Cedar County Appendix Cedar County ...... 3 Village of Coleridge ...... 39 Village of Fordyce...... 55 City of Hartington ...... 69 Village of Magnet ...... 89 Village of Obert ...... 103 Village of St. Helena ...... 117 Village of Wynot ...... 133 Hartington - Newcastle Public Schools...... 147 Laurel - Concord - Coleridge Public Schools ...... 159 Hartington Fire Department (includes Fordyce Fire Department) ...... 169 Randolph Volunteer Fire District ...... 177
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 1
This Page is Intentionally Blank
2 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 COUNTY PROFILE
CEDAR COUNTY
Cedar and Dixon Counties Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
2021
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 3 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
Local Planning Team
Table CRC.1: Cedar County Local Planning Team NAME TITLE JURISDICTION KEVIN GARVIN Emergency Manager Cedar County CARLA SCHMIDT County Highway Superintendent Cedar County DAVID MCGREGGOR County Board Chair Cedar County
Location, Geography, and Climate Cedar County is located in northeast Nebraska and is bordered by Knox, Pierce, Wayne, and Dixon Counties in Nebraska, and Yankton and Clay Counties in South Dakota. The total area of Cedar County is 746 square miles. Major waterways within the county include the Missouri River, which forms the northern boundary of the county, Bow Creek, Beaver Creek, Logan Creek, and Pearl Creek.
Climate For Cedar County, the normal high temperature for the month of July is 84.8 degrees Fahrenheit. The normal low temperature for the month of January is 10.3 degrees Fahrenheit. On average, the county gets 28.15 inches of rain and 33.3 inches of snowfall per year. The following table compares these climate indicators with those of the entire state. Climate data are helpful in determining if certain events are higher or lower than normal. For example, if the high temperatures in the month of July are running well into the 90s, then this indicates extreme heat events, which could impact vulnerable populations.
Table CRC.2: Cedar County Climate Normals CEDAR COUNTY STATE OF NEBRASKA JULY NORMAL HIGH TEMP 84.8°F 88.0°F JANUARY NORMAL LOW TEMP 10.3°F 12.0°F ANNUAL NORMAL PRECIPITATION 28.15” 30.3” ANNUAL NORMAL SNOWFALL 33.3” 25.9” Source: NCEI 1981-2010 Climate Normals1, High Plains Regional Climate Center, 1981-2010 Precipitation includes all rain and melted snow and ice.
Transportation Cedar County’s major transportation corridors include U.S. Highways 20 and 81, and Nebraska Highways 12, 84, 57, and 59. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad has a rail line that travels through the southern portion of the county. There is an airport located just southeast of Hartington. The planning team indicated that Highways 20, 81, 84, 57, and 898th Road are the transportation routes of top concern for the county. The highways carry the most traffic and are where the most accidents occur. These highways lead in and out of the county and are the routes in which hazardous materials are primarily transported. The planning team stated that chemicals such as diesel fuel, gasoline, ethanol, and farm fertilizers are known to be transported throughout the county.
898th Road is a gravel county road but is still considered a major artery for the county, as it is the primary road that leads to the Yankton, South Dakota area (apart from the highway). It is also used by a nearby feed yard that uses the road to get cattle trucks to their facility. There are critical
1 National Centers for Environmental Information. “1981-2010 U.S. Climate Normals.” Accessed December 2019. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datatools.
4 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
facilities located along main transportation routes in Cedar County. These include the Cedar County Courthouse in Hartington (adjacent to HWY 84), the Hartington Fire & EMS Station (adjacent to Highway 84), and the Discovery Bridge (North Highway 81). Transportation information is important to hazard mitigation plans as it suggests possible evacuation corridors in the county, as well as areas more at risk to transportation incidents.
The planning team noted that there have been several transportation events that occurred within the county. A BNSF train derailment near Belden in 2018 caused traffic issues along a section of Highway 20 for over a week. Other incidents resulted in hazardous materials being released. During a severe thunderstorm in Randolph, a vehicle rolled down a hill onto Highway 20 and struck a passing semi-trailer, puncturing the diesel fuel tank which caused fuel to leak into a nearby storm drain. Another incident resulted in a chemical spill when a speeding driver drove a motor vehicle into an oncoming fertilizer truck near the junction of Highways 84 and 81. Fertilizer and diesel fuel were spilled as a result, threatening nearby wetlands and a creek.
The flooding event of 2019 disrupted many critical transportation routes for multiple days, causing several bridges and roads to be impassable. County residents had to find alternate routes via county roads, further impacting the local transportation system and requiring extra maintenance. A bridge washout on Highway 121 affected residents who commute to Yankton, South Dakota for work. The bridge was impassable by car, so an extra vehicle or ATV had to be parked on the other side to complete their trip. Heavy rain and fog at the outset of the flood event resulted in a vehicle being driven into a washout approximately 15 feet deep on 564th Avenue where the bridge approach had previously been.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 5 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure CRC.1: Cedar County
6 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
Demographics The following figure displays the historical population trend from 1860 to 2017. This figure indicates that the population of Cedar County has been decreasing since 1930. This is notable for hazard mitigation for several important reasons. First, communities with declining population may have a higher level of unoccupied housing that is not being up kept. Secondly, areas with declining population will be less prone to pursuing residential/commercial development in their areas, which may reduce the number of structures vulnerable to hazards in the future. Finally, decreasing populations can also represent decreasing tax revenue for the county which could make implementation of mitigation actions more fiscally challenging.
Figure CRC.2: Population 1860 – 2017
18,000 16,225 16,427 16,000 15,191 15,126 13,843 14,000 12,467 12,192 12,000 13,368 10,131 10,000 11,375 8,852 9,615 8,000 7,028
8,561 Population 6,000 4,000 2,899 2,000 1,032 246 0
Year
Source: U.S. Census Bureau2
The following table indicates the State of Nebraska has a higher percentage of people under the age of 5 than Cedar County. However, Cedar County has a higher percentage of residents over 64. This is relevant to hazard mitigation insofar as the very young and elderly populations may be at greater risk from certain hazards than others. For a more elaborate discussion of this vulnerability, please see Section Four: Risk Assessment.
Table CRC.3: Population by Age AGE CEDAR COUNTY STATE OF NEBRASKA <5 6.5% 6.9% 5-64 72.5% 78.3% >64 21% 14.7% MEDIAN 44.1 36.3 Source: U.S. Census Bureau3
The following table indicates that median household income is slightly higher when compared to the State of Nebraska. Per capita income, median home value, and median rent are all lower than the rest of the state. These economic indicators are relevant to hazard mitigation because they
2 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 3 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 7 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE indicate the relative economic strength compared to the state as a whole. Areas with relatively low economic indicators may influence a county’s level of resiliency during hazardous events.
Table CRC.4: Housing and Income CEDAR COUNTY STATE OF NEBRASKA MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME $57,208 $56,675 PER CAPITA INCOME $29,694 $29,866 MEDIAN HOME VALUE $113,600 $142,400 MEDIAN RENT $621 $773 Source: U.S. Census Bureau4,5
The following figure indicates that the majority of the housing in Cedar County was built prior to 1970 (61.7 percent). According to 2017 ACS 5-year estimates, the county has 4,138 housing units with 85.0 percent of those units occupied. There are approximately 151 mobile homes in the county, but none are located within an organized mobile home park, according to the local planning team. Some mobile homes are used as recreational/seasonal cabins along the Missouri River. Some of these cabin areas include Haberman Resort and the Six Pack, to name a couple. Housing age can serve as an indicator of risk as structures built prior to state building codes may be at greater risk. Finally, residents that live in mobile homes may be more vulnerable to the impacts of high winds, tornadoes, and severe winter storms.
Figure CRC.3: Housing Units by Year Built
Built 1939 or earlier 1,453
Built 1940 to 1949 306
Built 1950 to 1959 352
Built 1960 to 1969 443
Built 1970 to 1979 587
Built 1980 to 1989 339
Built 1990 to 1999 328
Built 2000 to 2009 264
Built 2010 to 2013 53
Built 2014 or later 13
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Source: U.S. Census Bureau6
4 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 5 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 6 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/.
8 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
Table CRC.5: Housing Units JURISDICTION TOTAL HOUSING UNITS OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS
Occupied Vacant Owner Renter
Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
CEDAR COUNTY 3,508 84.8% 630 15.2% 2,830 80.7% 678 19.3%
NEBRASKA 748,405 90.8% 75,771 9.2% 494,189 66.0% 254,216 34.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau7
Major Employers According to 2012 Census Data, Cedar County had 303 business establishments. The following table presents the number of establishments, number of paid employees, and the annual payroll in thousands of dollars. This information is relevant to hazard mitigation insofar as it indicates the diversification of industry. Communities which have a diverse economic makeup may be more resilient following a hazardous event, especially if certain industries are more impacted than others.
Table CRC.6: Business in Cedar County TOTAL NUMBER OF PAID ANNUAL PAYROLL BUSINESSES EMPLOYEES (IN THOUSANDS) TOTAL FOR ALL 303 1,888 $64,405 SECTORS Source: U.S Census Bureau8
Agriculture is important to the economic fabric of Cedar County, and the state of Nebraska as a whole. Cedar County’s 784 farms cover 473,500 acres of land. Crop and livestock production are the visible parts of the agricultural economy, but many related businesses contribute as well. Related business contributions include producing, processing, and marketing farm and food products. These businesses generate income, employment, and economic activity throughout the region.
Table CRC.7: Cedar County Agricultural Inventory CEDAR COUNTY AGRICULTURAL INVENTORY NUMBER OF FARMS 784 LAND IN FARMS 473,500 acres Source: USDA 2017 Census of Agriculture9
7 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 8 United States Census Bureau. “2016 American Fact Finder: Geography Area Series County Business Patterns 2015 Business Patterns.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 9 United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Server. 2019. “2017 Census of Agriculture – County Data.” https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/AgCensus/2017/index.php.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 9 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
Future Development Trends Cedar County has seen recent housing development take place in places such as the cities of Hartington and Laurel. The Village of Wynot has experienced growth with the remodeling of several old structures and construction of a new fire station, an addition to the school, and a few new homes. 882nd Rd near Hartington was recently improved from gravel to pavement for the half-mile it runs parallel to Hartington city limits. The Agrex facility in Laurel was recently sold to Central Valley Ag.
The county has not been officially mapped for floods, so a formal floodplain designation does not yet exist in the unincorporated areas of the county. However, based on recent historical occurrence, there has been one new residential structure built in an area with a history of flooding.
According to census data, Cedar County’s population is declining slightly. The local planning team attributes this to several factors such as: the lower availability of jobs with higher wages and benefits, the lower availability of jobs in specific career fields, the lack of housing in some areas and the low availability of small rural acreages, the state tax structure, the lower amount of amenities, and smaller families compared to the past.
There is some housing development planned for the next five years within the county. The City of Laurel is in the midst of a feasibility study for a new housing development. The Village of Wynot has a housing development in the works, and there were two new developments recently announced on the edge of Hartington.
The planning team was not aware of any new businesses or industries coming to the county directly but indicated that wind energy has seen a boom in nearby counties and near the county border. This has been leading to some economic benefit from construction crews living in Cedar County during the construction phase of the wind turbines.
Structural Inventory and Valuation GIS parcel data as of December 2019 was requested from GIS Workshop, which the county hires to manage the County Assessor data. This data was analyzed for the location, number, and value of property improvements at the parcel level. The data did not contain the number of structures on each parcel. A summary of the results of this analysis is provided in the following table.
Table CRC.8: Cedar County Parcel Valuation TOTAL NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE OF VALUE OF NUMBER OF IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS VALUE IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN 4,663 $451,677,712 975 20.9% $112,646,262 Source: GIS Workshop/County Assessor, 201910 Critical Infrastructure/Key Resources Hazardous Materials Chemical Storage Fixed Sites According to the Tier II System reports submitted to the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, there are 24 chemical storage sites throughout Cedar County which house hazardous materials. However, only six are located in unincorporated Cedar County, as shown in
10 GIS Workshop/Cedar County Assessor. 2019. [Personal correspondence].
10 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
Table CRC.9. For a description of chemical sites located in incorporated areas, please see the jurisdiction’s participant section.
Table CRC.9: Chemical Storage Fixed Sites FACILITY NAME ADDRESS CENTRAL VALLEY AG 56356 891 Rd, Hartington, NE 68739 GAVINS POINT DAM 55245 Highway 121, Crofton, NE 68730 GERHOLD CONCRETE CO 88475 Highway 57, Hartington, NE 68739 NDOT CROFTON YARD 55268 Highway 12, Crofton, NE 68730 NDOT HIGHWAY 57/12 SATELLITE Jct Highways 57 & 12, Hartington, NE 68739 TRANSCANADA KEYSTONE PIPELINE 55953 883 Rd, Hartington, NE 68739 *NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS 56603 875th Rd, Coleridge, NE *NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS 86952 573rd Ave Laurel NE *FARMERS PRIDE LAUREL 302 Highway 20 N Laurel, NE *NDOT LAUREL YARD 214 Highway 20 N, Laurel NE *NDOT HARTINGTON YARD 215 Industrial RD, Hartington, NE *BUTCH’S PROPANE 103 Nebraska St, Obert, NE *FORDYCE NON-STOCK FARMERS COOP 113 Main St, Fordyce, NE *CENTRAL VALLEY AG 607 N Robinson Ave, Hartington, NE *JERRY’S SERVICE 608 N Robinson Ave, Hartington, NE *HEFNER OIL 202 E Broadway St, Coleridge, NE 200 Power Plant Road, Crofton, NE (rural *GAVINS POINT DAM Cedar County) Source: Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy11 *Additional storage sites provided by local planning team.
Critical Facilities The local planning team identified critical facilities necessary for Newcastle per FEMA’s Community Lifelines. Critical facilities were identified during the 2016 planning process and revised for this plan update. The following table and figure provide a summary of the critical facilities for the jurisdiction.
Table CRC.10: Critical Facilities SHORT- CF TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN TYPE NAME ADDRESS # SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) Food, Water, and NRD Water Cedar 1 N/A N N Shelter Tank County Discovery Cedar 2 Transportation N/A N/A Y Bridge County Safety and Cedar County Cedar 3 Y Y N Security Courthouse County County Radio Cedar 4 Communications N/A Y N Tower County Park County Road 5 Transportation Avenue, N N N Department Coleridge
11 Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy. “Search Tier II Data.” Accessed June 2020. https://deq-iis.ne.gov/tier2/search.faces.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 11 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
SHORT- CF TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN TYPE NAME ADDRESS # SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) Laurel Water Tower and 708 Oak 6 Communications N/A Y N Communicati St, Laurel ons Randolph Water Tower 205 W 7 Communications and Hughson, N/A Y N Communicati Randolph ons Coleridge 328 Water Tower Tower 8 Communications and N/A Y N Rd, Communicati Coleridge ons Food, Water, Bow Valley 202 Fred 9 N N/A N and Shelter Water Tank St Gavin’s Point 55246 10 Communications N N N Tower Hwy 121 207 ST 11 Communications Wynot Tower James N N N Ave Laurel Road 401 E 2nd 12 Transportation N N N Shop St Randolph 106 E 13 Transportation N N Y Road Shop HWY 20 Hartington 88179 14 Transportation N N N Road Shop HWY 57 Wynot Road 56830 15 Transportation N N N Shop 891st RD Menominee 55760 16 Transportation N N N Road Shop 894th RD Laurel City 101 Elm 17 Energy Y Y N Light Plant St Food, Water, Bow Valley 56495 18 N N N and Shelter Dance Hall 889th RD St. Helena 89878 19 Transportation N N Y Boat Dock 563rd Ave Brooky 89248 20 Transportation Bottom Boat N N Y 572nd Ave Dock Brooky Safety and 89268 21 Bottom N/A N N Security 572nd Ave Warning Siren Belden Sub 86902 22 Energy N/A N N Station HWY 57
12 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure CRC.5: Critical Facilities and Flood Risk Area
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 13 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
Historical Occurrences The following table provides a statistical summary for hazards that have occurred in the county. The property damages from the NCEI Storm Events Database (January 1996 – December 2019) should be considered only as broad estimates.
Table CRC.11: County Hazard Loss History Hazard Type Count Property Crop2 Agricultural Animal Disease1 20 63 N/A Disease Plant Disease2 18 N/A $135,681 Chemical Fixed Site Spills3 7 $0 N/A Chemical Transportation Spills4 0 $0 N/A Dam Failure5,6 0 $0 N/A 364/1,504 Drought7,8 $0 $74,961,279 months Earthquake9 0 $0 N/A Extreme Heat10 Avg 4 days/year $0 $13,521,702 Flash Flood 11 $400,000 Flooding8 $527,994 Flood 10 $1,041,000 High Winds 19 $25,000 $1,375,552 High Winds and 8 Tornadoes Tornadoes 16 $6,100,000 $693,178 1 fatality, 1 injury Landslides11 8 $65,000 N/A Levee Failure12 N/A N/A N/A 2 pandemic Public Health Emergency N/A N/A events Hail 182 $0 $11,481,400 Severe Heavy Rain 2 $0 $3,666,424 Thunderstorms8 Lightning 2 $105,000 N/A Thunderstorm Wind 106 $320,000 N/A Blizzard 13 $0 Extreme Cold/Wind 9 $0 Chill Severe Winter Heavy Snow 11 $0 $521,081 Storms8 Ice Storm 1 $0 Winter Storm 43 $0 Winter Weather 8 $0 Terrorism13 0 $0 N/A Urban Fire14 584 Unknown N/A Wildfires15 – 1 injury 109 $27,685 $17,376
N/A: Data not available 8 – NCEI, 1996 – 2019 1 - NDA, 2014 – 2019 9 – USGS, 1900 – June 2020 2 - USDA RMA, 2000 – 2019 10 – NOAA Regional Climate Center, 1893 – May 2020 3 - NRC, 1990 – February 2020 11 – UNL (1960-2014) 4 - PHSMA, 1971 – Jan 2020 12 – USACE NLN, 1900 – 2019 5 - Stanford NPDP, 1890 – 2018 13 – University of Maryland, 1970 – 2018 6 – ADSO, 2010-2020 14 – Nebraska State Fire Marshal’s Office, 2007-2017 7 - NOAA, 1895 – May 2020 15 – NFS, 2000 – 2020
14 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
The following table provides a summary of hazards that have or have the potential to affect each jurisdiction in Cedar County. Each jurisdiction was evaluated for previous hazard occurrence and the probability of future hazard events on each of the hazards profiled in this plan. The evaluation process was based on data collected and summarized in Table CRC.11; previous impacts or the potential for impacts to infrastructure, critical facilities, people, and the economy; and the proximity to certain hazards such as dams and levees. For example, while there have not been instances of dam failure in the County, there exists a possibility for a dam to fail in the future due to the presence of dams in the County.
Table CRC.12: Cedar County and Community Hazard Matrix
-
–
EAT
H
Severe
Storms
Wildfire
Drought
Flooding
Terrorism
Fixed Site Fixed
Urban Fire Urban
Chemical
Tornadoes
Landslides XTREME XTREME
Chemical
Emergency
Ag.Disease
Dam Failure Dam
Earthquakes
Public Health Public
Levee Failure Levee
High Winds &
E
SevereWinter
Thunderstorm Transportation
Cedar County X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Village of Coleridge X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Village of Fordyce X X X X X X X X X X X X X
City of Hartington X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Village of Magnet X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Village of Obert X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Village of Saint Helena X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Village of Wynot X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Hartington-Newcastle Schools X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Laurel-Concord-Coleridge Schools X X X X X X X X X X X X X Hartington-Fordyce Fire X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Departments Randolph Fire Department X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 15 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
County Hazard Prioritization For an in-depth discussion regarding area wide hazards, please see Section Four: Risk Assessment. The hazards discussed in detail below were either identified in the previous HMP and determined to still be of top concern or were added by the local planning team based on the identification of hazards of greatest concern, hazard history, and the jurisdiction’s capabilities.
Agricultural Plant and Animal Disease The local planning team identified agricultural plant and animal disease as a hazard of top concern due to both historical occurrences and recent events. In 2010 a minor outbreak of Bovine TB was discovered in Cedar County, and in 2015, Avian Influenza was discovered in Dixon and Knox Counties, devastating poultry production facilities and backyard poultry operations. With Cedar and Dixon Counties’ economies based largely upon the success of the agricultural industry within those counties, any pathogen affecting plants or animals that causes widespread damage will cause severe economic impact to the area.
The planning team noted that a swine flu was beginning to circulate in China in 2020, and it is thought that the disease can pass from animal to animal. If this makes it to the USA, Cedar County could be highly impacted as it has several hog confinements. The closest auctions to house large concentrations of livestock outside of farms are located in Creighton, NE in Knox County and Yankton, SD. Currently, the Nebraska Department of Agriculture maintains plans for responding and managing animal disease outbreaks, and they also provide educational materials and programs.
Chemical Spills (Fixed Site and Transportation) Chemical spills from both fixed sites and transportation are hazards of concern as identified by the local planning team. The main concern regarding chemical fixed sites in Cedar County is the quantity of the products stored and their proximity to the population. Often these factors are unknown. There have been two chemical spills that have occurred, but no reported damages. There are vulnerable populations located near the chemical fixed sites. The Arbor Care Long Term Care Facility in Hartington as well as a school are within one and half miles of a chemical storage facility.
According to PHMSA since 1970, there has not been a reported chemical spill as a result of transportation or during the loading and unloading of materials in the county. However, chemicals are regularly transported along major transportation routes, and the type and quantity of materials is unknown. The local planning team indicated that there have been chemical spills within the county in recent history. A traffic crash resulted in spilled diesel fuel and/or fertilizer, which threatened a waterway and wetlands. Another incident occurred when a pickup struck the diesel tanks on a tractor-trailer near Randolph resulting in diesel flowing near a storm drain during a thunderstorm. Near Laurel a traffic accident resulted in a tractor trailer leaking a small amount of agricultural fertilizer onto the highway. A traffic accident at the south edge of the Discovery bridge resulted in the release of several gallons of diesel fuel that threatened to be discharged into the Missouri River (it was contained before it got to the river).
There are several critical facilities located near highly trafficked roads that may be transporting chemicals including: the Cedar County Courthouse in Hartington (adjacent to HWY 84), the Hartington Fire & EMS Station (adjacent to Highway 84), Hartington-Newcastle Public School is near Hartington Airport, Discovery Bridge (North Highway 81), the Laurel Airport is near a K-12 school and located near HWY 15E, the Laurel school and sports complex is located near the intersection of Highways 20 and 15, Randolph Junior-Senior High School is adjacent to Highway
16 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
20 and BNSF railroad, and the Obert Village Offices are also located near a high trafficked road in Obert.
Residents in the county are not educated about the threats of the nearby chemical storage facilities and the proper response in the event of a spill. The local responders have minimal, if any, training in Hazardous Materials Response. However, the local responders have structural turnout gear and self-contained breathing apparatuses. Coleridge Fire has a Hazmat Decontamination unit, but no responders are certified to operate it. The nearest Hazmat Team that would respond to events is located in Norfolk, Nebraska. The planning team noted that public education and outreach are planned to reduce risk and impact to this hazard. The team indicated that hazardous materials training and basic hazardous materials equipment are needed in the future to prevent further damage until the Hazmat team can respond.
Dam Failure The main concerns regarding dam failure are the design of the dams and how they keep up with future weather trends, future municipal growth and development, and future changes in the terrain. Emergency housing is available for displaced residents, but it is limited and temporary. In the event of a dam failure, the likely impacts would be significant flooding in Hartington and Laurel where high hazard dams are located. Gavins Point Dam, the third high hazard dam in Cedar County, would impact rural populated portions of the county along the Missouri River. The resultant flooding from a dam failure in Hartington or Laurel would likely lead to significant damage and significant economic loss. There are 14 dams in Cedar County, and of these dams, three have been identified as high hazard dams. The county experienced a 500-year flood event in 2019 and record flooding along the Missouri river in 2011, with both events causing extensive damage and significant concerns. In 2011 USACE flowed 163,000 CFS from Gavins Point Dam, which is the maximum amount before the county begins flooding. The high hazard dams held during the 2019 flooding and there were no problems associated with them. There are additional high hazard dams located upstream from Gavins Point Dam on the Missouri River that could impact Cedar County were they to fail. These are listed in Section Four: Dam Failure.
There are a couple projects currently planned to reduce the county’s risk to this hazard. The Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy is in the process of creating flood maps to be approved by FEMA for much of Cedar County. The City of Laurel is planning improvements to the downtown area to revitalize downtown and improve storm water runoff that currently travels along the curbs through downtown. Projects identified by the planning team as being need in the future include new culverts, hydrologic and hydraulic studies, flood mapping, and drainage improvement.
Table CRC.13: Dams in Cedar County NUMBER OF LOW SIGNIFICANT HIGH DAMS CEDAR COUNTY 14 10 1 3 PLANNING AREA 59 46 9 4* Source: USACE National Inventory of Dams, NeDNR *Bloomfield Dam failed in 2016 and is not included in the USACE NID.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 17 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
Table CRC.14: High Hazard Dams in Cedar County NIDID DAM NAME LOCATION STREAM NAME OWNER Trib-Norwegian NE09968 Hartington Dam Hartington City of Hartington Creek Trib-Middle Logan NE02394 Laurel Norris Dam Laurel City of Laurel Creek SD01094 Gavins Point Dam Yankton, SD Missouri River US Army Corps Source: USACE National Inventory of Dams, NeDNR Flooding There have been several significant flooding events in the past. A widespread flood in 1996 inundated roads and damaged roadways and some private homes. The flood of 2011 on the Missouri River and the resulting record releases from Gavins Point Dam caused panic among residents close to the river. This led to widespread sandbagging operations in areas that were ultimately not affected by the flood. The 2011 flood did erode some bank areas and caused some seasonal cabins and outbuildings to fall into the river. The flood waters did flood some crop land and caused it to be unproductive for a couple of years following the flood. The Missouri River was closed to all boat traffic from Memorial Day through Labor Day, causing economic loss and a reduction in those who frequent the county on weekends for recreation. In 2015, Cedar County had highway closures twice due to water over the road, as well as damage caused to the BNSF railroad.
2019 flooding closed Highway 20 for several days and washout out the majority of the BNSF railroad from Belden to Randolph. The City of Laurel flooded from Logan Creek, south of the Agrex/CVA facility and caused significant damage to private residences. An electrical substation for the City of Hartington was affected by the floodwaters as well. The flooding cut off access to Hartington from the North (Highway 57) and cut off residents living in the Becker addition of Hartington from the rest of the city. Emergency services could not travel north for multiple days, making the closest emergency services fifteen miles away for that area of the city.
Other impacts of the 2019 flood include an injured motorist, stranded high school students who could not get back home from a district speech meet, and negative economic impacts. The City of Randolph experienced historic repeated flooding both in the rural area surrounding the town and within the town itself causing residents living near the flood plain to be evacuated for about five or six hours.
Cedar County is not a member of the NFIP, and there are no repetitive flood loss properties in unincorporated areas of Cedar County. The county has chosen to not participate in the NFIP due to a lack of public support at this time. Figure CRC.7 shows the flood risk area as developed by the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources. Currently, there is no SFHA delineated in the form of a FIRM for Cedar County. The main concern regarding flooding in the county is the associated erosion of riverbanks and large stream banks which would threaten Rural Water delivery lines, bridges, and roadways. The planning team indicated that several projects are needed in the future to mitigate risk and impacts from this hazard. These include the completion of hydrologic & hydraulic studies, adding culverts, acquiring type III barricades and warning devices, cleaning out ditches/culverts, purchasing more sand and sandbags, implementing zoning regulations to prevent from building in high hazard flood prone areas.
18 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure CRC.6: Cedar County Dam Locations
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 19 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
Landslides Landslides were identified as a hazard of concern for the county by the local planning team due to previous occurrences that caused damages. The primary concerns are road closures and safe travel on rural roads. The University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL) School of Natural Resources has a landslides database called “Landslides in Nebraska”. The database has not been updated or maintained in several years. However, the research team identified seven landslides across the county and are outlined in the database. Cedar County Emergency Management identified one additional landslide that occurred in June 2014. The additional landslide occurred in northern Cedar County on 894 Road after a section of the road slid off due to heavy rains. Total damages were estimated at $65,000.
The local planning team pointed out other landslides that have happened in recent years. In 2014, Logan Creek along 870th Road flooded the roadway. The floodwaters caused landslide effects on the creek bank, eroding some of the roadway used by semi-truck traffic entering and exiting the (then) Agrex grain elevator facility near Laurel. The floods of 2019 caused even more erosion and landslide conditions before the prior damage could be repaired to FEMA specifications. In 2018 a landslide event occurred at the intersection of 881 Road and 575th Avenue, causing three sides of the intersection to fail. This event closed the intersection and required it to be completely reconstructed. This impacted many of the area farmers who normally use the road to move their goods to market. Large farm machinery was forced onto alternate routes that were not suited for that type of traffic. A 2019 landslide event occurred on 892 Road near 571st Avenue which reduced the roadway to one lane. The landslide continues into 2020 as a periodic event and requires regular cleanup. It blocks residents from their housing development if not addressed soon enough. The planning team noted that landslides over the years have also impacted potential evacuation routes in areas along the Missouri River, near the Brooky Bottom development.
