Document Jeffersoncountyga_doc_9880101909

Jefferson County, Georgia Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Original Plan Approval: 03/27/2009 Update Plan Approval: 12/29/2014 Prepared For: Jefferson County Board of Commissioners P.O. Box 658 Louisville, Georgia 30830 (478) 625-3332 FAX (478) 625-4007 Prepared By: Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission 3023 River Watch Pkwy, Suite A Augusta, Georgia 30907-2016 (706) 210-2000 FAX (706) 210-2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Jefferson County TABLE OF CONTENTS Page # Chapter One: Introduction to the Planning 1 I. Purpose and need of the plan, authority & statement of problem…………… 1 II. Local Methodology, Plan Update Process and Participants……………….. 3 III. Original Plan Review and 7 IV. Organization of the V. Local Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability…………………………..…………… 8 VI. Multi-Jurisdictional Considerations……………………………………..…….9 VII. Adoption, Implementation, Monitoring & Evaluation…………………….....10 VIII. Community Chapter Two: Local Natural Hazard, Risk & Vulnerability (HRV) I. II. Dam Failure III. IV. Wildfire V. Severe Weather 37 VI. Winter Chapter Three: Mitigation I. Introduction to II. Natural A. B. Dam C. D. Wildfire E. Severe Weather 60 F. Winter G. All Hazard III. Mitigation Chapter Four: Plan Integration and Maintenance……………………………………………..77 I. Implementation Action Plan II. Evaluation, Monitoring, 79 III. Plan Update and Maintenance Chapter Five: I. II. III. Additional Sources of Information…………………………………………….83 Appendices ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 1 CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION TO THE PLANNING PROCESS Table 1.1 provides a brief description of each section in this chapter and a summary of the changes since 2009. Table 1.1 Chapter I Section Updates to Section I. Purpose and need of the plan, authority & statement of problem Updated text of this section II. Local methodology, brief description of plan update process, Participants in update process Updated the participants, planning process and how data was collected III. Description of how each section of the original plan was reviewed and analyzed and whether it was revised There have been numerous changes to the GEMA -PDM planning template since the 2009 approval. All sections of the original plan were analyzed and revised. IV. Organization of the plan The plan is organized by GEMA local planning template Local Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Template 5-23-12 and includes a timeline. V. Local Hazard, Risk, and Vulnerability (HRV) summary, local mitigation goals and objectives Added new information to summary, new purpose for plan VI. Multi-Jurisdictional special considerations (HRV, goals, special needs) Reviewed and updated information regarding multijurisdictional concerns VII. Adoption, implementation, monitoring and evaluation This was evaluated and remains the same. Additional text was added to clearly delineate the task of implementation and monitoring. Plan was adopted after GEMA and FEMA review and approves the update plan VIII. Community Data (demographics, census, commerce, history, etc.) Updated demographic and added additional information by jurisdiction SECTION I. PURPOSE AND NEED OF THE PLAN, AUTHORITY AND STATEMENT OF PROBLEM The Jefferson County 2014 Plan Update is the review and improvement to our Multi-Hazard Pre- Disaster Mitigation Plan approved on March 27, 2009. The plan fulfills the requirements of the Federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA2K). The Act is administered by the Georgia Emergency Management Agency (GEMA) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The act provides federal assistance to state and local emergency management and other disaster response organizations in an effort to reduce damage from disasters. The plan has involved many community partners including elected officials, city and county personnel, fire, emergency management, law enforcement, and public works. The ultimate goal of this plan is to identify natural hazards and develop strategies to lessen the impact on our community. The update is written to comply with Section 409 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act Title 44 CFR as amended by Section 102 of the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. The act gives state and local governments the framework to evaluate and mitigate all hazards as a condition of receiving federal disaster funds. The 2009 plan and the 2014 update covers all of Jefferson County to include the cities of Avera, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 2 Wadley, and Wrens. The plan will identify all natural disasters that could threaten the lives and properties of our community. The scope of this update includes both short and long-term mitigation strategies, implementation and possible sources of project funding. It also identifies mitigation strategies that have been implemented since the 2009 plan. The plan also contains the following information on:  The vision of mitigation in our community;  The profile of Jefferson County, its geography, history, physical features and other community indicators;  The planning process and the involvement of all municipal, state and federal governments, the public, industry and other community players;  Documentation of Jefferson County’s past and predicted exposure to natural hazards and the potential risks that include the impacts on critical infrastructure with anticipated losses;  Procedures for maintaining an effective, long-range hazard mitigation plan and the strategy to implement;  An assessment of Jefferson County’s and all municipalities’ current policies, goals and regulations that pertain to hazard mitigation;  Critical facilities information; and  Documentation of the process. Prior to the development of the 2009 plan, there was little guidance on mitigation strategies. As a result of the mitigation act, the county and municipal leaders came together and adopted the 2009 plan by resolution. The purpose of the plan was to identify risks to Jefferson County, to formulate achievable goals and objectives, and develop a plan of action to reduce losses from natural disasters. The 2009 plan serves as a benchmark for future mitigation activities and identified mitigation goals, objectives, and action steps. The 2014 plan has been completely reformatted to meet the requirements implemented after 2009. The update will examine all parts of the plan to include but not limited to:  Update Hazard Events that occurred since 2009;  Update Critical Facilities that have been added since 2009;  To document current mitigation strategies that have been implemented since 2009; and  Examine and update Mitigation Strategy Goals, Objectives and Action Steps. The update is the product of the combined efforts of Jefferson County and its municipalities. Realizing that it is in the county’s best interest to identify the community’s risks to natural disasters and to lessen their effects, the Jefferson County Emergency Management Agency (EMA) has taken the lead role in the update. Under the agency’s leadership, there has been an endorsement and a commitment by Jefferson County and its municipalities. Continued mitigation planning is imperative to lessen the impacts of disasters in Jefferson County and its municipalities. This plan serves as an excellent method to organize and document current and ongoing mitigation strategies. The implementation of this plan and its components is vital to achieve a community that is more disaster resistant. The objective is implementation of this plan will produce a reduction in the loss of life and property, while allowing the county to prosper with minimal disruption of services. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 3 SECTION II. LOCAL METHODOLOGY, PLAN UPDATE PROCESS AND PARTICIPANTS The Jefferson County Board of Commissioners contracted with the Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission (RC) to assist in the update to the 2009 plan. The RC has assisted nine counties in the completion of their Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plans including Jefferson County’s 2009 plan. The RC has completed updates on five plans and is currently working on six updates. The RC was tasked with the review of the current plan, the identification of new information that needed to be incorporated into the development and completion of the update. The RC in conjunction with the EMA Director, oversaw the project, organized the data, set meeting dates, documented in-kind services, and worked with the GEMA to complete this plan. EMA Director Jim Anderson was tasked with developing the Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee. The 2009 committee consisted of the following organizations. Jefferson County Board of Education City of Wrens Public Works Department Jefferson County Emergency Management Agency City of Wadley Police Department Jefferson County Fire Department City of Wadley Fire Department Jefferson County Health Department City of Wrens Police Department Jefferson County Administor City of Stapleton Mayor Jefferson County Public Works Director City of Wadley Mayor Jefferson County Building Inspector City of Avera City Council Member Jefferson County Road Department City of Bartow Mayor Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office City of Louisville Police Department City of Louisville Fire Department Georgia Forestry Commission City of Louisville City Administor The Jefferson Reporter All previous members from the 2009 plan were invited to participate in the update. Due to budget constraints and workloads some did not attend meetings but were active in the planning process and available by phone or email if information pertaining to their agency was required. The update committee is comprised of the following officials representing their respective organizations and political subdivisions. Name Agency/Title Jurisdiction Jim Anderson EMA Director Jefferson County Janet Pilcher Health Department Jefferson County Susan Scarboro Clerk Town of Bartow Robert Morris Fire Department Town of Bartow Frank Parrish Mayor City of Stapleton Larry Cheely Chief Fire Department City of Wrens Robert A. Chalker Sheriff’s Office Jefferson County Garry A McCord Chief of Police Department City of Wrens Larry Anderson Supervisor Waste Water Plant City of Wrens Larry Morgan Mayor City of Louisville Lamar Baxley Fire Chief City of Louisville Jimmy Miller Police Department City of Louisville Robert Hoffman Police Department City of Stapleton ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 4 Name Agency/Title Jurisdiction Robert Morris Mayor Town of Bartow Marc Peebles Assistant Fire Chief City of Wrens Shane Barrow Georgia Forestry Commission Glascock-Jefferson County GFC Andrew Rooks Georgia Forestry Commission Glascock-Jefferson County GFC Joshua Guy Georgia Forestry Commission Glascock-Jefferson County GFC Sallie Adams Clerk City of Wadley Wayne Davis Public Works Supervisor City of Wrens Wesley Lewis Police department City of Wadley Harold Moore Mayor City of Wadley Tommy Sheppard Mayor City of Avera Amy Hadden Clerk City of Avera Larry McGraw City Council Member City of Avera Leisa Hadden City Council Member City of Avera Joey May Engineer Jefferson Hospital Jefferson County Sam Dasher Board of Education Jefferson County Ricky Sapp City Administrator City of Louisville Anna Anderson EMA Jefferson County Leah Lumley E911 Jefferson County Louisa Pennington Tax Assessor Jefferson County Carol McLeod Staff Writer Jefferson Reporter Jefferson County The committee is responsible for the organization, data collection and completion of the plan. It was the responsibility of the committee to include all pertinent departments within their respective governments and to request information as needed. The following agencies/departments/organizations provided specific information and support for the original plan and provided any new information for the update:  Jefferson County School District was responsible for providing structural replacement and content values for all schools as well as square footage and occupancy limits.  