anchored to their foundations are typical victims.

Loose or poorly secured objects also pose a significant hazard when they are loosened or dropped by shaking. These “non-structural falling hazard” objects include bookcases, heavy wall hangings, and building facades. Home water heaters pose a special risk due to their tendency to start fires when they

124

topple over and rupture gas lines. Crumbling chimneys may also be responsible for injuries and property damage.

Dam and bridge failures are significant risks during stronger earthquake events, and due to the consequences of such failures, may result in considerable property damage and loss of life. In areas of severe seismic shaking hazard, Intensity VII or higher can be experienced even on solid bedrock. In these areas, older buildings especially are at significant risk.

Ground Displacement: Often, the most dramatic evidence of an earthquake results from displacement of the ground along a fault line. Utility lines and roads may be disrupted but damage directly attributable to ground displacement is generally limited. In rare instances, structure located directly on the fault line may be destroyed by the displacement.

Landslides and Avalanches: Even small earthquake events can cause landslides. Rock falls are common as unstable material on steep slopes is shaken loose, but significant landslides or even debris flows can be generated if conditions are ripe. Roads may be blocked by landslide activity, hampering response and recovery operations.

Liquefaction and Subsidence: Soils may liquefy and/or subside when impacted by the seismic waves. Fill and previously saturated soils are especially at risk. The failure of the soils can lead to possibly widespread structural damage. The oscillation and failure of the soils may result in increased water flow and/or failure of wells as the subsurface flows are disrupted and sometimes permanently altered. Increased flows may be dramatic, resulting in geyser-like water spouts and/or flash floods. Similarly, septic systems may be damaged creating both inconvenience and health concerns.

Seiches: Seismic waves may rock an enclosed body of water (e.g., lake or reservoir), creating an oscillating wave referred to as a “seiche.” Although not a common cause of damage in past Ohio earthquakes, there is a potential for large, forceful waves similar to tsunami (“tidal waves”) to be generated on the large lakes of the State. Such a wave would be a hazard to shoreline development and pose a significant risk on dam-created reservoirs. A seiche could either overtop or damage a dam leading to downstream flash flooding.

5.9.2 Regulatory Environment Ohio building codes generally do not focus on construction relative to earthquake loads. In such instances where earthquakes of seismic events are mentioned, it is usually in relation to truss design and anchoring of appliances in structures.

5.9.3 Hazard Events Tuscarawas County has not been the site of an earthquake epicenter. However, the effects from earthquakes in other parts of the state, as well as other parts of the nation have been felt within Tuscarawas County.

5.9.4 Historical Occurrences While there have been no occurrences of earthquake epicenters in Tuscarawas County, they do happen throughout the Midwest region, as well as in Ohio.

125

Figure 5-37 Earthquakes throughout Ohio

126

5.9.5 Magnitude/Severity The impact an earthquake event has on an area is typically measured in terms of earthquake intensity. Intensity is most commonly measured using the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) Scale based on direct and indirect measurements of seismic effects. A detailed description of the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale is shown in Table below.

Table 5-35 Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale with Associated Impacts

Richter Scale Scale Intensity Description Of Effects Equivalent I Instrumental Usually detected only on seismographs. Felt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper II Feeble floors of buildings. Felt quite noticeably indoors, especially on upper <4.2 III Slight floors. Most people don’t recognize it as an earthquake (i.e. a truck rumbling). Can be felt by people walking; dishes, windows, and IV Moderate doors are disturbed. Sleepers are awoken; unstable objects are V Slightly Strong <4.8 overturned. Trees sway; suspended objects swing; objects fall off VI Strong <5.4 shelves; damage is slight. Damage is negligible in buildings of good design and construction, slight to moderate in well-built ordinary VII Very Strong <6.1 structures, and considerable in poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys are broken. Damage is slight in specially designed structures; considerable in ordinary, substantial buildings. VIII Destructive Moving cars become uncontrollable; masonry fractures, poorly constructed buildings damaged. <6.9 Some houses collapse, ground cracks, pipes break IX Ruinous open; damage is considerable in specially designed structures; buildings are shifted off foundations. Some well-built wooden structures are destroyed; most masonry and frame structures are destroyed X Disastrous <7.3 along with foundations. Ground cracks profusely; liquefaction and landslides widespread. Most buildings and bridges collapse, roads, railways, XI Very Disastrous <8.1 pipes and cables destroyed. Total destruction; trees fall; lines of sight and level XII Catastrophic are distorted; ground rises and falls in waves; objects >8.1 are thrown upward into the air.

127

One way to express an earthquake’s severity is to compare its acceleration to the normal acceleration due to gravity. Peak ground acceleration (PGA) measures the strength of ground movements in this manner. PGA represents the rate in change of motion of the earth’s surface during an earthquake as a percent of the established rate of acceleration due to gravity.

The lack of noticeable activity in Tuscarawas County can be partly attributed to the PGA. PGA is partly determined by what soils and bedrocks are present in the area. In regards to Tuscarawas County, the PGA is relatively low. As shown in the map below, Tuscarawas County is in the area of zero (0) to two (2) PGA. According to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources Ohio Seismic Network, this is interpreted as the area having the possibility of zero (0) percent to two (2) percent of gravities acceleration listed as 1g. These numbers would be denoted as 0.02g and 0.00g respectively.

As noted by the Ohio Seismic Network, when the peak acceleration nears 0.1g, damage may be caused to poorly constructed buildings while acceleration nearing 0.2 would create loss of balance and greater damage to lesser quality structures. As mentioned previously, Tuscarawas County has peak acceleration much below that number, thus providing a buffer from most seismic activity. On a local basis, community members within Tuscarawas County have made reports of ground shakings. These are quite possibly localized mining operations that are prominent throughout the county. With this in mind, seismic activity will be a lessened priority in the Tuscarawas plan. Environmental impacts of earthquakes can be numerous, widespread, and devastating, particularly if indirect impacts are considered. Some examples are shown below, but are unlikely to occur in Tuscarawas County:

 Induced tsunamis and flooding or landslides and avalanches;  Poor water quality;  Damage to vegetation; and  Breakage in sewage or toxic material containments

128

Figure 5-38 Peak Ground Acceleration

129

Figure 5-39 Fault lines in Ohio

130

5.9.6 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences There have not been a sufficient number of events in the recent past to accurately determine the percent annual chance of this type of event occurring. Figure 5-39 above shows the potential locations where an earthquake scenario could theoretically take place within the state. There is noticeably no known fault within Tuscarawas County.

[(Current Year) 2017] subtracted by [(Historical Year) 2010] = 7 Years on Record

[(Years on Record) 7] divided by [(Number of Historical Events) 0] = N/A

131

5.9.7 Inventory Assets Exposed to Seismic/Earthquake Activity A mitigation action will be created to develop a countywide inventory of existing structures and infrastructure susceptible to Earthquake/Seismic Activity in order to address this specific plan element in the next Plan update.

Though no earthquake has had an epicenter in Tuscarawas County, a hypothetical scenario was generated using FEMA’s HAZUS-MH program. A magnitude 5.40 earthquake was placed in the center of the County to simulate the potential effects of this type of event on the community. Figure 5-40 and Figure 5-41 below show the potential debris and economic impacts of a moderate earthquake within Tuscarawas County.

5.9.7.1 HAZUS-MH 5.40 EARTHQUAKE Debris Generation HAZUS estimates the amount of debris that will be generated by the earthquake. The model breaks the debris into two general categories: a) Brick/Wood and b) Reinforced Concrete/Steel. This distinction is made because of the different types of material handling equipment required to handle the debris. Wood accounts for 265 tons of debris, 41.73% of the total with the remainder being steel.

The model estimates that a total of 635 tons of debris will be generated. If the debris tonnage is converted to an estimated number of truckloads, it will require 26 truckloads (@25 tons/truck) to remove the debris generated by the earthquake.

5.9.7.1.1 HAZUS-MH 5.40 EARTHQUAKE Displacement and Shelter Requirements HAZUS estimates the number of households that are expected to be displaced from their homes due to the earthquake and the number of displaced people that will require accommodations in temporary public shelters. The model estimates 1,116 households to be displaced due to the earthquake. Of these, 668 people (out of a total population of 92,916) will seek temporary shelter in public shelters.

5.9.7.2 HAZUS-MH 5.40 EARTHQUAKE Economic Losses HAZUS estimate that the indirect economic losses due to temporary or permanent building closure and the inability to perform work is $2,008,248.71.

132

Figure 5-40 Debris Generation from an Earthquake

133

Figure 5-41 Economic Losses from an Earthquake

134

5.9.8 Potential Losses from Seismic Events Tuscarawas County is historically at a very low vulnerability to seismic activity. The nearest major fault (New Madrid) is hundreds of miles away. Most sources indicate that even a major event on this fault (8.0 on Richter scale) would not be felt in Tuscarawas County. The lack of historical events in the county, along with the relatively low PGA associated with the lands around Tuscarawas County put seismic events very low in the category of probability of occurrence. With this in mind, the probability for a seismic event in Tuscarawas County is low. However, if for some reason an event was to occur with the county near the epicenter, there is no way to comprehend the amount of damage that could be sustained by the county.

5.9.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences As stated previously, the probability for a seismic event in Tuscarawas County is low. However, if for some reason an event was to occur with the county near the epicenter, there is no way to comprehend the amount of damage that could be sustained by the county.

5.9.10 Land Use & Development Trends The effects of an earthquake (if the hazard exists) could potentially be anything from detected only on seismographs to ground water wells collapsing to total destruction, trees falling, ground rises and falls in waves. Continued enforcement of the unified construction code should mitigate this vulnerability.

5.9.11 Earthquake HIRA Summary Most sources in the geology science predict that the largest magnitude earthquake that might occur in the state of Ohio would register no higher than five (5). However, some sources state that a magnitude of six (6), maybe higher, could be registered in the Anna region. An event of this intensity would most probably be felt in Tuscarawas County. However, predicting the amount of damage would be difficult due to lack of historic activity in the county. Since Tuscarawas County has not been exposed to an earthquake or seismic event it is difficult to estimate the damage that could occur.

135

5.10 Dam/Levee Failure (Internal/External) Spatial RF Natural Hazards Probability Impact Warning Time Duration Extent Rating Dam Failure 2 0.6 4 1.2 4 0.8 4 0.4 2 0.2 3.2 High RISK HAZARD (3.0 – 4.0)

5.10.1 Hazard Identification A dam is defined as a barrier constructed across a watercourse for the purpose of storage, control, or diversion of water. Dams typically are constructed of earth, rock, concrete, or mine tailings. A dam failure is the collapse, breach, or other failure, often resulting in down-stream flooding.

A dam impounds water in the upstream area, referred to as the reservoir. The amount of water impounded is measured in acre-feet. An acre-foot is the volume of water that covers an acre of land to a depth of one foot. As a function of upstream topography, even a very small dam may impound or detain many acre-feet of water. Two factors influence the potential severity of a full or partial dam failure: the amount of water impounded, and the density, type, and value of development and infrastructure located downstream.

A levee is an elongated ridge constructed of fill or wall which regulates water levels. These are usually earthen hills built along a river’s floodplain to prevent flooding in nearby population areas. Typically, these run parallel to a river.

Figure 5-42 The Zoar Levee (Times Reporter)

Dam and levee failures typically occur when spillway capacity is inadequate and excess flow overtops the dam, or when internal erosion (piping) through the dam or foundation occurs. Complete failure occurs if internal erosion or overtopping results in a complete structural breach, releasing a high-velocity wall of debris-laden water that rushes downstream.

Dam and levee failures can result from any one or a combination of the following causes:

 Prolonged periods of rainfall and flooding, which cause most failures;  Inadequate spillway capacity, resulting in Figure 5-43 The Dover Dam (Wikimedia) excess overtopping flows;  Internal erosion caused by embankment or

136

foundation leakage or piping;  Improper maintenance, including failure to remove trees, repair internal seepage problems, replace lost material from the cross section of the dam and abutments, or maintain gates, valves, and other operational components;  Improper design, including the use of improper construction materials and construction practices;  Negligent operation, including the failure to remove or open gates or valves during high flow periods;  Failure of upstream dams on the same waterway;  Landslides into reservoirs, which cause surges that result in overtopping;  High winds, which can cause significant wave action and result in substantial erosion; and  Earthquakes, which typically cause longitudinal cracks at the tops of the embankments, which can weaken entire structures.

Dams are considered to be localized in the State and are most likely to affect inundation areas downstream and immediate areas around the dam or levee. Discharge from a dam breach is usually several times the 1% chance flood, and, therefore, typical flood studies are of limited use in estimating the extent of flooding.

137

Figure -5-44 Dam Location in Tuscarawas County

138

Figure 5-45 Image of Zoar Levee from the USACE Project Description to Protect Zoar from Levee Failure

139

5.10.2 Regulatory Environment For reasons previously mentioned in this section and uncontrollable by humans, it is possible a dam can fail at any time, given the right circumstances. However the probability of future occurrence is for regulated dams can be reduced due to proactive preventative action in compliance ODNR Dam Safety Program. Ohio’s Dam Safety Program provides for the regulation and safety of high hazard dams and reservoirs throughout the State in order to protect the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens and their property.

Dams and levees have inundation maps that are very strictly controlled by the Army Corps of Engineers, who do not release this information publically.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Huntington District (Huntington District) has developed a preliminary array of draft alternatives to help reduce inundation risks to the public from Zoar Levee & Diversion Dam. These were presented to the public on December 11, 2013. These are preliminary alternative designs and are for draft review purposes only.