The planning team indicated a couple projects that are currently planned for the county. These include the annual cleanup of the 892 Road landslide area and repairing 870 Road near Laurel. Projects identified as being needed in the future include zoning regulations that prevent (or improve) construction in areas prone to landslides, bank stabilization along prone areas, drainage improvements, ditch cleanup, and scour water away from bridges.
Public Health Emergency The planning team identified public health emergency as a hazard of top concern due to recent historical events. In 2009 H1N1 circulated in Nebraska prompting public health districts to hold mass vaccination clinics to try and slow the outbreak. More recently, in the fall of 2019 Cedar County experienced an outbreak of the mumps and under CDC guidance a mass vaccination clinic was opened in Cedar County to slow or stop the outbreak. In the summer of 2020, there were 35 cases of mumps in Cedar County alone.
In March 2020 COVID-19 struck Nebraska; as of September 2020, Cedar County had 21 confirmed cases. The local economy has suffered during the pandemic, and many businesses were closed for at least two months. Even when they reopened, people were less likely to be out shopping or visiting local shops, which led to lost revenue. At least one business in Hartington is known to have closed permanently due to economic hardships. Local schools were also impacted and forced to transition to distance learning for the last three months of the school year. Many schools have reported staffing shortages or had to revert back to distance learning for a period of time due to outbreaks. The Northeast Nebraska Public Health Department in conjunction with the Nebraska DHHS are leading the effort against COVID-19 and providing educational materials.
20 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
Severe Thunderstorms Severe thunderstorms are a part of the natural climate across the region, and the combination of heavy rain, high winds, lightning, and hail can cause significant impacts to the county. The main concern regarding severe thunderstorms is the ability of those outdoors to receive timely warning and seek shelter in appropriate places. There have been several significant events that have occurred in the past. Severe thunderstorms have caused property damages as a result of heavy rain, large hail, or straight-line winds. On occasion, power gets disrupted, and roads have to be closed.
In June 2014, severe thunderstorms produced six tornadoes causing extensive damage across the county. In June 2015, a severe thunderstorm produced over three inches of rain in less than one hour, washing corn stalks out of fields, plugging drainage devices, and forcing water over main roadways. In June and July 2015, several thunderstorms dropped heavy rain in localized areas within the county over a short period of time when conditions were already saturated. In 2020 a severe thunderstorm with straight-line winds and hail damaged crops and a house in rural areas near Coleridge, Randolph, and Belden. Another severe thunderstorm in May 2020 dropped a narrow path of large hail, damaging crops and overturning a center pivot northwest of Hartington.
The planning team does have any projects currently planned to reduce impacts from this hazard but indicated projects that are needed in the future. These include updating outdoor warning sirens; updating indoor warning sirens for large facilities, such as schools and sports complexes; implementing reverse messaging or emergency alert notification systems; building safe rooms at critical facilities; installing redundant/backup equipment for critical communications including repeaters, antennas, cables, portables towers, etc.; and installing generators at critical facilities.
Severe Winter Storms Severe winter storms are a natural and regular occurrence for the region, which can cause significant impacts. The last significant event that occurred locally was the blizzard of 2009 that dropped almost twenty inches of snow, accompanied by sustained high winds over the Christmas holiday for several days. Roads were completely blocked, and travel was at a standstill. Many roads were only cleared to one lane making travel very dangerous for two to three weeks. People were calling 911 when they got stuck, falsely reporting injuries so emergency snow removal would occur and they could again travel. Many reported being caught out in snow storms without sufficient protective gear, such as coats, because the weather was nice when they had left home that morning. Additionally, farmers had difficulty getting feed to their livestock. To date, there have not been structural damages to critical facilities from severe winter storms.
The main concerns regarding severe winter storms in the county are the ability for motorists to seek shelter during surprise winter blizzards/storms, the ability to move large amounts of snow in a short amount of time, the disparate procedures between state, county and local snow removal crews, and the lack of equipment in the smaller communities to handle a significant snow event. Another concern is the amount of time it takes in an emergency to get a motor grader to rural parts of the county to open a road so an ambulance can get through.
The planning team indicated that public education through social media is currently planned to reduce risk for this hazard. Projects identified as being needed in the future include providing sheltering supplies (cots, blankets, etc.) to help stranded motorists, residents, and healthcare workers in each community; updating snow removal and de-icing equipment; improving timeliness and visibility of road condition reports to the public; installing wireless emergency alerts/reverse 911 (or similar system) to communicate hazards to the public in a timely fashion.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 21 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
Tornadoes and High Winds There have been several significant tornadic events that have occurred in the past. In June 2003, a tornado hit Coleridge causing one fatality and a large amount of property damage. In June 2014, six tornadoes occurred with the largest being an EF3 that stayed on the ground for over three hours and at times reaching three miles wide which caused significant property and roadway damage. Some of the property damage that occurred included overturned pivots, destroyed grain bins, damaged homes, and a destroyed communications tower. Additional impacts from these storms includes water over roadways, traffic was brought to a standstill when the tornado crossed the highway, and a large amount of livestock was killed during the event. The storm path was over 19 miles from start to finish. A tornado in 2018 resulted in damages and power outages in the Bow Valley and rural Hartington areas. The Bow Valley dance hall incurred significant damage and a home northeast of Hartington lost a roof. In 2020 a severe thunderstorm with straight-line winds and hail damaged crops and a house in rural areas near Coleridge, Randolph, and Belden. One critical facility, the Coleridge Fire Station, has been damaged in the past as a result of tornadoes and high winds. Outdoor warning sirens were recently installed in the Village of Belden and City of Laurel.
The main concerns regarding tornadoes are the lack of available shelter at critical facilities such as fire stations, city/village offices, downtown business districts, and athletic venues. Additionally, the county is concerned about the lack of outdoor warning or advanced warning/automatic warning systems in schools, churches, campgrounds, and businesses. The planning team identified projects needed in the future to reduce the county’s risk to this hazard. These include updating outdoor warning sirens, installing indoor warning systems in larger venues, building safe rooms/shelters, installing an alert system for text message/telephone notification of threats, etc.
Governance A community’s governance structure impacts its capability to implement mitigation actions. Cedar County is governed by a three-member board of supervisors. The county also has a county clerk, county assessor, emergency manager, extension office, highway department, weed superintendent, county sheriff, surveyor, treasurer, planning/zoning department, veterans service, transit service, E911 service, and county safety committee.
Capability Assessment The capability assessment consisted of a Capability Assessment Survey completed by the jurisdiction and a review of local existing policies, regulations, plans, and the programs. The survey is used to gather information regarding the jurisdiction’s planning and regulatory capability; administrative and technical capability; fiscal capability; and educational and outreach capability.
Table CRC.15: Capability Assessment SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Comprehensive Plan Yes PLANNING Capital Improvements Plan No & Economic Development Plan No REGULATORY Emergency Operational Plan Yes CAPABILITY Floodplain Management Plan No Storm Water Management Plan No
22 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Zoning Ordinance Yes Subdivision Regulation/Ordinance No Floodplain Ordinance No Building Codes No National Flood Insurance Program No Community Rating System No Other (if any) Planning Commission Yes Floodplain Administration No GIS Capabilities No Chief Building Official No ADMINISTRATIVE Civil Engineering No &TECHNICAL Local Staff Who Can Assess Community’s Yes CAPABILITY Vulnerability to Hazards Grant Manager Yes Mutual Aid Agreement No Yes (Interlocal Other (if any) agreements) Capital Improvement Plan/ 1- & 6-Year plan Yes Applied for grants in the past Yes Awarded a grant in the past Yes Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Yes such as Mitigation Projects FISCAL Gas/Electric Service Fees No CAPABILITY Storm Water Service Fees No Water/Sewer Service Fees No Development Impact Fees No General Obligation Revenue or Special Tax Yes Bonds Other (if any) Local citizen groups or non-profit organizations focused on environmental protection, emergency preparedness, access, and No functional needs populations, etc. Ex. CERT Teams, Red Cross, etc. EDUCATION Ongoing public education or information program (e.g., responsible water use, fire safety, & No OUTREACH household preparedness, environmental CAPABILITY education) Natural Disaster or Safety related school No programs StormReady Certification No Firewise Communities Certification No Tree City USA No
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 23 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
Table CRC.16: Overall Capability OVERALL CAPABILITY LIMITED/MODERATE/HIGH
Financial resources needed to implement mitigation projects Limited
Staff/expertise to implement projects Limited
Community support to implement projects Moderate
Time to devote to hazard mitigation Moderate
Plan Integration Cedar County’s comprehensive plan was completed in 2000 and does discuss flood hazards. The plan also contains goals and objectives aimed at safe growth. While the plan has not been updated in more than 20 years, there is no timeline for updating the plan at this time. The local planning team indicated that efforts will be made to ensure the objectives and strategies identified in the hazard mitigation plan will be integrated into the comprehensive plan during its development.
The LEOP, which was last updated in 2016, is an all-hazards plan that provides clear assignment of responsibility in case of an emergency. It includes, as annexes, LEOPs for the cities of Hartington, Laurel, and Randolph, and the Villages of Belden, Coleridge, Fordyce, Magnet, Obert, St. Helena, and Wynot.
Cedar County’s zoning ordinances were last updated in 2019. The ordinances discourage development in floodplain areas and prohibit filling of wetlands. It also restricts subdivision of land within or adjacent to the floodplain. a floodplain overlay district and its regulations.
The county maintains a 1- & 6- year road plan and county budget, and both are updated annually. The local planning team indicated that a small amount of funds are set aside each year for planned new capital projects, but the majority of funds go toward maintaining existing infrastructure. Some of the items currently include in the plan are: regular maintenance for drainage structures, improving transportation routes for drainage, road repair and maintenance, and bridge improvements.
The Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan and county zoning regulations are the only plans that currently incorporate hazards and mitigation. The county will incorporate identified hazards in to the Twelve County Threat Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA) document for the Northeast Homeland Security PET region. The LEOP is also modified and updated regularly to address more specifically some of the identified hazards and outline who has the authority to address those issues.
Plan Maintenance Hazard Mitigation Plans should be living documents and updated regularly to reflect changes in hazard events, priorities, and mitigation actions. These updates are encouraged to occur after every major disaster event, alongside community planning documents (i.e. annual budgets and Capital Improvement Plans), during the fall before the HMA grant cycle begins, and/or prior to other funding opportunity cycles begin including CDBG, Water Sustainability Fund, Revolving State Fund, or other identified funding mechanisms.
24 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
The local planning team is responsible for reviewing and updating this community profile as changes occur or after a major event. The local planning team will include the County Emergency Manager, County Highway Superintendent, and County Board Member. The local planning team will review the plan no less than annually and will include the public in the review and revision process by sharing on social media and at county board meetings.
Mitigation Strategy
Continuing Actions: MITIGATION ACTION BACKUP POWER GENERATORS Provide a portable or stationary source of backup power to redundant DESCRIPTION power supplies, municipal wells, lift stations and other critical facilities and shelters. Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Winter Storms, Severe HAZARD(S) Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST $150,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE 2-5 years PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management The county is waiting to hear back from various critical facilities on STATUS whether generators are desired. This project is also waiting on funding.
MITIGATION ACTION SAFE ROOMS Design and construct fully supplied safe rooms in highly vulnerable DESCRIPTION areas such as mobile home parks, campgrounds, schools, and other such areas. HAZARD(S) Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST $200-$300/sf stand alone; $150-200/sf addition/retrofit FUNDING Tax Revenue TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management STATUS This project has not been started due to a lack of funding.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 25 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION STABILIZE/ANCHOR FERTILIZER, FUEL AND PROPANE TANKS Anchor fuel tanks to prevent movement. If left unanchored, tanks DESCRIPTION could present a major threat to property and safety in a severe weather event. HAZARD(S) Tornadoes and High Winds, Flooding ESTIMATED COST $1,000+ FUNDING Local Tax Revenue TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management, County Roads Dept, County 911 The county discusses stabilization projects whenever new tanks are installed or existing tanks are discovered. The county is looking to STATUS adopt zoning regulations and work with local fire districts to accomplish this project.
MITIGATION ACTION STORMWATER SYSTEM AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Stormwater improvements may include pipe upsizing, retention, DESCRIPTION detention, and additional inlets. Drainage improvements may include ditch upsizing, ditch cleanout and culvert improvements. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $10,000-$100,000 FUNDING Local Tax Revenue TIMELINE 1-2 years PRIORITY High LEAD AGENCY County Roads Department The county roads department selects problem areas each year for STATUS which improvements are made. In 2019 several culverts were rehabilitated, and ditches were cleaned out after the flood.
STREAM BANK STABILIZATION/ GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURES/ MITIGATION ACTION CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS Stabilization improvements include: rock rip rap, vegetative cover, j- DESCRIPTION hooks, boulder vanes, etc. Grade control structures include: sheet-pile weirs, rock weirs, ponds, road dams, etc. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $800,000 FUNDING County Budget, Local Tax Revenue, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY County Roads Department Several stabilization improvements were made after the 2019 flood. STATUS Additional projects are completed when time and funding are available.
26 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION TRANSPORTATION DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Improvements to roadways and drainage ways to prevent damage to key transportation routes. Covering of road washouts, culvert sizing, headwalls, steep banks, slides, in-road springs, roadway edge DESCRIPTION armoring, low water crossings, pothole grading, weak foundations, gravel road maintenance, ditch linings, on steep grades, erosion protection, etc. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $500,000 FUNDING Local Tax Revenue TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY County Roads Department One segment of road in each county district is selected for STATUS improvement each year, with critical improvements taking precedence.
MITIGATION ACTION PUBLIC AWARENESS/EDUCATION Increase public awareness of hazards to both public and private property owners, renters, businesses, and local officials about DESCRIPTION hazards and ways to protect people and property from these hazards. In addition, educate citizens on erosion control and water conservation methods. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $20,000 FUNDING County Budget, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management, County Roads Department Public education during COVID-19 has taken place through social STATUS media and mailings. Other efforts include outreach during Severe Weather Awareness Week in March.
MITIGATION ACTION EVACUATION PLAN Establish a plan to effectively evacuate residents during storm events DESCRIPTION and major flooding. Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Winter Storms, Severe HAZARD(S) Thunderstorms, Flooding ESTIMATED COST $2,000 FUNDING Local Tax Revenue TIMELINE 2-5 years PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management A formal county evacuation plan has not yet been written, but an informal plan includes plans for specific areas of the county. More STATUS collaboration is needed to complete a county evacuation plan. A lack of time and funding is preventing this project from moving forward.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 27 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION ALERT/WARNING SIRENS Perform an evaluation of existing alert sirens in order to determine DESCRIPTION sirens which should be replaced or upgraded. Install new sirens where lacking and remote activation. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $120,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE 1-2 years PRIORITY High LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management Two sirens were installed in recent years, but two others were denied grant funding. Cedar County plans to apply for funding again when it STATUS becomes available. Sirens are needed in Wynot, Fordyce, and Coleridge.
MITIGATION ACTION WARNING SYSTEMS Improve city cable TV interrupt warning system and implement DESCRIPTION telephone interrupt system such as Reverse 911. Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Winter Storms, Severe HAZARD(S) Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST $5,000 FUNDING Local Tax Revenue TIMELINE 2-5 years PRIORITY High LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management/911 The county received quotes from various firms to provide such STATUS systems, but recent budget concerns prevented the project from moving forward.
MITIGATION ACTION WEATHER RADIOS Conduct an inventory of weather radios at schools and other critical DESCRIPTION facilities and provide new radios as needed. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $50/radio FUNDING Local Tax Revenue TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management A few radios have been purchased with local money and place in the county courthouse and the Hartington Sports Complex. The county STATUS emergency manager purchases and awards four weather radios each year as a poster contest prize during Severe Weather Awareness week. More radios will be purchased as funding allows.
28 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION CIVIL SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS Improve emergency rescue and response equipment and facilities by providing additional, or updating existing emergency response equipment. This would also include developing backup systems for DESCRIPTION emergency vehicles, identifying and training additional personnel for emergency response, or continuing educational opportunities for current personnel. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $140,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management The county recently purchased an EOC trailer, a UTV, and several other pieces of emergency response equipment. The county STATUS continues to pursue training opportunities for emergency responders in the county.
MITIGATION ACTION BACK UP COUNTY RECORDS Develop protocol for backup of critical records, especially at the DESCRIPTION Courthouse. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $100,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY County Clerk Two document scanners were purchased to scan large documents STATUS and has begun the scanning process. This project will continue as time and budget allow.
MITIGATION ACTION DATABASE OF VULNERABLE POPULATION Work with stakeholders to develop a database of vulnerable DESCRIPTION populations and the organizations which support them. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $200,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management This project has not been started. It is limited by time, money, and legal concerns. Various agencies have some information on STATUS vulnerable populations, but a comprehensive database has not yet been developed.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 29 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION EMERGENCY COMMUNICATION Establish an action plan to improve communication between agencies DESCRIPTION to better assist residents and businesses during and following emergencies. Establish inter-operable communications. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $300,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management The county purchased four two-way radios that allow interoperable radio communications across state lines and county borders. The STATUS county also invested in a new dispatch console that is capable of bridging channels and disparate frequencies. This project is ongoing as technology evolves and systems change.
MITIGATION ACTION EMERGENCY OPERATIONS DESCRIPTION Identify and establish an Emergency Operations Center. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $500,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management The county now has a trailer that can be used as a mobile EOC if needed. More training on EOC operation is required as local STATUS responders/elected officials are not trained in EOC operations. The county lacks the physical space on its property to set up a permanent EOC at this time.
MITIGATION ACTION INFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT STUDY Conduct an assessment of bridges in the county and assess other DESCRIPTION potential areas of concern. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $200,000 FUNDING County Budget, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY County Roads Department Fracture-critical and scour-critical bridges are inspected bi-annually. STATUS As areas of concern come to light, the county prioritizes repairs as time and funding permit.
30 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION EMERGENCY FUEL SUPPLY PLAN Plan to ensure adequate fuel supply is available during an emergency. Actions might include: prioritization and rationing plan for gasoline and DESCRIPTION diesel uses in extended loss of fuel supply or electric power supply; a plan to purchase local fuel supply, etc. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $100,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management, County Roads Department Cedar County has five tank wagon services within the county and one fuel wholesale/transport service. The county enjoys a good relationship with various vendors as well. In the short-term, the county STATUS could have fuel brought in by truckload, if needed. The project is ongoing and a formal contract with vendors still needs to be worked out.
MITIGATION ACTION COMPREHENSIVE DISASTER/EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN DESCRIPTION Develop a Comprehensive Disaster and Emergency Response Plan. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $200,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management The county maintains a LEOP that is kept current. A debris STATUS management plan and continuity of operations plan are currently being developed.
MITIGATION ACTION CONTINUITY PLANNING Develop continuity plans for critical community services. Encourage DESCRIPTION businesses to do the same. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $200,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management In conjunction with the Nebraska PET region, the county held a seminar to address such a plan in 2019. The local chamber of STATUS commerce and economic development agencies are taking on this project during the pandemic, independent of the county’s plan.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 31 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION INTERGOVERNMENTAL SUPPORT Support other local government entities such as fire departments, DESCRIPTION schools, and townships in the identification and pursuit of mitigation actions. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $600,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY High LEAD AGENCY County Board, Emergency Management The county applied for and received funding for an outdoor warning siren for Belden in 2018. Funding for warning sirens in Fordyce and STATUS Wynot was not awarded. This project is ongoing as hazard mitigation funds become available.
MITIGATION ACTION STATIC DETECTORS Static detectors are designed to detect lightning strikes and can predict the distance to the lightning strike and whether a storm is DESCRIPTION approaching or moving away from the detector. Deploying a static detector at outdoor events can warn of approaching, fast-moving storms and thus help officials respond appropriately. HAZARD(S) Severe Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST $150,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management STATUS This project has not been started due to a lack of funding.
MITIGATION ACTION SURGE PROTECTORS Purchase and install surge protectors on sensitive equipment in DESCRIPTION critical facilities. HAZARD(S) Severe Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST $30,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management All new equipment is installed with surge protection. Several pieces of equipment have been identified as needing surge protectors and have STATUS had surge protectors installed. More will be purchased and installed as equipment is identified and funds are made available.
32 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION DESIGNATED SNOW ROUTES During winter events, the community will have designated snow routes DESCRIPTION for use. HAZARD(S) Severe Winter Storms ESTIMATED COST $10,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY County Roads Department A few communities within the county have designated snow routes; however, the rural areas of the counties have changing snow routes STATUS due to changing school bus routes, livestock locations, etc. Each year snow routes are evaluated and identified for the winter based on the needs that year.
MITIGATION ACTION RESCUE/SNOW REMOVAL Improve capabilities to rescue those stranded in blizzards and DESCRIPTION increase the capacity to which snow can be removed from roadways after an event. HAZARD(S) Severe Winter Storms ESTIMATED COST $60,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY County Sheriff’s Department Law enforcement vehicles have all been upgraded to four-wheel drive. STATUS Interoperable communications within the county and state snow removal agencies has been added as well.
MITIGATION ACTION STORM SHELTER IDENTIFICATION DESCRIPTION Identify any existing private or public storm shelters. HAZARD(S) Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST Staff Time FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management The emergency manager maintains a list of businesses that offer resources such as sheltering options during severe storms. In 2019 STATUS the emergency manager worked with three schools to identify their shelters and suggest improvement. This project is ongoing as time and funding allow.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 33 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION SHELTER IN PLACE Provide shelter in place training to facilities housing vulnerable DESCRIPTION populations (nursing homes, childcare facilities, schools, etc.) HAZARD(S) Radiological Transportation, Chemical Spills ESTIMATED COST $20,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management The emergency manager has worked with one local long-term care STATUS facility to update their plan. Due to COVID-19 and the flooding of 2019, this project has been delayed.
MITIGATION ACTION EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT EXERCISE Develop and facilitate an exercise to identify gaps in planning and to DESCRIPTION ensure that community response plans are sufficient to meet the needs of the jurisdiction. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $20,000 FUNDING County Budget, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management The County participates in exercises within the Northeast PET (Homeland Security Region) on a regular basis. Several agencies within the county were scheduled to participate in operation vigilant STATUS guard in Wayne, Nebraska in 2020 but due to COVID-19, the event was cancelled. Cedar County is again soliciting volunteers for an exercise design team and trying to plan for training and exercises when the pandemic subsides.
MITIGATION ACTION CHANNEL AND BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS Implement channel and bridge improvements to increase channel DESCRIPTION conveyance and decrease the base flood elevation. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $500,000 FUNDING County Budget, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY County Roads Department Creek channels are assessed on a yearly basis around bridges and drainage structures. If cleanout measures are needed, they are scheduled and performed. Any improvements that need to be made when the county is repairing or replacing a structure are implemented STATUS at that time. Bridges are inspected bi-annually. In 2019 the flood took care of many of these projects widening things out increasing channel conveyance and removing debris. This is an ongoing project during the normal spring/summer construction season.
34 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION DEVELOP FLOOD ASSISTANCE STRATEGIES Develop strategies to provide necessary services in the event of DESCRIPTION flooding. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $30,000 FUNDING County Budget, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management Cedar County has stockpiled sandbags and distributed them throughout the county to be stored at various local entities for use STATUS when needed. The county has heavy equipment and operators available if assistance is needed in moving sand/filling sandbags.
MITIGATION ACTION DRAINAGE DITCHES DESCRIPTION Deepen drainage ditches and clean out culverts. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $250,000 FUNDING County Budget, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY County Roads Department The county completed much of this work in 2019 as a result of the STATUS flooding and continues to monitor culverts for debris. Ditches and culverts are normally cleaned out on an as-needed basis.
MITIGATION ACTION DRAINAGE STUDY/STORMWATER MASTER PLAN Preliminary drainage studies and assessments can be conducted to identify and prioritize design improvements to address site specific DESCRIPTION flooding/drainage issues to reduce or alleviate flooding. Stormwater master plans can be developed to help identify stormwater problem areas and potential drainage improvements. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $150,000 FUNDING County Budget, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY County Roads Department Cedar County does not currently have a stormwater master plan. Drainage studies are periodically conducted on specific sites if repairs/improvements to culverts or bridges are needed or if an area STATUS experiences repeated flooding. During 2019 flood repairs, several of these studies were conducted. A stormwater master plan will be developed when funding is made available.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 35 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION FIRM MAPPING Update FIRM maps to reflect accurate flood inundation areas within DESCRIPTION jurisdictions. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $50,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Emergency Management, Planning & Zoning Department, NeDNR The Nebraska Department of Natural Resources is in the process of STATUS updating the FIRM maps.
MITIGATION ACTION GRADE CONTROL STRUCTURES Stream bed degradation occurs along many river and creeks. Grade DESCRIPTION control structures including sheet-pile weirs, rock weirs, ponds, road dams, etc. can be implemented to maintain the channel bed. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $200,000 FUNDING County Budget, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY County Roads Department Several repairs and improvements were made in 2018 and 2019. STATUS Other improvements are made as needs and funds allow.
MITIGATION ACTION IMPROVE/UPGRADE BRIDGES Investigate, design, and retrofit or improve bridges to provide greater DESCRIPTION capacity and maintain or improve structural integrity during flood events. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $500,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY County Roads Department Bridges are inspected bi-annually. Due to the cost of engineering, no STATUS modifications are made unless historical conditions are a bridge inspection reveal it to be necessary.
36 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION IMPROVE DRAINAGE Improve storm sewers and drainage patters in and around the DESCRIPTION community or county. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $750,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY County Roads Department The county has no storm sewers that are its responsibility. The drainage patterns are improved whenever a culvert needs replaced. The county regularly maintains its roadways and inspects them after STATUS a storm event. In addition, local residents provide information to the county on issues they see. Improvements are made on a time- and money-permitting basis with the more chronic areas getting attention first.
MITIGATION ACTION REMOVE FLOW RESTRICTIONS Conduct a preliminary drainage assessment and/or design bridge improvements to reduce or alleviate flooding. Bridges typically serve DESCRIPTION as flow restrictions along streams and rivers. Cleanout and reshaping channel segments at bridge crossings can increase conveyance. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $250,000 FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY County Roads Department Bridges are inspected bi-annually. Issues of this nature generally STATUS have not been found except during the 2019 flood where massive amounts of water fell. Issues like this are addressed as they arise.
MITIGATION ACTION RISK COMMUNICATION Require landlords to disclose if a rental property is located in a flood- DESCRIPTION prone area or if the structure has been impacted previously by high water events. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST Staff Time FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY County Planning & Zoning, County Board STATUS A revision to the county zoning regulations is currently being studied.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 37 SECTION SEVEN: CEDAR COUNTY COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION LAND USE REGULATIONS Develop land use ordinances and regulations to prevent storage of DESCRIPTION chemicals near residential developments. HAZARD(S) Chemical Spills ESTIMATED COST Staff Time FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY County Planning & Zoning STATUS A revision to the county zoning regulations is currently being studied.
MITIGATION ACTION FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT Develop floodplain ordinances that prevent the storage of hazardous DESCRIPTION chemicals in the floodplain. HAZARD(S) Chemical Spills ESTIMATED COST Staff Time FUNDING County Budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY County Planning & Zoning STATUS A revision to the county zoning regulations is currently being studied.
Removed Actions: MITIGATION ACTION OBTAIN MISSING DATA Obtain necessary data to improve vulnerability assessments when updating the plan. Data may include (but is not limited to) a database DESCRIPTION of vulnerable populations, location of storm shelters, chemicals transported, etc. HAZARD(S) All hazards As information is discovered or made available, the Emergency REASON FOR Manager adds it to the 911 GIS database and is worked on as time REMOVAL permits/requires.
38 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021
COMMUNITY PROFILE
VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE
Cedar and Dixon Counties Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
2021
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 39 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Local Planning Team
Table CRG.1: Coleridge Local Planning Team NAME TITLE JURISDICTION GEORGE HEFNER Board Chair Village of Coleridge
Location and Geography The Village of Coleridge is located in the central portion of Cedar County and covers an area of 0.51 square miles. Major waterways in the area include Kerloo Creek, which is about one mile west of the village, and Perrin Creek, which is approximately one mile east of the village.
Transportation Coleridge’s major transportation corridors include Nebraska Highway 57 and 875th Road. Nebraska Highway 57 has on average 1,580 vehicles per day with 135 heavy commercial vehicles.12 Farm chemicals, fertilizer, and fuel are often transported through the village. A nursing home and assisted living facilities are located next to major transportation routes. There are no rail lines that travel through the village. Transportation information is important to hazard mitigation plans because it suggests possible evacuation corridors in the community, as well as areas more at risk to transportation incidents.