Police Departments for the Cities of Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, Wadley, and Wrens provided staff support and were responsible for providing structural replacement and content values for all critical facilities located in their respective cities as well as square footage and occupancy limits.  Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office provided staff support to the planning effort.  Jefferson County Health Department identified vulnerable populations. They also provided replacement value estimates for their properties.  Fire Departments of Jefferson County and the City of Louisville and Wrens provided staff support and assisted with identifying occupancy limits for some of the critical structures and replacement value estimates.  City officials from the Avera, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, Wadley, and Wrens provided information relative to their jurisdictions and provided replacement value estimates for their critical facilities.  Georgia Forestry Commission provided data on wildfire events and assisted with the formulation of mitigation measures.  Jefferson County Chamber of Commerce assisted in identifying major businesses.  Jefferson County Board of Commission County Administrator provided information ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 5 about Jefferson County government buildings including their respective replacement and content values and square footages.  Jefferson County Tax Assessor’s Office provided most of the aggregate values for the critical structures. The valuations had to be converted to full values since they are figured at 40 percent of actual value. This information, combined with demographic data, is compiled on GEMA Worksheet #3a in Appendix A for all jurisdictions.  CSRA Regional Commission’s Geographical Information System (GIS) Department produced several of the maps. Maps are located in Appendix A and C. Several resources were consulted to facilitate the development of the update. Data was collected from numerous sources, including the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC), Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States (SHELDUS™), National Weather Service, US Geological Survey (USGS), Southeast Regional Climate Center (SERCC), US Census Bureau, Georgia Department of Natural Resources (DNR), Georgia Forestry Commission (GFC), Georgia Tornado History Project Database, Georgia Department of Community Affairs (DCA), US Department of Agriculture (USDA), local and regional newspaper articles, as well as personal interviews. The RC assisted in research and analysis, facilitated committee meetings, complied data and composed the updated plan. The committee reviewed the following existing planning documents: Record of Review Existing planning mechanisms Reviewed (Yes/No) Method of use in Hazard Mitigation Plan Jefferson County Joint 2004-2024 Comprehensive Plan Yes Development trends, capability assessment, mitigation strategies Local Emergency Operations Plan Yes Identifying hazards; Assessing vulnerabilities; Capability assessment Georgia Emergency Operations Plan Yes Identifying hazards; Assessing vulnerabilities; Flood Damage Protection Ordinance Yes Mitigation strategies, capability assessment Building and Zoning Codes and Ordinances Yes Development trends; Future growth, capability assessment, mitigation strategies Mutual Aid Agreements Yes Assessing vulnerabilities, Determine assets added to disaster relief and response. State Hazard Mitigation Plan Yes Risk assessment, review of recommended strategies Land Use Maps Yes Assessing vulnerabilities; Development trends; Future growth Critical Facilities Maps Yes Locations Community Wildfire Protection Plan Yes Mitigation strategies, risk assessment Flood Insurance Study Yes Review for historical Data and Information The Jefferson County Assets Index Yes Reviewed for assets data, tax information CSRA Regional Plan 2035 Yes Development trends; Future growth, regional concerns and data ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 6 It should be noted that the county does not have a Flood Mitigation Assistance Plan. This has been listed as mitigation action in Chapter III. The committee held eight meetings over an 18-month period to guide the development of the plan. Individual meetings with jurisdictions and/or agencies were held as needed. The committee was responsible for developing the mission statement, as well as the goals, objectives, and action steps identified in the plan. The committee researched previous hazard information in the areas of earthquakes, flooding, wildfires, tornados, winter storms, hurricanes, high winds, dam failure, lightning, hail, and drought. However, some of these hazards were eliminated due to their low level of risk. All committee members collected critical facilities information based on their area of expertise or jurisdiction. The RC was responsible for assessing vulnerability and estimating potential losses from the information collected. Potential losses include people, structures/properties, infrastructure, and other important community assets. All meetings were open to the public and notices of meetings were posted at all city halls and the county commission office. Four meetings were advertised in The Jefferson Reporter, the County’s legal organ. This is the most efficient means to disseminate information to residents and organizations located in the county. Notices were also posted at city and county offices. In order to meet the requirement to afford an opportunity for neighboring communities, local and regional agencies, businesses, academia and other private and non-profit interests to be involved in the planning process, invitations were extended by email. The following counties were invited to attend: Burke, Columbia, Hancock, Glascock, Jenkins, Lincoln, McDuffie, Richmond, Taliaferro, Warren, Washington, and Wilkes. Initiations were sent to all municipalities located in these counties also. Copies of correspondence, emails and advertisements are in Appendix E. Meeting Date Purpose of Meeting May 9, 2013 Advertisement ran in The Jefferson Reporter Advertising for public meeting on May 15, 2103. May 15, 2013 To solicit public input on the goals and objectives of the Mitigation Update Plan. Brian Laughlin GEMA, representative provided a PowerPoint presentation about the purpose and need of the plan along with changes to the process since the 2009 planning process. Was advertised in local paper December 9, 2013 To begin hazard collection and critical facilities adjustments. Discuss the new requirements from the update and to review STAPLEE worksheet as it applied to mitigation strategies May 15, 2014 Article rain in The Jefferson Reporter about FEMA hazards funds and the May 28, 2014 meeting. May 28, 2014 This meeting was to ensure all data collected to date was correct with regards to critical facilities. The meeting covered in detail the devastation and after effects of the ice storm that occurred February 10-14, 2014 and resulted in a Federally Declared Disaster (DR4165). There was a very in-depth discussion of lessons learned. June 26 , 2014 This meeting was a continuation of the May 28, 2014 meeting. Ensured all data collected was correct with regards to critical facilities. It also covered in detail the devastation and after effects of the ice storm. The discussion of lessons learned continued. July10, 2014 Meet with GEMA to discuss grant applications and mitigation strategies. July 31, 2014 Advertisement ran in The Jefferson Reporter for the August 7, 2014 meeting. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 7 Meeting Date Purpose of Meeting August 7, 2014 To review draft plan and to ensure the public an opportunity provide input to Also to ensure all data was correct. August 7, 2014 An advertisement was placed in The Jefferson Reporter informing the citizens that a draft was available for review to ensure that the public had ample opportunity to review the first draft of the update and provide input. The notice also included information on the August 18, 2014 before submission to GEMA for review. August 18, 2014 This meeting was advertised in the legal organ ensure the public had ample opportunity to review the update before submission to GEMA for review. To Be Added after FEMA Approval Advertisement ran in The Jefferson Reporter Advertising for public review and the final meeting date will be added after FEMA approval To Be Added after FEMA Approval After GEMA submitted the plan to FEMA and FEMA Approved Pending Adoption (APA), the public was invited to review the final plan prior to adoption during (will be added after APA) time frame. The meeting was held after the aforementioned review period to ensure that the public was afforded the opportunity provide input. SECTION III. ORIGINAL PLAN REVIEW AND REVISION The Federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan be updated every five years. The EMA Director was responsible for ensuring that this requirement was met. The committee, with the assistance of the RC, was involved in the planning process to ensure thorough data collection. All members of the committee and the EMA Director were responsible for ensuring that the 2009 plan was evaluated as required. During the review process, the committee noted mitigation accomplishments, updated and prioritized mitigation projects, added additional hazard information, developed new goals and objectives, solicited input from the public and made any needed or required revisions. The evaluation included analyzing any changes in the needs and/or capabilities of Jefferson County and its municipalities. SECTION IV. ORGANIZATION OF THE PLAN The estimated time to complete the plan update was approximately 20 months. Plan completion is identified by adoption of resolution by all jurisdictions. The update contains a Hazard, Risk, and Vulnerability (HRV) Assessment describing the natural hazards typically occurring within the county, as well as a review of all mitigation goals, objectives, and related courses of action. In addition, plan implementation and maintenance are reviewed, which includes methods to provide opportunities for public involvement. The hazards included in this plan are considered to have the highest probability of occurrence, vulnerability, potential loss/damages, and highest frequency of occurrence. The plan also identifies and prioritizes hazard mitigation opportunities in each vulnerable area based on the input from the committee members, relevant government agencies, local businesses, and Jefferson County citizens. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 8 SECTION V. LOCAL HAZARD RISK AND VULNERABILITY, SUMMARY LOCAL MITIGATION PLANNING GOALS OBJECTIVES The committee, early in the update process, established a set of goals and objectives in order to ensure the effectiveness of this plan. These goals and objectives established the paradigm for the planning process and proved very successful by the many accomplishments of the 2009 plan. These goals and objectives are as follow:  To actively involve and gain support from all municipalities and Jefferson County for the reduction of disasters in our community:  Prioritize identified mitigation projects;  Seek and implement any grant funding for the reduction of disasters in Jefferson County and all municipalities;  Monitor, evaluate, and update the progress of the plan as needed;  To form partnerships among local, state, and federal agencies to make Jefferson County more resistant to the effects of disaster;  Strengthen our communities against the impacts of disasters through the development of new mitigation strategies and strict enforcement of current regulations that have proven effective;  Reduce and where possible eliminate repetitive damage, loss of life and property from disasters;  Bring greater awareness throughout the community about potential hazards and the need for community preparedness; and  To further enhance common mitigation projects and goals between Jefferson County and with its municipalities. An HRV assessment was accomplished by compiling and reviewing historical data on the location of specific hazards, the value of existing property in hazard locations, and analyzing the risk to life, property and the environment. The committee accomplished the HRV by completing the following steps: Inventory of Critical Facilities: Critical facilities are crucial for providing essential services for preserving the safety and quality of life of its residents. In addition, these facilities fulfill important public safety, emergency response, and/or disaster recovery functions. All critical facilities have been added to the Georgia Mitigation Information System (GMIS). Critical facilities for Jefferson County and its municipalities have been identified, updated, mapped, and illustrated in Appendix A. Hazard Identification: Maps and historical data sources were studied and reviewed in order to identify the geographic extent, intensity, and probability of occurrence for various hazard events. The committee identified six major hazards that have the potential to affect Jefferson County: flooding, dam failure, drought, wildfire, severe weather (tornados, tropical storms, thunderstorms winds, lightning and hail) and winter storms. An updated hazard history for Jefferson County and all municipalities is provided in Appendix A. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 9 Profiling Hazard Events: The committee analyzed the causes and characteristics of each hazard, their effects, and the population and infrastructure that has been historically vulnerable to each specific hazard. An updated profile of each hazard is discussed in Chapter II. Vulnerability Assessment: This step was accomplished by comparing each previously identified hazard with the inventory of affected critical facilities and population exposed to each hazard. Worksheet #3a was updated and is provided in Appendix A outlining this step of the HRV assessment. Estimating Losses: Using the best available data, to include, tax digest data, parcel maps and GMIS maps and reports for critical facilities allowed the committee to estimate damages and financial losses likely to be sustained in a geographic area. Describing vulnerability in terms of dollar losses provides the county with a common framework in which to measure the effects of hazards on critical facilities. All information in this section has been updated (Appendix A and Appendix It should be noted that an attempt was made to use FEMA’s HAZUS-MH software to predicate losses. The RC has GIS capabilities in-house but use ArcGIS 10.2 which is not compatible with the software which runs on ArcGIS 10.0. The RC will run scenarios when the next update for HAZUS is released and update the plan during the annual review period. This has been added as a mitigation goal. Documentation of correspondence with FEMA about the software can be founded in Appendix E. Mitigation Goals and Objectives: After ensuring that all interested persons had been given ample opportunity to contribute to strategy development, mitigation action steps were next given priority status by committee members. To evaluate priorities, committee members used the Social, Technical, Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic, and Environmental (STAPLEE) Worksheet prepared by FEMA. Mitigation steps were evaluated using the worksheet as the guiding principle to identify those actions best for Jefferson County. Steps were ranked as high priority, medium priority, or low priority. Past occurrences of disasters and historical trend data aided committee members in assigning priorities. SECTION VI. MULTI-JURISDICTIONAL SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS Jefferson County and all municipalities provided active participants in the planning process and have identified mitigation goals, objectives and action items specific to their jurisdiction. The governing bodies for the county and all municipalities have formally adopted the Jefferson County Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan. Jefferson County has six municipalities: Avera, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, Wadley, and Wrens. The municipalities were notified in January 2013 of the requirement concerning the update to the 2009 plan. Representatives from all seven jurisdictions have worked collectively over the past months to gather data that included researching old records, newspaper articles, data bases, historical data, past and present flood plain data, and technical information for the plan. The data was forwarded to the EMA Director and the RC for review and plan development. Subsequent meetings were held in an effort to ensure that all information was correct and all agencies and organizations input was included. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 10 The EMA Director led activities for mitigation planning countywide. To be specific, the County’s goal was to work in partnership with its municipalities toward a common mitigation strategy that significantly reduces vulnerability to hazards. Most natural threats overlap jurisdictions and all are susceptible to their affects. Jefferson County and its municipalities share the same passion and desire for protecting and reducing risk through the mitigation projects. Specific risks and areas have been identified through working relationships and data collection from all areas of the county and are identified in this plan. SECTION VII. ADOPTION, IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING AND EVALUATION Adoption Date Jurisdiction Adoption Date Jefferson County January 13, 2015 City of Avera December 19, 2015 City of Bartow December 18, 2015 City of Louisville December 19, 2015 City of Stapleton December 18, 2015 City of Wadley January 12, 2015 City of Wrens December 18, 2015 The plan was submitted to GEMA for review and then to FEMA for approval. Jefferson County and all municipalities served as active participants in the planning process and have identified mitigation goals, objectives, and actions specific to their jurisdiction. Their respective governing bodies have formally adopted the 2009 plan and have formally adopted the update plan after approval by GEMA and FEMA. The plan is intended to be implemented into policy and to enhance and complement state and federal recommendations for the mitigation of natural hazards in the following ways:  Substantially reduce the risk of life, injuries, and hardship from the destruction of natural disasters.  Create awareness to the public about the need for individual preparedness and about building safer, disaster resistant communities.  Develop strategies for long term community sustainability during community disasters.  Develop governmental and business continuity plans that will continue essential private sector and governmental activities during disasters. FEMA publishes many guidance documents for local governments for mitigating natural disasters. The plan fully recognizes, adopts, incorporates, and endorses the following principals.  Develop a strategic mitigation plan for Jefferson County.  Enforce current building codes.  Develop incentives to promote mitigation.  Incorporate mitigation of natural hazards into land use plans.  Promote awareness of mitigation opportunities throughout Jefferson County community on a continual basis. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 11  Identify potential funding sources for mitigation projects. The private sector is often an overlooked segment of the community during disasters. It is vital that this sector of a community is included in mitigation efforts that are consistent with state and federal recommendations as such:  Develop mitigation incentives with insurance agencies and lending institutions.  Encourage the creation of a business continuity plan for the continuance of commerce during disasters.  Partner with businesses in effort to communicate with customers about the community hazards and possible solutions. Also, individual citizens must be made aware of the hazards they face. Additionally, they must be educated in how to protect themselves from natural hazards. They must be shown mitigation is an important part of reducing loss of life and property in their community. Their support is critical to the success of any mitigation effort. The Jefferson County Plan supports the following FEMA recommendations regarding individual citizens:  Become educated on the hazards that your community and you may face.  Become part of the process by supporting and encouraging mitigation programs that reduce vulnerability to disasters.  That individual responsibility for safeguarding you and your family prior to a disaster is essential. Chapter IV. Plan Integration and Maintenance details the formal process that will ensure that the plan remains an active and relevant document. The plan maintenance process includes monitoring and evaluating the plan annually, and producing a plan revision every five years. Additionally, Jefferson County will develop steps to ensure public participation throughout the plan maintenance process. Finally, this section describes how Jefferson County will incorporate the mitigation strategies identified in this plan into other relevant planning documents such as the Jefferson County Joint Comprehensive Plan, Short-Term Work program (STWP) and Local Emergency Operations Plan (LEOP). SECTION VIII. COMMUNITY DATA Political Boundaries - Jefferson County Jefferson County GA DCA Region 7 Georgia ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 12 History Jefferson County was created in February 20, 1796 and named for Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States Jefferson County was originally part of Burke and Warren counties and named for Thomas Jefferson. Louisville, the county seat, was named in honor of King Louis XVI of France, because of the support given by France to the Colonials in the Revolution. Louisville was Georgia's third state capital, but its first "permanent" one. Louisville was the site of the Constitutional Convention of 1798 in which the state's pre-Civil War constitution was adopted. Georgia's Great Seal, which is still in use today, was adopted at the same time. Government Jefferson County operates under a commission-based system of government in which five commissioners are elected to four-year terms. Other county officials are the County Attorney, Clerk of Superior Court, Code Enforcement Officer, Public Works, Roads and Bridges, Probate Judge, Coroner, Magistrate Judge, Sheriff, and Tax Commissioner. Jefferson County contains six municipalities, all of which operate under a mayoral system of government with additional officials providing services to residents. Jefferson County Georgia: Municipal Governments AVERA BARTOW LOUISVILLE STAPLETON WADLEY WRENS Mayor X X X X X X # Council Members 4 5 5 5 5 5 City Clerk X X X X X City Coordinator/Administrator X X X City Attorney X X X X X X Police Chief X X X X X Fire Chief X X X X X X City Engineer Public Works Director X X X Gas Superintendent X X Water Superintendent X X X X Wastewater Superintendent X X X Sanitation Superintendent X X X Building Inspector X X Code Enforcement X Municipal Court Judge X X X X X Municipal Court Clerk X X X X X Source: Georgia Municipal Association ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 13 Demographics Presently, Jefferson County has a population of 16,930 persons. The two tables below shows current and historical comparisons of all jurisdictions. Category Jefferson County Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Population 16,930 246 286 2,493 438 2,061 2,187 Number of Households 6,241 100 110 875 175 752 860 Average Household Size 2.63 2.46 2.6 2.61 2.5 2.62 2.54 Race - White 42.6% 91.1% 41.3% 28.5% 66.2% 17.4% 32% Race - Black 54.4% 6.9% 58.4% 70.4% 30.8% 79.2% 64.7% Race - Hispanic 3.1% 0.0% 0.3% 0.7% 1.4% 4.8% 2.5% Race - Other 1.