Development of a preliminary array of alternatives is not a guarantee of action by the Huntington District and there has been no decision made to take any action at this time. There will not be any action taken until the documented decision in the Dam Safety Modification Report is complete, has been approved and funding is available to implement the selected plan. When ready, the draft Dam Safety Modification Report will be made available for public review and the Huntington District will continue public engagements throughout the study process.

5.10.3 Hazard Events/Historical Occurrences

5.10.3.1 Dam Failure As of January 2017, there have been no incidents of Class I or Class II dams failing in the County.

5.10.3.2 Levee Failure Two successive storm events that occurred in 2005 and 2008 loaded the exterior of Zoar Levee with water being impounded on the Tuscarawas River by Dover Dam. During these two events, significant under seepage was observed that is believed to have the potential to lead to stability issues at the levee.

5.10.4 Magnitude/Severity Ohio’s Department of Natural Resources, classifies dams by two (2) conditions, height and storage. As illustrated in the charts at right, there are four (4) classes of dams, which vary, based on the height of the actual dam, and the amount of water held behind the dam. In Tuscarawas County, there are a total of 26 dams. Of the total dams in the county, seven (7) are Class I, six (6) are Class II, and thirteen (13) are Class III. Many of these dams were created 50 years ago or more. These dams present the possibility that at some point in time they may fail. If this is the case, there will be damage to the surrounding area. According to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, the damage predicted by a dam failure coincides with the class of the dam. The potential downstream hazard is broken into four classes. The Zoar Levee

 Class I – Probable loss of life, serious hazard to health, structural damage to high value property (i.e., homes, industries, and major public utilities.).  Class II – Floodwater damage to homes, businesses, and industrial structures (no loss of life envisioned); damage to state and interstate highways, railroads; only access to residential areas.

140

 Class III – Damage to low value non-residential structures, local roads, agricultural crops and livestock.  Class IV – Losses restricted mainly to the dam

Only the seven (7) Class I dams are listed in the table below. Class I Dams within Tuscarawas County are marked on the map on the page before in Figure -5-44. Developing loss estimates resulting from dam failures will continue to be a long-term identified project.

Table 5-36: Location and Info on Class I Dams in Tuscarawas County

Name Owner Type Bolivar Dam Huntington District Earthfill Zoar Diversion Dam Huntington District Earthfill Dover Dam Huntington District Concrete, Gravity Beach City Dam Huntington District Earthfill Atwood Lake Dam Huntington District Earthfill Sleepy Hollow Lake Dam Dixon Real Estate Holdings Earthfill Sugarcreek Sportsman Club Lake Dam Sugarcreek Sportsman Club Earthfill

5.10.5 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences For reasons previously mentioned in this section and uncontrollable by humans, it is possible a dam can fail at any time, given the right circumstances. However, the probability of future occurrence can be reduced through preventative action that is in compliance with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources’ Dam Safety Program. Ohio’s Dam Safety Program provides for the regulation and safety of high hazard dams and reservoirs throughout the state in order to protect the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens and their property.

Dam safety laws are embodied in the Dam Safety and Encroachments Act ("DSE Act") -enacted July 1, 1979 and last amended in 1985. Rules pertaining to dam safety are found in Title 25-Rules and Regulations; Part I-Department of Environmental Resources; Subpart C-Protection of Natural Resources; Article II-Water Resources; Chapter 105-Dam Safety and Waterway Management ("the Rules")-adopted Sept. 16, 1980. (www.damsafety.org)

The Ohio Department of Natural Resources and the Tuscarawas County Emergency Manage Agency have reported no instances of dam failure since 2010.

[(Current Year) 2017] subtracted by [(Historical Year) 2010] = 7 Years on Record

[(Years on Record) 7] divided by [(Number of Historical Events) 0] = N/A

There have not been a sufficient number of events in the recent past to accurately determine the percent annual chance of this type of event occurring.

5.10.6 Inventory Assets Exposed To Dam Failure Dam or levee failures can have a greater environmental impact than that associated with a flood event. Large amounts of sediment from erosion can alter the landscape changing the ecosystem. Hazardous materials can be carried away from flooded out properties and distributed throughout the floodplain. Industrial and agricultural chemicals and wastes, solid wastes, raw sewage, and common household chemicals comprise the majority of hazardous materials spread by flood waters along the flood zone, polluting the environment and contaminating private property and the community’s water supply.

141

The soil loss from erosion and scouring would be significantly greater because of a large amount of fast moving water affecting a small localized area, which would likely change the ecosystem.

5.10.7 Potential Losses Determining the impact of flooding is difficult to accomplish, especially for estimating loss of life. Loss of life is a function of the time of day, warning time, awareness of those affected and particular failure scenarios. Many dam safety agencies have used “population at risk”, a more quantifiable measurement of the impact to human life, rather than “loss of life”. Population at risk is the number of people in structures within the inundation area that would be subject to significant personal danger, if they took no action to evacuate.

The Dover Dam is northeast of the City of Dover in Tuscarawas County. This dam is one of a series of sixteen USACE flood control dams in the Muskingum River basin. Above the dam is Zoar Levee, which provides flood damage reduction benefits to Zoar Village and provides protection when Dover Dam is retaining a pool above elevation 890 ft. (a 3‐year event).

Table 5-37 below shows the potential impact if the Dover Dam or the Zoar Levee failed. These two, in particular, were chosen because of their close proximity to population centers that would be devastated should either of these catastrophically fail.

Table 5-37 Areas in the County susceptible to Dam Failure

Property at risk from Dam Failure Population Type Total Value 1% Loss 5% Loss Affected Dover Dam $ 113,688,520 $ 1,136,885 $ 5,684,426 12,899 Zoar Levee $ 19,259,710 $ 192,597 $ 962,986 181

5.10.8 Land Use & Development Trends Public awareness measures such as notices on final plats and public education on dam safety are proactive mitigation measures that should be implemented by local communities. Also, Emergency Action Plans that identify potential dam failure inundation areas, notification procedures, and thresholds are prepared for response to potential dam related disaster events.

The USACE is preparing a Dam Safety Modification Report (DSMR) in accordance with Engineer Regulation for the Zoar Levee. A final project will be outlined once the DSMR is complete and made available for public review.

5.10.9 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences Tuscarawas County has many dams that could present the possibility for damage to municipalities. Probability of these events is low. In many cases, the dams are less than five (5) miles away from the nearest community. Class I dams alone present the hazard of flooding to six (6) communities within the county. The City of Dover is at risk from three (3) different Class I dams, but is primarily at risk from the Dover Dam, northeast of the City. The potential for catastrophic damage is high if one (1) or many dams were to fail.

The dams that would result in significant flooding, therefore property damage and potential injury and death to residents of the county, are principally those constructed as part of the Muskingum Watershed Conservancy District. These dams, all of which are earthen fill except for Dover Dam which is concrete, were built in the 1930s. The operation and maintenance of these dams is under the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Huntington, WV office. The USACE has prepared a series of Inundation Maps that

142

illustrate two (2) potential events: water going over the emergency spillways and dam failure. Should either of these events occur, the area downstream would suffer severe flooding conditions. The extent of the flooding would coincide, at a minimum, to the 100 year floodplain. In the worst case scenario, the flooding would, in reality, be greater in extent, thus in potential property damage, injury, and possible death. Dollar figures of property damage shown above for catastrophic flooding at the 100 year event could be easily duplicated and/or exceeded in the event of an emergency spillway release or dam failure.

Zoar Levee provides flood damage reduction benefits to Zoar Village and provides protection when Dover Dam is retaining a pool above elevation 890 feet (a 3‐year event). As such, the original crest elevation of the Zoar Levee was designed to correspond to the spillway elevation of Dover Dam at elevation 916 feet, with an additional 3 feet of freeboard for a resulting crest elevation of 919 feet. Following work in 1951, the crest elevation was raised to elevation 928.5 feet. The federal government still maintains flowage easement upstream of Dover Dam to elevation 916 feet. Without Zoar Levee, all portions of Zoar Village located at or below elevation 916 feet would have been evacuated at the time of Dover Dam's construction.

5.10.10 Dam/Levee Failure HIRA Summary As dams and levees in the County continue to age, the likelihood for failure increases as undesirable woody vegetation on the embankment, deteriorated concrete, inoperable gates, and corroded outlet pipes become problems. Since dam failures are often exacerbated by flooding, the probability of dam failures can be associated with projected flood frequencies.

Without these activities and oversight from the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, vulnerability increases significantly. The probability of a dam failure throughout the state should remain low with continued maintenance of dams and levees. Additionally, warning plans in place for designated high hazard dams will continue to decrease the danger for those residents in potential risk areas.

Overall, property and populations located downstream from any dam may be vulnerable to dam failure. However, communities downstream of high hazard dams should pay particular attention to inspection and maintenance activities that keep their communities safe.

143

5.11 Hazardous Material Incidents Spatial Natural Hazards Probability Impact Warning Time Duration RF Rating Extent Hazardous Material 3 0.9 3 0.9 2 0.4 4 0.4 1 0.1 2.7 Incidents MEDIUM RISK HAZARD (2.0 – 2.9)

5.11.1 Hazard Identification A hazardous material release is the contamination of the environment (i.e. air, water, soil) by any material that because of its quantity, concentration, physical characteristics, or chemical characteristics threatens human, animal, or plant health, the environment, or property. Hazardous material spills are usually accidental events that arise from human activities such as the manufacture, transportation, storage, and use of hazardous materials. The consequences of such spills are usually unintended. An accidental or intentional release of hazardous materials could produce a health hazard to those in the area, downwind, and/or downstream with immediate, prolonged, and/or delayed effects. The spread of the material may additionally be defined by weather conditions and topography of the area. A hazardous material release can come from a fixed facility, transportation, or an intentional release such terrorism.

A hazardous material release may also occur due to a transportation accident. The most likely locations for a transportation‐related hazardous material release are along the roads and highways running along the perimeters of the campus. Gas, propane, and other hazardous materials are delivered throughout the area year round. The need for gas, propane, fertilizers, and other toxic materials in daily life creates a larger risk for a hazardous materials release.

A hazardous materials release in the County may not only contaminate dirt or surface material but potentially contaminate flowing water in ditches, rivers, or small streams. Other potential concerns for spills/leaks are icy road conditions during winter months, sabotage, and terrorism.

Fixed facilities housing hazardous substances at the County include chemical manufacturing plants, swimming pools, gas stations, and supply stores containing substances such as fuel, farm chemicals, propane, fuel oil, paint, and small amounts of chlorine.

5.11.2 Regulatory Environment The US EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) program, tracks hazardous materials release and disposal data for US counties and states. Disposals in Tuscarawas County include Dioxin and Dioxin-Like Compounds. The TRI data does not provide data regarding the effect on the public of releases or disposals of hazardous materials.

5.11.3 Hazard Events/Historical Occurrences Between 2012 and 2015, there were 97 hazardous material spills in Tuscarawas County Material Spill Date Released Deaths Injuries Source Type 2/12/2007 Oil 0 0

3/5/2007 Fuel 0 0

5/1/2007 Oil 0 0

6/11/2007 Oil 0 0

6/26/2007 Oil 0 0 Highway 7/23/2007 Other 0 0 Fixed Facility

144

Material Spill Date Released Deaths Injuries Source Type 9/18/2007 Fuel 0 0 Highway 11/5/2007 Oil 0 0 Aboveground Tank 2/17/2008 Fuel 0 0 Unknown 3/4/2008 Salt solution 0 0 Fixed Facility 3/16/2008 Fuel 0 0 Underground Tank 4/24/2008 Other 0 0 Other 6/5/2008 Oil 0 0

8/6/2008 Other 0 0

2/13/2007 Oil 1 0

12/16/2008 Other 0 0

2/5/2009 Acid 0 0 Fixed Facility 2/13/2009 Chemical 0 0

11/10/2009 Chemical 0 0

11/18/2009 Fuel 0 0 Aboveground Tank 1/16/2010 Fuel 0 0

5/22/2010 Other 0 0

7/28/2010 Oil 0 0

9/19/2010 Other 0 0

9/16/2010 Oil 0 0

5/16/2009 Fuel 0 0

11/23/2010 Oil 0 0

8/11/2010 Oil 0 0

3/31/2011 Other 0 0

5/9/2011 Unknown 0 0

4/23/2011 Oil 0 0

5/2/2011 Unknown 0 0

6/14/2011 Oil 0 0

11/29/2011 Oil 0 0

12/7/2011 Fuel 0 1

9/6/2011 Other 0 0

3/16/2012 Oil 0 0

3/17/2012 Oil 0 0

4/19/2012 Oil 0 0 Aboveground Tank 5/21/2012 Chemical 0 0

7/8/2012 Other 0 0

7/16/2012 Oil 1 0 Aboveground Tank 7/18/2012 Acid 0 0

7/22/2012 Oil 0 0

7/22/2012 Other 0 0

8/13/2012 Unknown 0 0

9/13/2012 Fuel 1 0 Highway 8/27/2012 Unknown 0 0

11/15/2012 Gas 0 0

12/20/2012 Chemical 0 0

3/21/2013 Oil 0 0

3/27/2013 Oil 0 0 Fixed Facility 1/15/2013 Chemical 0 0 Other 4/15/2013 Oil 0 0 Aboveground Tank 5/3/2013 Other 0 0 Highway 7/21/2013 Chemical 0 0 Fixed Facility 1/7/2013 Unknown 0 0 Fixed Facility 9/23/2013 Chemical 0 0 Pipeline 9/19/2013 Chemical 0 0 Pipeline 10/22/2013 Other 0 0 Highway

