Document Dallascountyiowa_doc_e2ce3bcfc8

Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan 2023 Plan developed for Dallas County Emergency Management by JEO Consulting Group ---PAGE BREAK--- Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 I Hazard Mitigation Planning Team Name Title Jurisdiction AJ Seely Emergency Management Director Dallas County Emergency Management Agency Josh Heward Emergency Management Specialist Dallas County Emergency Management Agency Bob Ockerman Council Member City of Adel Chad Leonard Sheriff Dallas County Clint Robinson Fire Chief Waukee Fire Department Craig Leu Fire and EMS Chief West Des Moines Fire Department Jim Clark Fire Chief Johnston-Grimes Fire Department Karl Harris Assistant Fire Chief Woodward/Bouton Fire Department Matt Cavanaugh City Commission/Fire Chief City of Woodward/ Woodward Fire Department Robin Wolfe Clerk City of Dawson Steve Godwin Council Member City of Woodward *Becky Appleford Project Manager JEO Consulting Group, Inc. *Anthony Kohel Planner JEO Consulting Group, Inc. *Claire Patton Planning Intern JEO Consulting Group, Inc. *Served in a consultant or advisory role. ---PAGE BREAK--- II Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 This Page Is Intentionally Blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 III Table of Contents Hazard Mitigation Planning Team I Table of Contents III List of Figures V List of Tables VII List of Acronyms XI Executive Summary 1 Introduction 1 Goals 3 Summary of Changes 3 Plan Implementation 4 Hazard Profiles 5 Mitigation Strategies 7 Section One: Introduction 9 Hazard Mitigation Planning 9 Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 10 Hazard Mitigation Assistance 10 Section Two: Planning Process 13 Introduction 13 Multi-Jurisdictional Approach 13 Hazard Mitigation Planning Process 14 Organization of Resources 14 Public Involvement and Outreach 16 Participant Involvement 21 Data Sources and Information 27 Public Review 29 Plan Adoption and Implementation 30 Section Three: County Profile 31 Introduction 31 County Geographic Summary 31 Demographics 33 At-risk Populations 35 Governance 39 Built Environment and Structural Inventory 43 Social Vulnerability Index 46 State and Federally Owned Properties 58 Historical Sites 58 Section Four: Risk Assessment 65 Introduction 65 Methodology 65 Average Annual Damages and Frequency 66 Hazard Identification 67 Hazard Assessment Summary Tables 68 Historical Disaster Declarations 71 Climate Adaptation 72 Hazard Profiles 81 Animal and Plant Disease 83 Dam and Levee Failure 87 Drought 94 Earthquake 101 Expansive Soils 105 Extreme Temperature (Heat/Cold) 109 118 Grass/Wildland Fire 137 ---PAGE BREAK--- IV Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Hazardous Materials Release 148 Human Infectious Diseases 158 Infrastructure Failure 162 Landslide 165 Severe Thunderstorms 167 Severe Winter Storms 173 179 Terrorism and Civil Unrest 181 Tornado and Windstorm 185 Transportation Incident 198 Section Five: Mitigation Strategy 203 Introduction 203 Summary of Changes 203 Goals 204 Selected Mitigation and Strategic Actions 204 Participant Mitigation and Strategic Actions 205 Mitigation and Strategic Actions Project Matrix 205 Section Six: Plan Implementation and Maintenance 209 Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the Plan 209 Continued Public Involvement 210 Integrating Other Capabilities 210 Unforeseen Opportunities 211 Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms 212 Section Seven: Community Profiles 213 Purpose of Community Profiles 213 Community Profiles City of Adel City of Bouton City of Dallas Center City of Dawson City of De Soto City of Dexter City of Granger City of Linden City of Minburn City of Perry City of Redfield City of Van Meter City of Waukee City of Woodward Adel-DeSoto-Minburn School District Dallas Center-Grimes School District Perry Community School District Perry Water Works Van Meter School District Waukee School District West Central Valley School District Woodward-Granger School District Woodward Township Fire District Xenia Rural Water District Appendix A: Documents of Public Involvement Appendix B: Public Meeting Materials and Worksheets Appendix C: Worksheets to Assist Community in Review and Updates Appendix D: Hazard Mitigation Project Funding Guidebook Appendix E: Public Survey Results ---PAGE BREAK--- Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 V List of Figures Figure 1: Project Area 2 Figure 2: Project Timeline 15 Figure 3: Most Common Hazard Experienced (Public Survey) 18 Figure 4: Most Important Mitigation Projects (Public Survey) 20 Figure 5: Round 2 26 Figure 6: Map of Project Area 32 Figure 7: Iowa Landform Regions 33 Figure 8: County Population 1850-2020 34 Figure 9: County Population by Age Cohort and Sex (2020) 34 Figure 10: County School Districts 37 Figure 11: Housing Age in Dallas County 44 Figure 12: Social Vulnerability Index 47 Figure 13: Pipelines in Dallas County 49 Figure 14: Chemical Storage Sites 50 Figure 15: Map of Chemical Storage Sites and Floodplain 53 Figure 16: Average Temperature (1895-2020) 75 Figure 17: Average Precipitation (1895-2020) 76 Figure 18: U.S. Billion-Dollar Disaster Events (1980-2021) 77 Figure 19: Plant Hardiness Zone Change 78 Figure 20: EAB Infestation Status in Iowa 85 Figure 21: Dam Locations 89 Figure 22: Van Meter Leveed Area 91 Figure 23: Sequence and Impacts of Drought Types 95 Figure 24: Palmer Drought Severity Index 97 Figure 25: Average Precipitation for the Planning Area 98 Figure 26: 2018 Probability of Damage from Earthquakes 103 Figure 27: Earthquake Probability 104 Figure 28: Iowa Soil Regions 106 Figure 29: Predominant Soil Texture 0-100 cm 107 Figure 30: Number of Days Above 100°F 110 Figure 31: Number of Days with High of 10°F or Below 111 Figure 32: NOAA Heat Index 112 Figure 33: Climate Normal Max Temperature (1991-2020) 113 Figure 34: Wind Chill Index Chart 114 Figure 35: Climate Normals Minimum Temperature (1991-2020) 115 Figure 36: 1% and 0.2% Annual Flood Risk Hazard Areas 122 Figure 37: North Raccoon Watershed Flood Risk Map 124 Figure 38: Middle Des Moines Watershed Flood Risk Map 125 Figure 39: Average Precipitation for Planning Area 128 Figure 40: Events for Floods/Flash Floods 128 Figure 41: Yearly Events for Floods/Flash Floods 134 Figure 42: Grassland Fire Danger Example 138 Figure 43: Wildland Urban Interface Map - Iowa 139 Figure 44: Wildland Urban Interface Map – Dallas County 140 Figure 45: Wildfire Risk to Homes - Dallas County 141 Figure 46: Wildfires by Cause in the Planning Area 142 Figure 47: FEMA Flood After Fire 144 Figure 48: Mean Fire Return Interval 145 Figure 49: Fixed Chemical Sites in the County 151 Figure 50: Major Transportation Routes with Half Mile Buffer 152 Figure 51: Dallas County Public Pipeline Viewer Map 153 Figure 52: Chemical Fixed Site Spills by Year 156 Figure 53: Chemical Transportation Spills by Year 156 Figure 54: Bridge Surface Conditions 163 ---PAGE BREAK--- VI Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 55: Average Number of Thunderstorms 167 Figure 56: Hail Events by Magnitude 169 Figure 57: Severe Thunderstorm Events by Month 170 Figure 58: SPIA Index 174 Figure 59: Wind Chill Index Chart 175 Figure 60: Climate Normals Temperature (1991-2020) 176 Figure 61: Normal Snowfall in Inches (1991-2020) 176 Figure 62: Historic Coal Mining Areas 179 Figure 63: Tornado Activity in the United 186 Figure 64: Wind Zones in the U.S. 187 Figure 65: Historic Tornado Tracks 188 Figure 66: High Wind Events by Month 192 Figure 67: Tornadoes by Month in the Planning Area 192 Figure 68: Tornado Events Per Year 196 Figure 69: Windstorm Events Per Year 196 Figure 70: Transportation Corridors 199 Figure 71: Automobile Crashes 2012 - April 2022 200 ---PAGE BREAK--- Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 VII List of Tables Table 1: Participating Jurisdictions 1 Table 2: 2018 Plan Comments and Revisions 4 Table 3: Regional Risk Assessment 5 Table 4: Hazard Loss Estimates for the Planning Area 6 Table 5: Hazard Mitigation Planning Team 15 Table 6: Kick-off Meeting Attendees 16 Table 7: Kick-off Meeting Location and Time 16 Table 8: Communities Represented in Public Survey 17 Table 9: Priorities for Mitigation End Goals (Public Survey) 19 Table 10: Notified Stakeholder Groups 20 Table 11: Notified Neighboring 21 Table 12: Outreach Activity Summary 22 Table 13: Round 1 Meeting Dates and Locations 22 Table 14: Round 1 Meeting Attendees 23 Table 15: Round 1 Recorded Meeting Viewers 23 Table 16: Regional Planning Team Meeting Attendees 24 Table 17: Regional Planning Team Meeting Location and Time 24 Table 18: Round 2 Meeting Dates and Locations 25 Table 19: Round 2 Meeting Attendees 25 Table 20: Round 2 Recorded Meeting Viewers 26 Table 21: General Plans, Documents, and Information 27 Table 22: Public Review Revisions 29 Table 23: Dallas County Climate 31 Table 24: Population with the County (2020) 35 Table 25: School Inventory 36 Table 26: Stakeholder Outreach to Nursing Homes and Assisted Living Facilities 38 Table 27: ESL and Poverty At-Risk 39 Table 28: Racial Composition Trends 39 Table 29: Capability Assessment 40 Table 30: Overall Capability 41 Table 31: Selected Housing Characteristics 43 Table 32: Assessed Parcels and Value in the 1% Annual Flood Risk Area 45 Table 33: Assessed Parcels and Value in the 0.2% Annual Flood Risk Area 45 Table 34: County Flood Map Products 45 Table 35: Care Facility Inventory 54 Table 36: Critical Facilities 56 Table 37: State and Federally Owned Facilities and Lands 58 Table 38: Historical Sites 58 Table 39: Term Definitions 65 Table 40: Hazards Addressed in the Plan 67 Table 41: Regional Risk Assessment 68 Table 42: Hazard Loss Estimates for the Planning Area 69 Table 43: SBA Declarations 71 Table 44: Presidential Disaster Declarations 71 Table 45: Top Hazards of Concern 81 Table 46: Livestock Inventory 83 Table 47: Land and Value of Farms in the County 83 Table 48: Crop Values 83 Table 49: Agricultural Plant Disease Losses 85 Table 50: Regional Agricultural Disease Vulnerabilities 86 Table 51: Dam Hazard Classification 88 Table 52: Dams in the 90 Table 53: High Hazard Dams in the Planning Area 90 Table 54: Levees in Planning Area 92 ---PAGE BREAK--- VIII Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Table 55: USACE Levee Rating Categories 93 Table 56: Regional Dam and Levee Failure Vulnerabilities 93 Table 57: Historic 96 Table 58: Palmer Drought Severity Index Classification 96 Table 59: Loss Estimate for Drought 98 Table 60: Period of Record in Drought 99 Table 61: Notable Drought Impacts in Planning Area 99 Table 62: Regional Drought Vulnerabilities 100 Table 63: Richter Scale 101 Table 64: Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale 102 Table 65: Regional Earthquakes Vulnerabilities 104 Table 66: Regional Expansive Soils Vulnerabilities 108 Table 67: Loss Estimate for Extreme Heat 115 Table 68: Loss Estimate for Extreme Cold 116 Table 69: Loss of Electricity - Assumed Damage 116 Table 70: Extreme Heat Predictions for Days over 100°F 116 Table 71: Regional Extreme Heat Vulnerabilities 117 Table 72: FEMA FIRM Panel Status 120 Table 73: Flooding Stages 126 Table 74: NFIP Participants 129 Table 75: NFIP Policies in Force and Total Payments 130 Table 76: Flood Loss Estimate 134 Table 77: Parcel Improvements and Value in the 1% Annual Flood Risk Area 135 Table 78: Parcel Improvements and Value in the 0.2% Annual Flood Risk Area 135 Table 79: Regional Flooding Vulnerabilities 136 Table 80: Wildfire Vulnerabilities 141 Table 81: Wildfire Vulnerable Populations 142 Table 82: Wildfire Loss Estimation 143 Table 83: Reported Wildfires by Fire 143 Table 84: Regional Wildfire Vulnerabilities 147 Table 85: Hazardous Material Classes 149 Table 86: Large Fixed Site Chemical Spills 154 Table 87: Large Chemical Transportation Spills 155 Table 88: Hazardous Materials Release Loss Estimate 155 Table 89: Regional Hazardous Materials Release Vulnerabilities 157 Table 90: COVID-19 Cases in Dallas County 160 Table 91: Diabetes Prevalence in the Planning Area 160 Table 92: Regional Human Infectious Disease Vulnerabilities 161 Table 93: Regional Infrastructure Failure Vulnerabilities 164 Table 94: Regional Landslide Vulnerabilities 166 Table 95: TORRO Hail Scale 168 Table 96: Severe Thunderstorms Loss Estimate 171 Table 97: Regional Thunderstorm Vulnerabilities 171 Table 98: Severe Winter Storm Loss Estimate 177 Table 99: Regional Severe Winter Storm Vulnerabilities 178 Table 100: Regional Sinkhole 180 Table 101: Regional Terrorism Vulnerabilities 184 Table 102: Beaufort Wind Ranking 189 Table 103: Enhanced Fujita Scale 190 Table 104: Enhanced Fujita Scale Damage Indicator 190 Table 105: Tornado and Windstorm Loss Estimate 195 Table 106: Regional Tornado and Windstorm 197 Table 107: Historical Highway Rail Incidents 200 Table 108: Historical Aviation Incidents 201 Table 109: Transportation Incidents Loss Estimate 201 Table 110: Regional Transportation Incidents Vulnerabilities 202 ---PAGE BREAK--- Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 IX Table 111: Mitigation and Strategic Actions Selected by Each Jurisdiction (1 of 2) 206 Table 112: Mitigation and Strategic Actions Selected by Each Jurisdiction (2 of 2) 207 ---PAGE BREAK--- Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 X This Page Is Intentionally Blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 XI List of Acronyms ACS – American Community Survey BRIC – Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities CDC – Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CEP – Comprehensive Emergency Plan CF – Cubic Feet CFR – Code of Federal Regulations COVID-19 – Coronavirus Disease 2019 CRS – Community Rating System CWPP – Community Wildfire Protection Plans CyanoHABs – Cyanobacterial Harmful Algae Blooms DMA 2000 – Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 EAB – Emerald Ash Borer EAP – Emergency Action Plan EMA – Emergency Management Agency EPA – Environmental Protection Agency ESL – English as Second Language FBI – Federal Bureau of Investigation FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency FIRM – Flood Insurance Rate Map FMA – Flood Mitigation Assistance Program FR – FEMA’s Final Rule GIS – Geographic Information Systems HMA – Hazard Mitigation Assistance HMGP – Hazard Mitigation Grant Program HMP – Hazard Mitigation Plan HPSA – Health Professional Shortage Areas – High Plains Regional Climate Center HRSA – Health Resources and Services Administration HSEMD – Iowa Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management IDALS – Iowa Department of Agriculture & Land Stewardship IDNR – Iowa Department of Natural Resources JEO – JEO Consulting Group, Inc. LGA – Liquid Gallons MUA – Medically Underserved Areas MUP – Medically Underserved Populations NCEI – National Centers for Environmental Information NDMC – National Drought Mitigation Center NFIP – National Flood Insurance Program NOAA – National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NPI – Nonpharmaceutical Interventions NRC – National Response Center NWS – National Weather Service PDSI – Palmer Drought Severity Index PHMSA – U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration Risk MAP – Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning RMA – Risk Management Agency SBA – Small Business Administration SPIA – Sperry-Piltz Ice Accumulation Index START – National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism TORRO – Tornado and Storm Research Organization USACE – United States Army Corps of Engineers USDA – United States Department of Agriculture USGS – United States Geological Survey WHO – World Health Organization WUI – Wildland Urban Interface ---PAGE BREAK--- XII Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 This Page Is Intentionally Blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 1 Executive Summary Introduction This plan is an update to the Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) approved in 2018. The plan update was developed in compliance with the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000). Hazard mitigation planning is a process in which hazards are identified and profiled; people and facilities at-risk are identified and assessed for threats and potential vulnerabilities; and strategies and mitigation measures are identified. Hazard mitigation planning increases the ability of communities to effectively function in the face of natural and human-caused disasters. The goal of the process is to reduce risk and vulnerability, in order to lessen impacts to life, the economy, and infrastructure. Plan participants are listed in the following table and illustrated in the following planning area map. Table 1: Participating Jurisdictions Participating Jurisdictions Dallas County City of Waukee City of Adel City of Woodward City of Bouton Adel-DeSoto-Minburn School District City of Dallas Center Dallas Center-Grimes School District City of Dawson Perry Community School District City of De Soto Perry Water Works City of Dexter Van Meter School District City of Granger Waukee School District City of Linden West Central Valley School District City of Minburn Woodward-Granger School District City of Perry Woodward Township Fire District City of Redfield Xenia Rural Water District City of Van Meter ---PAGE BREAK--- Executive Summary 2 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 1: Project Area ---PAGE BREAK--- Executive Summary Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 3 Goals The potential for disaster losses and the probability of occurrence of natural and human-caused hazards present a significant concern for the jurisdictions participating in this plan. The driving motivation behind this hazard mitigation plan is to reduce vulnerability and the likelihood of impacts to the health, safety, and welfare of all citizens in the planning area. To this end, the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team reviewed and approved goals which helped guide the process of identifying both broad-based and community-specific mitigation strategies and projects that will, if implemented, reduce their vulnerability and help build stronger, more resilient communities. Goals from the 2018 HMP were reviewed, and the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team agreed that they are still relevant and applicable for this plan update. Jurisdictions that participated in this plan update agreed that the goals identified in 2018 would be carried forward and utilized for the 2023 plan, with just a couple slight modifications. The term “natural hazards” was changed to “all hazards” to provide further clarification, and the order was changed to list the fourth goal first, to reflect the priority of protecting people. The goals for this plan update are as follows: Goal 1: Prevent or reduce the impact of all hazards for the residents, businesses, and jurisdictions of Dallas County. Goal 2: Protect critical facilities and infrastructure from all hazards. Goal 3: Create a disaster resistant community by improving public understanding of all hazards and risk by providing public awareness, preparedness, and mitigation information through various channels of communication. Goal 4: Improve capabilities to mitigate all hazards by incorporating mitigation strategies in plans, policies, and programs. Goal 5: Strengthen communication among governmental agencies and between governmental agencies and the public. Summary of Changes The hazard mitigation planning process undergoes several changes during each plan update to best accommodate the planning area and specific conditions. Changes from the 2018 Hazard Mitigation Plan and planning process in this update included combined risk assessment for hazards with similar risks, impacts and mitigation strategies. These include Extreme Temperature (now includes extreme cold) and Flooding (includes flash flooding and riverine flooding). Other changes include the addition of Hazardous Materials Release and Human Infectious Diseases, as well as the inclusion of Plan Maintenance sections for individual community profiles. This update also works to unify the various planning mechanisms in place throughout the participating communities comprehensive plans, local emergency operation plans, zoning ordinances, building codes, etc.) to ensure that the goals and objectives identified in those planning mechanisms are consistent with the strategies and projects included in this plan. Other changes were made based on comments from the 2018 Review Tool: ---PAGE BREAK--- Executive Summary 4 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Table 2: 2018 Plan Comments and Revisions Comment from 2018 Review Tool Location of Revision Summary of Change Hazard scoring methodology (pg. 3.10): There is some inherent conflict between the chosen scales of Magnitude/Severity and Duration as the Magnitude/Severity scale includes a measure of how long the hazard will impact the jurisdiction (“less than 24 hrs, more than a week, at least 2 weeks and more than 30 days”), which do not correspond to the Duration timeframes (“less than 6 hrs, less than 1 day, less than 1 week, more than 1 week”). Section 3, Section 6 Hazard scoring has been replaced with a hazard prioritization system. This scale consists of Low, Medium, and High priority. The definitions of “Critical, Essential, High Potential Loss and Transportation/Lifeline Facilities” are similar, making it difficult to identify the differences between each. The definitions could benefit from examples of each or table 3.10 (pg. 3.19) could sort the 17 listed facility types into which are Critical, Essential, High Potential Loss and Transportation Lifeline. Section 3, Section 6 Community Lifelines are now split into Transportation Facilities, Hazardous Materials Facilities, Health/Medical Facilities, and Critical Facilities. Critical Facilities can include the other types of facilities if the community deems them vital for disaster response. In 2015 and 2017, the County was part of the Middle Des Moines and North Raccoon Watershed RiskMAP projects, which included development of a number of Flood Risk Products such as a Flood Risk Database and Flood Risk Report; the planning team is highly encouraged to make use of this information in future updates and to integrate the goals of RiskMAP with mitigation planning. Section 4: Flooding RiskMAP products/projects are now included. Additional changes and a summary of the planning process are described in Section Two: Planning Process. Plan Implementation Various communities across the planning area have implemented hazard mitigation and strategic projects following the 2018 Hazard Mitigation Plan. A few examples of completed projects include warning sirens, backup generators, storm water drainage improvements, safe room, new water storage facility, and others In order to build upon these prior successes and to continue implementation of mitigation and strategic projects, despite limited resources, communities will need to continue relying upon multi-agency coordination as a means of leveraging resources. Communities across the region have been able to work with a range of entities to complete projects; potential partners for future project implementation include but are not limited to: Iowa Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (HSEMD), Iowa Department of Transportation (IDOT), Iowa Department of Natural Resources (IDNR), United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), and United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). ---PAGE BREAK--- Executive Summary Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 5 Hazard Profiles The hazard mitigation plan includes a description of the hazards considered, including a risk and vulnerability assessment. Data considered during the risk assessment process included: historic occurrences and recurrence intervals; historic losses (physical and monetary); impacts to the built environment (including privately-owned structures as well as critical facilities); and the local risk assessment. The following tables provide an overview of the risk assessment for each hazard and the losses associated with each hazard. See Section Four: Risk Assessment for further discussion of counts, probabilities, and likely extent. Table 3: Regional Risk Assessment Hazard Previous Occurrences Approximate Annual Probability* Likely Extent Animal and Plant Disease Animal Disease: 1 N/A Unknown Plant Disease: 3 Plant Disease 3/22 = 14% Crop damage or loss Dam and Levee Failure 0 Less than 1% Varies by structure Drought 441/1,527 months 29% D1-D4 Earthquake 0 Less than 1% Less than 5.0 on the Richter Scale Expansive Soils Unknown Unknown Varies by event Extreme Temperature Cold: Avg 6 days/year 78/83 = 94% Max Temp ≤10°F Heat: Avg 1 day/year 29/83 = 39% Max Temp ≥100°F Flooding 172 21/26 =81% Some inundation of structures. Some evacuations of people may be necessary. Grass/Wildfire 10 3/3 = 100% Avg 22 acres Some homes and structures threatened or at risk Hazardous Materials Release Fixed Site Spill: 50 21/32 = 32% Avg Liquid Spill: 217 gallons Avg Gas Spill: 300 lbs. Transportation Spill: 6 22/51 = 43% Avg Liquid Spill: 182 gallons Human Infectious Diseases 26,057 Covid cases N/A N/A Infrastructure Failure Unknown Unknown Varies by event Landslide Unknown Unknown Varies by event Severe Thunderstorms 650 26/26= 100% rainfall Avg 66 mph winds Severe Winter Storms 79 25/26 = 96% 2-16” snow 10-60 mph winds Sinkhole Unknown Unknown Varies by location/event Terrorism and Civil Unrest 0 Less than 1% Varies by event ---PAGE BREAK--- Executive Summary 6 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Hazard Previous Occurrences Approximate Annual Probability* Likely Extent Tornado and Windstorm Tornadoes: 31 17/26 = 65% Mode: EF0 Range: EF0-EF1 Windstorms: 31 18/26 = 69% Avg: 55 mph Range 40-70 mph Transportation Incident Auto: 11,512 11/11 = 100% Damages incurred to vehicles involved and traffic delays; substantial damages to aircrafts involved with some aircrafts destroyed Aviation: 9 8/60 = 13% Rail: 31 19/47 = 40% * Annual Probability = Total Years with an Event Occurrence / Total Years of Record The following table provides loss estimates for hazards with sufficient data. Description of major events are included in Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 4: Hazard Loss Estimates for the Planning Area Hazard Type Count Property Crop1 Animal and Plant Disease Animal Disease16 1 48 birds N/A Plant Disease1 3 N/A $5,056 Dam and Levee Failure2,10 0 - N/A Drought3,6 441/1,527 months $12,650,000 $47,719,440 Earthquake4 0 - - Expansive Soils Unknown N/A N/A Extreme Temperature5 Cold (Max Temp ≤10°F) Avg 6 days per year N/A $4,580 Heat (Max Temp ≥100°F) Avg 1 day per year N/A $558,530 Flooding6 Flash Flood 52 $2,020,000 $1,023,979 Flood 120 $8,938,070 Grass/Wildfire7 10 222 Acres - Hazardous Materials Release 9 Injuries, 3 deaths Fixed Site8 50 $0 N/A Transportation9 6 $182,140 N/A Human Infectious Diseases15 154 deaths (Covid) 26,057 Covid cases N/A N/A Infrastructure Failure Unknown N/A N/A Landslide Unknown N/A N/A Severe Thunderstorms6 Hail 217 $813,000 $18,026,126 Heavy Rain 134 $20,000 Lightning 11 $1,147,000 Thunderstorm Wind 288 $8,540,000 Severe Winter Storms6 4 injuries Blizzard 14 $900,000 $374,815 Heavy Snow 24 $4,290,450 Ice Storm 12 $848,330 ---PAGE BREAK--- Executive Summary Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 7 Hazard Type Count Property Crop1 Winter Storm 28 $574,900 Winter Weather 1 $0 Sinkhole Unknown N/A N/A Terrorism and Civil Unrest11 0 - N/A Tornado and Windstorm6 Tornadoes: Mode: EF0 Range: EF0-EF3 31 $3,604,000 $0 Windstorms: Average: 55 mph Range: 40-70 mph 31 $958,110 $15,560,764 Transportation Incident Auto12 1,522 injuries, 53 deaths 11,472 $76,326,109 N/A Aviation13 5 injuries, 2 deaths 9 N/A N/A Rail14 17 injuries, 3 deaths 31 $300,148 N/A Total 12,545 $122,112,257 $83,273,290 N/A: Data not available 1 USDA RMA, 2000 - 2021 2 IDNR Communication, 2022 3 NOAA, 1895 - March 2022 4 USGS, 1900 - April 2022 5 NOAA Regional Climate Center, 1939 - 2021 6 NCEI, 1996 - 2021 7 IDNR, 2019 - 2021 8 NRC, 1990 - 2021 9 PHMSA 1971 - April 2022 10 USACE NLD, 1900 - April 2022 11 University of Maryland, 1970 - 2018 12 IDOT, 2012 - April 2022 13 NTSB, 1962 - April 2022 14 FRA, 1975 - 2021 15 IDPH, as of 11/22/2022 16 IDALS, 11/22/2022 Events like extreme temperatures, grass/wildland fires, severe thunderstorms, severe winter storms, and transportation incidents will occur annually. Other hazards like dam and levee failure, earthquakes, and terrorism/civil unrest will occur less often. The scope of events and how they will manifest themselves locally is not known regarding hazard occurrences. Historically, drought, severe thunderstorms, severe winter storms, tornadoes/windstorms, and transportation incidents have resulted in the most significant damages within the planning area. Current trends show an increase in event magnitude and a higher number of occurrences for several hazards, as will be explained in Section Four: Risk Assessment. Mitigation Strategies There are a wide variety of strategies that can be used to reduce the impacts of hazards for the built environment and planning area residents. Section Five: Mitigation Strategy shows the mitigation and strategic actions chosen by the participating jurisdictions to assist in preventing future losses. ---PAGE BREAK--- Executive Summary 8 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 This Page Is Intentionally Blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 9 Section One: Introduction Hazard Mitigation Planning Severe weather and hazardous events are occurring more frequently in our daily lives. Pursuing mitigation strategies reduces these risks and is socially and economically responsible to prevent long-term risks from natural and human-caused hazard events. Natural hazards, such as severe winter storms, high winds and tornadoes, severe thunderstorms, flooding, extreme heat, drought, agriculture diseases, and wildfires are part of the world around us. Human- caused hazards are a product of the society and can occur with significant impacts to communities. Human- caused hazards can include dam failure, hazardous materials release, transportation incidents, and terrorism. These hazard events can occur as a part of normal operation or as a result of human error. All jurisdictions participating in this planning process are vulnerable to a wide range of natural and human-caused hazards that threaten the safety of residents and have the potential to damage or destroy both public and private property, cause environmental degradation, and disrupt the local economy and overall quality of life. Dallas County has prepared this multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan in an effort to reduce impacts from natural and human-caused hazards and to better protect the people and property of the region from the effects of these hazards. This plan demonstrates a regional commitment to reducing risks from hazards and serves as a tool to help decision makers establish mitigation activities and resources. Further, this plan was developed to ensure the county and participating jurisdictions are eligible for federal Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) programs and to accomplish the following objectives: • Minimize the disruption to each jurisdiction following a disaster. • Establish actions to reduce or eliminate future damages in order to efficiently recover from disasters. • Investigate, review, and implement activities or actions to ensure disaster related hazards are addressed by the most efficient and appropriate solution. • Educate citizens about potential hazards. • Facilitate development and implementation of hazard mitigation management activities to ensure a sustainable community. FEMA definition of Hazard Mitigation “Any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property from [natural] hazards.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section One I Introduction 10 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 The U.S. Congress passed the Disaster Mitigation Act 2000 to amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act1. Section 322 of the DMA 2000 requires that state and local governments develop, adopt, and routinely update a hazard mitigation plan to remain eligible for pre- and post-disaster mitigation funding.2 These funds currently include the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP)3, Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC)4, and the Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (FMA)5. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) administers these programs under the Department of Homeland Security.6 This plan was developed in accordance with current state and federal rules and regulations governing local hazard mitigation plans. The plan shall be monitored and updated on a routine basis to maintain compliance with the legislation – Section 322, Mitigation Planning, of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as enacted by Section 104 of the DMA 2000 (P.L. 106-390)7 and by FEMA’s Final Rule (FR)8 published in the Federal Register on November 30, 2007, at 44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 201. Hazard Mitigation Assistance On June 1, 2009, FEMA initiated the Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) program integration, which aligned certain policies and timelines of the various mitigation programs. These HMA programs present a critical opportunity to minimize the risk to individuals and property from hazards while simultaneously reducing the reliance on federal disaster funds. Each HMA program is funded by separate legislative actions, and as such, each program differs in scope and intent. • HMGP: To qualify for post-disaster mitigation funds, local jurisdictions must have adopted a mitigation plan that is approved by FEMA. HMGP provides funds to states, territories, Indian tribal governments, local governments, and eligible private non-profits following a presidential disaster declaration. The DMA 2000 authorizes up to seven percent of HMGP 1 Federal Emergency Management Agency, Public Law 106-390. 2000. “Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000.” 2 Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2021. “Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as amended, and Related Authorities.” Federal Emergency Management Agency 592: 22. Sec. 322. Mitigation Planning (42 U.S.C. 5165). 3 Federal Emergency Management Agency. “Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.” Last modified August 6, 2021. 4 Federal Emergency Management Agency. “Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities.” Last modified December 1, 2021. 5 Federal Emergency Management Agency. “Flood Mitigation Assistance Grant Program.” Last modified August 6, 2021. 6 Federal Emergency Management Agency. “Hazard Mitigation Assistance.” Last modified September 30, 2021. 7 Federal Emergency Management Agency: Federal Register. 2002. “Section 104 of Disaster Mitigation Act 2000: 44 CFR Parts 201 and 206: Hazard Mitigation Planning and Hazard Mitigation Grant Programs; Interim Final Rule.” 8 Federal Emergency Management Agency: Federal Register. 2002. “44 CFR Parts 201 and 206: Hazard Mitigation Planning and Hazard Mitigation Grant Programs; Interim Final Rule.” Mitigation is the cornerstone of emergency management. Mitigation focuses on breaking the cycle of disaster damage, reconstruction, and repeated damage. Mitigation lessens the impact disasters have on people's lives and property through damage prevention, appropriate development standards, and affordable flood insurance. Through measures such as avoiding building in damage-prone areas, stringent building codes, and floodplain management regulations, the impact on lives and communities is lessened. - FEMA Mitigation Directorate ---PAGE BREAK--- Section One I Introduction Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 11 funds available to a state after a disaster to be used for the development of state, tribal, and local mitigation plans. • FMA: To qualify to receive FMA funds to reduce or eliminate risk of repetitive flood damage to buildings and structures, local jurisdictions must have an adopted and approved mitigation plan. Furthermore, local jurisdictions must be participating communities in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The goal of FMA is to reduce or eliminate claims under the NFIP. • BRIC: To qualify for funds, local jurisdictions must adopt a mitigation plan that is approved by FEMA. BRIC assists states, territories, Indian tribal governments, and local governments in implementing a sustained pre-disaster hazard mitigation program. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section One I Introduction 12 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 This Page Is Intentionally Blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 13 Section Two: Planning Process Introduction The process utilized to develop a hazard mitigation plan is often as important as the final planning document. For this planning process, Dallas County adapted the four-step hazard mitigation planning process outlined by FEMA to fit the needs of the participating jurisdictions. The following pages will outline how the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team was established; the function of the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team; critical project meetings and community representatives; outreach efforts to the general public; key stakeholders and neighboring jurisdictions; general information relative to the risk assessment process; general information relative to local/regional capabilities; plan review and adoption; and ongoing plan maintenance. Multi-Jurisdictional Approach According to FEMA, “A multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan is a plan jointly prepared by more than one jurisdiction.” The term ‘jurisdiction’ means ‘local government.’ Title 44 Part 201, Mitigation Planning in the CFR, defines a ‘local government’ as “any county, municipality, city, town, township, public authority, school district, special district, intrastate district, council of governments, regional or interstate government entity, or agency or instrumentality of a local government; any Indian tribe or authorized tribal organization, any rural community, unincorporated town or village, or other public entity.” For the purposes of this plan, a ‘taxing authority’ was utilized as the qualifier for jurisdictional participation. FEMA recommends the multi- jurisdictional approach under the DMA 2000 for the following reasons. • It provides a comprehensive approach to the mitigation of hazards that affect multiple jurisdictions. • It allows economies of scale by leveraging individual capabilities and sharing cost and resources. • It avoids duplication of efforts. • It imposes an external discipline on the process. Requirement §201.6(b): Planning process. An open public involvement process is essential to the development of an effective plan. In order to develop a more comprehensive approach to reducing the effects of natural disasters, the planning process shall include: Requirement §201.6(b)(1): An opportunity for the public to comment on the plan during the drafting stage and prior to plan approval; Requirement §201.6(b)(2): An opportunity for neighboring communities, local and regional agencies involved in hazard mitigation activities, and agencies that have the authority to regulate development, as well as businesses, academia and other private and non-profit interests to be involved in the planning process; and Requirement §201.6(b)(3): Review and incorporation, if appropriate, of existing plans, studies, reports, and technical information. Requirement §201.6(c)(1): The plan shall document the planning process used to develop the plan, including how it was prepared, who was involved in the process, and how the public was involved. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process 14 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Both FEMA and HSEMD recommend this multi-jurisdictional approach through the cooperation of counties and regional emergency management. Dallas County utilized the multi-jurisdiction planning process recommended by FEMA (Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide9, Local Mitigation Planning Handbook10, and Mitigation Ideas: A Resource for Reducing Risk to Natural Hazards11) to develop this plan. Hazard Mitigation Planning Process The hazard mitigation planning process as outlined by FEMA has four general steps which are detailed below. The mitigation planning process is rarely a linear process. It’s common that ideas developed during the initial risk assessment may need revision later in the process, or that additional information may be identified while developing the mitigation plan or during plan implementation that results in new goals or additional risk assessments. Organization of Resources Plan Update Process While the Dallas County Emergency Management Agency (EMA) applied for HMGP funding for their multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan in fiscal year 2020, the final grant approval and allocation of funds were not available in time for plan kickoff. As a result, the EMA funded this planning effort entirely through its general EMA budget. JEO Consulting Group, Inc. (JEO) was contracted in March 2022 to guide and facilitate the planning process and write and assemble the multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan. For the planning area, AJ Seely with Dallas County EMA led the development of the plan and served as the primary point of contact throughout the project. A clear timeline of this plan update process is provided in Figure 2. 9 Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2011. “Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide.” 10 Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2013. “Local Mitigation Planning Handbook.” 11 Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2013. “Mitigation Ideas: A Resource for Reducing Risk to Natural Hazards.” Organization of Resources •Focus on the resources needed for a successful mitigation planning process. Essential steps include: Organizing interested community members; and Identifying technical expertise needed. Assessment of Risk •Identify the characteristics and potential consequences of the hazard. Identify how much of the jurisdiction can be affected by specific hazards and the potential impacts on local assets. Mitigation Plan Development •Determine priorities and identify possible solutions to avoid or minimize the undesired effects. The result is the hazard mitigation plan and strategy for implementation. Plan Implementation and Progress Monitoring •Bring the plan to life by implementing specific mitigation and strategic projects and changing day-to-day operations. It is critical that the plan remains relevant to succeed. Thus, it is important to conduct periodic evaluations and revisions, as needed. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 15 Figure 2: Project Timeline Planning Team At the beginning of the planning process, Dallas County Emergency Management and JEO staff identified who would be the regional Hazard Mitigation Planning Team. This planning team was established to guide the planning process, review the existing plan, and serve as a liaison to plan participants throughout the planning area. A list of planning team members can be found in Table 5. Staff from IDNR provided additional technical support. Table 5: Hazard Mitigation Planning Team Name Title Jurisdiction AJ Seely Emergency Management Director Dallas County EMA Josh Heward Emergency Management Specialist Dallas County EMA Bob Ockerman Council Member City of Adel Chad Leonard Sheriff Dallas County Clint Robinson Fire Chief Waukee Fire Department Craig Leu Fire and EMS Chief West Des Moines Fire Department Jim Clark Fire Chief Johnston-Grimes Fire Department Karl Harris Assistant Fire Chief Woodward/Bouton Fire Department Matt Cavanaugh City Commission/Fire Chief City of Woodward/ Woodward Fire Department Robin Wolfe Clerk City of Dawson Steve Godwin Council Member City of Woodward *Becky Appleford Project Manager JEO Consulting Group, Inc. *Anthony Kohel Planner JEO Consulting Group, Inc. *Claire Patton Planning Intern JEO Consulting Group, Inc. *Served in a consultant or advisory role. A kick-off meeting was held on May 9, 2022, to discuss an overview of the planning process between JEO staff and members of the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team. Preliminary discussion was held over hazards to be included in this plan, changes to be incorporated since the last plan, goals, identification of key stakeholders to include in the planning process, and a general schedule for the plan update. This meeting also assisted in clarifying the role and responsibilities of the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team and strategies for public engagement throughout the planning process. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process 16 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Table 6 shows kick-off meeting attendees. Table 6: Kick-off Meeting Attendees Name Title Jurisdiction Adel, Iowa – Monday, May 9, 2022 AJ Seely Emergency Management Director Dallas County EMA Josh Heward Emergency Management Specialist Dallas County EMA Bob Ockerman Council Member City of Adel Chad Leonard Sheriff Dallas County Clint Robinson Fire Chief Waukee Fire Department Craig Leu Fire and EMS Chief West Des Moines Fire Department Jim Clark Fire Chief Johnston-Grimes Fire Department Karl Harris Assistant Fire Chief Woodward/Bouton Fire Department Becky Appleford Project Manager JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Anthony Kohel Planner JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Claire Patton Planning Intern JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Table 7 shows the date, location, and agenda items of for the kick-off meeting. Table 7: Kick-off Meeting Location and Time Location and Time Agenda Items Adel, Iowa May 9, 2022 1:00 PM -Consultant and planning team responsibilities -Overview of plan update process and changes from 2018 HMP -Review and adoption of goals -Plan goals -Hazard identification -Project schedule and dates/locations for public meetings Public Involvement and Outreach To notify and engage the public in the planning process, a wide range of stakeholder groups were contacted and encouraged to participate. There were 36 stakeholder groups or entities that were identified and sent letters to participate (Table 10). Of the 36 invited, Adel Iowa Chamber of Commerce, Alliant Energy, Dallas County Hospital, Iowa State University Extension, and UnityPoint Health attended meetings. Any comments these stakeholders provided were incorporated into the appropriate community profiles (see Section Seven). The general public was encouraged to take part in the planning process through a public survey. The survey was distributed by participating jurisdictions and was also made available online. Between May and September 2022, 34 survey responses were collected. Questions about hazards, past events, priorities for mitigation, and what community members would like to see done locally were asked through the survey. In total, 34 survey responses were collected, with all respondents being residents within the county. The first questions ask respondents to indicate whether they are residents and what location they live. Communities represented are provided in Table 8. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 17 Table 8: Communities Represented in Public Survey Communities Represented City of Adel City of Clive City of Dallas Center City of Dawson City of Perry City of Urbandale City of Van Meter City of Waukee City of West Des Moines City of Woodward Unincorporated Dallas County/Dallas County Officials Dallas Center-Grimes School District Overall respondent results are summarized below. Specific concerns or comments can be found in Community Profiles, as appropriate. Based on responses, the most commonly experienced hazard events for residents are Severe Thunderstorms, Tornado and Windstorms, Severe Winter Storms, and Extreme Temperature, as listed below. This generally aligned with the top ranked hazards of concern (from most concerning to least concerning) by ranked choice voting. 1. Severe Thunderstorms (includes Hail and Lightning) 2. Tornado and Windstorm 3. Severe Winter Storms 4. Extreme Temperature 5. Drought 6. Human Infectious Diseases 7. Animal and Plant Disease 8. Flooding 9. Infrastructure Failure 10. Transportation Incident 11. Hazardous Materials Release 12. Grass/Wildland Fire 13. Expansive Soils 14. Sinkhole 15. Dam and Levee Failure 16. Earthquake 17. Terrorism and Civil Unrest 18. Landslide ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process 18 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 3: Most Common Hazard Experienced (Public Survey) Respondents also rated hazards according to potential severity of impact to their community or school (from highest impact to lowest impact), as shown below. 