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.2% 2.4% 1.6% Median HH Income $27,612 $35,000 $40,000 $30,597 $27,143 $20,078 $29,620 Source: US Census Bureau Community Population Growth 1980 1990 2000 2010 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010 Jefferson County 18,403 17,408 17,266 16,930 -5.45% -0.8% -1.95% Avera 248 215 217 246 -13.3% 0.9% 13.37% Bartow 357 292 223 286 -18.2% -23.6% 28.26% Louisville 2,823 2,486 2,712 2,493 -11.9% 9.1% -8.08% Stapleton 388 330 318 438 -14.9% -3.6% 37.74% Wadley 2,438 2,416 2,088 2,061 -0.9% -13.6% -1.3% Wrens 2,415 2,414 2,314 2,187 0.0% -4.1% -5.49% Source: US Census Bureau Economy In the year 2013, the average weekly wage for employment sectors was $600, compared to the statewide average of $899. The May 2014 unemployment rate was 12.4 percent. In 2013, the total number of employees located in Jefferson County was 4,428. Of the total work force, 45.3 percent were employed in the service providing sector, followed by 30.2 percent in the goods producing sector 24.4 percent in the government sector. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 14 The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) is the standard used by Federal statistical agencies in classifying business establishments for the purpose of collecting, analyzing, and publishing statistical data related to the U.S. business economy. The table below provides a list of jobs, number of establishments and jobs along with average weekly wages per job for 2013 in Jefferson County. Annual Industry Distribution of Jobs and Average Wage in 2013 (NAICS) Establishments Jobs Annual Average Wage Per Job Total Covered Employment and Wages 363 4,428 $600 Total Private Sector 320 3,347 $611 Total Government 43 1,081 $566 Agriculture, forestry, fishing, hunting 35 260 $681 Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction 4 268 $1,142 Construction 28 185 $619 Manufacturing 30 623 $686 Wholesale trade 13 206 $588 Retail trade 60 583 $397 Transportation, warehousing 11 59 $708 Utilities 5 * * Information 4 20 $401 Finance and Insurance 18 103 $736 Real Estate, rental, leasing 11 45 $476 Professional, technical services 15 48 $899 Mgmt. of companies, enterprises 2 * * Administrative and support and waste management services 7 36 $540 Educational services 1 * * Health care, social assistance 20 347 $432 Arts, entertainment, recreation 2 * * Accommodation and food services 23 249 $238 Other services, except public administration 24 70 $328 Unclassified-Industry not assigned 7 * * Source: Georgia Department of Labor * Industry group does not meet criteria for disclosure Climate According to the National Weather Service Jefferson County experiences all four seasons. Summers typically consist of long spells of warm and humid weather with afternoon high temperatures in the lower 90’s and readings of 90 degrees or higher can be expected on 70 to 80 days. Overnight lows usually range from the upper 60’s to lower 70’s. Weather during winter months is more variable with stretches of mild weather alternating with cold spells. Winter high temperatures average in the mid 50’s to lower 60’s with lows averaging in the ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 15 mid 30’s. Temperatures of 32 degrees or lower can be expected on 40 to 50 days. Spring and autumn are characterized by much variability from day to day and from year to year. The average date of first freeze is in mid-November and the last freeze is in mid-to-late March. Jefferson County averages 45.6 inches of rain per year. The number of days with any measurable precipitation is 93. On average, there are 218 sunny days per year in the county. The average July high is around 92 degrees and the average January low is around 36 degrees. Physical Features Jefferson County encompasses an area of roughly 531.2 square miles or 339,936 acres. The County is located at the cusp of two geological regions, the Southern Piedmont and the Georgia Coastal Plain. This gives the county a mixture of geological features and provides for a variety of landscapes and available resources. The fall line, which runs through Jefferson County, is a geological boundary following the Appalachian Mountain range from Alabama to New York. In Georgia and South Carolina the fall line separates the Southern Piedmont from the Southern Coastal Plain. The location has implications for how drinking water is retrieved in the county as the Floridian aquifer closely follows the boundaries of the Fall Line. Jefferson County and its six incorporated cities are primarily within the Dothan-Fuquay-Tifton and Orangeburg-Faceville-Lucy Soil associations. These two make up 74% of the county. These soils are strong and well drained with slopes range from 0 to 15%. Excess surface water drains into a system of intermittent and perennial streams. There are few areas of open water. The soils are used mainly for field crops, hay, or pasture, but many areas are wooded. Roads, utility lines, fences, and farm homes and associated structures are common. The degree of visual diversity is moderate. These soils are good for most urban and agricultural uses. Soil map is in appendix A. Transportation Vehicle Traffic: U.S. Highways 1, 221, 319, and Georgia Highways 102 and 80 all intersect a portion of the county and are the primary arterials in Jefferson County. Interstate Highway 16 passes 32 miles south of the county line, while Interstate Highway 20 passes just 22 miles away via Georgia Highway 17. Roads classified on the map, located in Appendix A, are considered major county thoroughfares and serve as main transportation routes within the county and to surrounding areas. All other county or municipal roads not classified on the thoroughfare map are considered locally serving. Most of the roadway network is rural, with only a handful of urban roads in Louisville, Wadley and Wrens. Mileage by Route and Road System Report 445 for 2012 Total Road Mileage Lane Mileage Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) State Route 186.30 436 420,000 County Road 558.46 1,117 150,000 City Street 74.33 148 34,000 Total 819.09 1,701 604,000 Source: Georgia Department of Transportation, Office of Transportation Data, “445 Series Reports.” ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 16 Public Transportation: In addition to coordinated transportation through the Georgia Department of Human Resources, Jefferson County Transit (WCT) provides public transportation for county residents. Services include transporting residents to and from destinations for shopping, work, school, personal appointments, and recreational opportunities within and outside the county. The county and state fleets include a total of eight vans – two wheelchair accessible and six 12-15- passenger vans. Approximately 2,771 trips are provided to county residents. Rail Traffic: Rail companies provide crucial cargo transport for industries in Jefferson County. Many items and materials are too bulky or heavy to be shipped by truck and are moved by rail. Norfolk Southern has two lines that pass through Wadley and Wrens en route to Warrenton and Atlanta. In addition, the Central Georgia Railroad has a short line connecting Wadley with Louisville. Air Service: Airports located in Louisville and Wrens provide small craft aviation services. The airport in Wrens maintains a hangar space of 6,396 sf. and a runway. The airport in Louisville has a runway 5,000 feet long and offers hangars and tie-downs. There is 15,500 sf. of hangar space available as well as one T-hanger that will accommodate four planes. The current terminal building is small and old and needs to be replaced. There are two parallel unpaved taxiways. The nearest commercial air service is in Augusta, 35 miles away. Atlanta-Hartsfield International Airport, located in Atlanta approximately 150 miles from Louisville, provides major commercial airline service. Utilities Electricity: Residential electrical service is provided by three companies: Georgia Power, Jefferson Energy Cooperative, and Washington Electric Membership Corp. A part of Georgia's modern integrated electrical transmission system, Jefferson County has excellent ability to supply industrial demands. Compared to 47 percent for the U.S., coal accounts for 84 percent of fuel used by the state's power generating plants. This assures long-term continuity. If demand exceeds 900kw, any supplier can step in and offer service Natural gas: Natural Gas Services is provided by the City of Louisville and the City of Wrens. The service is available to residents of Louisville and Wrens and some residential customers in the unincorporated area of the county. Sewer: Public sewer service is provided in Bartow, Louisville, Wadley, and Wrens. A small section of the County is served by the City of Louisville. The remaining unincorporated areas of the County, Avera, and Stapleton are not served with public sanitary sewer service. Municipality Sewer and Wastewater Systems Avera Septic tanks only. Bartow Wastewater Treatment Plant Louisville Two water pollution control plants, 2 oxidation ponds Stapleton Septic tanks only. Wadley One wastewater treatment plant, 1 oxidation pond Wrens Wastewater Treatment Plant ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 17 Water: Public water supply is provided by the Cities of Avera, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, Wadley, and Wrens to residents within their incorporated boundaries. Some unincorporated areas of the County are served by Louisville or Wrens the remainder is served by private wells. Solid Waste: Jefferson County operates a landfill along U.S.1 under permit # 081-011D (MSWL). The majority of solid waste comes from residential use or household garbage, including paper products, plastics, glass, aluminum, and ferrous metals. A limited amount of commercial and industrial waste consists of corrugated paperboard and wood waste. Green box collection is used in the unincorporated areas for solid waste disposal. Currently there are green boxes at twenty-five (25) separate sites in the county. The county provides solid waste services for Avera. Louisville and Bartow haul their waste to the count landfill while the rest of the municipalities contract with private haulers. Communications: Jefferson County’s communication services is provided by three companies: Comcast, AT&T and Pineland Telephone. Local print media consists of The News and Farmer and Wadley Herald/The Jefferson Reporter (which serves as the legal organ of the county) and The Augusta Chronicle. Jefferson County is served by 2 local AM radio stations and 2 local FM radio stations. There are seven television stations in metro Augusta that broadcast in Jefferson County. They are WJBF, WAGT, WRDW, WAAU, WBPI, WCES, and WFXG. Fire and Emergency Services Response: All residents of Jefferson County have access to 911 service. The 911 service connects residents to police, fire and ambulance service. The dispatch office is in Louisville and a substation in Wrens. The 911 service has 3 employees on staff during the day on weekdays and 2 employees on staff at night and on weekends. The City of Wrens utilize their own system so any 911 calls are transferred over to their departments. The City of Wrens 911 communications center is staffed by four full-time dispatchers and two part-time dispatchers. The Jefferson County 911 service has mutual aid agreements with neighboring counties and therefore can respond to and assist in calls outside their jurisdiction. Municipality Water Distribution System Avera Complete water distribution and treatment system: Two wells, distribution lines, one elevated water storage tanks. Bartow Complete water distribution and treatment system: Two wells, distribution lines, one water storage tank. Louisville Complete water distribution and treatment system: Three water storage tanks, distribution lines, three elevated water storage tank. Stapleton Complete water distribution and treatment system: Two water storage tanks and distribution lines. Wadley Complete water distribution and treatment system: Two wells, two water storage tanks, distribution lines. Wrens Complete water distribution and treatment system: Five wells, four ground storage tanks, distribution lines. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 18 Emergency Medical Services: Jefferson County gets its Emergency Medical Services (EMS) through a private corporation called Gold Cross. Services provided include emergency and nonemergency ambulance transportation. The company provides dispatching services as well providing emergency service training. The Gold Cross has its main station at the Jefferson County Hospital. In addition there are substations located in Wrens and Wadley. The Hospital Station and the Wrens Substation operate on a 24-hour basis and the Wadley Substation operates from 7 AM to 7 PM. The Gold Cross service maintains four ambulances in the county but only operate three at any time. The fourth is kept as a backup. The ambulances are all ALS (Advanced Life Support) units. During the Monday through Friday 7 AM to 7 PM shift the service has three trucks operating. On weekends and from 7 PM to 7 AM during the week they operate with two trucks. Fire and Rescue: Jefferson County has seven fire departments throughout the county that provide service to both the incorporated and unincorporated areas. There is also a detachment of the Georgia Forestry Commission that combats woodland, wildlife and agricultural fires. Jefferson County itself has two departments with 28 volunteer firefighters and a total of three bays. The county insures six fire trucks, ranging in model years from 1957 to the two newest 1974 International pumper trucks. Law Enforcement: Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office employs the Sheriff, 14 deputies, five jailers, three investigators and two clerical personnel. The Office has a total of 30 vehicles, including 20 police cars, one pickup truck and one van. The County is also served by regional offices of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation and The Georgia State Patrol. Municipality Fire Department Avera Served by an all-volunteer fire department, with 22 volunteer firefighters. The department owns vehicles; two pumpers and a brush truck. The ISO rating for the district is a 6. Bartow Served by an all-volunteer fire department, with 18 volunteer firefighters. The department owns four vehicles; three pumpers and a Chevy Impala. The ISO rating for the district is a 7. Louisville Served by one fire department staffed with four full-time paid firefighters, and 28 volunteer firefighters. The department owns four vehicles; three pumpers and one fire knocker. The ISO rating for the district is a 5. Stapleton Served by an all-volunteer fire department, with 15 volunteer firefighters. The department owns four vehicles; two pumpers a fire knocker and a service truck. The ISO rating for the district is a 7. Wadley Served by an all-volunteer fire department, with 15 volunteer firefighters. The department owns four vehicles; four pumpers. The ISO rating for the district is a 7. Wrens Served by one fire department with six full-time firefighters and 20 volunteer firefighters. The fire department insures three 750-gallon pumper trucks, two 1,000- gallon knocker/forestry trucks, and one rescue truck. The ISO rating for the department is 4. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 19 The Jefferson County Jail is currently the only place being used to house inmates at this time. All inmates are brought there instead of being incarcerated in the individual municipality. The Jefferson County Jail has 120 beds and eight holding cells. Municipality Law Enforcement Avera Served by Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office Bartow Served by Bartow Police Department with the Police Chief and two part-time officers. Louisville Served by Louisville Police Department with the Police Chief and seven full- time officers. Stapleton Served by Stapleton Police Department with the Police Chief and two part- time officers. Wadley Served by Wadley Police Department with the Police Chief, one investigator, and five full-time officers. Wrens Served by Wrens Police Department with the Police Chief, an Assistant Chief, three full-time and four part-time officers, and one full-time sergeant. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 20 CHAPTER II. NATURAL HAZARD, RISK AND VULNERABILITY (HRV) The committee identified all natural hazards that could potentially affect Jefferson County and all incorporated jurisdictions utilizing FEMA Worksheet #1 (Appendix Task A of Worksheet #1 instructed committee members to research newspapers and other historical records, existing community plans and reports, as well as internet websites to determine which hazards might occur. Task B then narrowed the list to only hazards most likely to impact the county by reviewing hazard websites to determine if Jefferson County is located in a high-risk area. As a result of the planning process, the committee determined that six natural hazards pose a direct, measurable threat: flooding, dam failure, drought, wildfire, severe weather (to include tornados, tropical storms, thunderstorm winds, lightning and hail), and winter storms. The committee profiled each of these hazards using FEMA worksheet #2 and #3a, which included obtaining a base map and then recording hazard event profile information. Of the six hazards mentioned, the entire County is exposed to four: severe weather, winter storms, wildfire and drought. Flooding is isolated to select areas within the floodplain, while dam failure is isolated to areas of the event. Each of these potential hazards is addressed with relevant supporting data. Chapter II. Section Updates to Section I. Natural Hazard Flood Updated events, added critical facilities to GMIS, updated tax information. Recalculated hazard frequency data. II. Natural Hazard Dam Failure This was added and not in the 2009 plan. III. Natural Hazard Drought Updated events, added critical facilities to GMIS, updated tax information. Recalculated hazard frequency data. IV. Natural Hazard Wildfire Updated events, added critical facilities to GMIS, updated tax information. Recalculated hazard frequency data. V. Natural Hazard Severe Weather Updated events, added critical facilities to GMIS, updated tax information. Hail and lightning were added as a hazard. Recalculated hazard frequency data. VI. Natural Hazard Winter Storms Updated events, added critical facilities to GMIS, updated tax information. Recalculated hazard frequency data. SECTION I. FLOODING A. Hazard Identification: Flood plains are relatively flat lands that border streams and rivers that are normally dry, but are covered with water during floods. The severity of a flood is usually measured in terms of depth of flooding. The susceptibility of a stream to flooding is dependent upon several variables. Among these are topography, ground saturation, rainfall intensity and duration, soil types, drainage, drainage patterns of streams, and vegetative cover. A large amount of rainfall over a short time period can result in flash flood conditions. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 21 A small amount of rain can also result in floods in locations where the soil is saturated from a previous wet period or if the rain is concentrated in an area of impermeable surfaces such as large parking lots, paved roadways, etc. Topography and ground cover are contributing factors for floods in that water runoff is greater in areas with steep slopes and little or no vegetation. Flooding occurs when the volume of water exceeds the ability of a water body (stream, river, or lake) to contain it within its normal banks. Floodplains serve three major purposes: Natural water storage and conveyance, water quality maintenance, and groundwater recharge. These three purposes are greatly inhibited when floodplains are misused or abused through improper and unsuitable land development. For example, if floodplains are filled to construct a building, then valuable water storage areas and recharge areas are lost. This causes unnecessary flooding in previously dry areas and can damage buildings or other structures. Jefferson County, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, Wadley and Wrens will continue to participate in the NFIP. Avera has no identified flood plains. The following table provides information about each jurisdictions participation level. Source: FEMA Community Status Book B. Hazard Profile: Severe flooding within Jefferson County is a relatively infrequent event. The county has 54 streams/rivers, 39 reservoirs and three lakes which makes the potential for flooding significant. The committee examined historical data from the USGS, NCDC, SHELDUSTM, past newspaper articles and conducted interviews during its research on the effects of past flooding events. In the last 85 years there have been eight reported flooding events where six occurred countywide and two in Wrens. There has been a total of approximately $2.2 million in property and crop damages with three fatalities reported. The rainfall resulted in flash flooding which caused downed trees and power lines, apartment and schools to flood and washed out several roads. Data pinpointing the depth of flood waters and exact locations of all washed out roads and property damage is not available. Limited data is available for the incorporated jurisdictions. The most complete data applies to the county as a whole. The table below is a result of information gathered from interviews, newspaper articles, the USGS, the NCDC and SHELDUS databases. Community Name Init FHBM Identified Init. FIRM Identified Curr. Eff. Map Date Reg-Emer Date Sanction Date Jefferson County 12/17/10 12/17/10(M) 12/17/10 Avera N/A N/A N/A N/A Bartow 08/22/75 01/01/92 12/17/10(M) 01/01/92 Louisville 08/15/75 01/01/92 12/17/10(M) 07/03/86 Stapleton 04/04/75 08/19/96 12/17/10(M) 08/19/96 Wadley 08/22/75 08/19/96 12/17/10(M) 08/19/96 Wrens 05/10/74 06/17/86 12/17/10(M) 06/17/86 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 22 Details Begin Date End Date Type PrD CrD A result of a hurricane that came ashore at Pensacola Florida 9/30/1929 10/3/1929 Flood 0.00k 0.00 Flooding There was a 3-day rainfall of 19.89 inches in Louisville 10/11/1990 10/12/1990 Flooding 2000.00k 0.00 Flood 10/13/1990 10/15/1990 Flood 50.00k 0.00 Flash Flood 3/1/1991 3/1/1991 Flash Flood 5.00k 0.00 Tropical Storm Tammy caused heavy winds/minor flooding 10/5/1995 Flooding 0.00k 0.00 As a result of Hurricane Dennis widespread flooding 7/10/2005 Flooding 0.00k 0.00 Flood 5/6/2009 5/6/2009 Flooding 1.00k 0.000 The Jefferson County EOC reported washed out roads near Avera. Almost two inches of rainfall in a 3 hour period on already wet soils quickly overwhelmed the drainage systems. 