145

Material Spill Date Released Deaths Injuries Source Type 10/22/2013 Gas 0 0 Pipeline 6/16/2014 Other 0 0 Aboveground Tank 7/15/2014 Chemical 0 0 Fixed Facility 7/16/2014 Chemical 0 0 Fixed Facility 12/23/2015 Other 0 0

5/16/2014 Oil 0 0 Underground Tank 11/5/2013 Gas 0 0

8/3/2013 Chemical 0 0 Underground Tank 6/24/2014 Fuel 0 0

3/18/2014 Fuel 0 0

4/24/2014 Fuel 0 0

10/6/2014 Gas 0 0 Pipeline 10/21/2014 Other 0 0 Highway 1/15/2015 Fuel 0 0 Railway 2/10/2015 Oil 0 1 Highway 3/19/2015 Other 0 0 Fixed Facility 6/13/2015 Oil 0 0 Aboveground Tank 7/8/2015 Other 0 0

8/10/2015 Oil 0 0

8/20/2015 Other 0 0

8/23/2015 Other 0 0

7/10/2014 Other 0 0 Highway 3/19/2015 Other 0 0

9/10/2015 Salt solution 0 0

9/17/2015 Oil 0 0

9/15/2015 Chemical 0 0

10/5/2015 Oil 0 0

10/5/2015 Other 0 0

11/11/2015 Acid 1 6 Highway 11/18/2015 Other 0 0 Highway 12/17/2015 Oil 0 0 Aboveground Tank 3/11/2016 Oil 0 0

2/6/2016 Oil 0 0

1/26/2016 Oil 0 0

3/5/2016 Oil 0 0

3/11/2016 Fuel 0 0

3/30/2016 Oil 0 0

TOTALS 4 8

146

Figure 5-46 Map of hazardous materials releases throughout Tuscarawas County

147

5.11.4 Magnitude/Severity With a hazardous material release, whether accidental or intentional, there are several potentially exacerbating or mitigating circumstances that will affect its severity or impact. Mitigating conditions are precautionary measures taken in advance to reduce the impact of a release on the surrounding environment. Primary and secondary containment or shielding by sheltering-in-place protects people and property from the harmful effects of a hazardous material release. Exacerbating conditions, or characteristics that can enhance or magnify the effects of a hazardous material release, include:

 Weather conditions: affects how the hazard occurs and develops  Micro-meteorological effects of buildings and terrain: alters dispersion of hazardous materials  Non-compliance with applicable codes (e.g. building or fire codes) and maintenance failures (e.g. fire protection and containment features): can substantially increase the damage to the facility itself and to surrounding buildings.

Whether or not a hazardous materials site is contained in the SFHA is also a concern, as there could be larger-scale water contamination during a flood event should the flood compromise the production or storage of hazardous chemicals. Such a situation could swiftly move toxic chemicals throughout a water supply and across great distances.

The severity of a given incident is dependent not only on the circumstances described above, but also with the type of material released and the distance and related response time for emergency response teams. The areas within closest proximity to the releases are generally at greatest risk, yet depending on the agent, a release can travel great distances or remain present in the environment for a long period of time (e.g., centuries to millennia for radioactive materials), resulting in extensive impacts on people and the environment.

A hazardous materials or nuclear release has the possibility of having a significant impact on the County.

Most hazardous material releases do not usually have an effect on infrastructure, particularly underground infrastructure. Some critical facilities use hazardous materials to operate such as chlorine for water treatment and PCB’s for electric transformers. Similarly, the contamination of the water supply may be treated like a hazardous material release. Propane, oil, and natural gas, necessary fuels for heating, can also be hazardous if released during their delivery due to their explosive potential. Transportation may be limited if a key roadway or railway is blocked by an incident.

 Possible losses to critical facilities include: o Critical functional losses o Contamination o Structural and contents losses, if an explosion is present

 Possible losses to structures include: o Inaccessibility o Contamination o Structural and contents losses, if an explosion is present

 Possible economic losses include: o Business closures and associated business disruption losses

148

 Possible ecologic losses include: o Loss of wildlife o Habitat damage o Reduced air and water quality

 Possible social losses include: o Canceled activities o Emotional impacts of significant population losses and illnesses

5.11.5 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences The Tuscarawas County Emergency Management Agency reported that between 2010 and 2017, there were 77 hazardous materials release incidents in Tuscarawas County.

[(Current Year) 2017] subtracted by [(Historical Year) 2010] = 7 Years on Record

[(Years on Record) 7] divided by [(Number of Historical Events) 77] = 0.09 year between events

The historic frequency calculates that there is a 100% chance of this type of event occurring each year.

5.11.6 Inventory Assets Exposed to/Potential Losses to Hazardous Material Incidents All County assets can be considered at risk from hazardous materials releases. This includes 100 percent of the County population and all buildings and infrastructure. The presence of the interstates, state routes, as well as railroad tracks which pass throughout the County, make all of Tuscarawas County vulnerable to the effects of a possible incident.

Table 5-38 Inventory Exposed to Hazardous Materials

149

Grand Total 923 $ 150,643,060 $ 1,506,431 $ 7,532,153

5.11.7 Land Use & Development Trends The population impacts are often greater than the structural impacts during a hazardous material a release. Depending on the material, the health impacts to humans can be long and short term. Generally, an incident will affect only a subset of the total population at risk. In a hazardous materials release, those in the immediate isolation area would have little to no warning, whereas, the population further away in the dispersion path may have some time to evacuate, depending on the weather conditions, material released, and public notification.

There are no land use regulations that restrict building around industrial facilities or along transportation routes. As the population increases, development will also continue to increase in these areas thereby exposing a greater number of individuals to the risk of a hazardous materials release. Increase development will lead to increased vulnerability and increased potential losses

5.11.8 Hazardous Material Incidents HIRA Summary Hazardous materials incidents can pose a series of threats to human safety and welfare, as well as the environment. Incidents occur regularly, but are not often of a size to cause a significant threat. However, it seems likely that incidents will continue and the potential for a significant release is present. Incidents often occur in conjunction with, or as a result of, natural hazards impacting facilities that house hazardous materials. Depending upon the materials released, as well as atmospheric conditions, an incident has the potential to cause significant disruption to the County.

150

5.12 Mine Subsidence/Abandoned Wells Spatial Natural Hazards Probability Impact Warning Time Duration RF Rating Extent Mine Subsidence / 3 0.9 1 0.3 1 0.2 3 0.3 2 0.2 1.9 Abandoned Wells LOW RISK HAZARD (2.0 – 2.9)

5.12.1 Hazard Identification Subsidence can occur as a result of underground mining, excessive pumping of groundwater from wells, or subsurface erosion due to the failure of existing utility lines. As the supports of the mines fail over time, the ground above them begins to collapse, causing sinkholes.

A sinkhole can be defined as a subsidence feature that can form rapidly and which is characterized by a distinct break in the land surface and the downward movement of surface materials into the resulting hole or cavity. Sinkholes are generally found in areas underlain by carbonate bedrock (such as limestone and dolomite), found in large areas of central and eastern Pennsylvania. They occur naturally due to the physical and chemical weathering of the bedrock. Water passing through naturally occurring fractures and bedding planes dissolve the bedrock leaving voids below the surface. Eventually, overburden on top of the voids collapse, leaving surface depressions resulting in karst topography. Characteristics structures associated with karst topography include sinkholes, linear depressions and caves. Often, subsurface solution of limestone will not result in the immediate formation of karst features.

Although the actual subsidence process occurs over a long period of time, the final collapse can occur very rapidly. Collapse sometimes occurs only after a large amount of activity, or when a heavy burden is placed on the overlying material. Abrupt or long-term changes in the ground surface may also occur following sub-surface fluid extraction (e.g. natural gas, water, oil, etc.).

5.12.2 Regulatory Environment The Ohio Department of Natural Resources Division of Mineral Resources is responsible for the permitting of mining for industrial minerals and coal. The Field Inspection and Enforcement program enforces laws regulating active mining activities to ensure the protection of citizens and conservation of environmental resources, and oversees land reclamation requirements to assure operators restore mine land and waters to productive uses.

5.12.3 Hazard Events/Historical Occurrences While subsidence occurs throughout the County, much of it takes place in areas where there are no buildings or roads, so these incidents go relatively unnoticed. Many of the mines in Tuscarawas County, and throughout Ohio, are old coal mines. As a result of this, there are subsidence issues dating back to 1923. Because these mines and wells are significantly aged, they are not documented well, and may not have complete records.

In 2009, there were 2 reported claims regarding mine collapse. These events become hazards when they begin to affect life and property.

Table 5-39 Abandoned Mine Claims in Tuscarawas County

Reported Claims Closed Claims Open Claims Reserves Claim Payments Loss Adj. Exp. 2 0 5 $ 169,842 $ 205,158.26 $ 3,032.52

151

July 9, 2009: A mine collapsed underneath a home in Sugarcreek, Ohio. The collapse caused significant structural damage, including large cracks along the walls. The area was part of the Finzer Mine, which had been abandoned in 1960. There were no other documented reports or problems with this mine.

5.12.4 Magnitude/Severity Figure 5-47 The damage to a home from mine subsidence Subsidence and sinkhole events may occur gradually or abruptly. Events could result in minor elevation changes or deep, gaping holes in the ground surface. Subsidence and sinkhole events can cause severe damage in urban environments, although gradual events can be addressed before significant damage occurs. If long-term subsidence or sinkhole formation is not recognized and mitigation measures are not implemented, fractures or complete collapse of building foundations and roadways may result.

A worst case scenario for subsidence and sinkholes would be if a sinkhole occurred under a critical facility such as a hospital. Not only could structural damage occur to the building, but there could be injuries to patients, as well. In addition, part of the facility would have to be closed in order to repair the structural damage and this would reduce the hospital’s capacity and ability to treat people with other illnesses and injuries.

Tuscarawas County has an estimated 545 abandoned mines, the most out of any county in the State of Ohio. Many of these are coal mines.

5.12.5 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences The Ohio Department of Natural Resources and the Tuscarawas County Emergency Manage Agency have reported no instances of natural resource extraction hazards since 2010.

[(Current Year) 2017] subtracted by [(Historical Year) 2010] = 7 Years on Record

[(Years on Record) 7] divided by [(Number of Historical Events) 0] = N/A year between events

There have not been a sufficient number of events in the recent past to accurately determine the percent annual chance of this type of event occurring. There is no historical precedence to determine the frequency or probability of mine and abandoned well subsidence.

5.12.6 Inventory Assets Exposed to/Potential Losses to Mine Subsidence/Abandoned Wells Abandoned wells and mines exist throughout the entire County. All County assets, including 100% of its population and all critical facilities, are at risk.

152

Figure 5-48 Location of known mines throughout Tuscarawas County.

153

5.12.7 Land Use & Development Trends Much of the land throughout Tuscarawas County has agricultural uses. As farmers continue to use underground aquifers as a water source, it is possible that they may exacerbate any well collapse. This is particularly true in times of drought when aquifers are not being recharged. Development of all critical facilities should be kept away from land that is known to have a mine underneath it.

5.12.8 Mine Subsidence/Abandoned Well HIRA Summary Tuscarawas County has the most abandoned mines out of all Ohio Counties, with a known 545. Mines can collapse when their support structures begin to deteriorate, and abandoned wells, if not filled properly, can begin to cave in on themselves without support. Poor engineering practices at the time of mine withdrawal can lead to these collapses. Local roads need annual repair and damage to water and gas lines and telephone and electrical entry road facilities could occur in highly populated areas. Areas of filled wetlands or streams should be identified, and the prohibition of development in these areas should be encouraged. Additionally, caution should be taken when building structures on filled ground.

154

5.13 Natural Resource Extraction Spatial Natural Hazards Probability Impact Warning Time Duration RF Rating Extent Natural 2 0.6 1 0.3 1 0.2 4 0.4 2 0.2 1.7 Resource Extraction LOW RISK HAZARD (0.1 – 1.9)

5.13.1 Hazard Identification Minerals are defined as homogenous, naturally occurring, inorganic solids, each having their own characteristic chemical composition and highly ordered atomic structure. It is estimated that there are some 4,000 mineral types. A rock is an aggregate of one or more minerals or a body of undifferentiated mineral matter.

Minerals can be categorized in a variety of ways, including by chemical or crystal group; color; streak; hardness; and elemental affiliation. The Dana Classification System has been adopted as the primary system of mineralogy, with all minerals belonging to a specific chemical group. Copper and diamond are examples of naturally-occurring minerals made up of only one element. All other mineral groups are made up of one or more metallic elements combined with another element. The largest group is the silicates which contain varying amounts of silicon and oxygen; quartz and feldspar are two examples. Other important groups include the sulfides, which combine with sulfur, and the oxides, which combine with oxygen, water, or hydroxyl. These three groups are vital as they form many of the ores from which valuable metals can be extracted, including iron, lead and bauxite.

Essentially, if a material is not grown, it must be mined. Minerals are an economic commodity, mined for their potential use or their intrinsic value. Much of the comfort that we enjoy today depends on the abundant use of mineral resources. Things we use each day, from pencils to computers, are made from minerals and other materials that have been extracted from the Earth. And, despite concern over the last few decades that some mineral resources would become scarce, the supply of most major minerals is not actually an immediate concern. In fact, known reserves of most major minerals have increased over the last two decades despite population growth, which has led to both increased demand and consumption.