1. Tornado and Windstorm 2. Severe Thunderstorms (includes Hail and Lightning) 3. Sever Winter Storms 4. Extreme Temperature 5. Human Infectious Diseases 6. Drought 7. Flooding 8. Infrastructure Failure 9. Hazardous Materials Release 10. Terrorism and Civil Unrest 11. Transportation Incident 12. Grass/Wildland Fire 13. Animal and Plant Disease 14. Sinkhole 15. Earthquake 16. Dam and Levee Failure 17. Expansive Soils 18. Landslide In response to whether respondents had flood insurance, only one responded “yes”. Respondents were also asked about impacts from the hazards listed above. Some common themes from the responses include property damage, crop loss, tree damage, and power outages from storm- related hazards; increased energy use, heat stroke/hypothermia, and highway buckling from 17 1 21 1 2 21 14 3 4 19 10 0 29 24 2 0 27 6 ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 19 Extreme Temperature; mass illness, deaths, poor mental health, and burden on the healthcare system from Human Infectious Diseases; and crop/plant loss, increased fire risk, poor mental health, and strain on water systems from Drought. The majority of respondents indicated the best way to share information about preparing for a disaster is through emergency text alerts (27 votes), Dallas County Emergency Management website/social media posts (14 votes), community website (11 votes), and radio alerts (such as through the NWS, 8 votes). Other unique communication methods listed included newsletters, public meetings, sharing information at social events, email notification, and television. Oftentimes implemented mitigation actions are prioritized based upon need to mitigate risk, cost effectiveness, feasibility, and public support. To help identify overall local support for types of mitigation projects, respondents were asked to rank, from very important to neutral, mitigation action end goals. Table 9: Priorities for Mitigation End Goals (Public Survey) Preparing for a disaster can take many forms. Of the following items, please indicate the level of importance to you as one of the following: Very Important, Somewhat Important, or Neutral Protecting people Protecting private property Protecting community assets (parks, community buildings) Protecting critical facilities (hospitals, fire/police stations, utilities) Preventing development in hazardous areas (example - flood prone areas) Very Important 33 (97%) 15 (44%) 14 (41%) 31 (91%) 19 (56%) Somewhat Important 0 16 (47%) 13 (38%) 2 9 (26%) Neutral 1 3 7 (21%) 1 6 (18) Protecting natural environments Protecting historical/ cultural landmarks Increasing cooperation between emergency response agencies and the public Improving emergency response capabilities (fire/police/ emergency management equipment and training) Very Important 19 (56%) 8 (24%) 26 (76%) 29 (85%) Somewhat Important 10 (29%) 18 (53%) 4 (12%) 3 Neutral 5 (15%) 8 (24%) 4 (12%) 3 Respondents were also asked which projects would be most important for their community to reduce risk and be more resilient. The most important ones identified included utility protective measures (electric, gas, etc.), water and sanitary sewer system protective measures, backup generators, and warning systems/tornado sirens. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process 20 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 4: Most Important Mitigation Projects (Public Survey) Lastly, respondents were asked what they would like to see their respective communities do in the future to protect people and infrastructure from future hazard events. Specific suggestions are included the Community Profiles as applicable; however, common themes and responses are listed below. • Improving alert sirens and hazard event notification systems for residents text alerts and television). • Improve stormwater drainage. • Build, designate, and publicize emergency shelters. • Increase local education efforts, especially for immigrants/refugees. • Hold emergency exercises with the public. • Address climate change in county and community planning efforts. • Strengthen local power supplies and utility infrastructure. • Remove or trim old and dying trees. The public was also able to provide comments to the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team through the project website. One comment was provided through the project website. County Supervisor Mark Hanson expressed a desire to use county-owned abandoned quarries for some form of water/flood management. Survey results and comments were shared with the local planning team to inform and guide hazard prioritization and mitigation actions. Table 10: Notified Stakeholder Groups Organizations Adel Acres Nursing Home Greater Dallas County Development Alliance Perry Chamber of Commerce Adel Iowa Chamber of Commerce Guthrie REC Perry City Municipal Airport Alliant Energy Husband Airport-39ia Perry Lutheran Homes 26 24 30 20 15 3 18 25 Water and Sanitary Sewer System Protective Measures Warning Systems/Tornado Sirens Utility Protective Measures (Electric, Gas, etc.) Stormwater Management - Diversions, Detention/Retention Basins, Culverts Safe Rooms- Public and Private Structures Property Acquisition and Elevation Local Flood Control Systems for Critical Facilities Backup Generators ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 21 Organizations American Red Cross Independence Villages Senior Living/Village at Legacy Point Perry Municipal Airport City of Waukee Utility Billing Iowa Department of Natural Resources Region 8 Primary Health Care Clinic Dallas County Conservation Board Iowa Department of Transportation District 4 Region 12 Council of Governments Dallas County Farm Service Agency Iowa Homeland Security and Emergency Management Robel Airport Dallas County Health Department Iowa State University Extension and Outreach, Dallas County Spurgeon Manor Dallas County Hospital Methodist West Hospital Ultimate Nursing Services De Soto Airport Mid-American UnityPoint Health - Des Moines Des Moines Area MPO and Central Iowa Regional Transportation Planning Alliance Northern Natural Gas Van Fossen Square Independent Living Community Granger Nursing and Rehabilitation Center Pearl Valley Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center at Perry Waukee Gas Neighboring Jurisdictions Neighboring jurisdictions were notified and invited to take part in the planning process. The following table indicates which neighboring communities or entities were notified of the planning process. Invitation and informational letters were sent to county clerks, and county and regional emergency managers. Apart from the City of Grimes, jurisdictions outside of the planning area did not take part in the planning process. Table 11: Notified Neighboring Jurisdictions Notified Neighboring Jurisdictions Adair County City of West Des Moines Boone County Greene County City of Clive Guthrie County City of Grimes Madison County City of Johnston Polk County City of Urbandale Warren County Participant Involvement Plan participants play a key role in identifying hazards, providing a record of historical disaster occurrences and localized impacts, identifying and prioritizing potential mitigation projects and strategies, and developing plan maintenance procedures. A plan participant is defined as a jurisdiction that fulfills the following requirements: have one representative present at the Round 1 and Round 2 meetings (or attend a follow-up meeting with a JEO planner); assist in data collection by completing worksheets; identify mitigation actions, review plan drafts; and adopt the plan by resolution. Some jurisdictions sent multiple representatives to meetings. For jurisdictions who had only one representative, they were encouraged to bring meeting materials back to their governing bodies, to collect diverse input on their jurisdiction’s meeting documents. Sign-in sheets from all public meetings can be found in Appendix A. Jurisdictions that were unable to attend the scheduled public meetings were able to watch a recording of the meetings or request a meeting with JEO ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process 22 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 staff to satisfy the meeting attendance requirements. This effort enabled jurisdictions which could not attend a scheduled public meeting to participate in the planning process. Outreach to eligible jurisdictions included notification prior to all public meetings, phone calls and email reminders of upcoming meetings, and reminders to complete worksheets required for the planning process. Table 12 provides a summary of outreach activities utilized in this process. Table 12: Outreach Activity Summary Action Intent Project Website Informed the public and local/planning team members of past, current, and future activities Press Release Shared with Regional Planning Team and sent to local media outlets for dispersal. Survey Shared with the public to solicit feedback about concerns regarding hazards and to increase awareness of the Hazard Mitigation Plan. Round 1 Meeting Letters and Emails (30-day notification) Sent to participants, stakeholders, and neighboring jurisdictions to discuss the agenda/dates/times/ locations of the first round of public meetings. Round 2 Meeting Letters and Emails (30-day notification) Sent to participants to discuss the agenda/dates/times/locations of the second round of public meetings. Notification Phone Calls Called potential participants to remind them about upcoming meetings. Follow-up Emails and Phone Calls Correspondence was provided to remind and assist participating jurisdictions with the collection and submission of required local data. Project Flyer Flyers were posted about the Dallas County HMP and how to get involved. Flyers were shared with all Hazard Mitigation Planning team members to distribute. Word-of-Mouth Staff discussed the plan with jurisdictions throughout the planning process. Round 1 Meetings: Hazard Identification At the Round 1 meetings, jurisdictional representatives the local planning teams) reviewed the hazards identified at the kick-off meeting and conducted risk and vulnerability assessments based on these hazards’ previous occurrence and the communities’ exposure. (For a complete list of hazards reviewed, see Section Four: Risk Assessment.). Table 13 shows the date and location of meetings held for the Round 1 meeting phase of the project. Table 13: Round 1 Meeting Dates and Locations Agenda Items General overview of the HMP update process, discuss participation requirements, begin the process of risk assessment and impact reporting, update critical facilities, capabilities assessment, and status update on current mitigation and strategic projects Location and Time Date Dallas County Human Services Campus Emergency Management Conference Room Adel, Iowa – 1:30 PM Tuesday, June 7, 2022 The intent of these meetings was to familiarize local planning team members with the plan update process, expected actions for the coming months, the responsibilities of being a participant, and to collect preliminary information to update the HMP. Data collected at these meetings included: updates to mitigation and strategic actions from the 2018 Dallas County HMP; identify the top ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 23 concerns from each jurisdiction; and to begin reviewing and updating community profiles for demographics, capabilities, and critical facilities. Information/data reviewed include but was not limited to local hazard prioritization results; identified critical facilities and their location within the community; future development areas; and expected growth trends (refer to Appendix The following tables show the attendees for each jurisdiction who attended a Round 1 meeting or had a one-on-one discussion with JEO staff. Follow-up one-on-one meetings were held for communities who did not have representatives present at public meetings either through watching a recording of the meeting or via conference call with a member of the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team. Table 14: Round 1 Meeting Attendees Name Title Jurisdiction Adel, Iowa – Tuesday, June 7, 2022 AJ Seely Emergency Management Director Dallas County EMA Josh Heward Emergency Management Specialist Dallas County EMA Ann Torbert Assistant Director County Serv - Regional Director ISU Extension and Outreach Bob Ockerman Council Member City of Adel Brian Nelson Facilities Management Director Dallas County Hospital Clint Robinson Fire Chief City of Waukee Cory Iben HR & Administration Manager Xenia Rural Water District Deb Bengtson President Adel Iowa Chamber of Commerce Jack Butler Public Works Director City of Perry Jim Clark Fire Chief City of Grimes Kirk Johnson COO Waukee Community School District Kolleen Dahl Emergency Preparedness Coordinator UnityPoint Health - Des Moines Mark Shearer Central Iowa District Liaison Iowa Homeland Security and Emergency Management Matt Cavanaugh Fire Chief/City Commission City of Woodward Woodward Fire Dept. Matt Hix Director of Buildings and Grounds Perry School District Matt Holmes Superintendent Perry City Water Works Rudy Koester Public Works Director/City Engineer City of Waukee Suzanne Hegarty Director Dallas County Health Department Ty Wheeler Fire Chief Granger Fire Department Becky Appleford Project Manager JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Anthony Kohel Planner JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Claire Patton Planning Intern JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Table 15: Round 1 Recorded Meeting Viewers Name Title Jurisdiction Jim Uthe City Clerk City of Bouton City Council - City of Linden Joe Stuetelberg Mayor City of Minburn ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process 24 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Name Title Jurisdiction Greg Dufoe Superintendent Adel-DeSoto-Minburn School District Scott Grimes Superintendent Dallas Center-Grimes School District Rusty Shockley Superintendent West Central Valley School District Mark Lane Superintendent Woodward-Granger School District Regional Planning Team Meeting A regional planning team meeting was held on July 26, 2022, to provide an update on the planning process. This entailed a discussion of which jurisdictions had attended the Round 1 Meeting, public involvement status, review of top hazards of concern by jurisdiction, and planning for the Round 2 Meeting. The plan goals were also finalized. Table 16 shows the regional planning team meeting attendees. Table 16: Regional Planning Team Meeting Attendees Name Title Jurisdiction Zoom Meeting – July 26, 2022 AJ Seely Emergency Management Director Dallas County EMA Josh Heward Emergency Management Specialist Dallas County EMA Bob Ockerman Council Member City of Adel Chad Leonard Sheriff Dallas County Craig Leu Fire and EMS Chief West Des Moines Fire Department Jim Clark Fire Chief Johnston-Grimes Fire Department Matt Cavanaugh City Commission/Fire Chief City of Woodward/ Woodward Fire Department Robin Wolfe Clerk Dawson Steve Godwin Council Member Woodward Becky Appleford Project Manager JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Anthony Kohel Planner JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Claire Patton Planning Intern JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Table 17 shows the date, location, and agenda items of for the kick-off meeting. Table 17: Regional Planning Team Meeting Location and Time Location and Time Agenda Items Zoom Meeting July 26, 2022 1:00 PM -Hazard Mitigation Plan update status -Public involvement status -Review top hazards of concern by jurisdiction -Review and finalize plan goals -Plan for the Round 2 Meeting ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 25 Round 2 Meetings: Mitigation Strategies Round 2 meetings are designed to identify and prioritize mitigation measures and evaluate potential integration of the HMP alongside other local planning mechanisms. Mitigation and strategic actions and plan integration are essential components in effective hazard mitigation plans. Participating jurisdictions were asked to identify any new mitigation and strategic actions to pursue alongside continued actions from the 2018 HMP and provide copies or descriptions of current jurisdictional plans in which hazard mitigation goals and principals can be integrated. Participating jurisdictions were also asked to review the information collected from the Round 1 meeting related to their community through this planning process for accuracy. Information/data reviewed included but was not limited to local hazard prioritization results, identified critical facilities and their location within the community, future development areas, and expected growth trends (refer to Appendix There was also a brief discussion about the planning process, when the plan would be available for public review and comment, annual review of the plan, and the approval and grant opportunities available once the plan was approved. As with Round 1 meetings, any jurisdictions unable to attend were given the opportunity to have a one-on-one phone conference with the consultant or view a recording of the meeting in order to meet plan participation requirements and complete required information. Table 18 shows the date and location of the Round 2 Meeting. Meeting attendees are identified in Table 19 and Table 20. Table 18: Round 2 Meeting Dates and Locations Agenda Items Identify new mitigation and strategic actions, review of local data and community profile, discuss review process, discuss available grants and eligibility, and complete plan integration tool. Location and Time Date Dallas County Human Services Campus Emergency Management Conference Room Adel, Iowa – 1:30 PM Thursday, September 1, 2022 Table 19: Round 2 Meeting Attendees Name Title Jurisdiction Adel, Iowa – Thursday, September 1, 2022 AJ Seely Emergency Management Director Dallas County EMA Josh Heward Emergency Management Specialist Dallas County EMA Bob Ockerman City Council Member City of Adel Cindy Riesselman City Administrator/Finance Director City of Dallas Center Clint Robinson Fire Chief City of Waukee Eli Canfield Public works City of Dexter Greg Dufoe Superintendent Adel-De Soto-Minburn Schools Jim Uthe City Clerk City of Bouton John Andorf Mayor City of Perry John Hoy City Council Member City of Redfield Kip Overton Public Works Director City of Adel Kirk Johnson Chief Operating Officer Waukee Community School District ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process 26 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Name Title Jurisdiction Matt Cavanaugh Fire Chief/City Commission City of Woodward/ Woodward Fire Department Matt Hix Director of Buildings and Grounds Perry School District Mitch Crozier Mayor City of DeSoto Rusty Shockley Superintendent West Central Valley School District Suzanne Hegarty Director Dallas County Health Department Becky Appleford Project Manager JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Anthony Kohel Planner JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Claire Patton Planning Intern JEO Consulting Group, Inc. Table 20: Round 2 Recorded Meeting Viewers Name Title Jurisdiction Jim Uthe City Clerk City of Bouton Kristy Trzeciak City Clerk City of Granger City Council - City of Linden Joe Stuetelberg Mayor City of Minburn Scott Grimes Superintendent Dallas Center-Grimes School District Mark Lane Superintendent Woodward-Granger School District Figure 5: Round 2 Meeting ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 27 Data Sources and Information Effective hazard mitigation planning requires the review and inclusion of a wide range of data, documents, plans, and studies. The following table identifies many of the sources utilized during this planning process. Specific references are included as footnotes when used as applicable. The following table is not exhaustive as many studies, plans, and data resources at the local level are not publicly available. Individual examples of plan integration are identified in Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 21: General Plans, Documents, and Information Documents Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 DMA 11/fema_disaster-mitigation-act-of-2000_10-30- 2000.pdf Mitigation Ideas: A Resource for Reducing Risk to Natural Hazards (2013) 06/fema-mitigation-ideas_02-13-2013.pdf Final Rule (2007) managers/risk/hazard-mitigation/regulations- guidance/archive National Flood Insurance Program Community Status Book (2020) nfip/community-status-book Hazard Mitigation Assistance Unified Guidance (2015) 07/fy15_HMA_Guidance.pdf National Response Framework (2019) managers/national- preparedness/frameworks/response Hazard Mitigation Assistance Guidance and Addendum (2015) 07/fy15_hma_addendum.pdf Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (2021) Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide (2011) 06/fema-local-mitigation-plan-review- guide_09_30_2011.pdf The Census of Agriculture (2017) s/2017/Full_Report/Census_by_State/Iowa/ Local Mitigation Planning Handbook (2013) 06/fema-local-mitigation-planning-handbook_03- 2013.pdf What is a Benefit: Guidance on Benefit-Cost Analysis on Hazard Mitigation Projects tools/benefit-cost-analysis Plans and Studies Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan (2018) blic-safety/emergency-management/hazard- mitigation-plan Iowa Hazard Mitigation Plan (2018) content/uploads/2020/09/IowaHMPSection5-508- Compliant.pdf Flood Insurance Studies National Climate Assessment (2014) Fourth National Climate Assessment (2018) Data Sources/Technical Resources Arbor Day Foundation – Tree City Designation ectory.cfm National Drought Mitigation Center – Drought Monitor http://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/ Environmental Protection Agency - Chemical Storage Sites program National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service http://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/ Federal Emergency Management Agency http://www.fema.gov National Fire Protection Association ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process 28 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Documents FEMA Flood Map Service Center National Flood Insurance Program High Plains Regional Climate Center http://climod.unl.edu/ National Flood Insurance Program protection/land-quality/flood-plain- management/national-flood-ins-program Iowa Climatology Bureau National Historic Registry x.htm Iowa Department of Education National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) http://www.noaa.gov/ Iowa Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management National Weather Service http://www.weather.gov/ Iowa Department of Human Services Natural Resources Conservation Service www.ne.nrcs.usda.gov Iowa Department of Natural Resources State Historical Society of Iowa Iowa Department of Natural Resources – Dam Inventory Stanford University - National Performance of Dams Program Iowa Department of Natural Resources - Environmental Protection Storm Prediction Center Statistics http://www.spc.noaa.gov Iowa Department of Revenue – Property Tax Overview United States Army Corps of Engineers – National Levee Database Iowa Department of Transportation United States Census Bureau http://www.census.gov Iowa Energy Office United States Census Bureau Iowa Forest Service United States Department of Agriculture http://www.usda.gov Iowa Forest Service – Fire Protection and Prevention re-Prevention/Fire-Protection-Prevention United States Department of Agriculture – Risk Management Agency http://www.rma.usda.gov Iowa Geospatial Data United States Department of Agriculture – Web Soil Survey Survey.aspx Iowa Public Power Service United States Department of Commerce http://www.commerce.gov/ ISU – College of Agriculture and Life Sciences United States Department of Transportation – Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration ISU – Extension and Outreach United States Geological Survey http://www.usgs.gov/ National Agricultural Statistics Service http://www.nass.usda.gov/ United States National Response Center National Centers for Environmental Information United States Small Business Administration ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 29 Documents http://www.sba.gov National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) http://www.start.umd.edu/gtd/ Watershed Management Authorities of Iowa Protection/Water-Quality/Watershed- Management-Authorities National Drought Mitigation Center – Drought Impact Reporter http://droughtreporter.unl.edu/map/ Public Review Once the HMP draft was completed, a public review period was opened to allow for participants and community members at large to review the plan, provide comments, and request changes. The public review period was open from November 9, 2022, through December 6, 2022. Participating jurisdictions and relevant stakeholders were emailed or mailed a letter notifying them of this public review period. The draft HMP was also made available on the project website for download. Jurisdictions and the public could provide comments via mail, fax, email, or by using the comment box on the project website. Table 22: Public Review Revisions Plan Section Name, Title, and/or Agency Comment/Revision Section 3: County Profile; Section 4: Severe Thunderstorms, Tornadoes & Windstorms Mike Wallace, Executive Director, Dallas County Conservation Board Additional Mitigation Actions, vulnerability clarification Section 7: Dallas Center Profile Cindy Riesselman, City Administrator, City of Dallas Center Data clarification, boundary map update, Mitigation Action update, addition of future land use map, flood map products update Section 7: Minburn Profile Dan Case, Fire Chief, City of Minburn Data correction, funding update to Mitigation Action Section 7: Van Meter Profile Sarah Ames, City Administrator, City of Van Meter Planning team updates, Critical Facility updates Section 7: Waukee Profile Clint Robinson, Fire Chief, Rudy Koester, Public Works Director, City of Waukee Additional Mitigation Action, typographical and grammatical errors, data clarification. Section 7: Perry Profile Josh Wuebker, Public Works Director, City of Perry Planning Team member corrections Executive Summary Section 2: Plan Adoption and Implementation, Section 3: County Profile, Section 4: Dams, Section 4: Human Infectious Diseases, Section 6: Unforeseen Opportunities Section 7: De Soto Profile, Bouton Profile AJ Seely, Emergency Management Director, Dallas County EMA Data clarification, plan maintenance clarification, typographical and grammatical errors ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Two I Planning Process 30 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Plan Adoption and Implementation Based on FEMA requirements, this multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan must be formally adopted by each participant through approval of a resolution. This approval will create individual ownership of the plan by each participant. Formal adoption provides evidence of a participant’s full commitment to implement the plan’s goals and action items. A copy of the resolution draft submitted to participating jurisdictions is located in Appendix A. Copies of adoption resolutions may be requested from the HSEMD’s State Hazard Mitigation Officer. Hazard mitigation plans are living documents. Once an HMP has been adopted locally, participants are responsible for implementing identified projects, maintaining the plan with relevant information, and fully updating the plan every five years. The plan must be monitored, evaluated, and updated on a five-year or less cycle. Those who participated directly in the planning process would be logical champions during reviews between the five-year cycle update of the plan. It is critical that the plan be reviewed at regular intervals and when a hazard event occurs that significantly affects the area or individual participants. These reviews are the responsibility of each jurisdiction’s local planning team and should be documented and reflected in the plan. Participants are encouraged to work alongside the plan sponsor, Dallas County EMA, or the consultant, JEO, to document updates and revise the HMP as needed. See Section Six: Plan Implementation and Maintenance for additional information on plan amendments. Additional implementation of the mitigation plan should include integrating HMP goals and mitigation and strategic actions into county and local comprehensive or capital improvement plans as they are developed or updated. Section Six describes the system that jurisdictions participating in the HMP have established to monitor the plan; provides a description of how, when, and by whom the HMP process and mitigation and strategic actions will be evaluated; presents the criteria used to evaluate the plan; and explains how the plan will be maintained and updated. Requirement §201.6(c)(5): For multi- jurisdictional plans, each jurisdiction requesting approval of the plan must document that it has been formally adopted. ---PAGE BREAK--- Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 31 Section Three: County Profile Introduction To identify jurisdictional vulnerabilities, it is vitally important to understand the people and built environment of the county. The following section provides a description of the characteristics of the county to create an overall profile. Many characteristics are covered in each jurisdiction’s community profile including demographics, employment, and transportation routes. Redundant information will not be covered in this section. Therefore, this section highlights county specific information and will also serve as the county’s profile. County Geographic Summary The project area is comprised of Dallas County, which is located in central Iowa. The county covers 592 square miles and sits just west of the City of Des Moines. There are eighteen incorporated communities in the county, with the City of Adel being the county seat. Figure 6 shows the county, incorporated communities, and location within the state. Dallas County resides mostly in the Des Moines Lobe landform region, with a portion of the Southern Iowa Drift Plain within the county’s southern edge. The Des Moines Lobe region is noted for its smaller lakes, wetlands, and ridges caused by a glacier 14,000 years ago.12 13 Three watershed regions cover Dallas County: the South Raccoon, North Raccoon, and West Des Moines watersheds. Main waterways in the planning area include the South, Middle, and North Raccoon Rivers, and the Des Moines River. Climate The average high temperature in Dallas County for the month of July is 85 degrees and the average low temperature for the month of January is 10 degrees. On average, Dallas County receives over 36 inches of rain and 36.5 inches of snowfall per year. Climate data is 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, high heat events may be more likely which could impact vulnerable populations. Table 23: Dallas County Climate Dallas County July Normal High Temp 85.4 °F January Normal Low Temp 10.2 °F Annual Normal Precipitation 36.1 inches Annual Normal Snowfall 36.5 inches Source: NCEI U.S. Climate Normals14, Precipitation includes all rain and melted snow and ice. 12 Iowa State University Geographic Information Systems Support & Research Facility. 2022. “Iowa – Landforms Regions and Features.” 13 Iowa Geological Survey. 2017. “Landform Regions of Iowa.” 04-11_em44.pdf. 14National Centers for Environmental Information. “1991-2020 U.S. Climate Normals.” Accessed June 2022. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile 32 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 6: Map of Project Area ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 33 Figure 7: Iowa Landform Regions Source: Iowa State University, 201715 Demographics Demographic and asset information can be used to determine levels of vulnerability via population and housing, structural inventories and valuations, critical facilities, and other vulnerable areas analysis. This population includes a range of demographic cohorts and persons at risk to natural and man-made disasters. The following figures depict the historical population of the county and the age cohort breakdown in 2020.16 15 Iowa Geological Survey. 2017. “Landform Regions of Iowa.” 04-11_em44.pdf. 16 United States Census Bureau. “2020 Census Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171): P1: Race.” [database file]. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile 34 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 8: County Population 1850-2020 Figure 9: County Population by Age Cohort and Sex (2020) Source: U.S. Census Bureau 854 5,244 12,019 18,746 20,479 23,058 23,628 25,120 25,493 24,649 23,661 24,123 26,085 29,513 29,755 40,750 66,135 99,678 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000 110,000 Population Year 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Under 5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 34 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 to 69 70 to 74 75 to 79 80 to 84 85 & Over Percentage of the Population Years Female % Male % ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 35 Table 24: Population with the County (2020) Jurisdiction 2010 Population 2020 Population City of Adel 3,682 6,153 City of Bouton 129 127 City of Dallas Center 1,623 1,901 City of Dawson 131 116 City of De Soto 1,050 915 City of Dexter 611 640 City of Granger* 1,244 1,654 City of Linden 199 200 City of Minburn 365 325 City of Perry 7,702 7,836 City of Redfield 835 731 City of Van Meter 1,016 1,484 City of Waukee 13,790 23,940 City of Woodward* 1,024 1,346 Total** 66,135 99,678 Source: U.S. Census Bureau *Part of the Cities of Granger and Woodward are located outside of Dallas County **Total includes population from portions of the Cities of Clive, Grimes, Urbandale, and West Des Moines The population for the county has increased since the 2010 census (66,135 persons to 99,678 persons). That trend is likely to continue with a higher percentage of individuals under 40 years old. The median age for the county is 35.4 which is younger than the State of Iowa at 38.3. The county accounts for approximately 3.1% of the total population for the state in 2020. Since 2010, the majority of cities in the county have seen an uptick in population. Increasing populations are associated with increased hazard mitigation and emergency planning requirements for development. Increasing populations can also contribute to increasing tax revenues, allowing communities to pursue additional mitigation projects. At-risk Populations In general, at-risk populations may have difficulty with medical issues, poverty, extremes in age, and communication issues due to language barriers. Several outliers may be considered when discussing potentially at-risk populations, including: • Not all people who are considered “at-risk” are vulnerable; • Outward appearance does not necessarily mark a person as at-risk; • A hazard event will, in many cases, impact at-risk populations in different ways. The National Response Framework defines at-risk populations as “…populations whose members may have additional needs before, during, and after an incident in functional areas, including but not limited to: maintaining independence, communication, transportation, supervision, and medical care.”17 17 United States Department of Homeland Security. October 2019. “National Response Framework Third Edition.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile 36 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Dependent children under 18 years old are one of the most vulnerable populations to disasters.18 The majority of people in this age group do not have access to independent financial resources and transportation. They lack practical knowledge necessary to respond appropriately during a disaster. Despite this vulnerability, children are generally overlooked in disaster planning because the presence of a caretaker is assumed. With approximately 30% of the planning area’s population younger than 20, children are a key vulnerable group to address in the planning process. Schools house a high number of children within the county during the daytime hours of weekdays, as well as during special events on evenings and weekends. The following table identifies the various school districts located within the county, and Figure 10 displays a map of the school district boundaries. Table 25: School Inventory School District Total Enrollment (2021-2022) Total Teachers Adel DeSoto Minburn School District 2,108 154 Dallas Center-Grimes School District 3,443 243 Perry School District 1,702 143 Van Meter School District 993 70 Waukee School District 12,205 885 West Central Valley School District 815 71 Woodward-Granger School District 1,085 105 Total 22,351 1,671 Source: Iowa Department of Education19 18 Flanagan, Gregory, Hallisey, Heitgerd, & Lewis. 2011. “A Social Vulnerability Index for Disaster Management.” Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, 8(11): Article 3. 19 Iowa Department of Education. “Iowa Public School and AEA Teacher and Teacher Leader Information.” Accessed May 2022. iowa ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 37 Figure 10: County School Districts ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile 38 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Like minors, seniors (age 65 and greater) are often more significantly impacted by hazards and temperature extremes. During prolonged heat waves or periods of extreme cold, seniors may lack resources to effectively address hazard conditions and as a result may incur injury or potentially death. Prolonged power outages (either standalone events or as the result of other contributing factors) can have significant impacts on any citizen relying on medical devices. One study conducted by the Center for Injury Research and Policy found that increases in vulnerability related to severe winter storms (with significant snow accumulations) begin at age 55.20 The study found that on average there are 11,500 injuries and 100 deaths annually related to snow removal. Men over the age of 55 are 4.25 times more likely to experience cardiac events during snow removal. On the other hand, women can have a more difficult time during post-disaster recovery than men, often due to sector-specific employment, lower wages, and family care responsibilities. Nursing homes and assisted living facilities within the planning area were invited to take part as stakeholders in the planning process, as noted in Section Two: Planning Process. Table 26 lists the facilities invited. Table 26: Stakeholder Outreach to Nursing Homes and Assisted Living Facilities Nursing Homes and Assisted Living Facilities Adel Acres Nursing Home Pearl Valley Rehabilitation and Healthcare Center at Perry Van Fossen Square Independent Living Community Granger Nursing and Rehabilitation Center Perry Lutheran Homes Independence Villages Senior Living/Village at Legacy Point Spurgeon Manor Residents below the poverty line may lack resources to prepare for, respond to, or recover from hazard events. Residents with limited economic resources will struggle to prioritize the implementation of mitigation measures over more immediate needs. Further, residents with limited economic resources are more likely to live in older, more vulnerable structures. These structures could be mobile homes, located in the floodplain, located near known hazard sites chemical storage areas), or older poorly maintained structures. Residents below the poverty line will be more vulnerable to all hazards within the county. Residents who speak English as a second language may struggle with a range of issues before, during, and after hazard events. General vulnerabilities revolve around what could be an inability to effectively communicate with others or an inability to comprehend materials aimed at notification and/or education if a hazard event. When presented with a hazardous situation it is important that all community members be able to receive, decipher, and act on relevant information. An inability to understand warnings and notifications may prevent non-native English speakers from reacting in a timely manner. Further, educational materials related to regional hazards are most often developed in the dominant language for the area, for the county that would be English. Residents who struggle with English in the written form may not have sufficient information related to local concerns to effectively mitigate potential impacts. Residents with limited English proficiency would be at an increased vulnerability to all hazards within the county. Table 27 provides statistics for the county regarding individuals who speak English as a second language (ESL) and families reported as in poverty in the last 12 months. 20 Center for Injury Research and Policy. 2011. “Snow Shoveling Safety.” Accessed July 2022. http://www.nationwidechildrens.org/cirp-snow-shoveling. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 39 Table 27: ESL and Poverty At-Risk Populations Percent that speak English as second language People below poverty level 11.2% 5.2% Source: U.S. Census Bureau21 22 Similar to residents below the poverty line, racial minorities tend to have access to fewer financial and systemic resources that would enable them to implement hazard mitigation and strategic projects and to respond and recover from hazard events, including residence in standard housing and possession of financial stability. The county is primarily White, non-Hispanic; however, racial diversity has significantly increased since 2010, which could affect the county’s vulnerability to hazards (Table 28). Table 28: Racial Composition Trends Race 2010 2020 % Change Number % of Total Number % of Total White, Not Hispanic 60,971 92.2% 83,359 83.6% +36.7% Black 918 1.4% 2,698 2.7% +194% American Indian and Alaskan Native 127 0.2% 224 0.2% +76.4% Asian 1,662 2.5% 5,009 5.0% +201.4% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 39 0.1% 38 0.0% -2.6% Other Races 1,409 2.1% 2,556 2.6% +81.4% Two or More Races 1,009 1.5% 5,794 5.8% +474% Total Population 66,135 - 99,678 - - Source: U.S. Census Bureau23 24 Governance The county’s governmental structure impacts its capability to implement mitigation actions. Dallas County is governed by a three-member board of county supervisors. The county also has the following offices and departments. • County Assessor • Sheriff • County Treasurer • Planning and Development • Community Services • Conservation • EMS • Environmental Health • GIS/Mapping • Information Services/Technology 21 U.S. Census Bureau. 2021. “Language Spoken at Home: 2020 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates.” 22 U.S. Census Bureau. 2021. “Selected Economic Characteristics: 2020 ACS 5-year estimate.” 23 United States Census Bureau. “2010 Census Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171): P1: Race.” 24 United States Census Bureau. “2020 Census Redistricting Data (Public Law 94-171): P1: Race.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile 40 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 • Public Health • Emergency Management • Finance and Operations Department • Secondary Roads Department • Veterans Affairs Capability Assessment The capability assessment consisted of a review of local existing policies, regulations, plans, and programs with hazard mitigation capabilities. The following tables summarize the county’s planning and regulatory capability; administrative and technical capability; fiscal capability; educational and outreach capability; and overall capability to implement mitigation projects. County funds are sufficient to pursue new capital projects as approved by the board of supervisors. County funds have mostly stayed the same over recent years, according to the local planning team. Table 29: Capability Assessment Survey Components/Subcomponents Yes/No Planning & Regulatory Capability Comprehensive Plan Yes Capital Improvements Plan No Economic Development Plan No Emergency Operations Plan Yes Floodplain Management Plan No Storm Water Management Plan No Zoning Ordinance Yes Subdivision Regulation/Ordinance Yes Floodplain Ordinance Yes Building Codes Yes National Flood Insurance Program Yes Community Rating System No Other (if any) Administrative & Technical Capability Planning Commission Yes Floodplain Administration Yes GIS Capabilities Yes Chief Building Official Yes Civil Engineering No Local Staff Who Can Assess Community’s Vulnerability to Hazards Yes Grant Manager No Mutual Aid Agreement Yes Other (if any) Fiscal Capability Capital Improvement Plan/ 1 & 6 Year Plan No Applied for grants in the past Yes Awarded a grant in the past Yes ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 41 Authority to Levy Taxes for Specific Purposes such as Mitigation Projects Yes 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 Bonds Yes Other (if any) Education & Outreach Capability Local citizen groups or non-profit organizations focused on environmental protection, emergency preparedness, access and functional needs populations, etc. Ex. CERT Teams, Red Cross, etc. Yes Ongoing public education or information program responsible water use, fire safety, household preparedness, environmental education) Yes Natural Disaster or Safety related school programs No StormReady Certification Yes Other (if any) Table 30: Overall Capability Overall Capability Limited/Moderate/High Financial resources needed to implement mitigation projects Moderate Staff/expertise to implement projects Limited Community support to implement projects High Time to devote to hazard mitigation Limited Plan Integration Dallas County has several planning documents that discuss or relate to hazard mitigation. Each plan is listed below along with a short description of how it is integrated with the hazard mitigation plan. Planning documents were reviewed and information from these plans were used in the risk assessment and mitigation strategy sections of this plan. The county will seek out and evaluate any opportunities to integrate the results of the current hazard mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms and updates. Building Codes (2006) The building code sets standards for constructed buildings and structures. The county follows the 2006 version of the International Building Code, and the 2008 version of the National Electrical Code. The county plans to update these in the next year. Comprehensive Plan (2000) The comprehensive plan is designed to guide the future actions and growth within the county. The county’s plan does not discuss natural hazards or mitigation strategies, but it does encourage ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile 42 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 infill development. The county plans to update the comprehensive plan in the next few years. County Emergency Management would like to include hazard mitigation enhancements in the next plan update if the county supervisors agree. Capital Improvement Plan (2022) The capital improvement plan outlines large purchases and projects that the county would like to pursue. Projects identified include various storm water focused projects including upsizing of culverts and drainage structures, upgrading storm sewer systems, and improving transportation routes for drainage. The plan also includes widening roadways (that would improve evacuations), bridge improvements, installing emergency generators in critical facilities, and improving existing police headquarters. A future update of the plan will include a new public works facility. Local Road Safety Plan (2019) A local road safety plan (LRSP) was developed for Dallas County in 2019 to provide a basis for systematic safety improvements along local roads under the county’s jurisdiction. The LRSP helps local practitioners make informed safety decisions and fosters coordination between various agencies within the county. The plan focuses on the five E’s of safety: Engineering, Emergency Response, Education, Enforcement, and Everyone. Zoning Ordinance (2022), Floodplain Ordinance (2018), Subdivision Regulations (2013) The county’s floodplain ordinance, zoning ordinance, and subdivision regulations outline where and how development should occur in the future. These documents contain floodplain maps, provide a framework and regulations for development within the floodplain (as required by Iowa DNR and FEMA), and include well setback requirements. The county is currently in the process of updating the zoning ordinance section by section as needed. The floodplain will be updated by the end of 2022 and as required by FEMA. Water System Emergency Response Plan (2022) Water system emergency response plans ensure the drinking water systems that serve Dallas County are prepared to supply customers with drinking water in the event of an emergency. It includes identifying potential emergencies and how the utility will ensure water delivery in specific scenarios. Community Wildfire Protection Plan (2014) Dallas County Emergency Management participated in the Saylorville Flood Plain Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP), which was developed in 2014. The Saylorville floodplain is located along the Des Moines River. The purpose of the CWPP is to help effectively manage wildfires and increase collaboration and communication among organizations who manage fire. The CWPP discusses area-specific historical wildfire occurrences and impacts, identifies areas most at risk from wildfires, discusses protection capabilities, and identifies wildfire mitigation strategies. Wellhead Protection Plan The purpose of wellhead protection plans is to protect the public drinking water supply wells from contamination. It includes identifying potential sources of groundwater contamination in the area. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 43 Economy According to the US Census Bureau, the top industries in Dallas County are Education, Health Care, and Social Assistance Financial, Insurance, and Real Estate and Professional, Scientific, Management, and Administrative Services (11.2%).25 Dallas County’s median household income in 2020 was $88,368. This is higher than Iowa’s median household income of $61,836. Major employers within the county include Wells Fargo, Tyson, Athene, Sammons Group, and Unity Point Hospital. Approximately 29% of residents in Dallas County travel less than 15 minutes to work, while 24% travel more than 30 minutes, suggesting many residents live and work in somewhat close proximity. Built Environment and Structural Inventory Data related to the built environment is an important component of a hazard mitigation plan. It is essential that during the planning process communities and participating jurisdictions display an understanding of their built environment and work to identify needs that may exist within the county. The United States Census Bureau provides information related to housing units and potential areas of vulnerability. The selected characteristics examined below include lacking complete plumbing facilities; lacking complete kitchen facilities; no telephone service available; housing units that are mobile homes; and housing units with no vehicles. Table 31: Selected Housing Characteristics Dallas County Occupied Housing Units 35,383 (93.7%) Lacking Complete Plumbing Facilities 0.2% Lacking Complete Kitchen Facilities 0.3% No Telephone Service Available 1.3% No Vehicles Available 3.3% Mobile Homes 2.7% Source: U.S. Census Bureau26 Less than two percent of housing units lack access to landline telephone service. This does not necessarily indicate that there is not a phone in the housing unit, as cellular telephones are increasingly a primary form of telephone service. However, this lack of access to landline telephone service does represent a population at increased risk to disaster impacts. Reverse 911 systems are designed to contact households via landline services and as a result, some homes in hazard prone areas may not receive notification of potential impacts in time to take protective actions. Emergency managers should continue to promote the registration of cell phone numbers with emergency alert systems and utilize systems which automatically ping cellphones by triangulating cell towers. Almost three percent of housing units in the county are mobile homes. Mobile homes have a higher risk of sustaining damages during high wind events, tornadoes, severe thunderstorms, and severe winter storms. Mobile homes that are either not anchored or are anchored incorrectly can 25 United States Census Bureau. “2020 Census Bureau American Community Survey: DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics.” 26 United States Census Bureau. “2020 Census Bureau American Community Survey: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile 44 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 be overturned by 60 mph winds. A thunderstorm is classified as severe when wind speeds exceed 58 mph, placing improperly anchored mobile homes at risk. Over six percent of the homes in the county are unoccupied. Unoccupied homes may not be maintained as well as occupied housing, thus adding to their vulnerability. Also, over three percent of households in the county report no available vehicles. Households without vehicles may have difficulty evacuating during a hazardous event and a reduced ability to access resources in time of need. The vast majority of homes in the county were built 1990 or later (Figure 11). Housing age can serve as an indicator of risk, as structures built prior to state or local building codes being developed may be more vulnerable. According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), older homes are at greater risk of poor repair and dilapidation resulting in blighted or substandard properties. Residents living in these homes maybe at higher risk to the impacts of high winds, tornadoes, severe winter storms, and thunderstorms. Figure 11: Housing Age in Dallas County Source: U.S. Census Bureau27 27 United States Census Bureau. “2020 Census Bureau American Community Survey: DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics.” 10 2 3 4 7 4 12 28 13 18 Pre 1940 1940-1949 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2009 2010-2013 Post 2013 Percentage of Housing Units Year Built ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 45 Parcel Assessment and Valuation The planning team acquired GIS parcel data from the County Assessor to analyze the location, number, and value of assessed properties 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 tables. Table 32: Assessed Parcels and Value in the 1% Annual Flood Risk Area Total Number of Improvements Total Improvement Value Number of Improvements in Floodplain Value of Improvements in Floodplain % of Improvements in Floodplain 34,462 $11,178,810,910 1,558 $1,158,464,010 5% Source: County Assessor, 2022 Table 33: Assessed Parcels and Value in the 0.2% Annual Flood Risk Area Total Number of Improvements Total Improvement Value Number of Improvements in Floodplain Value of Improvements in Floodplain % of Improvements in Floodplain 34,462 $11,178,810,910 1,309 $748,065,260 4% Source: County Assessor, 2022 Table 34: County Flood Map Products Type of Product Product ID Effective Date Details FIS Report 19049CV000B 12/7/2018 Flood Insurance Study LOMA 19-07-0830A-190860 4/4/2019 Structure (residence) is outside SFHA LOMA 20-07-0249A-190860 1/3/2020 Structure (residence) removed from SFHA LOMA 20-07-0862A-190860 6/19/2020 Structure removed from SFHA Source: FEMA Flood Map Service Center28 Future Development Trends The future development trends discussed are specific to Dallas County. For a discussion of trends within individual communities, see Section Seven: Community Profiles. The Dallas County Planning & Development administers building code, zoning, subdivision, and floodplain development for the rural, unincorporated areas of Dallas County, Iowa. During the past five years the county has seen a continued trend of annexation by cities as they continued to grow. In rural areas of the county, a trend of new housing continues, as well as a significant increase in commercial and industrial developments. The county has issued 34 Flood Plain Development Permits for projects in rural Dallas County over the past five years, with projects including bank stabilization, wetland restoration, water and sewer improvements, and filling areas to create residential sites. According to the county, all projects meet the requirements of the NFIP. 28 Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2022. “FEMA Flood Map Service Center.” Accessed July 2022. Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(C): [The plan should provide] a general description of land uses and development trends within the community so that mitigation options can be considered in future land use decisions. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile 46 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 At this time, there are no significant housing or industrial developments planned for the next five years. Social Vulnerability Index All communities have some vulnerability to natural and man-made hazard events. Various social conditions such as poverty rates, vehicle access, language, or housing stock contribute to a community’s overall social vulnerability. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has developed a Social Vulnerability Index to help public health officials and emergency responders identify communities at greater risk before, during, and after major hazardous events. The index evaluates 15 social factors and breaks down vulnerability into four domains: socioeconomic status; household composition and disability; minority status and language; housing and transportation.. Figure 12 illustrates the overall Social Vulnerability Index for Dallas County. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 47 Figure 12: Social Vulnerability Index Source: CDC Social Vulnerability Index, 201829 29 Centers for Disease Control Social Vulnerability Index. 2018. “CDC’s Social Vulnerability Index (SVI): County Map” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 48 Community Lifelines Community lifelines enable the continuous operation of critical government and business functions and are essential to human health and safety and economic security. When disrupted, decisive intervention is required for stabilization. FEMA has identified seven types of community lifelines: Safety and Security (law enforcement, fire service, search and rescue); Food, Water, Shelter; Health and Medical (medical care, public health, patient movement); Energy; Communications (infrastructure, responder communications, alerts warning, 911, dispatch); Transportation (highway, roadway, mass transit, railway, aviation); and Hazardous Material (facilities, HAZMAT, pollutants, contaminants). Community lifelines identified in this plan were based off the categories identified by FEMA. Each participant identified their own community lifelines specific to their jurisdiction. These community lifelines are discussed in greater detail in Section Seven: Community Profiles. Dallas County lifelines are discussed below. Transportation Transportation information is important to hazard mitigation plans because it suggests possible evacuation corridors, as well as areas more at risk of transportation incidents. Dallas County’s major transportation corridors include Interstate 80, US Highways 6 and 169, and State Highways 44, 141, and 144. The most traveled route is Interstate 80 in West Des Moines, with an average of 70,600 vehicles daily.30 Two railroad lines travel through the county. An Iowa Interstate Railroad line runs along the southern edge of the county and a Union Pacific line has a segment that runs into Waukee from the southeast. The county also has the Perry Municipal Airport, located just west of the City of Perry. 30 Iowa Department of Transportation. 2020. "Iowa Traffic Data". Accessed May 2022. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 49 Hazardous Materials There are several gas transmission pipelines and one hazardous liquid pipeline running through the county, as seen in the figure below. Figure 13: Pipelines in Dallas County Source: National Pipeline Mapping System31 31 National Pipeline Mapping System. 2022. “Public Viewer.” Accessed April 2022. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile 50 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 According to the database/reporting system the State of Iowa uses for Tier II data – E-Plan Emergency Response Information System – there are 69 chemical storage sites within Dallas County which house hazardous materials. Figure 14: Chemical Storage Sites Facility Name Address Adel Maintenance No 2 516 Greene Highway Adel, IA 50003 Adel Office & Maintenance Facility No 1 415 River Street Adel, IA 50003 CenturyLink - Adel CO 908 Prairie Avenue Adel, IA 50003 CIRM-- Adel Plant 301 S 6th Street Adel, IA 50003 Dallas County Central Maintenance Facility 23380 250th Street Adel, IA 50003 Ferrellgas 23601 Pasco Lane Adel, IA 50003 Inland Coatings 26259 Highway 6 Adel, IA 50003 Landus Cooperative - Panther 23926 H Avenue Adel, IA 50003 Manatts Inc--Adel 103 N 19th Street Adel, IA 50003 MidAmerican Energy-Dallas County Service Center 29817 R Avenue Adel, IA 50003 Northern Natural Gas - Redfield Production & Drilling Facility 2554 G Avenue Adel, IA 50003 United Brick & Tile 1831 W Main Street Adel, IA 50003 Booneville West Sand Pit 30129 360th Street Booneville, IA 50263 Heartland Co-op, Booneville 106 Main Street Booneville, IA 50038 Heartland Co-op, Booneville Agronomy 29927 360th Street Booneville, IA 50038 New Cooperative, Inc. - Bouton 13773 N Avenue Bouton, IA 50039 Wells Fargo - University Building 13733 University Avenue Clive, IA 50325 West Side Storage #13384 Des Moines Water Works 2860 X Avenue Clive, IA 50311 Corteva Dallas Center 205 Fair View Drive Dallas Center, IA 50063 Heartland Co-op, Dallas Center 1107 Sycamore Street Dallas Center, IA 50063 ITC Jamaica 12028 141st Street Dawson, IA 50066 Landus Cooperative - Dawson 212 S First Street Dawson, IA 50066 ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 51 Facility Name Address Ferrellgas 20509 360th Court Earlham, IA 50072 Granger Maintenance Building 2111 West Kennedy Blvd Granger, IA 50109 Heartland Co-op, Minburn Acres 2263 187 Road Minburn, IA 50167 Heartland Co-op, Minburn Main Location 500 Walnut Street Minburn, IA 50167 Minburn Telephone Company 416 Chestnut Street Minburn, IA 50167 Agriland FS, Inc. - Dallas CO 23986 A Avenue Panora, IA 50216 CenturyLink - Perry CO 1424 Willis Avenue Perry, IA 50220 CIRM-- Perry Plant 915 Railroad Street Perry, IA 50220 ITC Midwest Perry 1400 I Court Perry, IA 50220 Minburn Telephone Company - CLEC 923 Willis Avenue Perry, IA 50220 Perry Maintenance Building 205 South First Street Perry, IA 50220 Perry Municipal Water Works 1101 W Third Street Perry, IA 50220 Perry Willis 910 I Court Perry, IA 50220 Progressive Foundry Inc 1518 1st Avenue Perry, IA 50220 Quick Oil Co 104 Willis Avenue Perry, IA 50220 Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc 13500 I Court Drive Perry, IA 50220 Wiese Industries 1501 5th Street Perry, IA 50220 Heartland Co-op, Redfield East Agronomy 30352 G Avenue Redfield, IA 50233 Heartland Co-op, Redfield Main Location 513 1 Street Redfield, IA 50233 Heartland Co-op, Redfield West 15571 Hwy 6 Redfield, IA 50233 Northern Natural Gas - Redfield Compressor Station 24282 G Avenue Redfield, IA 50233 Redfield Maintenance Building 1200 Omaha Street Redfield, IA 50233 CenturyLink - Van Meter CDO 406 Wilson Avenue Van Meter, IA 50261 Van Meter & I-80 2804 337th Court Van Meter, IA 52346 3079 CSC, Waukee 605 University Avenue ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile 52 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Facility Name Address Waukee, IA 50263 CenturyLink - Waukee CO 645 Walnut Street Waukee, IA 50263 Fleet Farm 1300 SE Kettlestone Blvd Waukee, IA 50263 Heartland Co-op, Waukee 529 Ashworth Drive Waukee, IA 50263 Heartland Co-op, Waukee Bulk Plant 104 Ashworth Drive Waukee, IA 50263 MidAmerican Energy-Raccoon Trail Substation 2593 West Hickman Road Waukee, IA 50263 OneNeck IT Solutions 390 NE Alices Road Waukee, IA 50263 QG Printing II LLC 400 Deming Avenue Waukee, IA 50263 Waukee Public Works 805 University Avenue Waukee, IA 50263 Costco Wholesale (0788) 7205 Mills Civic Parkway West Des Moines, IA 50266 Des Moines Data Center (DM1/2/3/4) 8855 Grand Avenue West Des Moines, IA 50266 Hallett Materials Booneville Plant 8850 Raccoon River Drive West Des Moines, IA 50266 Lowes Of Jordan Creek, IA (#2648) 450 S Jordan Creek Parkway West Des Moines, IA 50266 Methodist West Hospital 1660 60th Street West Des Moines, IA 50266 MidAmerican Energy - Johnson Creek Substation 11080 Booneville Road West Des Moines, IA 50266 Ramada 1250 C Jordan Creek Parkway West Des Moines, IA 50266 Verizon Wireless Meadowview (IAW4447537) 101 Jordan Creek Parkway West Des Moines, IA 50266 Verizon Wireless Walnut Creek: Cell Site (IAW125787) 6000 University Avenue West Des Moines, IA 50266 Wells Fargo - CSCL Cards Services 7000 Vista Drive West Des Moines, IA 50266 Wells Fargo Home Mortgage HQ 7001 Westown Parkway West Des Moines, IA 50266 Wells Fargo West Des Moines Campus - Union Station 815 E Wells Fargo Trail West Des Moines, IA 50266 Landus Cooperative - Woodward 110 Railway Street Woodward, IA 50276 Minburn Telecommunications, Inc. 108 W 2nd Street Woodward, IA 50276 Source: E-Plan32, Dallas County EMA - Personal Correspondence 32 E-Plan – Emergency Response Information System. 2022. "Facility Search." Accessed November 2022. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 53 Figure 15: Map of Chemical Storage Sites and Floodplain *Floodplain maps were created based on the available FIRM data at the time. Updated effective FIRM data was scheduled to be available on December 15, 2022. Please refer to FEMA's Flood Map Service Center for the current FIRM information. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile 54 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Health and Medical Facilities The following medical and health facilities are located within the county. Table 35: Care Facility Inventory Name Type of Facility Address Number of Beds Adel Acres Free Standing NF/SNF 1919 Greene Street Adel 50 Arbor Springs of West Des Moines LLC Free Standing SNF 7951 EP True Pkwy West Des Moines 56 Pearl Valley (Aspire of Perry) Free Standing NF/SNF 2625 Iowa Street Perry 46 Cedar Ridge Village Assisted Living Programs 8950 Coachlight Drive West Des Moines 68 (units) Cedar Ridge Village Free Standing NF/SNF 8950 Coachlight Drive West Des Moines 40 Dallas Center Medical Associates Rural Health Clinics 507 14th Street Dallas Center - Dallas County Hospital Critical Access Hospitals 610 Tenth Street Perry 25 DCH Family Medicine Perry Rural Health Clinics 616 10th Street Perry - Edgewater A Wesley Active Life Community LLC Free Standing NF/SNF 9225 Cascade Avenue West Des Moines 40 Edgewater ALP/D - Beacon Springs Assisted Living Programs for People with Dementia 9250 Edgeline Drive West Des Moines 32 (units) Edgewater Assisted Living - Brookside Assisted Living Programs 9225 Cascade Avenue West Des Moines 62 (units) Exemplar Care Full Service Medical Clinic, 24- Hour Urgent Care 7300 Westown Pkwy, Stee 330, West Des Moines - Granger Nursing and Rehabilitation Center Free Standing NF/SNF 2001 Kennedy Street Granger 67 Independence Village of Waukee Free Standing NF/SNF 1645 SE Holiday Crest Circle, Waukee 48 Independence Village of Waukee AL Assisted Living Programs 1654 SE Holiday Crest Circle, Waukee 80 (units) Independence Village of Waukee MC Assisted Living Programs for People with Dementia 1505 SE Laurel Street Waukee 32 (units) Iowa Clinic West Des Moines Medical Facility 5950 University Ave, West Des Moines - Iowa Clinic Waukee- Alice’s Road Medical Clinic – Family Medicine, Pediatrics, Physical Therapy 842 NE Alice’s Road, Waukee - Iowa Clinic Waukee – Dartmoor Drive Medical Clinic - Family Medicine 120 NE Dartmoor Drive, Waukee - ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 55 Name Type of Facility Address Number of Beds Jordan Creek Family Medicine Medical Clinic 230 S. 68th St, Ste 1203, West Des Moines - MercyOne Clinic Adel Non-Profit Medical Center 1120 Greene St, Adel - MercyOne Clinic Waukee Non-Profit Medical Center 25 West Hickman Rd, Waukee - Methodist West Hospital Hospital 1660 60th Street West Des Moines 95 Morningstar at Jordan Creek Assisted Living Programs 525 S. 60th Street West Des Moines 93 (units) Morningstar at Jordan Creek MC Assisted Living Programs for People with Dementia 525 S. 60th Street West Des Moines 58 (units) Perry Dialysis End Stage Renal Disease 610 10th Street Perry - Perry Lutheran Home Free Standing NF/SNF 2323 E Willis Avenue Perry 70 Perry Lutheran Home Eden Acres Campus Free Standing NF 3000 East Willis Avenue Perry 57 Perry Lutheran Homes Eden Acres Campus Assisted Living Programs 1300 28th Street Perry 16 (units) Perry Lutheran Homes Spring Valley Campus Assisted Living Programs 501 12th Street Perry 77 (units) Redfield Medical Clinic Rural Health Clinics 1013 First Street Redfield - Spurgeon Assisted Living Assisted Living Programs for People with Dementia 1006 Linden Street Dallas Center 64 (units) Spurgeon Manor Free Standing NF/SNF 1204 Linden Street Dallas Center 55 Spurgeon Manor Residential Care Facilities 1204 Linden Street Dallas Center 30 Universal Pediatrics Home Health Agencies 6750 Westown Pkwy, Ste 110, West Des Moines - Unity Point Clinic - Express at Waukee Walk-In Urgent Care Clinic 950 E Hickman Rd. Waukee - Unity Point Clinic - Express at Jordan Creek Walk-In Urgent Care Clinic 180 Jordan Creek Pkwy, Ste 120, West Des Moines - Unity Point at Kettlestone Family Medicine Clinic 1152 Southeast Ashworth Rd, Waukee, - Unity Point at Lakeview Walk-In Clinic 6000 University Ave, Ste 101, West Des Moines - Unity Point at Waukee Medical Clinic 30 Hickman Rd, Waukee, IA 50263 - Unity Point at WDM Medical Clinic 6010 Mills Civic Pkwy, Suite 200, West Des Moines - ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile 56 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Name Type of Facility Address Number of Beds Waggoner Pediatrics Pediatric Medical Clinic 2555 Berkshire Pkwy, Ste A, Clive - Waukee Area Free Clinic Free Clinic Westview Church, 1155 SE Boone Dr., Waukee - Source: Iowa Department of Inspections and Appeals33, Dallas County EMA - Personal Correspondence Critical Facilities Dallas County identified critical facilities that are vital for disaster response, providing shelter to the public, and essential for returning the county’s functions to normal operation during and after a disaster per the FEMA Community Lifelines guidance. Critical facilities were identified during the original planning process and updated as part of this plan update. The following table lists those critical facilities identified by the county. Table 36: Critical Facilities CF # Name Mass Care (Y/N) Generator (Y/N) Floodplain (Y/N) 1 Dallas County Courthouse N Y N 2 County Office Building – Assessor, Planning & Development N N N 3 County Office Building – Attorney, Central Services N Y N 4 County Office Building – Engineer, Secondary Roads Office N N N 5 County Office Building – Auditor/Jail N N N 6 Central Maintenance Facility N N N 7 Dallas County EMS – Adel Station N N N 8 County Office Building – Sheriff N Y N 9 ITC Midwest Electric Substation N Unknown Y 10 County Emergency Operations Center / Human Services Campus Y Y N 11 Dallas County Conservation N N N 12 Dallas County EMS – Perry Station N N N 13 Dallas County Hospital Y Y N 14 Dallas County Extension Office N N N 33 Iowa Department of Inspections and Appeals. "Direct Care Worker Registry & Health Facility Database." Accessed April 2022. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 57 Map of Critical Facilities *Floodplain maps were created based on the available FIRM data at the time. Updated effective FIRM data was scheduled to be available on December 15, 2022. Please refer to FEMA's Map Service for the current FIRM information. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile 58 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Critical Infrastructure Although they may not be listed in the table above, critical infrastructure can also include power and energy infrastructure, alert sirens, water infrastructure, and wastewater infrastructure. State and Federally Owned Properties The following table provides an inventory of state and federally owned properties within the county. Note that this list does not include federally or state-owned highway systems or specific buildings within each community. Table 37: State and Federally Owned Facilities and Lands Site Name Nearest Community Beaver Lake Wildlife Management Area (WMA) Dexter Courtney McCammond WMA Dexter Middle Raccoon River WMA Linden Perry WMA Perry Pleasant Valley WMA Adel Saylorville WMA Granger, Woodward Snyder Access WMA Minburn Two Rivers Access WMA Van Meter Silvers-Smith Woods State Preserve Adel Source: Iowa Department of Natural Resources,34 U.S National Park Service35 Historical Sites According to the National Register of Historic Places for Iowa by the National Park Service, there are 17 historic sites located in the county. Structures identified as cultural or historic resources represent assets that are unique to the county and are, in many situations, irreplaceable and have local significance. Table 38: Historical Sites Site Name Date Listed Nearest Community In Floodplain? Adel Bridge 4/18/2002 Adel Y (Floodway) Adel Public Square Historic District 12/18/2009 Adel Y Beaver Creek Bridge 6/25/1998 Perry Y Bruce's Snowball Market #1 Addition 9/8/2000 Perry N Dallas County Courthouse 11/26/1973 Adel N Dallas County Courthouse (Boundary Increase) 10/25/1979 Adel N Dayton Stagecoach Inn and Tavern Historic District 11/17/2021 Bouton N Dexter Community House 3/3/1975 Dexter N Downtown Perry Historic District 9/8/2000 Perry N 34 Iowa Department of Natural Resources. 2022. “Wildlife Management Areas.” shoot/wildlife-management-areas#13254117-t---w 35 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service. 2017. “National Register of Historic Places.” [shapefile]. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 59 Site Name Date Listed Nearest Community In Floodplain? Feller, Robert William Andrew, Farmstead 12/17/1999 Van Meter N Jones Business College 11/30/2000 Perry N McColl, Anthony House 2/5/1987 Woodward N Minburn Railroad Depot 12/7/2015 Minburn N Perry Carnegie Library Building 10/3/1996 Perry N Prairie Center Methodist Episcopal Church and Pleasant Hill Cemetery 10/12/2004 Yale N Saint Patrick's Catholic Church and Rectory 3/22/2011 Perry N Wilson, John, House 3/30/1979 DeSoto Y Source: National Park Service36 36 U.S. National Park Service. April 2022. “National Register of Historic Places NPGallery Database.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile 60 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Mitigation Strategy Throughout this planning process, the county was asked to review mitigation projects from the 2018 HMP and identify new potential mitigation and strategic actions to further reduce the effects of hazards. Below are the updated and new mitigation and strategic actions for Dallas County. Completed Mitigation and Strategic Actions Mitigation Action County Road System-200th St-B Ave. Description Place additional drainage structures and raise road profile. Hazard(s) Flooding, Transportation Incidents Estimated Cost $22,000 Funding County Budget Timeline 1 year Priority Medium Lead Agency Dallas County Roads Department Status Completed Mitigation Action County Road System-205th St-Pioneer Ave. Description Place additional drainage structures and raise road profile. Hazard(s) Flooding, Transportation Incidents Estimated Cost $18,000 Funding County Budget Timeline 1 year Priority Medium Lead Agency Dallas County Roads Department Status Completed Mitigation Action County Road System-210th St-V. Ave. Description Place additional drainage structures and raise road profile. Hazard(s) Flooding, Transportation Incidents Estimated Cost $15,000 Funding County Budget Timeline 1 year Priority Medium Lead Agency Dallas County Roads Department Status Completed Mitigation Action County Road System 250th St-T. Ave. Description Place additional drainage structures and raise road profile. Hazard(s) Flooding, Transportation Incidents Estimated Cost $18,000 Funding County Budget Timeline 1 year Priority Medium Lead Agency Dallas County Roads Department Status Completed ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 61 New Mitigation and Strategic Actions Mitigation Action Abandoned Quarry Flood Management Description Explore use of abandoned quarries (county-owned) as flood/water management area. Hazard(s) Flooding, Drought Estimated Cost Unknown Funding County Budget Timeline 5+ years Priority Low Lead Agency Dallas County Board of Supervisors Status Not started Mitigation Action Alert/Warning Sirens Description Replace aging or obsolete outdoor warning sirens within the county. Add outdoor warning sirens in populated areas. Hazard(s) Tornadoes and Windstorms Estimated Cost $400,000 Funding County Budget Timeline 2-5 years Priority High Lead Agency Dallas County EMA Status Pending funding Mitigation Action Alert/Warning Sirens at Park Areas Description Install outdoor warning siren/system for designated park areas within the county. Hazard(s) Tornadoes and Windstorms Estimated Cost $15,000 Funding County Budget Timeline 3 years Priority Medium Lead Agency Dallas County Conservation Board Status Not started Mitigation Action Backup Generator Description Purchase a new backup generator for the Central Maintenance Facility. Hazard(s) All Hazards Estimated Cost $250,000 Funding County Budget Timeline 1 year Priority High Lead Agency Dallas County Board of Supervisors Status Not started ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile 62 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Mitigation Action Reinforced Structures Description Upgrade existing structures or construct new ones in designated parks to provide shelter to the public during severe storms. Hazard(s) Severe Thunderstorms, Severe Winter Storms, Tornadoes and Windstorms Estimated Cost $300,000 Funding County Budget Timeline 5 years Priority High Lead Agency Dallas County Conservation Board Status Awaiting funding Mitigation Action Tree Management/Hazardous Tree Removal Description Improve tree management practices. Identify and remove hazardous limbs and/or trees. Hazard(s) Severe Thunderstorms, Severe Winter Storms, Tornadoes and Windstorms Estimated Cost $10,000 Funding County Budget Timeline 5 years Priority Medium Lead Agency Dallas County Conservation Board Status Performed on an annual basis Continued Mitigation and Strategic Actions Mitigation Action County Road System-Other Description Improve drainage structures and raise road profile. Hazard(s) Flooding, Transportation Incidents Estimated Cost $250,000 Funding County Budget Timeline 1 year Priority Medium Lead Agency Dallas County Roads Department Status Not started Mitigation Action Replace Aging Generator System at County EOC North Campus Description Remove and replace 25+ year old generator with new generator that powers all EOC/North Campus Hazard(s) Severe Thunderstorms, Severe Winter Storms, Tornadoes and Windstorms Estimated Cost $100,000 - $500,000 Funding Local Tax Revenue Timeline 2-3 years Priority Medium Lead Agency Dallas County Board of Supervisors Status The county is currently seeking grant funds for the replacement. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 63 Mitigation Action Saferooms in New Dallas County Buildings Description Place safe rooms in new construction County public buildings. Hazard(s) Flooding, Severe Thunderstorms, Severe Winter Storms, Tornadoes and Windstorms Estimated Cost Unknown Funding County Budget, Local Tax Revenue Timeline 3-5 years Priority High Lead Agency Dallas County Board of Supervisors Status This is ongoing as new buildings are planned and built. Removed Mitigation and Strategic Actions Mitigation Action Move IT systems from present location to North Campus /County EOC Description Move systems to County EOC/North Campus. Building is 25 to 30ft. higher than present location Hazard(s) Flooding Reason for Removal This project is no longer a priority for the county. 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 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 can occur before or after a major event. The local planning team will include the Dallas County Emergency Management Agency and the plan will be reviewed bi-annually or as needed. Revisions will be conducted internally and proposed during open session of a Board of Supervisors meeting for adoption. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Three I County Profile Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 64 This Page Is Intentionally Blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 65 Section Four: Risk Assessment Introduction The ultimate purpose of this hazard mitigation plan is to minimize the loss of life and property across the county due to natural or man-made hazards. This section contains a county and local risk assessment including descriptions of potential hazards, vulnerabilities and exposures, probability of future occurrences, and potential impacts and losses. By conducting a county and local risk assessment, participating jurisdictions can develop specific strategies to address areas of concern identified through this process. The following table defines terms that will be used throughout this section of the plan. Table 39: Term Definitions Term Definition Hazard A potential source of injury, death, or damages Asset People, structures, facilities, and systems that have value to the community Risk The potential for damages, loss, or other impacts created by the interaction of hazards and assets Vulnerability Susceptibility to injury, death, or damages to a specific hazard Impact The consequence or effect of a hazard on the community or assets Historical Occurrence The number of hazard events reported during a defined period of time Extent The strength or magnitude relative to a specific hazard Probability Likelihood of a hazard occurring in the future Methodology The risk assessment methodology utilized for this plan follows the same methodology as outlined in the FEMA Local Mitigation Planning Handbook. This process consists of four primary steps: 1. Describe the hazard 2. Identify vulnerable community assets 3. Analyze risk 4. Summarize vulnerability When describing the hazard, this plan will examine the following items: previous occurrences of the hazard within the county; locations where the hazard has occurred in the past or is likely to occur in the future; extent of past events and likely extent for future occurrences; and probability of future occurrences. While the identification of vulnerable assets will be conducted across the entire county, Section Seven will discuss community-specific assets at risk for relevant hazards. Analysis for regional risk will examine historic impacts and losses and what is possible should the hazard occur in the future. Risk analysis will include both qualitative description of historic or potential impacts) and quantitative data assigning values and measurements for potential loss of assets). Finally, each hazard identified in the plan will provide a summary statement encapsulating the information provided during each of the previous steps of the risk assessment process. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 66 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 For each of the hazards profiled, the best available and most appropriate data available have been considered. Further discussion relative to each hazard is discussed in the hazard profile portion of this section. Average Annual Damages and Frequency FEMA Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii) suggests that when the appropriate data is available, hazard mitigation plans should also provide an estimate of potential dollar losses for structures in vulnerable areas. This risk assessment methodology includes an overview of assets at risk and provides historic average annual dollar losses for all hazards for which historic event data are available. Additional loss estimates are provided separately for those hazards for which sufficient data is available. These estimates can be found within the relevant hazard profiles. Average annual losses from historical occurrences can be calculated for those hazards which there is a robust historic record and for which monetary damaged are recorded. There are three main pieces of data used throughout this formula. • Total Damages in Dollars: This is the total dollar amount of all property damages and crop damages as recorded in federal, state, and local data sources. The limitation to these data sources is that dollar figures usually are estimates and often do not include all damages from every event, but only officially recorded damages from reported events. • Total Years of Record: This is the span of years there are data available for recorded events. During this planning process, vetted and cleaned NCEI data are available for 1996 to 2021. Although some data are available back to 1950, this plan update only utilizes the more current and more accurate data available. Other periods of record for data sets are supplied where appropriate. Requirement §201.6(c)(2): Risk assessment. The plan shall include a risk assessment that provides the factual basis for activities proposed in the strategy to reduce losses from identified hazards. Local risk assessments must provide sufficient information to enable the jurisdiction to identify and prioritize appropriate mitigation actions to reduce losses from identified hazards. Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(i): The risk assessment shall include a description of the type, location, and extent of all natural hazards that can affect the jurisdiction. The plan shall include information on previous occurrences of hazard events and on the probability of future hazard events. Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii): The risk assessment shall include a description of the jurisdiction’s vulnerability to the hazards described in paragraph of this section. This description shall include an overall summary of each hazard and its impact on the community. The plan must also address National Flood Insurance Program insured structures that have been repetitively damaged by floods. Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(ii)(A): The plan should describe vulnerability in terms of the types and numbers of existing and future buildings, infrastructure, and critical facilities located in the identified hazard area. Requirement §201.6(c)(2)(iii): For multi-jurisdictional plans, the risk assessment must assess each jurisdiction’s risks where they vary from the risks facing the entire planning area. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 67 • Number of Hazard Events: This shows how often an event occurs. The frequency of a hazard event will affect how a community responds. A thunderstorm may not cause much damage each time, but multiple storms can have an incremental effect on housing and utilities. In contrast, a rare tornado can have a widespread effect on a community. An example of the event damage estimate is found below: 𝐀𝐧𝐧𝐮𝐚𝐥 𝐃𝐚𝐦𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐬 = 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑒𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝐷𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑌𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 of 𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑑 Each hazard will be addressed in this plan, while those which have caused significant damages or occurred in significant numbers are discussed in detail. It should be noted that NCEI data are not all inclusive and the database provides very limited information on crop losses. To provide a better picture of the crop losses associated with the hazards within the county, crop loss information provided by the Risk Management Agency (RMA) of the USDA was also utilized for this update of the plan. The collected data were from 2000 to 2021. Data for all the hazards are not always available, so only those with an available dataset are included in the loss estimation. Annual probability can be calculated based on the total years of record and the total number of years in which an event occurred. An example of the annual probability estimate is found below: 𝐀𝐧𝐧𝐮𝐚𝐥 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 = 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑌𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑎𝑛 𝐸𝑣𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑂𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑌𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑑 𝑥 100 Hazard Identification The identification of relevant hazards for the county began with a review of the 2018 State of Iowa Hazard Mitigation Plan. Dallas County representatives and key contacts reviewed, discussed, and determined the list of hazards to be profiled in this HMP update at the Kick-off Meeting. The hazards for which a risk assessment was completed are included in the following table. Table 40: Hazards Addressed in the Plan Hazards Addressed in the Plan Animal and Plant Disease Flooding Severe Thunderstorms Dam and Levee Failure Grass/Wildland Fire Severe Winter Storms Drought Hazardous Materials Release Sinkhole Earthquake Human Infectious Diseases Terrorism and Civil Unrest Expansive Soils Infrastructure Failure Tornado and Windstorm Extreme Temperature Landslide Transportation Incident ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 68 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Hazard Changes All hazards from the State HMP were included in this Hazard Mitigation Plan. However, some were combined due to their similarity of risks, impacts and mitigation strategies. These combined hazards are listed below. • Extreme Temperature: This hazard includes both Extreme Heat and Extreme Cold. Extreme Cold is included here, rather than with Severe Winter Storms. • Flooding: This hazard includes both Flash and Riverine Flooding. • Hazardous Materials Release: This includes both Hazardous Materials and Radiological. Hazard Assessment Summary Tables The following table provides an overview of the data contained in the hazard profiles. Hazards listed in this table and throughout the section are in alphabetical order. This table is intended to be a quick reference for people using the plan and does not contain source information. Source information and full discussion of individual hazards are included later in this section. Annual probability is based off the number of years that had at least one event. Table 41: Regional Risk Assessment Hazard Previous Occurrences Approximate Annual Probability* Likely Extent Animal and Plant Disease Animal Disease: 1 N/A Unknown Plant Disease: 3 Plant Disease 3/22 = 14% Crop damage or loss Dam and Levee Failure 0 Less than 1% Varies by structure Drought 441/1,527 months 29% D1-D4 Earthquake 0 Less than 1% Less than 5.0 on the Richter Scale Expansive Soils Unknown Unknown Varies by event Extreme Temperature Cold: Avg 6 days/year 78/83 = 94% Max Temp ≤10°F Heat: Avg 1 day/year 29/83 = 39% Max Temp ≥100°F Flooding 172 21/26 =81% Some inundation of structures. Some evacuations of people may be necessary. Grass/Wildfire 10 3/3 = 100% Avg 22 acres Some homes and structures threatened or at risk Hazardous Materials Release Fixed Site Spill: 50 21/32 = 32% Avg Liquid Spill: 217 gallons Avg Gas Spill: 300 lbs. Transportation Spill: 6 22/51 = 43% Avg Liquid Spill: 182 gallons Human Infectious Diseases 26,057 Covid cases N/A N/A ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 69 Hazard Previous Occurrences Approximate Annual Probability* Likely Extent Infrastructure Failure Unknown Unknown Varies by event Landslide Unknown Unknown Varies by event Severe Thunderstorms 650 26/26= 100% rainfall Avg 66 mph winds Severe Winter Storms 79 25/26 = 96% 2-16” snow 10-60 mph winds Sinkhole Unknown Unknown Varies by location/event Terrorism and Civil Unrest 0 Less than 1% Varies by event Tornado and Windstorm Tornadoes: 31 17/26 = 65% Mode: EF0 Range: EF0-EF1 Windstorms: 31 18/26 = 69% Avg: 55 mph Range 40-70 mph Transportation Incident Auto: 11,512 11/11 = 100% Damages incurred to vehicles involved and traffic delays; substantial damages to aircrafts involved with some aircrafts destroyed Aviation: 9 8/60 = 13% Rail: 31 19/47 = 40% * Annual Probability = Total Years with an Event Occurrence / Total Years of Record The following table provides loss estimates for hazards with sufficient data. Detailed descriptions of major events are included in Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 42: Hazard Loss Estimates for the Planning Area Hazard Type Count Property Crop1 Animal and Plant Disease Animal Disease16 1 48 birds N/A Plant Disease1 3 N/A $5,056 Dam and Levee Failure2,10 0 - N/A Drought3,6 441/1,527 months $12,650,000 $47,719,440 Earthquake4 0 - - Expansive Soils Unknown N/A N/A Extreme Temperature5 Cold (Max Temp ≤10°F) Avg 6 days per year N/A $4,580 Heat (Max Temp ≥100°F) Avg 1 day per year N/A $558,530 Flooding6 Flash Flood 52 $2,020,000 $1,023,979 Flood 120 $8,938,070 Grass/Wildfire7 10 222 Acres - Hazardous Materials Release 9 Injuries, 3 deaths Fixed Site8 50 $0 N/A Transportation9 6 $182,140 N/A Human Infectious Diseases15 154 deaths (Covid) 26,057 Covid cases N/A N/A Infrastructure Failure Unknown N/A N/A ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 70 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Hazard Type Count Property Crop1 Landslide Unknown N/A N/A Severe Thunderstorms6 Hail 217 $813,000 $18,026,126 Heavy Rain 134 $20,000 Lightning 11 $1,147,000 Thunderstorm Wind 288 $8,540,000 Severe Winter Storms6 4 injuries Blizzard 14 $900,000 $374,815 Heavy Snow 24 $4,290,450 Ice Storm 12 $848,330 Winter Storm 28 $574,900 Winter Weather 1 $0 Sinkhole Unknown N/A N/A Terrorism and Civil Unrest11 0 - N/A Tornado and Windstorm6 Tornadoes: Mode: EF0 Range: EF0-EF3 31 $3,604,000 $0 Windstorms: Average: 55 mph Range: 40-70 mph 31 $958,110 $15,560,764 Transportation Incident Auto12 1,522 injuries, 53 deaths 11,472 $76,326,109 N/A Aviation13 5 injuries, 2 deaths 9 N/A N/A Rail14 17 injuries, 3 deaths 31 $300,148 N/A Total 12,545 $122,112,257 $83,273,290 N/A: Data not available 1 USDA RMA, 2000 - 2021 2 IDNR Communication, 2022 3 NOAA, 1895 - March 2022 4 USGS, 1900 - April 2022 5 NOAA Regional Climate Center, 1939 - 2021 6 NCEI, 1996 - 2021 7 IDNR, 2019 - 2021 8 NRC, 1990 - 2021 9 PHMSA 1971 - April 2022 10 USACE NLD, 1900 - April 2022 11 University of Maryland, 1970 - 2018 12 IDOT, 2012 - April 2022 13 NTSB, 1962 - April 2022 14 FRA, 1975 - 2021 15 IDPH, as of 11/22/2022 16 IDALS, 11/22/2022 ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 71 Historical Disaster Declarations The following tables show past disaster declarations that have been granted within the county. Small Business Administration Disasters The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) was created in 1953 as an independent agency of the federal government to aid, counsel, assist, and protect the interests of small business concerns, to preserve free competitive enterprise, and maintain and strengthen the overall economy of our nation. A program of the SBA includes disaster assistance for those affected by major natural disasters. The following table summarizes the SBA Disasters involving the planning area since 2017. Table 43: SBA Declarations Declaration Date Disaster Declaration Number Title Listed as Primary County Listed as Contiguous County 06/06/2018 IA-00077 Severe Storms, Tornadoes, and Flooding X 06/06/2018 IA-00083 Severe Winter Storms X 03/12/2019 IA-00087 Severe Storms, Flooding, and Tornadoes X 08/10/2020 IA-00092 Drought X 08/10/2020 IA-00093 Drought X Source: Small Business Administration, 2017-202237 Presidential Disaster Declarations The presidential disaster declarations involving the county from 1962 to April 2022 are summarized in the following table. Declarations prior to 1962 are not designated by county and are not included. Table 44: Presidential Disaster Declarations Disaster Declaration Number Declaration Date Title 193 04/22/65 Flooding 259 04/25/69 Flooding 590 07/01/79 High Winds & Tornadoes 868 05/26/90 Severe Storms & Flooding 928 12/26/91 Ice Storm 996 07/09/93 Severe Storms & Flooding 1230 07/02/98 Severe Storms, Tornadoes And Flooding 1518 05/25/04 Severe Storms, Tornadoes, And Flooding 37 Small Business Administration. 2022. “Current Declared Disasters”. declarations. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 72 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Disaster Declaration Number Declaration Date Title 3239 09/10/05 Hurricane Katrina Evacuation 1705 05/25/07 Severe Storms, Flooding, And Tornadoes 1763 05/27/08 Severe Storms, Tornadoes, And Flooding 1880 03/02/10 Severe Winter Storm 1930 07/29/10 Severe Storms, Flooding, And Tornadoes 4234 07/31/15 Severe Storms, Tornadoes, Straight-Line Winds, And Flooding 4386 08/20/18 Severe Storms, Tornadoes, Straight-Line Winds, And Flooding 4421 03/23/19 Severe Storms And Flooding 3480 03/13/20 Covid-19 4483 03/23/20 Covid-19 Pandemic 4557 08/17/20 Severe Storms Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency, 1953 – April 202238 Climate Adaptation Long-term climate trends have shifted throughout the 21st century and have created significant changes in precipitation and temperature which have altered the severity and subsequent impacts from severe weather events. The Regional and Local Planning Teams identified changes in the regional climate as a top concern impacting communities, residents, local economies, and infrastructure throughout the planning area. Discussions on temperature, precipitation, and climate impacts are included below. The planning area is located in the Midwest region of the United States, which includes Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin. The area is well known for agricultural production. The Midwest has many federal, state, and private forests that provide considerable economic and ecological benefits. The Fourth National Climate Assessment has provided an overview of potential impacts within the planning area.39 • Agriculture: The Midwest is a major producer of a wide range of food and animal feed for national consumption and international trade. Increases in warm-season absolute humidity and precipitation have eroded soils, created favorable conditions for pests and pathogens, and degraded the quality of stored grain. Projected changes in precipitation, coupled with rising extreme temperatures before mid-century, will reduce Midwest agricultural productivity to levels of the 1980s without major technological advances. • Forestry: Midwest forests provide numerous economic and ecological benefits, yet threats from a changing climate are interacting with existing stressors such as invasive species and pests to increase tree mortality and reduce forest productivity. Without adaptive actions, these interactions will result in the loss of economically and culturally important tree species such as paper birch and black ash and are expected to lead to the conversion of some forests to other forest types or even to non-forested ecosystems by the end of the century. Land managers are beginning to manage risk in forests by 38 Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2022. “Disaster Declarations”. Accessed May 2022. 