12 Nebraska Department of Roads. “Traffic Flow Map of the State Highways: State of Nebraska.” [map]. Scale 1”= 20 miles. State of Nebraska: Department of Roads, 2015. http://www.roads.nebraska.gov/media/2510/2014-statewide-traffic-flow-map.pdf
40 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure CRG.1: Village of Coleridge
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 41 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Demographics The following figure displays the historical population trend from 1890 to 2017. This figure indicates that the population of Coleridge decreased from 1980 to 2010. When population increases, areas of the village may experience housing developments or a lack of properties available for rent or to own. Increasing populations can also represent increasing tax revenue for the community, which could make implementation of mitigation actions possible.13
Figure CRG.2: Estimated Population 1890 – 2017 800 674 673 700 627 621 616 604 608 596 600 535 541 507 471 473 500
400 315
Population 300
200
100
0
Year
Source: U.S. Census Bureau14
The young, elderly, minorities, and poor may be more vulnerable to certain hazards than other groups. In comparison to the county, Coleridge’s population was:
• Older. The median age of Coleridge was 50.7 years old in 2017, compared with the county average of 44.1 years. Coleridge’s population has grown younger since 2010, when the median age was 53.3 years old. Coleridge had a smaller proportion of people under 20 years old (24.2%) than the county (27.4%) in 2017.15 • Lower ethnic diversity. Since 2010, Coleridge grew less ethnically diverse. In 2010, 1% was Native Hawaiian. By 2017, 100% of Coleridge’s population was White. During that time, Cedar County grew 1% (American Indian) from 2010 to 2017.16 • Less likely to be at the federal poverty line. The poverty rate in Coleridge (persons living below the federal poverty line) was 9.5% in 2017. This was lower than the county’s poverty rate of 9.7%.17
13 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 14 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 15 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 16 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP05: ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 17 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/.
42 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Employment and Economics The village’s economic base is a mixture of industries. In comparison to Cedar County, Coleridge’s economy had:
• Different mix of industries. Employment sectors accounting for 10% or more of employment in Coleridge included Educational Services, Manufacturing, Retail, and Construction. While Cedar County’s sectors included Educational Services, Agriculture, and Manufacturing in 2017.18 • Higher household income. Coleridge’s median household income in 2017 ($58,750) was about $1,542 higher than the county ($57,208).19 • More long-distance commuters. About 46.1% percent of workers in Coleridge commuted for fewer than 15 minutes, compared with about 53.7% of workers in Cedar County. About 33.8% of workers in Coleridge commute 30 minutes or more to work, compared to about 19% of the county workers.20
Major Employers Major employers in Coleridge include Laurel-Concord-Coleridge Middle School, Park View Haven Nursing Home, The Embers Assisted Living, D & K Trailers, Hefner Oil, Coleridge Welding, Coleridge Grain, and Security Bank. The planning team noted that some residents commute to Laurel, Hartington, Norfolk, Wayne, Sioux City, and Yankton. Housing In comparison to Cedar County, Coleridge’s housing stock was:
• Less owner occupied. About 73.5% of occupied housing units in Coleridge are owner occupied compared with 80.7% of occupied housing in Cedar County in 2017.21 • Smaller share of aged housing stock. Coleridge has a smaller share of housing built prior to 1970 than the county (55.8% compared to 61.7%).22 • Fewer single-family homes. The predominant housing type in the village is single family detached and Coleridge contains more multifamily housing with five or more units per structure than the county (10.1% compared to 3.1%). About 80.3% of housing in Coleridge was single-family detached, compared with 89.9% of the county’s housing.23 The planning team indicated that there are no mobile homes in the community, but there are some issues with blighted properties.
This housing information is relevant to hazard mitigation insofar as the age of housing may indicate which housing units were built prior to state building codes being developed. Further, unoccupied housing may suggest that future development may be less likely to occur. Finally, communities with a substantial number of mobile homes may be more vulnerable to the impacts of high winds, tornadoes, and severe winter storms.
18 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 19 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 20 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0802: Means of Transportation to Work by Selected Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 21 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 22 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 23 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 43 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Future Development Trends The village has seen some changes in development over the past five years, including the re- opening of both a grocery store and a mini-mart, the expansion of Coleridge Grain and Feed, and the implementation of a 1% sales tax to use for economic development. The planning team also noted that the village is working to clean up dilapidated housing within the community. According to census data, Coleridge’s population has mainly decreased over the past few decades. The planning team attributes this to an aging population, residents moving to larger cities that have more activities and amenities, the decreasing size of families, and a decreased sense of community. However, there are indications that population is now growing. This may be attributed to the village offering an ongoing promotion of giving away real estate in the Corona Addition development to attract people to the community. This new housing development is not located in a known hazardous area. There are no known commercial or industrial developments planned for the next five years. Structural Inventory and Valuation The planning team requested GIS parcel data from the County Assessor as of December 2019. This data allowed the planning team to analyze the location, number, and value of property improvements at the parcel level. The data did not contain the number of structures on each parcel. A summary of the results of this analysis is provided in the following table.
Table CRG.2: Coleridge Parcel Valuation TOTAL NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE OF VALUE OF NUMBER OF IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS VALUE IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN 283 $11,170,285 0 0% $0 Source: GIS Workshop/County Assessor, 201924 Critical Infrastructure/Key Resources Chemical Storage Fixed Sites According to the Tier II System reports submitted to the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, there are two chemical storage sites in Coleridge that contain hazardous chemicals.
Table CRG.3: Chemical Storage Fixed Sites FACILITY NAME ADDRESS LOCATED IN FLOODPLAIN? FARMERS PRIDE BULK Jct E Fulton & S Pearl Sts No FUEL NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS 56603 875 Rd No Source: Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy25
There have been no fixed site chemical spills within the community according to the planning team. If a spill were to occur, concerns for resident safety and chemical containment would be top priority. If a spill occurred near Highway 57, there would be transportation and evacuation concerns as the highway is a main transportation route in the community.
24 GIS Workshop/Cedar County Assessor. 2019. [Personal correspondence]. 25 Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy. “Search Tier II Data.” Accessed May 2020. https://deq-iis.ne.gov/tier2/search.faces.
44 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Critical Facilities The local planning team identified critical facilities necessary for Coleridge per FEMA’s Community Lifelines. Critical facilities were identified during the 2016 planning process and revised for this plan update. The following table and figure provide a summary of the critical facilities for the community.
Table CRG.4: Critical Facilities SHORT- CF TYPE OF TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN NAME ADDRESS # LIFELINE SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) Health and Park View 1 309 N. Madison St N Y N Medical Haven Health and The Embers 2* 509 W. Cedar St. N N N Medical Assisted Living Food, 3 Water, and Water Tower 304 Tower Rd. N/A N N Shelter Health and Ridge View 4* 106 E. Douglas St. N N N Medical Manor Safety and Coleridge Fire 5 211 E. Broadway St. N N N Security Hall Food, LCC Middle 6 Water, and 203 S. Main St. Y N N School Shelter Safety and Village Office/ 7 111 S. Main St. N N N Security Public Building Health and 100 block of East 8 Lift Station N/A N N Medical Nebraska St. Food, Village Well 9 Water, and 407 W. Nebraska St. N/A N N 2000-1 Shelter Health and 10 Sewer Plant 87600 566 Avenue N/A N N Medical Food, Village Well 11 Water, and 418 W. Fulton St. N/A Y N 81-1 Shelter *These facilities have a safe room.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 45 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure CRG.3: Critical Facilities and Flood Risk Area
46 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Historical Occurrences See the Cedar County community profile for historical hazard events.
Hazard Prioritization For an in-depth discussion regarding area wide hazards, please see Section Four: Risk Assessment. The hazards discussed in detail below were either identified in the previous HMP and determined to still be of top concern or were added by the local planning team based on the identification of hazards of greatest concern, hazard history, and the jurisdiction’s capabilities.
Agricultural Animal Disease The local planning team identified agricultural animal disease as a hazard of top concern for the village. An avian flu outbreak occurred in neighboring Dixon County during the summer of 2015, greatly impacting the poultry industry. However, there were no reports of avian flu near Coleridge. Cattle and hogs are also large animal populations that are a concern if an outbreak were to occur. The greatest impacts from an animal disease outbreak would be economical, as agriculture is a top industry for the region. The planning team noted that informing and educating residents about animal disease is needed in the future.
Drought and Extreme Heat Drought was identified as a top concern for the village. During the summer of 2012, an exceptional drought formed for a large portion of the state, including Cedar County. The local planning team did not report any significant impacts from this event. However, prolonged drought periods can impact water supply, cause roads to heave and break, create building foundation issues, and cause economic impacts. The water supply is sufficient for the village at this time according to the planning team. However, the team indicated that infrastructure maintenance on wells, storage tanks, fire hydrants, and water mains is currently planned to reduce risk and impact from this hazard. Actions identified as being needed in the future include monitoring the water system and protecting groundwater, as outlined in the wellhead protection plan.
Severe Thunderstorms (including Hail) The local planning team identified severe thunderstorms as a top concern. The combination of heavy rain, high winds, lightning, and hail can often cause significant impacts to the community. According to the NCEI, there have been 42 severe thunderstorm events from 1996 to September 2019, which caused $200,000 in property damage. Thunderstorm wind affecting the community has averaged 55 knots (or 63 mph). One event on September 18, 1997 and caused $110,000 in property damages. The high winds destroyed a center pivot system and a tree fell and destroyed a shed about three miles northeast of Coleridge. The strong winds also damaged a portion of a hog building five miles northeast of Coleridge. The community has installed weather radios in the critical facilities.
Severe Winter Storms Severe winter storms are a natural and regular occurrence for the region, which can cause significant impacts, and were identified as a top concern for the community. According to the NCEI, there were 85 severe winter storm events in Cedar County from 1996 through September 2019; however, no property or crop damages were reported. The winter of 2009-2010 was especially harsh, with road closures and powers outages due to heavy snow and high winds. There have not been any damages to critical facilities. Designated snow routes are clearly marked on major roads. The village is responsible for clearing roads, and it was noted that snow removal
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 47 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE COMMUNITY PROFILE
resources are sufficient. The planning team indicated that the village monitors weather reports and plans to maintain and enhance equipment/supplies as needed.
Tornadoes and High Winds Due to previous occurrences of tornadoes impacting the village, tornadoes were identified as a top concern. According to NCEI data, there have been 19 high wind events in Cedar County from 1996 to September 2019. There have been five tornadoes in Coleridge during that time, totaling $5.7 million in damages. The highest rated tornado was an F-4 tornado on June 23, 2003. This tornado began six miles southeast of Coleridge and crossed the northern sections of the village uprooting trees, downing power lines, and destroying a couple of grain bins. A construction business in a garage was also destroyed. The tornado then continued northeast of town hitting a large hog farm. At this farm, a man was killed while in a storage shed. Many livestock were also killed by debris or by the high winds. In total, 11 homes received substantial damage and between 100 and 200 utility poles were downed. The total cost in damages were estimated at $3.7 million.
On June 17, 2014, an EF-3 tornado - one of several produced in the area that night - caused significant damages to the eastern side of the village, as it moved very slowly. Four farmhouses were destroyed down to the foundations and trees were snapped and debarked. Those examples of extreme damage indicate the severity of the tornado. The total path for this tornado was 8.24 miles. Total damages from the tornado are estimated at $2 million, but there were no injuries from this event. Two assisted living facilities have access to tornado shelters for their vulnerable population. The planning team noted that the village has increased its property coverage for village-owned property recently. A currently planned project includes storm-spotter training for fire department members.
Governance A community’s governance indicates the number of boards or offices that may be available to help implement hazard mitigation actions. Coleridge has a five-member village board, a clerk/treasurer, utility superintendent, fire department, sewer plant, street commissioner, water commissioner, EMS, and village maintenance office. Capability Assessment The capability assessment consisted of a Capability Assessment Survey completed by the jurisdiction and a review of local existing policies, regulations, plans, and the programs. The survey is used to gather information regarding the jurisdiction’s planning and regulatory capability; administrative and technical capability; fiscal capability; and educational and outreach capability.
Municipal funds are primarily limited to maintaining current facilities and municipal systems. New capital projects are funded through issuance of general obligation bonds and include street improvements and water or sewer projects. Municipal funds have generally remained constant over time.
Table CRG.5: Capability Assessment SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO PLANNING Comprehensive Plan No & Capital Improvements Plan No REGULATORY Economic Development Plan No CAPABILITY Emergency Operational Plan Yes (County)
48 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE COMMUNITY PROFILE
SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Floodplain Management Plan No Storm Water Management Plan No Zoning Ordinance Yes Subdivision Regulation/Ordinance Yes Floodplain Ordinance No Building Codes Yes National Flood Insurance Program No Community Rating System No Other (if any) Planning Commission Yes Floodplain Administration No GIS Capabilities No Chief Building Official Yes ADMINISTRATIVE &TECHNICAL Civil Engineering Yes Local Staff Who Can Assess Community’s CAPABILITY No Vulnerability to Hazards Grant Manager No Mutual Aid Agreement Yes Other (if any) Capital Improvement Plan/ 1 & 6 Year plan No Applied for grants in the past No Awarded a grant in the past No Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Yes such as Mitigation Projects Gas/Electric Service Fees No FISCAL CAPABILITY Storm Water Service Fees No Water/Sewer Service Fees Yes Development Impact Fees No General Obligation Revenue or Special Tax Yes Bonds 1% Sales Other (if any) Tax Local citizen groups or non-profit organizations focused on environmental protection, emergency preparedness, access, and functional needs No populations, etc. EDUCATION Ex. CERT Teams, Red Cross, etc. & Ongoing public education or information program (e.g., responsible water use, fire safety, OUTREACH No CAPABILITY household preparedness, environmental education) Natural Disaster or Safety related school No programs StormReady Certification No
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 49 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE COMMUNITY PROFILE
SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Firewise Communities Certification No Tree City USA No Other (if any)
Table CRG.6: Overall Capability OVERALL CAPABILITY LIMITED/MODERATE/HIGH
Financial resources needed to implement mitigation projects Limited
Staff/expertise to implement projects Limited
Community support to implement projects Limited
Time to devote to hazard mitigation Limited
Plan Integration The Local Emergency Operations Plan (LEOP) for Coleridge, which was last updated in 2016, is an annex of Cedar County’s LEOP. It is an all-hazards plan that does not address specific natural and man-made disasters. It provides a clear assignment of responsibility in case of an emergency.
While the village does not currently have a formal comprehensive plan, there is support for the development of a plan in the future. The planning team indicated that it would include goals aimed at Safe Growth, limit density in areas adjacent to know hazardous areas, infill development, and identify areas that need emergency shelters. The information from the HMP will be reviewed and considered for the comprehensive plan.
Zoning ordinance updates are currently in progress. Current zoning ordinances include well setback requirements and the ability to implement water restrictions. Building codes are from the most recent edition of the International Code Book published in 2018.
Coleridge plans to develop a Capital Improvement Plan but does not yet have a timeline for this. Generally, the plan will likely include installing emergency generators in critical facilities, improving the community center, constructing a new water treatment facility, as well as constructing and improving other community structures.
Plan Maintenance Hazard Mitigation Plans should be living documents and updated regularly to reflect changes in hazard events, priorities, and mitigation actions. These updates are encouraged to occur after every major disaster event, alongside community planning documents (i.e. annual budgets and Capital Improvement Plans), during the fall before the HMA grant cycle begins, and/or prior to other funding opportunity cycles begin including CDBG, Water Sustainability Fund, Revolving State Fund, or other identified funding mechanisms.
The village last reviewed their section of the HMP during their annual budget process, which included a discussion of short, medium, and long-term goals, and no revisions were identified at that time. Going forward, the local planning team responsible for reviewing and updating the
50 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE COMMUNITY PROFILE
community profile will be comprised of the village board of trustees, village clerk, and village maintenance superintendent, and it will continue to review the plan annually at a minimum. The public will be notified and involved in the update review process through board meetings, letters in utility billings, published public notices, and social media.
Mitigation Strategy
Continuing Actions: MITIGATION ACTION BACKUP POWER GENERATORS Provide a portable or stationary source of backup power to redundant DESCRIPTION power supplies, municipal wells, lift stations and other critical facilities and shelters. Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Winter Storms, Flooding, Severe HAZARD(S) Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST $30,000/generator FUNDING Municipal budget, HMA TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Village Board, Fire Department A generator was installed for Well 81-1. Wireless controls were STATUS installed between the wells and the water tower. Additional generators are needed at critical facilities.
MITIGATION ACTION SAFE ROOMS Design and construct fully supplied safe rooms in highly vulnerable DESCRIPTION areas such as mobile home parks, campgrounds, schools, and other such areas. A safe room is needed at the Community Sports Complex. HAZARD(S) Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST $200-$300/sf stand alone; $150-200/sf addition/retrofit FUNDING Municipal budget, HMA TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Village Board STATUS This project has not started yet.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 51 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION STORMWATER SYSTEM AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Stormwater improvements may include pipe upsizing, retention, DESCRIPTION detention, and additional inlets. Drainage improvements may include ditch upsizing, ditch cleanout and culvert improvements. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $10,000 - $100,000 FUNDING Municipal budget, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Water/Wastewater Department Drainage improvements are currently being made to North Portland STATUS Street as part of a paving project. Ditches are being cleaned out in other areas.
MITIGATION ACTION TREE CITY USA DESCRIPTION Become a Tree City USA through the National Arbor Day Foundation. HAZARD(S) Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Thunderstorms and Hail ESTIMATED COST $1,000+ FUNDING Municipal budget, Arbor Day Foundation TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Village Maintenance Superintendent STATUS This project has not started yet.
MITIGATION ACTION PUBLIC AWARENESS/EDUCATION Increase public awareness of hazards to both public and private property owners, renters, businesses, and local officials about DESCRIPTION hazards and ways to protect people and property from these hazards. In addition, educate citizens on erosion control and water conservation methods. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $500+ FUNDING Municipal budget, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY All departments The village has been stuffing inserts in utility bills. Currently exploring STATUS additional educational outreach opportunities.
52 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION CIVIL SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS Improve emergency rescue and response equipment and facilities by providing additional, or updating existing emergency response equipment. This would also include developing backup systems for DESCRIPTION emergency vehicles, identifying and training additional personnel for emergency response, or continuing educational opportunities for current personnel. HAZARD(S) All hazards $5,000 to $400,000 per vehicle, varies depending on the equipment ESTIMATED COST needed FUNDING Municipal budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY High LEAD AGENCY Village Board, Fire Department and EMS Continuing education and training for fire and EMS personnel has been taking place. General maintenance and repairs have been done STATUS to equipment. Certification of equipment and EMS staff credentials is in progress.
MITIGATION ACTION ALERT/WARNING SIRENS Perform an evaluation of existing alert sirens in order to determine DESCRIPTION sirens which should be replaced or upgraded. Install new sirens where lacking and remote activation. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $15,000+ FUNDING Municipal budget, HMA TIMELINE 2-5 years PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Village Board, Emergency Management STATUS This project has not started yet.
MITIGATION ACTION DEVELOP A DROUGHT MANAGEMENT PLAN Work with relevant stakeholders to develop a drought management plan. The plan would identify water monitoring protocols, outline DESCRIPTION drought responses, identify opportunities to reduce water consumption, and establish the jurisdictional management procedures. HAZARD(S) Drought ESTIMATED COST $15,000 FUNDING Tax revenue, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Water Department Recently completed a $200,000 project to replace all water meters. STATUS Also added software to harvest and water usage data.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 53 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF COLERIDGE COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION RESCUE/SNOW REMOVAL Improve capabilities to rescue those stranded in blizzards and DESCRIPTION increase the capacity to which snow can be removed from roadways after an event. HAZARD(S) Severe Winter Storms ESTIMATED COST $25,000 FUNDING Tax revenue TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Fire Department, Street Department The village keeps streets and equipment in good repair. Street STATUS improvement bond of $750,000 passed in 2018.
MITIGATION ACTION STORM SHELTER IDENTIFICATION DESCRIPTION Identify any existing private or public storm shelters. HAZARD(S) Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST $5,000 FUNDING Tax revenue TIMELINE 2-5 years PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Village Board STATUS This project has not started yet.
Removed Actions: MITIGATION ACTION WARNING SYSTEMS Improve cable TV interrupt warning system and implement telephone DESCRIPTION interrupt system such as Reverse 911. HAZARD(S) All hazards The planning team indicated that this is beyond their current REASON FOR REMOVAL capabilities and is not a priority at this time.
54 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021
COMMUNITY PROFILE
VILLAGE OF FORDYCE
Cedar and Dixon Counties Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
2021
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 55 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF FORDYCE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Local Planning Team
Table FDC.1: Fordyce Local Planning Team NAME TITLE JURISDICTION DIANE LIMOGES Clerk Village of Fordyce
Location and Geography The Village of Fordyce is located in the northwestern portion of Cedar County and covers an area of 0.14 square miles. The major waterway in the area is the West Bow Creek, which is located just north and west of the village. The floodplain does not encroach into the jurisdictional boundaries of the community.
Transportation Fordyce’s major transportation corridors include Nebraska Highway Spur 14A, which becomes 558th Avenue, and 888th Road. The highway has on average 520 vehicles per day with 40 of those being heavy commercial vehicles.26 There are no rail lines that travel through the community.
The transportation route that is of most concern is Spur 14A. Chemicals such as fertilizer and gasoline are regularly transported along local routes, but there have been no significant transportation events that occurred locally. There is one facility of concern located along main transportation routes, which is the COOP located on Main Street. Transportation information is important to hazard mitigation plans because it suggests possible evacuation corridors in the community, as well as areas more at risk to transportation incidents.
26 Nebraska Department of Roads. “Traffic Flow Map of the State Highways: State of Nebraska.” [map]. Scale 1”= 20 miles. State of Nebraska: Department of Roads, 2015. http://www.roads.nebraska.gov/media/2510/2014-statewide-traffic-flow-map.pdf
56 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF FORDYCE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure FDC.1: Village of Fordyce
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 57 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF FORDYCE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Demographics The following figure displays the historical population trend from 1920 to 2017. This figure indicates that the population of Fordyce has been declining since 1990. When population is decreasing, there may be a higher level of unoccupied housing that is not being maintained. Furthermore, a declining population can lead to decreasing tax revenue for the village which could make implementation of mitigation actions more fiscally challenging.27
Figure FDC.2: Estimated Population 1920 – 2017 250 202 192 190 200 182 165 150 148 143 146 139 150 106
100 Population
50
0
Year
Source: U.S. Census Bureau28
The young, elderly, minorities, and poor may be more vulnerable to certain hazards than other groups. In comparison to the county, Fordyce’s population was:
• Older. The median age of Fordyce was 48 years old in 2017, compared with the county average of 44.1 years. Fordyce’s population has grown older since 2010, when the median age was 44.8 years old. Fordyce had a similar proportion of people under 20 years old (28.3%) to the county (27.4%) in 2017.29 • Similar ethnic diversity. Since 2010, Fordyce grew less ethnically diverse. In 2010, 8% was two or more races. By 2017, only 2% was two or more races. During that time, Cedar County grew 1% (American Indian) from 2010 to 2017.30 • More likely to be at the federal poverty line. The poverty rate in Fordyce (persons living below the federal poverty line) was 12.9% in 2017. This was higher than the county’s poverty rate of 9.7%.31
27 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 28 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 29 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 30 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP05: ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 31 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/.
58 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF FORDYCE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Employment and Economics The village’s economic base is a mixture of industries. In comparison to Cedar County, Fordyce’s economy had:
• Similar mix of industries. Employment sectors accounting for 10% or more of employment in Fordyce included Educational Services, Manufacturing, Retail, and Agriculture. While Cedar County’s sectors included Educational Services, Agriculture, and Manufacturing in 2017.32 • Lower household income. Fordyce’s median household income in 2017 ($51,875) was about $5,333 lower than the county ($57,208).33 • Fewer long-distance commuters. About 30.3% percent of workers in Fordyce commuted for fewer than 15 minutes, compared with about 53.7% of workers in Cedar County. About 12.6% of workers in Fordyce commute 30 minutes or more to work, compared to about 19% of the county workers.34 The planning team indicated that a large percentage of residents commute to other communities for work, primarily Yankton, South Dakota.
Housing In comparison to Cedar County, Fordyce’s housing stock was:
• More owner occupied. About 89.4% of occupied housing units in Fordyce are owner occupied compared with 80.7% of occupied housing in Cedar County in 2017.35 • Similar share of aged housing stock. Fordyce has a similar share of housing built prior to 1970 to the county (61.3% compared to 61.7%).36 • Fewer single-family homes. The predominant housing type in the village is single family detached and Fordyce contains fewer multifamily housing with five or more units per structure than the county (0% compared to 3.1%). About 95.9% of housing in Fordyce was single-family detached, compared with 89.9% of the county’s housing.37 The planning team indicated that there are no mobile homes in the community as current zoning prohibits them being within village boundaries.
This housing information is relevant to hazard mitigation insofar as the age of housing may indicate which housing units were built prior to state building codes being developed. Further, unoccupied housing may suggest that future development may be less likely to occur. Finally, communities with a substantial number of mobile homes may be more vulnerable to the impacts of high winds, tornadoes, and severe winter storms.
Future Development Trends Over the past five years, the old bank was demolished, and the COOP added two grain bins. There is a new house being planned for next year which will be built on the southeast side of the village, away from major transportation and the floodplain. There are no new businesses or industry planned for the next five years.
32 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 33 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 34 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0802: Means of Transportation to Work by Selected Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 35 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 36 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 37 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 59 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF FORDYCE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Structural Inventory and Valuation The planning team requested GIS parcel data from the County Assessor as of December 2019. This data allowed the planning team to analyze the location, number, and value of property improvements at the parcel level. The data did not contain the number of structures on each parcel. A summary of the results of this analysis is provided in the following table.
Table FDC.2: Fordyce Parcel Valuation TOTAL NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE OF VALUE OF NUMBER OF IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS VALUE IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN 87 $6,195,295 0 0% $0 Source: GIS Workshop/County Assessor, 201938 Critical Infrastructure/Key Resources Chemical Storage Fixed Sites According to the Tier II System reports submitted to the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, there are no chemical storage sites in Fordyce that contain hazardous chemicals. The planning team indicated that some fertilizer is stored in smaller amounts, and there are no concerns for chemical spills.
Critical Facilities The local planning team identified critical facilities necessary for Fordyce per FEMA’s Community Lifelines. Critical facilities were identified during the 2016 planning process and revised for this plan update. The following table and figure provide a summary of the critical facilities for the community. Table FDC.3: Critical Facilities SHORT- TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN CF# TYPE NAME ADDRESS SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) Other (Vulnerable 1 City Park 1st Street N N N Gathering Area) Food, St. John’s 2 Water, and 1st Street & Omaha Y N N Parish Center Shelter Food, 3 Water, and Old Well* 1st and Ford N N N Shelter Food, 4 Water, and Water Tower 312 W 2nd Street N/A N N Shelter Safety and Fordyce Fire 5 119 W 2nd Street N N N Security Department Federal 119 Main St, 6 US Post Office N N N Facility Fordyce Health and 7 Sewer Lagoon North of the Village N/A N/A N Safety Safety and 8 Village Hall 211 W. 2nd Street N N N Security
38 GIS Workshop/Cedar County Assessor. 2020. [Personal correspondence].
60 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF FORDYCE COMMUNITY PROFILE
SHORT- TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN CF# TYPE NAME ADDRESS SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) Safety and Maintenance 9 East 2nd Street N N N Security Shed *Old well is used for filling fire truck tanks as needed for fire suppression.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 61 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF FORDYCE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure FDC.3: Critical Facilities and Flood Risk Area
62 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF FORDYCE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Historical Occurrences See the Cedar County community profile for historical hazard events.
Hazard Prioritization For an in-depth discussion regarding area wide hazards, please see Section Four: Risk Assessment. The hazards discussed in detail below were either identified in the previous HMP and determined to still be of top concern or were added by the local planning team based on the identification of hazards of greatest concern, hazard history, and the jurisdiction’s capabilities.
Flooding Although flooding was not identified as a top concern for the community due to an absence of losses from flooding, the village does intend to participate in the NFIP in the future. Such participation was identified as a mitigation action for the community to pursue over the coming years. According to the NCEI, there were no flood events reported in Fordyce between 1996 and September 2019. The planning team indicated that the regional flood event of March 2019 did not significantly impact the community. Water flowed down the hills, into the streets and ditches, but never covered any roads. No damages were reported, and no roads were closed. Currently, there is no SFHA delineated in the form of a FIRM for Fordyce. The flood risk area shown on the map was developed by the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources.
Severe Thunderstorms (including Hail) Severe thunderstorms were identified as a top concern for the village as they are a regular part of the regional climate. Heavy rain, high winds, lightning, and hail can often occur in combination causing significant impacts to the community. According to the NCEI, there have been 19 severe thunderstorm events in Fordyce between 1996 and September 2019. One thunderstorm event in 2000 brought wind gusts close to 70 mph and downed tree limbs across the village.
Severe thunderstorms have brought several instances of hail to the community with hail sizes ranging from 0.75 inches to two inches in diameter. A hail event in 1997 caused $300,000 in crop damage in the community. Although there have not been any property damages reported in the community or to critical facilities, the large hail sizes seen in the village can cause damages to roofs, vehicles, windows, siding, trees, and vegetation.