7/13/2013 Flooding 0.00k 0.00 Source: NCDC and SHELDUS Limited data is available for the infrequent flood events in Jefferson and its municipalities. Based on historical stream gauge data from the USGS major flood stage for the Brushy Creek near Wrens is eight feet. The highest historical crest at this location was 14.02 feet on October 12, 1990. The Ogeechee River near Louisville highest historical crest was 21.3 feet in October 1929. There have been two major flood events recorded: one in 1929 and one in October 1990. Torrential rain occurred in east-central Georgia on October 10-12, 1990. The largest 24-hour rainfall amount recorded was 16.42 inches at Louisville. Severe flooding caused by the intense rain occurred in several tributaries to the Ogeechee, Ohoopee, and Savannah Rivers. There was a 3-day rainfall of 19.89 inches in Louisville. Maximum discharges of streams in east-central Georgia had recurrence intervals ranging from 2-years to more than 100 years. Record-high stages and discharges occurred at 14 sites in east-central Georgia where stage and discharge data were collected. The most severe flooding occurred on Big Creek near Louisville, Brushy Creek near Wrens and Buckhead Creek near Waynesboro where the maximum discharges were much greater than the respective 100-year discharges. Known dam failures upstream of the gaged sites on Big Creek and Brushy Creek contributed to the severity of the flooding. Also, there were at least six other streams within about a 50-mile radius of Augusta that experienced maximum discharges equal to or greater than those having a 100-year recurrence interval (fig. 45, table 38). All sites where discharge equaled or exceeded the 100-year discharge within this 50- mile radius had drainage areas of less than 100 square miles, except sites on the Ogeechee River. The Ogeechee River experienced maximum discharges having recurrence intervals ranging from 10 to more than 100 years. The maximum discharge of 27,000 cubic feet per ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 23 second for the Ogeechee River near Louisville was the largest since 1929. (Summary of Floods in the United States during 1990 and 1991 USGS) While severe flooding within the county is a relatively infrequent event, there is a potential for flooding. Flooding usually occurs from fall to mid-spring. Flash flooding is the most prominent flooding event that takes place as riverbanks overflow due to rainfall. To date there has been more than $2 million dollars in reported damages and three fatalities. There are no NFIP mitigated properties and no properties have encountered repetitive flooding. The GMIS flood hazard map, located in Appendix A, assigns the following flood zone ratings for each jurisdiction:  Avera and the unincorporated parts of the County, have a flood zone rating on one where area is not included in survey and undetermined but possible.  Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, Wadley and Wrens have a flood zone rating of three where floodplains are known.  Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton. Wadley and Wrens have a flood zone rating flood zone rating of zero for areas outside of flood zones. The following table describes the characteristics of the flood zones based on data from the GMIS. Score Original Value Description 4 Floodway Floodway (within zone AE) V 1% with Velocity no Base Flood Elevation (BFE) VE 1% with Velocity BFE 3 A 1% Annual Chance no BFE A99 1% Federal flood protection system AE 1% has BFE AH 1% Ponding has BFE AO 1% Sheet Flow has depths AR 1% Federal flood protection system 2 X500 0.2% Annual Chance 1 ANI Area not included in survey D Undetermined but possible 0 UNDES Undesignated X Outside Flood Zones Source: GMIS The magnitude of a major flood event could have approximately 75% of the county experiencing some damage from flooding. The FEMA Flood Zone maps shows the following conditions for:  the unincorporated areas of the County have flood prone areas along waterways and the rest of the unincorporated areas are outside of known flood hazard areas;  Avera has no identified flood prone areas;  Bartow’s flood prone areas run along the entire western boundary; Map Color Code from GMIS ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 24  Louisville’s flood prone areas flood prone areas run along the western boundary;  Stapleton’s flood prone areas run through the city trickle throughout the city;  Wadley’s flood prone areas run along the entire southern, eastern and western borders of the city with a small area at the upper northern part of the city; and  Wrens’ flood prone areas run across the lower southern portion of the city, a small area at the northern top of the city and a section on the eastern portion that run into the middle of the city. While data was collected looking at 85 years of data, frequency rate was calculated using a 20-year hazard cycle per guidance from GEMA. Based on a 20-year hazard cycle the chance of an annual flooding event occurring is 20% for all of Jefferson County. Data is not available for individual jurisdictions (See Appendix A, Section I and Appendix C. Assets Exposed to Hazard and Estimates of Potential Loss: For determination of assets exposed to risk this plan used maps created from FEMA data and available parcel data. Based on FIRM, tax digests, parcel maps and FEMA Worksheet #3a for inventory of assets, the following assets are at risk during a flood event:  Avera has no structures/properties at risk;  Bartow has five structures/properties valued at approximately $1 million with an estimated population of eight;  Louisville has nine structures/properties valued at approximately $1.5 million with a population of zero;  Stapleton has 16 structures/properties valued at approximately $332,977 with a population of 31;  Wadley has 30 structures/properties valued at approximately $1.7 million with a population of 30;  Wrens has 46 structures/properties valued at approximately $2.9 million with a population of 205; and  Unincorporated Jefferson County has 102 structures/properties valued at approximately $6.5 million with an estimated population of 75. All 208 structures/properties have been identified by federal flood plain maps and/or parcel maps. Not all structures that have been identified will experience damage from floods. Further studies, including professional surveys, would have to be conducted to determine exactly which structures are at consistent risk from flooding. The extent of each flood varies according to the amount of rainfall in a given area. If a complete loss of the 208 structures/properties located within flood zones would result in approximately $14.1 million in damages assuming 100% loss, a 75% loss would represent approximately $10.6 million, a 50% loss would represent approximately $7.1 million, and a 25% loss would represent approximately $3.5 million. The GMIS has two critical facilities with a hazard score of three: the Wrens Waste Water Treatment Plant and the West Walker Street Lift Station with a replacement value of more than $3.5 million. Of the 107 remaining critical facilities, 40 have a hazard score of one ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 25 with a replacement value of more than $111 million and 67 have a hazard score of zero with a replacement value of more than $192 million. The table below shows the breakdown of critical facilities by jurisdiction, flood hazard score, replacement value, content value, and daily occupancy. Jurisdiction Hazard Score # of Critical Facilities Replacement Value $ Content Value $ Daily Occupancy Jefferson County 1 17 102,862,230 6,572,300 1,884 Jefferson County 0 17 157,379,663 3,982,500 1,927 Avera 1 3 737,500 400,000 1 Bartow 1 1 60,500 00 0 Bartow 0 15 3,811,977 402,000 6 Louisville 1 6 2,656,165 00 0 Louisville 0 9 15,486,225 1,700,000 269 Stapleton 0 4 1,778,500 730,000 2 Wadley 0 9 6,876,513 1,788,200 140 Wrens 3 2 3,550,000 125,000 0 Wrens 1 13 5,287,500 25,000 0 Wrens 0 13 7,365,350 1,549,200 70 TOTAL FOR COUNTY 109 307,852,123 17,274,200 4,299 The GMIS has no repetitive flooding NFIP property and no NFIP mitigated properties or properties that have encountered repetitive flooding where there was loss. There are no estimate for future structures since future development will be limited and regulated in areas where floodplains exist. (See Appendix A, Section I and Appendix D. Land Use and Development Trends: The Joint Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 2004-2024 presents future development scenarios for Jefferson County and its municipalities. The county has experienced very little growth over the past decade, and future forecasts project relatively slow growth patterns. Despite the slow growth forecasts the county intends to work closely with the cities to preemptively manage future growth. Additionally, as the Fall Line Freeway and US Route 1 corridor widening projects are completed, the county expects growth to occur. The main areas of the county considered adequate for growth are those areas adjacent to Louisville, Wrens, and Wadley. The majority of planned commercial, industrial and residential expansion is appropriate for these areas because of their proximity to the cities and the community facilities and services that they provide, as well as their access to major thoroughfares. Jefferson County’s rural character is illustrated by its abundance of natural resources. The lack of development pressures in the county has contributed to the continued presence of these resources and projected development needs can be well managed without negatively impacting any environmentally sensitive area. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 26 Similarly, the county has an abundance of cultural resources. These are truly fragile resources that must be treated in the same fashion as natural features because of the local importance that they hold. Future development needs to incorporate the preservation of locally significant historic resources as identified in that element of this plan. Jefferson County’s relative isolation from major urban markets decreases outside influences on local development patterns. This is expected to change as the State completes the Fall Line Freeway and as GA 17 is developed into a four-lane highway. As commuting patterns shift and urbanized areas continue to expand Jefferson County may develop a greater attraction to urban commuters as a suburban, “bedroom,” community. The county is considering implementation of zoning as a viable method of controlling future land use. Through the zoning ordinance, the county will be able to limit and regulate development in known flood prone areas. (Current and Future Land Maps and Tables for each jurisdiction can be found in Appendix B) E. Multi-Jurisdictional Concerns: Jefferson County, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, Wadley and Wrens will continue to participate in the NFIP. Avera has no identified floodplains. There are no initial flood hazard base maps for the unincorporated areas of Jefferson County or the city of Avera. The County and Avera need to have FHBM created. During a natural hazard it is imperative that all emergency personal can communicate with each other throughout the entire planning area. The County and its jurisdictions have numerous dead spots throughout the area due to topography and lack of adequate communication equipment. The County and its emergency personnel are dependent on the private sector for towers to use for signals. If these towers are ever removed the County will be without any adequate means to transmit signals. The County and all jurisdictions are aware of the need to develop communication capabilities that will serve their County. Another concern is the lack of available data for the county and individual jurisdictions on hazard events. A database needs to be created and maintained that provides information on flooding events that occur. This database should include information such as location (road names, neighborhoods, GPS coordinates, etc.), damages reported, power outages, road closures, county and city personal that are dispatched to the area, etc. Since flooding has the potential to affect all of Jefferson County, any mitigation steps taken related to flooding should be undertaken on a countywide basis and include all incorporated jurisdictions. F. Hazard Summary: There have been no changes since the previous plan was completed that would affect the overall vulnerability of the community to this hazard. The county has seen a decrease in population over the last 30 years and no new development has taken place. All jurisdictions, except Avera, adopted the new floodplain maps in 2010. While severe flooding within Jefferson County is a relatively infrequent event. The county has 54 streams/rivers, 39 reservoirs and three lakes which makes the potential for flooding ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 27 significant. There has been eight flooding events recorded in the last 85 years. These events resulted in school closings, roads washing out and $2 million in property damages. The flood of 1990 also caused a dam failure. The Jefferson County Hazard Frequency table calculates a 20% chance of an annual flooding event. Hazard frequency tables can be found in Appendix D for all jurisdictions. Severe flooding, although relatively rare in occurrence, has the potential to inflict significant damage in Jefferson County. Mitigation of flood damage requires the community to know where flood prone areas are, what roads and bridges may be affected, and which facilities fall below anticipated flood levels. The committee recognized the potential for losses caused by flooding and identified it as a hazard requiring mitigation measures. Based on tax data, parcel and flood maps all or a portion of 208 known structures/properties valued at approximately $14 million and a population of 349 located in known floodplains. The committee identified specific mitigation goals, objectives and action items related to flooding, which can be found in Chapter III, Section I. SECTION II. DAM FAILURE A. Hazard Identification: Dam failures and incidents involve unintended release or surges of impounded water. They can destroy property and cause injury and death While they may involve the total collapse of a dam, that is not always the case. Damaged spillways, overtopping of a dam or other problems may result in a hazardous situation. Dam failures may be caused by structural deficiencies in the dam itself. Dam failures may also come from other factors including but not limited to debris blocking spillways, flooding, earthquakes, improper operation and vandalism. Dam failures are potentially the worst flood events. When a dam fails, a large quantity of water is suddenly released destroying anything in its path and posing a threat to life and property. Dams are classified into three categories:  High Hazard – Dams where failure or disoperation will probably cause loss of human life.  