39 U.S. Global Change Research Program. 2018. “Fourth National Climate Assessment”. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 73 increasing diversity and selecting for tree species adapted to a range of projected conditions. • Biodiversity and Ecosystems: The ecosystems of the Midwest support a diverse array of native species and provide people with essential services such as water purification, flood control, resource provision, crop pollination, and recreational opportunities. Species and ecosystems, including the important freshwater resources of the Great Lakes, are typically most at risk when climate stressors, like temperature increases, interact with land-use change, habitat loss, pollution, nutrient inputs, and nonnative invasive species. Restoration of natural systems increases in the use of green infrastructure, and targeted conservation efforts, especially of wetland systems, can help protect people and nature from climate change impacts. • Human Health: Climate change is expected to worsen existing health conditions and introduce new health threats by increasing the frequency and intensity of poor air quality days, extreme high temperature events, and heavy rainfalls; extending pollen seasons; and modifying the distribution of disease-carrying pests and insects. By mid-century, the region is projected to experience substantial, yet avoidable, loss of life, worsened health conditions, and economic impacts estimated in the billions of dollars as a result of these changes. Improved basic health services and increased public health measures— including surveillance and monitoring—can prevent or reduce these impacts. • Transportation and Infrastructure: Storm water management systems, transportation networks, and other critical infrastructure are already experiencing impacts from changing precipitation patterns and elevated flood risks. Green infrastructure is reducing some of the negative impacts by using plants and open space to absorb storm water. The annual cost of adapting urban storm water systems to more frequent and severe storms is projected to exceed $500 million for the Midwest by the end of the century. • Community Vulnerability and Adaptation: At-risk communities in the Midwest are becoming more vulnerable to climate change impacts such as flooding, drought, and increases in urban heat islands. Tribal nations are especially vulnerable because of their reliance on threatened natural resources for their cultural, subsistence, and economic needs. Integrating climate adaptation into planning processes offers an opportunity to better manage climate risks now. Developing knowledge for decision-making in cooperation with vulnerable communities and tribal nations will help to build adaptive capacity and increase resilience. Iowa’s Changing Climate The United States as a whole is experiencing significant changes in temperature, precipitation, and severe weather events resulting from climate change. According to the Iowa Climate Change Impacts Committee’s Report to the Governor and Iowa General Assembly, the following changes can be expected for Iowa’s future climate:40 40 Iowa Climate Change Impacts Committee. 2010. “Climate Change Impacts on Iowa”. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 74 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Increased Precipitation • Increased frequency of precipitation extremes that lead to flooding. • Increase of 8 percent more precipitation from 1873 to 2008. • A larger increase in precipitation in eastern Iowa than in western Iowa. Higher Temperatures • Long-term winter temperatures have increased six times more than summer temperatures. • Nighttime temperatures have increased more than daytime temperatures since 1970. • Iowa’s humidity has risen substantially, especially in summer, which now has 13 percent more atmospheric moisture than 35 years ago as indicated by a three to five degree (Fahrenheit) rise in dew-point temperature. This fuels convective thunderstorms that provide more summer precipitation. Agricultural Challenges • Climate extremes, not averages, have the greater impact on crop and livestock productivity. • Increased soil erosion and water runoff. • Increased challenges associated with manure applications. • Favorable conditions for survival and spread of many unwanted pests and pathogens. Habitat Changes • Plants are leafing out and flowering sooner. • Birds are arriving earlier in the spring. • Particular animals are now being sighted farther north than in the past. Public Health Effects • Increases in heart and lung programs from increasing air pollutants of ozone and fine particles enhanced by higher temperatures. • Increases in infectious diseases transmitted by insects that require a warmer, wetter climate. • An increased prevalence of asthma and allergies. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 75 Changes in Temperature Since 1895 Iowa’s overall average temperature has increased by 1°F (Figure 16). Climate modeling suggests warmer temperature conditions will continue in the coming decades and rise steadily into mid-century. Warming has increased the most in winter and spring months with winter minimum temperatures rising 2-4°F. In addition, there is greater warming for nighttime lows than for daytime highs. Since 2000, temperatures in Iowa have been higher than any other historical period, apart from the 1930s dustbowl era. Warming across the state has been mostly in the winter and fall, while summer has not warmed substantially with a below average number of very hot days. Historically unprecedented warming is projected to continue during this century.41 Figure 16: Average Temperature (1895-2020) Source: NOAA, 202242 41 NOAA. “State Climate Summaries 2022 - Iowa”. Accessed June 2022. t%20of%20the%20state. 42 NOAA. 2020. “Climate at a Glance: Statewide Time Series.”. Accessed June 2022. 2020?base_prd=true&begbaseyear=1901&endbaseyear=2000&trend=true&trend_base=100&begtrendyear=1895&endtre ndyear=2020 ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 76 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Changes in Precipitation Changing extremes in precipitation are anticipated in the coming decades, with more significant rain and snowfall events and more intense drought periods. Climatological patterns of precipitation for Iowa consist of an east-west gradient, with drier conditions to the west and wetter to the east The southeastern portion of the state receives around 38 inches annually compared to only 26 inches in the northwest. Much of Iowa’s precipitation falls in summer, with an average of 14 inches in the central part of the state. Spring precipitation has been above average since 1990. Since 1895, yearly annual precipitation for Iowa has increased (Figure 17). This trend is expected to continue as the impacts of climate change continue to be felt.43 Figure 17: Average Precipitation (1895-2020) Source: NOAA, 202244 43 NOAA. “State Climate Summaries 2022 - Iowa”. Accessed June 2022. t%20of%20the%20state. 44 NOAA. 2020. “Climate at a Glance: Statewide Time Series.”. Accessed June 2022. 2020?base_prd=true&begbaseyear=1901&endbaseyear=2000&trend=true&trend_base=100&begtrendyear=1895&endtre ndyear=2020. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 77 Impacts from Climate Change Observed changes in the intensity and frequency of extreme events are a significant concern now and in the future because of the social, environmental, and economic costs associated with their impacts. Challenges that are expected to affect communities, environments, and residents as a result of climate change include: • Developing and maintaining sustainable agricultural systems. • Resolving increasing competition among land, water, and energy resources. • Conserving vibrant and diverse ecological systems. • Enhancing the resilience of the region’s people to the impacts of climatic extremes. Certain groups of people may face greater difficulty when dealing with the impacts of a changing climate. Older adults, immigrant communities, and those living in poverty are particularly susceptible. Additionally, specific industries and professions tied to weather and climate, like outdoor tourism, commerce, and agriculture, are especially vulnerable.45 As seen in the figure below, the United States is experiencing an increase in the number of billion- dollar natural disasters due to increases in development and climate change. Figure 18: U.S. Billion-Dollar Disaster Events (1980-2021) Source: NOAA, 202146 Agriculture Agriculture is one of the most important sectors in Iowa’s economy and is especially vulnerable to extreme weather conditions. The agricultural sector will experience an increase in droughts, an increase in grass and wildfire events, changes in the growth cycle as winters warm, an influx of new and damaging agricultural diseases or pests, and changes in the timing and magnitude of 45 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. “Climate Impacts on Society.” Accessed June 2022. 46 NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. 2021. “U.S. Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters”. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 78 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 rainfall. As described in the Plant Hardiness Zone map available for the United States (Figure 19), these changes have shifted the annual growing season and expected agricultural production conditions. Iowa is vulnerable to changes in growing season duration and growing season conditions as a heavily agriculturally dependent state. These added stressors on agriculture could have devastating economic effects if new agricultural and livestock management practices are not adopted. Figure 19: Plant Hardiness Zone Change Source: Arbor Day Foundation, 201847 Air Quality Rising temperatures will also impact air quality. Harmful air pollutants and allergens increase as temperatures increase. More extended periods of warmth contribute to longer pollen seasons that allow plant spores to travel farther and increase exposure to allergens. More prolonged exposure to allergens can increase the risk and severity of asthma attacks and worsen existing allergies in individuals.48 An increase in air pollutants can occur from the increased number of grass/wildfires. The public can be exposed to harmful particulate matter from smoke and ash that can cause various health issues. Depending on the length of exposure, age, and individual susceptibility, effects from wildfire smoke can range from eye and respiratory irritation to severe disorders like bronchitis, asthma, and aggravation of pre-existing respiratory and cardiovascular diseases.49 Water Quality Increasing temperatures, shifting precipitation patterns, and extreme weather events impact water quality throughout the state. With the increasing intensity and frequency of extreme precipitation events, impacts to water systems ultimately threaten human health. Events can lead to flooding and stormwater runoff that can carry pollutants across landscapes and threaten human health by contaminating water wells, groundwater, and other bodies of water. Common pollutants include pesticides, bacteria, nutrients, sediment, animal waste, oil, and hazardous waste. 47 Arbor Day Foundation. 2018. “Hardiness Zones.” 48 Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America. 2010. “Extreme Allergies and Climate Change.” Accessed 2022. 49 AirNow. 2019. “Wildfire Smoke: A Guide for Healthcare Professionals.” Accessed 2022. guide-publications/ ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 79 As average temperatures increase, water temperatures also rise and put water bodies at risk for eutrophication and excess algal growth that reduce water quality. In agricultural landscapes this can be exacerbated from major storm events that cause sediment and nutrients such as phosphorous and nitrogen to runoff into nearby water sources. The runoff can contribute to the buildup of nutrients in the water, increasing plant and algae growth that can deplete oxygen and kill aquatic life. Nutrient enrichment can lead to toxic cyanobacterial harmful algae blooms (cyanoHABs), which can be harmful to animal and human health. CyanoHABs can cause economic damage such as decreasing property values, reducing recreational revenue, and increasing the costs for treating drinking water.50 Zoonotic Disease Changes in temperature and precipitation can alter the geographic range of disease-carrying insects and pests. Mosquitoes that transmit viruses such as Zika, West Nile and dengue may become more prevalent in Iowa because of the increased temperatures and precipitation. These diseases may initially spread faster as the local population is not aware of the proper steps to reduce their risk. Energy As the number of 100°F days increases, along with warming nights, the stress placed on the energy grid will likely increase and possibly lead to more power outages. Severe weather events also stress emergency production, infrastructure transmission, and transportation. Roads, pipelines, and rail lines are all at risk of damages from flooding, extreme heat, erosion, or added stress from increased residential demands.51 Critical facilities and vulnerable populations that are not prepared to handle periods of power outages, particularly during heat waves, will be at risk. Drought and Extreme Heat In Iowa, future droughts are projected to increase in intensity even with an increase in precipitation. An increase in average temperatures will contribute to the raise in the frequency and intensity of hazardous events like extreme heat and drought, which will cause significant economic, social, and environmental impacts on Iowans. Although drought is a natural part of the climate system, increasing temperatures will increase evaporation rates, decrease soil moisture, and lead to more intense droughts in the future, having negative impacts on farming and community water systems. Extreme heat events have adverse effects on both human and livestock health. Heatwaves may also impact plant health, with negative effects on crops during essential growth stages. Increasing temperatures and drought may reduce the potential for aquifers to recharge, which has long-term implications for the viability of agriculture in Iowa. Grass/Wildfire Rising temperatures will likely increase the frequency and intensity of grass/wildfires. Warmer temperatures cause snow to melt sooner and create drier soils and forests, which act as kindling to ignite fires. Dry and dead trees will increase fuel loads causing fires to spread much quicker. Additionally, warmer nighttime temperatures contribute to the continued spread of wildfires over multiple days.52 50 USGS. “Nutrients and Eutrophication”. Accessed February 2021. resources/science/nutrients-and-eutrophication?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects. 51 2018: Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume II: Report-in- Brief [Reidmiller, D.R., C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, K.L.M. Lewis, T.K. Maycock, and B.C. Stewart U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, 186 pp. 52 NASA Global Climate Change. September 2019. “Satellite Data Record Shows Climate Change's Impact on Fires.” Accessed 2021. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 80 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Severe Storms and Flooding Iowa experiences frequent snowstorms and ice storms during winter, which can produce heavy snowfall and high wind gusts that lead to whiteout conditions. Thunderstorms capable of producing floods, hail, and tornadoes are common in the warmer months. As temperatures continue to rise, more water vapor evaporates into the atmosphere, creating increased humidity, which can increase the frequency and intensity of these storms. An increase in severe storms and heavy rain events will lead to more flooding and larger magnitude flood events. These severe storm and flooding events can cause increased damages to structures and put more people at risk of injury or death. A powerful derecho that occurred on August 10, 2020, was one of the most destructive thunderstorms to ever affect the state. The storm produced widespread winds greater than 100 mph and caused significant damage to millions of acres of corn and soybean crops across central Iowa. Homes, businesses, and vehicles were also severely damaged, with major impacts occurring mostly in Cedar Rapids. Future Adaptation and Mitigation The county will have to adapt to a changing climate and its impacts or experience an increase in economic losses, property damages, agricultural damages, and loss of life. Past events have typically informed HMPs to be more resilient to future events. This HMP includes strategies for the county to address these changes and increase resilience. However, future updates of this HMP should consider including adaptation as a core strategy to be better informed by future projections on the frequency, intensity, and distribution of hazards. Jurisdictions in the county should consider past and future climate changes and impacts when incorporating mitigation actions into local planning processes. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 81 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Hazard Profiles Information from participating jurisdictions was collected and reviewed alongside hazard occurrence, magnitude, and event narratives as provided by local, state, and federal databases. Based on this information, profiled hazards were determined to either have a historical record of occurrence or the potential for occurrence in the future. The following profiles will broadly examine the identified hazards across the region. Hazards of local concern or events which have deviated from the norm are discussed in greater detail in each respective community profile (see Section Seven of this plan). The following table identifies the prioritization of hazards by participating jurisdictions hazards of top concern). Local jurisdictional planning teams selected these hazards from the regional hazard list as the prioritized hazards for the community based on historical hazard occurrences, potential impacts, and the jurisdictions’ capabilities. However, it is important to note that while a jurisdiction may not have selected a specific hazard to be profiled, hazard events can impact any community at any time and their selection is not a full indication of risk. Table 45: Top Hazards of Concern Jurisdiction Animal and Plant Disease Dam and Levee Failure Drought Earthquake Expansive Soils Extreme Temperature Flooding Grass/Wildland Fire Hazardous Materials Release Human Infectious Diseases Infrastructure Failure Landslide Severe Thunderstorms Severe Winter Storms Sinkhole Terrorism and Civil Unrest Tornado and Windstorm Transportation Incident Adel X X X X X Bouton X X X X Dallas Center X X X X Dawson X X X De Soto X X X Dexter X X X X X Granger X X X X Linden X X X X Minburn X X X X Perry X X X X X Redfield X X X X Van Meter X X X X X X X Waukee X X X X Woodward X X ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 82 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Jurisdiction Animal and Plant Disease Dam and Levee Failure Drought Earthquake Expansive Soils Extreme Temperature Flooding Grass/Wildland Fire Hazardous Materials Release Human Infectious Diseases Infrastructure Failure Landslide Severe Thunderstorms Severe Winter Storms Sinkhole Terrorism and Civil Unrest Tornado and Windstorm Transportation Incident Adel-DeSoto- Minburn Schools X X X Dallas Center- Grimes Schools X X X Perry Schools X X X X Perry Water Works X X X X Van Meter Schools X X X Waukee Schools X X X West Central Valley Schools X X X Woodward- Granger Schools X X X X Xenia Rural Water District X X X Woodward Township Fire District X X X X ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 83 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Animal and Plant Disease Agriculture disease is any biological disease or infection that can reduce the quality or quantity of either livestock or vegetative crops. This section looks at both animal disease and plant disease, as both make up a significant portion of Iowa’s and the planning area’s economy. The State of Iowa’s economy is heavily invested in both livestock and crop sales. According to the Iowa Department of Agriculture & Land Stewardship (IDALS) in 2017, the market value of agricultural products sold was estimated at nearly $28 billion; this total is split between crops (estimated $13.8 billion) and livestock (estimated $15.1 billion). For the planning area, the market value of sold agricultural products totaled $93.9 million.53 Table 46 shows the population of livestock within the county. This count does not include wild populations that are also at risk from animal diseases. Table 46: Livestock Inventory County Market Value of 2017 Livestock Sales Cattle and Calves Hogs and Pigs Sheep and Lambs Poultry Egg Layers Dallas $28,681,000 22,221 102,435 773 248,947 Source: U.S. Census of Agriculture, 2017 The following tables provide the value and acres of land in farms for the county. Corn is the most prevalent crop type in the region, followed by soybeans. Table 47: Land and Value of Farms in the County County Number of Farms Land in Farms (acres) Market Value of 2017 Crop Sales Dallas 924 293,435 $143,768,000 Source: U.S. Census of Agriculture, 2017 Table 48: Crop Values County Corn Soybeans Wheat Acres Planted Value (2017) Acres Planted Value (2017) Acres Planted Value (2017) Dallas 135,452 $87,400,000 100,679 $49,712,000 - - Source: U.S. Census of Agriculture, 2017 Location Given the strong agricultural presence in the county, animal and plant disease have the potential to occur across the county. If a major outbreak were to occur, the economy in the entire region would be affected, including urban areas. 53 US Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Server. 2022. “2017 Census of Agriculture – County Data.” Accessed May 2022. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 84 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 The primary land uses where animal and plant disease will be observed include agricultural lands, range or pasture lands, and forests. It is possible that animal or plant disease will occur in domestic animals or crops in urban areas. Historical Occurrences Animal Disease Dallas County experienced a confirmed case of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) in October 2022. According to IDALS, the virus was found in a non-commercial backyard flock and was the first confirmed case in Dallas County. The Iowa Secretary of Agriculture stated that enhanced biosecurity is the best way to protect animal health. The recent HPAI detections in birds do not present a public health concern, the CDC indicated.54 In 2015 Iowa experienced impacts to avian populations when 18 counties and 77 sites across the state were affected by HPAI. The 2018 Iowa State Hazard Mitigation Plan noted that more than 33 million birds had to be euthanized and disposed of with the cost of replacement estimated at $83.6 million. The replacement cost does not include economic impacts from unemployment and costs to euthanize and dispose of carcasses. Plant Disease The RMA provides data on plant disease events and plant losses in the county. There are three instances of plant diseases reported from 2000-2021 by the RMA. These outbreaks occurred in 2008, 2016, and 2019, and caused $5,056 in crop losses. Emerald Ash Borer The spread and presence of the Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) have become a rising concern for many Iowan communities in recent years. The beetle spreads through transport of infected ash trees, lumber, and firewood. All species of North American ash trees are vulnerable to infestation. Confirmed cases of EAB have been found in three Canadian provinces and 45 US states, primarily in the eastern, southern, and midwestern regions. The two most recent infestation confirmations came from Georgia and Vermont in 2020. EAB was first confirmed in Iowa on May 14th, 2010. Figure 20 shows the locations of Iowa’s confirmed EAB cases as of May 2022. Additional confirmed cases have likely occurred and many communities across the state are prioritizing the removal of ash trees to help curb potential infestations and tree mortality. While adult beetles cause little damage, larvae damage trees by feeding on the inner bark of mature and growing trees, causing tunnels. Effects of EAB infestation include extensive damage to trees by birds, canopy dieback, bark splitting, and water sprout growth at the tree base, and eventual tree mortality. EAB has impacted millions of trees across North America, killing young trees one to two years after infestation and mature trees three to four years after infestation.55 In Dallas County, EAB was confirmed in the City of Waukee in 2015 and rural De Soto in 2019.56 Iowa has an estimated 3.1 million urban ash trees. Estimated costs to Iowa communities for ash tree removal is $1.6 billion and $468 million to replant.57 Dead or dying trees affected by EAB are also more likely to cause damage during high winds, severe thunderstorms, or severe winter 54 Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship. October 2022. “Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship and USDA APHIS Confirm Case of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza in Non-Commercial Backyard Flock in Dallas County, Iowa.” 55 Arbor Day Foundation. 2015. “Emerald Ash Borer.” 56 Iowa Department of Agriculture & Land Stewardship. 2022. “Iowa EAB Locations (Confirmed).” http://iowatreepests.com/documents/Iowa_EAB_Locations_2_17_2022.pdf. 57 Iowa Department of Natural Resources. 2016. “Emerald Ash Borer.” 6-12-21-151336-840. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 85 storms from weakened or hazardous limbs and can contribute a significant fuel load to grass/wildfire events. Figure 20: EAB Infestation Status in Iowa Source: Iowa Department of Agriculture & Land Stewardship, 202258 Average Annual Losses Average annual losses for agricultural animal disease cannot be calculated as there is no source in the state for documented historical events. According to the USDA RMA (2000-2021) there were three plant disease events in the planning area. While the RMA does not track losses for livestock, annual crop losses from plant disease can be estimated. Table 49: Agricultural Plant Disease Losses Hazard Type Number of Events Events per Year Total Crop Loss Average Annual Crop Loss Plant Disease 3 .14 $5,056 $230 Source: RMA, 2000-2021 58 Iowa Department of Agriculture & Land Stewardship. 2022. “Iowa Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) Infestation Status.” http://www.iowatreepests.com/eab_home.html. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 86 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Extent There is no standard for measuring the magnitude of agricultural disease. The State of Iowa does not report livestock disease numbers, so the extent is not known. The county is heavily dependent on the agricultural economy. Any severe plant or animal disease outbreak which may impact this sector would negatively impact the entire county’s economy. Probability Given the lack of historical livestock disease numbers, the annual probability of animal disease occurrence is unknown. With the historic record for agricultural plant disease events (three out of 22 years with a reported event), for the purposes of this plan, the annual probability of agricultural plant disease occurrence is 14%. Community Top Hazard Status The following table lists jurisdictions which identified Animal and Plant Disease as a top hazard of concern: Jurisdictions Dallas Center Linden Dexter Regional Vulnerabilities The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional- specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 50: Regional Agricultural Disease Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Those in direct contact with infected livestock -Potential food shortage during prolonged events -Residents in poverty if food prices increase Economic -Regional economy is reliant on the agricultural industry -Large scale or prolonged events may impact tax revenues and local capabilities -Land value may largely drive population changes within the county Built Environment None Infrastructure -Transportation routes can be closed during quarantine Critical Facilities None Climate -Exacerbate outbreaks, impacts, and/or recovery period -Changes in seasonal normals can promote spread of invasive species and agricultural disease ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 87 Dam and Levee Failure A dam is defined as a barrier constructed across a water course for the purpose of storage, control, or diversion of water. Dams are typically constructed of earth, rock, concrete, or mine failings. Dam failure is the uncontrolled release of impounded water resulting in flooding, affecting both life and property. Structural failure can occur during extreme conditions, which include, but are not limited to: • Reservoir inflows in excess of design flows • Flood pools higher than previously attained • Unexpected drop in pool level • Pool near maximum level and rising • Excessive rainfall or snowmelt • Large discharge through spillway • Erosion, landslide, seepage, settlement, and cracks in the dam or area • Earthquakes • Vandalism • Terrorism The effective height of a dam is defined as the difference in elevation in feet between the natural bed of the stream or watercourse measured at the toe (or from the lowest elevation of the outside limit of the barrier if it is not across stream) to the auxiliary spillway crest. The effective storage is defined as the total storage volume in acre-feet in the reservoir below the elevation of the crest of the auxiliary spillway. If the dam does not have an auxiliary spillway, the effective height and effective storage should be measured at the top of dam elevation. The thresholds for state-regulated dams are outlined in Iowa Administrative Code 567-73.3. They are listed below. • A dam with a height of at least 25 feet and a storage of 15 acre-feet or more at the top of the dam elevation. • A dam with a storage of 50 acre-feet or more at the top of the dam elevation and a height of at least 6 feet. • A dam that is assigned a hazard potential of high hazard. Exceptions include: • Road embankments or driveways with culverts are exempt unless such structure serves, either primarily or secondarily, a purpose commonly associated with dams, such as the temporary storage of water for flood control. The State of Iowa assigns existing and proposed dams a hazard potential classification based on future land and impoundment use. Changes in land use, development, impoundment, or critical hydraulic structures to a dam require a reevaluation of the hazard potential. The Iowa Department of Natural Resources periodically performs inspections of dams ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 88 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 posing a significant risk to life and property. The three hazard potential classifications are low hazard, significant hazard, and high hazard and are defined below. Table 51: Dam Hazard Classification Hazard Type Definition Low A dam shall be classified as “low hazard” if failure of the dam would result in no probable loss of human life, low economic losses, and low public damages. Significant A dam shall be classified as “significant hazard” if failure of the dam would result in no probable loss of human life but may damage residential structures or industrial, commercial, or public buildings; may negatively impact important public utilities or moderately traveled roads or railroads; or may result in significant economic losses or significant public damages. High A dam shall be classified as “high hazard” if located in an area where failure would result in probable loss of human life. According to FEMA: The United States has thousands of miles of levee systems. These manmade structures are most commonly earthen embankments designed and constructed in accordance with sound engineering practices to contain, control, or divert the flow of water to provide some level of protection from flooding. Some levee systems date back as far as 150 years. Some levee systems were built for agricultural purposes. Those levee systems designed to protect urban areas have typically been built to higher standards. Levee systems are designed to provide a specific level of flood protection. No levee system provides full protection from all flooding events to the people and structures located behind it. Thus, some level of flood risk exists in these levee-impacted areas. Levee failure can occur several ways. A breach of a levee is when part of the levee breaks away, leaving a large opening for floodwaters to flow through. A levee breach can be gradual by surface or subsurface erosion, or it can be sudden. A sudden breach of a levee often occurs when there are soil pores in the levee that allow water to flow through causing an upward pressure greater than the downward pressure from the weight of the soil of the levee. This under seepage can then resurface on the backside of the levee and can quickly erode a hole to cause a breach. Sometimes the levee actually sinks into a liquefied subsurface below. Another way a levee failure can occur is when the water overtops the crest of the levee. This happens when the flood waters simply exceed the lowest crest elevation of the levee. An overtopping can lead to significant erosion of the backside of the levee and can result in a breach and thus a levee failure. Location According to USACE’s National Inventory of Dams, there are a total of 66 dams located within the planning area, with classifications ranging from low to high hazard. Figure 21 maps the location of these dams in the county. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 89 Figure 21: Dam Locations ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 90 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Table 52: Dams in the County Low Hazard Significant Hazard High Hazard 50 14 3* Source: USACE, 202259 *The Iowa Homeland Security Hazard Mitigation Viewer classifies six dams as high hazard. While the USACE inventory lists 66 dams in the county, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources inventory indicates there are 69 dams.60 However, both inventories have the same three dams classified with high hazard potential. Dams classified with high hazard potential require the creation of an Emergency Action Plan (EAP). The EAP defines responsibilities and provides procedures designed to identify unusual and unlikely conditions which may endanger the structural integrity of the dam within sufficient time to take mitigating actions and to notify the appropriate emergency management officials of possible, impending, or actual failure of the dam. The EAP may also be used to provide notification when flood releases will create major flooding. An emergency situation can occur at any time; however, emergencies are more likely to happen when extreme conditions are present. High hazard dams are listed in the table below. Table 53: High Hazard Dams in the Planning Area Dam Name NID ID Dam Height (Feet) Dam Length (Feet) Condition Inspection Date Heritage Woods Dam IA03548 35 300 Satisfactory 5/21/2020 Maffitt Reservoir Dam IA01338 79 1,800 Satisfactory 6/12/2019 Southfork Dam IA02411 38 560 Satisfactory 3/12/2021 Jordan Creek Mall – Northwest Dam* IA03530 17 920 Satisfactory 6/22/2018 Jordan Creek Mall – South Dam* IA03529 17 1,100 Satisfactory 6/22/2018 JSC Farms Dam* IA02906 49 740 Satisfactory 8/19/2022 Source: USACE, 202261, IDNR, 202262, HSEMD, 202263 *HSEMD classifies these dams as high hazard, while USACE and IDNR classify them as significant hazard dams. According to the USACE, there are no high hazard dams upstream from the planning area that would impact the county. The USACE’s National Levee Database shows one levee within the planning area, which is located in Van Meter. The Van Meter Levee spans approximately 1.8 miles in length and protects 124 residents and 49 structures. The levee has not been inspected and thus has no risk rating. The levee is locally constructed, operated, and maintained. An illustration of the levee can be seen in Figure 22. 59 United States Army Corps of Engineers. November 2022. “National Inventory of Dams.” 60 Iowa Department of Natural Resources. November 2022. “Iowa DNR Dam Inventory.” r%22%3A%22is%22%2C%22field%22%3A%22field_431%22%7D%5D. 61 United States Army Corps of Engineers. November 2022. “National Inventory of Dams.” 62 Iowa Department of Natural Resources. November 2022. “Iowa DNR Dam Inventory.” r%22%3A%22is%22%2C%22field%22%3A%22field_431%22%7D%5D. 63 Iowa Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management. November 2022. “Iowa Homeland Security Hazard Mitigation Viewer: Dams & Levee Failure.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 91 Figure 22: Van Meter Leveed Area *Floodplain maps were created based on the available FIRM data at the time. Updated effective FIRM data was scheduled to be available on December 15, 2022. Please refer to FEMA's Flood Map Service Center for the current FIRM information. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 92 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Beyond the USACE’s National Levee Database, there is no known comprehensive list of levees that exists in the planning area, especially for private agricultural levees. Due to limited information on non-federal levees, it is not currently possible to document all levee locations, the areas for which they provide flood risk reduction, or the potential levee failure impacts. However, the City of Adel indicated that the city has a berm structure in the northern portion of town to mitigate flooding along the North Racoon River watershed. The city has expressed interest in adding to the berm structure, which was originally built in the early 2000s. Table 54: Levees in Planning Area Levee Name Sponsor Location Length (Miles) Risk Level Population in Leveed Area Structures in Leveed Area Property Value in Leveed Area Van Meter Levee Undefined Van Meter 1.8 Not rated 124 49 $24.7 M Source: USACE Levee Database64 Historical Occurrences According to the Association of State Dam Safety Dam Incident Database, there are no reported dam failures within the planning area.65 No recorded instances of levee failure were reported either. Average Annual Losses There are no recorded instances of dam or levee failure in the planning area; therefore, the average annual losses are Extent Areas directly of dams agricultural land, out buildings, county roads, and communities) are at greatest risk in the case of dam failure. The extent of dam failure is indicated by its hazard classification and location. Note that hazard classification does not indicate the likelihood of a dam failure event to occur, but rather the extent of potential damages that may occur in case of a failure. There is one levee in the planning area, located in the City of Van Meter. If the levee were to fail, approximately 49 structures would be inundated. USACE, who is responsible for federal levee oversight and inspection of levees, has three ratings for levee inspections. Non-federal levees, such as the Van Meter Levee, are not inspected and thus do not have ratings. 64 United States Army Corps of Engineers. April 2022. “National Levee Database.” 65 Association of State Dam Safety Officials. “Dam Incident Database Search”. Accessed April 2022. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 93 Table 55: USACE Levee Rating Categories Ratings Description Acceptable All inspection items are rated as Acceptable Minimally Acceptable One or more inspection items are rated as Minimally Acceptable, or one or more items are rated as Unacceptable and an engineering determination concludes that the Unacceptable inspection items would not prevent the segment/system from performing as intended during the next flood event Unacceptable One or more items are rated as Unacceptable and would prevent the segment/system from performing as intended, or a serious deficiency noted in past inspections has not been corrected within the established timeframe, not to exceed two years Source: USACE Probability For the purpose of this plan, the probability of dam or levee failure will be stated at less than one percent annually as no dams or levees have failed in the planning area. Community Top Hazard Status No jurisdictions identified Dam and Levee Failure as a top hazard of concern. Regional Vulnerabilities The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional- specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 56: Regional Dam and Levee Failure Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Those living of high hazard dams -Those at recreational sites situated near high hazard dams -Evacuation needs likely with high hazard dam failure events -Hospitals, nursing homes, and the elderly at greater risk due to low mobility -Minimal risk from unmapped private levees and berms Economic -Loss of agricultural land -Businesses or recreation sites located in inundation areas would be impacted and closed for an extended period of time -Employees of closed businesses may be out of work for an extended period of time -Minimal impact to agricultural lands from levee failure Built Environment -Damage to facilities, recreation areas, and roads -All buildings within leveed areas are at risk to damages Infrastructure -Transportation routes could be closed for extended period of time -Minimal impact to infrastructure due to levee failure. Likely to be localized Critical Facilities -Any critical facilities in inundation or leveed areas are vulnerable to damages Climate -Increased annual precipitation contributes to sustained stress on systems -Changes in water availability and supply can constrain energy production and reservoir stores -Changes in seasonal precipitation and temperature normals can increase strain on any unmapped private levees and berms ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 94 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Drought Drought is generally defined as a natural hazard that results from a substantial period of below normal precipitation. Although many erroneously consider it a rare and random event, drought is a normal, recurrent feature of climate. It occurs in virtually all climatic zones, but its characteristics vary significantly from one region to another. A drought often coexists with periods of extreme heat, which together can cause significant social stress, economic losses, and environmental degradation. The planning area is largely rural, which presents an added vulnerability to drought events; drought conditions can significantly and negatively impact the agricultural economic base. Drought is a slow-onset, creeping phenomenon that can affect a wide range of people, livestock, and industries. While many impacts of these hazards are non-structural, there is the potential that during prolonged drought events structural impacts can occur. Drought normally affects more people than other natural hazards, and its impacts are spread over a larger geographical area. As a result, the detection and early warning signs of drought conditions and assessment of impacts are more difficult to identify than that of quick-onset natural hazards flood) that results in more visible impacts. According to the National Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC), droughts are classified into four major types: • Meteorological Drought is defined based on the degree of dryness and the duration of the dry period. Meteorological drought is often the first type of drought to be identified and should be defined regionally as precipitation rates and frequencies (norms) vary. • Agricultural Drought occurs when there is deficient moisture that hinders planting germination, leading to low plant population per hectare and a reduction of final yield. Agricultural drought is closely linked with meteorological and hydrological drought, as agricultural water supplies are contingent upon the two sectors. • Hydrologic Drought occurs when water available in aquifers, lakes, and reservoirs falls below the statistical average. This situation can arise even when the area of interest receives average precipitation. This is due to the reserves diminishing from increased water usage, usually from agricultural use or high levels of evapotranspiration, resulting from prolonged high temperatures. Hydrological drought often is identified later than meteorological and agricultural drought. Impacts from hydrological drought may manifest themselves in decreased hydropower production and loss of water-based recreation. • Socioeconomic Drought occurs when the demand for an economic good exceeds supply due to a weather-related shortfall in water supply. The supply of many economic goods includes, but are not limited to, water, forage, food grains, fish, and hydroelectric power.66 The following figure indicates different types of droughts, their temporal sequence, and the various types of effects they can have on a community. 66 National Drought Mitigation Center. 2017. “Drought Basics.” Drought is a normal, recurrent feature of climate, although many erroneously consider it a rare and random event. It occurs in virtually all climatic zones, but its characteristics vary significantly from one region to another. ~National Drought Mitigation Center ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 95 Figure 23: Sequence and Impacts of Drought Types Source: National Drought Mitigation Center, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, 201767 Location The entire county is susceptible to drought impacts. Historical Occurrences Table 57 indicates it is reasonable to expect extreme drought to occur 4.1% of the time for the planning area (63 extreme drought months in 1,527 months). Severe drought occurred in 83 months of the 1,527 months of record (5.4% of months). Moderate drought occurred in 126 months of the 1,527 months of record (8.3% of months), and mild drought occurred in 169 of the 1,527 months of record (11.1% of months). Non-drought conditions occurred in 1,086 months, or 71% percent of months. These statistics show that the drought conditions of the planning area are highly variable. The average annual planning area precipitation is approximately 36.1 inches according to the NCEI.68 67 National Drought Mitigation Center. 2017. “Types of Drought.” 68 NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. May 2022. "Data Tools: 1991-2020 Normals." [datafile]. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 96 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Table 57: Historic Droughts Drought Magnitude Months in Drought Percent Chance -1 Magnitude (Mild) 169/1,527 11.1% -2 Magnitude (Moderate) 126/1,527 8.3% -3 Magnitude (Severe) 83/1,527 5.4% -4 Magnitude or Greater (Extreme) 63/1,527 4.1% Source: NCEI, 1895-202269 Extent The Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) is utilized by climatologists to standardize global long- term drought analysis. The data for the planning area was collected for Climate Division 5, which includes the planning area. This particular station’s period of record started in 1895. Table 58 shows the details of the Palmer classifications. Figure 23 shows drought data from this time period. The negative Y axis represents the extent of a drought, for which indicates a moderate drought, a severe drought, and an extreme drought. The planning area has experienced several extreme droughts since 1901 and moderate, severe, and extreme droughts are likely in the future. Table 58: Palmer Drought Severity Index Classification Numerical Value Description Numerical Value Description 4.0 or more Extremely wet -0.5 to -0.99 Incipient dry spell 3.0 to 3.99 Very wet -1.0 to -1.99 Mild drought 2.0 to 2.99 Moderately wet -2.0 to -2.99 Moderate drought 1.0 to 1.99 wet -3.0 to -3.99 Severe drought 0.5 to 0.99 Incipient wet spell -4.0 or less Extreme drought 0.49 to -0.49 Near Normal Source: Climate Prediction Center70 69 National Centers for Environmental Information. 1895-2022. “Climate at a Glance: Divisional Time Series”. Accessed April 2022. 70 National Weather Service. 2017. “Climate Prediction Center.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 97 Figure 24: Palmer Drought Severity Index Source: NCEI, 1895-March 202271 Figure 24 shows the normal average precipitation for the planning area, which is helpful in determining whether any given month is above, below, or near normal in precipitation. Prolonged deviation from the norm showcases drought conditions and influence growing conditions for farmers. 71 National Centers for Environmental Information. 