Severe Winter Storms Severe winter storms were selected as a top concern for the village by the local planning team. According to the NCEI, there were 85 severe winter storm events in Cedar County from 1996 through September 2019; however, no property or crop damages were reported. The winter of 2010-2011 brought heavy snow in combination with high winds. Roadways were difficult to clear due blowing and drifting snow. In early January 2011, a severe winter storm dropped 8-10 inches across the area in about 24 hours. Winds picked up the next day, which allowed the snow to blow and drift over roads. The local planning team did not report any damages to critical facilities from winter storms. The team noted that village maintenance is responsible for clearing the roads, and that snow removal resources are sufficient.
Tornadoes and High Winds The local planning team identified tornadoes and high winds as hazards of concern for community. According to NCEI data, there have been 19 high wind events in Cedar County, but no tornadoes that passed through Fordyce between 1996 and September 2019. High winds in October 1997 reached 53 mph and caused a steel pig barn to go airborne just outside of the
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 63 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF FORDYCE COMMUNITY PROFILE
community; however, no injuries were reported. If a tornado were to occur in Fordyce residents can seek shelter in their basements or a neighbor’s basement. The planning team indicated that a portable backup generator is needed in the future for power failures.
Governance A community’s governance indicates the number of boards or offices that may be available to help implement hazard mitigation actions. Fordyce has a five-member village board, clerk/treasurer, maintenance supervisor, sewer commissioner, street/park commissioner, water commissioner, and a solid waste commissioner. The community is covered under the Hartington- Fordyce Fire Departments for fire services and Hartington emergency services for EMS response.
Capability Assessment The capability assessment consisted of a Capability Assessment Survey completed by the jurisdiction and a review of local existing policies, regulations, plans, and the programs. The survey is used to gather information regarding the jurisdiction’s planning and regulatory capability; administrative and technical capability; fiscal capability; and educational and outreach capability.
Table FDC.4: Capability Assessment SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Comprehensive Plan Yes Capital Improvements Plan No Economic Development Plan No Emergency Operational Plan Yes (County) Floodplain Management Plan No PLANNING Storm Water Management Plan No & Zoning Ordinance Yes REGULATORY CAPABILITY Subdivision Regulation/Ordinance No Floodplain Ordinance No Building Codes No National Flood Insurance Program No Community Rating System No Other (if any) Planning Commission Yes Floodplain Administration No GIS Capabilities No Chief Building Official No ADMINISTRATIVE &TECHNICAL Civil Engineering Yes Local Staff Who Can Assess Community’s CAPABILITY No Vulnerability to Hazards Grant Manager No Mutual Aid Agreement Yes Other (if any) FISCAL Capital Improvement Plan/ 1 & 6 Year plan Yes CAPABILITY Applied for grants in the past Yes
64 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF FORDYCE COMMUNITY PROFILE
SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Awarded a grant in the past Yes Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Yes such as Mitigation Projects Gas/Electric Service Fees No Storm Water Service Fees No Water/Sewer Service Fees No Development Impact Fees No General Obligation Revenue or Special Tax Yes Bonds Other (if any) Local citizen groups or non-profit organizations focused on environmental protection, emergency preparedness, access and No functional needs populations, etc. Ex. CERT Teams, Red Cross, etc. Ongoing public education or information EDUCATION program (e.g., responsible water use, fire safety, No & household preparedness, environmental OUTREACH education) CAPABILITY Natural Disaster or Safety related school No programs StormReady Certification No Firewise Communities Certification No Tree City USA No Other (if any)
Table FDC.5: Overall Capability OVERALL CAPABILITY LIMITED/MODERATE/HIGH
Financial resources need to implement mitigation projects Moderate
Staff/expertise to implement projects Moderate to High
Community support to implement projects High
Time to devote to hazard mitigation High
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 65 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF FORDYCE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Plan Integration The Local Emergency Operations Plan (LEOP) for Fordyce, which was last updated in 2016, is an annex of Cedar County’s LEOP. It is an all-hazards plan that does not address specific natural and man-made disasters. It provides a clear assignment of responsibility in case of an emergency.
The Zoning Ordinances for the Village of Fordyce do not integrate topics from the Hazard Mitigation Plan or in general as it relates to flooding, high winds, etc.
The village’s 2016 comprehensive plan generally discusses all weather-related hazards such as severe thunderstorms and winter weather. However, it does not indicate specific mitigation strategies. The planning team indicated that the next update of the comprehensive plan (2026) will mention the top hazards of concern and mitigation strategies.
The community’s annual budget were indicated as being limited to only maintaining current facilities and municipal systems. It is not anticipated that municipal funds will increase in the coming years. The village will need to utilize partnerships and grants to fund mitigation projects. The village does have a history of securing grant funding with most recently being awarded a USDA street grant in 2020. Plan Maintenance Hazard Mitigation Plans should be living documents and updated regularly to reflect changes in hazard events, priorities, and mitigation actions. These updates are encouraged to occur after every major disaster event, alongside community planning documents (i.e. annual budgets and Capital Improvement Plans), during the fall before the HMA grant cycle begins, and/or prior to other funding opportunity cycles begin including CDBG, Water Sustainability Fund, Revolving State Fund, or other identified funding mechanisms.
The local planning team, which includes the Village Board, Fire District, and Clerk, is responsible for reviewing and updating this community profile as changes occur or after a major event. The plan will be reviewed by the local planning team on a bi-annual basis. The public will be notified of the review process through a post at the office and shown on the board meeting agenda.
66 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF FORDYCE COMMUNITY PROFILE
Mitigation Strategy
Continuing Actions: MITIGATION ACTION BACKUP POWER GENERATORS Provide a portable or stationary source of backup power to redundant DESCRIPTION power supplies, municipal wells, lift stations and other critical facilities and shelters. Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Winter Storms, Severe HAZARD(S) Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST $30,000/generator FUNDING Municipal budget, HMA TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Clerk and Village Board The village board discusses this project regularly but is not a priority STATUS at this time. The board will pursue project funding and implementation when feasible. The generator will be a portable one.
PARTICIPATE IN THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM MITIGATION ACTION (NFIP) Participate in the NFIP, which enables property owners to purchase DESCRIPTION insurance protection against flood losses. Good standing enables participants to apply for FMA grants. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST Staff Time FUNDING Municipal budget TIMELINE 2-5 years PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Clerk and Village Board The project has been discussed at board meetings as there is STATUS continued interest in participating.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 67
This Page is Intentionally Blank
68 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021
COMMUNITY PROFILE
CITY OF HARTINGTON
Cedar and Dixon Counties Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
2021
.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 69 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
Local Planning Team
Table HTN.1: Hartington Local Planning Team NAME TITLE JURISDICTION NATALIE SCHAECHER City Clerk/Floodplain Admin City of Hartington PAT GUY Utility Superintendent City of Hartington
Location and Geography The City of Hartington is located in the central portion of Cedar County and covers an area of 0.94 square miles. Major waterways in the area include Bow Creek, which lies southeast of the city, and Norwegian Bow Creek, which runs through the northeastern corner of the corporate limits and a tributary through the northwestern corner. Hartington is also the county seat of Cedar County.
Transportation Hartington’s major transportation corridors include Nebraska Highways 57 and 84. Nebraska Highway 57 has on average 4,870 vehicles per day with 400 of those being heavy commercial vehicles. Nebraska Highway 84 has on average 1,780 vehicles per day with 130 heavy commercial vehicles.39 The planning team indicated that various chemicals are transported along these main transportation routes daily. A nursing home, daycare facility, and hotel are located near major transportation routes. There are no rail lines that travel through the community. The Hartington Municipal Airport is located southeast of the city.
According to the local planning team and PHMSA, there have not been any reported chemical spills during transportation in Hartington going back to 1980. Transportation information is important to hazard mitigation plans because it suggests possible evacuation corridors in the community, as well as areas more at risk to transportation incidents.
39 Nebraska Department of Roads. “Traffic Flow Map of the State Highways: State of Nebraska.” [map]. Scale 1”= 20 miles. State of Nebraska: Department of Roads, 2015. http://www.roads.nebraska.gov/media/2510/2014-statewide-traffic-flow-map.pdf
70 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure HTN.1: City of Hartington
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 71 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
Demographics The following figure displays the historical population trend from 1900 to 2017. This figure indicates that the population of Hartington decreased from 1980 to 2010, but recently increased from 2010 to 2017. When population increases, areas of the city may experience housing developments or a lack of properties available for rent or to own. Increasing populations can also represent increasing tax revenue for the community, which could make implementation of mitigation actions possible.40
Figure HTN.2: Estimated Population 1900 – 2017 2,000 1,730 1,701 1,800 1,688 1,660 1,648 1,652 1,640 1,568 1,581 1,554 1,600 1,413 1,467 1,400 1,200 971 1,000
800 Population 600 400 200 0
Year
Source: U.S. Census Bureau41
The young, elderly, minorities, and poor may be more vulnerable to certain hazards than other groups. In comparison to the county, Hartington’s population was:
• Younger. The median age of Hartington was 40.5 years old in 2017, compared with the county average of 44.1 years. Hartington’s population has grown younger since 2010, when the median age was 42.6 years old. Hartington had a larger proportion of people under 20 years old (29.5%) than the county (27.4%) in 2017.42 • Lower ethnic diversity. Since 2010, Hartington’s ethnic diversity did not change. In both 2010 and 2017, less than 1% of the city’s population was something other than White. During that time, Cedar County grew 1% (American Indian) from 2010 to 2017.43 • Less likely to be at the federal poverty line. The poverty rate in Hartington (persons living below the federal poverty line) was 9.4% in 2017. This was lower than the county’s poverty rate of 9.7%.44
40 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 41 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 42 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 43 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP05: ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 44 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/.
72 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
Employment and Economics The city’s economic base is a mixture of industries. In comparison to Cedar County, Hartington’s economy had:
• Different mix of industries. Employment sectors accounting for 10% or more of employment in Hartington included Educational Services, Manufacturing, Retail, and Construction. While Cedar County’s sectors included Educational Services, Agriculture, and Manufacturing in 2017.45 • Lower household income. Hartington’s median household income in 2017 ($43,698) was about $13,510 lower than the county ($57,208).46 • Similar share of long-distance commuters. About 73.8% percent of workers in Hartington commuted for fewer than 15 minutes, compared with about 53.7% of workers in Cedar County. About 19% of workers in Hartington commute 30 minutes or more to work, which is similar to the rest of the county.47
Major Employers Major employers in the community include Hartington Public School District, Cedar County Catholic School District, Cedar County Courthouse, Golden Living Nursing Home, Hydraulic Components, Grossenburg Implement, and Northeast Pipe and Panel. A large percentage of residents commute to other communities for work, such as Yankton, South Dakota. Housing In comparison to Cedar County, Hartington’s housing stock was:
• More owner occupied. About 81.7% of occupied housing units in Hartington are owner occupied compared with 80.7% of occupied housing in Cedar County in 2017.48 • Similar share of aged housing stock. Hartington has a similar share of housing built prior to 1970 than the county (60.9% compared to 61.7%).49 • Similar share of single-family homes. The predominant housing type in the city is single family detached and Hartington contains more multifamily housing with five or more units per structure than the county (8.7% compared to 3.1%). About 89.3% of housing in Hartington was single-family detached, compared with 89.9% of the county’s housing. Hartington had a smaller share of mobile and manufactured housing (~0%) compared to the county (3.6%).50 The planning team indicated there is only one mobile home in the city.
This housing information is relevant to hazard mitigation insofar as the age of housing may indicate which housing units were built prior to state building codes being developed. Further, unoccupied housing may suggest that future development may be less likely to occur. Finally, communities with a substantial number of mobile homes may be more vulnerable to the impacts of high winds, tornadoes, and severe winter storms.
45 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 46 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 47 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0802: Means of Transportation to Work by Selected Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 48 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 49 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 50 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 73 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
Future Development Trends There has been a small amount of change in development over the past five years in Hartington. The planning team indicated that Pine Lane Assisted Living center is now an apartment complex. Globe clothing store has been converted into a residence and a small store. The Historic Hartington Hotel has been refurbished, and Pomp’s Tire Service moved to a new location.
According to census data, Hartington’s population has fluctuated over the last two decades. The planning team attributes this to more work being available outside of the city. The team noted that phase two of a new housing development is being planned at Westfield Acres, and these new developments are directed away from hazardous areas such as the floodplain. There is no new industry or businesses planned.
Structural Inventory and Valuation The planning team requested GIS parcel data from the County Assessor as of December 2019. This data allowed the planning team to analyze the location, number, and value of property improvements at the parcel level. The data did not contain the number of structures on each parcel. A summary of the results of this analysis is provided in the following table.
Table HTN.2: Hartington Parcel Valuation TOTAL NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE OF VALUE OF NUMBER OF IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS VALUE IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN 764 $76,402,440 16 2.1% $971,015 Source: GIS Workshop/County Assessor, 201951 Critical Infrastructure/Key Resources Chemical Storage Fixed Sites According to the Tier II System reports submitted to the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, there are nine chemical storage sites in Hartington that contain hazardous chemicals.
Table HTN.3: Chemical Storage Fixed Sites FACILITY NAME ADDRESS LOCATED IN FLOODPLAIN? CENTRAL VALLEY AG 607 N Robinson Ave No CENTRAL VALLEY AG 56356 891 Rd No FARMERS PRIDE Yes PROPANE 607 N Robinson Ave FARMERS UNION CO-OP Jct Madison Ave & E Felber Yes BULK PLANT St FARMERS UNION CO-OP No GAS OIL CO 208 N Summit Ave GERHOLD CONCRETE CO 88475 Highway 57 No NDOT HARTINGTON YARD 215 Industrial Ave No NDOT HIGHWAY 57/12 No SATELLITE Jct Highways 57 & 12 TRANSCANADA No KEYSTONE PIPELINE 55953 883 Rd Source: Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy52
51 GIS Workshop/Cedar County Assessor. 2019. [Personal correspondence]. 52 Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy. “Search Tier II Data.” Accessed May 2020. https://deq-iis.ne.gov/tier2/search.faces.
74 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
There have been no recorded chemical spills from fixed storage sites within the city. The planning team indicated that there are currently no major concerns for fixed chemical spills. The team noted that Highways 57 and 84 would be at risk if a spill were to occur.
Critical Facilities The local planning team identified critical facilities necessary for Hartington per FEMA’s Community Lifelines. Critical facilities were identified during the 2016 planning process and revised for this plan update. The following table and figure provide a summary of the critical facilities for the community.
Table HTN.4: Critical Facilities SHORT- CF TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN TYPE NAME ADDRESS NUMBER SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) 401 W. Health and Arbor Care 1 Darlene N Y N Medical Center Street 405 W. Health and Avera Medical 2 Darlene N N N Medical Clinic Street Other (Vulnerable Community 3 N/A N N N Gathering Sports Complex Area) Other (Vulnerable W. Felber 4 Felber Park N N N Gathering Street Area) Other W. Felber (Vulnerable 5 City Pool Street/Felber N N N Gathering Park Area) Other W. Felber (Vulnerable 6 Golf Clubhouse Street/Felber N N N Gathering Park Area) Food, 7 Water, and Shelter House Felber Park N N N Shelter 608 N. NRD Lewis & Clark 8 Robinson N N N Offices NRD Office Avenue Food, 301 W. 9 Water, and UCC Church Y N N Franklin Shelter Safety and 10 City Hall 107 W. State N N N Security Other 304 W. 11 (Vulnerable Camper Court Franklin N N N Population) Street
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 75 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
SHORT- CF TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN TYPE NAME ADDRESS NUMBER SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) E. Felber 12 Energy Fuel Storage and N N N Broadway E. Felber Safety and Wastewater 13 and N. N Y Y Medical Treatment Plant Portland E. Felber 14 Energy NPPD Substation and N. N N Y Madison Food, Cedar Catholic 401 S. 15 Water, and Y N N High School Broadway Shelter Food, Holy Trinity 502 S. 16 Water, and Y N N Grade School Broadway Shelter Food, Hartington Public 501 S. 17 Water, and Y N N Schools Broadway Shelter Food, Holy Trinity 404 S. 18 Water, and Y N N Church Broadway Shelter Food, 106 W. 19 Water, and Lutheran Church Y N N Cedar Shelter Food, 20 Water, and Senior Center 112 W. Main Y N N Shelter Other (Vulnerable 106 S. 21 Public Library N N N Gathering Broadway Area) Other W. Felber (Vulnerable Baseball 22 Street/Felber N N N Gathering Complex Park Area) Food, 101 N. 23 Water, and Civic Auditorium Y N N Broadway Shelter Safety and 203 E. 24 Fire Department N N N Security Franklin Food, Knights of 25 Water, and 105 E. State Y N N Columbus Shelter Food, 26 Water, and VFW Hall 126 E. Main Y N N Shelter Other Holy Trinity 203 S. 27 (Vulnerable N N N Preschool Capitol Population) Health and 405 E. 28 Cedar Villa N N N Medical Centre
76 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
SHORT- CF TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN TYPE NAME ADDRESS NUMBER SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) Health and 605 E. 29 Porte Centre N N N Medical Centre Health and 102 S. 30 Porte Villa N N N Medical Portland Food, 203 Tower 31 Water, and Water Tower N N N Rd Shelter
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 77 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure HTN.3: Critical Facilities and Flood Risk Area
78 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure HTN.4: Flood Insurance Rate Map
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 79 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure HTN.5: Dam Location
80 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
Historical Occurrences See the Cedar County community profile for historical hazard events.
Hazard Prioritization For an in-depth discussion regarding area wide hazards, please see Section Four: Risk Assessment. The hazards discussed in detail below were either identified in the previous HMP and determined to still be of top concern or were added by the local planning team based on the identification of hazards of greatest concern, hazard history, and the jurisdiction’s capabilities.
Dam Failure Although not identified as a top hazard of concern for Hartington, the city would be significantly impacted by the failure of a high hazard dam located just south of the city. Hartington Dam, a newly constructed dam to withstand up to a 500-year rainfall event, was completed in 2015. If the dam were to fail, impacts would include property damages from flooding, economic impacts, and possible loss of life. The following table provides information on the high hazard dam.
Table HTN.5: High Hazard Dams in Hartington NIDID Dam Name Location Name of Stream Owner Tributary to NE09968 Hartington Dam City of Hartington Hartington Norwegian Creek Source: NDNR
The planning team indicated that dam inspections are currently planned to reduce risk of failure. The team also noted that an upgrade to the storm sewer system is needed in the future to help reduce risk and impacts.
Drought Drought was identified as a top concern for the city. During the summer of 2012, an exceptional drought formed for a large portion of the state, including Cedar County. The local planning team reported that the impacts from this drought were a low water table, an increase in grass and crop fires, and economic impacts to businesses, as agriculture is a significant industry in the region. It was reported that the water supply in the city is not sufficient and alternative water sources are needed. Hartington does implement water restrictions limiting the watering of lawns on an even and odd day system during droughts. The planning team indicated that upgrading a well is currently planned to help reduce the impacts of this hazard.
Flooding Flooding has caused significant impacts to Hartington in the past. According to NCEI data, there have been five flood events in Hartington between 1996 and September 2019. These caused a total of $350,000 in property damage and $50,000 in crop damage. One of these events occurred over two days and brought over ten inches of rain in July 1999, resulting in a flash flood that washed out two bridges. Highways 12 and 81 just northwest of Hartington were flooded. The flooding cut off access to Hartington from the north on Highway 57 and cut off residents living in Becker addition from the rest of the city. Emergency services could not travel north for multiple days, making the closes emergency services fifteen miles away for that area of the city. In addition to the road damage, many homes were also flooded. The total amount of damages from this event alone was estimated to be $150,000.
Another flash flood occurred on June 17, 2014 from a stationary thunderstorm over the area. Highway 57 south of Hartington was flooded and numerous gravel roads across the area were
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 81 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
flooded as well. Property damages were estimated at $200,000. The local planning team indicated that impacts from the March 2019 flood event caused damage to the fairgrounds and the wastewater treatment plant. Some residents reported water in their basements. Furthermore, the local planning team noted that there were concerns with the sewage plant, which is located in the floodplain. Heavy rain events present a concern for property damages to occur again.
The City of Hartington has five NFIP policies in-force for $551,000 and there are no repetitive flood loss properties. Figure HTN.4 shows the flood risk area as developed by the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources, and Figure HTN.5 shows the current FIRM for Hartington.
A floodplain project to update the flood risk maps for the Lewis and Clark Lake Watershed is currently underway. The project is being completed by the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources. No other projects are currently planned, but the planning team noted that more floodplain studies will be needed in the future to reduce the community’s risk.
Grass/Wildfires The local planning team identified grass and wildfires as a top concern. The primary concern from grass fires is the risk of property damage and economic impacts, as crops may be destroyed as well. The local planning team did not report any significant previous grass fires and according to the Nebraska Forest Service, there were no grass fires reported between 2000 and August 2018 by the Hartington Fire Department. It was noted that bunker gear was purchased recently and that the purchase of more gear and equipment is currently planned.
Severe Thunderstorms (including Hail) Severe thunderstorms are common events in the planning area and were identified as a top concern for the community. Severe thunderstorms and hail can result in the loss of electricity, blocked roadways, damages to trees, and flooding. Blocked roadways present life safety concerns to those needing evacuation or immediate medical attention. The NCEI recorded 51 severe thunderstorm events in Hartington between1996 and September 2019, with $85,000 in damages to property and $3,300,000 in crop damage. The local planning team noted that a severe thunderstorm on July 17, 2014 caused significant wind damage in the city. Lightning from a September 18, 1997 storm also caused significant damage to a telephone facility after the power lines outside were struck. It’s estimated that 20 percent of power lines have been buried in the city and there are no known hazardous trees in the community at this time.
Severe Winter Storms Severe winter weather is part of the regular climate for Hartington and was identified as a top concern for the city. Severe winter storms include blizzards, ice accumulation, extreme cold, heavy snow, and winter storms. These storms can cause power outages during bitterly cold temperatures, road closures, and economic impacts. According to the NCEI, there were 85 severe winter storm events in Cedar County between 1996 and September 2019; however, no property or crop damages were reported. The local planning team indicated that the winter of 2009-2010 was especially harsh, with road closures and powers outages due to heavy snow and high winds, but there have been no damages to critical facilities. Designated snow routes are on Main Street, Broadway, and Madison. The city is responsible for clearing roads, but it was noted that snow removal resources are not sufficient. The planning team indicated that some equipment has been recently upgraded. Upgrading equipment in the future is also planned.
82 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
Tornadoes and High Winds Tornadoes and high winds have the potential for significant damages, economic impacts, and loss of life and the local planning team identified them as a top concern for the city. According to NCEI data, there have been 19 high wind events in Cedar County and four tornadoes that passed through or near Hartington between 1996 and September 2019. One tornado, on May 3, 1999, caused heavy damage to farm buildings and center irrigation pivot near Hartington. The tornado also damaged a garage and a part of a roof within the community. Total damages were estimated at $50,000 but there were no injuries from the F-1 tornado. On June 17, 2014 a tornado primarily impacted rural areas just outside of Hartington. Damage was reported at a farm where outbuildings were impacted, and there was severe tree damage along the path from the EF-1 tornado. Property damages were estimated at $10,000. The community is interested in constructing a safe room when funding becomes available.
Governance A community’s governance indicates the number of boards or offices that may be available to help implement hazard mitigation actions. Hartington has a mayor, a five-member city council and the following offices.
• Clerk/Treasurer • Utility Superintendent • Fire Department • Wastewater Treatment Plant • Street/Water Commissioner • Economic Development • Hartington Airport • Hartington Chamber of Commerce • Ambulance Squad • Park Board • Library Board • Tree Board • Variance Committee • Cemetery Board Capability Assessment The capability assessment consisted of a Capability Assessment Survey completed by the jurisdiction and a review of local existing policies, regulations, plans, and the programs. The survey is used to gather information regarding the jurisdiction’s planning and regulatory capability; administrative and technical capability; fiscal capability; and educational and outreach capability.
Table HTN.5: Capability Assessment SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Comprehensive Plan Yes PLANNING Capital Improvements Plan No & Economic Development Plan Yes REGULATORY Emergency Operational Plan Yes (County) CAPABILITY Floodplain Management Plan No Storm Water Management Plan No
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 83 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Zoning Ordinance Yes Subdivision Regulation/Ordinance Yes Floodplain Ordinance Yes Building Codes Yes National Flood Insurance Program Yes Community Rating System No Planning Commission Yes Floodplain Administration Yes GIS Capabilities No ADMINISTRATIVE Chief Building Official Yes &TECHNICAL Civil Engineering Yes CAPABILITY Local Staff Who Can Assess Community’s Yes (County) Vulnerability to Hazards Grant Manager Yes Mutual Aid Agreement Yes Capital Improvement Plan/ 1 & 6 Year plan Yes Applied for grants in the past Yes Awarded a grant in the past Yes Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Yes such as Mitigation Projects FISCAL Gas/Electric Service Fees Yes CAPABILITY Storm Water Service Fees No Water/Sewer Service Fees Yes Development Impact Fees No General Obligation Revenue or Special Tax Yes Bonds Local citizen groups or non-profit organizations focused on environmental protection, emergency preparedness, access and No functional needs populations, etc. Ex. CERT Teams, Red Cross, etc. EDUCATION Ongoing public education or information program (e.g., responsible water use, fire safety, & Yes OUTREACH household preparedness, environmental CAPABILITY education) Natural Disaster or Safety related school Yes programs StormReady Certification No Firewise Communities Certification No Tree City USA Yes
84 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
Table HTN.6: Overall Capability OVERALL CAPABILITY LIMITED/MODERATE/HIGH
Financial resources need to implement mitigation projects Moderate
Staff/expertise to implement projects Moderate
Community support to implement projects Moderate
Time to devote to hazard mitigation Limited
Plan Integration The city’s comprehensive plan was last updated in 2010. The plan outlines long term goals for Hartington as it pertains to economic development, land use, transportation, housing, public facilities, infrastructure, and environmental. Under land use, one of the objectives address flooding and recommends that flood prone areas be developed as recreational or open spaces. Another objective identified under infrastructure is to “evaluate and implement flood protection for the northeast portion of the community.” Furthermore, the plan encourages the use of green development and aims at Safe Growth. The planning team noted a hazard mitigation section will be added to the comprehensive plan in a future update.
The Local Emergency Operations Plan (LEOP) for Hartington, which was last updated in 2016, is an annex of Cedar County’s LEOP. It is an all hazards plan that does not address specific natural and man-made disasters. It provides a clear assignment of responsibility in case of an emergency.
The municipal budget was last updated in October 2020 and is updated annually. The planning team indicated municipal funds were limited to maintaining current facilities and municipal systems, outside of current projects related to street and well repair. The amount of municipal funds has increased in recent years, as the community has increased utility rates. The village board accounts for severe winter storms in its annual budget and plans for related expenses. In the last five years, Hartington has been awarded three grants related to GIS mapping and trees from the Lewis and Clark NRD as well as the Arbor Day Foundation.
Zoning and flooding ordinances were last updated in 1996. Hartington’s floodplain ordinances include floodplain maps and require more than one foot of elevation above Base Flood Elevation in the floodplain. Building codes are from the most recent edition of the International Code Book published in 2018.
Plan Maintenance Hazard Mitigation Plans should be living documents and updated regularly to reflect changes in hazard events, priorities, and mitigation actions. These updates are encouraged to occur after every major disaster event, alongside community planning documents (i.e. annual budgets and Capital Improvement Plans), during the fall before the HMA grant cycle begins, and/or prior to other funding opportunity cycles begin including CDBG, Water Sustainability Fund, Revolving State Fund, or other identified funding mechanisms.
The local planning team is responsible for reviewing and updating this community profile as changes occur or after a major event. The local planning team will include the City Clerk, Utility Superintendent, and the City Board. The plan will be reviewed no less than bi-annually and will include the public in the review and revision process by sharing information at council meetings.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 85 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
Mitigation Strategy
Continuing Actions: MITIGATION ACTION ACQUIRE ADDITIONAL BUNKER GEAR Purchase additional bunker gear to improve the resources and DESCRIPTION equipment available for firefighting. HAZARD(S) Grass/Wildfire, Urban Fire ESTIMATED COST $2,000 per firefighter FUNDING Municipal budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Fire Department Additional gear was recently purchased. Acquisition of more gear is STATUS currently planned.
MITIGATION ACTION BACKUP POWER GENERATORS Provide a portable or stationary source of backup power to redundant DESCRIPTION power supplies, municipal wells, lift stations and other critical facilities and shelters. Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Winter Storms, Severe HAZARD(S) Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST $30,000/generator FUNDING Municipal budget, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Fire Department, Utility Superintendent, City Council The city will continue to add backup generators to needed sites as STATUS funding allows.