Significant Hazard – Dams where failure or disoperation will probably not result in loss of life, but can cause economic loss, environmental damage, and disruption of lifeline facilities or other concerns.  Low Hazard – Dams where failure or disoperation will probably not result in loss of life and cause only low economic and/or environmental loss. B. Hazard Profile: The 2013 National Inventory of Dams has 40 low hazard dams and 1 high hazard dam located at Lake Marion in Jefferson County. There are 39 dams in the unincorporated areas and two located within the city boundaries of Wadley. There has been one known dam failure to date during the flood of 1990. The committee felt that it was important to address the issue. A map and complete table of the dams can be found in Appendix A by classification. Based on interviews and best available data one dam failure has occurred within the last 64 years. Based on a 20-year hazard cycle the chance of an annual dam failure occurring is less ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 28 than one percent for all of Jefferson County. There is not enough data available to determine rate of onset or the extent a dam failure hazard. Further study needs to be conducted to determine the precise probability of an annual dam failure event. This has been listed as a mitigation action in Chapter III. (See Appendix A: Section II and Appendix C. Assets Exposed to Hazard and Estimate of Potential Losses: The number of dams posing potential loss of life hazards to Jefferson County residents and the number of residents living from these potentially hazardous dams is unknown at this time. Based on best available data, Avera and Stapleton appear not to be at risk due to dam failure. The data is not available at this time for the committee to determine what assets are exposed to risk due to dam failure in the unincorporated areas of Jefferson County, Bartow, Louisville, Wadley and Wrens. The potential losses due to dam failure flooding are unknown and cannot be estimated at this time. The GMIS report has critical facilities replacement at more than $307 million with a population of 4,299. The County has population of 16,930 and 37,363 structures/properties valued at less than $1.4 billion at risk of potential loss. (See Appendix A Section II and Appendix D. Land Use and Development Trends: Projected changes in land use based on the county’s multi-jurisdictional comprehensive plan shows that the county has experienced very little growth over the past decade and future forecasts project relatively slow growth patterns. Despite the slow growth forecasts the county intends to work closely with the cities to preemptively manage future growth. Additionally, as the Fall Line Freeway and US Route 1 corridor widening projects are completed, the county expects growth to occur. The main areas of the county considered adequate for growth are those areas adjacent to Louisville, Wrens, and Wadley. The majority of planned commercial, industrial and residential expansion is appropriate for these areas because of their proximity to the cities and the community facilities and services that they provide, as well as their access to major thoroughfares. Vulnerability in terms of future buildings, infrastructure and critical facilities is not known at this time. It can be surmised that this future development will bring an increase in population and efforts must be made to ensure new homes are not built where a dam break may occur. Current and Future Land Use maps, tables and projections can be found in Appendix B. A dam break analysis study is recommended in Chapter III, Section II to determine the exact assets exposed to risk as a result of a dam failure. E. Multi-Jurisdictional Concerns: Areas of dams are most likely to be affected by a dam failure. Until a dam breach analysis is run it is hard to pinpoint what assets will be affected. Any mitigation steps taken related to dam failure should be undertaken on a countywide basis and include all incorporated jurisdictions. During a natural hazard it is imperative that all emergency personal can communicate with each other throughout the entire planning area. The County and its jurisdictions have numerous dead spots throughout the area due to topography and lack of adequate communication equipment. The County and its emergency personnel are dependent on the private sector for towers to use for signals. If these towers are ever removed the County will ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 29 be without any adequate means to transmit signals. The County and all jurisdictions are aware of the need to develop communication capabilities that will serve their County Another concern is the lack of available data for the county and individual jurisdictions on hazard events. A database needs to be created and maintained that provides information on flooding events that occur. This database should include information such as location (road names, neighborhoods, GPS coordinates, etc.), damages reported, power outages, road closures, county and city personal that are dispatched to the area, etc. F. Hazard Summary: There have been no changes since the previous plan that would affect the overall vulnerability of the community to this hazard. This has been no new development in hazard areas or adoption of development or building regulations to increase or decrease the overall vulnerability to dam failure. Dam failures and incidents involve unintended release or surges of impounded water. They can destroy property and cause injury and death While they may involve total collapse of a dam, that is not always the case. Since there has been one reported dam failure event in Jefferson County, the committee felt that it was important to address the issue due to the fact there are 41 dams in the county with one classified as high hazard. The committee recognized the potential for losses caused by dam failure and identified it as a hazard requiring mitigation measures. To summarize, there are approximately 37,363 structures/properties in the county totaling less than $1.4 billion with a population of 16,930. The committee identified specific mitigation goals, objectives and action items related to dam failure, which can be found in Chapter III, Section II. SECTION III. DROUGHT A. Hazard Identification: The committee reviewed historical data from the Palmer Drought Index, NCDC, DNR, and USDA in researching drought conditions in Jefferson County. Drought conditions are identified by a prolonged period of moisture deficiency. Climatologists and hydrologists use five indicators of drought: rainfall, soil moisture, stream flows, lake levels and groundwater level. Drought conditions affect the cultivation of crops as well as water availability and water quality. Drought is also a key factor in wildfire development. Wildfire will be addressed in a separate HRV. B. Hazard Profile: Drought is not spatially defined and has the potential to affect the entire planning area equally. Jefferson County has a total area of 339,991 acres of which 14,847 acres dedicated to agricultural and 287,186 acres (84.5%) dedicated to forestry. According to the USDA 2012 Census of Agriculture 17,523 head of livestock. Agricultural losses due to drought have been the primary losses. No critical facilities have sustained any damage or functional downtime due to dry weather conditions. The last drought event in Jefferson County began in January 2012 and ended in October 2012. Based on historical data from the United States Drought Monitor (USDM) website there have been 84 months from January 2000 to August 2014 that have had drought conditions. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 30  27 months with a D0 - Abnormally Dry  34 months with a D1 - Moderate Drought  21 months with a D2 - Severe Drought  26 months with a D3 - Extreme Drought  3 months with a D4 - Exceptional Drought According to the 2003 Georgia Drought Management Plan, Jefferson County is located in Climate Division 6. For this Climate Division, the GA EPD monitors the following indicators for drought triggers, or specific values. If any one of the indicators reaches or passes a trigger value for two consecutive months, a preliminary evaluation is conducted to determine the appropriate response.  Standard Precipitation Index: This figure compares precipitation levels during the last three, six, and twelve months with historical figures to determine net loss or increase.  Reservoir Levels: Water level is measured Clarks Hill and Lake Hartwell.  Streamflow: Annual and discharge levels are monitored and compared with historical figures along Ogeechee River near Eden A drought event is not considered to be over until all of the indicators for the Climate Division are at an acceptable stress level for at least four consecutive months. The Palmer Index is most effective in determining long term drought, a matter of several months, and is not as good with short-term forecasts (a matter of weeks). The Palmer Index (from http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/prelim/drought/pdiimage.html) map below, from the NOAA web site, indicates that Jefferson County and its municipalities’ were in Severe to Extreme drought from the spring thru the fall of 2012. The Palmer Index uses a 0 as normal, and drought is shown in terms of minus numbers; for example, minus two is moderate drought, minus three is severe drought, and minus four is extreme drought. The maps below show drought conditions for April 2012 and April 2014. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 31 There have been 25 drought events in the county in the last 64 years with estimated crop losses at $9.7 million. According to the farm subsidies database there has been a total of $8,827,715 in disaster assistance from 1995-2012. Historical data is only for the county as a whole. A severe, prolonged drought would mainly affect the 88.9% of the county that makes up the timber and agriculture business. This could result in loss of crops, livestock and create the conditions for a major wildfire event. This would also have an impact on the incorporated cities as water restrictions would be enforced. Based on a 20-year hazard cycle history there is a 120% chance of an annual drought event. The chance for an annual drought event is the same for the county as well as all jurisdictions (See Appendix A, Section III, and Appendix D) C. Assets Exposed to Hazard and Estimate of Potential Losses: Drought conditions typically pose little or no threat to structures; however, fires can occur as a result of dry weather. The greatest threat to assets in the county is to forestry and agricultural properties and livestock. No damage to critical facilities is anticipated as a result of drought conditions. Crop damage cannot be accurately quantified due to several unknown variables: duration of the drought, temperatures during the drought, severity of the drought, different crops require different amounts of rainfall, and different growing seasons. Based on FEMA Worksheet #3a the potential loss in agricultural and forestry properties for each jurisdiction is:  Avera has 16 structures/properties valued at approximately $485,968 with an estimated population of 4.  