Current regulation now prioritizes mine reclamation to further initiate beneficial end-uses of the land area. In addition to minimizing any residual hazards to public safety, the process includes maintaining water and air quality, minimizing flooding, erosion and damage to wildlife and aquatic habitats, and providing topsoil replacement and the introduction of appropriate plant species.

Natural Resource Extraction/Transport in Tuscarawas County focus on hazardous material releases and pollution or fire from oil and gas well drilling. Technology is making possible the exploration and extraction of oil and gas resources from the Marcellus shale formation in Eastern Ohio. Hazardous material releases can occur at facilities or along transportation routes. These releases can result in injury and death and may contaminate air, water and soils. Activities associated with oil and gas well drilling can cause fires or explosions and may pollute streams and drinking water.

Another focus of this hazard is pollution and subsidence factors associated with mining. Subsidence may be natural or related to mining activities. Areas under-laid by coal or other minerals which use deep mining techniques may become susceptible to subsidence. Poor engineering practices at the time of withdrawal or progressive degradation in geological stability contribute to subsidence. Natural

155

subsidence results from what are considered normal geological processes particular to certain landform. For example, water movement through carbonate terrain, i.e., limestone and dolomite, may result in topographic features such as swales, sinkhole and forms of subsidence.

Oil and gas well drilling can have a variety of effects on the environment. Abandoned oil and gas wells, not properly plugged can contaminate groundwater and consequently drinking water wells. Surface waters and soil are sometimes polluted by brine, a salty wastewater product of oil and gas well drilling, and from oil spills occurring at the drilling site or from a pipeline breach. This can spoil public drinking water supplies and be particularly detrimental to vegetation and aquatic animals.

Natural gas well fires occur when natural gas is ignited at the well site. Often, these fires erupt during drilling when a spark from machinery or equipment ignites the gas. The initial explosion and resulting flames have the potential to seriously injure or kill individuals in the immediate area. These fires are often difficult to extinguish due to the intensity of the flame and the abundant fuel source.

Transportation of hazardous materials on highways involves tanker trucks or trailers. Unsurprisingly, large trucks are responsible for the greatest number of hazard material release incidents. Hazardous material releases from rail transport are also of concern due to collisions and derailments that result in large spills. There are many thoroughfares within Tuscarawas County. A total of 35 Interstate highway miles traverse the county. These are located along I-77, running north to south through the county. There are also 39 U.S. highway miles that include U.S. 36 (east/west) and U.S. 250(north/south). Along with the federal highway miles, there are over 140 miles of state highway. East/west State Routes include 39, 183 and 258. North/south State Routes are 21, 93, 212, 416, and 800. Besides roadways, Tuscarawas County has a system of rails that crisscross the county. Major railways include two (2) Ohio Central Rail Systems one (1) running north/south through the northwest corner of the county and one (1) running east/west along the lower portion of the county. There are also two (2) rails for the Wheeling and Lake Erie Railroad that run north/south in the northeast corner of the county. Tuscarawas County also has a small airport on the east side of New Philadelphia with small plane service only.

Areas of the state that have underlying mines are subject to subsidence and constitute a potential threat to people living in those areas. Isolated incidents throughout the “coal regions,” over the years have been houses, garages, and trees swallowed up by subsidence holes. Lengths of local streets and highways, and countless building foundations have been damaged. Tuscarawas County out of all the Counties in Ohio has the most abandoned mines at 545.

5.13.2 Regulatory Environment The Ohio Department of Natural Resources is responsible for overseeing and permitting natural resource extraction sites throughout the State, including Tuscarawas County. This is done through ODNR’s Division of Oil and Gas Resources Management. A strong regulatory framework enables the Division to ensure the safety of Ohio’s citizens and environment. This framework is continuously reviewed and updated to accommodate the ever-changing technologies of oil and natural gas drilling.

5.13.3 Hazard Events/Historical Occurrences The Ohio Department of Natural Resources and the Tuscarawas County Emergency Manage Agency have reported no instances of natural resource extraction hazards since 2010.

5.13.4 Magnitude/Severity The extraction, processing, and transport of minerals all have impacts on the environment, as well as on the potential health and safety of those working in the industry. Mitigating the disruption of landscapes and ecosystems, while continuing to ensure supplies of critical minerals, is a constant technological

156

challenge. In addition, the use of cyanide by some mining operations (gold, for example), and the release of gases, dust, and other particulates can impact soils, water, and the air. Water quality can also be affected by metal contamination or sedimentation; yet, the largest problem facing the mining industry is considered to be acid drainage which can threaten aquatic ecosystems.

5.13.5 Frequency/Probability of Future Occurrences The Ohio Department of Natural Resources and the Tuscarawas County Emergency Manage Agency have reported no instances of natural resource extraction hazards since 2010.

[(Current Year) 2017] subtracted by [(Historical Year) 2010] = 7 Years on Record

[(Years on Record) 7] divided by [(Number of Historical Events) 0] = N/A year between events

There have not been a sufficient number of events in the recent past to accurately determine the percent annual chance of this type of event occurring.

5.13.6 Inventory Assets Exposed to/Potential Losses to Natural Resource Extraction No countywide assessment has been completed at this time to clearly identify structures that would be susceptible to and impacted by mineral extraction processes/transport.

5.13.7 Potential Losses Possible losses to structures include:  Inaccessibility  Contamination  Structural and contents losses, if an explosion is present

Possible economic losses include:  Business closures and associated business disruption losses

Possible ecologic losses include:  Loss of wildlife  Habitat damage  Reduced air and water quality

5.13.8 Multi-Jurisdictional Differences Jurisdictions where mining and other extraction processes/transport take place in have a greater vulnerability compared to those who don’t have those activities taking place. Please refer to the map on the next page for location information on oil and gas wells.

157

Figure 5-49 Location of Oil and Gas Wells

158

5.13.9 Land Use & Development Trends Tuscarawas County and the surrounding areas are rich in natural resources and the continued development of industries related to these natural resources is a distinct possibility. New development may increase the number of people and facilities/structures exposed. The purchase of mine subsidence insurance can help reduce the expense a home owner would occur should a mine subsidence event take place.

5.13.10 Natural Resource Extraction HIRA Summary The transport of minerals and hazardous materials generated through extraction processes along state highway and railway corridors around Tuscarawas County could potentially be affected by a spill during transport.

Overall, it is difficult to predict when and where environmental hazards will arise. Stringent monitoring will reduce the likelihood of potential impacts to the community and the environment. Incidents involving oil and gas well drilling are expected to remain relatively low.

159

Section 6. Mitigation Strategy The intent of the Mitigation Strategy is to provide Tuscarawas County and its municipalities with the goals that will serve as the guiding principles for future mitigation policy and project administration, along with a list of proposed actions deemed necessary to meet those goals and reduce the impact of natural hazards. It is designed to be comprehensive and strategic in nature.

The development of the strategy included a thorough review of natural hazards and identified policies and projects intended to not only reduce the future impacts of hazards, but also to help Tuscarawas County achieve compatible economic, environmental, and social goals. The development of this section is also intended to be strategic, in that all policies and projects are linked to establish priorities assigned to specific departments or individuals responsible for their implementation and assigned target completion deadlines. Funding sources are identified that can be used to assist in project implementation.

 Mitigation goals are general guidelines that explain what the County wants to achieve. Goals are usually expressed as broad policy statements representing desired long-term results.

 Mitigation objectives describe strategies or implementation steps to attain the identified goals. Objectives are more specific statements than goals; the described steps are usually measurable and can have a defined completion date.

 Mitigation Actions provide more detailed descriptions of specific work tasks to help the County and its municipalities achieve prescribed goals and objectives.

Based on participation from the Tuscarawas County Mitigation Planning Committee, the mitigation strategy was developed. Objectives were clarified to better document roles and responsibilities. Actions have been added to address particular hazards facing the County and the consensus achieved in how to address those actions.

The last step in updating the Mitigation Strategy is creating the Mitigation Action Plans (MAPs). MAPs represents the key outcome of the mitigation planning process. MAPs include a prioritized list of proposed hazard mitigation actions (policies and projects) for the County, including accompanying information such as those agencies or individuals assigned responsibility for their implementation, potential funding sources, estimated target date for completion, and a current status. MAPs provides those individuals or agencies responsible for implementing mitigation actions with a clear roadmap that also serves as an important tool for monitoring progress over time. The collection of actions listed in each jurisdictions MAPs also serves as an easily understood synopsis of activities for local decision makers.

Prioritizing mitigation actions for each jurisdiction was completed using FEMA’s STAPLEE methodology.

The STAPLEE approach allows for a careful review of the feasibility of mitigation actions by using seven criteria. The criteria are described below:

160

 S - Social  T - Technical  A - Administrative  P - Political  L - Legal  E - Economic  E - Environmental

A full list of hazard mitigation actions sorted by their STAPLEE priority ranking can be found in Appendix E.

FEMA mitigation planning requirements indicate that any prioritization system used shall include a special emphasis on the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost-benefit review of the proposed projects. To do this in an efficient manner that is consistent with FEMA’s guidance on using cost-benefit review in mitigation planning, the STAPLEE method was adapted to include a higher weighting for two elements of the economic feasibility factor – Benefits of Action and Costs of Action. This method incorporates concepts similar to those described in Method C of FEMA 386-5: Using Benefit Cost Review in Mitigation Planning (FEMA, 2007).

For the individual action plans, a STAPLEE score was calculated based on the number of favorable considerations that can be found on the STAPLEE document. Up to 23 considerations can be used to prioritize each action using this evaluation methodology. Typically, scores rank between 17 and 21. Infrastructure projects tend to incur a lower score due to their high price and lengthy completion times, while actions such as plans, regulations, and educational programs rank higher due to their ease of deployment. The table below shows an example of the STAPLEE tool.

161

Figure 6-1 Example STAPLEE tool

In order to ensure that a broad range of mitigation actions were considered, the Tuscarawas County Mitigation Planning Committee analyzed a comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions for each hazard after it had completed the risk assessment. This helped to ensure that there was sufficient span and creativity in the mitigation actions considered.

There are four categories of mitigation actions which Tuscarawas County considered in developing its mitigation action plan. Those categories include:

 Local Plans and Regulations: These actions include government authorities, policies, or codes that influence the way land and buildings are developed and built.

 Structure and Infrastructure Projects: These actions involve modifying existing structures and infrastructure to protect them from a hazard or remove them from a hazard area. This could apply to public or private structures as well as critical facilities and infrastructure. This type of action also involves projects to construct manmade structures to reduce the impact of hazards. Many of these types of actions are projects eligible for funding through the FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance program.

 Natural Systems Protection: These are actions that minimize damage and losses and also preserve or restore the functions of natural systems.

 Education and Awareness Program: These are actions to inform and educate citizens, elected officials, and property owners about hazards and potential ways to mitigate them. These actions may also include participation in national programs, such as StormReady1 or Firewise2 Communities. Although this type of mitigation reduces risk less directly than structural projects or regulation, it is an important foundation. A greater understanding and awareness of hazards

162

and risk among local officials, stakeholders, and the public is more likely to lead to direct actions. All mitigation actions can be found in Section 6.5, with the originals being located in Appendix B, under Meeting 3.

6.1 Planning Process for Setting Hazard Mitigation Goals and Objectives The mitigation strategy represents the key outcomes of the 2017 Tuscarawas County HMP planning process. The hazard mitigation planning process conducted by the Planning Committee is a typical problem-solving methodology:

. Estimate the impacts the problem could cause; . Describe the problem; . Assess what safeguards and resources exist that could potentially lessen those impacts; . Develop Goals and Objectives with current capabilities to address problem . Using this information, determine what, if anything, can be done, and select those actions that are appropriate for the community 6.2 Capabilities Assessment The mitigation strategy includes an assessment of Tuscarawas County planning and regulatory, administrative/technical, fiscal, and political capabilities to augment known issues and weaknesses from identified natural hazards.