MITIGATION ACTION IMPROVE AND REVISE SNOW/ICE REMOVAL PROGRAM As needed, continue to revise and improve the snow and ice removal program for streets. Revisions should address situations such as DESCRIPTION plowing snow, ice removal, parking during snow and ice removal, and removal of associated storm debris. This would include the purchase of and/or updates to equipment that is needed and paving routes. HAZARD(S) Severe Winter Storms ESTIMATED COST $50,000 FUNDING Municipal budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY City Council, Utility Superintendent The city plans to purchase a new payloader in Fall 2021. STATUS
86 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION NEW MUNICIPAL WELL Install a new well to provide a safe backup water supply for the DESCRIPTION community, replace existing wells affected by drought, and additional water for fire protection. HAZARD(S) Drought ESTIMATED COST $350,000 - $450,000 FUNDING Municipal budget, HMA TIMELINE 1-2 years PRIORITY High LEAD AGENCY City Council, Utility Superintendent STATUS The well is currently in the process of being upgraded.
MITIGATION ACTION SAFE ROOMS Design and construct fully supplied safe rooms in highly vulnerable DESCRIPTION areas such as mobile home parks, campgrounds, schools, and other such areas. HAZARD(S) Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST $200-$300/sf stand alone; $150-200/sf addition/retrofit FUNDING Municipal budget, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY City Council STATUS This project has not started due to a lack of funding.
MITIGATION ACTION WEATHER RADIOS Conduct an inventory of weather radios at schools and other critical DESCRIPTION facilities and provide new radios as needed. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $50/radio FUNDING Municipal budget, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Utility Superintendent, Fire Department and County EMA Weather radios are currently in place at some critical facilities. The city STATUS will continue to add/replace weather radios as needed.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 87 SECTION SEVEN: CITY OF HARTINGTON COMMUNITY PROFILE
Removed Actions: MITIGATION ACTION FLOODPLAIN REGULATION ENFORCEMENTS AND UPDATES Continue to enforce the local floodplain ordinances to include (but not limited to): regulating construction in the floodplain, prohibiting construction for human habitation in the floodway, prohibiting manure DESCRIPTION storage in the floodplain as delineated by the FIRM, and requiring any use of lands within the SFHA to have low flood damage potential and result in no adverse effects on channels or tributary to the stream or drainage system. HAZARD(S) Flooding While the city continues to enforce floodplain ordinances as required, REASON FOR REMOVAL this project can be removed as it is considered an ongoing effort.
MAINTAIN GOOD STANDING IN THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE MITIGATION ACTION PROGRAM (NFIP) Maintain good standing in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) including floodplain management practices/requirements and DESCRIPTION regulation enforcements and updates. Continue education of Floodplain Administrators, building inspectors, etc. HAZARD(S) Flooding While the city will continue to participate and maintain compliance in REASON FOR REMOVAL the NFIP, this project can be removed as it is considered an ongoing effort.
MITIGATION ACTION SNOW FENCES Construct snow fences to protect main transportation routes and DESCRIPTION critical facilities from excessive snow drifting and road closure. HAZARD(S) Severe Winter Storms REASON FOR While the city continues to prepare for severe winter storms, time and REMOVAL funds have been allocated to other projects.
MITIGATION ACTION TREE CITY USA DESCRIPTION Continue participation in Tree City USA. HAZARD(S) Tornadoes and High Winds, Hail While the city continues to participate in Tree City USA, this project REASON FOR REMOVAL can be removed as it is considered an ongoing effort.
88 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021
COMMUNITY PROFILE
VILLAGE OF MAGNET
Cedar and Dixon Counties Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
2021
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 89 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF MAGNET COMMUNITY PROFILE
Local Planning Team
Table MGT.1: Magnet Local Planning Team NAME TITLE JURISDICTION JASON BECKER Board Chairman Village of Magnet
Location and Geography The Village of Magnet is located in the southwestern portion of Cedar County and covers an area of 0.15 square miles. The Village lies over five miles southwest of Pearl Creek.
Transportation Magnet’s major transportation corridors include Nebraska Highway 59, which is just north of the Village, Nebraska Highway 14C, and 871st Road. NE-59 sees an average 470 vehicles per day with 85 of those being heavy commercial vehicles, and Highway 14C has 140 vehicles per day. There are no rail lines that travel through the community.53
NE-59 was identified as a concern by the local planning team due to the frequency of agricultural chemicals, primarily for the fertilizer plant nearby, being transported along this route. According to PHSMA and the planning team, no transportation spills have occurred locally. Critical facilities are not located on any of these routes. Transportation information is important to hazard mitigation plans because it suggests possible evacuation corridors in the community, as well as areas more at risk to transportation incidents.
53 Nebraska Department of Roads. “Traffic Flow Map of the State Highways: State of Nebraska.” [map]. Scale 1”= 20 miles. State of Nebraska: Department of Roads, 2015. http://www.roads.nebraska.gov/media/2510/2014-statewide-traffic-flow-map.pdf
90 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF MAGNET COMMUNITY PROFILE
Demographics The following figure displays the historical population trend from 1910 to 2017. This figure indicates that the population of Magnet has decreased since 2000. When population decreases, there may be a higher level of unoccupied housing that is not being kept up. Furthermore, a declining population can lead to decreasing tax revenue for the Village which could make implementation of mitigation actions more fiscally challenging.54
Figure MGT.2: Estimated Population 1910 – 2017
200 178 180 160 153 152 160 140 115 116 120 100 88 79 69
Population 80 59 57 60 45 40 20 0
Year
Source: U.S. Census Bureau55
The young, elderly, minorities, and poor may be more vulnerable to certain hazards than other groups. In comparison to the County, Magnet’s population was:
• Older. The median age of Magnet was 62.3 years old in 2017, compared with the County average of 44.1 years. Magnet’s population has grown younger since 2010, when the median age was 50.8 years old. Magnet had a smaller proportion of people under 20 years old (8.9%) than the County (27.4%) in 2017.56 • Lower ethnic diversity. Since 2010, Magnet remained the same regarding ethnic diversity. In both 2010 and 2017, 100% of Magnet’s population was White. During that time, Cedar County grew 1% (American Indian) from 2010 to 2017.57 • Less likely to be at the federal poverty line. The poverty rate in Magnet (persons living below the federal poverty line) was 0% in 2017. This was lower than the County’s poverty rate of 9.7%.58
54 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 55 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 56 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 57 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP05: ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 58 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 91 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF MAGNET COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure MGT.1: Village of Magnet
92 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF MAGNET COMMUNITY PROFILE
Employment and Economics The Village’s economic base is a mixture of industries. In comparison to Cedar County, Magnet’s economy had:
• Similar mix of industries. Employment sectors accounting for 10% or more of employment in Magnet included Educational Services, Construction, and Manufacturing. While Cedar County’s sectors included Educational Services, Agriculture, and Manufacturing in 2017.59 • Higher household income. Magnet’s median household income in 2017 ($40,938) was about $16,270 lower than the County ($57,208).60 • More long-distance commuters. About 17.6% percent of workers in Magnet commuted for fewer than 15 minutes, compared with about 53.7% of workers in Cedar County. About 29.4% of workers in Magnet commute 30 minutes or more to work, compared to about 19% of the County workers.61
Major Employers There were no major employers identified by the planning team, but a large percentage of residents commute to other communities for work, such as Norfolk, Yankton, Hartington, and Bloomfield.
Housing In comparison to Cedar County, Magnet’s housing stock was:
• Less owner occupied. About 69.6% of occupied housing units in Magnet are owner occupied compared with 80.7% of occupied housing in Cedar County in 2017.62 • Greater share of aged housing stock. Magnet has a larger share of housing built prior to 1970 than the County (96.5% compared to 61.7%).63 • Similar share of single-family homes. The predominant housing type in the Village is single family detached and Magnet contains fewer multifamily housing with five or more units per structure than the County (0% compared to 3.1%). About 89.3% of housing in Magnet was single-family detached, compared with 89.9% of the County’s housing. Magnet had a larger share of mobile and manufactured housing (10.7%) compared to the County (3.6%).64 There is one mobile home located within the community.
This housing information is relevant to hazard mitigation insofar as the age of housing may indicate which housing units were built prior to state building codes being developed. Further, unoccupied housing may suggest that future development may be less likely to occur. Finally, communities with a substantial number of mobile homes may be more vulnerable to the impacts of high winds, tornadoes, and severe winter storms.
59 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 60 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 61 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0802: Means of Transportation to Work by Selected Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 62 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 63 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 64 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 93 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF MAGNET COMMUNITY PROFILE
Future Development Trends Aside from a few vacant homes being demolished, the village has not changed or developed any areas in the last five years. No new businesses have been constructed. No new housing or business developments are planned for the next five years. The team attributes the village’s declining population to an aging population as well as senior relocating to assisted living or retirement homes. More homes have become inhabitable and demolished, affecting the population of the community as well.
Structural Inventory and Valuation The planning team requested GIS parcel data from the County Assessor as of December 2019. This data allowed the planning team to analyze the location, number, and value of property improvements at the parcel level. The data did not contain the number of structures on each parcel. A summary of the results of this analysis is provided in the following table.
Table MGT.2: Magnet Parcel Valuation TOTAL NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE OF VALUE OF NUMBER OF IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS VALUE IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN 62 $1,226,260 0 0% $0 Source: GIS Workshop/County Assessor, 201965
Critical Infrastructure/Key Resources Chemical Storage Fixed Sites According to the Tier II System reports submitted to the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, there are no chemical storage sites in Magnet that contain hazardous chemicals. The planning team indicated no concerns exist for fixed chemical spills since no spills have occurred locally, and there are no chemical storage sites.
Critical Facilities The local planning team identified critical facilities necessary for Magnet per FEMA’s Community Lifelines. Critical facilities were identified during the 2016 planning process and revised for this plan update. The following table and figure provide a summary of the critical facilities for the community.
Table MGT.3: Critical Facilities SHORT- CF TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN TYPE NAME ADDRESS NUMBER SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) Main St. Safety and Community 1 and N N N Security Building Cedar St. Other Park St. (Vulnerable 2 Magnet Park and Main N/A N/A N Gathering St. Area)
65 GIS Workshop/Cedar County Assessor. 2019. [Personal correspondence].
94 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF MAGNET COMMUNITY PROFILE
SHORT- CF TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN TYPE NAME ADDRESS NUMBER SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) Safety and Magnet Fire Cedar 3 N N N Security Department Street Food, Cedar St. Rural Water 4 Water, and and 552 N/A N N Supply Shelter Avenue Health and Southeast 5* Lagoon N/A N/A Y Medical of Magnet *Not mapped
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 95 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF MAGNET COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure MGT.3: Critical Facilities and Flood Risk Area
96 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF MAGNET COMMUNITY PROFILE
Historical Occurrences See the Cedar County community profile for historical hazard events.
Hazard Prioritization For an in-depth discussion regarding area wide hazards, please see Section Four: Risk Assessment. The hazards discussed in detail below were either identified in the previous HMP and determined to still be of top concern or were added by the local planning team based on the identification of hazards of greatest concern, hazard history, and the jurisdiction’s capabilities.
Severe Thunderstorms (including Hail) Severe thunderstorms were identified as a top concern for the Village as they are a regular part of the climate. Heavy rain, high winds, lightning, and hail can often occur in combination causing significant impacts to the community. A severe thunderstorm during May 2011 packed winds upwards of 70 mph. These winds downed several trees in Magnet and moved a building off of its foundation northwest of town. The downed trees also downed power lines causing a power outage in the area. The local planning team noted that none of the power lines are buried in the community.
Magnet has had several instances of hail reported in the community. Hail sizes have ranged from 0.75 to 2.50 inches in diameter. When hail reaches over two inches, there is a risk of injury, damage to brick walls and siding, vehicle damage, and severe roof damage. The local planning team reported that a 1998 event was particularly damaging where windows were broken, and roofs were damaged on almost every building in the Village. Following the 1998 hailstorm, the community center has installed hail resistant materials to the roof and siding. No significant hailstorms have been reported since then.
A backup generator at the fire hall and community building was identified as being needed in the future to reduce risk and improve the community’s response to this hazard.
Severe Winter Storms Severe winter storms were selected as a top concern for the Village by the local planning team. There were 85 winter storm or blizzard zonal events reported by NCEI since 1996. The winter of 2009-2010 was particularly harsh on the community. A long duration winter storm occurred over the Christmas holiday which snowed in the community and made travel impossible. As a result of the long duration and large amount of snow, the community did not have access to fuel. The Village designates Main Street as a snow route and is interested in using snow fences on the west side of the community. Streets are cleared by the Village with a snow plow, tractor, and loader.
Tornadoes and High Winds The local planning team identified both tornadoes and high winds as hazards of concern for the Village. A brief F-0 tornado touched down near Magnet in May 2001. It resulted in no damage to property nor were there any injuries or deaths. Damage to property and trees along with resulting power outages are a concern to the community when high winds occur. Weather radios were also identified as a need for critical facilities.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 97 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF MAGNET COMMUNITY PROFILE
Governance A community’s governance indicates the number of boards or offices that may be available to help implement hazard mitigation actions. Magnet has a five-member village board and the following offices.
• Clerk/Treasurer • Fire Department • Sewer Commissioner • Water Commissioner Capability Assessment The capability assessment consisted of a Capability Assessment Survey completed by the jurisdiction and a review of local existing policies, regulations, plans, and the programs. The survey is used to gather information regarding the jurisdiction’s planning and regulatory capability; administrative and technical capability; fiscal capability; and educational and outreach capability.
Table MGT.4: Capability Assessment SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Comprehensive Plan No Capital Improvements Plan No Economic Development Plan No Emergency Operational Plan Yes (County) Floodplain Management Plan No PLANNING Storm Water Management Plan No & Zoning Ordinance No REGULATORY CAPABILITY Subdivision Regulation/Ordinance No Floodplain Ordinance No Building Codes No National Flood Insurance Program No Community Rating System No Other (if any) Planning Commission No Floodplain Administration No GIS Capabilities No Chief Building Official No ADMINISTRATIVE &TECHNICAL Civil Engineering No Local Staff Who Can Assess Community’s CAPABILITY No Vulnerability to Hazards Grant Manager No Mutual Aid Agreement Yes Other (if any) Capital Improvement Plan/ 1 & 6 Year plan Yes FISCAL Applied for grants in the past No CAPABILITY Awarded a grant in the past No
98 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF MAGNET COMMUNITY PROFILE
SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Yes such as Mitigation Projects Gas/Electric Service Fees No Storm Water Service Fees No Water/Sewer Service Fees Yes Development Impact Fees No General Obligation Revenue or Special Tax Yes Bonds Other (if any) Local citizen groups or non-profit organizations focused on environmental protection, emergency preparedness, access and No functional needs populations, etc. Ex. CERT Teams, Red Cross, etc. Ongoing public education or information EDUCATION program (e.g., responsible water use, fire safety, No & household preparedness, environmental OUTREACH education) CAPABILITY Natural Disaster or Safety related school No programs StormReady Certification No Firewise Communities Certification No Tree City USA No Other (if any)
Table MGT.5: Overall Capability OVERALL CAPABILITY LIMITED/MODERATE/HIGH
Financial resources need to implement mitigation projects Limited
Staff/expertise to implement projects Limited
Community support to implement projects Limited
Time to devote to hazard mitigation High
Plan Integration The community currently has very few planning mechanisms in place. The Local Emergency Operations Plan (LEOP) for Magnet, which was last updated in 2011, is an annex of Cedar County’s LEOP. It is an all hazards plan that does not address specific natural and man-made disasters. It provides a clear assignment of responsibility in case of an emergency.
The municipal budget was updated in 2020, but municipal funds remain very limited, as noted by the planning team. Funds have decreased over recent years due to declining population and property values. Any mitigation projects that are pursued would require the assistance of outside funding to be implemented.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 99 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF MAGNET COMMUNITY PROFILE
Plan Maintenance Hazard Mitigation Plans should be living documents and updated regularly to reflect changes in hazard events, priorities, and mitigation actions. These updates are encouraged to occur after every major disaster event, alongside community planning documents (i.e. annual budgets and Capital Improvement Plans), during the fall before the HMA grant cycle begins, and/or prior to other funding opportunity cycles begin including CDBG, Water Sustainability Fund, Revolving State Fund, or other identified funding mechanisms.
The local planning team, comprised of the board chairman, village clerk, and fire chief, will be responsible for reviewing and updating this community profile as changes occur or after a major event. The plan will be reviewed annually and will involve the public in the review process by sharing information at board meetings or through letters.
Mitigation Strategy
Continuing Actions: MITIGATION ACTION BACKUP POWER GENERATORS Provide a portable or stationary source of backup power to redundant DESCRIPTION power supplies, municipal wells, lift stations and other critical facilities and shelters. The community center is in need of a generator. Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Winter Storms, Severe HAZARD(S) Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST $30,000+/generator FUNDING Municipal budget, HMA TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Village Board STATUS Backup power is needed for the fire station and community building.
MITIGATION ACTION WEATHER RADIOS Conduct an inventory of weather radios at schools and other critical DESCRIPTION facilities and provide new radios as needed. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $50/radio FUNDING Municipal budget, HMA TIMELINE 1-2 years PRIORITY High LEAD AGENCY Village Board STATUS Weather radios are needed at the fire station and community building.
100 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF MAGNET COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION CIVIL SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS Improve emergency rescue and response equipment and facilities by providing additional, or updating existing emergency response equipment. This would also include developing backup systems for DESCRIPTION emergency vehicles, identifying and training additional personnel for emergency response, or continuing educational opportunities for current personnel. HAZARD(S) All hazards $5,000 to $400,000 per vehicle, varies depending on the equipment ESTIMATED COST needed FUNDING Municipal budget TIMELINE 1-2 years PRIORITY High LEAD AGENCY Fire Department, Village Board STATUS Early assessments of current equipment underway.
Removed Actions: MITIGATION ACTION SNOW PLOW DESCRIPTION Purchase additional snow plow. HAZARD(S) Severe Winter Storms REASON FOR REMOVAL Not identified as a need at this time.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 101
This Page is Intentionally Blank
102 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021
COMMUNITY PROFILE
VILLAGE OF OBERT
Cedar and Dixon Counties Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
2021
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 103 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF OBERT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Local Planning Team
Table OBT.1: Obert Local Planning Team NAME TITLE JURISDICTION STAN WIESELER Village Board Village of Obert
Location and Geography The Village of Obert is located in the northeastern portion of Cedar County and covers an area of 0.07 square miles. The major waterway in the area is the Lime Creek, which is located just south of the corporate limits.
Transportation Obert’s major transportation corridor is Nebraska Highway 12. This Highway on average has 1,315 vehicles per day, with 140 of those being heavy commercial vehicles. There are no rail lines that travel through the Village.
The transportation route of most concern is Highway 12. The planning team indicated that chemicals are transported on the transportation route, but the type of chemical and amount is unknown. There have been no significant transportation events in the area and there are no critical facilities along the main routes. Transportation information is important to hazard mitigation plans because it suggests possible evacuation corridors in the community, as well as areas more at risk to transportation incidents.
Demographics The following figure displays the historical population trend from 1920 to 2017. This figure indicates that the population of Obert has decreased since 2000. When population decreases, there may be a higher level of unoccupied housing that is not being kept up. Furthermore, a declining population can lead to decreasing tax revenue for the village, which could make implementation of mitigation actions more fiscally challenging.1
104 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF OBERT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure OBT.2: Estimated Population 1920 – 2017 140
116 120 112 112
100 91
80
60
Population 49 42 44 36 39 40 23 17 20
0
Year
Source: U.S. Census Bureau66
The young, elderly, minorities, and poor may be more vulnerable to certain hazards than other groups. In comparison to the County, Obert’s population was:
• Older. The median age of Obert was 50.8 years old in 2017, compared with the County average of 44.1 years. Obert’s population has grown younger since 2010, when the median age was 52.3 years old. Obert had a smaller proportion of people under 20 years old (17.7%) than the County (27.4%) in 2017.67 • Lower ethnic diversity. Since 2010, Obert remained the same regarding ethnic diversity. In both 2010 and 2017, 100% of Obert’s population was White. During that time, Cedar County grew 1% (American Indian) from 2010 to 2017.68 • More likely to be at the federal poverty line. The poverty rate in Obert (persons living below the federal poverty line) was 41.2% in 2017. This was higher than the County’s poverty rate of 9.7%.69
66 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://factfinder.census.gov. 67 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://factfinder.census.gov/. 68 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP05: ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates.” [database file]. https://factfinder.census.gov/. 69 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://factfinder.census.gov/.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 105 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF OBERT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure OBT.1: Village of Obert
106 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF OBERT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Employment and Economics The Village’s economic base is a mixture of industries. In comparison to Cedar County, Obert’s economy had:
• Similar mix of industries. Employment sectors accounting for 10% or more of employment in Obert included Wholesale Trade, Agriculture, and Manufacturing. While Cedar County’s sectors included Educational Services, Agriculture, and Manufacturing in 2017.70 • Lower household income. Obert’s median household income in 2017 ($29,375) was about $27,833 lower than the County ($57,208).71 • More long-distance commuters. About 33.3% percent of workers in Obert commuted for fewer than 15 minutes, compared with about 53.7% of workers in Cedar County. About 33.3% of workers in Obert commute 30 minutes or more to work, compared to about 19% of the County workers.72
Major Employers Major employers in Obert include Butch’s Propane. The planning team indicated that a large percentage of residents commute to other communities for work, such as Yankton, Wynot, and Hartington.
Housing In comparison to Cedar County, Obert’s housing stock was:
• More owner occupied. About 100% of occupied housing units in Obert are owner occupied compared with 80.7% of occupied housing in Cedar County in 2017.73 • Greater share of aged housing stock. Obert has a larger share of housing built prior to 1970 than the County (86.7 compared to 61.7%).74 • More single-family homes. The predominant housing type in the Village is single family detached and Obert contains fewer multifamily housing with five or more units per structure than the County (0% compared to 3.1%). About 100% of housing in Obert was single-family detached, compared with 89.9% of the County’s housing. Obert had a smaller share of mobile and manufactured housing (~0%) compared to the County (3.6%).75 There is one mobile home located within the community.
This housing information is relevant to hazard mitigation insofar as the age of housing may indicate which housing units were built prior to state building codes being developed. Further, unoccupied housing may suggest that future development may be less likely to occur. Finally, communities with a substantial number of mobile homes may be more vulnerable to the impacts of high winds, tornadoes, and severe winter storms.
Future Development Trends The village has not experienced any changes in housing or businesses over the past five years, and there are no housing or business developments planned for the next five years. The team attributes the village’s fluctuating population to an aging population and lack of employment opportunities.
70 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://factfinder.census.gov/. 71 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://factfinder.census.gov/. 72 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0802: Means of Transportation to Work by Selected Characteristics.” [database file]. https://factfinder.census.gov/. 73 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://factfinder.census.gov/. 74 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://factfinder.census.gov/. 75 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://factfinder.census.gov/.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 107 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF OBERT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Structural Inventory and Valuation The planning team requested GIS parcel data from the County Assessor as of December 2019. This data allowed the planning team to analyze the location, number, and value of property improvements at the parcel level. The data did not contain the number of structures on each parcel. A summary of the results of this analysis is provided in the following table.
Table OBT.2: Obert Parcel Valuation TOTAL NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE OF VALUE OF NUMBER OF IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS VALUE IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN 24 $398,450 0 0% $0 Source: GIS Workshop/County Assessor, 201976 Critical Infrastructure/Key Resources Chemical Storage Fixed Sites According to the Tier II System reports submitted to the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, there are no chemical storage sites in Obert that contain hazardous chemicals. The planning team indicated there are no concerns for fixed chemical spills and no spills have occurred locally.
Critical Facilities The local planning team identified critical facilities necessary for Obert per FEMA’s Community Lifelines. Critical facilities were identified during the 2016 planning process and revised for this plan update. The following table and figure provide a summary of the critical facilities for the community.
Table OBT.3: Critical Facilities SHORT- CF TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN TYPE NAME ADDRESS NUMBER SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) Safety and Main 1 Village Hall N N N Security Street Food, Water, Community Main 2 Y N N and Shelter Hall Street Obert Food, Water, Community 2nd 3 N N N and Shelter Hillside Street Chapel Northern Obert Food, Water, Water 4 Park N N N and Shelter Reservoir east of Main St
76 GIS Workshop/Cedar County Assessor. 2019. [Personal correspondence].
108 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF OBERT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure OBT.3: Critical Facilities and Flood Risk Area
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 109 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF OBERT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Historical Occurrences See the Cedar County community profile for historical hazard events.
Hazard Prioritization For an in-depth discussion regarding area wide hazards, please see Section Four: Risk Assessment. The hazards discussed in detail below were either identified in the previous HMP and determined to still be of top concern or were added by the local planning team based on the identification of hazards of greatest concern, hazard history, and the jurisdiction’s capabilities.
Drought The planning team identified drought as a top hazard of concern for the Village. During the summer of 2012, an exceptional drought formed for a large portion of the state, including Cedar County. The local planning team reported that the impacts from this drought were crop loss and dried out trees. At the time of writing, the planning team indicated Obert was concerned about drought in 2021. Economic impacts from drought are of particular concern. If the drought is prolonged in the region, it would impact the agricultural industry. Additionally, the secondary impacts of wildfire were also noted as a concern. Water is supplied by the rural water district. The reservoir is located north of town and supplies water to the town but is owned by the Rural Water District. In the event of loss of drinking water, the reservoir is large enough to supply the community for up to at least two days. The local planning team noted that the water supply is sufficient at this time, but identified the need to implement water system improvements for a more efficient system in the community.
Flooding Currently, there is no SFHA delineated in the form of a FIRM for Obert. Given the lack of a designated SFHA and the absence of losses resulting from flooding, the Village has opted to not participate in the NFIP. Figure OBT.4 shows the flood risk area as developed by the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources. The planning team indicated that Obert was not affected by the March 2019 flood event. It was noted that a new culvert was installed near Butch’s Propane, which has greatly alleviated localized flooding that would occur during heavy rains.
Severe Thunderstorms (including Hail) The planning team ranked severe thunderstorms as a top hazard of concern. Heavy rain, high winds, lightning, and hail can often occur in combination causing significant impacts to the community. In August 2011, a severe thunderstorm brought damaging winds estimated at 60 mph and large hail. The high winds drove the large hail into buildings and broke the west facing windows out of at least one home in the community. There was also significant tree damage associated with this storm. Thunderstorm winds in Cedar County have been reported to reach about 60 miles per hour, causing temporary power outages. Obert receives power from the Northeast Nebraska Public Power District in Wayne.
The main concerns regarding hail is the damage to buildings and property. Obert has had several instances of hail in the community with hail size ranging from 0.88 to 1.75 inches. These hailstorms have resulted in damages to siding, roofs, and some broken glass. To reduce impact from these storms, the community installed metal roofs on both the community hall and city hall.
110 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF OBERT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Tornadoes and High Winds The planning team ranked tornadoes and high winds as top hazards of concern. The main concern regarding these hazards is the safety of the residents in the community. A brief F-0 tornado touchdown just south of the community in 2003 and caused no damage or injuries. However, tornadoes have impacted other communities in Cedar County, so tornadoes remain a concern. The planning team indicated that after this 2003 event, the entire community took part in debris cleanup from trees. Critical facilities have not been damaged in the past by tornadoes or high wind events. Since there is no community safe room, residents take shelter in their basements during storm events. One new, battery-powered siren is located in the community and can be activated by Cedar County Emergency Management. Weather radios and backing up municipal records were identified as being needed in the future to reduce risk and improve the community’s response to this hazard.
Grass/Wildfire The planning team ranked wildfire as a top hazard of concern. The main concern regarding this hazard is that the Village has to rely on surrounding communities such as Wynot or Newcastle for response assistance in the event of a wildfire. In case of a wildfire, Obert has hydrants available in the community. The team indicated that there have been no significant events that have occurred locally. Governance A community’s governance indicates the number of boards or offices that may be available to help implement hazard mitigation actions. Obert has a five-member village board, a clerk/treasurer, and a water commissioner.
Capability Assessment The capability assessment consisted of a Capability Assessment Survey completed by the jurisdiction and a review of local existing policies, regulations, plans, and the programs. The survey is used to gather information regarding the jurisdiction’s planning and regulatory capability; administrative and technical capability; fiscal capability; and educational and outreach capability.