1895-2022. “Climate at a Glance: Divisional Time Series”. Accessed April 2022. Mild Drought Moderate Drought Severe Drought Extreme Drought ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 98 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 25: Average Precipitation for the Planning Area Source: NCEI, 1991-202072 Average Annual Losses The annual property estimate was determined based upon NCEI Storm Events Database since 1996. The annual crop loss was determined based upon the RMA Cause of Loss Historical Database since 2000. This does not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. The direct and indirect effects of drought are difficult to quantify. Potential losses such as power outages could affect businesses, homes, and critical facilities. High demand and intense use of air conditioning or water pumps can overload the electrical systems and damage infrastructure. Table 59: Loss Estimate for Drought Hazard Type Total Property Loss1 Average Annual Property Loss1 Total Crop Loss2 Average Annual Crop Loss2 Drought $12,650,000 $486,538 $47,719,440 $2,169,065 Source: 1 Indicates data is from NCEI (1996-2021); 2 Indicates data is from USDA RMA (2000-2021) Probability Drought conditions are likely to occur regularly in the planning area. The following table summarizes the magnitude of drought and probability of occurrence. 72 NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. May 2022. "Data Tools: 1991-2020 Normals." [datafile]. 0.95 1.14 1.96 4.10 5.15 4.88 4.42 4.14 3.44 2.70 1.86 1.38 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Inches Month ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 99 Table 60: Period of Record in Drought PDSI Value Magnitude Drought Occurrences by Month Probability 4 or more to -0.99 No Drought 1,086/1,512 71.0% -1.0 to -1.99 Mild Drought 169/1,527 11.1% -2.0 to -2.99 Moderate Drought 126/1,527 8.3% -3.0 to -3.99 Severe Drought 83/1,527 5.4% -4.0 or less Extreme Drought 63/1,527 4.1% Source: NCEI, 1895-April 202273 Community Top Hazard Status No jurisdictions identified Drought as a top hazard of concern. Regional Vulnerabilities The Drought Impact Reporter is a database of drought impacts throughout the United States, with data going back to 2000. The Drought Impact Reporter has recorded a total of 13 drought-related impacts throughout the county. Notable drought impacts are summarized in the following table. This is not a comprehensive list of droughts that may have impacted the planning area. Table 61: Notable Drought Impacts in Planning Area Category Date Title Fire, Relief, Response & Restrictions 10/23/2020 Iowa counties adopt burn bans Agriculture, Plants & Wildlife, Water Supply & Quality 8/6/2020 Reduction in corn yields, dry stock ponds in west central Iowa Agriculture 7/22/2020 Corn, soybeans stressed in west central Iowa Plants & Wildlife, Water Supply & Quality 9/26/2017 Leaves turning color early in Dallas County, Iowa Agriculture, Water Supply & Quality 7/8/2016 Corn yield potential down in Iowa Agriculture, Relief, Response & Restrictions 9/11/2013 Muscatine County and 35 other Iowa counties received authorization from the Farm Service Agency for emergency haying and grazing Agriculture, Society & Public Health, Water Supply & Quality 5/13/2013 Drought-stressed crops left unused fertilizer in Iowa fields, impacting water quality Agriculture, Relief, Response & Restrictions 5/17/2013 Drought-related USDA disaster declarations in 2013 Agriculture, Relief, Response & Restrictions 9/21/2012 USDA Designates 6 Counties in Iowa as Primary Natural Disaster Areas with Assistance to Producers in Surrounding States 73 National Centers for Environmental Information. 1895-March 2022. Accessed April 2022. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 100 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Agriculture 9/10/2012 Wide range of corn yield in Iowa Plants & Wildlife, Water Supply & Quality 8/6/2012 Roughly 40,000 shovelnose sturgeon died in the Des Moines River in Iowa Agriculture 11/14/2012 Elk Mound Seed Co in Wisconsin arranged to purchase about 20 percent more corn seed this year Relief, Response & Restrictions 9/7/2006 Relief, Response & Restrictions impact from Media submitted on 9/7/2006 Source: NDMC, 2000-June. 202274 The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities. For jurisdictional- specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 62: Regional Drought Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Insufficient water supply -Loss of jobs in agricultural sector -Residents in poverty if food prices increase Economic -Closure of water intensive businesses (carwashes, pools, etc.) -Short-term interruption of business -Loss of tourism dollars -Decrease in cattle prices -Decrease of land prices→ jeopardizes educational funds Built Environment -Cracking foundations (residential and commercial structures) -Damages to landscapes Infrastructure -Damages to waterlines below ground -Damages to roadways (prolonged extreme events) Critical Facilities -Loss of power and impact on infrastructure Climate -Increased risk of wildfire events, damaging buildings and agricultural land 74 National Drought Mitigation Center. 2022. “U.S. Drought Impact Reporter.” Accessed April 2022.. http://droughtreporter.unl.edu/map/. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 101 Earthquake An earthquake is the result of a sudden release of energy in the Earth’s tectonic plates that creates seismic waves. The seismic activity of an area refers to the frequency, type, and size of earthquakes experienced over a period of time. Although rather uncommon, earthquakes do occur in Iowa and are usually small, generally not felt, and cause little to no damage. Earthquakes are measured by magnitude and intensity. Magnitude is measured by the Richter Scale, a base- 10 logarithmic scale, which uses seismographs around the world to measure the amount of energy released by an earthquake. Intensity is measured by the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale, which determines the intensity of an earthquake by comparing actual damage against damage patterns of earthquakes with known intensities. The following tables summarize the Richter Scale and Modified Mercalli Scale. Table 63: Richter Scale Richter Magnitudes Earthquake Effects Less Than 3.5 Generally not felt but recorded. 3.5 – 5.4 Often felt, but rarely causes damage. Under 6.0 At most, slight damage to well-designed buildings. Can cause major damage to poorly constructed buildings over small regions. 6.1 – 6.9 Can be destructive in areas up to about 100 kilometers across where people live. 7.0 – 7.9 Major earthquake. Can cause serious damage over larger areas. 8 Or Greater Great earthquake. Can cause serious damage in areas several hundred kilometers across. Source: FEMA, 201675 75 Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2016. “Earthquake.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 102 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Table 64: Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale Scale Intensity Description of Effects Corresponding Richter Scale Magnitude I Instrumental Detected only on seismographs II Feeble Some people feel it < 4.2 III Slight Felt by people resting, like a truck rumbling by IV Moderate Felt by people walking V Strong Sleepers awake; church bells ring < 4.8 VI Strong Trees sway, suspended objects swing, objects fall off shelves < 5.4 VII Very Strong Mild Alarm; walls crack; plaster falls < 6.1 VIII Destructive Moving cars uncontrollable; masonry fractures, poorly constructed buildings damaged IX Ruinous Some houses collapse; ground cracks; pipes break open < 6.9 X Disastrous Ground cracks profusely; many buildings destroyed; liquefaction and landslides widespread < 7.3 XI Very Disastrous Most buildings and bridges collapse; roads, railways, pipes and cables destroyed; general triggering of other hazards < 8.1 XII Catastrophic Total destruction, trees fall, ground rises and falls in waves > 8.1 Source: FEMA, 2016 Location According to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, there are no major fault lines in Iowa. Historical Occurrences According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS), there have been zero earthquakes that have occurred in the planning area since 1900. Extent If an earthquake were to occur in the planning area, it would likely measure between 5.0 or less on the Richter Scale. Very little to no damage is anticipated from events of these magnitudes. Average Annual Losses Due to zero historical earthquakes and low earthquake risk for the area, it is not feasible to utilize the ‘event damage estimate formula’ to estimate potential losses for the planning area. Figure 26 shows the probability of damage from earthquakes, according to the USGS. The figure shows that the planning area has a less than one percent chance of damages from earthquakes. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 103 Figure 26: 2018 Probability of Damage from Earthquakes Source: USGS, 201876 Probability The following figure visualizes the probability of a 5.0 or greater earthquake occurring in the planning area within 50 years. Based on zero occurrences of earthquakes over a 122-year period, the probability of an earthquake in the county in any given year is less than one percent. 76 United States Geological Survey. 2018. “Short-term Induced Seismicity Models: 2018 One-Year Model.” science_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects. Planning Area ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 104 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 27: Earthquake Probability Source: USGS 2009 PSHA Model *Map shows the two-percent probability of exceedance in 50 years of peak ground acceleration. Community Top Hazard Status No jurisdictions identified Earthquake as a top hazard of concern. Regional Vulnerabilities The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional- specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 65: Regional Earthquakes Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Risk of injury or death from falling objects and structures Economic -Short term interruption of business Built Environment -Damage to buildings, homes, or other structures from foundation cracking, falling objects, shattered windows, etc. Infrastructure -Damage to subterranean infrastructure (i.e. waterlines, gas lines, etc.) -Damage to roadways Critical Facilities -Same as all other structures Climate -None Planning Area ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 105 Expansive Soils A relatively widespread geologic hazard for Iowa is the presence of expansive soils or clay soils, which behave differently than other soils due to their tendency to swell and shrink due to changes in moisture content. Fluctuations in the groundwater table, changes in humidity, and prolonged drought followed by precipitation events can accelerate the swelling and shrinking of expansive soils. Other factors influencing the behavior of expansive soils are plumbing leaks, site drainage, and irrigation practices that cause differences in moisture volume in the soil. Expansive soils can cause the following problems in structures: • Structural damage to lightweight structures such as sidewalks and driveways • Lifting of buildings, damage to basements, and building settlement • Heaving of roads and highway structures • Cracks in walls and ceilings • Damage to pipelines and other public utilities77 For Iowa, the vulnerability to this hazard most frequently is associated with soils shrinking during periods of drought. Location The following figure shows a map of the soil types in Iowa. Dallas County is mainly located in Loamy Wisconsin Glacial Till and Loess Ridges/Glacial Till soil regions. Glacial Till is a high-clay content soil that is prone to expansion. Loess is a compressive soil comprised mainly of silt. 77 Colorado Geological Survey. Accessed March 2022. “Expansive Soil and Rock”. rock/#:~:text=Expansive%20soils%20are%20one%20of,the%20range%20of%20%242%20billion. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 106 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 28: Iowa Soil Regions Source: NRCS78 78 Iowa Natural Resources Conservation Service. Accessed April 2022. “Iowa Soil Regions Map.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 107 Historical Occurrences There is no official data pertaining to damages from expansive soils; however, the frequency of damage from expansive soils can be associated with the cycles of drought and heavy rainfall which reflect changes in moisture content. Extent The types of soil texture in Dallas County are shown in Figure 29. Soil texture is identified by predominant USDA texture class derived from predicted percent sand, silt, and clay. The figure displays a 100cm depth, which matches many of the worlds crop rooting depths. Dallas County primarily consists of silty clay loam, silty clay, and sandy clay loam soil textures. Figure 29: Predominant Soil Texture 0-100 cm Source: Esri Environment, 202279 Average Annual Losses There is no data available to determine damage estimates for this hazard. In most cases, individual property owners, local governments, and businesses pay for repairs for damages caused by this hazard. 79Esri Environment. June 2022. “SoilGrids: World Soil Predominant texture 0-100cm”. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 108 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Probability Due to a lack of data surrounding expansive soil occurrences in the planning area, the probability for this hazard occurring annually cannot be calculated. Community Top Hazard Status No jurisdictions identified Expansive Soils as a top hazard of concern. Regional Vulnerabilities The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities. For jurisdictional- specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 66: Regional Expansive Soils Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Risk of injury from falling structures. Economic -Damages to buildings and property can cause significant losses to business owners and divert tax revenue from social and economic improvement programs Built Environment -Basements and subterranean infrastructure can incur damage Infrastructure -Roadways, sidewalks, driveways, and bridges can be damaged Critical Facilities -Same as all other structures Climate -None ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 109 Extreme Temperature (Heat/Cold) Extreme Heat Extreme heat is often associated with periods of drought but can also be characterized by long periods of high temperatures in combination with high humidity. During these conditions, the human body has difficulty cooling through the normal method of the evaporation of perspiration. Health risks arise when a person is overexposed to heat. Extreme heat can also cause people to overuse air conditioners, which can lead to power failures. Power outages for prolonged periods increase the risk of heat stroke and subsequent fatalities due to loss of cooling and proper ventilation. The planning area is largely rural, which presents an added vulnerability to extreme heat events; those suffering from an extreme heat event may be farther away from medical resources as compared to those living in an urban setting. Along with humans, animals also can be affected by high temperatures and humidity. Cattle and other farm animals respond to heat by reducing feed intake, increasing their respiration rate, and increasing their body temperature. These responses assist the animal in cooling itself, but this is usually not sufficient. When animals overheat, they will begin to shut down body processes not vital to survival, such as milk production, reproduction, or muscle building. Other secondary concerns connected to extreme heat hazards include water shortages brought on by drought-like conditions and high demand. Government authorities report that civil disturbances and riots are more likely to occur during heat waves. In cities, pollution becomes a problem because the heat traps pollutants in densely populated urban areas. Adding pollution to the stresses associated with the heat magnifies the health threat to the urban population. The National Weather Service (NWS) is responsible for issuing excessive heat outlooks, excessive heat watches, and excessive heat warnings. • Excessive heat outlooks are issued when the potential exists for an excessive heat event in the next three to seven days. Excessive heat outlooks can be utilized by public utility staffs, emergency managers, and public health officials to plan for extreme heat events. • Excessive heat watches are issued when conditions are favorable for an excessive heat event in the next 24 to 72 hours. • Excessive heat warnings are issued when an excessive heat event is expected in the next 36 hours. Excessive heat warnings are issued when an extreme heat event is occurring, is imminent, or has a very high probability of occurring. Extreme Cold Prolonged exposure to cold causes the human body to lose heat faster than it can be produced and use up the bodies stored energy. As a result, abnormally low body temperature can lead to hypothermia. Frostbite is another of prolonged cold exposure that causes a loss of feeling and color in affected areas of the body. Frostbite most often affects the nose, ears, cheeks, chin, fingers, or toes and can permanently damage body tissues. Location The entire county is susceptible to extreme heat and cold impacts. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 110 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Historical Occurrences According to the High Plains Regional Climate Center on average, the county experiences one day above 100°F per year. The county experienced the most days on record above 100°F in 1983 with 13 days (Figure 30). Conversely, the planning area experiences an annual average of one day with a high of 10°F or below and saw the most days below 10°F in 1963 with 23 days (Figure 31). Figure 30: Number of Days Above 100°F Source: 1939-2021 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 1939 1942 1945 1948 1951 1954 1957 1960 1963 1966 1969 1972 1975 1978 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 Number of Days Above 100°F Year ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 111 Figure 31: Number of Days with High of 10°F or Below Source: 1939-2021 Extent (Extreme Heat) A key factor to consider regarding extreme heat situations is the humidity level relative to the temperature. As is indicated in the following figure from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, as the relative humidity increases, the temperature needed to cause a dangerous situation decreases. For example, for 100% relative humidity, dangerous levels of heat begin at 86°F whereas a relative humidity of 50%, require 94°F. The combination of relative humidity and temperature result in a heat index as demonstrated below: 100% 𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝐻𝑢𝑚𝑖𝑑𝑖𝑡𝑦+ 86℉= 112℉ 𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑥 Figure 32 is designed for shady and light wind conditions. Exposure to full sunshine or strong winds can increase hazardous conditions and raise heat index values by up to 15F. For the purposes of this plan, extreme heat is being defined as temperatures of 100°F or greater. In the planning area, the months with the highest temperatures are June, July, and August. 0 5 10 15 20 25 1939 1942 1945 1948 1951 1954 1957 1960 1963 1966 1969 1972 1975 1978 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2008 2011 2014 2017 2020 Number of Days with Max Temp 10° F Year ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 112 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 32: NOAA Heat Index Source: NOAA, 201780 80 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Weather Service. 2017. “Heat Index.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 113 Figure 33: Climate Normal Max Temperature (1991-2020) Source: NCEI, 2022 Extent (Extreme Cold) Along with snow and ice storm events, extreme cold is dangerous to the well-being of people and animals. What constitutes extreme cold varies from region to region but is generally accepted as temperatures that are significantly lower than the region’s average low temperature. For the purposes of this plan, extreme cold is being defined as the high temperature being 10°F or below. For the planning area, the coldest months of the year are December, January, and February (Figure 35). The average low temperature for these months is below freezing (average low for the three months is 13.6°F). 81 The Wind Chill Index was developed by the NWS to determine the decrease in air temperature felt by the body on exposed skin due to wind. The wind chill is always lower than the air temperature and can quicken the effects of hypothermia or frost bite as it gets lower. Figure 34 shows the Wind Chill Index used by the NWS. 81 NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. May 2022. "Data Tools: 1991-2020 Normals." [datafile]. 30 34 48 61 72 82 85 83 77 64 48 35 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Temperature Month ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 114 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 34: Wind Chill Index Chart Source: NWS, 201782 82 National Weather Service. 2001. “Wind Chill Chart.” . ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 115 Figure 35: Climate Normals Minimum Temperature (1991-2020) Source: NCEI, 2022 Average Annual Losses The annual property estimate was determined based upon NCEI Storm Events Database since 1996. The annual crop loss was determined based upon the RMA Cause of Loss Historical Database since 2000. This does not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. The direct and indirect effects of extreme temperatures are difficult to quantify. Potential losses such as power outages could affect businesses, homes, and critical facilities. High demand and intense use of HVAC systems or water pumps can overload the electrical systems and damage infrastructure. Table 67: Loss Estimate for Extreme Heat Hazard Type Avg. Number of Days Above 100°F1 Total Property Loss2 Average Annual Property Loss2 Total Crop Loss3 Average Annual Crop Loss3 Extreme Heat 1 days $135,000 $5,192 $558,530 $25,388 Source: 1 (1939-2021); 2 Indicates data is from NCEI (1996 to 2021); 3 Indicates data is from USDA RMA (2000 to 2021) 10 14 26 37 49 60 64 61 52 39 27 17 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Temperature Month ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 116 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Table 68: Loss Estimate for Extreme Cold Hazard Type Avg. Number of Days with Max Temp <=10°F1 Total Property Loss2 Average Annual Property Loss2 Total Crop Loss3 Average Annual Crop Loss3 Extreme Cold 6 days $0 $0 $4,580 $208 Source: 1 (1939-2021); 2 Indicates data is from NCEI (1996 to 2021); 3 Indicates data is from USDA RMA (2000 to 2021) Estimated Loss of Electricity According to the FEMA Benefit Cost Analysis Reference Guide, if an extreme heat event occurred within the planning area, the following table assumes the event could potentially cause a loss of electricity for 10% of the population at a cost of $174 per person per day.83 In rural areas, the percent of the population affected, and duration may increase during extreme events. The assumed damages do not take into account physical damages to utility equipment and infrastructure. Table 69: Loss of Electricity - Assumed Damage Jurisdiction 2020 Population Population Affected (Assumed) Electric Loss of Use Assumed Damage Per Day Dallas County 99,678 9,968 $1,734,432 Probability Extreme temperatures are a regular part of the climate for the planning area. Extreme heat events having at least one day of 100°F occurred in 29 out of 83 years. The probability that extreme heat will occur in any given year in the planning area is 35 percent. Extreme cold events having at least one day with a high at or below 10°F occurred in 78 out of 83 years. The probability that extreme cold will occur in any given year in the planning area is 94 percent. The Union for Concerned Scientists released a report in July 2019 titled Killer Heat in the United States: Climate Choices and the Future of Dangerously Hot Days84 which included predictions for extreme heat events in the future dependent on future climate actions. The table below summarizes those findings for the planning area. Table 70: Extreme Heat Predictions for Days over 100°F Jurisdiction Midcentury Prediction 2036-2065 (days per year) Late Century Prediction 2070-2099 (days per year) Dallas County 33 58 Source: Union of Concerned Scientists, 1971-200085 83 Federal Emergency Management Agency. July 2020. “FEMA Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) Toolkit 6.0 Release Notes.” 84 Union of Concerned Scientists. 2019. “Killer Heat in the United States: Climate Choices and the Future of Dangerously Hot Days.” 85 Union of Concerned Scientists. 2021. “Extreme Heat and Climate Change: Interactive Tool”. warming/global-warming-impacts/extreme-heat-interactive-tool?location=dallas-county--ia ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 117 Community Top Hazard Status The following table lists jurisdictions which identified Extreme Temperatures as a top hazard of concern: Jurisdictions Perry Community School District Perry Water Works Regional Vulnerabilities The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities. For jurisdictional- specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 71: Regional Extreme Heat Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Heat exhaustion -Heat stroke -Hypothermia -Heart Disease -Asthma Vulnerable populations include: -People working outdoors -People without air conditioning or heat -Young children outdoors or without air conditioning or heat -Elderly outdoors or without air conditioning or heat Economic -Short-term interruption of business -Loss of power -Agricultural losses Built Environment -Damage to HVAC systems if overworked Infrastructure -Damages to roadways (prolonged extreme events) -Stressing electrical systems (brownouts during peak usage) -Stressing water systems Critical Facilities -Loss of power Climate -Increased risk of wildfire events -Increases in extreme heat conditions are likely, adding stress on livestock, crops, people, and infrastructure -Increases in extreme cold conditions are likely, adding stress on electrical systems, people, and infrastructure ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 118 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Flooding Flooding can occur on a local level, sometimes affecting only a few streets, but can also extend throughout an entire district, affecting whole drainage basins and impacting people and property in multiple states. Heavy accumulations of ice or snow can also cause flooding during the melting stage. These events are complicated by the freeze/thaw cycles characterized by moisture thawing during the day and freezing at night. There are four main types of flooding: riverine flooding, flash flooding, stormwater flooding, and ice jam flooding. Riverine Flooding Riverine flooding, typically slower developing with a moderate to long warning time, is defined as the overflow of rivers, streams, drains, and lakes due to excessive rainfall, rapid snowmelt or ice melt. The areas adjacent to rivers and stream banks that carry excess floodwater called floodplains. A floodplain or flood risk area is defined as the lowland and relatively flat area adjoining a river or stream. The terms “base flood” and “100-year flood” refer to the area in the floodplain that is subject to a one percent or greater chance of flooding in any given year. Floodplains are part of a larger entity called a basin or watershed, which is defined as all the land draining to a river and its tributaries. Flash Flooding Flash floods, typically rapidly developing with little to no warning time, result from convective precipitation usually due to intense thunderstorms or sudden releases due to a failure of an upstream impoundment created behind a dam, landslide, or levee. Flash floods are distinguished from regular floods by a timescale of fewer than six hours. Flash floods cause the most flood- related deaths because of this shorter timescale. Flooding from excessive rainfall events in Iowa usually occurs between late spring and early fall. Stormwater Flooding In some cases, flooding may not be directly attributable to a river, stream, or lake overflowing its banks. Rather, it may simply be the combination of excessive rainfall or snowmelt, saturated ground, and inadequate drainage capacity. With no place to go, the water will find the lowest elevations – areas that are often not in a floodplain. This type of flooding, often referred to as stormwater flooding, is becoming increasingly prevalent as development exceeds the capacity of drainage infrastructure, therefore limiting its ability to convey stormwater. Flooding also occurs due to combined storm and sanitary sewers being overwhelmed by the high flows that often accompany storm events. Typical impacts range from dangerously flooded roads to water backing up into homes or basements, which damages mechanical systems and can create serious public health and safety concerns. Ice Jam Flooding Ice jams occur when ice breaks up in moving waterways, and then stacks on itself where channels narrow, or human-made obstructions constrict the channel. This creates an ice dam, often causing flooding within minutes of the dam formation. Ice formation in streams occurs during periods of cold weather when finely divided colloidal particles called "frazil ice" form. These particles combine to form what is commonly known as “sheet ice.” This type of ice covers the entire river. The thickness of this ice sheet depends upon the degree and duration of cold weather in the area. This ice sheet can freeze to the bottom of the channel in places. During spring thaw or winter freezing, rivers frequently become clogged with this winter accumulation of ice. Because of relatively low stream banks and channels blocked with ice, rivers overtop existing banks and ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 119 flow overland. This type of flooding tends to more frequently occur on wide, shallow rivers, although other rivers can be impacted. Location The county resides in the South Raccoon, North Raccoon, and West Des Moines watersheds. Main waterways in the area include the South, Middle, and North Raccoon Rivers, and the Des Moines River. These rivers and their tributaries are potential locations for flooding to occur. Table 72 shows current statuses of FIRM panels. For additional details on localized flood risk such as flood zone types, please refer to the official FIRM available from FEMA’s Flood Map Service Center. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 120 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 36 shows the modeled floodplain for the county. For jurisdictional-specific maps as well as an inventory of structures in the floodplain, please refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 72: FEMA FIRM Panel Status Jurisdiction Participating in NFIP? (Y/N) Panel Number Effective Date Dallas County Y 19049CIND0C, 19049C0025F, 19049C0050F, 19049C0075F, 19049C0100F, 19049C0125F, 19049C0150F, 19049C0175F, 19049C0180F, 19049C0185F, 19049C0190F, 19049C0191G, 19049C0192G, 19049C0193G, 19049C0194G, 19049C0205F, 19049C0210F, 19049C0211G, 19049C0212G*, 19049C0213G, 19049C0214G, 19049C0220F, 19049C0230F, 19049C0240F, 19049C0275F, 19049C0300F, 19049C0305F, 19049C0306G, 19049C0307G, 19049C0308G, 19049C0309G, 19049C0315F, 19049C0320F, 19049C0326G, 19049C0327G*, 19049C0328G, 19049C0329G, 19049C0335F, 19049C0336G, 19049C0337G, 19049C0338G, 19049C0339G, 19049C0341G, 19049C0342G, 19049C0343G, 19049C0344G, 19049C0355F, 19049C0361G, 19049C0362G, 19049C0363G, 19049C0364G, 19049C0366G, 19049C0368G 12/7/2018, 12/15/2022 Adel Y 19049CIND0C, 19049C0193G, 19049C0194G, 19049C0306G, 19049C0307G, 19049C0309G, 19049C0326G, 19049C0327G*, 19049C0328G 12/15/2022 Bouton N 19049CIND0C, 19049C0075F 12/7/2018, 12/15/2022 Dallas Center Y 19049CIND0C, 19049C0185F, 19049C0192G, 19049C0205F, 19049C0211G, 19049C0212G* 12/7/2018, 12/15/2022 Dawson Y 19049CIND0C, 19049C0050F 12/7/2018, 12/15/2022 De Soto Y 19049CIND0C, 19049C0320F, 19049C0336G 12/7/2018, 12/15/2022 Dexter N 19049CIND0C, 19049C0300F 12/7/2018, 12/15/2022 Granger Y 19049CIND0C, 19049C0125F, 19049C0230F, 19049C0235F* 12/7/2018, 12/15/2022 Linden N 19049CIND0C, 19049C0150F 12/7/2018, 12/15/2022 Minburn N 19049CIND0C, 19049C0075F 12/7/2018, 12/15/2022 Perry Y 19049CIND0C, 19049C0050F, 19049C0075F 12/7/2018, 12/15/2022 Redfield Y 19049CIND0C, 19049C0300F 12/7/2018, 12/15/2022 Van Meter Y 19049CIND0C, 19049C0337G, 19049C0339G, 19049C0343G 12/15/2022 Waukee Y 19049CIND0C, 19049C0214G, 19049C0220F, 19049C0240F, 19049C0327G*, 19049C0335F, 19049C0341G, 19049C0342G, 19049C0343G, 19049C0355F 12/7/2018, 12/15/2022 ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 121 Woodward N 19049CIND0C, 19015C0325D, 19015C0450D, 19049C0100F 12/7/2018, 10/21/2021, 12/15/2022 Source: FEMA, 202286 87 *Panel not printed 86 Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2022. “FEMA Flood Map Service Center.” Accessed December 2022. http://msc.fema.gov/portal/advanceSearch. 87 Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2022. “Community Status Book Report.” Accessed December 2022. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 122 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 36: 1% and 0.2% Annual Flood Risk Hazard Areas *Floodplain maps were created based on the available FIRM data at the time. Updated effective FIRM data was scheduled to be available on December 15, 2022. Please refer to FEMA's Flood Map Service Center for the current FIRM information. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 123 Risk Map Products Risk Mapping, Assessment, and Planning (Risk MAP) is a FEMA program that provides communities with flood information and additional flood risk data flood depth grids, percent chance grids, areas of mitigation interest, etc.) that can be used to enhance their mitigation plans and take action to better protect their citizens. There have been two Risk Map products completed for watersheds in the planning area. In 2015, a Risk Map project for the North Raccoon Watershed was completed, and in 2017, a project was completed for the Middle Des Moines Watershed. According to the North Raccoon Watershed Flood Risk Report, the watershed has a drainage area of 3,625 square miles and is made up of the North Raccoon River, Middle Raccoon River, and South Raccoon River.88 The Flood Risk Map can be seen in Figure 37.89 The watershed includes portions of Dallas County and 14 other counties. Communities within the Dallas County portion of the watershed include Adel, Clive, Dallas Center, Dawson, Grimes, Minburn, Perry, Urbandale, Van Meter, Waukee, and West Des Moines. Total estimates for potential losses from flood event scenarios exceed $24 million in annualized losses. The Middle Des Moines Watershed has a drainage area of 1,881 square miles, with the Des Moines River being the main waterbody.90 The Flood Risk Map can be seen in Figure 38.91 The watershed includes all or portions of 14 counties and 41 communities. Communities within the Dallas County portion of the watershed include Bouton, Dallas Center, Granger, Grimes, Minburn, Perry, Urbandale, and Woodward. Total estimates for potential losses from flood event scenarios reach almost $34 million in annualized losses. 88 FEMA. 2015. Flood Risk Report: North Raccoon Watershed, Iowa.” 89 FEMA. 2015. “Flood Risk Map: North Raccoon Watershed, Iowa.” 90 FEMA. 2017. Flood Risk Report: Middle Des Moines Watershed, Iowa.” 91 FEMA. 2017. “Flood Risk Map: Middle Des Moines Watershed, Iowa.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 124 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 37: North Raccoon Watershed Flood Risk Map ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 125 Figure 38: Middle Des Moines Watershed Flood Risk Map ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 126 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 According to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, other flood plain mapping projects in Dallas County are currently underway. As of 2022, lidar data has been collected and the county is undergoing 2D base level engineering and data development activities.92 The Iowa Flood Center hosts flood risk maps on an interactive web map that contains tools for analyzing scour-prone areas, flood risk gradients, and flood depths. The interactive flood risk maps can be viewed at: Extent The NWS has three categories to define the severity of a flood once a river reaches flood stage as indicated in Table 73. Table 73: Flooding Stages Flood Stage Description of Flood Impacts Minor Flooding Minimal or no property damage, but possibly some public threat or inconvenience Moderate Flooding Some inundation of structures and roads near streams. Some evacuations of people and/or transfer of property to higher elevations are necessary Major Flooding Extensive inundation of structures and roads. Significant evacuations of people and/or transfer of property to higher elevations Source: NOAA, 201793 92 Iowa Department of Natural Resources. 2022. “Flood Plain Mapping.” Quality/Flood-Plain-Management/Flood-Plain-Mapping. 93 National Weather Service. 2017. “Flood Safety.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 127 Figure 39 shows the normal average precipitation for the planning area, which is helpful in determining whether any given month is above, below, or near normal in precipitation. As indicated in Figure 40, the most common months for flooding within the planning area are May and June. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 128 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 39: Average Precipitation for Planning Area Source: NCEI, 1991-202094 Figure 40: Events for Floods/Flash Floods Source: NCEI, 1996-2021 94 NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information. May 2022. "Data Tools: 1991-2020 Normals." [datafile]. 0.95 1.14 1.96 4.10 5.15 4.88 4.42 4.14 3.44 2.70 1.86 1.38 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Inches Month 0 3 15 9 30 68 17 18 6 3 0 3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Number of Events Month ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 129 National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) The NFIP was established in 1968 to reduce flood losses and disaster relief costs by guiding future development away from flood hazard areas where feasible; by requiring flood resistant design and construction practices; and by transferring the costs of flood losses to the residents of floodplains through flood insurance premiums. In return for availability of federally backed flood insurance, jurisdictions participating in the NFIP must agree to adopt and enforce floodplain management standards to regulate development in special flood hazard areas as defined by FEMA’s flood maps. One of the of the program has been keeping people away from flooding rather than keeping the flooding away from people— through historically expensive flood control projects. The following tables summarize NFIP participation and active policies within the planning area. Table 74: NFIP Participants Jurisdiction Participate in NFIP Eligible- Regular Program Date Current Map Sanction Suspension Rescinded Dallas County Y 5/1/1994 12/7/2018 - - - Adel Y 8/4/1987 12/7/2018 - - - Bouton N 1/19/2000 12/7/2018 - - - Dallas Center Y 02/22/10 12/07/18(M) - - - Dawson Y 08/12/11 12/07/18(M) - - - De Soto Y 09/27/85 12/07/18(M) - - - Dexter N 1/19/2000 12/7/2018 - - - Granger Y 06/01/87 12/7/2018 - - - Linden N 1/19/2000 12/7/2018 - - - Minburn N 1/19/2000 12/7/2018 - - - Perry Y 09/04/85 12/07/18(M) - - - Redfield Y 09/18/85 12/07/18(M) - - - Van Meter Y 1/19/2000 01/26/09 - - - Waukee Y 1/19/2000 05/03/01 - - - Woodward N 9/1/1996 10/21/2021 - - - Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Flood Insurance Program, 202295 indicates no elevation determined – All Zone A, C, and X; indicates original FIRM by Letter – All Zone A, C, and X; indicates entry in Emergency Program The NFIP Emergency Program allows a community to voluntarily participate in the NFIP if no flood hazard information is available for their area; the community has a Flood Hazard Boundary Map but no FIRM; or the community has been identified as flood-prone for less than a year. 95 Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2022. “Community Status Book Report.” Accessed June 2022. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 130 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Table 75: NFIP Policies in Force and Total Payments Jurisdiction Policies In-force Total Coverage Total Premiums Total Losses Total Payments Dallas County 18 $4,924,300 $11,126 8 $115,546 Adel 6 $857,800 $2,352 14 $73,578 Dallas Center 4 $1,050,000 $1,767 2 $55,406 Granger 2 $560,000 $957 1 $1,000 Perry 5 $741,700 $5,419 7 $4,200 Redfield 1 $280,000 $485 3 $565 Van Meter 6 $941,000 $4,180 0 $0 Waukee 16 $4,342,000 $7,207 2 $1,595 Source: HUDEX, April 2022 This plan highly recommends and strongly encourages plan participants to enroll, participate, and remain in good standing with the NFIP. Compliance with the NFIP should remain a top priority for each participant. Jurisdictions are encouraged to initiate activities above the minimum participation requirements, which are described in the Community Rating System (CRS) Coordinator’s Manual.96 Currently no jurisdictions in the planning area participate in the CRS program. NFIP Repetitive Loss Structures IDNR was contacted to determine if any existing buildings, infrastructure, or critical facilities are classified as NFIP Repetitive Loss Structures. As of July 2022, there are two repetitive loss properties in unincorporated Dallas County. Both structures are non-residential. There are no additional repetitive loss or severe repetitive loss properties located in the county. It is important that the county works with the property owner to identify a solution to mitigate the repetitive flood damages into the future and is included as a project in the county’s profile. Definitions of a structure identified as a NFIP Repetitive Loss (RL) and Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL) are given below. NFIP RL: Repetitive Loss Structure refers to a structure covered by a contract for flood insurance under the NFIP that has incurred flood-related damage on two occasions during a 10-year period, each resulting in at least a $1,000 claim payment. NFIP SRL: Severe Repetitive Loss Properties are defined as single or multifamily residential properties that are covered under an NFIP flood insurance policy and: That have incurred flood-related damage for which four or more separate claims payments have been made, with the amount of each claim (including building and contents payments) exceeding $5,000, and with the cumulative amount of such claim payments exceeding $20,000; or For which at least two separate claims payments (building payments only) have been made under such coverage, with cumulative amount of such claims exceeding the market value of the building. 96 Federal Emergency Management Agency. 2017. “National Flood Insurance Program Community Rating System: Coordinator’s Manual FIA-15/2017.” Accessed June 2022. system_coordinators-manual_2017.pdf. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 131 In both instances, at least two of the claims must be within 10 years of each other, and claims made within 10 days of each other will be counted as one claim. HMA RL: A repetitive loss property is a structure covered by a contract for flood insurance made available under the NFIP that: Has incurred flood-related damage on two occasions, in which the cost of the repair, on the average, equaled or exceeded 25 percent of the market value of the structure at the time of each such food event; and At the time of the second incidence of flood-related damage, the contract for flood insurance contains increased cost of compliance coverage. HMA SRL: A severe repetitive loss property is a structure that: Is covered under a contract for flood insurance made available under the NFIP. Has incurred flood related damage – For which four or more separate claims payments (includes building and contents) have been made under flood insurance coverage with the amount of each such claim exceeding $5,000, and with the cumulative amount of such claim payments exceeding $20,000; or For which at least two separate claims payments (includes only building) have been made under such coverage, with the cumulative amount of such claims exceeding the market value of the insured structure. Purpose of the HMA definitions: The HMA definitions were allowed by the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 to provide an increased federal cost share under the FMA grant when a property meets the HMA definition. Historical Occurrences The NCEI reports events as they occur in each community. A single flooding event can affect multiple communities and counties at a time; the NCEI reports these large scale, multi-county events as separate events. The result is a single flood event covering a large portion of the planning area could be reported by the NCEI as several events. According to the NCEI, 52 flash flooding events resulted in $2,020,000 in property damage, while 120 riverine flooding events resulted in $8,938,070 in property damage. USDA RMA data does not distinguish the difference between riverine flooding damages and flash flooding damages. The total crop loss according to the RMA is $1,023,979. Descriptions of the most damaging flood events from the NCEI are below: • June 18, 1998 – Flood – Dallas County: Following a brief break from the rain on the 16th, rainfall resumed on the 17th and 18th. Heavy rain fell over just about the entire state on both days, with the heaviest amounts of 1 to 3 inches on the first night in the Nishnabotna River basin, the Upper Des Moines and Iowa basins, and the lower parts of the South Skunk basin. These rains fell on already saturated soils and resulted on considerable runoff. On the 18th, the Des Moines metropolitan area was blitzed with a massive flooding event. Local rains in the city ranged from 1 to 4 inches, much of it falling in one to two hours. Much of this water was quickly added to the flows on the already high ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 132 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Raccoon River. The Raccoon crested again on the afternoon of the 18th with the 11th highest crest of record and the 2nd highest since 1993. Four Mile Creek in Des Moines crested at the 3rd highest crest on record, and numerous evacuations were conducted as a result. Cleanup and repair of the damages from this event alone were estimated at $12 million. Numerous rivers south of Des Moines flooded as well. The rivers effected from this event were the Iowa, Squaw Creek, Cedar Creek south of Des Moines, Skunk, Raccoon, Walnut Creek in Des Moines, Beaver Creek in Des Moines, Four Mile Creek in Des Moines, the North, Middle, and South. The situation had become very serious across much of Iowa by this point. In early July, 10 counties were declared major disaster areas by President Clinton and a few days later another 16 counties were added to this list by Vice President Gore. Much of the damage was due to flooding, although severe weather played a major role as well. Damage was very widespread across the state. Many people had water in their basements. Some said they had water even though they did not have water during the flood of '93, suggesting the water table in many areas was as high or higher than during the great flood of '93. Many crop fields were drowned out by high water. The true extent of the damage will not be known until the harvest in the fall. • June 20, 1996 – Flood – Dallas County: Another round of heavy thunderstorms occurred on the 20th and affected much of the west third of Iowa including the Raccoon River basin. This produced minor to moderate flooding on the North Raccoon River which continued to the end of the month. Virtually the entire basin received heavy rains, which were generally in the 1-to-3-inch range. The flooding was primarily lowland flooding even though the river rose over 6 feet over flood stage at Jefferson. • April 25, 2007 – Flood – Redfield: A strong low pressure developed over eastern Colorado and moved southeast into northern Oklahoma by the 24th. Deep moisture was pulled north ahead of the low with surface dew points in the low 70s reaching northern Oklahoma. Strong isentropic lift took place over the Des Moines CWA and resulted in a large and sustained area of rain and embedded thunderstorms. Rainfall of two to over five inches of rainfall occurred over a large part of the CWA, with isolated amounts in the six-to-seven-inch range over a 2-day period. This event brought about the flash flooding event of the evening of the 24th. The situation transitioned into a general areal flood event on the 25th, with several counties reporting serious flooding from the 25th into early on the 28th. Many roads were either under water or washed out by the flood waters and countless basements were flooded. • June 8, 2008 – Flood – Panther: Low pressure developed over Kansas with a strong southerly flow of very moist air streaming into Iowa ahead of it. Surface temperatures warmed into the 80s with dew point readings in the low to mid 70s. A semi-stationary front extended northeast from the low, across northern Iowa during the afternoon into the evening hours. The atmosphere became very unstable with MUCAPE in the 4500 to 5000 J/kg range by midafternoon and lifted indices around -7 C. The shear was quite high, between 40 and 70 kts. Downdraft CAPW was between 1000 and 1300 J/kg with cape in the -10 to -30 C. layer of the atmosphere around 400 J/kg. The LCL was in the 750-to- 1000-meter range, with the lowest over north central Iowa. With the exception of one hail report of 3-inch diameter hail report in north central Iowa, hail size was somewhat limited by the freezing level of 15500 to 16500 feet. A very strong transport of moisture took place on a 50 to 75 kt 850 mb jet. Precipitable water values soared to 1.6 to 1.9 inches by evening. During the initial phase of the severe event, high winds and hail were reported along the line of thunderstorms that formed from northern into west central Iowa. There were four reports of tornadoes in Worth, Winnebago and Cerro Gordo Counties during the ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 133 afternoon hours of the 7th. This was with the initial round of storms. One of the tornadoes in Winnebago County destroyed a hog confinement building containing 3500 hogs. Several of them were killed and the remaining hogs needed to be taken to slaughter. The event transitioned into a flooding event overnight, then tornadoes began again during the afternoon of the 8th. A tornado touched down in Taylor County. Windows were blown out of houses there and several trees were twisted and blown down around the house. A pole shed was completely destroyed south of Ferguson in Marshall County. A stronger tornado was on the ground north to northeast of Ottumwa. A home lost a roof, with a wall of one room partially collapsed by the tornado. Several trees were also downed around the home. The event transitioned into a major Flood/Flash Flood event during the evening and early morning hours with many locations reporting 1 to 2 inches of rainfall, and spotty amounts of around 5 inches in just a few hours’ time. The line moved very little for a period of several hours. During the predawn hours, the line became broad and weakened to generally below severe limits. A new round of thunderstorms from Nebraska, which was the southwest part of the extensive line, moved into west central and southwest Iowa. The storm generally remained below severe levels for the most part, but they did produce very heavy rains. Another line of thunderstorms formed/re-intensified along the frontal boundary by the early afternoon hours. Initially, the storms produced strong winds and some small hail. As they moved southeast, several reports of high winds to near 70 MPH and a few reports of tornadoes were received. The most significant weather feature with this event was the heavy rainfall. The antecedent soil conditions in Iowa were extremely wet, such that flash flooding was caused by rainfall of an inch or more in an hour, even in rural areas. Heavy rainfall of 3 to 6 inches occurred in a broad swath extending from west central into north central, and parts of central and northeast Iowa. This resulted in widespread flash flooding. Eventually, the rain led to major to record flooding along many of the rivers in the state. At one point or another, about 40 of the DMX 51 counties in the CWA were under flash flood warning. The situation was very serious over the north central and northeast counties. A levy was breached in the Mason City area as the Winnebago River rose to 3 feet over the record stage. The city was inundated by water. The water treatment plant was under water and nonoperational, all power was lost to the power grid in the city. The river cut a new channel and changed course into the downtown area. In the New Hartford area, a dam broke on Beaver Creek, resulting in the water level rising 2 feet above the all-time record level. High water along the mainstem Cedar River also caused communities to lose water. Nashua lost water as the water plant became flooded. Flooding along the Shell Rock River resulted in water supply loss in the town of Rockford. There was one death that resulted from the flooding. A 33-year-old man died as he drove into flood waters in Interstate 35 at mile post 141 in Hamilton County. A second death occurred in Wright County as a 50-year-old male farmer near Galt was sucked into a culvert by flood waters as he checked the field tiles in his farm field. Average Annual Damages The average damage per event estimate was determined based upon NCEI Storm Events Database since 1996 and the number of historical occurrences. This does not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. Flooding causes an average of $421,464 in property damages and $39,384 in crop losses per year for the planning area. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 134 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Table 76: Flood Loss Estimate Hazard Type Number of Events1 Average Events Per Year Total Property Loss1 Average Annual Property Loss 1 Total Crop Loss2 Average Annual Crop Loss 2 Flooding 172 7 $10,958,070 $421,464 $1,023,979 $39,384 Source: 1 Indicates data is from NCEI (1996 to 2021); 2 Indicates data is from USDA RMA (2000 to 2021) Probability The NCEI reports 120 flooding and 52 flash flooding events for a total of 172 events from 1996 to 2021. Some years had multiple flooding events. Figure 41 shows the events broken down by year. 21 out of 26 years. Based on the historic record and reported incidents by participating communities, there is an 81% percent probability that flooding will occur annually in the county. Figure 41: Yearly Events for Floods/Flash Floods Source: NCEI, 1996-2021 Community Top Hazard Status The following table lists jurisdictions which identified Flooding as a top hazard of concern: Jurisdictions Adel Redfield Bouton Van Meter 0 5 10 15 20 25 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Number of Events Year ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 135 Regional Vulnerabilities Low-income and minority populations are disproportionately vulnerable to flood events.97 These groups may lack needed resources to mitigate potential flood events as well as resources that are necessary for evacuation and response. In addition, low-income residents are more likely to live in areas vulnerable to the threat of flooding but lack the resources necessary to purchase flood insurance. The study found that flash floods are more often responsible for injuries and fatalities than prolonged flood events. Other groups that may be more vulnerable to floods, specifically flash floods, include the elderly, those outdoors during rain events, and those in low-lying areas. Elderly residents may suffer from a decrease or complete lack of mobility and as a result, be caught in flood-prone areas. Residents in campgrounds or public parks may be more vulnerable to flooding events. Many of these areas exist in natural floodplains and can experience rapid rise in water levels resulting in injury or death. To analyze parcels and populations located in the floodplain, GIS parcel data were acquired from the Dallas County Assessor. This data was analyzed for the location, number, and value of property improvements at the parcel level. Property improvements include any built structures such as roads, buildings, and paved lots. The data did not contain the number of structures on each parcel. A summary of the results of this analysis for the planning area is provided in the following table. Specific jurisdictional parcel improvements in the floodplain can be found in the corresponding community profiles in Section Seven. Table 77: Parcel Improvements and Value in the 1% Annual Flood Risk Area Number of Improvements Total Improvement Value Number of Improvements in Floodplain Value of Improvements in Floodplain Percentage of Improvements in Floodplain 34,462 $11,178,810,910 1,558 $1,158,464,010 5% Source: Dallas County Assessor, 2022 Table 78: Parcel Improvements and Value in the 0.2% Annual Flood Risk Area Number of Improvements Total Improvement Value Number of Improvements in Floodplain Value of Improvements in Floodplain Percentage of Improvements in Floodplain 34,462 $11,178,810,910 1,309 $748,065,260 4% Source: Dallas County Assessor, 2022 In Iowa, Watershed Management Authorities (WMA) are a tool to help cities, counties, Soil and Water Conservation Districts and stakeholders to work towards watershed planning and management. There are six watershed management authorities that cover portions of Dallas County: Beaver Creek WMA, Walnut Creek WMA, North Raccoon River Watershed Management Coalition, and Middle-South Raccoon WMA. WMAs are directed by a board of directors and may perform activities to reduce flood risk. 97 Cutter, Susan and Finch, Christina. February 2008. “Temporal and Spatial Changes in Social Vulnerability to Natural Hazards”. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 136 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 More information on Watershed Management Authorities can be found at the following link: Authorities. The following table is a summary of regional vulnerabilities. For jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 79: Regional Flooding Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Low income and minority populations may lack the resources needed for evacuation, response, or to mitigate the potential for flooding -Elderly or residents with decreased mobility may have trouble evacuating -Residents in low-lying areas, especially campgrounds, are vulnerable during flash flood events -Residents living in the floodplain may need to evacuate for extended periods Economic -Business closures or damages may have significant impacts -Agricultural losses from flooded fields or cattle loss -Closed roads and railways would impact commercial transportation of goods Built Environment -Buildings may be damaged Infrastructure -Damages to roadways and railways Critical Facilities -Wastewater facilities are at risk, particularly those in the floodplain -Critical facilities, especially those in the floodplain, are at risk to damage (critical facilities are noted within individual community profiles) Climate -Changes in seasonal and annual precipitation normals will likely increase frequency and magnitude of flood events ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 137 Grass/Wildland Fire Wildfires, also known as grass fires, brush fires, forest fires, or wildland fires, are uncontrolled fires that occur in the or wildland. Wildland areas may include but are not limited to grasslands, forests, woodlands, agricultural fields, pastures, and other vegetated areas. Wildfires differ from other fires by their potential extensive size, the speed at which they can spread from the original source, their ability to change direction unexpectedly, and to jump gaps (such as roads, rivers, and fire breaks). While some wildfires burn in remote forested and grassland regions, others can cause extensive destruction of homes and other property located in the wildland-urban interface (WUI), the zone of transition between developed areas and undeveloped wilderness. Wildfires are a growing hazard in most regions of the United States, posing a threat to life and property, particularly where native ecosystems meet urban developed areas or where local economies are heavily dependent on open agricultural land. Although fire is a natural and often beneficial process, fire suppression can lead to more severe fires due to the buildup of vegetation, which creates more fuel and increases the intensity and devastation of future fires. Wildfires are characterized in terms of their geographical characteristics including topography, weather, and fuels; or physical properties such as flame length and propagation. Wildfire behavior is often complex and variably dependent on factors such as fuel type and moisture content, humidity, wind speed, topography, geographic location, and ambient temperature. Fuel is the only one of these factors that humans can control and is the target of most mitigation efforts. The NWS monitors the risk factors including high temperature, high wind speed, fuel moisture (greenness of vegetation), low humidity, and cloud cover in the state on a daily basis (Figure 42). These fire danger predictions are updated regularly and should be reviewed frequently by community leaders and fire department officials. Lightning starts approximately 10,000 forest fires each year, yet ninety percent of forest fires are started by humans. ~National Park Service ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 138 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 42: Grassland Fire Danger Example Source: NWS, 202298 In recent decades, as the population of the United States has decentralized and residents have moved farther away from the center of cities, the WUI has developed significantly, both in terms of population and building stock. The WUI is defined as the zone of transition between developed areas and undeveloped wilderness, where structures and other human development meet wildland. The expansion of the WUI increases the likelihood that wildfires will threaten people and homes, making this area the focus of the majority of wildfire mitigation efforts. Location Grass/wildland fires can occur throughout the planning area. The following figure produced by the USDA Forest Service displays the State of Iowa’s WUI conditions as of 2010. The approximate location of the planning area is indicated by the black outline. According to this WUI map (Figure 43), intermix areas (orange) are primarily found on the southern portion of Dallas County, near the interstate. An interface area (yellow) is also located in the northeast corner of the county, near the Des Moines River. The rest of the planning area is primarily non-WUI vegetated designated areas, with no or low-density housing with a mix of vegetated, non-vegetated, and agricultural land. Figure 44 shows the WUI map for Dallas County. 98 National Weather Service. April 2022. “Iowa Grassland Fire Danger Index.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 139 Figure 43: Wildland Urban Interface Map - Iowa Source: USDA, 201599 99 USDA, USFS, & University of Wisconsin. 2015. “The 2010 Wildland-Urban Interface of the Conterminous United States.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 140 Figure 44: Wildland Urban Interface Map – Dallas County ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 141 The United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service created the interactive web resource, Wildfire Risk to Communities, to help communities and jurisdictions understand, explore, and reduce wildfire risk. Figure 45 displays wildfire risk to homes in Dallas County, as of April 2022. Figure 45: Wildfire Risk to Homes - Dallas County Source: Wildfire Risk to Communities100 Table 80: Wildfire Vulnerabilities County Risk to Homes (compared to Iowa Counties) Exposure Type* Wildfire Likelihood (compared to Iowa Counties) Dallas 68% Not Exposed (43%) Directly Exposed (33%) Indirectly Exposed (24%) 68% Source: Wildfire Risk to Communities, 2022101 * Exposure is defined as the spatial coincidence of wildfire likelihood and intensity with communities. 100 United States Department of Agriculture, United States Forest Service. 2022. “Wildfire Risk to Communities.” Accessed April 2022. 101 United States Department of Agriculture, United States Forest Service. 2022. “Wildfire Risk to Communities.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 142 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Table 81: Wildfire Vulnerable Populations County Families in Poverty People with Disabilities People over 65 Difficulty with English Households with no Vehicle Mobile Homes Dallas 3.5% 7.2% 11.5% 1.6% 3.2% 2.6% Source: Wildfire Risk to Communities, 2022102 Historical Occurrences According to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources fire supervisor, fire report data in Dallas County is only available from 2019 to 2021. Local fire districts reported a total of ten wildfires during that time. The most fires occurred in 2020, with five. The reported events burned 222 acres. The majority of wildfires in the planning area are caused by debris burning with equipment use as the second leading cause (30%) (Figure 44). Wildfires in the planning area have ranged from two to 77 acres, with an average event burning 22.2 acres. Figure 46: Wildfires by Cause in the Planning Area Source: IDNR Fire Supervisor (personal correspondence), 2019-2021 Average Annual Damages No damages were reported by NCEI or from IDNR, so it is not possible to calculate the average annual damages for wildfire. Damages caused by wildfires extend past the loss of building stock, recreation areas, timber, forage, wildlife habitat, and scenic views. Secondary effects of wildfires, including erosion, landslides, introduction of invasive species, and changes in water quality, all increase due to the exposure of bare ground and loss of vegetative cover following a wildfire, and can often be more disastrous than the fire itself in long-term recovery efforts. 102 United States Department of Agriculture, United States Forest Service. 2022. “Wildfire Risk to Communities.” 1 0 0 5 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wildfire Events Cause ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 143 Table 82: Wildfire Loss Estimation Hazard Type Number of Events Events Per Year Total Property Loss1 Average Annual Property Loss1 Total Crop Loss2 Average Annual Crop Loss2 Wildfires 10 3.3 N/A N/A $9,653 $439 Source: 1 Indicates data is from NCEI (1996-2021); 2 Indicates data is from USDA RMA (2000-2021) Extent For Dallas County, the following fire departments reported wildfire events: Adel Fire Department, Minburn Fire Department, and Yale Fire Department. Fire districts respond to both wildfires and structural fires in cities. As the reported wildfires by department indicates, wildfire is a threat throughout the planning area. Minburn Fire Department has reported the greatest number of fires, while Adel Fire reported the greatest number of acres burned. Table 83: Reported Wildfires by Fire Department Fire Department Reported Wildfires Acres Burned Adel Fire Department 1 77 Minburn Fire Department 7 70 Yale Fire Department 2 75 Total 10 222 Source: IDNR Fire Supervisor (personal correspondence), 2019-2021 As seen in Table 83 above, wildfires have burned 222 acres of land. In total, there were 10 reported wildfires in the planning area. Of these, two fires burned 50 acres or more, with the largest wildfire burning 77 acres in 2021. Wildfire also contributes to an increased risk from other hazard events, compounding damages and straining resources. FEMA has provided additional information in recent years detailing the relationship between wildfire and flooding (Figure 47). Wildfire events remove vegetation and harden soil, reducing infiltration capabilities during heavy rain events. Subsequent severe storms that bring heavy precipitation can then escalate into flash flooding, dealing additional damage to jurisdictions. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 144 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 47: FEMA Flood After Fire Source: FEMA, 2020103 Figure 48 shows the USGS’ Mean Fire Return Interval for the planning area. This model considers a variety of factors, including landscape, fire dynamics, fire spread, fire effects, and spatial context. These values show how often fires occur in each area under natural conditions. 103 FEMA and NFIP. 2020. “Flood After Fire.” Accessed September 2020. 3908ab0344ff8fbf5d537ee0c6fb531d/101844-019_FEMA_FAF_Infographic-ENG-web_v8_508.pdf. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 145 Figure 48: Mean Fire Return Interval ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 146 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Probability The probability of wildfire occurrence is based on the historic record provided by the Iowa Department of Natural Resources and reported potential by participating jurisdictions. With a grass/wildfire occurring in each year for the period of record, there is a 100 percent annual probability of grass/wildfires occurring in the county each year. Community Top Hazard Status Woodward Township Fire District was the only jurisdiction which identified Grass/Wildland Fire as a top hazard of concern. Regional Vulnerabilities Periods of drought can occur throughout the year while extreme heat conditions during summer months greatly increase the potential for and magnitude of wildland fires. Drought has a high probability of occurring in the planning area and the planning area sees, on average, one day above 100°F each year (Figure 30). During a severe drought, dry conditions, and/or windy conditions, large wildfires can more easily spread. Wildfire poses a threat to a range of demographic groups. Wildfire, wildfire within the WUI, and urban fire could result in major evacuations of residents in impacted and threatened areas. Groups and individuals lacking reliable transportation could be trapped in dangerous locations. Lack of transportation is common among the elderly, low-income individuals, and racial minorities, including on tribal reservation lands. Wildfires can cause extensive damage to both urban and rural building stock and properties including critical facilities and infrastructure, as well as agricultural producers which support the local industry and economy. Damaged homes can reduce available housing stock for residents, causing them to leave the area. Additionally, fire events threaten the health and safety of residents and emergency response personnel. Recreation areas, timber and grazing land, wildlife habitat, and scenic views can also be threatened by wildfires. Development across the planning area may be located within the WUI, particularly in larger municipalities such as the City of Adel with a larger amount of intermix overlap. Local officials can adopt codes and ordinances that can guide growth in ways to mitigate potential losses from wildfires. These may include more stringent building code standards, setback requirements, or zoning regulations. Other notable vulnerabilities exist for fire departments which service both urban and rural areas as some fire districts lack adequate staff to respond to multi-fire complexes or events in separate areas. The utilization and development of mutual aid agreements or memorandum of understandings are an important tool for districts to share resources and/or coverage. The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional- specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 147 Table 84: Regional Wildfire Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Risk of injury or death for residents and firefighting personnel -Displacement of people and loss of homes -Lack of transportation poses risk to low-income individuals, families, and elderly -Transportation routes may be blocked by fire, preventing evacuation efforts Economic -Damages to buildings and property can cause significant losses to business owners -Loss of businesses Built Environment -Property damages Infrastructure -Damage to power lines and utility structures -Potential loss of firefighting equipment and resources Critical Facilities -Risk of damages Climate -Changes in seasonal temperature and precipitation normals can increase frequency and severity of wildfire events -Changes in climate can help spread invasive species, changing potential fuel loads in wildland areas Other -Increased chance of landslides, erosion, and land subsidence -May lead to poor water quality -Post fire, flash flooding events may be exacerbated ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 148 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Hazardous Materials Release The following description for hazardous materials is provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA): Chemicals are found everywhere. They purify drinking water, are used in agriculture and industrial production, fuel our vehicles and machines, and simplify household chores. But chemicals also can be hazardous to humans or the environment if used or released improperly. Hazards can occur during production, storage, transportation, use, or disposal. The community is at risk if a chemical is used unsafely or released in harmful amounts. Hazardous materials in various forms can cause fatalities, serious injury, long-lasting health effects, and damage to buildings, homes, and other property. Many products containing hazardous chemicals are used and stored in homes routinely. Chemicals posing a health hazard include carcinogens, toxic agents, reproductive toxins, irritants, and many other substances that can harm human organs or vital biological processes. Chemical manufacturers are one source of hazardous materials, but there are many others, including service stations, hospitals, and hazardous materials waste sites. Varying quantities of hazardous materials are manufactured, used, or stored at an estimated 4.5 million facilities in the United States—from major industrial plants to local dry-cleaning establishments or gardening supply stores. Hazardous materials come in the form of explosives, flammable and combustible substances, poisons, and radioactive materials. Hazardous material incidents are technological (meaning non- natural hazards created or influenced by humans) events that involve large-scale releases of chemical, biological or radiological materials. Hazardous materials incidents generally involve releases at fixed-site facilities that manufacture, store, process or otherwise handle hazardous materials or along transportation routes such as major highways, railways, navigable waterways and pipelines. Fixed sites are those that involve chemical manufacturing sites and stationary storage facilities. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires the submission of the types and locations of hazardous chemicals being stored at any facility within the state over the previous calendar year. This is completed by submitting a Tier II form to the EPA as a requirement of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986. Likewise, the U.S. Department of Transportation, through the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), has broad jurisdiction to regulate the transportation of hazardous materials, including the discretion to decide which materials shall be classified as hazardous. These materials are placed into one of nine hazard classes based on their chemical and physical properties. The hazard schedules may be further subdivided into divisions based on their characteristics. Because the properties and characteristics of materials are crucial in understanding the dynamics of a spill during a transportation incident, it is important for response personnel to understand the hazard classes and their divisions. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 149 The transportation of hazardous materials is defined by PHMSA as substance that has been determined to be capable of posing an unreasonable risk to health, safety, and property when transported in commerce…” According to PHMSA, hazardous materials traffic in the U.S. now exceeds 1,000,000 shipments per day. Nationally, the U.S. has had 108 fatalities associated with the transport of hazardous materials between 2007 through 2016. While such fatalities are a low probability risk, even one event can harm many people. Table 85 demonstrates the nine classes of hazardous material according to the 2020 Emergency Response Guidebook. Table 85: Hazardous Material Classes Class Type of Material Divisions 1 Explosives Division 1.1 – Explosives which have a mass explosion hazard Division 1.2 – Explosives which have a projection hazard but not a mass explosion hazard Division 1.3 – Explosives which have a fire hazard and either a minor blast hazard or a minor projection hazard or both, but not a mass explosion hazard Division 1.4 – Explosives which present no significant hazard Division 1.5 – Very insensitive explosives with a mass explosion hazard Division 1.6 – Extremely insensitive articles which do not have a mass explosion hazard 2 Gases Division 2.1 – Flammable gases Division 2.2 – Non-flammable, non-toxic gases Division 2.3 – Toxic gases 3 Flammable liquids (and Combustible liquids) 4 Flammable solids; Substances liable to spontaneous combustion; Substances which, on contact with water, emit flammable gases Division 4.1 – Flammable solids, self-reactive substances and solid desensitized explosives Division 4.2 – Substances liable to spontaneous combustion Division 4.3 – Substances which in contact with water emit flammable gases 5 Oxidizing substances and Organic peroxides Division 5.1 – Oxidizing substances Division 5.2 – Organic peroxides 6 Toxic Substances and infectious substances Division 6.1 – Toxic substances Division 6.2 – Infectious substances 7 Radioactive materials - 8 Corrosive substances - 9 Miscellaneous hazardous materials/dangerous goods and articles - Source: Emergency Response Guidebook, 2020104 104 U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. 2022. “2020 Emergency Response Guidebook.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 150 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Location Iowa has approximately 4,602 facilities across the state that house hazardous materials according to the Tier II reports submitted to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources. Of those, 69 locations are located in the planning area. These locations are shown in the following figure. A listing of hazardous material storage sites can be found in Section Seven: Community Profiles for each jurisdiction. Hazardous material releases during transportation primarily occur on major transportation routes as identified in (Figure 50). Railroads providing service through the planning area have developed plans to respond to chemical releases along rail routes. A large number of spills also typically occur during the loading and unloading of chemicals for highway and pipeline chemical transport. Transportation corridors in the planning area are primarily US Routes, State Routes, and one Interstate Highway. According to PHMSA, there are several gas transmission and hazardous liquid pipelines located in the planning area. A map of the pipelines and incidents from PHMSA for Dallas County can be seen below (Figure 51).105 According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) there is one crude oil pipeline and three natural gas pipelines that run through the county. 106 105 Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. 2022. “National Pipeline Mapping System.” . 106 U.S. Energy Information Administration. 2022. “Maps – Crude Oil Pipelines, Natural Gas Interstate and Intrastate Pipelines, Petroleum Products Pipelines.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 151 Figure 49: Fixed Chemical Sites in the County *Floodplain maps were created based on the available FIRM data at the time. Updated effective FIRM data was scheduled to be available on December 15, 2022. Please refer to FEMA's Flood Map Service Center for the current FIRM information. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 152 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 50: Major Transportation Routes with Half Mile Buffer ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 153 Figure 51: Dallas County Public Pipeline Viewer Map ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 154 Iowa has established a Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)/HazMat team to provide statewide coverage for identifying, assessment and support of render-safe procedures involving explosive devices and those that may contain chemical, biological, radioactive, nuclear, or explosive (CBRNE) materials. The team is made up of personnel from Council Bluffs, Davenport, and Des Moines and helps enhance the capabilities of existing fire department hazmat teams across the state.107 Extent The extent of chemical spills at fixed sites varies and depends on the type of chemical that is released with a majority of events localized to the facility. The probable extent of chemical spills during transportation is difficult to anticipate and depends on the type and quantity of chemical released. In total 37 fixed site releases have occurred in the planning area, and the total amount spilled ranged from one gallon to 1,000 gallons. Of the 37 chemical spills, four spills led to the evacuations, one of 600 people. Four spills led to injuries and one spill resulted in a fatality. In total, 75 releases have occurred during transportation in the planning area. Transportation spills ranged from less than one liquid gallon of material released to 4,500 liquid gallons released, with an average quantity spilled of 182 liquid gallons. None of the 75 chemical spills led to an evacuation or fatality; however, one injury did occur. Based on historic records, it is likely that any spill involving hazardous materials will not affect an area larger than a quarter mile from the spill location. Historical Occurrences Fixed Site Spills According to the U.S. Coast Guard’s National Response Center database (NRC), there have been 37 fixed site chemical spills from 1990 to 2021 in the planning area. There were no property damages reported for these chemical spills. The following table displays the larger spills that have occurred throughout the planning area (>500 gallons). Table 86: Large Fixed Site Chemical Spills Date Location of Release Quantity Spilled Material Involved Number of Injuries Property Damage 1990 Perry 1,000 lbs. Ammonia 0 $0 1995 Near Des Moines 1,000 gal. Diesel Oil 0 $0 Source: National Response Center, 1990- 2021 Transportation Spills According to PHMSA, 75 hazardous materials releases occurred during transportation in the planning area between 1971 and 2021. During these events, there were no evacuations or fatalities; however, one injury did occur. Damages totaled $1,048,377. The following table provides a list of the larger historical transportation chemical spills (>500 gallons). 107 HSEMD. 2020. “Iowa’s Emergency Response Teams.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 155 Table 87: Large Chemical Transportation Spills Date of Event Location of Release Failure Description Material Involved Transportation Mode Injuries or Fatalities Total Damage 8/10/2005 Grimes Vehicle Accident 1,300 LGA Gasoline with Ethyl Alcohol Highway None $108,200 10/25/2006 Perry Vehicle Accident 3,000 LGA Ethanol Alcohol Highway None $180,000 6/17/2016 West Des Moines Abrasion 3,998 LGA Diesel Fuel Highway None $363,393 6/17/2016 West Des Moines Abrasion 4,400 LGA Gasoline with Ethyl Alcohol Highway None $363,393 Source: PHMSA, 1971-2021 Average Annual Damages There have been 37 fixed site spills in the planning area reported from the NRC and 75 transportation spills as reported by PHMSA. Neither the NRC nor PHMSA track crop losses from chemical spills. These events reported $1,048,377in property damages. This does not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. Table 88: Hazardous Materials Release Loss Estimate Hazard Type Number of Events Events Per Year Injuries Total Evacuated Total Damages Average Annual Loss Hazardous Materials Release (Fixed Site) 37 1.2 0 1,130 $0 $0 Hazardous Materials Release (Transportation) 75 1.5 1 0 $1,048,377 $20,556 Source: National Response Center, 1990-2021; PHMSA, 1971-2021 Probability Given the historic record of occurrence for fixed chemical spill events (at least one chemical spill reported in 21 of 32 years), for the purposes of this plan, the annual probability of a fixed chemical spill is 66 percent. Given the historic record of occurrence for chemical transportation spill events (22 out of 51 years with a reported event), for the purposes of this plan, the annual probability of chemical transportation occurrence is 43%. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 156 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 52: Chemical Fixed Site Spills by Year Source: National Response Center, 1990-2021 Figure 53: Chemical Transportation Spills by Year Source: PHMSA, 1971-2021 0 1 2 3 4 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Number of Events Year 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 Number of Events Year ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 157 Community Top Hazard Status The following table lists jurisdictions which identified Hazardous Materials Release as a top hazard of concern: Jurisdictions Dallas Center Perry Minburn Van Meter Regional Vulnerabilities To reduce the risk to people and property damage, future development should encourage chemical storage and manufacturing facilities to be built away from critical facilities such as hospitals, schools, daycares, nursing homes, and other residential areas. Likewise, development and critical facilities should be built away from major transportation corridors used for chemical transportation. Specific vulnerabilities exist for critical facilities or vulnerable population centers (schools, daycares, hospital, etc.) which are most heavily populated during the daytime as most chemical transportation incidents occur during the weekday daytime hours. The following table summarizes regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 89: Regional Hazardous Materials Release Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Those in close proximity could have minor to severe health impacts -Possible evacuation -Hospitals, nursing homes, and the elderly at greater risk due to low mobility Economic -A chemical plant shutdown in smaller communities would have significant impacts on the local economy -Evacuations and closed transportation routes could impact businesses near spill Built Environment -Risk of fire or explosion Infrastructure -Transportation routes can be closed during evacuations or cleanup Critical Facilities -Risk of fire, explosion, or other damages -Risk of evacuation Climate -More extreme weather events and flood events put sites at risk of flooding at greater risk ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 158 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Human Infectious Diseases According to the Cleveland Clinic, Infectious Diseases are: “illnesses caused by harmful agents (pathogens) that get into your body. The most common causes are viruses, bacteria, fungi and parasites. Infectious diseases usually spread from person to person, through contaminated food or water and through bug bites.”108 In some situations Human Infectious Diseases can lead to the declaration of a public health emergency. The number of cases that qualifies as a public health emergency depends on several factors including the illness, its ease in transmission, incubation period, and available treatments or vaccinations. With the advent of sanitation sewer systems and other improvements in hygiene since the 19th century, the spread of infectious disease has greatly diminished. Additionally, the discovery of antibiotics and the implementation of universal childhood vaccination programs have played a major role in reducing human disease impacts. Today, human disease incidences are carefully tracked by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and state organizations for possible epidemics and to implement control systems. Novel illnesses or diseases have the potential to develop annually and significantly impact residents and public health systems. Some of the best actions or treatments for outbreaks are nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPI). These are readily available behaviors or actions, and response measures people and communities can take to help slow the spread of respiratory viruses such as influenza. Understanding NPIs and increasing the capacity to implement them in a timely way, can improve overall community resilience during an outbreak. Using multiple NPIs simultaneously can reduce influenza transmission in communities even before vaccination is available.109 Pandemics are global or national disease outbreaks. These types of illnesses, such as influenza, can easily spread person-to-person, cause severe illness, and are difficult to contain. An especially severe pandemic can lead to high levels of illness, death, social disruption, and economic turmoil. Past pandemic events include: • 1918 Spanish Flu: the H1N1 influenza virus spread world-wide during 1918 and 1919. It is estimated that at least 50 million people worldwide died during this pandemic with about 675,000 deaths alone in the United States. No vaccine was ever developed, and control efforts included self-isolation, quarantine, increased personal hygiene, disinfectant use, and social distancing. • 1957 H2N2 Virus: a new influenza A virus emerged in Eastern Asia and eventually crossed into coastal U.S. cities in summer of 1957. In total 1.1 million people worldwide died of the flu with 116,000 of those in the United States. • 1968 H3N2 Virus: an influenza A virus discovered in the United States in September 1968 which killed over 100,000 citizens. The majority of deaths occurred in people 65 years and older. 108 Cleveland Clinic. 2022. Accessed November 2022. “Infectious Diseases.” infectious-diseases. 109 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2017. “Pandemic Influenza Plan: 2017 Update.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 159 • 2009 H1N1 Swine Flu: a novel influenza A virus discovered in the United States and spread quickly across the globe. This flu was particularly prevalent in young people while those over 65 had some antibody resistance. The CDC estimated the U.S. had over 60.8 million cases and 12,469 deaths. • 2019 COVID-19: the novel influenza A virus which originated in Wuhan China and spread globally. As of November 8, 2022, the CDC reported 97.6 million cases and 1.1 million deaths attributed to COVID-19 in the United States. Efforts to control and limit the virus included self-isolation, quarantine, increased cleaning measures, social distancing, and vaccinations. Significant impacts to the national and global economy have been caused by COVID-19. The Iowa Department of Public Health requires doctors, hospitals, and laboratories to report on many communicable diseases and conditions to monitor disease rates for epidemic events. Additionally, regional or county health departments monitor local disease outbreaks and collect data relevant to public health. The Dallas County Health Department serves all of Dallas County. Location Human disease outbreaks can occur anywhere in the planning area. Public heath emergencies or pandemic threshold levels are dependent on the outbreak type, transmission vectors, location, and season. Normal infectious disease patterns are changing due to increasing human mobility and climate change. Rural populations are particularly at risk for animal-related diseases while urban areas are at greater risk from community spread type illnesses. All residents throughout the planning area are at risk during public health emergencies. All areas within the planning area experienced impacts from COVID-19 specifically during 2020. Historical Occurrences Cases and fatalities associated with Human Infectious Diseases vary between illness types and severity of outbreak. Past major outbreaks in Iowa have specifically included the H1N1 Swine Flu in 2009 and COVID-19 in 2020. • H1N1 Swine Flu (2009) – outbreaks were first reported in mid-April 2009 and spread rapidly. The new flu strand for which immunity was nonexistent in persons under 60 years old was similar in many ways to typical seasonal influenza. of H1N1 included fever greater than 100°F, cough, and sore throat. County specific counts of H1N1 are not available, however a total of 92 confirmed cases were reported for Iowa by June 12, 2009.110 Outbreaks in Iowa were typically seen sporadically. The U.S. Public Health Emergency for the H1N1 Influenza outbreak expired on June 23, 2010. The CDC developed and encouraged all US residents to receive a yearly flu vaccination to protect against potential exposures. The H1N1 continues to appear annually and persons in the planning area are at risk of infection in the future. 110 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. June 2009. “Novel H1N1 Flu Situation Update.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 160 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 • COVID-19 (2020) – In January 2020, the CDC confirmed the first case of COVID-19 in the United States, and it quickly spread across the country. By March 2020, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic and travel bans were instituted around the globe. Primary of the infection included cough, fever or chills, shortness of breath or difficulty breathing, fatigue, muscle and body aches, headache, loss of taste or smell, sore throat, and others. The first confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the State of Iowa were three residents in Johnson County. Governor Kim Reynolds issued a Public Health Disaster Emergency Proclamation on March 17, 2020, which lasted until February 14, 2022. The table below displays COVID-19 confirmed cases and deaths as of November 22, 2022. Table 90: COVID-19 Cases in Dallas County Population Total Number of Tests Confirmed Cases Fatalities 99,678 30,531 26,057 154 Source: Iowa Department of Public Health111 Extent Those most affected by human infectious disease outbreaks are typically the very young, the very old, the immune-compromised, the economically vulnerable, and the unvaccinated. Roughly 28% of the planning area’s population is 18 years or younger, and 12% of the planning area is 65 years or older. These factors increase vulnerability to the impacts of outbreaks. Refer to Section Three: County Profile for further discussion of age and economic vulnerability in the planning area. It is not possible to determine the extent of individual public health emergency events, as the type and severity of a novel outbreak cannot be predicted. However, depending on the disease type, a significant portion of residents may be at risk to illness or death. The extent of human infectious diseases is closely tied to the proximity or availability of health centers and services. There are two hospitals in the county and several nursing facilities and health clinics. Immunodeficiency disorders (such as diabetes), obesity, or other pre-existing health complications reduce the ability of the body to fight infection. Diabetes prevalence in Dallas County and for the state are listed in the table below. Table 91: Diabetes Prevalence in the Planning Area Geography Diagnosed Diabetes Rate (Total Adults Age 20+) Dallas County 6.4% State of Iowa 5% Source: Centers of Disease Control and Prevention, 2019112 *State data is from 2018. 111 Iowa Department of Public Health. November 22, 2022. “Covid-19 Reporting”. Issues/Novel-Coronavirus/COVID-19-Reporting 112 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2017. “Diagnosed diabetes prevalence – Iowa.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 161 Iowa Code, Chapter 139a.8(6) and Iowa Administrative Code, 641-7.7(139) outline the immunization requirement for students attending licensed childcare centers and elementary or secondary schools. Requirements are for the following vaccinations: Pneumococcal, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, polio, measles, rubella, Hepatitis B, meningococcal, and varicella (chicken pox). The Vaccines for Children program is a federally funded and state-operated vaccine supply program that provides free vaccines to children under 18 who are of American Indian or Alaska Native descent, enrolled in Medicaid, uninsured, or underinsured. Additionally, the HPV vaccination series is recommended for teenagers and influenza vaccinations are recommended yearly for those over six months old. Individuals without vaccinations are at greater risk of contracting diseases or carrying diseases to others. Average Annual Losses The national economic burden of influenza medical costs, medical costs plus lost earnings, and total economic burden was $10.4 billion, $26.8 billion, and $87.1 billion respectively in 2007.113 However, associated costs with pandemic response are much greater. Current estimated costs for COVID-19 in the United States exceed $16 trillion. Specific costs do not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. The direct and indirect effects of significant health impacts are difficult to quantify. Probability There is no pattern as to when public health emergencies will occur. Based on historical records, it is likely that small-scale disease outbreaks will occur annually within the county. However, large scale emergency events (such as COVID-19) cannot be predicted. Community Top Hazard Status Xenia Rural Water District was the only jurisdiction which identified Human Infectious Diseases as a top hazard of concern. Regional Vulnerabilities The following table summarizes regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 92: Regional Human Infectious Disease Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Vulnerable populations include the very young, the very old, the unvaccinated, the economically vulnerable, and those with immunodeficiency disorders. Economic -Institutional settings such as prisons, dormitories, long-term care facilities, day cares, and schools are at higher risk to contagious diseases Built Environment -Poverty, rurality, underlying health conditions, and drug or alcohol use increase chronic and infectious disease rates Infrastructure -Large scale or prolonged events may cause businesses to close, which could lead to significant revenue loss and loss of income for workers Critical Facilities -Increased number of unoccupied business structures Climate -Transportation routes may be closed if a quarantine is put in place 113 Molinari, N.M., Ortega-Sanchez, I.R., Messonnier, Thompson, W.W., Wortley, P.M., Weintraub, & Bridges, C.B. April 2007. “The annual impact of seasonal influenza in the US: measuring disease burden and costs.” DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2007.03.046. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 162 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Infrastructure Failure The Iowa Hazard Mitigation Plan notes a variety of different occurrences which may be classified as infrastructure failure; including communication failure, energy failure, structural failure, and structural fire. The plan goes on to note that one potential cause of infrastructure failure is space weather/solar flares. Any sort of disruption in cell, electric, radio or other service may be considered a form of infrastructure failure. Community infrastructure that provides vital supplies such as electrical and water utilities are also vulnerable to both natural and technological hazards. Vulnerability can largely be measured as a result of aging infrastructure. According to FEMA’s Strategic Foresight Initiative published in June 2011, “…infrastructure in the United States is becoming more prone to failure as the average age of structures increases.” The publication goes on to state that many necessary updates to infrastructure failure may be considered cost prohibitive due to rising construction costs. According to the American Society of Civil Engineers’ (ASCE) 2019 Infrastructure Report Card, Iowa received an overall grade of C. The Infrastructure Report Card is updated every four years with the goal of depicting the condition and performance of infrastructure systems. The Report Card utilizes letter grades similar to those used for school report cards. Using this classification, an would indicate a state is exceeding expectations; an is failing to meet expectations. Thus, a indicates below expected standards. Specifically, for Iowa, bridges, dams, wastewater, inland waterways, received a below expected score to This is largely consistent with reports from local planning teams.114 Some jurisdictions have mentioned concerns of infrastructure failure, including Adel, Dallas Center, Dexter, Granger, Minburn, Perry, Van Meter, Perry Water Works, and Xenia Rural Water District. Concerns include threats to water supplies and utilities, inadequate sewer systems, and threats to the electrical grid. Location Infrastructure failure is not correlated to a specific geographic area. Extent The extent of infrastructure failure events is hard to quantify given the lack of recorded events. Potential losses will likely be related to aging structures. The BTS National Bridge Inventory displays information describing the location, description, classification, and general condition of bridges located on public roads, such as interstate highways, U.S. highways, state and county roads, and publicly accessible bridges on federal and tribal lands. According to BTS, Dallas County has 186 bridges with 11% of those bridges in poor condition and 89% in medium to fair condition.115 Figure 54 displays the bridge surface conditions for Dallas County. 114 American Society of Civil Engineers. 2019. “2019 Iowa Infrastructure Report Card.” item/iowa/ 115 Bureau of Transportation Statistics. July 2022. “County Transportation Profiles.” Statistics/County-Transportation-Profiles/qdmf-cxm3/data ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 163 Figure 54: Bridge Surface Conditions Source: BTS, 2022116 116 Bureau of Transportation Statistics. July 2022. “National Bridge Inventory.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 164 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Historical Occurrences There is no known database for recording infrastructure failure, and thus, previous occurrences may not be calculated. Average Annual Losses Due to lack of data, potential losses are not calculated for this hazard. Probability With no recorded past events, future occurrences may not be calculated. Community Top Hazard Status The following table lists jurisdictions which identified Infrastructure Failure as a top hazard of concern: Jurisdictions Adel Perry Dallas Center Van Meter Dexter Xenia Rural Water District Granger Perry Water Works Minburn Regional Vulnerabilities The following table summarizes regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 93: Regional Infrastructure Failure Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Vulnerable populations including the very young and the very old may not have the capability to properly care for their aging private infrastructure Economic -Building, bridge, or road closures may cause businesses to close temporarily, which could lead to significant revenue loss and loss of income for workers Built Environment -Aging fixtures such as roofs and siding make buildings vulnerable to failure Infrastructure -Aging infrastructure is particularly vulnerable Critical Facilities -Critical facilities may close if they are not properly maintained Climate -Space weather/solar flares can disrupt cell, electric, and radio services which could result in infrastructure failure Other -Severe winter storms, severe thunderstorms, and tornadoes can exacerbate this hazard ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 165 Landslide Landslides are the downward and outward movement of slopes with debris. These events include names such as slumps, rockslides, debris slide, lateral spreading, debris avalanche, earth flow, and soil creep. The size of a landslide usually depends on the geology and landslide triggering mechanism. Landslides initiated by rainfall tend to be smaller, while those initiated by earthquakes may be very large. Slides associated with volcanic eruptions can include as much as one cubic mile of material. Landslides are typically triggered by periods of heavy rainfall or rapid snowmelt. Earthquakes, changes to the hydrology, removal of vegetation, and excavations may also trigger landslides. Certain geologic formations are more susceptible to landslides than others. Human activities, including locating development near steep slopes, can increase susceptibility to landslide events as well. Landslides on steep slopes are more dangerous because movements can be rapid. Some characteristics that determine the type of landslide are slope of the hillside, moisture content, and the nature of the underlying materials. Slow moving landslides can occur on relatively gentle slopes and can cause significant property damage. However, slow moving landslides are far less likely to result in serious injuries than rapidly moving landslides that can leave little time for evacuation. Van Meter School District has experienced landslides from a hill near the school. A retaining wall has been built but concerns continue due to the proximity of the hill. Location This hazard is correlated with elevation change; thus, this hazard is more likely to occur in the sloped areas of the county. Small landslides have occurred in the Van Meter area at the school building. Extent Rapidly moving landslides (debris flows and earth flows) present the greatest risk to human life. Persons living in or traveling through areas more prone to rapidly moving landslides should take caution if the conditions warrant. Slow moving landslides can cause significant property damage but are less likely to result in serious human injuries. Landslides can be massive, or they may disturb only a few cubic feet of material. Events in Dallas County are likely to cause limited property damage; limited or no deaths and injuries; and little or no impacts to critical facilities and infrastructure. However, single events near populated areas or key infrastructure may have significant impacts. Historical Occurrences According to the USGS Landslide Inventory Map, no recorded landslides occurred in Dallas County from 1878 to 2021.117 However, the Regional Planning Team and local planning team indicated that some small landslides have occurred in the Van Meter area. 117 United States Geological Survey. 2022. “U.S. Landslide Inventory”. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 166 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Average Annual Losses With no historical reported landslide events, the average annual losses for property and crops are Any landslides that could occur are likely to have minimal impacts on the built environment. Probability For the purpose of this plan, the probability of landslide will be stated at less than one percent annually as there have been zero recorded by the USGS and minimal amounts locally reported in the planning area. Landslides can be sporadic and somewhat unpredictable. These events are more likely to occur in the rural and hilly parts of the county, typically in areas where they won’t get recorded. However, in the case of a post-wildfire condition and in combination of heavy precipitation, it is more likely that landslides, debris flows, and mudslides will occur more frequently. Large mudflows can occur when a relatively common rainfall event happens over a watershed that has been exposed to wildfire. As the vegetation and soil in a burned area recover and the watershed returns to its pre-burn hydrologic condition, the depth and intensity of rainfall necessary to generate a mudflow will generally increase for a given location. Jurisdictional Top Hazard Status Van Meter School District was the only jurisdiction which identified Landslide as a top hazard of concern. Future Developments Although landslides are a natural geologic process, the incidence of landslides and their impacts on people can be exacerbated by human activities. Grading for road construction and development can increase slope steepness and decrease the stability of a hillslope by adding weight to the top of the slope, removing support at the base of the slope, and increasing water content. Other human activities affecting landslides include: excavation, drainage and groundwater alterations, and changes in vegetation. Future development could be vulnerable to landslides, as well as the infrastructure required to support this growth, if not accounted for in siting and design. Regional Vulnerabilities The following table provides information related to county vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 94: Regional Landslide Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Exposure is more likely to occur driving on roadways and in sloped recreation areas Economic -People living in homes located on steep slopes Built Environment -First responders in areas that are still geologically unstable Infrastructure -Limited loss of accessibility and potential damage to businesses Critical Facilities -Damage to roadways and bridges -Damage or breaking of underground utility lines -Power loss from downed lines and towers Climate -More extreme weather events, such as severe thunderstorms, severe winter storms, and grass/wildfire events put areas at greater risk to landslides ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 167 Severe Thunderstorms (Includes Hail and Lightning) Severe thunderstorms are common and unpredictable seasonal events throughout Iowa. A thunderstorm is defined as a storm that contains lightning and thunder, which is caused by unstable atmospheric conditions. When the cold upper air sinks and the warm, moist air rises, storm clouds or “thunderheads” develop, resulting in thunderstorms. This can occur singularly, in clusters, or in lines. Thunderstorms can develop in fewer than 30 minutes and can grow to an elevation of eight miles into the atmosphere. Lightning, by definition, is present in all thunderstorms and can cause harm to humans and animals, fires to buildings and agricultural lands, and electrical outages in municipal electrical systems. Lightning can strike up to 10 miles from the portion of the storm depositing precipitation. There are three primary types of lightning: intra-cloud, inter-cloud, and cloud to ground. While intra and inter-cloud lightning are more common, communities are potentially impacted when lightning comes in contact with the ground. Lightning generally occurs when warm air mixes with colder air masses resulting in atmospheric disturbances necessary for polarizing the atmosphere. Severe thunderstorms usually occur in the evening during the spring and summer months. Economically, thunderstorms are generally beneficial in that they provide moisture necessary to support Iowa’s largest industry, agriculture. The majority of thunderstorms do not cause damage, but when they escalate to severe storms, the potential for damages increases. Damages can include crop losses from wind; property losses due to building and automobile damages from high wind, flash flooding, and death or injury to humans and animals from lightning, drowning, or getting struck by falling or flying debris. Figure 55 displays the average number of days with thunderstorms across the country each year. The planning area experiences an average of 40 to 50 thunderstorms over the course of one year. Figure 55: Average Number of Thunderstorms Source: NWS, 2017118 118 National Weather Service. 2017. “Introduction to Thunderstorms.” http://www.srh.noaa.gov/jetstream/tstorms/tstorms_intro.html. Planning Area ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 168 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Location The entire county is at risk of severe thunderstorms and associated damages from heavy rain, lightning, hail, and thunderstorm level wind. Extent The geographic extent of a severe thunderstorm event may be large enough to impact the entire planning area (such as in the case of a squall line, derecho, or long-lived supercell) or just a few square miles, in the case of a single cell that marginally meets severe criteria. The NWS defines a thunderstorm as severe if it contains hail that is one inch in diameter or capable of wind gusts of 58 mph or higher. The Tornado and Storm Research Organization (TORRO) scale is used to classify hailstones and provides some detail related to the potential impacts from hail. Table 95 outlines the TORRO Hail Scale. Table 95: TORRO Hail Scale TORRO Classification / Intensity Typical Hail Diameter Typical Damage Impacts H0: Hard Hail 5 mm; (Pea size); 0.2 in No damage H1: Potentially Damaging 5 -15 mm (Marble) 0.2 – 0.6 in Slight general damage to plants and crops H2: Significant 10 -20 mm (Grape) 0.4 – 0.8 in. Significant damage to fruit, crops, and vegetation H3: Severe 20 -30 mm (Walnut) 0.8 – 1.2 in Severe damage to fruit and crops, damage to glass and plastic structures H4: Severe 30 -40 mm (Squash Ball) 1.2 – 1.6 in Widespread damage to glass, vehicle bodywork damaged H5: Destructive 40 – 50 mm (Golf ball) 1.6 – 2.0 in. Wholesale destruction of glass, damage to tiled roofs; significant risk or injury H6: Destructive 50 – 60 mm (Chicken Egg) 2.0 – 2.4 in Grounded aircrafts damaged; brick walls pitted; significant risk of injury H7: Destructive 60 – 75 mm (Tennis Ball) 2.4 – 3.0 in Severe roof damage; risk of serious injuries H8: Destructive 75 – 90 mm (Large Orange) 3.0 – 3.5 in. Severe damage to structures, vehicles, airplanes; risk of serious injuries H9: Super Hail 90 – 100 mm (Grapefruit) 3.5 – 4.0 in Extensive structural damage; risk of severe or even fatal injuries to persons outdoors H10: Super Hail >100mm (Melon); >4.0 in Extensive structural damage; risk of severe or even fatal injuries to persons outdoors Source: TORRO, 2019119 Of the 217 hail events reported for the planning area, the average hailstone size was 1.1 inches. Events of this magnitude correlate to an H3 classification. It is reasonable to expect H3 classified 119 Tornado and Storm Research Organization. 2019. “Hail Scale.” http://www.torro.org.uk/hscale.php. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 169 events to occur several times in a year throughout the county. In addition, it is reasonable, based on the number of occurrences, to expect larger hailstones to occur in the county annually. The county has endured one H8 hail event (3.0 – 3.5 inches) during the period of record. Figure 56 shows hail events based on the size of the hail. Figure 56: Hail Events by Magnitude Source: NCEI, 1996-2021 Historical Occurrences Severe thunderstorms in the planning area usually occur in the afternoon and evening from May through July (Figure 57). 40 41 86 9 7 26 1 1 1 4 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0.75 0.88 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 2.25 2.5 2.75 3 Number of Events Hail Stone Size (inches) ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 170 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 57: Severe Thunderstorm Events by Month Source: NCEI, 1996-2021 The NCEI reports events as they occur in each community. A single severe thunderstorm event can affect multiple communities and counties at a time; the NCEI reports these large scale, multi- county events as separate events. The result is a single thunderstorm event covering the entire region could be reported by the NCEI as several events. The NCEI reports a total of 217 hail, 134 heavy rain, 11 lightning, and 288 thunderstorm wind events in the planning area from 1996 to 2021. In total these events were responsible for $10,520,000 in property damages. The USDA RMA data shows that severe thunderstorms caused $18,026,126 in crop damages. There were four injuries reported in association with these storms. The county conservation board expressed concern about people being vulnerable to severe thunderstorms while outside in public conservation areas. More shelter locations are needed in those areas. Average Annual Damages The average damage per event estimate was determined based upon recorded damages from NCEI Storm Events Database since 1996 and number of historical occurrences. This does not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. Severe thunderstorms cause an average of $404,615 per year in property damages and $819,369 in crop damages. 0 1 26 61 124 169 127 73 42 12 5 11 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Number of Events Month ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 171 Table 96: Severe Thunderstorms Loss Estimate Hazard Type Number of Events1 Average Events Per Year Total Property Loss1 Average Annual Property Loss Total Crop Loss2 Average Annual Crop Loss Hail 217 8.3 $813,000 $31,269 $18,026,126 $819,369 Heavy Rain 134 5.2 $20,000 $769 Lightning 11 0.4 $1,147,000 $44,115 Thunderstorm Wind 288 11.1 $8,540,000 $328,462 Total 651 25 $10,520,000 $404,615 $18,026,126 $819,369 Source: 1 Indicates data is from NCEI (1996 to 2021); 2 Indicates data is from USDA RMA (2000 to 2021) Probability Based on historical records and reported events, severe thunderstorms events are likely to occur on an annual basis. The NCEI reported a severe thunderstorm 26 out of 26 years, resulting in a 100 percent chance for thunderstorms to occur annually. Community Top Hazard Status The following table lists jurisdictions which identified Severe Thunderstorms as a top hazard of concern: Jurisdictions Adel Waukee Bouton Woodward Dawson Adel-DeSoto-Minburn School District De Soto Dallas Center-Grimes School District Granger Perry Community School District Linden Van Meter School District Perry Woodward-Granger School District Redfield Woodward Township Fire District Van Meter Regional Vulnerabilities The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional- specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 97: Regional Thunderstorm Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Elderly citizens with decreased mobility may have trouble evacuating or seeking shelter -Mobile home residents are risk of injury and damage to their property if the mobile home is not anchored properly -Injuries can occur from not seeking shelter, standing near windows, and shattered windshields in vehicles Economic -Damages to buildings and property can cause significant losses to business owners and employees ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 172 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Sector Vulnerability Built Environment -Buildings are at risk to hail damage -Downed trees and tree limbs -Roofs, siding, windows, gutters, HVAC systems, etc. can incur damage Infrastructure -High winds and lightning can cause power outages and down power lines -Roads may wash out from heavy rains and become blocked from downed tree limbs Critical Facilities -Power outages are possible -Critical facilities may sustain damage from hail, lightning, and wind Climate -Changes in seasonal precipitation and temperature normals can increase frequency and magnitude of severe storm events ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 173 Severe Winter Storms Severe winter storms are an annual occurrence in Iowa. Winter storms can bring extreme cold, freezing rain, heavy or drifting snow, and blizzards. Blizzards are particularly dangerous due to drifting snow and the potential for rapidly occurring whiteout conditions which greatly inhibit vehicular traffic. Generally, winter storms occur between the months of November and March but may occur as early as October and as late as April. Heavy snow is usually the most defining element of a winter storm. Large snow events can cripple an entire jurisdiction by hindering transportation, knocking down tree limbs and utility lines, and structurally damaging buildings. Freezing Rain Along with snow events, winter storms also have the potential to deposit significant amounts of ice. Ice buildup on tree limbs and power lines can cause them to collapse. This is most likely to occur when rain falls that freezes upon contact, especially in the presence of wind. Freezing rain is the name given to rain that falls when surface temperatures are below freezing. Unlike a mixture of rain and snow, ice pellets or hail, freezing rain is made entirely of liquid droplets. Freezing rain can also lead to many problems on the roads, as it makes them slick, causing automobile accidents, and making vehicle travel difficult. Blizzards A blizzard can be defined as “blowing and/or falling snow with winds of at least 35 mph, reducing visibilities to a quarter of a mile or less for at least three hours”.120 Blizzards are particularly dangerous due to drifting snow and the potential for rapidly occurring whiteout conditions, which greatly inhibits vehicular traffic. Heavy snow is usually the most defining element of a winter storm. Large snow events can cripple an entire jurisdiction for several days by hindering transportation, knocking down tree limbs and utility lines, structurally damaging buildings, and injuring or killing crops and livestock. Location The entire county is at risk of severe winter storms. Extent The Sperry-Piltz Ice Accumulation Index (SPIA) was developed by the NWS to predict the accumulation of ice and resulting damages. The SPIA assesses total precipitation, wind, and temperatures to predict the intensity of ice storms. Figure 58 shows the SPIA index. 120 National Weather Service. 2022. “Winter Weather Safety.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 174 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 58: SPIA Index Source: SPIA-Index, 2017121 The Wind Chill Index was developed by the NWS to determine the decrease in air temperature felt by the body on exposed skin due to wind. The wind chill is always lower than the air temperature and can quicken the effects of hypothermia or frost bite as it gets lower. Figure 59 shows the Wind Chill Index used by the NWS. Average snowfall for the planning area is shown in Figure 61, which shows the snowiest months are between December and March. A common snow event (likely to occur annually) will result in accumulation totals between one and six inches. Often these snow events are accompanied by high winds. It is reasonable to expect wind speeds of 25 to 35 mph with gusts reaching 50 mph or higher. Strong winds and low temperatures can combine to produce extreme wind chills of 20°F to 40°F below zero. 121 SPIA-Index. 2009. “Sperry-Piltz Ice Accumulation Index.” Accessed June 2017. http://www.spia-index.com/index.php. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 175 Figure 59: Wind Chill Index Chart Source: NWS, 2017122 122 National Weather Service. 2001. “Wind Chill Chart.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 176 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 60: Climate Normals Temperature (1991-2020) Source: NCEI, 2022 Figure 61: Normal Snowfall in Inches (1991-2020) Source: High Plains Regional Climate Center, 2022 29.5 34 47.5 61.3 71.9 81.9 85.4 83.3 77.1 64 47.8 35 19.8 24.1 36.6 49 60.5 70.9 74.5 72.1 64.3 51.5 37.3 25.7 10.2 14.1 25.8 36.7 49 59.8 63.5 60.8 51.5 39.1 26.8 16.5 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 Temperature Normals Max Temp Normals Avg Tem Normals Min Temp 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 2.7 7.9 9.4 10.2 4.4 1.2 0.2 0.0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June Inches Month ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 177 Historical Occurrences Due to the regional scale of severe winter storms, the NCEI reports events as they occur in each county. According to the NCEI, there were a combined 79 severe winter storm events for the planning area from 1996 to 2021. January had the most recorded events for the planning area. These recorded events caused a total of $6,613,680 in reported property damages and $374,815 in crop damages. According to the NCEI, there were no injuries or fatalities associated with winter storms in the planning area. Additional information from these events from NCEI and reported by each community are listed in Section Seven: Community Profiles. Average Annual Damages The average damage per event estimate was determined based upon NCEI Storm Events Database since 1996 and includes aggregated calculations for each of the five types of winter weather as provided in the database. This does not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. Severe winter storms have caused an average of $256,372 per year in property damage and $17,037 per year in crop damages for the planning area. Table 98: Severe Winter Storm Loss Estimate Hazard Type Number of Events1 Average Events Per Year1 Total Property Loss1 Average Annual Property Loss 1 Total Crop Loss2 Average Annual Crop Loss 2 Blizzard 14 0.5 $900,000 $36,615 $374,815 $17,037 Heavy Snow 24 0.9 $4,290,450 $165,017 Ice Storm 12 0.5 $848,330 $32,628 Winter Storm 28 1.1 $574,900 $22,112 Winter Weather 1 0.04 $0 $0 Total 79 3.04 $6,613,680 $256,372 $374,815 $17,037 Source: 1 Indicates data is from NCEI (1996-2021); 2 Indicates data is from USDA RMA (2000-2021) Probability Based on historical records and reported events, severe winter storm events are likely to occur on an annual basis. The NCEI reported a severe winter storm event in 25 of 26 years, resulting in 96% percent chance annually for severe winter storms. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 178 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Community Top Hazard Status The following table lists jurisdictions which identified Severe Winter Storms as a top hazard of concern: Jurisdictions Adel Van Meter Bouton Waukee Dawson Adel-Desoto-Minburn School District De Soto Dallas Center-Grimes School District Dexter Perry Community School District Linden West Central Valley School District Minburn Woodward-Granger School District Perry Xenia Rural Water District Redfield Perry Water Works Regional Vulnerabilities The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional- specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 99: Regional Severe Winter Storm Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Elderly citizens are at higher risk to injury or death, especially during extreme cold and heavy snow accumulations -Citizens without adequate heat and shelter at higher risk of injury or death Economic -Closed roads and power outages can cripple a region for days, leading to significant revenue loss and loss of income for workers Built Environment -Heavy snow loads can cause roofs to collapse -Significant tree damage possible, downing power lines and blocking roads Infrastructure -Heavy snow and ice accumulation can lead to downed power lines and prolonged power outages -Transportation may be difficult or impossible during blizzards, heavy snow, and ice events Critical Facilities -Emergency response and recovery operations, communications, water treatment plants, and others are at risk to power outages, impassable roads, and other damages Climate -Changes in seasonal precipitation and temperature normals can increase frequency and magnitude of severe winter storm events ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 179 Sinkhole A sinkhole is defined as the loss of surface elevation due to the removal of subsurface support. Sinkholes can range from broad, regional lowering of the land surface to localized collapse. The primary causes of most subsidence are human activities such as: underground mining of coal, groundwater or petroleum withdraw, and drainage of organic soils. Sinkholes can also be due to erosion of limestone of the subsurface. As a result of Iowa’s former mining operations and unique geology, sinkholes are found throughout much of the state, but the majority of the sinkholes are located in the northeast quadrant of the state. The vulnerability of sinkholes in Dallas County primarily stems from the existence of old mines. Location The following map (Figure 62) shows historic coal mining areas reported by IDNR. These documented coal mines may be prone to a sinkhole event. Figure 62: Historic Coal Mining Areas Source: IDNR, 2022123 123 IDNR. Accessed April 2022. “Iowa Coal Mines.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 180 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Extent Any sinkhole that might occur would likely be isolated to a small area. Historical Occurrences There have been no reported sinkholes within the county. Average Annual Losses There is no data available to determine damage estimates for this hazard. In most cases, individual property owners, local governments, and businesses pay for repairs for damages caused by this hazard. Probability Future occurrences of sinkholes are possible, but without a well-documented record of events, it is difficult to determine the overall probability of this hazard. However, for the purposes of this plan, the probability of sinkholes will be estimated as ten percent annually. Community Top Hazard Status No jurisdictions identified Sinkhole as a top hazard of concern. Regional Vulnerabilities The following table summarizes regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional-specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 100: Regional Sinkhole Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Citizens living near old mining operations in the northern half of the Country are at risk Economic -If a business is impacted, employees may be temporarily out of work Built Environment -All building stock has a small risk of damage Infrastructure -All underground infrastructure at risk to damages Critical Facilities -Roadways may be damaged Climate -Fluctuating precipitation extremes (drought or heavy rain events) can cause sinkholes ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 181 Terrorism and Civil Unrest Terrorism and civil disorder are broad terms typically used by law enforcement to describe groups of people protesting major socio-political problems by choosing not to observe a law or regulation or the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives. Though peaceful public demonstrations are allowed under US Federal law, any domestic situations such as a strike or riot involving three or more people could be considered civil disorder if the demonstration has devolved into having a potential for causing injuries, casualties, or property damage.124,125 According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), there is no single, universally accepted definition of terrorism. Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives”.126 Terrorist activities are also classified based on motivation behind the event (such as religious fundamentalism, national separatist movements, and social revolutionary movements). Terrorism can also be random with no ties to ideological reasoning. The FBI further describes terrorism as either domestic or international, depending on the origin, base, and objectives of the terrorist organization. For this plan, the following definitions from the FBI will be used: • Domestic terrorism is the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or Puerto Rico without foreign direction committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives. • International terrorism involves violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or any state, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or any state. These acts appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of a government by assassination or kidnapping. International terrorist acts occur outside the United States or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to coerce or intimidate, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum. There are different types of terrorism depending on the target of attack, which are: • Political Terrorism • Bio-Terrorism • Cyber-Terrorism • Eco-Terrorism • Nuclear-Terrorism 124 Civil Disorders, 18 U.S. Code § 231-233 (1992) 125 Terrorism, 28 U.S. Code § 0.85. 126 Terrorism, 28 U.S. Code Section 0.85 ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 182 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 • Narco-Terrorism • Agro-Terrorism Terrorist activities are also classified based on motivation behind the event such as ideology religious fundamentalism, national separatist movements, and social revolutionary movements). Terrorism can also be random with no ties to ideological reasoning. The FBI also provides clear definitions of a terrorist incident and prevention: • A terrorist incident is a violent act or an act dangerous to human life, in violation of the criminal laws of the United States, or of any state, to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives. • Terrorism prevention is a documented instance in which a violent act by a known or suspected terrorist group or individual with the means and a proven propensity for violence is successfully interdicted through investigative activity. Cyber-terrorism is an incident involving the theft or modification of information on computer systems that can compromise the system or potentially disrupt essential services. A cyber- terrorism incident can impact city agencies, private utilities, or critical infrastructure/key resources like a power grid, public transportation system, and wireless networks. Cyber infrastructure includes electronic information and communications systems, and the information contained in those systems. Computer systems, control systems such as Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems, and networks such as the Internet are all part of cyber infrastructure. Nation-states, criminal organizations, terrorists, and other malicious actors conduct attacks against critical cyber infrastructure on an ongoing basis. The impact of a serious cyber incident or successful cyber-attack would be devastating to state, local, tribal, and territorial governments’ assets, systems, and/or networks; the information contained in those networks; and the confidence of those who trust governments to secure those systems. A cyber incident can affect a system’s: • Confidentiality: protecting a user’s private information • Integrity: ensuring that data is protected and cannot be altered by unauthorized parties • Availability: keeping services running and giving administration access to key networks and controls. The Department of Homeland Security and its affiliated agencies are responsible for disseminating any information regarding terrorist activities in the country. The system in place is the National Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS). NTAS replaced the Homeland Security Advisory “Many of the Nation’s essential and emergency services, as well as our critical infrastructure, rely on the uninterrupted use of the Internet and the communications systems, data, monitoring, and control systems that comprise our cyber infrastructure. A cyber-attack could be debilitating to our highly interdependent critical infrastructure and key resources and ultimately to our economy and national security.” - National Strategy for Homeland Security ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 183 System (HSAS) which was the color-coded system put in place after the September 11th attacks by Presidential Directive 5 and 8 in March of 2002. NTAS replaced HSAS in 2011. NTAS is based on a system of analyzing threat levels and providing either an imminent threat alert or an elevated threat alert. An Imminent Threat Alert warns of a credible, specific and impending terrorist threat against the United States. An Elevated Threat Alert warns of a credible terrorist threat against the United States. The Department of Homeland Security, in conjunction with other federal agencies, will decide whether a threat alert of one kind or the other should be issued should credible information be available. Each alert provides a statement summarizing the potential threat and what, if anything should be done to ensure public safety. U.S. Code on civil disorder considers the following actions to be civil disorder: Whoever teaches or demonstrates to any other person the use, application, or making of any firearm or explosive or incendiary device, or technique capable of causing injury or death to persons, knowing or having reason to know or intending that the same will be unlawfully employed for use in, or in furtherance of, a civil disorder which may in any way or degree obstruct, delay, or adversely affect commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce or the conduct or performance of any federally protected function; or Whoever transports or manufactures for transportation in commerce any firearm, or explosive or incendiary device, knowing or having reason to know or intending that the same will be used unlawfully in furtherance of a civil disorder; or Whoever commits or attempts to commit any act to obstruct, impede, or interfere with any fireman or law enforcement officer lawfully engaged in the lawful performance of his official duties incident to and during the commission of a civil disorder which in any way or degree obstructs, delays, or adversely affects commerce or the movement of any article or commodity in commerce or the conduct or performance of any federally protected function Primarily, threat assessment, mitigation and response to civil unrest and terrorism are federal and state directives and work primarily with local law enforcement. The Office of Infrastructure Protection within the Federal Department of Homeland Security is a component within the National Programs and Protection Directorate. Location Terrorism and Civil Unrest can occur throughout the entire planning area. Urban area, schools, and government buildings are more likely to see terroristic activity. Concerns are primarily related to political unrest, activists’ groups, and others that may be targeting businesses police, and federal buildings. In schools, concerns center on political terrorism and are generally perpetrated erratically by loners. In rural areas, concerns are primarily related to agro-terrorism and tampering with water supplies. However, water systems of any size could be vulnerable. Extent Incidents of civil disorder and terrorism can vary greatly in scale and magnitude, depending on the location of the attack, number of protesters, and reasoning for unrest. Historical Occurrences To identify any incidence of civil disorder or terrorism in the planning area, data was gathered from the Global Terrorism Database, maintained by the University of Maryland and the National ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 184 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START). This database contains information for over 140,000 terrorist attacks. According to this database, there were zero civil disorder or terrorist incidents within the planning area from 1970-2017.127 Average Annual Damages According to the START Global Terrorism Database (1970-2017), no civil unrest or terrorist events have occurred in the planning area. As there were no such events within the planning area, there were no average annual damages. Probability Given zero incidences over a 48-year period, the annual probability for civil unrest and terrorism in the planning area has a less than one percent chance of occurring during any given year. This does not indicate that an event will never occur within the planning area, only that the likelihood of such an event is incredibly low. Community Top Hazard Status Waukee School District was the only jurisdiction that identified Terrorism and Civil Unrest as a top hazard of concern. Regional Vulnerabilities The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional- specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 101: Regional Terrorism Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Police officers and first responders at risk of injury or death -Civilians at risk of injury or death -Students and staff at school facilities at risk of injury or death from school shootings Economic -Damaged businesses can cause loss of revenue and loss of income for workers -Agricultural attacks could cause significant economic losses for the region -Risk of violence in an area can reduce income flowing into and out of that area Built Environment -Targeted buildings may sustain heavy damage Infrastructure -Water supply, power plants, utilities may be damaged Critical Facilities -Police stations, government offices, and schools are at a higher risk Climate -None 127 National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism. 2018. Global Terrorism Database [Data file]. Retrieved from ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 185 Tornado and Windstorm A tornado is typically associated with a supercell thunderstorm. For a rotation to be classified as a tornado, three characteristics must be met: • There must be a microscale rotating area of wind, ranging in size from a few feet to a few miles wide; • The rotating wind, or vortex, must be attached to a convective cloud base and must be in contact with the ground; and, • The spinning vortex of air must have caused enough damage to be classified by the Fujita Scale as a tornado. Once tornadoes are formed, they can be extremely violent and destructive. They have been recorded all over the world but are most prevalent in the American Midwest and South, in an area known as “Tornado Alley.” Approximately 1,250 tornadoes are reported annually in the contiguous United States. Tornadoes can travel distances over 100 miles and reach over 11 miles above ground. Tornadoes usually stay on the ground no more than 20 minutes. Nationally, the tornado season typically occurs between April and July. On average, 80% of tornadoes occur between noon and midnight. In Iowa, 64% of all tornadoes occur in the months of May, June, and July. Iowa is ranked sixth in the nation for tornado frequency with an annual average of 47 tornadoes between 1985 and 2014.128 Figure 63 shows the tornado activity in the United States as a summary of recorded EF3, EF4, and EF5 tornadoes per 2,470 square miles from 1950 through 2006. 128 NOAA. “U.S. Annual Averages: Tornadoes by State (1985-2014)”. Accessed April 2022. 2014-stateavgtornadoes.png ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 186 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 63: Tornado Activity in the United States Source: FEMA, 2008129 Windstorms typically accompany severe thunderstorms, severe winter storms, tornadoes, and other large low-pressure systems, which can cause significant crop damage, downed power lines, loss of electricity, traffic flow obstructions, and significant property damage including to trees and center-pivot irrigation systems. The National Weather Service (NWS) defines high winds as sustained wind speeds of 40 mph or greater lasting for one hour or longer, or winds of 58 mph or greater for any duration.130 The NWS issues High Wind Advisories when there are sustained winds of 25 to 39 mph and/or gusts to 57 mph. Figure 64 shows the wind zones in the United States. The wind zones are based on the maximum wind speeds that can occur from a tornado or hurricane event. The planning area is located in Zone IV which has maximum winds of 250 mph, equivalent to an EF5 tornado. 129 Federal Emergency Management Agency. August 2008. “Taking Shelter From the Storm: Building a Safe Room for Your Home or Small Business, 3rd edition.” 130 National Weather Service. 2017. “Glossary.” http://w1.weather.gov/glossary/index.php?letter=h. Planning Area ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 187 Figure 64: Wind Zones in the U.S. Source: FEMA, 2016 Location Windstorms commonly occur throughout Dallas County and tornadoes can take place anywhere in the county. The impacts would likely be greater in densely populated areas, such as cities within the Des Moines Metro, Perry, and Adel . Figure 65 shows the historical track locations across the region according to the Midwestern Regional Climate Center. A few significant tornado events have directly impacted communities located in the planning area between 1996 and 2021. These include a 2005 EF2 that impacted Minburn and Woodward, and an EF2 in Granger in 1998. Planning Area ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 188 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 65: Historic Tornado Tracks ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 189 Extent The Beaufort Wind Scale can be used to classify wind strength, while the magnitude of tornadoes is measured by the Enhanced Fujita Scale. Table 102 outlines the Beaufort scale, provides wind speed ranking, range of wind speeds per ranking, and a brief description of conditions for each ranking. Table 102: Beaufort Wind Ranking Beaufort Wind Force Ranking Range of Wind Conditions 0 <1 mph Smoke rises vertically 1 1 – 3 mph Direction shown by smoke but not wind vanes 2 4 – 7 mph Wind felt on face; leaves rustle; wind vanes move 3 8 – 12 mph Leaves and small twigs in constant motion 4 13 – 18 mph Raises dust and loose paper; small branches move 5 19 – 24 mph Small trees in leaf begin to move 6 25 – 31 mph Large branches in motion; umbrellas used with difficulty 7 32 – 38 mph Whole trees in motion; inconvenience felt when walking against the wind 8 39 – 46 mph Breaks twigs off tree; generally, impedes progress 9 47 – 54 mph Slight structural damage; chimneypots and slates removed 10 55 – 63 mph Trees uprooted; considerable structural damages; improperly or mobiles homes with no anchors turned over 11 64 – 72 mph Widespread damages; very rarely experienced Source: Storm Prediction Center, 2017131 Using the NCEI reported events, the most common windstorm event in the planning area is a level 10 on the Beaufort Wind Ranking scale. The reported high wind events ranged from 40 mph to 70 mph, with an average speed of 55 mph. The Enhanced Fujita Scale replaced the Fujita Scale in 2007. The Enhanced Fujita Scale does not measure tornadoes by their size or width, but rather the amount of damage caused to human- built structures and trees after the event. The official rating category provides a common benchmark that allows comparisons to be made between different tornadoes. The enhanced scale classifies EF0-EF5 damage as determined by engineers and meteorologists across 28 different types of damage indicators, including different types of building and tree damage. To establish a rating, engineers and meteorologists examine the damage, analyze the ground-swirl patterns, review damage imagery, collect media reports, and sometimes utilize photogrammetry and videogrammetry. Based on the most severe damage to any well-built frame house, or any comparable damage as determined by an engineer, an EF-Scale number is assigned to the tornado. 131 Storm Prediction Center: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 1805. “Beaufort Wind Scale.” http://www.spc.noaa.gov/faq/tornado/beaufort.html. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 190 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 The following tables summarize the Enhanced Fujita Scale and damage indicators. According to a recent report from the National Institute of Science and Technology on the Joplin Tornado, tornadoes rated EF3 or lower account for around 96 percent of all tornado damages.132 Table 103: Enhanced Fujita Scale Storm Category 3 Second Gust (mph) Damage Level Damage Description EF0 65-85 mph Gale Some damages to chimneys; breaks branches off trees; pushes over shallow-rooted trees; damages to sign boards. EF1 86-110 mph Weak The lower limit is the beginning of hurricane wind speed; peels surface off roofs; mobile homes pushed off foundations or overturned; moving autos pushed off the roads; attached garages might be destroyed. EF2 111-135 mph Strong Considerable damage. Roofs torn off frame houses; mobile homes demolished; boxcars pushed over; large trees snapped or uprooted; light object missiles generated. EF3 136-165 mph Severe Roof and some walls torn off well-constructed houses; trains overturned; most trees in forest uprooted. EF4 166-200 mph Devastating Well-constructed houses leveled; structures with weak foundations blown off some distance; cars thrown, and large missiles generated. EF5 200+ mph Incredible Strong frame houses lifted off foundations and carried considerable distances to disintegrate; automobile sized missiles fly through the air in excess of 100 meters; trees debarked; steel re- enforced concrete structures badly damaged. EF No rating Inconceivable Should a tornado with the maximum wind speed in excess of F5 occur, the extent and types of damage may not be conceived. A number of missiles such as iceboxes, water heaters, storage tanks, automobiles, etc. will create serious secondary damage on structures. Source: NOAA; FEMA Table 104: Enhanced Fujita Scale Damage Indicator Number Damage Indicator Number Damage Indicator 1 Small barns, farm outbuildings 15 School - 1-story elementary (interior or exterior halls) 2 One- or two-family residences 16 School - Junior or Senior high school 3 Single-wide mobile home (MHSW) 17 Low-rise (1-4 story) bldg. 4 Double-wide mobile home 18 Mid-rise (5-20 story) bldg. 132 Kuligowski, E.D., Lombardo, F.T., Phan, L.T., Levitan, M.L., & Jorgensen, D.P. March 2014. “Final Report National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Technical Investigation of the May 22, 2011, Tornado in Joplin, Missouri.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 191 Number Damage Indicator Number Damage Indicator 5 Apartment, condo, townhouse (3 stories or less) 19 High-rise (over 20 stories) 6 Motel 20 Institutional bldg. (hospital, govt. or university) 7 Masonry apartment or motel 21 Metal building system 8 Small retail bldg. (fast food) 22 Service station canopy 9 Small professional (doctor office, branch bank) 23 Warehouse (tilt-up walls or heavy timber) 10 Strip mall 24 Transmission line tower 11 Large shopping mall 25 Free-standing tower 12 Large, isolated ("big box") retail bldg. 26 Free standing pole (light, flag, luminary) 13 Automobile showroom 27 Tree - hardwood 14 Automotive service building 28 Tree - softwood Source: NOAA; FEMA Based on historic record, it is most likely that tornadoes within the planning area will be of EF0 strength. Of the 31 reported tornado events, 23 were EF0, five were EF1, two were EF2, and one was EF3. Historical Occurrences There were 31 windstorm events that occurred between 1996 and 2021 and 31 tornadic events ranging from a magnitude of EF0 to EF3. These events were responsible for $4,562,110 in property damages and $15,560,764 in crop damages. No deaths or injuries were reported. The most damaging tornado occurred in 2005, causing $2,500,000 in damages. This EF2 tornado tracked from just outside Minburn through Woodward. The tornado destroyed at least 12 houses near downtown Woodward and resulted in two serious injuries. A second EF2 tornado hit Granger in 1998 and caused $500,000 in property damage. As seen in the following figures, the majority of windstorm events occur in the spring and winter months, while most tornado events occur in the spring. The county conservation board expressed concern about people being vulnerable to tornadoes and windstorms while outside in public conservation areas. More shelter locations are needed in those areas. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 192 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 66: High Wind Events by Month Source: NCEI, 1996-2021 Figure 67: Tornadoes by Month in the Planning Area Source: NCEI, 1996-2021 4 2 2 8 5 1 0 0 0 3 4 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Number of Events Month 0 0 1 2 16 6 0 2 2 0 2 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Number of Events Month ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 193 Event descriptions from NCEI for the most damaging events are provided below. • 6/29/1998 Tornado – $500,000 in property damages, $20,000 in crop damage. A complex weather situation was set up over the central U.S. as a mesoscale convective system passed to the south of Iowa during the overnight hours and early morning of the 29th. Initially, the surface warm front was located to the south of this system. That was not actually the case aloft, however. During the predawn hours the surface front surged north and by sunrise was located across northeast Nebraska across northern Iowa. The airmass was very unstable to the south of the front with dew point temperatures will in the 70s F. The initial development of thunderstorms took place during the early part of the day over northeast Nebraska. The storms became severe quickly as they moved and developed eastward into Iowa. By mid-morning, the storms had formed a nearly east to west line. Storm relative inflow into the line was around 40 knots. The storms produced a variety of severe weather across Iowa. They initially moved east across the northern and central counties, but then began sinking southeast. The dominant severe weather with the storms was extremely high winds. Damage was very widespread across the state. Winds in excess of 100 MPH were reported with one unofficial wind speed measured at 126 MPH in the town of Washington at 1405 CST. In one unusual story, high winds hit Mahaska County. Three miles south of New Sharon, a puppy was tied to its doghouse which was picked up by the wind. The doghouse and puppy were lifted over the top of a two-car garage and a corn crib. Both were deposited in the farmyard. When found the doghouse was upside down and the puppy, though scared, was fine. There were several tornadoes during the event. One of the longer track well defined tornadoes was the initial tornado. It was on the ground for about 11 miles as it swept across Crawford County. Several residences, outbuildings, grain bins, and trees were damaged along its path. Reports indicate that between 30 and 50 residences were damaged by this tornado. There were several small tornadoes in central Iowa. They had short tracks and only touched down briefly. One cut a mile long path east of Marshalltown through a corn field and a grove of trees. Another in Dallas County was on the ground through mostly open country for two miles. High winds were a major problem with these storms. Many places reported winds over 80 MPH with incredible tree damage and numerous buildings damaged or destroyed. At least 38 counties were declared disaster areas by the Federal Government due to the severe damage and flooding. A final total will not be available before publication deadlines, however preliminary data have been included. In the Des Moines County Warning Area these included: Wright, Franklin, Butler, Bremer, Hamilton, Hardin, Grundy, Crawford, Carroll, Greene, Boone, Story, Marshall, Audubon, Guthrie, Dallas, Polk, Jasper, Cass, Adair, Madison, Warren, Marion, Adams, and Taylor. One of the hardest hit Counties was Polk County. Damage appeared to be from straight line winds based on a storm survey that was done following the event. The damage occurred over the southwest semicircle of a large meso low in contact with the ground. Due to the rapid translational speed of 50 to 75 MPH, winds were enhanced on the southwest semicircle of the meso low. Smaller scale winds could have been embedded within this circulation as well. There was little evidence of small scale convergent tornadic damage, however aerial surveys did make some suggestion and eyewitness accounts of sightings were quite numerous in the metro Des Moines area. All trees and debris were laid down to the south or southeast. The major damage swath as 3 to 7 miles wide northwest of Camp Dodge, with a widening into a full-blown derecho after that. The event was born a few miles northwest of Perry, between Rippey and Berkley in southwest Boone County. The mile wide damage path expanded to over 3 miles by the time it reached full intensity near highway 169 between Woodward and Perry. The path continued through Granger, Camp Dodge, and Johnston. The path was nearly 7 miles wide near Granger. A second, smaller, meso low passed near Madrid, downing power lines. This meso low matured near Jester Park Golf Course, causing significant structural damage to houses. The two meso lows merged near the NWS Forecast Office in Johnston, with two miles of power poles snapped off between Johnston and Granger. Much of the damage along the most severe track was in the F1 intensity category, with speeds in the 75 to 110 MPH range. A few spots along the path, such as in the Granger and Camp Dodge area, sustained ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 194 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 sufficient damage to justify F2 winds, 110 to 155 MPH. It appears a tornado or family of tornadoes touched down southeast of Berkley and moved southeast into the Pleasant Hill area just east of Des Moines. The track was intermittent, indicating either one tornado touching down occasionally, or one or more weak tornadoes rotating around the meso circulation. The worst effected metro areas were the Granger area, Johnston, and the northeast side of Des Moines proper. A duplex in Granger was flattened by the winds. There were several reports of roofs being ripped off stores and houses in the metropolitan Des Moines area. Several small private planes were flipped at a small airfield north of Des Moines. There were also several reports of semi-tractor-trailer trucks being blown over on Interstate 35. Heavy construction equipment was overturned on Interstate 35/80 just north of Des Moines. Damage was extensive to the east side of Des Moines proper. To make matters worse, following the passage of the main line of thunderstorms, a second line of severe thunderstorms developed and moved across the same areas already hit. The storms were smaller but did produce brief tornado touch downs and hail up to 2.5 inches in diameter. The second line of storms did eventually combine with the first and moved southeast across the rest of the state. Damage was widespread across the state, and it will be months before final numbers are in. Estimates from Polk County alone are near $100 million in damage including cleanup. Totals were still being tallied at this writing; however, a few include over $11 million in damage from initial claims in Johnston and $726,000 from West Des Moines just to city buildings and systems. West Des Moines was on the far west edge of the major damage, however. In addition to the property damage, at least 125 people were injured during the storm. Most of the injuries were caused by flying debris and many were not serious. Fortunately, there were no fatalities. Heavy damage was reported by MidAmerica Energy. On a statewide report, they indicated 200,000 homes were without electricity, effecting over 500,000 people, at one time during the storm. In the metropolitan Des Moines area, 100,000 homes were without electricity at the height of the storm. That number was reduced to around 25,000 36 hours later. The worst damaged areas were without power for 5 to 6 days. Heavy damage was also reported by local telephone and cable systems. In Polk County, the worst damage extended from the Camp Dodge area into the northeast parts of Des Moines. At least 462 homes in the metro Des Moines area sustained significant damage. Statewide, 80 homes were destroyed, 559 sustained severe damage, with 1416 others receiving moderate damage. In the Camp Dodge area, 80 to 90 percent of the brick buildings were damaged with the roofs removed from many of them. Lightning from the storms struck the WSR-88D in the midst of the storm. The radar was taken out of service for more than 24 hours because of this. In addition to the severe weather, flooding quickly became a problem. Iowa soil was nearly saturated as the weather pattern had been very wet for six weeks previous. Although rainfall was not extreme, one to three inches of rain fell over a several county area. This caused widespread urban flooding across north central into central Iowa, though damage from the flooding was not serious. Crop damage was very difficult to determine and will not likely be clear until the fall harvest. Reports from some of the local extension agents say damage to the corn ranged up to 75% destroyed in areas with the highest wind, such as the swath that went through central Iowa in association with the tornado there. No doubt losses will be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars if not in the millions. Accounts of damage were of course too numerous to document here as the areal extent of the storms was very large. Countless reports of parts of crop fields being flattened were received. Semi-tractor-trailer trucks were overturned by the high winds both in the Des Moines metro area as well as in Newton. Trees were found on houses over a large part of the state. One news reported wrote there is not a power pole standing between Fort Dodge and Oskaloosa". Though not figuratively true this statement does point out the extensive damage that occurred with these storms. • "11/12/2005 Tornado - $2,500,000 in property damages. A very intense weather system developed over the central U.S. during the day on the 12th. A strong upper-level system moved through the area with mid and upper-level winds in the 70 to 90 kt range. Low level winds of 35 to 50 kts transported moisture north into the system. High temperatures reached the mid-60s to ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 195 low 70s, with dew point readings approaching 60 by late afternoon. A surface low developed over northern Kansas during the previous night and lifted northeast into eastern South Dakota during the afternoon of the 12th, then into central Minnesota as a 985 mb low by late evening. The atmosphere became quite unstable with CAPE values reaching 1000 J/kg by late afternoon. The Lifted Index values were in the -5 C. range. Being as it was in November, the freezing level was quite low during the event, in the 10,000-to-11,000-foot range. Though the soundings were quite unidirectional, there was plenty of shear with zero to 6 km shear values around 65 kts. Thunderstorms erupted during the afternoon in west central into southwest Iowa. The storms became severe quite quickly. Initially the storms produce quarter to golf ball size hail, with 2 1/2- inch diameter hail falling in Dallas County. Hail up to baseball size fell in Greene County as well. The system transitioned into a tornadic system within an hour with several tornadoes touching down in the central sections of the state. At least 9 communities were hit by tornadoes and 65 homes damaged or destroyed. An 82-year-old woman was killed in Stratford when the tornado demolished her home. In a 2 or 3 block area of downtown Woodward, at least 12 houses were totally destroyed. There was one minor injury in Ames, two serious injuries in the Woodward area, and three injuries in Stratford. Due to the extensive damage to property caused by the tornadoes, Iowa Governor Vilsack declared Boone, Story, Webster, Dallas, and Hamilton Counties disaster areas. Average Annual Damages The average damage per event estimate was determined based upon NCEI Storm Events Database since 1996 and number of historical occurrences. This does not include losses from displacement, functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. It is estimated that windstorm events can cause an average of $36,850 per year in property damages and $707,307 per year in crop damages. Tornadoes have caused an average of $138,615 per year in property damages; however, damages from tornadoes vary greatly depending on the severity or magnitude of each event. Table 105: Tornado and Windstorm Loss Estimate Hazard Type Number of Events1 Average Events Per Year Total Property Loss1 Average Annual Property Loss1 Total Crop Loss2 Average Annual Crop Loss2 Tornado 31 1.2 $3,604,000 $138,615 $0 $0 Windstorm 31 1.2 $958,110 $36,850 $15,560,764 $707,307 Source: 1 Indicates data is from NCEI (1996 to 2021); 2 Indicates data is from USDA RMA (2000 to 2021) Probability Given the historic record of occurrence for windstorms (18 out of 26 years with reported events), for the purposes of this plan, the annual probability of windstorm occurrence is 69 percent. However, windstorms could be more common than presented here but may have simply not been reported in past years. Given the historic record of occurrence for tornado events (17 out of 26 years with reported events), for the purposes of this plan, the annual probability of tornado occurrence is 65 percent. However, it is worth noting that the period of record for data utilized during this analysis is from 1996-2021. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 196 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Figure 68: Tornado Events Per Year Source: NCEI, 1996-2021 Figure 69: Windstorm Events Per Year 0 1 2 2 4 1 0 0 4 1 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 1 2 2 1 Number of Tornadoes Year 5 2 2 1 0 1 1 2 3 2 3 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 Number of Windstorms Year ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 197 Community Top Hazard Status The following table lists jurisdictions which identified Tornado and Windstorm as a top hazard of concern: Jurisdictions Adel Waukee Bouton Woodward Dallas Center Adel-DeSoto-Minburn School District Dawson Dallas Center-Grimes School District De Soto Perry Community School District Dexter Van Meter School District Granger Waukee School District Linden West Central Valley School District Minburn Woodward-Granger School District Perry Woodward Township Fire District Redfield Perry Water Works Van Meter Regional Vulnerabilities The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional- specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 106: Regional Tornado and Windstorm Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Vulnerable populations include those living in mobile homes (especially if they are not anchored properly), nursing homes, and/or schools -People outdoors during events -Citizens without access to shelter below ground or in safe rooms -Elderly with decreased mobility or poor hearing may be higher risk -Lack of multiple ways of receiving weather warnings, especially at night Economic -Agricultural losses to both crops and livestock -Damages to businesses and prolonged power outages can cause significant impacts to the local economy, especially with EF3 tornadoes or greater Built Environment -All building stock is at risk of significant damages Infrastructure -Downed power lines and power outages -All above ground infrastructure at risk to damages -Impassable roads due to debris blocking roadways Critical Facilities -All critical facilities are at risk to damages and power outages Climate -Changes in seasonal precipitation and temperature normals can increase frequency and magnitude of severe storm events ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 198 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Transportation Incident A transportation accident involves an incident between one or more conveyances on land, sea, or air. Transportation accidents can cause property damage, bodily injury, and death. Accidents are influenced by several factors, including the type of driver, road condition, weather conditions, density of traffic, type of roadway, signage, and signaling. In the planning area, automobile accidents are likely to be the most common type of incident as there are few rail lines and bodies of water. In addition, most of the airports in the county are smaller with a low number of takeoffs and landings. Location Transportation incidents can occur anywhere along transportation routes in the planning area but are most likely to occur along major highways due to increased speeds and the higher number of vehicles. The Perry Municipal Airport is the only public airport in Dallas County, according to the Iowa Department of Transportation. The Des Moines International Airport is only six miles east of southeast Dallas County. Des Moines International Airport, Iowa’s largest airport, serves over one million passengers per year plus 120,000+ tons of cargo and some military use. Figure 70 shows the location of the major transportation routes in the planning area. Extent The extent of automobile, rail, and air incidents is usually localized, however catastrophic events can occur and may require assistance from outside jurisdictions. Transportation incidents can also cause hazard materials releases, which can further increase damages and risk of injury. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 199 Figure 70: Transportation Corridors ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 200 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Historical Occurrences Automobile The Iowa Department of Transportation (IDOT) maintains records at the county level for certain automobile related accidents. The following figure shows total crashes from 2012 to April 2022. These events resulted in a total of 11,472 crashes, 3,780 injuries, and 53 fatalities. Figure 71: Automobile Crashes 2012 - April 2022 Source: IDOT133 Highway Rail The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) keeps data on all highway rail accidents since 1975. Table 107 shows the number of highway rail accidents that have occurred in the county from 1975 to 2021. 17 injuries and three deaths resulted from these events. Table 107: Historical Highway Rail Incidents Number of Incidents Injuries Fatalities 31 17 3 Source: Federal Railroad Administration, 1975-2021134 133 Iowa Department of Transportation. 2022. "ICAT-Iowa Crash Analysis Tool." 134 Federal Railroad Administration. 2022. “Highway Rail Accidents”. 854 968 988 1,080 1,156 1,123 1,347 1,339 1,035 1,238 344 Total Crashes Year ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 201 Aviation From 1962 through April 2022, there were nine aviation accidents in the planning area, as reported by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) database. The events resulted in five injuries and two fatalities. Table 108: Historical Aviation Incidents Date Phase of Flight Injuries Fatalities Nearest Community 5/2/1982 Landing 0 1 Adel 8/24/1996 Landing 0 0 Dexter 12/30/1983 Cruise 2 0 Grimes 8/9/1999 Landing 0 0 Perry 7/10/1989 Maneuvering 1 0 Perry 4/10/1986 Takeoff 0 0 Perry 9/9/1983 Approach 1 0 Perry 5/7/1998 Maneuvering 0 1 Waukee 3/17/2022 Unlisted 1 0 De Soto Source: National Transportation Safety Board, 1962-April 2022135 Average Annual Damages The average damage per event estimate was determined for each incident type based upon records from IDOT, FRA, NTSB, and number of historical occurrences. Only transportation events from FRA included damage totals. This does not include losses from functional downtime, economic loss, injury, or loss of life. Transportation incidents have caused an average of $6,943,739 per year in property damages to the planning area. RMA data is not available for transportation incidents, but crop damage would be expected to be minimal. Table 109: Transportation Incidents Loss Estimate Hazard Type Number of Events Average Events per Year Total Property Loss Average Annual Property Loss Auto1 11,472 1,043 $76,326,109 $6,938,737 Aviation2 9 0.15 N/A N/A Highway Rail3 31 0.67 $300,148 $5,002 Total 11,512 1,044 $76,626,257 $6,943,739 Source:1 IDOT, 2012-April 2022; 2 NTSB 1962-April 2022; 3 FRA 1975- 2021 Probability The probability of transportation incidents is based on the historic record provided by the IDOT, FRA, and NTSB. Based on the historic record, there is a 100% annual probability of auto incidents, a 13% annual probability (8 out of 60 years with reported events) for aviation incidents, and a 40% probability (19 out of 47 years) of highway rail incidents occurring in the planning area each year. 135 National Transportation Safety Board. 1962-April 2022. “Aviation Accident Database & Synopses”. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Four I Risk Assessment 202 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Community Top Hazard Status The following table lists jurisdictions which identified Transportation Incident as a top hazard of concern: Jurisdictions Dexter Waukee School District Granger West Central Valley School District Van Meter Woodward-Granger School District Waukee Woodward Township Fire District Regional Vulnerabilities The following table provides information related to regional vulnerabilities; for jurisdictional- specific vulnerabilities, refer to Section Seven: Community Profiles. Table 110: Regional Transportation Incidents Vulnerabilities Sector Vulnerability People -Injuries and fatalities to drivers and passengers -Injuries and fatalities to those nearby if hit Economic -Prolonged road closures and detours for clean-up Built Environment -Potential damage to nearby buildings Infrastructure -Damage to roadways, utility poles, and other infrastructure if struck by a vehicle Critical Facilities -Roadway closures -Damage to facilities if located near transportation routes Climate -None ---PAGE BREAK--- Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 203 Section Five: Mitigation Strategy Introduction The primary focus of the mitigation strategy is to identify action items to reduce the effects of hazards on existing infrastructure and property based on the established goals. These actions should consider the most cost effective and technically feasible manner to address risk. The establishment of goals took place during the kick-off meeting with the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team. Meeting participants reviewed the goals from the 2018 HMP and discussed recommended additions and modifications. The intent of each goal is to develop strategies to account for risks associated with hazards and identify ways to reduce or eliminate those risks. The Hazard Mitigation Planning Team decided to keep the same list of goals from the 2018 HMP, with a couple slight modifications. “Natural hazards” was updated to “All hazards” to provide clarification, and the order was changed to move the fourth goal to be listed first to reflect the priority of protecting people. The goals were then shared with all planning team members at the Round 1 public meetings. Summary of Changes The development of the mitigation strategy for this plan update includes the addition of new mitigation and strategic actions, updated status or removal of past actions, and revisions to the mitigation and strategic action selection process or descriptions of actions for consistency across the planning area. Requirement §201.6(c)(3): The plan shall include a mitigation strategy that provides the jurisdiction’s blueprint for reducing the potential losses identified in the risk assessment, based on existing authorities, policies, programs, and resources, and its ability to expand on and improve these tools. Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(i): The hazard mitigation strategy shall include a description of mitigation goals to reduce or avoid long-term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards. Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(ii): The mitigation strategy shall include a section that identifies and analyzes a comprehensive range of specific mitigation actions and projects being considered to reduce the effects of each hazard, with particular emphasis on new and existing buildings and infrastructure. The jurisdiction’s participation in the National Flood Insurance Program and continued compliance with NFIP requirements, as appropriate, must also be addressed. Requirement: §201.6(c)(3)(iii): The mitigation strategy section shall include an action plan describing how the actions identified in section (c)(3)(ii) will be prioritized, implemented, and administered by the local jurisdiction. Prioritization shall include a special emphasis on the extent to which benefits are maximized according to a cost benefit review of the proposed projects and their associated costs. Requirement §201.6(c)(3)(iv): For multi- jurisdictional plans, there must be identifiable action items specific to the jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval or credit of the plan. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Five I Mitigation Strategy 204 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Goals Below is the final list of goals as determined for this plan update. These goals provide direction to guide participants in reducing future hazard related losses. Goal 1: Prevent or reduce the impact of all hazards for the residents, businesses, and jurisdictions of Dallas County. Goal 2: Protect critical facilities and infrastructure from all hazards. Goal 3: Create a disaster resistant community by improving public understanding of all hazards and risk by providing public awareness, preparedness, and mitigation information through various channels of communication. Goal 4: Improve capabilities to mitigate all hazards by incorporating mitigation strategies in plans, policies, and programs. Goal 5: Strengthen communication among governmental agencies and between governmental agencies and the public. Selected Mitigation and Strategic Actions Local planning teams evaluated and prioritized mitigation and strategic actions. These actions included: the mitigation and strategic actions identified per jurisdiction in the previous plan; additional mitigation and strategic actions discussed during the planning process; and recommendations from JEO for additional mitigation and strategic actions based on risk probability and vulnerability at the local level. The Hazard Mitigation Planning Team provided each participant a link to the FEMA Handbook as a list of mitigation actions to be used as a starting point. Participants were also encouraged to think of actions that may need FEMA grant assistance and to review their hazard prioritization for potential mitigation actions. These suggestions helped participants determine which actions would best assist their respective jurisdiction in alleviating damages in the event of a disaster. The listed priority rating does not indicate which actions will be implemented first but serves as a guide in determining the order in which each action should be implemented. Participants were informed of the STAPLEE (Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic, Environmental) feasibility review process and were encouraged to use it when determining project priorities. These prioritized projects are the core of a hazard mitigation plan. The local planning teams were instructed that each action must directly relate to the goals of the plan and the hazards of top concern for their jurisdiction. Actions must be specific activities that are concise and can be implemented individually. Mitigation and strategic actions were evaluated based on referencing the community’s risk assessment and capability assessment. Jurisdictions were encouraged to choose mitigation and strategic actions that were realistic and relevant to the concerns identified. A final list of alternatives was established including the following information: description of action; which hazard(s) the action addresses; responsible party; priority; cost estimate; potential local funding sources; and estimated timeline. This information was established through input from participants and determination by the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Five I Mitigation Strategy Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 205 It is important to note that not all the mitigation and strategic actions identified by a jurisdiction may ultimately be implemented due to limited capabilities, prohibitive costs, low benefit-cost ratio, or other concerns. These factors may not be identified during this planning process. The cost estimates, priority rating, potential funding, and identified agencies are used to give communities an idea of what actions may be most feasible over the next five years. This information will serve as a guide for the participants to assist in hazard mitigation for the future. Also, some jurisdictions may identify and pursue additional mitigation and strategic actions not identified in this HMP. Participant Mitigation and Strategic Actions Mitigation and strategic actions identified by participants of the Dallas County HMP are found in the Mitigation and Strategic Actions Project Matrix below. Additional information about selected actions can be found in respective Section Seven: Community Profiles. Each action includes the following information in the respective community profile. • Action: General title of the action item. • Description: Brief summary of what the action item(s) will accomplish. • Hazard(s) Addressed: Which hazard the action aims to address. • Estimated Cost: General cost estimate for implementing the action for the appropriate jurisdiction. • Funding: A list of any potential local funding mechanisms to fund the action. • Timeline: General timeline as established by planning participants. • Priority: General description of the importance and workability in which an action may be implemented (high/medium/low); priority may vary between each community, mostly dependent on funding capabilities and the size of the local tax base. • Lead agency: Listing of agencies or departments which may lead or oversee the implementation of the action item. • Status: A description of what has been done, if anything, to implement the action item. Implementation of the actions will vary between individual plan participants based upon the availability of existing information; funding opportunities and limitations; and administrative capabilities of communities. Establishing a cost-benefit analysis for any projects listed is beyond the scope of this plan and could potentially be completed prior to submittal of a project grant application or as part of an annual or five-year update. Completed, removed, and ongoing or new mitigation actions for each participating jurisdiction can be found in Section Seven: Community Profiles. Mitigation and Strategic Actions Project Matrix During public meetings, each participant was asked to review mitigation and strategic projects listed in the 2018 HMP and identify new potential actions, if needed, to reduce the effects of the hazards profiled for their area. Selected projects varied per jurisdiction depending upon the significance of each hazard present. The information listed in the following tables is a compilation of new and ongoing mitigation and strategic actions identified by jurisdiction. Completed and removed actions can be found in respective community profiles. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Five I Mitigation Strategy 206 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Table 111: Mitigation and Strategic Actions Selected by Each Jurisdiction (1 of 2) Actions Goal Dallas County City of Adel City of Bouton City of Dallas Center City of Dawson City of De Soto City of Dexter City of Granger City of Linden City of Minburn City of Perry City of Redfield City of Van Meter City of Waukee City of Woodward Alert/Warning Sirens 1, 3 X X X X Backup and Emergency Generators 1, 2 X X X X X X X Bank Stabilization 1, 2 X Building Code Enforcement/Improvement 1, 2, 4 X Clean Culverts/ Deepen Drainage Ditches 1, 2 X Emergency Management Exercise 1, 3 Emergency Operations 1, 2, 5 X X Flood Control Structure Improvements 1, 2 X Floodplain Management 1, 2 X Flood Prone Property Acquisition 1 X HAZMAT Training/Awareness 1, 3, 5 X Improve Water System 1, 2 X NIMS Training 1, 5 X X Public Awareness/Education 1, 3 X X X X X X Remove Hazardous Trees 1, 2 X Short Term Residency Shelters 1 X Storm Shelters / Safe Rooms 1, 2 X X X X X X X X X X ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Five I Mitigation Strategy Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 207 Actions Goal Dallas County City of Adel City of Bouton City of Dallas Center City of Dawson City of De Soto City of Dexter City of Granger City of Linden City of Minburn City of Perry City of Redfield City of Van Meter City of Waukee City of Woodward Stormwater System and Drainage Improvements 1, 2 X X X X X X Tree Management 1, 2 X X X Water Storage 1, 2 X X Table 112: Mitigation and Strategic Actions Selected by Each Jurisdiction (2 of 2) Actions Goal Adel-DeSoto-Minburn Schools Dallas Center-Grimes Schools Perry Community Schools Perry Water Works Van Meter Schools Waukee Schools West Central Valley Schools Woodward-Granger Schools Xenia Rural Water District Woodward Township Fire District Backup and Emergency Generators 1, 2 X X X X X Bank Stabilization 1, 2 X Civil Service Improvements 1, 2 X Emergency Management Exercise 1, 3, 5 X Improve Water System 1, 2 X Public Awareness/Education 1, 3 X Storm Shelters / Safe Rooms 1, 2 X X X X X X Water Treatment Plant 1, 2 X ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Five I Mitigation Strategy 208 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 This Page Is Intentionally Blank ---PAGE BREAK--- Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 209 Section Six: Plan Implementation and Maintenance Monitoring, Evaluating, and Updating the Plan Each participating jurisdiction in the Dallas County HMP is responsible for monitoring, evaluating, and updating the plan during its five-year lifespan. Hazard mitigation and strategic projects will be prioritized by each participant’s governing body with support and suggestions from the public and business owners. Unless otherwise specified by each participant’s local planning team, the governing body will be responsible for implementing the recommended projects. The responsible party for the various implementation actions will report on the status of all projects and include which implementation processes worked well, any difficulties encountered, how coordination efforts are proceeding, and which strategies could be revised. As projects or actions are implemented, a detailed timeline of how that project was completed should be written and attached to the plan in a format selected by the governing body. Information that will be included will address project timelines, agencies involved, area(s) benefited, total cost (if complete), etc. At the discretion of each governing body, local planning team members, and other identified relevant stakeholders should review the original draft of the mitigation plan and recommend applicable changes. Plan review and updates should occur regularly, with a complete update occurring every five years at a minimum. At the discretion of each governing body, updates may be incorporated more frequently, especially in the event of a major hazard or as additional mitigation needs are identified. Local planning team members should engage with the public, other elected officials, and multiple departments as they review and update the plan. The persons overseeing the evaluation process will review the goals of the previous plan and evaluate them to determine whether they are still pertinent and current. Among other questions, they may want to consider the following: • Do the goals address current and expected conditions? • If any of the recommended projects have been completed, did they have the desired impact on the goal for which they were identified? If not, what was the reason it was not Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(i): The plan maintenance process shall include a section describing the method and schedule of monitoring, evaluating, and updating the mitigation plan within a five-year cycle. Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(ii): The plan shall include a process by which local governments incorporate the requirements of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms such as comprehensive or capital improvement plans, when appropriate. Requirement §201.6(c)(4)(iii): The plan maintenance process shall include a discussion on how the community will continue public participation in the plan maintenance process. Requirement §201.6(d)(3): A local jurisdiction must review and revise its plan to reflect changes in development, progress in local mitigation efforts, and changes in priorities, and resubmit it for approval within five years to continue to be eligible for mitigation project grant funding. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Six I Plan Implementation and Maintenance 210 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 successful (lack of funds/resources, lack of political/popular support, underestimation of the amount of time needed, etc.)? • Have either the nature, magnitude, and/or type of risks changed? • Are there implementation problems? • Are current resources appropriate to implement the plan? • Were the outcomes as expected? • Did the plan partners participate as originally planned? • Are there other agencies which should be included in the revision process? Worksheets in Appendix C may also be used to assist with plan review and updates. In addition, the governing body will be responsible for ensuring that the HMP’s goals are incorporated into applicable revisions of other planning mechanisms per jurisdiction. These plans may include: Comprehensive Plans, Capital Improvement Plans, Zoning Ordinances, Floodplain Ordinances, Building Codes, and/or Watershed Management Plans. Future updates of this HMP will review and update discussions of plan integration per community as appropriate. Continued Public Involvement To ensure continued plan support and input from the public and business owners, public involvement should remain a top priority for each participating jurisdiction. Notices for public meetings involving discussion of an action on mitigation updates should be published and posted in the following locations: • Public spaces around the jurisdiction • City/Village Hall • Websites • Social media • Local radio stations • Local newspapers • Regionally distributed newsletters Any amendments to the HMP as determined through public involvement or community actions should be shared with HSEMD. Integrating Other Capabilities There are a number of state and federal agencies with capabilities that can be leveraged during HMP updates or mitigation and strategic action implementation. A description of some regional resources is provided below. Iowa Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management HSEMD is the coordinating body for homeland security and emergency management activities across the state of Iowa. HSEMD is responsible for emergency management, which is usually divided into five phases: preparedness, response, recovery, prevention, and mitigation. The governor appoints the Iowa homeland security advisor and the director of the Iowa Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management (HSEMD). The HSEMD director serves as the state administrative agent for grants administered by the federal government: such ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Six I Plan Implementation and Maintenance Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 211 as HMGP, FMA and BRIC. HSEMD is responsible for developing the state hazard mitigation plan, which serves as a comprehensive set of guidelines for hazard mitigation across the state. The state hazard mitigation officer (SHMO) is responsible for the coordination of plan updates and maintenance. The SHMO also serves as the lead coordinator for the State Hazard Mitigation Team (SHMT), which provides input on the state hazard mitigation planning process. For more information regarding HSEMD responsibilities as well as their ongoing projects and programs, please go to Iowa Department of Natural Resources The IDNR is committed to providing Iowa’s citizens and leaders with the data and analyses they need to make appropriate natural resource decisions for the benefit of all Iowan’s both now and in the future. This state agency is responsible in the areas of forest and prairie management, fish and wildlife programs, fire prevention, surface water and groundwater, floodplain management, dam safety, natural resource planning, animal feeding operations, permitting, solid waste management, household hazardous materials and many other programs and services. IDNR also coordinates with the US Forest Service, State and private forest agencies, the Big Rivers Forest Fire Management Compact to support natural resource managers and fire departments in fire prevention efforts. For more information regarding IDNR’s responsibilities as well as their ongoing projects, please go to Silver Jackets Program The Silver Jackets program is also worth mentioning for their extensive role in providing a formal and consistent strategy for an interagency approach to planning and implementing measures to reduce the risks associated with flooding and other natural hazards. It brings together multiple state, federal, and sometimes tribal and local agencies to learn from one another and apply their knowledge to reduce risk. The State Hazard Mitigation Team and the Iowa Flood Risk Management Team, also known as the Silver Jackets, coordinate efforts related to the review and update of the Iowa Hazard Mitigation Plan. The State Hazard Mitigation Team has largely delegated flood mitigation interagency coordination to the Silver Jackets. At this time the Silver Jackets do not have any projects taking place in the Dallas County planning area. Unforeseen Opportunities If new, innovative mitigation strategies arise that could impact the planning area or elements of this plan, which are determined to be of importance, a plan amendment may be proposed. If a new mitigation action is identified in between the five-year updates, it is recommended to share this amendment with Dallas County Emergency Management, as the plan sponsor, and with HSEMD, who will file it with FEMA. Re-adoption of the plan would not be needed until the normal five-year update. Such amendments should include all applicable information for each proposed action, including description of changes, identified funding, responsible agencies, etc. For an amendment template, see Appendix C. ---PAGE BREAK--- Section Six I Plan Implementation and Maintenance 212 Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 Incorporation into Existing Planning Mechanisms The Regional Planning Team utilized a variety of plan integration tools to help communities determine how their existing planning mechanisms were related to the Hazard Mitigation Plan. Utilizing FEMA’s Integrating Hazard Mitigation Into the Local Comprehensive Plan136 guidance, as well as FEMA’s 2015 Plan Integration137 guide, each jurisdiction engaged in a plan integration discussion. This discussion was facilitated by a Plan Integration Worksheet, created by the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team. This document offered an easy way for participants to notify the Hazard Mitigation Planning Team of existing planning mechanisms, and if they interface with the HMP. Each jurisdiction referenced all relevant existing planning mechanisms and provided information on how these did or did not address hazards and vulnerability. Summaries of plan integration are found in each participant’s Community Profile. For jurisdictions that lack existing planning mechanisms, especially smaller communities, the HMP may be used as a guide for future activity and development in the jurisdiction. 136 Federal Emergency Management Agency. July 2020. “FEMA Region X Integrating the Local Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan into a Community’s Comprehensive Plan.” plan.pdf 137 Federal Emergency Management Agency. July 2015. “Plan Integration: Linking Local Planning Efforts.” ---PAGE BREAK--- Dallas County Hazard Mitigation Plan I 2023 213 Section Seven: Community Profiles Purpose of Community Profiles Community Profiles contain information specific to jurisdictions participating in the Dallas County planning effort. Community Profiles were developed with the intention of highlighting each jurisdiction’s unique characteristics that affect its risk to hazards. Community Profiles may serve as a reference of identified vulnerabilities and mitigation and strategic actions for a jurisdiction as they implement the mitigation plan. Information from individual jurisdictions was collected at public and one-on-one meetings and used to establish the plan. Community Profiles include the following elements: • Local Planning Team • Location and Geography • Demographics • Employment and Economics • Housing • Governance • Capability Assessment • Plan Integration • Future Development Trends • Community Lifelines • Structural Inventory and Valuation • Historical Occurrences • Hazard Prioritization • Mitigation Strategy • Plan Maintenance In addition, maps specific to each jurisdiction are included, such as jurisdiction identified critical facilities, flood-prone areas, and a future land use map (when available). The hazard prioritization information, as provided by individual participants, varies due in large part to the extent of the geographical area, the jurisdiction’s designated representatives (who were responsible for completing meeting worksheets), identification of hazards, and occurrence and risk of each hazard type. The overall risk assessment for the identified hazard types represents the presence and vulnerability to each hazard type throughout the entire planning area. A discussion of certain hazards selected for each Community Profile was prioritized by the local planning team based on the identification of hazards of greatest concern, hazard history, and the jurisdiction’s capabilities. The hazards not examined in depth for each community profile can be found in Section Four: Risk Assessment.