Table 6-1 Planning and Regulatory Mitigation Capabilities Summary

Tool/Program Jurisdictions with this resource, or in process of developing this resource Baltic, Barnhill, Bolivar, Dennison, Dover, Gnadenhutten, Midvale, Mineral City, New Hazard Mitigation Philadelphia, Newcomerstown, Parrall, Roswell, Stone Creek, Strasburg, Sugarcreek, Plan Tuscarawas County, Tuscarawas Village, Uhrichsville, Zoar Baltic, Barnhill, Dennison, Dover, Gnadenhutten, Mineral City, New Philadelphia, Emergency Operations Newcomerstown, Parrall, Roswell, Stone Creek, Strasburg, Sugarcreek, Tuscarawas Plan County, Tuscarawas Village, Uhrichsville, Zoar Disaster Recovery Baltic, Dover, Stone Creek, Tuscarawas County Plan Baltic, Barnhill, Bolivar, Dennison, Dover, Gnadenhutten, New Philadelphia, Evacuation Plan Newcomerstown, Parrall, Roswell, Stone Creek, Strasburg, Sugarcreek, Tuscarawas County, Tuscarawas Village, Uhrichsville, Zoar Continuity of Baltic, Mineral City, Strasburg, Tuscarawas County Operations Plan Baltic, Dennison, Dover, Gnadenhutten, Midvale, Mineral City, New Philadelphia, NFIP Newcomerstown, Port Washington, Roswell, Strasburg, Sugarcreek, Tuscarawas County, Tuscarawas Village, Uhrichsville, Zoar NFIP-CRS N/A Baltic, Dennison, Dover, Gnadenhutten, Midvale, Mineral City, New Philadelphia, Floodplain Newcomerstown, Port Washington, Roswell, Strasburg, Sugarcreek, Tuscarawas County, Regulations Tuscarawas Village, Uhrichsville, Zoar Floodplain Baltic, Dover Management Plan Zoning Regulations Baltic, Bolivar, Dover, Mineral City, New Philadelphia, Port Washington, Strasburg, Zoar Subdivision Baltic, New Philadelphia, Strasburg, Tuscarawas County, Zoar

163

Tool/Program Jurisdictions with this resource, or in process of developing this resource Regulations Comprehensive Land Use Plan (or General, Tuscarawas County Master or Growth Mgmt. Plan) Open Space Management Plan (or Dover, Zoar Parks/Rec or Greenways Plan) Stormwater Management Plan / Baltic, Mineral City, Roswell Ordinance Natural Resource

Protection Plan Capital Improvement Baltic, Dover, Mineral City Plan Economic Development Mineral City Plan Historic Preservation Dover, Mineral City, Zoar Plan Farmland Preservation Tuscarawas County Building Code Dennison, Dover, Mineral City, New Philadelphia Dennison, Dover, Mineral City, New Philadelphia, Newcomerstown, Stone Creek, Fire Code Sugarcreek, Tuscarawas Village, Uhrichsville

6.2.1 Administrative and Technical Capabilities Table 6-2 provides a summary of administrative and technical capabilities organized by staff type and department. It is important to understand current administrative and technical capabilities before developing a myriad of mitigation activities.

Table 6-2: Administrative and Technical Mitigation Capabilities

Staff/Personnel Resources Department / Agency Planners (with land use / land development knowledge) Dennison, Dover, Tuscarawas County Planners or engineers (with natural and/or human Dennison, Tuscarawas County caused hazards knowledge) Engineers or professionals trained in building and/or infrastructure construction practices (includes building Dennison, Dover, Mineral City, Zoar inspectors) Emergency manager Baltic, Dover, Mineral City, Tuscarawas County, Zoar Baltic, Barnhill, Dover, Mineral City, New Philadelphia, Floodplain manager Strasburg, Tuscarawas County, Tuscarawas Village, Uhrichsville Land surveyors Dover, Tuscarawas County Scientists or staff familiar with the hazards of the

community Personnel skilled in Geographic Information Systems Tuscarawas County (GIS) and/or FEMA’s HAZUS program Grant writers or fiscal staff to handle large/complex Barnhill, Mineral City, Tuscarawas County

164

grants

6.2.2 Fiscal Capabilities This section identifies the financial tools or resources that Tuscarawas County could potentially use to help fund mitigation activities. Fiscal capabilities include community-specific as well as State and Federal resources.

Table 6-3: Fiscal Capabilities Table

Financial Resources Department / Agency Capital improvement programming Dennison, Dover, Mineral City Baltic, Barnhill, Dover, Midvale, Mineral City, Tuscarawas Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) County Special purpose taxes Baltic, Midvale, Mineral City, Strasburg, Zoar Gas / electric utility fees Dover Baltic, Bolivar, Dennison, Dover, New Philadelphia, Water / sewer fees Newcomerstown, Strasburg, Tuscarawas County, Uhrichsville Stormwater utility fees Baltic, Parrall Development impact fees Mineral City General obligation, revenue, and/or special tax Baltic, Dover, Tuscarawas County, bonds Partnering arrangements or intergovernmental Baltic, Dover agreements

6.2.3 Education and Outreach This section identifies the education and outreach tools or resources that Tuscarawas County could potentially use. These capabilities include community-specific as well as State and Federal resources.

Table 6-4 Education and Outreach Table

Financial Resources Department / Agency Firewise Communities Certification Baltic, Barnhill, Bolivar, Dennison, Dover, Gnadenhutten, Midvale, Mineral City, New Philadelphia, Newcomerstown, StormReady Certification Parrall, Roswell, Stone Creek, Strasburg, Sugarcreek, Tuscarawas County, Tuscarawas Village, Uhrichsville, Zoar Natural disaster or safety related school programs Baltic, Dennison, Mineral City Ongoing public education or information program Baltic, Dennison, Mineral City, New Philadelphia, (e.g. responsible water use, fire safety, household Newcomerstown, Stone Creek, Strasburg, Sugarcreek, preparedness, environmental education) Tuscarawas Village, Uhrichsville, Zoar Public-private partnership initiatives addressing

disaster- related issues Local citizen groups or non- profit organizations focused on environmental protection, emergency Mineral City, Strasburg preparedness, access and functional needs populations, etc.

165

6.2.4 Degree of Capability This section identifies the overall ability of each jurisdiction in Tuscarawas County to address hazard mitigation strategies with their existing resources.

Table 6-5 Degree of Capability

Degree of Capability

Area Limited Moderate High Baltic, Barnhill, Bolivar, Dennison, Gnadenhutten, Midvale, Mineral City, Planning and New Philadelphia, Newcomerstown, Dover, Tuscarawas

Regulatory Parrall, Port Washington, Roswell, County, Zoar Stone Creek, Strasburg, Sugarcreek, Uhrichsville Baltic, Barnhill, Bolivar, Dennison, Gnadenhutten, Midvale, Mineral City, Administrative New Philadelphia, Newcomerstown, Tuscarawas County Dover and Technical Parrall, Port Washington, Roswell, Stone Creek, Strasburg, Sugarcreek, Tuscarawas Village, Uhrichsville, Zoar Baltic, Barnhill, Bolivar, Dennison, Gnadenhutten, Midvale, Mineral City, New Philadelphia, Newcomerstown, Parrall, Tuscarawas Financial Dover Port Washington, Roswell, Stone County Creek, Strasburg, Sugarcreek, Tuscarawas Village, Uhrichsville, Zoar Baltic, Barnhill, Bolivar, Dennison, Dover, Gnadenhutten, Midvale, Mineral City, New Philadelphia, Education and Parrall, Strasburg, Newcomerstown, Port Washington, Outreach Tuscarawas County Roswell, Stone Creek, Strasburg, Sugarcreek, Tuscarawas Village, Uhrichsville, Zoar

6.2.5 Ability to Expand on Existing Capabilities The planning process used surveys to determine the existing capabilities for the County and its political subdivisions. Actual capability assessments can be found in Appendix D. These capabilities can be expanded upon with the proper influx of funds or personnel. Should additional state or federal funding become available to specifically augment existing capabilities, then the jurisdictions represented in this plan would be able to improve their capabilities. Additionally, as personnel turn over, they may be replaced with individuals with skillsets not captured in these surveys. The County will continue to develop their capabilities over time, and expand upon them where they are able.

166

6.3 Community Values, Historic and Special Considerations Historic resources include landmark buildings, historic structures and sites, commercial and residential districts, historic rural resources, archaeological and cultural sites, and the historic environment in which they exist. Historic Resources serve as visual reminders of a community's past, providing a link to its cultural heritage and a better understanding of the people and events that shaped the patterns of its development. Preservation of these important resources makes it possible for them to continue to play an integral, vital role in the community. Currently the County has twenty‐four properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places and one historic landmark; Frederick Bernhard House (Dover), Katherine Cooper House (Dover), John Deis House (Dover), Dennison High School (Dennison), E.D. Fisher House (Bolivar), Fort Laurens Site (Lawrence Township), Garver Brothers Store (Strasburg), Gnadenhutten Massacre Site (Gnadenhutten), Johnson Site II (Dover Township), T. Lanning & Co. Department Store (Dennison), John Lebol House: Smokehouse and Springhouse (Lawrence Township), Pennsylvania Railroad Depot and Baggage Room (Dennison), Christian Pershing Barn (Dover Township), Port Washington Town Hall (Port Washington), Ragersville School (Auburn Township), The Railway Chapel (Dennison), Jeremiah Reeves House and Carriage House (Dover), Christian Rinderknect House (Dover), Schoenbrunn Site (New Philadelphia), Seven Ranges Terminus (Sandy Township), Dr. Joseph Slingluff House (Dover), Tuscarawas County Courthouse (New Philadelphia), Zoar Historic District (Zoar), Zoarville Bridge (Fairfield Township).

Depending on the number of historic resources within a community, it can be unrealistic to assume that all of the necessary mitigation activities can be done at once to protect these resources. The work must be done in a manner that retains the character‐defining features of a historic property, and can be costly. Therefore, it makes sense to set priorities in terms of which resources and mitigation projects should be the point of focus. Tuscarawas County recognizes that the preservation and maintenance of archaeological sites and historic structures contribute to the cultural heritage of the county and are in the long‐term best interest of the county.

6.4 Mitigation Goals, Objectives and Actions Goals and objectives discussed in this section help describe what actions should occur, using increasingly narrow descriptors. Long-term goals are developed which can be accomplished by objectives. To achieve the stated objectives “mitigation actions” provide specific measurable descriptors on how to accomplish the objective. The goals, objectives, and actions form the basis for the development of a Mitigation Action Strategy and specific mitigation projects to be considered for implementation.

167

The process consists of 1) setting goals and objectives, 2) considering mitigation alternatives, 3) identifying strategies or “actions”, and 4) developing a prioritized action plan resulting in a mitigation strategy.

6.4.1 Goals and Objectives The Planning Committee discussed goals and objectives for this plan update at distinct points in the planning process. On April 7, 2016 (Planning Committee Meeting #2), the Planning Committee discussed the results of the risk assessment and the identified issues/weaknesses to be addressed by Mitigation Actions. During that time the HMP Planning Committee opted to carry over some of the goals from the previous pan, as well as develop new ones. More details of this particular meeting are provided in meeting minutes found in Appendix B. The following goals and objectives have been developed as part the planning effort:

Goal 1. To minimize the losses of life and property due to flooding in Tuscarawas County Objective 1.1: To minimize the impact of flooding to life and property to include buildings, infrastructure, and critical infrastructure

Goal 2. To minimize the losses of life and property due to drought in Tuscarawas County Objective 2.1: To educate the citizens of Tuscarawas County on methods to reduce the effects of drought

Goal 3. To minimize the losses of life and property due to severe thunderstorms in Tuscarawas County Objective 3.1: To minimize the effects of electrical storms to public and private property in Tuscarawas County

Objective 3.2: To minimize the effects of high winds to public and private property in Tuscarawas County

Goal 4: To minimize the losses of life and property due to tornadoes in Tuscarawas County Objective 4.1: Increase the resilience to the effects of high winds from tornadoes on public and private property in Tuscarawas County

Objective 4.2: Continue to promote public awareness to the dangers of high wind events

Goal 5: To minimize the losses of life and property due to earthquakes in Tuscarawas County Objective 5.1: To minimize the effects of seismic activity to life and property to include buildings, infrastructure, critical facilities and critical infrastructure in Tuscarawas County

Goal 6: To minimize the losses of life and property due to dam failure in Tuscarawas County Objective 6.1: To minimize the effects of dam failure to life, public and private property in Tuscarawas County

Goal 7: To minimize the losses of life and property due to natural resource extraction in Tuscarawas County Objective 7.1: To minimize the impact of natural resource extraction to life and property to include buildings, infrastructure, critical facilities and critical infrastructure and natural environment Goal 8: To minimize the loss of life and property due to severe winter weather in Tuscarawas County

168

Objective 8.1: Develop a public education and outreach program about severe winter weather

Objective 8.2: To minimize the effects of winter storms to public and private property in Tuscarawas County

Goal 9: Minimize the impact to people, property and infrastructure to extreme temperatures Objective 9.1: Develop a public education and outreach program about extreme temperatures

Goal 10: Minimize the impact to people, property, infrastructure and natural environment due to hazardous materials releases Objective 10.1: Develop a public education and outreach program for hazmat releases

Objective 10.2: Minimize the impact to people, property, infrastructure and the natural environment in the event of a hazmat spill

Goal 11: Minimize the impact – Mine subsidence/abandoned wells Objective 11.1: Public education and outreach program around land subsidence/abandoned wells

Objective 11.2: Minimize the impact to people, property, infrastructure and the natural environment in the event of land subsidence/abandoned wells

6.4.2 Mitigation Action Development To begin the process of identifying mitigation actions, the HMP Planning Committee reviewed existing mitigation actions from the 2011 HMP. Based upon new priorities and risk assessment results, mitigation actions were edited and removed. Most importantly, the newly developed mitigation actions acknowledge updated risk assessment information outlined in Section 5.

6.4.2.1 Mitigation Costs Cost effectiveness of each measure was a primary consideration when developing mitigation actions. Because mitigation is an investment to reduce future damages, it is important to select measures for which the reduced damages over the life of the measure are likely to be greater than the project cost. For structural projects, the level of cost effectiveness is primarily based on the likelihood of damages occurring in the future, the severity of the damages when they occur, and the level of effectiveness of the selected measure.

While detailed analysis was not conducted during the mitigation action development process, these factors were of primary concern when selecting measures. For measures that do not result in a quantifiable reduction of damages, such as public education and outreach, the relationship of the probable future benefits and the cost of each measure was considered when developing the mitigation actions. Costs are made available in individual Implementation Plans described in Section 7.