Table OBT.4: Capability Assessment SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Comprehensive Plan No Capital Improvements Plan No Economic Development Plan No Emergency Operational Plan Yes (County) Floodplain Management Plan No PLANNING & Storm Water Management Plan No REGULATORY Zoning Ordinance No CAPABILITY Subdivision Regulation/Ordinance No Floodplain Ordinance No Building Codes No National Flood Insurance Program No Community Rating System No Other (if any)
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 111 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF OBERT COMMUNITY PROFILE
SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Planning Commission No Floodplain Administration No GIS Capabilities No ADMINISTRATIVE Chief Building Official No &TECHNICAL Civil Engineering No CAPABILITY Local Staff Who Can Assess Community’s No Vulnerability to Hazards Grant Manager No Mutual Aid Agreement Yes Capital Improvement Plan/ 1 & 6 Year plan Yes Applied for grants in the past No Awarded a grant in the past No Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes No such as Mitigation Projects FISCAL Gas/Electric Service Fees No CAPABILITY Storm Water Service Fees No Rural Water Water/Sewer Service Fees Fees Development Impact Fees No General Obligation Revenue or Special Tax No Bonds Local citizen groups or non-profit organizations focused on environmental protection, emergency preparedness, access and No functional needs populations, etc. Ex. CERT Teams, Red Cross, etc. Ongoing public education or information EDUCATION & program (e.g., responsible water use, fire safety, No OUTREACH household preparedness, environmental CAPABILITY education) Natural Disaster or Safety related school No programs StormReady Certification No Firewise Communities Certification No Tree City USA No
Table OBT.5: Overall Capability OVERALL CAPABILITY LIMITED/MODERATE/HIGH Financial resources need to implement mitigation projects Limited Staff/expertise to implement projects Limited
Community support to implement projects Limited
Time to devote to hazard mitigation Limited
112 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF OBERT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Plan Integration The community currently has very few planning mechanisms in place. The Local Emergency Operations Plan (LEOP) for Obert, which was last updated in 2016, is an annex of Cedar County’s LEOP. It is an all-hazards plan that does not address specific natural and man-made disasters. It provides a clear assignment of responsibility in case of an emergency.
The municipal budget is updated annually, and municipal funds remain very limited, as noted by the planning team. Funds have remained consistent the over recent years, but is limited to maintenance projects only. Any mitigation projects that are pursued would require the assistance of outside funding to be implemented.
Plan Maintenance Hazard Mitigation Plans should be living documents and updated regularly to reflect changes in hazard events, priorities, and mitigation actions. These updates are encouraged to occur after every major disaster event, alongside community planning documents (i.e. annual budgets and Capital Improvement Plans), during the fall before the HMA grant cycle begins, and/or prior to other funding opportunity cycles begin including CDBG, Water Sustainability Fund, Revolving State Fund, or other identified funding mechanisms.
The local planning team is responsible for reviewing and updating this community profile as changes occur or after a major event. The local planning team will include the five-member board. The planning team will review the plan no less than annually and will include the public in the review and revision process by sharing information at board meetings.
Mitigation Strategy
Completed Actions: MITIGATION ACTION IMPACT RESISTANT ROOF COVERINGS Use roofing materials that are resistant to hail impacts for new DESCRIPTION buildings. Retrofit existing buildings with hail resistant roofing. HAZARD(S) Severe Thunderstorms and Hail STATUS Obert replaced the roofs with metal roofing.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 113 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF OBERT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Continuing Actions: MITIGATION ACTION PUBLIC AWARENESS/EDUCATION Increase public awareness of hazards to both public and private property owners, renters, businesses, and local officials about DESCRIPTION hazards and ways to protect people and property from these hazards. In addition, educate citizens on erosion control and water conservation methods. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $500+ FUNDING Municipal budget, HMA TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY High LEAD AGENCY Village Board RWD and NPPD have come and educated residents on safety and STATUS water conservation.
MITIGATION ACTION BACKUP POWER GENERATORS Provide a portable or stationary source of backup power to redundant DESCRIPTION power supplies, municipal wells, lift stations and other critical facilities and shelters. Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Thunderstorms, Severe Winter HAZARD(S) Storms ESTIMATED COST $30,000+/generator FUNDING Municipal budget, HMA TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Village Board STATUS Not yet started.
Removed Actions: MITIGATION ACTION STABILIZE/ANCHOR FERTILIZER, FUEL, AND PROPANE TANKS Anchor fuel tanks to prevent movement. If left unanchored, tanks DESCRIPTION could present a major threat to property and safety in a hazard event. Area in need is at Main Street and Highway 12. Chemical Spills, Flooding, High Winds, Tornadoes, Severe HAZARD(S) Thunderstorms REASON FOR Butches’ Propane is up to date on regulations and are anchored. No REMOVAL other anchoring is identified as a need.
MITIGATION ACTION WEATHER RADIOS Conduct an inventory of weather radios at schools and other critical DESCRIPTION facilities and provide new radios as needed. HAZARD(S) All hazards REASON FOR Notification is possible by phone and siren. REMOVAL
114 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF OBERT COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION IMPLEMENT WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS Jurisdictions can update/improve water distribution system. This may include but is not limited to: identifying and replacing leaky pipes, DESCRIPTION assisting homeowners in identifying inefficiencies, and transitioning to smart irrigation systems. HAZARD(S) Drought REASON FOR All pipes and distribution are sufficient at this time. REMOVAL
WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS/WATER PRESSURE/FIRE MITIGATION ACTION HYDRANTS Make water system improvements to include additional fire hydrants/increase supply and pressure. High pressure is needed in DESCRIPTION the event of an emergency to effectively fight fires and also to meet increasing demands. HAZARD(S) Grass/Wildfires, Urban Fire REASON FOR Removed to prioritize other projects. REMOVAL
MITIGATION ACTION ELECTRICAL SYSTEM LOOPED DISTRIBUTION/REDUNDANCIES Provided looped distribution service and other redundancies in the DESCRIPTION electrical system as a backup power supply in the event the primary system is destroyed or fails. Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Thunderstorms, Severe Winter HAZARD(S) Storms REASON FOR Removed to prioritize other projects. REMOVAL
MITIGATION ACTION BURY POWER LINES Require powerlines installed as a part of new construction to be DESCRIPTION buried. Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Thunderstorms, Severe Winter HAZARD(S) Storms REASON FOR Most homes have power buried, and no new construction is planned REMOVAL at this time.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 115
This Page is Intentionally Blank
116 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021
COMMUNITY PROFILE
VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA
Cedar and Dixon Counties Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
2021
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 117 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA COMMUNITY PROFILE
Local Planning Team
Table SHA.1: St. Helena Local Planning Team NAME TITLE JURISDICTION VICTOR PALTZ Village Board Chairman Village of St. Helena
Location and Geography The Village of St. Helena is located in the northern portion of Cedar County and covers an area of 0.44 square miles. The village lies approximately two miles southwest of the Missouri River and two miles northeast of a tributary of Second Box Creek.
Transportation St. Helena’s major transportation corridors include Nebraska Highway 14H and Cedar County Road 896. US Highway 81 is located about eight miles west of the community. Nebraska Highway 14H has on average 305 vehicles per day with 30 of those being heavy commercial vehicles. There are no rail lines that travel through the village.77 The transportation routes of most concern are Nebraska Highway 14H (St. Helena Spur) to Nebraska Highway 12, Cedar County Road 896/898 to US Highway 81, and a paved road through St. Helena (St. Helena Street to Nette Street to Jones Ave).
Chemicals, such as gasoline, diesel, propane, and agricultural chemicals/fertilizers are regularly transported along these local routes. There have been no significant transportation incidents that have occurred locally. The following critical facilities are located along main transportation routes: the Village of St. Helena’s water tower and water mains, the Village Hall/Post Office, the Immaculate Conception Church & Parish Hall, and the St. Helena Social Club, which are both shelter areas for community members, and the St. Helena Store, which is the fuel, food, and supplies location. Transportation information is important to hazard mitigation plans because it suggests possible evacuation corridors in the community, as well as areas more at risk to transportation incidents.
77 Nebraska Department of Roads. “Traffic Flow Map of the State Highways: State of Nebraska.” [map]. Scale 1”= 20 miles. State of Nebraska: Department of Roads, 2015. http://www.roads.nebraska.gov/media/2510/2014-statewide-traffic-flow-map.pdf
118 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure SHA.1: Village of St. Helena
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 119 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA COMMUNITY PROFILE
Demographics The following figure displays the historical population trend from 1880 to 2017. This figure indicates that the population of St. Helena decreased from 2010 to 2017. When population decreases, there may be a higher level of unoccupied housing that is not being kept up. Furthermore, a declining population can lead to decreasing tax revenue for the village which could make implementation of mitigation actions more fiscally challenging.78
Figure SHA.2: Estimated Population 1880 – 2017 250
200 200 189
151 148 150 124 111 102 92 96 100 83 87 86 Population 77 81 63
50
0
Year
Source: U.S. Census Bureau79
The young, elderly, minorities, and poor may be more vulnerable to certain hazards than other groups. In comparison to the county, St. Helena’s population was:
• Younger. The median age of St. Helena was 42.9 years old in 2017, compared with the county average of 44.1 years. St. Helena’s population has grown younger since 2010, when the median age was 45 years old. St. Helena had a larger proportion of people under 20 years old (34.6%) than the county (27.4%) in 2017.80 • Similar ethnic diversity. Since 2010, St. Helena grew more ethnically diverse. In 2010, 100% was White. By 2017, 1% of St. Helena’s population was American Indian. During that time, Cedar County grew 1% (American Indian) from 2010 to 2017.81 • Less likely to be at the federal poverty line. The poverty rate in St. Helena (persons living below the federal poverty line) was 8.6% in 2017. This was lower than the county’s poverty rate of 9.7%.82
78 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 79 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 80 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 81 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP05: ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 82 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/.
120 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA COMMUNITY PROFILE
Employment and Economics The village’s economic base is a mixture of industries. In comparison to Cedar County, St. Helena’s economy had:
• Different mix of industries. Employment sectors accounting for 10% or more of employment in St. Helena included Educational Services, Retail, and Arts and Entertainment. While Cedar County’s sectors included Educational Services, Agriculture, and Manufacturing in 2017.83 • Lower household income. St. Helena’s median household income in 2017 ($46,250) was about $10,958 lower than the county ($57,208).84 • More long-distance commuters. About 7.1% percent of workers in St. Helena commuted for fewer than 15 minutes, compared with about 53.7% of workers in Cedar County. About 31% of workers in St. Helena commute 30 minutes or more to work, compared to about 19% of the county workers.85
Major Employers According to the local planning team, there are no major employers located in St. Helena. The team noted that a large percentage of residents commute to other communities for work, such as Hartington, Nebraska and Yankton, South Dakota.
Housing In comparison to Cedar County, St. Helena’s housing stock was:
• More owner occupied. About 93.3% of occupied housing units in St. Helena are owner occupied compared with 80.7% of occupied housing in Cedar County in 2017.86 • Greater share of aged housing stock. St. Helena has a larger share of housing built prior to 1970 than the county (64.6% compared to 61.7%).87 • Fewer single-family homes. The predominant housing type in the village is single family detached and St. Helena contains fewer multifamily housing with five or more units per structure than the county (0% compared to 3.1%). About 88.2% of housing in St. Helena was single-family detached, compared with 89.9% of the county’s housing. St. Helena had a larger share of mobile and manufactured housing (11.8%) compared to the county (3.6%).88 The local planning team indicated that there are two mobile homes in the community and that most of the community’s housing was built before 1980.
This housing information is relevant to hazard mitigation insofar as the age of housing may indicate which housing units were built prior to state building codes being developed. Further, unoccupied housing may suggest that future development may be less likely to occur. Finally, communities with a substantial number of mobile homes may be more vulnerable to the impacts of high winds, tornadoes, and severe winter storms.
83 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 84 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 85 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0802: Means of Transportation to Work by Selected Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 86 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 87 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 88 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 121 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA COMMUNITY PROFILE
Future Development Trends The planning team indicated that there haven’t been many housing changes in the community over the past five years. A few homes have been remodeled or have new additions. One fire- damaged house was demolished and removed to make way for a new building. The St. Helena Store recently closed, and the property is up for sale. Additionally, the Wynot Volunteer Fire Department built a new fire hall. There are currently no new housing developments or businesses planned in the community.
According to census data, St. Helena’s population has fluctuated over the past two decades. The planning team attributes this to residents relocating to other areas and older residents moving to nursing homes. A larger percentage of younger families with young children also live in St. Helena.
Structural Inventory and Valuation The planning team requested GIS parcel data from the County Assessor as of December 2019. This data allowed the planning team to analyze the location, number, and value of property improvements at the parcel level. The data did not contain the number of structures on each parcel. A summary of the results of this analysis is provided in the following table.
Table SHA.2: St. Helena Parcel Valuation TOTAL NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE OF VALUE OF NUMBER OF IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS VALUE IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN 41 $2,332,275 2 4.9% $140,300 Source: GIS Workshop/County Assessor, 201989
Critical Infrastructure/Key Resources Chemical Storage Fixed Sites According to the Tier II System reports submitted to the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, there are no chemical storage sites in St. Helena that contain hazardous chemicals. The planning team indicated that no chemical spill events have occurred locally.
Critical Facilities The local planning team identified critical facilities necessary for St. Helena per FEMA’s Community Lifelines. Critical facilities were identified during the 2016 planning process and revised for this plan update. The following table and figure provide a summary of the critical facilities for the community.
Table SHA.3: Critical Facilities SHORT- CF TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN TYPE NAME ADDRESS NUMBER SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) Food, 1600 St. 1 Water, and Water Tower N/A Y N Helena St Shelter
89 GIS Workshop/Cedar County Assessor. 2019. [Personal correspondence].
122 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA COMMUNITY PROFILE
SHORT- CF TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN TYPE NAME ADDRESS NUMBER SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) Food, Immaculate 104 E 9th 2 Water, and Conception N N N St Shelter Church Food, Church 104 E 10th 3 Water, and Building/Parish Y N N St Shelter Hall Health and Sewage 8th and 4 N/A N N Medical Lagoon Evans St Other (Vulnerable 8th and St. 5 City Park N/A N N Gathering Helena St Area) Other Lewis St (Vulnerable 6 Baseball Field and Jones N/A N N Gathering Ave Area) Food, 101 W 7 Water, and Social Club Y N N Jones Ave Shelter US Post Safety and 110 W 9th 8 Office/Village N N N Security St Hall Food, St. Helena 101 W 9th 9 Water, and N N N Store St Shelter Wynot 9th and St. Safety and 10 Volunteer Fire Helena Y N N Security Hall Street
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 123 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure SHA.3: Critical Facilities and Flood Risk Area
124 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA COMMUNITY PROFILE
Historical Occurrences See the Cedar County community profile for historical hazard events.
Hazard Prioritization For an in-depth discussion regarding area wide hazards, please see Section Four: Risk Assessment. The hazards discussed in detail below were either identified in the previous HMP and determined to still be of top concern or were added by the local planning team based on the identification of hazards of greatest concern, hazard history, and the jurisdiction’s capabilities.
Grass/Wildfire The main concern surrounding this hazard is the dry conditions in recent years that have resulted in fires that damaged fairly large areas in Nebraska and South Dakota. If dry conditions return, fire and wind could create wildfires that impact the village. The planning team indicated that there have not been any significant events that have impacted the village, but there have been wildfires along the Niobrara River and in Bon Homme County in South Dakota located northwest of the community. The Village of Wynot has a volunteer fire department and recently constructed a new fire hall, which houses a pumper truck, grass rig, an ambulance, and other equipment. There are four or five area residents on the Wynot Volunteer Fire Department and two EMTs as well.
Severe Thunderstorms (including Hail) Severe thunderstorms are common events in the planning area and were identified as a top concern for the community. The primary concern is the potential damage to trees, buildings, and other property caused by strong winds, hail, and lightning. There have been many severe thunderstorms with damaging winds and large hail documented for the area over the past few years. Hail has ranged from 0.75 to 2.0 inches in diameter and property damage was encountered by residents (i.e. automobiles, roofs, windows, siding) along with crop damage for area farmers. The NCEI recorded 25 severe thunderstorm events in St. Helena from 1996 to September 2019. Less than five percent of the power lines in the community have been buried. The planning team indicated that burying power lines would help reduce outages due to severe thunderstorms and that Cedar Knox Public Power District regularly trims trees near power lines, check poles, and maintains their distribution infrastructure.
Severe Winter Storms The main concerns regarding severe winter storms are loss of power due to downed power lines, loss of heat due to power outages, restricted travel due to ice/snow/drifts, and access to water/food/supplies/medical attention during extended severe winter storms. According to the NCEI, there were 85 severe winter storm events in Cedar County from 1996 through September 2019; however, no property or crop damages were reported. The most recent significant event to have occurred locally was the large snowfall/blizzard events in 2009-2010. These storms caused some extended power outages and limited travel, but residents had adequate water, food, and supplies during the storms. Additional effort was needed to clear roads, assist stranded motorists, clear roads blocked by high drifts, as well as assisting area farmers who struggled to feed/water livestock. Critical facilities have not been damaged in the past from a severe winter storm event.
The planning team noted that the village has been participating in a short-term lease program with a local dealer to use a front wheel assist tractor with cab and loader on-site to better clear snow. The village is looking to potentially purchase a replacement tractor in the future.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 125 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA COMMUNITY PROFILE
Tornadoes and High Winds The main concerns regarding tornadoes and high winds are property damages and the risk to the public, including injury or death. According to NCEI data, there have been 19 high wind events in Cedar County; however, no tornadoes have passed through St. Helena from 1996 to September 2019. Tornadoes have been reported as close as Coleridge, Hartington, and the Weigand Recreational Area, west of Gavins Point Dam. The planning team noted that critical facilities have not been damaged by tornadoes in the past. In the event of a tornado, most residents seek shelter in basements or an external cellar.
Governance A community’s governance indicates the number of boards or offices that may be available to help implement hazard mitigation actions. St. Helena has a five-member village board and a clerk/treasurer. Capability Assessment The capability assessment consisted of a Capability Assessment Survey completed by the jurisdiction and a review of local existing policies, regulations, plans, and the programs. The survey is used to gather information regarding the jurisdiction’s planning and regulatory capability; administrative and technical capability; fiscal capability; and educational and outreach capability.
Table SHA.4: Capability Assessment SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Comprehensive Plan No Capital Improvements Plan No Economic Development Plan No Emergency Operational Plan Yes (County) Floodplain Management Plan No PLANNING Storm Water Management Plan No & Zoning Ordinance No REGULATORY CAPABILITY Subdivision Regulation/Ordinance No Floodplain Ordinance No Building Codes No National Flood Insurance Program No Community Rating System No Other (if any) Planning Commission No Floodplain Administration No GIS Capabilities No Chief Building Official No ADMINISTRATIVE &TECHNICAL Civil Engineering Contracted Local Staff Who Can Assess Community’s CAPABILITY Yes Vulnerability to Hazards Grant Manager No Mutual Aid Agreement No Other (if any)
126 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA COMMUNITY PROFILE
SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Capital Improvement Plan/ 1 & 6 Year plan Yes Applied for grants in the past Yes Awarded a grant in the past Yes Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes Yes such as Mitigation Projects FISCAL Gas/Electric Service Fees No CAPABILITY Storm Water Service Fees No Water/Sewer Service Fees Yes Development Impact Fees No General Obligation Revenue or Special Tax Yes Bonds Other (if any) Local citizen groups or non-profit organizations focused on environmental protection, emergency preparedness, access and No functional needs populations, etc. Ex. CERT Teams, Red Cross, etc. Ongoing public education or information EDUCATION program (e.g., responsible water use, fire safety, No & household preparedness, environmental OUTREACH education) CAPABILITY Natural Disaster or Safety related school No programs StormReady Certification No Firewise Communities Certification No Tree City USA No Other (if any)
Table SHA.5: Overall Capability OVERALL CAPABILITY LIMITED/MODERATE/HIGH
Financial resources need to implement mitigation projects Limited
Staff/expertise to implement projects Limited
Community support to implement projects Limited
Time to devote to hazard mitigation Limited
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 127 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA COMMUNITY PROFILE
Plan Integration The community currently has very few planning mechanisms in places. The Local Emergency Operations Plan (LEOP) for St. Helena, which was last updated in 2016, is an annex of Cedar County’s LEOP. It is an all hazards plan that does not address specific natural and man-made disasters. It provides a clear assignment of responsibility in case of an emergency.
Municipal funds are limited to maintain current facilities and municipal systems. The village replaced its water tower in 2013 and used financing to pay for the project. Semi-annual payments are being made from the water fund to repay the financing. The village was awarded a security grant in 2013/2014 to install a small generator at the water tower. The financing the village received to construct the new water tower also included a small amount of loan forgiveness. The village also received a grant in 2012/2013 to install a new siren as part of the county wide siren project. Those are the most recent grants the Village has received.
The general fund and sewer/wastewater fund have slowly but steadily increased in recent years. The water fund has been decreasing due to the semi-annual water-tower financing payments, and higher costs due to water loss from leaks in the distribution system. The village is actively trying to identify the location of leaks so they can be repaired however to date the leaks have not surfaced which makes locating the leaks difficult. A couple of recent repairs has reduced the amount of water loss, but a significant amount of water loss is still occurring.
The Village has included in its budget amounts to purchase a replacement tractor as well as a speed detection/warning sign, which are included in the mitigation strategy.
Plan Maintenance Hazard Mitigation Plans should be living documents and updated regularly to reflect changes in hazard events, priorities, and mitigation actions. These updates are encouraged to occur after every major disaster event, alongside community planning documents (i.e. annual budgets and Capital Improvement Plans), during the fall before the HMA grant cycle begins, and/or prior to other funding opportunity cycles begin including CDBG, Water Sustainability Fund, Revolving State Fund, or other identified funding mechanisms.
The Village Board is responsible for reviewing and updating this community profile. The plan will be reviewed annually and will include the public during the review process by sharing information at board meetings.
128 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA COMMUNITY PROFILE
Mitigation Strategy
Continuing and New Actions: MITIGATION ACTION BACKUP POWER GENERATORS Provide a portable or stationary source of backup power to redundant DESCRIPTION power supplies, municipal wells, lift stations and other critical facilities and shelters. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $30,000/generator FUNDING Municipal budget, bonds, grants TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Village Board The village has a small stationary backup generator at the water tower. Water is supplied by Cedar Knox Rural Water District and a small generator has been sufficient to maintain operations during STATUS power outages. The planning team stated that an additional one would be helpful for a community building/shelter. This is a low priority due to the high cost of a large generator.
MITIGATION ACTION CIVIL SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS Improve emergency rescue and response equipment and facilities by providing additional equipment, or updating existing emergency response equipment. This would also include developing backup DESCRIPTION systems for emergency vehicles, identifying and training additional personnel for emergency response, or continuing educational opportunities for current personnel. HAZARD(S) All hazards $5,000 to $400,000 per vehicle, varies depending on the equipment ESTIMATED COST needed FUNDING Municipal budget, bonds, grants, loans TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Village Board, Wynot Volunteer Fire Department The village has been leasing a tractor from a local dealer to better handle and respond to severe winter weather. Additionally, a fire hall was recently built in the village for the Wynot Volunteer Fire Department to expand their ability to respond to emergencies and add STATUS redundancy. The fire hall houses a pumper truck, grass rig, an ambulance, and other equipment. Personnel have been added and the fire department meets and trains regularly. They also look for opportunities to upgrade and add equipment.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 129 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION POWER, SERVICE, ELECTRICAL, AND WATER DISTRIBUTION LINES Work with utility providers to bury power lines and other service lines underground, upgrade, or retrofit existing structures to be less DESCRIPTION vulnerable to hazard events. Utilities shall be required to bury lines where possible for future installation of power lines. Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Thunderstorms, Flooding, Severe HAZARD(S) Winter Storms ESTIMATED COST $50,000 to $70,000 (per mile for electrical) FUNDING Municipal budget, Cedar Knox PPD TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Village Board, Cedar Knox PPD The village upgraded the underground service line to the water tower and buried the service line to the village. Some residents have had STATUS their overhead lines replaced with underground lines. Cedar Knox Public Power District owns and operates all lines in the village.
MITIGATION ACTION SPEED DETECTION/WARNING SIGNS Purchas a portable radar speed detection sign and display to warn DESCRIPTION drivers to slow down. HAZARD(S) Chemical transportation ESTIMATED COST $5,000 - $10,000 FUNDING Municipal budget TIMELINE 1 year PRIORITY High LEAD AGENCY Village Board New action. Residents have noted vehicles traveling above the speed limit and are concerned accidents may occur, especially with younger children that live close to the road. The village would like to purchase STATUS a portable radar sign that will detect and display actual speed and flash when the speed is above the posted speed limit to warn and encourage drivers to slow down. A portable sign is preferred so that it can be relocated and used in other spots.
130 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION STORMWATER SYSTEM AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Stormwater improvements may include pipe upsizing, retention, DESCRIPTION detention, and additional inlets. Drainage improvements may include ditch upsizing, ditch cleanout and culvert improvements. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $10,000-$100,000 FUNDING Municipal budget TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Village Board The village has cleaned out a few culverts and is in the process of repairing a culvert that partially collapsed after the March 2019 flood STATUS event. Future steps include cleaning out ditches and ensuring culverts are clear and in good condition.
MITIGATION ACTION TREE CITY USA DESCRIPTION Become a Tree City USA through the National Arbor Day Foundation. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $1,000+ FUNDING Municipal budget TIMELINE 5 + years PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Village Board STATUS This project has not started due to lack of funding.
Removed Actions: MITIGATION ACTION SAFE ROOMS Design and construct fully supplied safe rooms in highly vulnerable DESCRIPTION areas such as mobile home parks, campgrounds, schools, and other such areas. HAZARD(S) Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Thunderstorms There are a limited number of mobile homes in the community and it was determined that other structures can shelter those in need during REASON FOR REMOVAL severe thunderstorms, high winds, and tornadoes. Open areas such as the baseball field and park are not regularly used but do have outbuildings close by that can be used as shelters if needed.
MITIGATION ACTION STABILIZE/ANCHOR FERTILIZER, FUEL AND PROPANE TANKS Anchor fuel tanks to prevent movement. If left unanchored, tanks DESCRIPTION could present a major threat to property and safety in a severe weather event. HAZARD(S) Tornadoes and High Winds, Flooding The property owner removed the above ground fuel tanks that were REASON FOR REMOVAL previously in the village.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 131 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF ST. HELENA COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION WEATHER RADIOS Conduct an inventory of weather radios at schools and other critical DESCRIPTION facilities and provide new radios as needed. HAZARD(S) All hazards The village emergency siren, the widespread use of smartphones, and REASON FOR REMOVAL the small amount of useful locations for placement have all reduced the need for weather radios.
132 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021
COMMUNITY PROFILE
VILLAGE OF WYNOT
Cedar and Dixon Counties Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
2021
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 133 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF WYNOT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Local Planning Team
Table WYT.1: Wynot Local Planning Team NAME TITLE JURISDICTION GREG HITE Board Chairman Village of Wynot
Location and Geography The Village of Wynot is located in the northeastern portion of Cedar County and covers an area of 0.18 square miles. The village lies immediately west of Bow Creek.
Transportation Wynot’s major transportation corridors include Nebraska Highway Spur 14B and Highway 12, which are located just south of the village. Both are of top concern for the village. Highway 14B averages 650 vehicles per day, with 55 of those being heavy commercial vehicles. Nebraska Highway 12 has on average 1,170 vehicles per day, with 180 being heavy commercial vehicles.90 The planning team indicated that farm chemicals are regularly transported along local routes. There are no rail lines that travel through the village. Transportation information is important to hazard mitigation plans because it suggests possible evacuation corridors in the community, as well as areas more at risk to transportation incidents.
90 Nebraska Department of Roads. “Traffic Flow Map of the State Highways: State of Nebraska.” [map]. Scale 1”= 20 miles. State of Nebraska: Department of Roads, 2015. http://www.roads.nebraska.gov/media/2510/2014-statewide-traffic-flow-map.pdf
134 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF WYNOT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure WYT.1: Village of Wynot
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 135 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF WYNOT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Demographics The following figure displays the historical population trend from 1910 to 2017. This figure indicates that the population of Wynot has been mainly decreasing since 1970. When population decreases, there may be a higher level of unoccupied housing that is not being kept up. Furthermore, a declining population can lead to decreasing tax revenue for the city which could make implementation of mitigation actions more fiscally challenging.91
Figure WYT.2: Estimated Population 1910 – 2017
450 416 400 368 348 350
300 258 233 226 222 250 209 213 191 200 166 168 Population 150 100 50 0
Year
Source: U.S. Census Bureau92
The young, elderly, minorities, and poor may be more vulnerable to certain hazards than other groups. In comparison to the county, Wynot’s population was:
• Older. The median age of Wynot was 46.8 years old in 2017, compared with the county average of 44.1 years. Wynot’s population has grown younger since 2010, when the median age was 50 years old. Wynot had a larger proportion of people under 20 years old (29%) than the county (27.4%) in 2017.93 • Similar ethnic diversity. Since 2010, Wynot grew more ethnically diverse. In 2010, 100% was White. By 2017, 1% of Wynot’s population was two or more races. During that time, Cedar County grew 1% (American Indian) from 2010 to 2017.94 • More likely to be at the federal poverty line. The poverty rate in Wynot (persons living below the federal poverty line) was 11.9% in 2017. This was higher than the county’s poverty rate of 9.7%.95
91 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 92 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 93 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0101: Age and Sex.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 94 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP05: ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 95 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/.
136 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF WYNOT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Employment and Economics The village’s economic base is a mixture of industries. In comparison to Cedar County, Wynot’s economy had:
• Different mix of industries. Employment sectors accounting for 10% or more of employment in Wynot included Agriculture, Manufacturing, Retail, and Finance/Insurance. While Cedar County’s sectors included Educational Services, Agriculture, and Manufacturing in 2017.96 • Lower household income. Wynot’s median household income in 2017 ($53,750) was about $3,458 lower than the county ($57,208).97 • More long-distance commuters. About 52.5% percent of workers in Wynot commuted for fewer than 15 minutes, compared with about 53.7% of workers in Cedar County. About 23.9% of workers in Wynot commute 30 minutes or more to work, compared to about 19% of the county workers.98
Major Employers The main employer in the village is the Wynot Public School District. The planning team indicated that a large percentage of residents commute to other communities such as: Yankton and Vermillion in South Dakota, and Sioux City, Iowa. Housing In comparison to Cedar County, Wynot’s housing stock was:
• More owner occupied. About 91.3% of occupied housing units in Wynot are owner occupied compared with 80.7% of occupied housing in Cedar County in 2017.99 • Greater share of aged housing stock. Wynot has a larger share of housing built prior to 1970 than the county (70.6% compared to 61.7%).100 • More single-family homes. The predominant housing type in the village is single family detached and Wynot contains fewer multifamily housing with five or more units per structure than the county (0% compared to 3.1%). About 95.3% of housing in Wynot was single-family detached, compared with 89.9% of the county’s housing. Wynot had a larger share of mobile and manufactured housing (4.7%) compared to the county (3.6%).101 The planning team indicated that there are three mobile homes in the community.
This housing information is relevant to hazard mitigation insofar as the age of housing may indicate which housing units were built prior to state building codes being developed. Further, unoccupied housing may suggest that future development may be less likely to occur. Finally, communities with a substantial number of mobile homes may be more vulnerable to the impacts of high winds, tornadoes, and severe winter storms.
96 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 97 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 98 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: S0802: Means of Transportation to Work by Selected Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 99 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 100 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/. 101 United States Census Bureau. “2017 American Fact Finder: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” [database file]. https://data.census.gov/.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 137 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF WYNOT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Future Development Trends In the past five years, there have been seven new homes built in the community: five new houses and two duplexes. These developments were built outside of any known hazardous areas. According to the planning team, there are no new residential or commercial developments planned for the next five years. The planning team attributes the decreasing population trend to a lack of employment in the area. Structural Inventory and Valuation The planning team requested GIS parcel data from the County Assessor as of December 2019. This data allowed the planning team to analyze the location, number, and value of property improvements at the parcel level. The data did not contain the number of structures on each parcel. A summary of the results of this analysis is provided in the following table.
Table WYT.2: Wynot Parcel Valuation TOTAL NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE OF VALUE OF NUMBER OF IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENTS VALUE IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN IN FLOODPLAIN 129 $7,601,470 1 1% [withheld] Source: GIS Workshop/County Assessor, 2019102 Critical Infrastructure/Key Resources Chemical Storage Fixed Sites According to the Tier II System reports submitted to the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, there is one chemical storage site in Wynot that contains hazardous chemicals. No fixed site chemical spills were reported by the planning team. If a chemical spill were to occur, the Highway 12 Spur could potentially be affected, limiting, or cutting off the main access route to the community.
Table WYT.3: Chemical Storage Fixed Sites FACILITY NAME ADDRESS LOCATED IN FLOODPLAIN? WYNOT OIL INC 610 Shamrock No Source: Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy103
Critical Facilities The local planning team identified critical facilities necessary for Wynot per FEMA’s Community Lifelines. Critical facilities were identified during the 2016 planning process and revised for this plan update. The following table and figure provide a summary of the critical facilities for the community.
Table WYT.4: Critical Facilities SHORT- CF TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN TYPE NAME ADDRESS NUMBER SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) Other 414 St. (Vulnerable Park/Shelter 1 James Y N N Gathering House Ave. Area)
102 GIS Workshop/Cedar County Assessor. 2019. [Personal correspondence]. 103 Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy. “Search Tier II Data.” Accessed May 2020. https://deq-iis.ne.gov/tier2/search.faces.
138 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF WYNOT COMMUNITY PROFILE
SHORT- CF TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN TYPE NAME ADDRESS NUMBER SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) Other (Vulnerable 2 Baseball Field W. 8th St. N N N Gathering Area) 709 St. Food, Water, Wynot Public 3 James Y N N and Shelter School Ave. Wynot Fire 405 Safety and 4 Department Jones Y N N Security (Old) Ave. Food, Water, Sacred Heart 5 W. 8th St. Y N N and Shelter Hall 803 Food, Water, Sacred heart 6 Emerson Y N N and Shelter Catholic Church Ave. Food, Water, 310 891 7 City Well N N N and Shelter Rd. Food, Water, Bowder 8 City Well N N N and Shelter Lane Portable Health and 109 E. 7th 9 Lift Station N Generator N Medical St. Only 423 St. Safety and Wynot Village 10 James Y N N Security Office Ave Fire 307 St. Safety and 11 Communications James N N N Security Ambulance Barn Ave
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 139 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF WYNOT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Figure WYT.3: Critical Facilities and Flood Risk Area
140 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF WYNOT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Historical Occurrences See the Cedar County community profile for historical hazard events.
Hazard Prioritization For an in-depth discussion regarding area wide hazards, please see Section Four: Risk Assessment. The hazards discussed in detail below were either identified in the previous HMP and determined to still be of top concern or were added by the local planning team based on the identification of hazards of greatest concern, hazard history, and the jurisdiction’s capabilities.
Drought The planning team indicated that drought was a top hazard of concern. During the summer of 2012, an exceptional drought formed for a large portion of the state, including Cedar County. The local planning team reported that the primary impacts of concern are water supply and economic impacts, as agriculture is a significant industry in the area. The village does not have a drought monitoring board, nor does it have a drought response plan. The village has a 100,000-gallon backup storage tank if needed along with two municipal wells. The need for a new water source to meet future needs is currently being explored by the community.
Flooding The local planning team identified flooding as a hazard of top concern for the community and one- mile jurisdiction. According to NCEI data, the village experienced three flood events from 1996 to September 2019, resulting in $50,000 in property damage. A July 2009 thunderstorm produced flash flooding in the area and flooding was observed across several county roads and Highway 12 near Wynot. Gravel was washed off a few roads and some culvert damage was noted. March 2019 flooding inundated the basements of several homes in the village due to drainage issues in the streets. The planning team noted that the village has been cleaning out culverts and ditches for better drainage during heavy rains. It was also noted that no critical facilities have experienced damages from flooding.
The village is not currently a member of the NFIP due to a lack of public support, and there is no SFHA delineated in the form of a FIRM for Wynot. Figure WYT.4 shows the flood risk area as developed by the Nebraska Department of Natural Resources.
Severe Thunderstorms (including Hail) The planning team indicated that severe thunderstorms were a top hazard of concern. Heavy rain, high winds, lightning, and hail can often occur in combination causing significant impacts to the community. According to NCEI data, 17 severe thunderstorm events were recorded in Wynot from 1996 to September 2019. One thunderstorm, on July 9, 2009, brought heavy rain to the area with 3.55 inches reported in Wynot. This caused flash flooding and flooded several county roads. In July 2013, a severe thunderstorm with winds gusting over 60 mph downed large tree limbs onto power lines, which caused some scattered power outages in Wynot. The lift station has a manual backup power generator, and the fire hall and other critical facilities are in need of an automatic backup power generator.
Some thunderstorms have produced hail in the area, with hail sizes ranging from 0.75 inches to 1.75 inches in diameter. The local planning team reported that in 2009 and 2010 hailstorms did damage to the village shop, village offices, and the baseball park lights.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 141 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF WYNOT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Severe Winter Storms The planning team indicated that severe winter storms were a top hazard of concern. According to the NCEI, there were 85 severe winter storm events in Cedar County from 1996 through September 2019; however, no property or crop damages were reported. The winter of 2009-2010 was particularly harsh across the region. A prolonged winter storm and blizzard occurred during the Christmas holiday in 2009. It brought heavy snow of over a foot and high winds which reduced visibilities to less than a quarter of a mile. Many roads were either closed or impassable due to the low visibilities and drifting snow. In the event of a snowstorm, the streets are cleaned by village maintenance. The planning team indicated that the snow removal resources are sufficient for normal winter conditions but ensuring removal equipment is well-maintained is necessary to meet future needs.
Tornadoes and High Winds The planning team indicated that tornadoes and high winds were hazards of concern. According to the NCEI, there have been 19 high wind events in Cedar County from 1996 to September 2019. There were no tornadoes reported in the village during that time, though tornadoes do occur in the county and have caused damages to nearby communities.
Governance A community’s governance indicates the number of boards or offices that may be available to help implement hazard mitigation actions. Wynot has a five-member village board, a clerk/treasurer, utility superintendent, fire department, sewer commissioner, street commissioner, water commissioner, zoning administrator, and parks and recreation commissioner. Capability Assessment The capability assessment consisted of a Capability Assessment Survey completed by the jurisdiction and a review of local existing policies, regulations, plans, and the programs. The survey is used to gather information regarding the jurisdiction’s planning and regulatory capability; administrative and technical capability; fiscal capability; and educational and outreach capability.
Table WYT.5: Capability Assessment SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Under Comprehensive Plan Development Capital Improvements Plan No Economic Development Plan No Emergency Operational Plan Yes (County) Floodplain Management Plan No PLANNING & Storm Water Management Plan No Under REGULATORY Zoning Ordinance CAPABILITY Development Under Subdivision Regulation/Ordinance Development Floodplain Ordinance No Under Building Codes Development National Flood Insurance Program No
142 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF WYNOT COMMUNITY PROFILE
SURVEY COMPONENTS/SUBCOMPONENTS YES/NO Community Rating System No Other (if any) Planning Commission Yes Floodplain Administration No GIS Capabilities No Chief Building Official Yes ADMINISTRATIVE Civil Engineering Contractor Local Staff Who Can Assess Community’s &TECHNICAL No CAPABILITY Vulnerability to Hazards Economic Grant Manager Development Group Mutual Aid Agreement Yes Other (if any) Capital Improvement Plan/ 1 & 6 Year plan Yes Applied for grants in the past Yes Awarded a grant in the past Yes Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes No such as Mitigation Projects FISCAL Gas/Electric Service Fees No CAPABILITY Storm Water Service Fees No Water/Sewer Service Fees Yes Development Impact Fees No General Obligation Revenue or Special Tax Yes Bonds Other (if any) Local citizen groups or non-profit organizations focused on environmental protection, emergency preparedness, access and No functional needs populations, etc. Ex. CERT Teams, Red Cross, etc. Ongoing public education or information EDUCATION program (e.g., responsible water use, fire safety, No & household preparedness, environmental OUTREACH education) CAPABILITY Natural Disaster or Safety related school Yes programs StormReady Certification No Firewise Communities Certification No Tree City USA No Other (if any)
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 143 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF WYNOT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Table WYT.6: Overall Capability OVERALL CAPABILITY LIMITED/MODERATE/HIGH
Financial resources need to implement mitigation projects Limited
Staff/expertise to implement projects Limited
Community support to implement projects Limited
Time to devote to hazard mitigation Limited
Plan Integration While there are very few planning mechanisms currently in place, the community is currently developing a comprehensive plan and zoning ordinances, and will adopt building codes. It is anticipated that hazard mitigation planning principles will be incorporated into these new planning efforts.
The Local Emergency Operations Plan (LEOP) for Wynot, which was last updated in 2016, is an annex of Cedar County’s LEOP. It is an all hazards plan that does not address specific natural and man-made disasters. It provides a clear assignment of responsibility in case of an emergency.
Plan Maintenance Hazard Mitigation Plans should be living documents and updated regularly to reflect changes in hazard events, priorities, and mitigation actions. These updates are encouraged to occur after every major disaster event, alongside community planning documents (i.e. annual budgets and Capital Improvement Plans), during the fall before the HMA grant cycle begins, and/or prior to other funding opportunity cycles begin including CDBG, Water Sustainability Fund, Revolving State Fund, or other identified funding mechanisms.
The local planning team is responsible for reviewing and updating this community profile as changes occur or after a major event. The local planning team will include the five-member board and planning and zoning board. The planning team will review the plan no less than annually and will include the public in the review and revision process by sharing information at board meetings, letters to residents, and social media posts.
144 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF WYNOT COMMUNITY PROFILE
Mitigation Strategy
Continuing Actions: MITIGATION ACTION ALERT/WARNING SIRENS Perform an evaluation of existing alert sirens in order to determine DESCRIPTION sirens which should be replaced or upgraded. Install new sirens where lacking and remote activation. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $50,000 FUNDING Village Budget TIMELINE 3-5 years PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Utility Superintendent, Fire Department While the Village recently acquired a new siren about three years ago, STATUS another one may be needed in the next few years.
MITIGATION ACTION BACK-UP POWER GENERATORS Provide a portable or stationary source of backup power to redundant DESCRIPTION power supplies, municipal wells, lift stations and other critical facilities and shelters. Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Winter Storms, Severe HAZARD(S) Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST $30,000+/generator FUNDING Bonds, taxes, HMA TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Utility Superintendent, Fire Department STATUS This project has not started due to lack of funding.
MITIGATION ACTION NEW WELL DESCRIPTION Construct new well to increase water quantity. HAZARD(S) Drought ESTIMATED COST $100,000+ FUNDING Municipal budget TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Water commissioner, utility superintendent STATUS Feasibility and location are currently being explored.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 145 SECTION SEVEN: VILLAGE OF WYNOT COMMUNITY PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION PUBLIC AWARENESS/EDUCATION Increase public awareness of hazards to both public and private property owners, renters, businesses, and local officials about DESCRIPTION hazards and ways to protect people and property from these hazards. In addition, educate citizens on erosion control and water conservation methods. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $500+ FUNDING Municipal budget, HMA TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Clerk STATUS This project has not been started due to lack of funding.
MITIGATION ACTION STORMWATER SYSTEM AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Stormwater improvements may include pipe upsizing, retention, DESCRIPTION detention, and additional inlets. Drainage improvements may include ditch upsizing, ditch cleanout and culvert improvements. HAZARD(S) Flooding ESTIMATED COST $10,000 - $100,000 FUNDING Taxes, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Village Maintenance The village will continue to identify needed ditch cleanouts and culvert STATUS improvements.
MITIGATION ACTION WEATHER RADIOS Conduct an inventory of weather radios at schools and other critical DESCRIPTION facilities and provide new radios as needed. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $50/radio FUNDING Taxes, HMA TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Fire Department, Village Board This project has not been started due to lack of funding and use of STATUS smartphone technology.
146 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021
DISTRICT PROFILE
HARTINGTON-NEWCASTLE PUBLIC
SCHOOLS
Cedar and Dixon Counties Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
2021
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 147 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-NEWCASTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
Local Planning Team
Table HNS.1: Hartington-Newcastle Public Schools Local Planning Team NAME TITLE JURISDICTION Hartington-Newcastle Public AJ Johnson Superintendent Schools
Location and Services Hartington-Newcastle Public Schools is located in northern Cedar County and northwestern Dixon County, serving the communities of St. Helena, Fordyce, Obert, Newcastle, and Hartington, Maskell and part of Bow Valley. The school district operates three schools including two elementary schools (K-6) and a high school (7-12). There is one elementary school in Hartington, and one located in Newcastle. The school district reports students primarily speak English.
Demographics The following figure displays the historical student population trend starting with the 2004-2005 school year and ending with the 2018-19 year. It indicates that the student population has been generally increasing since 2013. There were 370 students enrolled in the 2018-19 school year. The district anticipates that the student population will continue at a moderate increase in the coming years.
148 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-NEWCASTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
Figure HNS.1: Hartington-Newcastle Public Schools
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 149 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-NEWCASTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
Figure HNS.2: Student Population, 2004-2020 400
350 370 370 358 353 300 324 333 326 306 250 274 271 279 262 260 254 254 200
150
100
50
0
Source: Nebraska Department of Education
Figure HNS.3: Students by Grade, 2018-2019 38
30 30 29 29 29 28 25 24 23 23 23 23
16
PK KG 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th
Source: Nebraska Department of Education
The figure above indicates that the largest number of students are in 1st grade, followed by 2nd and 3rd grades. The lowest population of students are in 10th grade. According to the Nebraska Department of Education, 40 percent of students receive either free or reduced priced meals at school. This is lower than the state average of 45 percent. Additionally, 23 percent of students are in the Special Education Program, which is higher than the state average of 16 percent. These students may be more vulnerable during a hazardous event than the rest of the student population.
150 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-NEWCASTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
Table HNS.2: Student Statistics, 2018-2019 DISTRICT STATE OF NEBRASKA Free/Reduced Priced Meals 40.00% 45.21% School Mobility Rate 9.97% 4.61% English Language Learners N/A 7.16% Special Education Students 23.00% 15.48%
Future Development Trends In the past five years, the district built a new shop, renovated the library, and combined the high school and elementary libraries. The new shop building is located across the street. The school district also updated the HVAC system.
The student population is increasing, and the planning team indicated this primarily comes from growth in Hartington. The planning team indicated the pre-school class size of 2021-2022 will determine the need for an addition to the current building. The basement is currently used as a shelter space and is big enough for future growth. Critical Infrastructure/Key Resources Chemical Storage Fixed Sites According to the Tier II System reports submitted to the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, there are nine chemical storage sites that house hazardous materials in Hartington and two in Newcastle. These facilities may be located near school facilities.104 No spills have occurred.
Critical Facilities The local planning team identified critical facilities necessary for the school district per FEMA’s Community Lifelines. Critical facilities were identified during the 2016 planning process and revised for this plan update. The following table and figure provide a summary of the critical facilities.
Table HNS.4: Critical Facilities SHELTER # OF # OF GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN CF # NAME ADDRESS LOCATION (Y/N) (Y/N) STUDENTS STAFF (Y/N) Hartington Newcastle High 501 S. 1 School and Broadway, 200, 150 62 Y N N Elementary Hartington School at Hartington Hartington Newcastle 509 Annie 2 Elementary St, 21 10 N N N School at Newcastle Newcastle
104 Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy. “Search Tier II Data.” Accessed May 2020. https://deq-iis.ne.gov/tier2/search.faces.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 151 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-NEWCASTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
SHELTER # OF # OF GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN CF # NAME ADDRESS LOCATION (Y/N) (Y/N) STUDENTS STAFF (Y/N) Across the School 3 street, N/A N/A N N N shop Hartington Next to 4 Bus barn N/A N/A N N N school
152 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-NEWCASTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
Figure HNS.4: Critical Facilities and Flood Risk Area
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 153 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-NEWCASTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
School Drills and Staff Training The school district is required by law to conduct a number of drills throughout the year. Students and staff participate in monthly fire drills, and tornado drills once per year. These drills are in cooperation with the State Patrol and County Sheriff. Members of the Crisis Team are trained in how to respond to certain hazard events including lockdowns, shelter in place, and evacuations. A lockdown drill and reunification drill are also conducted regularly. Staff members are also trained annually by reviewing the Safety Manual and through in-service. In the event of an emergency, automated calls are sent to parents of students enrolled in the district. Additionally, the school website and app are used to notify families.
Historical Occurrences See the Cedar County or individual community profiles for historical hazard events.
Hazard Prioritization For an in-depth discussion regarding area wide hazards, please see Section Four: Risk Assessment. The hazards discussed in detail below were either identified in the previous HMP and determined to still be of top concern or were added by the local planning team based on the identification of hazards of greatest concern, hazard history, and the jurisdiction’s capabilities.
Drought During the summer of 2012, an exceptional drought formed for a large portion of the state, including Cedar County. Water supply can drop during exceptional droughts that extend several months or even years. Furthermore, as soil dries and shrinks over a long period without moisture, foundations can crack and become unstable. There were no water supply issues during the 2012 drought in the district, but the school district did not irrigate their lawns for most of the summer. The primary concerns related to drought for the district are any impacts or damages to the buildings and the effect on the local economy.
High Winds and Tornadoes The local planning team identified tornadoes as a top concern for the school district. Hartington- Newcastle Schools have not had damages or injuries occur from a tornado in the past. However, the City of Hartington has had tornadoes in 1999 and 2014, both F-1 magnitude, that were close calls for impacting school facilities. In 2016, a high wind event caused damage to the roof and water pipes. Repairs were covered by insurance. Weather radios are available in both schools, and electronic records are regularly backed-up.
Public Health Emergency The planning team indicated public health as a concern after the COVID-19 pandemic. Early in the pandemic, the district had to quickly transition staff and students to teaching classes online. There was concern of high transmissibility of COVID-19 in the classrooms. In preparation for the 2020/2021 school year, the school district invested in technology, PPE, and cleaning supplies, which was paid for initially by the district in the hopes that at least a portion would be reimbursed with emergency funding. The school district is interested in a mass vaccination event and have sufficient PPE for students and staff, as well as disinfectant and sanitizer. The district provides technological devices for students in grades 1-12 in case of health risk. Staff and students attending classes in person are required to wear masks or socially distance.
154 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-NEWCASTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
Severe Thunderstorms (and Hail) The local planning team identified severe thunderstorms as a top concern for the school district. Severe thunderstorms are a common occurrence for the area, and the combination of heavy rain, high winds, lightning, and hail can cause significant damages to facilities. Hail sizes up to three inches are possible, which could cause significant damages to roofs, windows, buses and vehicles, trees, and HVAC systems. Furthermore, severe thunderstorm winds can lead to power outages, roof damage, and electrical damages can occur. NOAA reports that both Newcastle and Hartington experienced a severe thunderstorm in June 2009 but did not report any damages. The school district has not reported any damages from previous thunderstorm winds, lightning, or hail. When the HVAC system was updated in 2019, hail guards were added in Hartington. While the schools are located out of the floodplain and sit on hills, transportation throughout the district can be difficult during heavy rain.
Severe Winter Storms Severe winter storms are a natural and regular occurrence for the region, which can cause significant impacts to the school district. Winter storms that bring high winds and heavy snow can reduce visibilities and cause roads to be snow packed, which can result in school closures. Bitterly cold temperatures can also occur during and following a significant snow event. Heavy snow loads on trees or roofs can cause roof and property damage. The school district has not experienced damages as a result of severe winter storms but has closed schools due to heavy snow and low visibilities. Snow removal resources are sufficient at this time, but the planning team indicated concerns exist for bus routes as some roads have not been repaired after flooding in March 2019.
Administration/Capability Assessment The school district has a superintendent, two principals, and three school secretaries. The school board is made up of a six-member panel. The district also has additional departments and staff that may be available to implement hazard mitigation initiatives. They include:
• Coordinator of Special Education • Business Manager/Human Resource • Technology Coordinator • Custodians • Kitchen Staff • Safety/Crisis Committee
The Safety/Crisis Committee, Superintendent, and Business Manager would likely be the primary staff to oversee the implementation of mitigation projects in the school facilities. The district does have the authority to levy taxes and school bonds for specific purposes that may involve mitigation projects.
Table HNS.5: Overall Capability OVERALL CAPABILITY LIMITED/MODERATE/HIGH Financial resources need to implement mitigation projects High
Staff/expertise to implement projects Moderate
DIstrict support to implement projects High
Time to devote to hazard mitigation Limited
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 155 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-NEWCASTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
Plan Integration The crisis response plan for the school district is called the Safety Manual, which is updated annually. The Safety Manual includes topics on the standard response protocol, bomb threat evacuation, utility shut-offs, map & room assignments, evacuation drills, bus routes, tornado action plan, fire drill plan, lockdown plans, emergency response team list, safety committee list, and grief recovery. The lockdown procedure was recently updated. Additionally, the safety team meets monthly to discuss conditions of the buildings and grounds.
The district has made efforts to reduce the risk to hazards by forming a safety team and crisis team, educating staff on proper procedures, practicing drills with staff and students, and involving law enforcement and emergency management personnel in drill planning. In a future response plan update, the planning team would like to identify opportunities for mitigation following hazard events, as well as identify any gaps related to particular hazards.
Plan Maintenance Hazard Mitigation Plans should be living documents and updated regularly to reflect changes in hazard events, priorities, and mitigation actions. These updates are encouraged to occur after every major disaster event, alongside community planning documents (i.e. annual budgets and Capital Improvement Plans), during the fall before the HMA grant cycle begins, and/or prior to other funding opportunity cycles begin including CDBG, Water Sustainability Fund, Revolving State Fund, or other identified funding mechanisms.
The local planning team is responsible for reviewing and updating this community profile as changes occur or after a major event. The local planning team includes the Superintendent and will review the plan no less than semi-annually, including the public in the review and revision process by sharing information through its website.
Mitigation Strategy
Continuing Actions: MITIGATION ACTION BACKUP GENERATORS DESCRIPTION Provide a portable or stationary source of backup power. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $30,000+ FUNDING School budget, HMA TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY School Administration STATUS Not yet started.
156 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-NEWCASTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION PUBLIC AWARENESS/EDUCATION Educate staff, students, and parents about hazard vulnerability and mitigation measures. Activities may include classroom modules profiling certain hazards and discussing preparedness measures. DESCRIPTION Education materials such as brochures and fliers can be developed and provided. In addition, purchasing education equipment such as overhead projectors and laptops. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $5,000+ FUNDING School budget, HMA TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY School Administration The school district continues to maintain open communication and STATUS awareness about COVID-19 restrictions and policies.
Removed Actions: MITIGATION ACTION SAFE ROOMS DESCRIPTION Design and construct fully supplied safe rooms in school facilities HAZARD(S) Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Thunderstorms REASON FOR Both facilities have access to basements. REMOVAL
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 157
This Page is Intentionally Blank
158 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: LAUREL-CONCORD-COLERIDGE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
DISTRICT PROFILE
LAUREL-CONCORD-COLERIDGE
PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Cedar and Dixon Counties Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
2021
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 159 SECTION SEVEN: LAUREL-CONCORD-COLERIDGE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
Local Planning Team
Table LCC.1: Laurel-Concord-Coleridge Public Schools Local Planning Team NAME TITLE JURISDICTION JEREMY Superintendent Laurel-Concord-Coleridge School CHRISTIANSEN KEN SWANSON High School Principal Laurel-Concord-Coleridge School PAIGE PARSONS Elementary Principal Laurel-Concord-Coleridge School MARK LEONARD Middle School Principal Laurel-Concord-Coleridge School
Location and Services The Laurel-Concord-Coleridge Public School District operates three schools with two in Laurel and the middle school in Coleridge. The school district serves students residing in the communities of Laurel, Coleridge, Dixon, and Concord as well as portions of Cedar and Dixon Counties. School facilities are open after normal business hours for community members to have access to the library, weight room, and gym. The school district primarily serves English speaking students, but there are also a number of Spanish speaking students.
160 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: LAUREL-CONCORD-COLERIDGE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
Figure LCC.1: Laurel-Concord-Coleridge Public School District
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 161 SECTION SEVEN: LAUREL-CONCORD-COLERIDGE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
Demographics The following figure displays the historical student population trend starting with the 2004-05 school year and ending with the 2018-19 year. It indicates that the district’s student population grew steadily between 2014 and 2018. However, enrollment dropped in the 2018-2019 school year, going from 485 students to 456 students. The local planning team noted the school district is likely to experience little change in student population over the next several years.
Figure LCC.2: Student Population 2004-2019
600
500 485 451 460 456 400 438 387 375 380 359 358 353 355 350 300 337 331
200
100
0
Source: Nebraska Department of Education
Figure LCC.3: Number of Students by Grade, 2018-2019
41 38 38 37 36 34 32 32 31 30 28 29 25 25
PK KG 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th
Source: Nebraska Department of Education
162 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: LAUREL-CONCORD-COLERIDGE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
The figure above indicates that the largest number of students are in Pre-Kindergarten, Kindergarten, 4th, and 6th grades. The lowest population of students are 2nd, 10th, and 11th grades. According to the Nebraska Department of Education, 40 percent of students receive either free or reduced priced meals at school. This is lower than the state average at nearly 45 percent. Additionally, there are 14 percent of students enrolled in the Special Education Program, which is slightly lower than the state average of 16 percent. These particular students may be more vulnerable during a hazardous event than the rest of the student population.
Table LCC.2: Student Statistics, 2018-2019 School District State of Nebraska FREE/REDUCED PRICED MEALS 40% 45.21% SCHOOL MOBILITY RATE 6.94% 4.61% ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS * 6.87% SPECIAL EDUCATION STUDENTS 14% 15.48% Source: Nebraska Department of Education *Data has been masked to protect the identity of students.
Future Development Trends In the past five years, no changes have occurred. Pending bond approval, however, there are plans to construct a new high school and renovate the elementary school in Laurel. This project has yet to be started.
Critical Infrastructure/Key Resources Chemical Storage Fixed Sites According to the Tier II System reports submitted to the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, there are eight chemical storage sites in Coleridge and Laurel that contain hazardous chemicals.
Critical Facilities The local planning team identified critical facilities necessary for the school district per FEMA’s Community Lifelines. Critical facilities were identified during the 2016 planning process and revised for this plan update. The following table and figure provide a summary of the critical facilities.