6.4.3 2011 Mitigation Action Review During the third planning meeting, the mitigation actions from the 2011 HMP were reviewed and determined to be; deferred into the new plan, changed to reflect an update in priorities, completed, or deleted. “Deferred” actions are those that the communities still feel are relevant, even though they have not been completed. These have been carried over into the mitigation strategy in section 6.5.

169

Actions from the previous plan can be found below. Actions marked as “Completed” were finished between the drafting of the 2011 HMP, and the 2017 HMP. Deletion of an action generally refers to that action no longer being relevant to the community.

Below are the reviews by jurisdiction. The originals as filled out by each jurisdiction can be found located in Appendix B. To ensure organization, those reviews that were collected during individual meetings, as described in Section 4, have been incorporated into their respective locations within the other meeting minutes.

170

6.4.3.1 Tuscarawas County - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments?

Acquire emergency generators for X placement at critical facilities

Acquire structures in identified repetitive X loss areas throughout Tuscarawas county Acquire, retrofit, elevate, or relocate flood prone structures throughout Tuscarawas X county

Acquisition of floodprone structures X downstream from Dover Dam Continue a public awareness campaign designed to promote individual preparedness using a public education and X awareness program Continue to promote the public awareness campaign to promote water saving techniques (such as low flow water saving X showerheads and toilets) Continue to support and manage the tornado safety public awareness campaign X in Tuscarawas county

Continue to update GIS mapping capabilities X and integrate data with local responders Wildfires are not a hazard in the 2016 plan update. Develop a public awareness campaign to X heighten awareness about brush fires and 171

preventative maintenance for homeowners

Develop land use strategies to promote the X safe use of land downstream from dams Ensure that NFIP requirements are being met concerning repairs, renovations, and remodeling of structures located in the X regulatory floodplain

Equip all county and public gathering places X with lightning detectors Establish countywide zoning that Municipalities lack the ability to complete this task. incorporates floodplain development X permitting Evaluate the feasibility of upstream surface flood storage for flood prone structures that cannot be mitigated by conventional X techniques Identify structure inventory for properties at-risk to flood (specifically properties located in the special flood hazard area/1% X annual chance area) Improve/enlarge discharge capacity for Goettge Run to increase outflow capacity X into the Sugar Creek This is no longer a priority for the County Install surge protectors on electronic X equipment in county and municipal facilities Install uninterruptible power supplies on This is no longer a priority for the County critical electronic equipment in county and X municipal facilities

Maintain an inventory of category 1 and 2 X dams in GIS format

Notify owners in writing of flood prone X properties and recommend the need for

172

flood insurance

Promote enhanced anchoring of X manufactured homes

Promote equipment fastening in county and X municipal facilities

Promote public awareness of natural X resource extraction techniques Promote the use of special roofing shingles designed to interlock and resist uplift forces X for both new construction and retrofits

Public education and outreach concerning X the dangers of high winds Purchase the equipment necessary to FEMA funds can no longer be used to purchase equipment. efficiently remove snow and ice from county X roads during severe winter weather Support tree-trimming to prevent limb breakage and for safeguarding nearby utility X lines during severe winter storm events Undertake projects to elevate roads with fill material, particularly county and township roads that result in closures due to high X water during flood events

Update existing flood damage prevention X and ordinances (as it relates to 44 cfr 60.3)

Update storm water policies for new X development (specifically subdivisions)

173

6.4.3.2 City of Dover - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Identify structure inventory for properties at-risk Purchased all residential properties along river and are in the process of to flood (specifically properties located in the removing the same. Identification is proceeding in other areas. special flood hazard area/1% annual chance X area) Ensure that NFIP requirements are being met Need to examine feasibility without a certified building department. concerning repairs, renovations, and remodeling X of structures located in the regulatory floodplain Investigate the need for the City of Dover to Need to investigate further as far as cost effectiveness.

participate in the NFIP’s CRS program X Identify a location and construct a community Will be considered in future planning. safe room within the city parks of new X Philadelphia, Dover, and Uhrichsville Develop a public awareness campaign to Does not apply within corporation limits. heighten awareness about brush fires and X preventative maintenance for homeowners Identify structure inventory for properties at-risk Needs completed. to flood (specifically properties located in the

special flood hazard area/1% annual chance X area)

174

6.4.3.3 City of New Philadelphia - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Identify structure inventory for properties at-risk to flood (specifically properties located in the special flood hazard area/1% X annual chance area) Ensure that NFIP requirements are being met concerning repairs, renovations, and remodeling of structures located in the X regulatory floodplain Clean and clear woody debris from stream banks preventing possible jams during flood X events Purchase of generators to serve as backup power for heating and cooling centers X Identify a location and construct a community saferoom within the city parks of X new Philadelphia, Dover, and Uhrichsville Develop a public awareness campaign to Wildfires are not a part of the 2016 mitigation plan update. heighten awareness about brush fires and X preventative maintenance for homeowners

175

6.4.3.4 City of Uhrichsville - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Identify structure inventory for properties at-risk to flood (specifically properties located in the special flood hazard area/1% X annual chance area) Ensure that NFIP requirements are being We check our floodplain map before allowing any of the items to be met concerning repairs, renovations, and complete to make sure it’s not in the floodplain area. remodeling of structures located in the X regulatory floodplain Develop new storm water regulations X Conduct dredging operations on nearby Did clean up Big and Little Stillwater Creeks waterways X Install sirens for early warning capability X Updated siren power source – currently have one siren Identify a location and construct a community saferoom within the city parks of X new Philadelphia, Dover, and Uhrichsville Develop a public awareness campaign to Fires are not a part of this plan heighten awareness about brush fires and X preventative maintenance for homeowners

176

6.4.3.5 Village of Baltic - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Develop a public awareness campaign to This awareness campaign is not significantly applicable to our little heighten awareness about brush fires and X village. Presently we are redirecting focus to other challenges. preventative maintenance for homeowners Identify structure inventory for properties Baltic received a floodplain map in June 2016. Now we can identify at-risk to flood (specifically properties specific properties for inventory and documentation.

located in the special flood hazard area/1% X annual chance area) Ensure that NFIP requirements are being Same as above. met concerning repairs, renovations, and

remodeling of structures located in the X regulatory floodplain Clean and clear woody debris from stream With input from MWCD and Army Corps of Engineers, Brush Run Creek. banks preventing possible jams during flood Thru the Village of Baltic has been completely cleared of woody debris,

events X dead and fallen trees, and brush in 2014/2015. Total cost paid by Baltic Village.

177

6.4.3.6 Village of Barnhill - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Develop a public awareness campaign to X Fires are not a part of this plan heighten awareness about brush fires and preventative maintenance for homeowners Identify structure inventory for properties X Barnhill is not within the 100-year floodplain at-risk to flood (specifically properties located in the special flood hazard area/1% annual chance area) Clean and clear woody debris from stream X banks preventing possible jams during flood events

178

6.4.3.7 Village of Bolivar - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Develop a public awareness campaign to heighten awareness about brush fires and X preventative maintenance for homeowners Identify structure inventory for properties Funding has not been provided in order to complete this task. It is no at-risk to flood (specifically properties longer a priority for the community.

located in the special flood hazard area/1% X annual chance area) Ensure that NFIP requirements are being Funding is not available for this project. met concerning repairs, renovations, and

remodeling of structures located in the X regulatory floodplain Create/develop flood damage prevention This is no longer a priority for the community. and ordinances (as it relates to 44 cfr 60.3) X and participate in the NFIP and CRS program

179

6.4.3.8 Village of Dennison - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Develop a public awareness campaign to X heighten awareness about brush fires and preventative maintenance for homeowners Identify structure inventory for properties X at-risk to flood (specifically properties located in the special flood hazard area/1% annual chance area) Ensure that NFIP requirements are being X met concerning repairs, renovations, and remodeling of structures located in the regulatory floodplain Update existing flood damage prevention X and ordinances (as it relates to 44 cfr 60.3) and participate in the CRS program Clean and clear woody debris from stream X It was determined that this would be cost prohibitive with our limited banks preventing possible jams during flood resources. events Conduct dredging operations on nearby X Same as above. waterways

180

6.4.3.9 Village of Gnadenhutten - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

181

6.4.3.10 Village of Midvale - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Develop a public awareness campaign to X Fires are not a part of this plan heighten awareness about brush fires and preventative maintenance for homeowners Identify structure inventory for properties X at-risk to flood (specifically properties located in the special flood hazard area/1% annual chance area) Ensure that NFIP requirements are being X met concerning repairs, renovations, and remodeling of structures located in the regulatory floodplain Clean and clear woody debris from stream X banks preventing possible jams during flood events

182

6.4.3.11 Village of Mineral City - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

located in the special flood hazard area/1% X annual chance area) Ensure that NFIP requirements are being met concerning repairs, renovations, and

remodeling of structures located in the X regulatory floodplain Clean and clear woody debris from stream banks preventing possible jams during flood X events

183

6.4.3.12 Village of Newcomerstown - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Develop a public awareness campaign to heighten awareness about brush fires and X Working with NERS/Fire Dept. on campaign currently. preventative maintenance for homeowners Identify structure inventory for properties at-risk to flood (specifically properties Village workers need to be educated on this area. located in the special flood hazard area/1% X annual chance area) Ensure that NFIP requirements are being met concerning repairs, renovations, and Village mayor is currently in the process of reviewing NFIP materials. remodeling of structures located in the X regulatory floodplain Clean and clear woody debris from stream banks preventing possible jams during flood X A yearly evaluation checks for debris from Buckhorn Creek. events Funding has been applied for, but the Village has not been notified to Install sirens for early warning capability X any yet.

184

6.4.3.13 Village of Parral - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Develop a public awareness campaign to Wildfires are not a part of this HMP update. heighten awareness about brush fires and X preventative maintenance for homeowners Identify structure inventory for properties This is no longer a priority for the village. at-risk to flood (specifically properties

located in the special flood hazard area/1% X annual chance area)

185

6.4.3.14 Village of Port Washington - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Develop a public awareness campaign to heighten awareness about brush fires and X Wildfires are not part of the 2016 mitigation plan update. preventative maintenance for homeowners Identify structure inventory for properties at-risk to flood (specifically properties

located in the special flood hazard area/1% X annual chance area) Ensure that NFIP requirements are being met concerning repairs, renovations, and

remodeling of structures located in the X regulatory floodplain

186

6.4.3.15 Village of Roswell - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Develop a public awareness campaign to heighten awareness about brush fires and X Wildfires are not a part of the 2016 mitigation plan update. preventative maintenance for homeowners Identify structure inventory for properties at-risk to flood (specifically properties located in the special flood hazard area/1% X annual chance area) Ensure that NFIP requirements are being met concerning repairs, renovations, and remodeling of structures located in the X regulatory floodplain Clean and clear woody debris from stream banks preventing possible jams during flood X events

187

6.4.3.16 Village of Stone Creek - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Develop a public awareness campaign to X Brush fires are not a part of this plan. heighten awareness about brush fires and preventative maintenance for homeowners Identify structure inventory for properties X at-risk to flood (specifically properties located in the special flood hazard area/1% annual chance area) X Install sirens for early warning capability

188

6.4.3.17 Village of Strasburg - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

189

6.4.3.18 Village of Sugarcreek - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Develop a public awareness campaign to Wildfires are not a part of the 2016 mitigation plan update heighten awareness about brush fires and X preventative maintenance for homeowners Identify structure inventory for properties at-risk to flood (specifically properties located in the special flood hazard area/1% X annual chance area) Ensure that NFIP requirements are being Village is actively concerning NFIP met concerning repairs, renovations, and remodeling of structures located in the X regulatory floodplain

190

6.4.3.19 Village of Tuscarawas - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Develop a public awareness campaign to Wildfire is not a part of the 2016 hazard mitigation update. heighten awareness about brush fires and X preventative maintenance for homeowners Identify structure inventory for properties Have not experienced any degree of disaster due to flood to determine at-risk to flood (specifically properties parameters of dangers areas except mapping for floodplain. located in the special flood hazard area/1% X annual chance area) Ensure that NFIP requirements are being Have not experienced any degree of disaster due to flood to determine met concerning repairs, renovations, and parameters of dangers areas except mapping for floodplain. remodeling of structures located in the X regulatory floodplain Install sirens for early warning capability X Installed new unites with upgrades.

191

6.4.3.20 Village of Zoar - Mitigation Action Progress Report Form

STATUS STATUS UPDATE NOTES

ACTION

What was accomplished for this action during this reporting period?

What obstacles, problems, or delays were encountered? If not completed, is the action still relevant?

Ongoing Should the action and/or the anticipated completion date be revised?