Table LCC.3: Critical Facilities Number Shelter CF Number Generator Floodplain Name Address of Location # of Staff (Y/N) (Y/N) Students (Y/N) Elementary School /High 502 Wakefield, 209, 1 59 Y N N School Laurel 111 /Football Complex Middle 203 S. Main St, 2 136 29 Y N N School Coleridge Alma St. and Hwy 3 Bus Barn N/A 5 N N N 15
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 163 SECTION SEVEN: LAUREL-CONCORD-COLERIDGE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
Figure LCC.4: Critical Facilities and Flood Risk Area
164 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: LAUREL-CONCORD-COLERIDGE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
School Drills and Staff Training The school district is required by law to conduct a number of drills throughout the year. Students and staff participate in monthly fire drills and tornado drills twice per year. School and bus evacuation drills are also done, and lockdown drills are likely to be included as well. Some staff members serve on a Crisis Team, which are trained annually and meet as needed. Members of the Safety Team meet quarterly to address safety concerns. All staff are trained in CPR and in the use of defibrillators and EpiPens. Staff also complete “Alice” training and the Standard Response Protocol training. In the event of an emergency, the district has the ability to reach parents by phone, text, website, and email. Historical Occurrences See the Cedar County or Dixon County community profile for historical hazard events. Hazard Prioritization For an in-depth discussion regarding area wide hazards, please see Section Four: Risk Assessment. The hazards discussed in detail below were either identified in the previous HMP and determined to still be of top concern or were added by the local planning team based on the identification of hazards of greatest concern, hazard history, and the jurisdiction’s capabilities.
Chemical Spills (Transportation) The local planning team identified chemical spills during transportation a hazard of concern due to their proximity to major highways and railroads. The district is not aware of any spills that have occurred near the schools as a result of transportation. It is possible that in the event of a chemical release, the school may need to evacuate or go into lockdown depending on the type, quantity, and proximity of the release to the facility. Currently, the schools practice emergency response procedures to prepare for this hazard. The planning team mentioned a barrier may be built in the future to separate the high school from the highway.
Severe Winter Storms Severe winter storms are a natural and regular occurrence for the region, which can cause significant impacts to the school district. Winter storms that bring high winds and heavy snow can reduce visibilities and cause roads to be snow packed, which can result in school closures. Bitterly cold temperatures can also occur during, and following, a significant snow event. Heavy snow loads on trees or roofs can cause roof and property damage. The school district is concerned with student safety while traveling on buses to and from school during snow events. Bus drivers are equipped with cell phones in case they become stuck or need assistance. Farmers have helped remove stuck buses from deep snow drifts. The school purchased a bobcat skid loader for snow removal, and the district hires a contractor to clear parking lots. Custodians are responsible for clearing sidewalks.
Tornadoes and High Winds The school in Coleridge has taken an indirect hit from tornadoes that moved in or near Coleridge in the past. The Village of Coleridge has experienced five tornadoes since 1996, and all with varying degrees of damage to the community. The highest rated tornado was an F-4 on June 23, 2003. In total, 11 homes received substantial damage and hundreds of utility poles were downed. The total cost in damages was estimated at $3.7 million. The roof and windows at the school were damaged as a result of this storm. The most recent tornado occurred on June 17, 2014 and was rated an EF-3. This tornado impacted primarily the eastern side of the Village. Pending bond approval, the high school and elementary school in Lauren will add a storm shelter. The Elementary, High School and Middle School, as well as the district’s bus barn are in need of
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 165 SECTION SEVEN: LAUREL-CONCORD-COLERIDGE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
weather radios. At the Middle School, an antenna is needed to tune into an accurate forecast and notifications.
Administration/Capability Assessment The school district has a superintendent, three principals, and additional office staff. The school board is made up of a nine-member panel. The district also has additional departments and staff that may be available to implement hazard mitigation projects. They include: • Custodians • Kitchen Staff • Business Manager • Transportation • Economic Development • IT Specialist • Technology Coordinator
The superintendent would likely be the primary person to oversee the implementation of mitigation projects in school facilities. The district does have the authority to levy taxes and school bonds for specific purposes that may involve mitigation projects.
Table LCC.4: Overall Capability OVERALL CAPABILITY LIMITED/MODERATE/HIGH FINANCIAL RESOURCES NEEDED TO IMPLEMENT Moderate MITIGATION PROJECTS STAFF/EXPERTISE TO IMPLEMENT PROJECTS Limited
DISTRICT SUPPORT TO IMPLEMENT PROJECTS Moderate
TIME TO DEVOTE TO HAZARD MITIGATION Moderate
Plan Integration The crisis response plan for the school district is called the Safety Plan, which was last updated in 2017. The Safety Plan is an all-hazards plan that includes topics on prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery. The district also completes an Annual Safety Audit.
Plan Maintenance Hazard Mitigation Plans should be living documents and updated regularly to reflect changes in hazard events, priorities, and mitigation actions. These updates are encouraged to occur after every major disaster event, alongside community planning documents (i.e., annual budgets and Capital Improvement Plans), during the fall before the HMA grant cycle begins, and/or prior to other funding opportunity cycles begin including CDBG, Water Sustainability Fund, Revolving State Fund, or other identified funding mechanisms.
The local planning team is responsible for reviewing and updating this community profile as changes occur or after a major event. The local planning team will include the Safety Team, Superintendent, and High School Principal. The local planning team will review the plan no less than annually and will include the public in the review and revision process by sharing information through its website, social media, letters to families, and at board meetings.
166 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: LAUREL-CONCORD-COLERIDGE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
Mitigation Strategy
Completed Actions: MITIGATION ACTION ALARM SYSTEM NOTIFICATION Alert police and fire department if a fire starts, sprinklers go off, or if DESCRIPTION there is a break-in at the schools. HAZARD(S) Urban Fire, Civil Disorder STATUS Alarm system notification process is complete.
MITIGATION ACTION BUILDING SAFETY RENOVATIONS Complete several safety renovations to high school which may include: moving the main office to allow for secure check-in of visitors DESCRIPTION and students, link buildings together, and update/improve interior and exterior doors for security. HAZARD(S) Civil Disorder, Terrorism STATUS Project completed. Central office operational as check in point.
Continuing Actions: MITIGATION ACTION BACKUP GENERATORS DESCRIPTION Provide a portable or stationary source of backup power. Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Winter Storms, Severe HAZARD(S) Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST $60,000+ FUNDING School budget TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Superintendent STATUS This project is not yet started.
MITIGATION ACTION SECURITY CAMERA UPDATES Replace, update, and/or add additional security cameras to school DESCRIPTION facilities. HAZARD(S) Civil Disorder, Urban Fire ESTIMATED COST $5,000 FUNDING School budget TIMELINE 1-2 years PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Superintendent STATUS Phase 1 of 3 phases completed.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 167 SECTION SEVEN: LAUREL-CONCORD-COLERIDGE PUBLIC SCHOOLS PROFILE
MITIGATION ACTION SAFE ROOMS DESCRIPTION Design and construct fully supplied safe rooms in school facilities. HAZARD(S) Tornadoes and High Winds, Severe Thunderstorms ESTIMATED COST $200-$300/sf stand alone; $150-$200/sf addition or retrofit FUNDING School budget, HMA TIMELINE 5+ years PRIORITY Low LEAD AGENCY Superintendent STATUS This project is not yet started.
168 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021
Fire District
Hartington Fire Department includes Fordyce Volunteer Fire Department
Cedar and Dixon Counties Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
2021
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 169 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-FORDYCE FIRE DEPARTMENTS PROFILE
Local Planning Team
Table HFD.1: Hartington-Fordyce Fire Departments Local Planning Team NAME TITLE JURISDICTION Hartington-Fordyce Fire TRAVIS GUENTHER Fire Chief Departments Location and Geography The Hartington Fire Department covers approximately 91,500 acres of land in the central portion of Cedar County. The fire district includes one sub-district, which is Fordyce Volunteer Fire Department. The fire district mainly addresses grass and wildfire in the region’s rural area as well as provides fire services to the City of Hartington and the Village of Fordyce. TRANSPORTATION Two of the major transportation corridors for the fire district include Nebraska Highways 57 and 84. Nebraska Highway 57 has on average 4,870 vehicles per day with 400 of those being heavy commercial vehicles. Nebraska Highway 84 has on average 1,780 vehicles per day with 130 heavy commercial vehicles.105 These routes are of most concern to the planning team due to them being the most populated routes in the district and proximity to populated areas. Hazardous materials such as gasoline, diesel fuel, anhydrous ammonia, and propane are regularly transported along local routes; however, no chemicals spills have occurred locally, according to the planning team. DEMOGRAPHICS See the profiles for the City of Hartington, Village of Fordyce, and Cedar County for regional demographic information. The fire district serves approximately 1,900 people.
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT TRENDS There have been no changes in the past five years, and there are no developments or stations planned for the near future, as noted by the local planning team.
Critical Infrastructure Chemical Storage Fixed Sites According to the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy, there are nine chemical fixed sites, all of which are located in or near the City of Hartington. For a list of these chemical fixed sites, refer to the City of Hartington Community Profile. Fordyce does store some fertilizer in smaller amounts but there are no concerns regarding spills from the fertilizer. The planning team noted that the district has limited response resources for chemical spills and relies on the county LEOP, the Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC), the Norfolk HazMat team, and the Nebraska Hazardous Incident Team (NHIT).
105 Nebraska Department of Roads. “Traffic Flow Map of the State Highways: State of Nebraska.” [map]. Scale 1”= 20 miles. State of Nebraska: Department of Roads, 2015. http://www.roads.nebraska.gov/media/2510/2014-statewide-traffic-flow-map.pdf
170 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-FORDYCE FIRE DEPARTMENTS PROFILE
Figure HFD.1: Hartington-Fordyce Fire Departments
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 171 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-FORDYCE FIRE DEPARTMENTS PROFILE
Figure HFD.2: Critical Facilities
172 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-FORDYCE FIRE DEPARTMENTS PROFILE
Critical Facilities The local planning team identified critical facilities necessary for the district per FEMA’s Community Lifelines. The following table and Figure AWF.2 provide a summary of the identified critical facilities.
Table HFD.2: Critical Facilities SHORT- CF TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN TYPE NAME ADDRESS NUMBER SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) 119 W 2nd Safety and 1 Fire Hall Street, N Y N Security Fordyce 203 E. Safety and 2 Fire Hall Franklin, N Y N Security Hartington
Historical Occurrences See the Cedar County community profile for historical hazard events. Hazard Prioritization For an in-depth discussion regarding area wide hazards, please see Section Four: Risk Assessment. The hazards discussed in detail below were either identified in the previous HMP and determined to still be of top concern or were added by the local planning team based on the identification of hazards of greatest concern, hazard history, and the jurisdiction’s capabilities.
Flooding Flooding was identified as a top hazard of concern for the district. Neither of the fire stations have flooded or are located near a known flood hazard area. However, the district is concerned with flooded roadways and road closures which would affect the ability to respond to fire calls. In July 1999, a significant rain event that dropped more than ten inches resulted in Highways 12 and 81 northwest of Hartington being flooded. The flooding cut off access to Hartington from the north on Highway 57 and cut off residents living in Becker addition from the rest of the city. Emergency services could not travel north for multiple days, making the closes emergency services fifteen miles away for that area of the city.
Another flash flood occurred on June 17, 2014 from a stationary thunderstorm over the area. Highway 57 south of Hartington was flooded and numerous gravel roads across the area were flooded as well. Heavy rain events present a concern for road closures to occur in the future.
Grass/Wildfire According to the Nebraska Forest Service, the Hartington Fire Department responded to four fires and Fordyce Fire Department responded to three fires from 2000 to April 2020. A total of 56 acres were burned as a result of those fires.106 The planning team noted that none of the fires were very large in size, but there is a concern about having enough personnel to respond, especially in the case of a large fire. The district does have mutual aid agreements with nearby fire districts. Continued fire prevention education is needed.
106 Nebraska Forest Service (NFS). http://www.nfs.unl.edu/
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 173 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-FORDYCE FIRE DEPARTMENTS PROFILE
Tornadoes and High Winds Due to previous events, tornadoes and high winds were identified as hazards of top concern. According to NCEI data, there have been 19 high wind events in Cedar County from 1996 to September 2019. High winds are common across the region and can cause property and tree damage and brief power outages. Four tornadoes have passed through or near Hartington between 1996 and September 2019, but there are no reports of tornadoes impacting Fordyce. One tornado, on May 3, 1999, caused heavy damage to farm buildings and center irrigation pivot near Hartington. The tornado also damaged a garage and a part of a roof within the community. Total damages were estimated at $50,000 but there were no injuries from the F-1 tornado. On June 17, 2014 a tornado primarily impacted rural areas just outside of Hartington. Damage was reported at a farm where outbuildings were impacted, and there was severe tree damage along the path from the EF-1 tornado. Property damages were estimated at $10,000. The planning team expressed concern about getting personnel to the fire station in the event of a tornado or high wind event. Furthermore, the siren in Fordyce is aging and is need of replacement to ensure residents are alerted of tornadoes.
Governance The Hartington/Fordyce Fire Department is supervised by two fire chiefs and a five-member fire board of directors who will oversee the implementation of hazard mitigation projects. The fire department is co-governed by an interlocal agreement between the City of Hartington, Village of Fordyce, and the Hartington/Fordyce Fire Board. The fire board is made up of five members, and the district is staffed by the following positions:
• Two Fire Chiefs • Two Assistant Fire Chiefs • President • Vice President • Treasurer • Secretary
Capability Assessment Due to the unique structure of fire districts, the typical capability assessment table was not used. The following table summarizes the district’s overall capabilities. The Hartington/Fordyce Fire Department will utilize existing relationships with local, county, state, and federal agencies in the implementation of mitigation projects. The district has applied for and been awarded grants in the past.
Table AWF.3: Capability Assessment Overall Capability Limited/Moderate/High Financial resources to implement mitigation projects Limited Staff/expertise to implement projects Moderate Public support to implement projects Moderate Time to devote to hazard mitigation Limited
Plan Integration The Hartington/Fordyce Fire Department does not have any formal planning documents other than participating in the regional Community Wildfire Protection Plan, which was last updated in
174 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: HARTINGTON-FORDYCE FIRE DEPARTMENTS PROFILE
2015. The department follows Standard Operating Guidelines (SOGs). Additionally, the district has the Cedar County LEOP available as a reference for local emergency operations within the county. The LEOP was last updated in 2016 and is updated every five years. Both natural and man-made disasters are discussed in the LEOP.
Plan Maintenance Hazard Mitigation Plans should be living documents and updated regularly to reflect changes in hazard events, priorities, and mitigation actions. These updates are encouraged to occur after every major disaster event, alongside community planning documents (i.e. annual budgets), during the fall before the HMA grant cycle begins, and/or prior to other funding opportunity cycles begin including CDBG, Water Sustainability Fund, Revolving State Fund, or other identified funding mechanisms.
The local planning team is responsible for reviewing and updating this district profile as changes occur or after a major event. The local planning team will include the Fire Chiefs. The local planning team will review the plan no less than annually and will include the public in the review and revision process by sharing information on social media and at officer meetings. Mitigation Strategy
New Actions: MITIGATION ACTION ALERT/WARNING SIRENS Perform an evaluation of existing alert sirens in order to determine DESCRIPTION sirens which should be replaced or upgraded. Install new sirens where lacking and remote activation. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $50,000 FUNDING Fire Board Budget TIMELINE 1-2 years PRIORITY High LEAD AGENCY Hartington and Fordyce Fire Chiefs, Village Board, City Council STATUS The Village of Fordyce is in need a new siren.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 175
This Page is Intentionally Blank
176 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021
Fire District
Randolph Volunteer Fire District
Cedar and Dixon Counties Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Update
2021
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 177 SECTION SEVEN: RANDOLPH VOLUNTEER FIRE DISTRICT PROFILE
Local Planning Team
Table RFD.1: Randolph Volunteer Fire District Local Planning Team NAME TITLE JURISDICTION Randolph Volunteer Fire JIM SCOTT Fire Chief District
Location and Geography The Randolph Volunteer Fire District covers approximately 80,640 acres of land in southwest Cedar County, northwest Wayne County, and northeast Pierce County. The City of Randolph is located in the central portion of the district and is the area most at risk to fire, according to the planning team. The fire district also addresses grass and wildfire in the region’s rural area. Transportation The major transportation corridors for the fire district include U.S. Highway 81, U.S. Highway 20, and a BNSF rail line that runs through the district. U.S. Highway 81 averages 4,245 vehicles daily, with 765 being heavy commercial vehicles. Highway 20 averages 2,635 vehicles daily, 380 of which are heavy trucks.107 The BNSF rail line runs east-west just north of Highway 20 and is known to carry ethanol, coal, and grain commodities, according to the planning team. The team also noted that flooding has resulted in closures on both highways, with recent flood events closing Highway 20 in twenty locations due to localized flooding.
Hazardous materials such as chemicals and nuclear waste materials are regularly transported on Highways 81 and 20. Liquid fuels and agricultural chemicals are transported along the BNSF rail line at irregular intervals. The planning team indicated that there have been two transportation- related chemical spills that occurred recently within the fire district. In 2019, approximately 20 gallons of diesel fuel was spilled onto Highway 20 as a result of an auto accident. In 2020, approximately half a train car spilled liquid fertilizer at the Central Valley Ag grain facility near the intersection of highways 81 and 20. According to the planning team, the impacts from both spills were mitigated to have little to no effect on the community or the environment. The planning team also noted that evacuating the City of Randolph could prove problematic in the event of a large flood event due to the topography and ingress and egress roads. A flood mitigation project is currently underway in the city to reduce risk in a large flood event.
Demographics See the Cedar County profile for regional demographic information. The fire district serves approximately 3,200 people.
107 Nebraska Department of Roads. 2018. “Interactive Statewide Traffic Counts Map.” [map]. https://gis.ne.gov/portal/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=bb00781d6653474d945d51f49e1e7c34.
178 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: RANDOLPH VOLUNTEER FIRE DISTRICT
Figure RFD.1: Randolph Volunteer Fire District
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 179 SECTION SEVEN: RANDOLPH VOLUNTEER FIRE DISTRICT PROFILE
Figure RFD.2: Critical Facility and Flood Risk Area
180 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: RANDOLPH VOLUNTEER FIRE DISTRICT
Future Development Trends There have been no changes in the past five years and there are no developments planned for the near future. Critical Infrastructure
Chemical Storage Fixed Sites There are two chemical fixed sites in the district, Randolph Farm Supply Inc and CenturyLink, which are both located in the City of Randolph.108 According to the planning team, these were constructed in cooperation with the Nebraska State Fire Marshall and the EPA. The fire district does not have any dedicated HAZMAT response units and has very little chemical containment equipment. Additionally, only 33% of the membership is trained to HAZMAT awareness levels. The district is therefore not qualified to address or contain spills beyond those that require the spreading of absorption materials. The planning team indicated that the units should have a minimum of 50% of its members trained to the operations level, with at least two of the twelve trained to more advanced response levels.
District equipment includes a pumper-tanker with 3,000 gallons, a pumper with 1,250 gallons, two tankers with 2,000 gallons, a brush unit with 300 gallons, one rescue truck, and a utility pickup truck. The pumper-tankers are capable of foam operation on multiple lines. Public outreach efforts include public service announcements on the local radio during fire awareness week in mid- October and community fire awareness events when requested by community clubs, boards, and schools.
Critical Facilities The local planning team identified critical facilities necessary for the district per FEMA’s Community Lifelines. The following table and Figure RFD.2 provide a summary of the identified critical facilities.
Table RFD.2: Critical Facilities SHORT- CF TERM GENERATOR FLOODPLAIN TYPE NAME ADDRESS NUMBER SHELTER (Y/N) (Y/N) (Y/N) Safety and 202 S. Main St, 1 Fire Station N N Y Security Randolph, NE
Historical Occurrences See the Cedar County profile for historical hazard events. Hazard Prioritization For an in-depth discussion regarding area wide hazards, please see Section Four: Risk Assessment. The hazards discussed in detail below were either identified in the previous HMP and determined to still be of top concern or were added by the local planning team based on the identification of hazards of greatest concern, hazard history, and the jurisdiction’s capabilities.
108 Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy. “Search Tier II Data.” Accessed May 2020. https://deq-iis.ne.gov/tier2/search.faces.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 181 SECTION SEVEN: RANDOLPH VOLUNTEER FIRE DISTRICT PROFILE
Drought and Extreme Heat The local planning team identified drought and extreme heat as a hazard of top concern based on previous occurrence. In the event of extreme heat and drought, there is always a risk for wildland fires that can extend into the rural-urban interface spaces. The planning team is also concerned about water availability. With the ability to predict future drought and heat events, planning and mitigation conversations have been created around the need for an apparatus with greater water hauling capacity, and a department need to acquire more wildland fire equipment. Specifically, equipment designed to address the rural-urban interface spaces. In the past, drought and heat events have driven greater call volumes to the district. Many drought fires impact the harvest time period with cultivated fields. In-season call volumes occur largely in tree breaks and on ag-based farm sites.
The district currently completes regular risk-gap analysis to determine the probability of positive call outcomes, and to plan for future apparatus and equipment needs to mitigate risk exposure events on the members and the service community. When gaps are identified, the department seeks out grants or cost-share opportunities to address the needs. Where those opportunities do not exist, the department works with the local funding boards to acquire necessary funding. Very similar tasks to the above are completed with in-house and external personnel training needs as well. The district currently has a need for more equipment, specifically wildland response gear.
Flooding Flooding was identified as a hazard of top concern for the fire district based on previous occurrence. Events in the past have impacted the capacity and capabilities of the department. In 2019, the district experienced a large-scale flooding event. In response, the community of Randolph has embarked on a project to help mitigate the flooding issues; however, this will impact only the town. Other flooding issues exist on federal and state highways and rural roads. These impacts both rescue attempts, and the department’s ability to reach calls for service in the rural community. The community of Randolph experienced an estimated 35% floodplain coverage in spillway areas. This impacted the unit’s ability to access calls for service and identified risk-gap areas for the department with respect to equipment availability and member training.
The department has attempted to acquire flood and swift water equipment through state and FEMA grant opportunities without success. The department has not been able to add this equipment in the past due to funding restrictions on local budgets. Without access to the equipment, and in turn additional training, the department’s capacity to address future needs will not be realized. The department requires additional training and equipment to effectively and safely respond to incidents that arise from future flooding events.
Severe Thunderstorms (including hail) Severe thunderstorms are common events in the planning area and were identified as a top concern for the community. Severe thunderstorms and hail can result in the loss of electricity, blocked roadways, damages to trees, and flooding. Blocked roadways present life safety concerns to those needing evacuation or immediate medical attention. The NCEI recorded 14 severe thunderstorm events in Randolph from 1996 to September 2019, with $70,000 in damages to property. The local planning team noted that the greatest concerns with severe thunderstorms is the impact on the traveling public with respect to ability to navigate roadways (both rural and urban), impacts from lightning strikes as it relates to wildland fires, and effects to the rural/urban interface as it relates to wind damages and structural integrity.
The greatest historic impact has been localized flooding within the urban areas and federal/state/local roadways. Similarly, the movement of field debris has caused issues with
182 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: RANDOLPH VOLUNTEER FIRE DISTRICT mobility of the traveling public, as well as the department’s capacity to reach areas requesting assistance. In the past, trees falling within the community has occurred, but none have caused substantial damage to structures.
The department has engaged programs to improve the capacity, reliability, and efficiency of tools related to the removal of trees and field debris. Similarly, department members are given annual training opportunities related to severe weather sponsored by NOAA in Omaha. The department will need to continue to upgrade equipment to safely address this hazard. Multi-response protective gear, such as wildland or technical rescue PPE is needed. Currently, the only protective gear available is structure-based, which limits mobility, increases risk to health, and reduces the wear-life of existing apparel.
Severe Winter Storms Severe winter weather is part of the regular climate for the district and was identified as a top concern by the planning team. Severe winter storms include blizzards, ice accumulation, extreme cold, heavy snow, and winter storms. These storms can cause power outages during bitterly cold temperatures and road closures. According to the NCEI, there were 74 severe winter storm events in Cedar County from 1996 through September 2019. A major concern for the district is lack of protective gear to properly respond to severe winter storm events. Additionally, winter weather severely limits the department’s ability to reach calls for service due to drifted rural roadways. The department regularly responds to winter driving calls for service, which largely includes DOT incidents, and passenger-vehicle accidents with roadway hazards. In January 2019, the department responded to a horse rescue with livestock in a ditch. While the rescue was successful for the animal, several members were exposed to severe hypothermia due to the lack of ice-water and cold weather rescue gear. The district plans to continue seeking funding to acquire gear for future cold-weather and ice-rescue calls to enhance their response capabilities.
Tornadoes and High Winds The local planning team identified tornadoes and high winds as a hazard of top concern due to their potential to impact rural structures, travel capacity, utilities, spot-fires, and critical infrastructures within the district. The NCEI recorded 19 high wind events and 16 tornadoes in Cedar County from 1996 to September 2019. Although no critical facilities have been impacted by this hazard, the district remains concerned with severe summer and spring weather events. In 2014, high winds and tornadic activity was reported in the district and neighboring districts including Stanton, Laurel, and Wayne. Tornadoes were reported with heavy damage, and units were called for mutual aid. While the department was able to respond, it was difficult to effectively communicate with other districts which greatly limited the department’s ability to assist. The district indicated that current radio systems are old and ineffective, and unable to connect without coordination to other fire units, state elements, and federal resources that may be in place to assist.
The department continues to seek funding and grants to improve the radio communications systems, and to improve access to equipment/gear that would enable USAR responses to rural and urban loss of structural integrity. To date, no funding or grants have been approved for this equipment/gear. Without adequate equipment and gear, the department is not able to train effectively for USAR responses, and until such time as it is acquired, the capacity to respond
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 183 SECTION SEVEN: RANDOLPH VOLUNTEER FIRE DISTRICT PROFILE
safely with a high probability of success will remain low. Furthermore, the planning team indicated that there are some discussions for a new diesel-powered generator at the local fire hall, but the project has not been started. Governance A fire district’s governance indicates the number of board members or offices that may be able to help implement hazard mitigation actions. The Randolph Volunteer Fire District is co-governed by an interlocal agreement between the City of Randolph and the Randolph Rural Fire Board. The city leadership includes a mayor and a four-member city council. The rural fire board is made up of five members, and the district is staffed by the following positions:
• Fire Chief • Treasurer/Secretary • Assistant Chief 1 • Assistant Chief 2 • Training Officer • Fleet Sergeant • President • Vice President
Capability Assessment Due to the unique structure of fire districts, the typical capability assessment table was not used. The following table summarizes the district’s overall capabilities. The Randolph Volunteer Fire District will continue to utilize existing relationships with local, county, state, and federal agencies in the implementation of mitigation projects. The district has applied for grants in the past and won funding from FEMA AFG, the Nebraska Forest Service, NSF, Farm Credit Services, Pioneer Seeds, Home Depot, and Jack Lewis Safety fund, all totaling approximately $315,000 from 2010 to 2020.
Table RFD.3: Capability Assessment Overall Capability Limited/Moderate/High Financial resources to implement mitigation projects Limited Staff/expertise to implement projects Limited Public support to implement projects Limited Time to devote to hazard mitigation Limited
Plan Integration The Randolph Fire District does not have formal planning documents other than participating in the regional Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). However, the district follows Standard Operating Guidelines (SOGs). Additionally, the district has the Cedar County LEOP available as a reference for local emergency operations within the county. The LEOP was last updated in 2016 and is updated every five years. Both natural and man-made disasters are discussed in the LEOP.
184 Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 SECTION SEVEN: RANDOLPH VOLUNTEER FIRE DISTRICT
Plan Maintenance Hazard Mitigation Plans should be living documents and updated regularly to reflect changes in hazard events, priorities, and mitigation actions. These updates are encouraged to occur after every major disaster event, alongside community planning documents (i.e. annual budgets and Capital Improvement Plans), during the fall before the HMA grant cycle begins, and/or prior to other funding opportunity cycles begin including CDBG, Water Sustainability Fund, Revolving State Fund, or other identified funding mechanisms.
The local planning team is responsible for reviewing and updating this district profile as changes occur or after a major event. The local planning team will include the Fire Chief, Assistant Chief, and Second Assistant Chief. The local planning team will review the plan no less than bi-annually and will include the public in the review and revision process by sharing information on social media and at officer meetings.
Mitigation Strategy
New Actions: MITIGATION ACTION BACKUP GENERATOR DESCRIPTION Obtain a backup generator for the fire station. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST $10,000-$15,000 FUNDING VFD and City General Fund TIMELINE 2-5 years PRIORITY High LEAD AGENCY City of Randolph, Randolph VFD STATUS New action. Pending 2021/2022 budget approval.
MITIGATION ACTION CIVIL SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS Improve emergency rescue and response equipment and facilities by providing additional, or updating existing equipment. For example: DESCRIPTION backup systems for emergency vehicles, training additional personnel, upgrading radio systems, etc. HAZARD(S) All hazards ESTIMATED COST Varies FUNDING VFD General Fund TIMELINE Ongoing PRIORITY Medium LEAD AGENCY Randolph VFD New action. Additional training of personnel is needed along with STATUS appropriate all-hazard response equipment and radio upgrades.
Cedar and Dixon Counties Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2021 185