Deferred Canceled Completed Do you have any other comments? Develop a public awareness campaign to Wildfires are not a part of the 2016 mitigation plan update. heighten awareness about brush fires and X preventative maintenance for homeowners Identify structure inventory for properties FEMA has issued a Letter of Map Revision that is in Public Notice. Should at-risk to flood (specifically properties be finalized September 9, 2016. This will remove all structures inside the located in the special flood hazard area/1% X Zoar levee out of the floodplain. annual chance area) Ensure that NFIP requirements are being FEMA has issued a Letter of Map Revision that is in Public Notice. Should met concerning repairs, renovations, and be finalized September 9, 2016. This will remove all structures inside the remodeling of structures located in the X Zoar levee out of the floodplain. regulatory floodplain Install sirens for early warning capability X Siren installed several years ago

192

6.5 Mitigation Strategies

6.5.1 Flood Mitigation Strategy Goal 1. To minimize the losses of life and property due to flooding in Tuscarawas County Objective 1.1: To minimize the impact of flooding to life and property to include buildings, infrastructure, and critical infrastructure Flooding Mitigation Actions Lead Agency/ Implementation Estimated Priority Action Funding Source Department Schedule Cost Score

Goal 1. To minimize the losses of life and property due to flooding in Tuscarawas County

Objective 1.1: To minimize the impact of flooding to life and property to include buildings, infrastructure, and critical infrastructure Expand existing freeboard Staff time City of New Philadelphia requirements above minimum 2017-2022 and Existing budget 21 Service Director levels resources Notify owners in writing of flood prone properties and Tuscarawas County 2017-2022 $1,000 Existing budget 21 recommend the need for flood Commission insurance Staff time Develop new storm water City of Uhrichsville 2017-2022 and Existing budget 21 regulations Mayor resources Village of Newcomerstown Mayor, Village of Baltic Mayor, Village of Dennison Mayor, Village of Gnadenhutten Mayor, Village of Midvale Mayor, Village of Staff time Identify properties at risk Newcomerstown Mayor, 2017-2022 and Existing budget 20 within the 1% SHFA Village of Port resources Washington Mayor, Village of Stone Creek Mayor, Village of Strasburg Mayor, Village of Sugarcreek Mayor, Tuscarawas County Commission Promote equipment fastening Tuscarawas County in county and municipal 2017-2022 $1,000 Existing budget 20 Commission facilities Promote the use of special roofing shingles designed to Tuscarawas County interlock and resist uplift 2017-2022 $1,000 Existing budget 20 Commission forces for both new construction and retrofits

193

Tuscarawas County Floodplain Administrator, Village of Baltic Mayor, Ensure that NFIP Village of Dennison requirements are being met Mayor, Village of Midvale Staff time concerning repairs, Mayor, Village of 2017-2019 and Existing budget 19 renovations, and remodeling Newcomerstown Mayor, resources of structures located in the Village of Port regulatory floodplain Washington Mayor, Village of Strasburg Mayor Update storm water policies Staff time Tuscarawas County for new development 2017-2019 and Existing budget 19 Commission (specifically subdivisions) resources Establish countywide zoning Staff time Tuscarawas County that incorporates floodplain 2017-2019 and Existing budget 19 Commission development permitting resources Update major subdivision regulation on storm drainage Tuscarawas County MWCD funds, existing 2017-2019 $15,000 18 to incorporate “green” Commission county budget planning initiatives. Heighten awareness of flood risk by developing and maintaining a database to Village of Stone Creek 2017-2022 $2,000 Grants 18 track community exposure to Mayor flood risk, and revising and updating floodplain maps. Village of Roswell Mayor, Clean out storm drainage City of New Philadelphia system of vegetation debris in Mayor, Village of Barnhill 2017-2022 $20,000 Grants 17 order to improve stormwater Mayor, Village of Midvale flow Mayor, Village of Stone Creek Mayor Improve/enlarge discharge capacity for Goettge Run to Tuscarawas County 2017-2022 $50,000 FEMA Grants 17 increase outflow capacity into Engineer the Sugar Creek Adopting ASCE-24-05 Flood Resistant and Design Construction. ASCE-24 is referenced standard in the IBC that specified minimum Staff time Village of Stone Creek requirements and expected 2019-2022 and Existing budget 17 Mayor and Council performance for the design resources and construction of building in the flood hazard areas to make them more resistant to flood loads and flood damage. Acquire repetitive loss and City of Dover Mayor and severe repetitive loss buildings 2017-2022 $500,000 Clean Ohio Fund 17 Council within the 100-year floodplain.

194

Undertake projects to elevate roads with fill material, particularly county and Tuscarawas County FEMA Grants, 2017-2022 $500,000 17 township roads that result in Commission Existing budget closures due to high water during flood events Update existing flood damage Staff time prevention and ordinances (as Village of Dennison 2017-2019 and Existing budget 17 it relates to 44 cfr 60.3) and Mayor resources participate in the CRS program

195

6.5.2 Drought Mitigation Strategy Goal 2. To minimize the losses of life and property due to drought in Tuscarawas County Objective 2.1: To educate the citizens of Tuscarawas County on methods to reduce the effects of drought

Drought Mitigation Actions Lead Agency/ Implementation Estimated Priority Action Funding Source Department Schedule Cost Score

Goal 2. To minimize the losses of life and property due to drought in Tuscarawas County

Objective 2.1: To educate the citizens of Tuscarawas County on methods to reduce the effects of drought

Engage active well- monitoring to assist in United States Department of keeping track of water Stone Creek Mayor 2017-2022 $1,500 20 Agriculture grants usage during drought conditions. Create a public education campaign aimed at farmers and Tuscarawas County HMGP and PDM funds, 2017-2022 $2,000 20 residents about best Commission Existing budget water practices during times of drought

196

6.5.3 Severe Thunderstorm Mitigation Strategy Goal 3. To minimize the losses of life and property due to severe thunderstorms in Tuscarawas County Objective 3.1: To minimize the effects of electrical storms to public and private property in Tuscarawas County

Objective 3.2: To minimize the effects of high winds to public and private property in Tuscarawas County

Severe Thunderstorms Mitigation Actions Lead Agency/ Implementation Estimated Priority Action Funding Source Department Schedule Cost Score

Goal 3: To minimize the loss of life and property due to severe winter weather in Tuscarawas County

Objective 3.1: To minimize the effects of electrical storms to public and private property in Tuscarawas County

Install lightning Tuscarawas prediction equipment PDM grants, National County 2017-2022 $20,000 19 near critical county Weather Service grants Commission facilities.

Objective 3.2: To minimize the effects of high winds to public and private property in Tuscarawas County

Require school administrators to perform annual drills so Staff time Bolivar Village that students and 2017-2022 and Existing operating budget 21 Administrator teachers know where to resources take shelter during severe storms.

Place signs in local parks Village of about the dangers of Sugarcreek Q2 2017 $3,000 Grants, existing budget 20 lightning strikes to raise Administrator public awareness.

Bi-annual inspection of Strasburg Village vegetation growing in or Administrator, $75,000 - 2017-2022 Operating Budget 19 near powerlines, and City of Dover $100,000 pruning as necessary Mayor

197

6.5.4 Tornado Mitigation Strategy Goal 4: To minimize the losses of life and property due to tornadoes in Tuscarawas County Objective 4.1: Increase the resilience to the effects of high winds from tornadoes on public and private property in Tuscarawas County

Objective 4.2: Continue to promote public awareness to the dangers of high wind events

Tornado Mitigation Actions Lead Agency/ Implementation Estimated Priority Action Funding Source Department Schedule Cost Score Goal 8: To minimize the losses of life and property due to tornadoes in Tuscarawas County Objective 4.1: Increase the resilience to the effects of high winds from tornadoes on public and private property in Tuscarawas County Relocate the designated shelter Staff time area for Zoar to be the Fire Village of Zoar Mayor Q4 2017 and Existing budget 21 Station resources Replace current tornado sirens Village of Existing budget, with ones capable of reaching Q3 2017 $23,000 19 Newcomerstown Mayor Grants the corporation limit. Construct a saferoom within City City of Uhrichsville FEMA PDM grants, 2017-2022 $150,000 17 of Uhrichsville Parks Mayor HMGP grants Identify a location and construct a community saferoom within Cities of New FEMA PDM grants, the city parks of new Philadelphia, Dover, and 2017-2022 $100,000 17 HMGP grants Philadelphia, Dover, and Uhrichsville Mayors Uhrichsville Install sirens for early warning Village of Strasburg FEMA PDM grants, 2017 $20,000 17 capability Mayor HMGP grants Objective 4.2: Continue to promote public awareness to the dangers of high wind events Conduct outreach activities to Staff time increase awareness of tornado Existing budget, Village of Parral Mayor 2017-2022 and 21 risk, as well as the promotion grants resources and use of safe rooms. Through a public education campaign, promote the construction and use of safe Village of Stone Creek FEMA HMGP or PDM room in homes and shelter areas 2017-2022 $1,000 21 Mayor grants of manufactures homes / trailers or other vulnerable public structures. Conduct village-wide tornado drills in conjunction with local Village of Tuscarawas schools, the fire department, and Mayor and Village Q1 2020- the police department. Council, $3,000 Existing budget 20 Q4 2022 Promoting the use of NOAA Village of Dennison weather radios in local homes Mayor and businesses.

198

Implement reverse 911 calling to Village of Port residents of Port Washington 2017-2022 $10,000 FEMA HMGP funds 19 Washington Mayor during tornadoes. Install a siren at the west end of Village of Port 2017-2022 $10,000 FEMA HMGP funds 19 Port Washington Washington Mayor Install a siren to alert residents of FEMA HMGP or PDM Village of Roswell Mayor 2017-2022 $25,000 19 impending tornadoes grants

6.5.5 Earthquake Mitigation Strategy Goal 5: To minimize the losses of life and property due to earthquakes in Tuscarawas County Objective 5.1: To minimize the effects of seismic activity to life and property to include buildings, infrastructure, critical facilities and critical infrastructure in Tuscarawas County

Earthquake Mitigation Actions Lead Agency/ Implementation Estimated Priority Action Funding Source Department Schedule Cost Score

Goal 5: To minimize the loss of life and property due to earthquakes in Tuscarawas County

Objective 5.1: To minimize the effects of seismic activity to life and property to include buildings, infrastructure, critical facilities and critical infrastructure in Tuscarawas County

Stabilize the Chesepeake insertion well near Village of Edwards Ridge Road Gnadenhutten 2017-2022 $50,000 Grants, existing budget 17 against minor-to- Mayor moderate magnitude earthquakes.

6.5.6 Dam Failure Mitigation Strategy Goal 6: To minimize the losses of life and property due to Dam Failure in Tuscarawas County Objective 6.1: To minimize the effects of dam failure to life, public and private property in Tuscarawas County

Dam Failure Mitigation Actions Lead Agency/ Implementation Estimated Priority Action Funding Source Department Schedule Cost Score

Goal 6: To minimize the losses of life and property due to dam failure in Tuscarawas County

Objective 6.1: To minimize the effects of dam failure to life, public and private property in Tuscarawas County

Coordinate with dam owners to ensure that Staff time their inundation Tuscarawas County Tuscarawas County EMA 2017-2022 and 19 mapping and response Commission Budget resources plans are being kept up to date

199

Make repairs to levee Village of Zoar Federal Government and near Village of Zoar Q1 2019- $12-15 Council, Army Muskingum Watershed 17 alongside the Army Q4 2020 million Corps of Engineers Conservancy District Corps of Engineers.

200

6.5.7 Natural Resource Extraction Mitigation Strategy Goal 7: To minimize the losses of life and property due to natural resource extraction in Tuscarawas County Objective 7.1: To minimize the impact of natural resource extraction to life and property to include buildings, infrastructure, critical facilities and critical infrastructure and natural environment

Natural Resource Extraction Mitigation Strategy Lead Agency/ Implementation Estimated Priority Action Funding Source Department Schedule Cost Score

Goal 7: To minimize the losses of life and property due to natural resource extraction in Tuscarawas County

Objective 7.1: To minimize the impact of natural resource extraction to life and property to include buildings, infrastructure, critical facilities and critical infrastructure and natural environment Develop a public education program that informs residents and businesses of the Tuscarawas County Q1 2019 – $500 Existing County Budget 20 County about the Commission Q4 2019 potential effects of Natural Resource Extraction

201

6.5.8 Severe Winter Weather Mitigation Strategy Goal 8: To minimize the loss of life and property due to severe winter weather in Tuscarawas County Objective 8.1: Develop a public education and outreach program about severe winter weather

Objective 8.2: To minimize the effects of winter storms to public and private property in Tuscarawas County

Severe Winter Storms Mitigation Actions Lead Agency/ Implementation Estimated Priority Action Funding Source Department Schedule Cost Score

Goal 8: To minimize the loss of life and property due to severe winter weather in Tuscarawas County

Objective 8.1: Develop a public education and outreach program about severe winter weather

Identify vulnerable populations from the impacts of severe winter storms by identifying Staff time Village of Parral specific at-risk 2017-2022 and Existing budget, grants 21 Mayor populations that may be resources vulnerable to winter storm-related power outages.

Objective 8.2: To minimize the effects of winter storms to public and private property in Tuscarawas County

Identify at-risk populations that may be Staff time Village of Stone exceptionally vulnerable 2017-2022 and Existing budget 21 Creek Mayor in the event of long resources term power outages Establish standards for all utilities regarding Village of Stone 2017-2022 $1,000 Existing budget 20 tree pruning around Creek Mayor power lines Establishing and promoting heating Staff time Village of Parral centers throughout the 2017-2022 and Existing budget, grants 19 Mayor community during resources winter storms. Planning for and Staff time maintaining adequate Village of Stone 2017-2022 and Existing budget 18 road and debris clearing Creek Mayor resources capabilities Acquire emergency generators for Tuscarawas County 2017-2022 $10,000 FEMA grants, existing budget 17 placement at critical Commission facilities

202

6.5.9 Extreme Temperature Mitigation Strategy Goal 9: Minimize the impact to people, property and infrastructure to extreme temperatures Objective 9.1: Develop a public education and outreach program about extreme temperatures

Extreme Temperatures Mitigation Actions Lead Agency/ Implementation Estimated Priority Action Funding Source Department Schedule Cost Score

Goal 9: Minimize the impact to people, property and infrastructure to extreme temperatures

Objective 9.1: Develop a public education and outreach program about extreme temperatures

Create a public education campaign that informs Bolivar Village homeowners that faucet Administrator, drip during cold weather Village of 2017-2022 $1,000 Grants 21 can prevent the buildup of Barnhill Mayor, excessive pressure in the Village of pipeline and avoid Midvale Council bursting. Use of a monthly newsletter thru Baltic Water Corp for public outreach. Pamphlets from Village of Baltic 2017-2018 $500 Baltic Water Corp 21 Swiss Valley Ambulance to Mayor’s Office increase awareness of physic effects of extreme temperatures. Educate residents of the risks and symptoms of extreme temperatures, and Village of raise awareness that the Mineral City 2017-2022 $500 Grants, Existing Budget 21 Mineral City FD is a heating Mayor or cooling station for residents during extreme temperatures. Purchase of generators to City of New serve as backup power for Philadelphia 2017-2022 $5,000 Grants, Existing Budget 18 heating and cooling center Mayor

203

6.5.10 Hazardous Material Incident Mitigation Strategy Goal 10: Minimize the impact to people, property, infrastructure and natural environment due to hazardous materials releases Objective 10.1: Develop a public education and outreach program for hazmat releases

Objective 10.2: Minimize the impact to people, property, infrastructure and the natural environment in the event of a hazmat spill

Hazardous Material Incident Mitigation Actions Lead Agency/ Implementation Estimated Priority Action Funding Source Department Schedule Cost Score Goal 11: Minimize the impact – land subsidence/abandoned wells

Objective 10.1: Develop a public education and outreach program for hazmat releases

Develop a public education campaign about what procedures Tuscarawas County Q1 2018 – $500 FEMA PDM Grants 20 to take if there is a large Commission Q4 2018 hazardous materials release. Objective 10.2: Minimize the impact to people, property, infrastructure and the natural environment in the event of a hazmat spill Hold a training for all jurisdictions and their emergency personnel to Tuscarawas County Q1 2018 – Individuals jurisdiction $10,000 19 improve hazardous Commission Q4 2018 budgets material incident response time

204

6.5.11 Land Subsidence/Abandoned Well Mitigation Strategy Goal 11: Minimize the impact – land subsidence/abandoned wells Objective 11.1: Public education and outreach program around land subsidence/abandoned wells

Objective 11.2: Minimize the impact to people, property, infrastructure and the natural environment in the event of land subsidence/abandoned wells

Severe Winter Storms Mitigation Actions Lead Agency/ Implementation Estimated Priority Action Funding Source Department Schedule Cost Score Goal 11: Minimize the impact – land subsidence/abandoned wells

Objective 11.1: Public education and outreach program around land subsidence/abandoned wells

Create a public education campaign detailing what to do and Tuscarawas County Q3 2018 – who to call should their $1,000 Ohio DNR Grants 19 Commission Q3 2019 home or business begin to experience damage due to mine collapse. Objective 11.2: Minimize the impact to people, property, infrastructure and the natural environment in the event of land subsidence/abandoned wells Repair damage to Village of Roswell Q2 2017- retaining walls within $25,000 Grants 17 Mayor Q2 2022 the Village of Roswell

205

Section 7. Plan Implementation and Maintenance As a living document it is important that this plan becomes a tool in Tuscarawas County resources to ensure reductions in possible damage from a natural hazard event. This section discusses plan adoption, implementation, monitoring, evaluating, and updating the HMP. Plan implementation and maintenance procedures will ensure that the HMP remains relevant and continues to address the changing environment in Tuscarawas County. This section describes the incorporation of the HMP into existing planning mechanisms, and how the staff will continue to engage the public. 7.1 Plan Adoption To comply with DMA 2000, Tuscarawas County and its jurisdictions have officially adopted the 2017 Tuscarawas County HMP. The adoption of the 2017 HMP recognizes the commitment to reducing the impacts of natural hazards within Tuscarawas County limits. A copy of the adoption resolutions are included in Appendix F. 7.2 Implementation Over time, Implementation Strategies will become more detailed and the mitigation planners will work to provide more detail for priority mitigation actions. In conjunction with progress report processes outlined in Section 7.4.2, implementation strategy worksheets provided in Appendix A, will be extremely useful as a plan of record tool for updates. Each implementation strategy worksheet provides individual steps and resources needed to complete each mitigation action. The following provides several options to consider when developing implementation strategies in the future:

. Use processes that already exist; initial strategy is to take advantage of tools and procedures identified in the capability assessment in Section 6. By using planning mechanisms already in use and familiar to departments and organizations, it will give the planning implementation phase a strong initial boost, especially if a mitigation strategy calls for expanding existing programs, or creating new programs or processes at a later date. Section 6 provides more information on existing planning mechanisms. . Updated work plans, policies, or procedures; hazard mitigation concepts and activities can help integrate the HMP into daily operations. These changes can include how major development projects and subdivision reviews are addressed in hazard prone areas or ensure that hazard mitigation concerns are considered in the approval of major capital improvement projects. . Job descriptions; working with department or agency heads to revise job descriptions of government staff to include mitigation-related duties could further institutionalize hazard mitigation. This change would not necessarily result in great financial expenditures or programmatic changes. The previous version of the plan was incorporated into County comprehensive planning to do buyouts along the Tuscarawas River in Dover. The plan was also incorporated into hospital emergency operations plans throughout the County, as it was decided they would use the hazards addressed in the mitigation plan to determine what posed a risk.

7.3 Evaluation, Monitoring, and Updating Monitoring, evaluating, and updating this plan is critical to maintaining its value and success in Tuscarawas County’s hazard mitigation efforts. Ensuring effective implementation of mitigation

206

activities paves the way for continued momentum in the planning process and gives direction for the future. This section explains who will be responsible for maintenance activities and what those responsibilities entail. It also provides a methodology and schedule of maintenance activities including a description of how the public will be involved on a continued basis.

The Tuscarawas County Mitigation Planning Committee established for this 2017 HMP is designated to lead plan maintenance processes of monitoring, evaluation, and updating with support and representation from all participating municipalities. The Mitigation Planning Committee will coordinate maintenance efforts, but the input needed for effective periodic evaluations will come from community representatives, local emergency management coordinators and planners, the general public, and other important stakeholders. Input from the public and these stakeholders will be sought by publishing public notices in the Times Reporter, as well as through the Tuscarawas EMA’s social media accounts. Notices will also be published in the EMA office. During the review process, the committee will serve in an advisory capacity to Tuscarawas County citizens and elected officials.

The Mitigation Planning Committee will oversee the progress made on the implementation of action items identified and modify actions, as needed, to reflect changing conditions. The Tuscarawas County Mitigation Planning Committee will meet annually to evaluate the plan and discuss specific coordination efforts that may be needed with participating jurisdictions and other stakeholders. The annual evaluation may include the participation of individual municipal monitors, or at least will include reports prepared by them.

The annual evaluation of the 2017 HMP will not only include an investigation of whether mitigation actions were completed, but also an assessment of how effective those actions were in mitigating losses. A review of the qualitative and quantitative benefits (or avoided losses) of mitigation activities will support this assessment. Results of the evaluation will then be compared to the goals and objectives established in the plan and decisions will be made regarding whether actions should be discontinued, or modified in any way in light of new developments in the community. Progress will be documented by the Mitigation Planning Committee for use in the next Hazard Mitigation Plan update. Finally, the Mitigation Planning Committee will monitor and incorporate elements of this Plan into other planning mechanisms. The annual reviews will be led by Patty Levengood, Director of the Tuscarawas County EMA.

This Plan will be updated by the FEMA approved five year anniversary date, as required by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, or following a disaster event. Future plan updates will account for any new hazard vulnerabilities, special circumstances, or new information that becomes available. During the five-year review process, the following questions will be considered as criteria for assessing the effectiveness of the Tuscarawas County Hazard Mitigation Plan.

 Has the nature or magnitude of hazards affecting the County changed?  Are there new hazards that have the potential to impact the County?  Do the identified goals and actions address current and expected conditions?  Have mitigation actions been implemented or completed?  Has the implementation of identified mitigation actions resulted in expected outcomes?  Are current resources adequate to implement the plan?  Should additional local resources be committed to address identified hazards?

207

Issues that arise during monitoring and evaluation which require changes to the local hazard, risk and vulnerability summary, mitigation strategy, and other components of the plan will be incorporated during future updates.

Update process for plan prior to 5-year update. Any interested party wishing for an update of this Plan sooner than the 5-year update will submit such a request to the Tuscarawas County EMA for consideration through Patty Levengood, Director of the Tuscarawas County EMA and the Mitigation Planning Committee. The request shall be accompanied by a detailed rationale. The EMA will evaluate all such requests and determine whether the update request should be acted upon. If the decision is in the affirmative, an assignment will be made for an individual to author the update. The draft updated section along with a detailed rationale will be submitted to the Tuscarawas County Mitigation Planning Committee. The committee will circulate the draft updated section of the plan for comment and after an appropriate period of time, the committee shall make a decision to update the plan at least partially based on the feedback received from the other jurisdiction. Municipal adoptions will then occur. 7.4 Plan Update and Maintenance This section describes the schedule and process for monitoring, evaluating, and updating the 2017 HMP.

7.4.1 Schedule Monitoring the progress of the mitigation actions will be on-going throughout the five-year period between the adoption of the HMP and the next update effort. The HMP Planning Committee will meet on an annual basis to monitor the status of the implementation of mitigation actions and develop updates as necessary.

The HMP will be updated every five years, as required by DMA 2000. The update process will begin at least one year prior to the expiration of the HMP. However, should a significant disaster occur within Tuscarawas County, the HMP Planning Committee will reconvene within 30 days of the disaster to review and update the HMP as appropriate.

7.4.2 Process The HMP Planning Committee will coordinate with responsible agencies/organizations identified for each mitigation action. These responsible agencies/organizations will monitor and evaluate the progress made on the implementation of mitigation actions and report to the HMP Planning Committee on an annual basis. Working with the HMP Planning Committee, these responsible agencies/organizations will be asked to assess the effectiveness of the mitigation actions and modify the mitigation actions as appropriate. A HMP Mitigation Action Progress Report worksheet, provided in Appendix A, developed as part of this HMP to assist mitigation project managers in reporting on the status and assessing the effectiveness of the mitigation actions.

Information culled from the mitigation leads or “champions” will be used to monitor mitigation actions and annual evaluation of the HMP. The following questions will be considered as criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of the HMP:

. Has the nature or magnitude of hazards affecting the community changed? . Are there new hazards that have the potential to impact the community? . Do the identified goals and actions address current and expected conditions? . Have mitigation actions been implemented or completed? . Has the implementation of identified mitigation actions resulted in expected outcomes? . Are current resources adequate to implement the HMP?

208

. Should additional local resources be committed to address identified hazards?

A HMP Annual Review form, provided in Appendix A, has been developed as part of this HMP to provide guidance to the HMP Planning Committee on what should be included in the evaluation. Future updates to the HMP will account for any new hazard vulnerabilities, special circumstances, or new information that becomes available. Issues that arise during monitoring and evaluating the HMP, which require changes to the risk assessment, mitigation strategy, and other components of the HMP, will be incorporated into the next update of the HMP. The questions identified above would remain valid during the preparation of the update. 7.5 Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms An important implementation mechanism is to incorporate the recommendation and underlying principles of the HMP into community planning and development such as capital improvement budgeting, building and zoning codes, general plans, and regional plans. Mitigation is most successful when it is incorporated within the day-to-day functions and priorities of the jurisdiction attempting to implement risk reducing actions. The integration of a variety of departments on the HMP Planning Committee provides an opportunity for constant and pervasive efforts to network, identify, and highlight mitigation activities and opportunities at all levels of government. This collaborative effort is also important to monitor funding opportunities which can be leveraged to implement the mitigation actions. HMP mitigation planners will actively incorporate information into:

. Building / Development Codes and Zoning Ordinances: The HMP will provide information to enable Tuscarawas County and its jurisdictions to make decisions on appropriate building/development codes and ordinances where applicable. Appropriate building codes and ordinances can increase resilience against natural disasters. . Tuscarawas County Comprehensive Plan: The HMP will provide information that can be incorporated into the Land Use Element during the next general plan update. Specific risk and vulnerability information from the Tuscarawas County HMP will assist to identify areas where development may be at risk to potential hazards. . Tuscarawas County Emergency Operations Plan (EOP): The HMP highlights hazards that the County and its jurisdictions are vulnerable to. This information would be valuable to include in future updates to the EOP.

The County’s process to integrate the data, information, and hazard mitigation goals and actions in other planning mechanisms is accomplished through select members on the Mitigation Planning Committee. These members from Mitigation Planning Committee include, but are not limited to:  County Commissioners  Tuscarawas County Homeland and Emergency Management Agency  Floodplain Administrators (County and jurisdictions)  County Engineer’s Office  County Geographic Information System Staff

These Committee Members take information to their respective organizations that are charged with the development, maintenance, and on occasion, enforcement of rules, regulations, codes, ordinances, policies, plans, procedures, and other administrative instruments. Information from the mitigation planning effort is presented to the leadership of these organizations, who then authorize the information to be added, to revise or update current administrative instruments. This allows for oversight, commitment of time, energy, and resources to change actions into projects.

209

Although the jurisdictions do not have as many representatives to serve on the Committee, their representatives follow the same processes as those at County level.

210