Bartow has 4 structures/properties valued at approximately $1.9 million with an estimated population of 0.  Louisville has 23 structures/properties valued at $675,083 with an estimated population of 8.  Stapleton has 6 structures/properties valued at approximately $1.1 million with an estimated population of 4;  Wadley has 50 structures/properties valued at approximately $1.7 million with a population of 12;  Wrens has 27 structures/properties valued at $1million with a population of 8;  Unincorporated Jefferson County has 6,663 structures/properties valued at approximately $171 million with an estimated population of 586. There are a total of 6,789 agricultural/forestry properties in all of Jefferson County valued at more than $495 million with a population of 622 that are at the greatest risk due to a drought event (Appendix A and Appendix D. Land Use and Development Trends: Jefferson County currently has no land use or development trends related to drought conditions. When drought conditions do occur the county and all municipalities follow the restrictions set forth by the Georgia DNR Drought Management Plan and the Statewide Outdoor Water Use Schedule. All six water departments have adopted the Georgia Water Stewardship Act went into effect statewide on June 2, 2010. It allows daily outdoor watering for purposes of planting, growing, managing, or maintaining ground cover, trees, shrubs, or other plants only between the hours of 4 p.m. and 10 a.m. by anyone whose water is supplied by a water system permitted by the Environmental Protection Division. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 32 The following outdoor water uses also are allowed daily at any time of the day by anyone:  Commercial Agriculture  Alternative sources of water (grey water, rain water, condensate, etc.)  Irrigation of food gardens  Irrigation of newly installed or reseeded turf for the first 30 days  Drip irrigation or soaker hoses  Hand watering with a shut off nozzle  Water from a private well  Irrigation of plants for sale  Irrigation of athletic fields, golf courses or public recreational turf  Hydroseeding Outdoor water use for any purposes other than watering of plants, such as power washing or washing cars, is still restricted to the current odd/even watering schedule.  Odd-numbered addresses can water on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Sundays.  Even-numbered and unnumbered addresses are allowed to water on Mondays, Wednesdays and Saturdays. The main areas of the county considered to experience growth are those areas adjacent to Louisville, Wrens, and Wadley. The majority of planned commercial, industrial and residential expansion is appropriate for these areas because of their proximity to the cities and the community facilities and services that they provide, as well as their access to major thoroughfares. Growth for the unincorporated areas of the county will be minimal. Vulnerability in terms of future buildings, infrastructure and critical facilities is not known at this time. Current and Future Land Use maps, tables and projections can be found in Appendix B. E. Multi-Jurisdictional Concerns: Agricultural losses associated with drought are more likely to occur in the rural, less concentrated areas of the county. Although all incorporated jurisdictions are less likely to experience drought related losses, they should not be excluded from mitigation considerations. Drought creates a deficiency in water supply that affects water availability and water quality. Droughts can and have severely affected private wells, municipal and industrial water supplies, agriculture, stream water quality, recreation at major reservoirs hydropower generation, navigation, and forest resources. F. Hazard Summary: Drought is not spatially defined and equally affects the entire planning area. Droughts do not have the immediate effects of other natural hazards, but sustained drought can cause severe economic stress to not only the agricultural interests in Jefferson County, but to the entire State of Georgia. The potential negative effects of sustained drought are numerous. Historical data is available only for the county as a whole. Based on a 20- year cycle hazard history along with available data there is a 120% chance of an annual drought event in Jefferson County. In addition to an increased threat of wildfires, drought ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 33 can affect municipal and industrial water supplies, stream-water quality, water recreation facilities, hydropower generation, as well as agricultural and forest resources. In summary, for Jefferson County as a whole, there are a total of 6,789 agricultural/forestry properties in Jefferson County valued at more than $495 million with a population of 622 and includes 17,523 head of livestock that are at the greatest risk due to a drought event. There is a population of 16,930 and approximately 37,363 structures/properties in the county with a value just more than $1.3 billion which could be affected if wildfires break out as a result of drought conditions. Drought mitigation goals and objectives can be found in Chapter III, Section III. There has been no new development in the county and no population increase in 30 years. Since the previous plan all six water departments have adopted the Georgia Water Stewardship Act went into effect statewide on June 2, 2010. It allows daily outdoor watering for purposes of planting, growing, managing, or maintaining ground cover, trees, shrubs, or other plants only between the hours of 4 p.m. and 10 a.m. by anyone whose water is supplied by a water system permitted by the Environmental Protection Division. The enforcement of these restrictions helps to ensure an ample water supply during drought times. All citizens are informed of water restrictions as they occur. Also Wrens extend water system 3.5 miles and Louisville completed a $1.7 million a new well. SECTION IV. WILDFIRE A. Hazard Identification: A wildfire is any uncontrolled fire occurring on undeveloped land that needs fire suppression. The potential for wildfire is influenced by three factors: the presence of fuel, the area’s topography and air mass. There are three different classes of wildland fires. A surface fire is the most common type and burns along the floor of a forest, moving slowly and killing or damaging trees. A ground fire is usually started by lightning and burns on or below the forest floor. Crown fires spread rapidly by wind and move quickly by jumping along the tops of trees. Wildfires are usually signaled by dense smoke that fills the area for miles around. Wildfires by lightning have a very strong probability of occurring during drought conditions. Drought conditions make natural fuels (grass, brush, trees, dead vegetation) more fire-prone. B. Hazard Profile: Jefferson County has a total area of 339,991 acres of which 14,847 acres dedicated to agricultural and 287,186 acres (84.5%) dedicated to forestry. Given the right weather conditions and variables, wildfire, due to natural causes, creates a potential threat to the lives of residents and property in the planning area. The NCDC has never reported a significant wildfire event in Jefferson County. The committee reviewed historical data from the Georgia Forestry Commission, which is not found in the NCDC database, to research wildfire events. The GFC provides wildfire data on man-made and natural wildfire occurrences for the county as a whole and not for individual jurisdictions. This plan will address only natural disasters. According to Georgia Forestry data, from 1957 to 2013, there have been 2,814 fire events burning a total of 15,997 acres for an average extent of 5.68 acres. Of these 2,814 fire events 168 were a result of lightning ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 34 strikes that burned 1,505 acres. Based on best available data 168 wildfire events as a result of lightning occurred in the unincorporated areas of the county. While data was collected looking at 57 years of data, frequency rate was calculated using a 20-year hazard cycle per guidance from GEMA. Based on a 20-year hazard cycle there is a 455% chance of an annual wildfire due to a lightning strike or statistically the county can expect 4.5 wildfires as a result of lightning annually. The drier the condition the more susceptible the county is to wildfire (See Appendix GMIS assigned the following wildfire hazard scores for each jurisdiction:  Hazard score of two (low wildfire risks) o Unincorporated areas of the county – approximately 10% o Louisville - approximately 20% of the city o Wadley - approximately 65% of the city o Wrens - approximately 20% of the city  Hazard score of one (very low wildfire risk) o Unincorporated areas of the county – approximately 55% o Avera- approximately 80% of the city o Bartow- approximately 60% of the city o Louisville - approximately 60% of the city o Stapleton - approximately 75% of the city o Wadley - approximately 34% of the city o Wrens - approximately 30% of the city  Hazard score of zero (no houses, agriculture, water, or city) o Unincorporated areas of the county – approximately 35% o Avera- approximately 20% of the city o Bartow- approximately 40% of the city o Louisville - approximately 20% of the city o Stapleton - approximately 25% of the city o Wadley - approximately 1% of the city o Wrens - approximately 50% of the city The Jefferson County Community Wildfire Protection Plan references specific areas determined by the GFC to be wildfire hazard areas. The wildland fire risk assessment was conducted in 2011 by the Jefferson County Fire Department and the Georgia Forestry Commission returned an average score of 112, placing Jefferson County in the “very high risk” hazard range. The risk assessment instrument takes into consideration accessibility, vegetation (based on fuel models), roofing assembly, building construction, and availability of fire protection resources, placement of gas and electric utilities, and additional rating factors. The Communities-at-Risk within Jefferson County that led to its Very High Hazard risk rating are: Community Score Hazard Rating Ogeechee Heights 114 Very High Hazard Taylor Lane 54 Moderate Hazard Golf Drive 105 Very High Hazard Berrien Branch 71 Moderate Hazard ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 35 Community Score Hazard Rating Casson Creek Subdivision 120 Very High Hazard Oak Hill Subdivision 101 Very High Hazard Stellaville Community 128 Extreme Hazard Mathews Community 105 Very High Hazard Red McDonald Community 156 Extreme Hazard Sitadey Oaks Community 147 Extreme Hazard Gus Perdue Community 116 Very High Hazard Country Club Circle 74 Moderate Hazard Kelly Quarter 142 Extreme Hazard Whitley Community 115 Very High Hazard Deerwood Circle 110 Very High Hazard Sylvan Grove 93 High Hazard Brown Terrace 78 High Hazard Jefferson County Average 107 Very High Hazard C. Assets Exposed to Hazard and Estimate of Potential Losses: While wildfires are more likely to occur in the county outside of the incorporated areas. The committee concluded that wildfires present a threat to all existing buildings, infrastructure and critical facilities since wildfires can spread throughout the county and into the urban areas. Damages as a result of a wildfire event are more likely to occur in areas of the county where forestry and woodland are prevalent. Wildfire does have the potential to spread into the incorporated areas and cause extensive damage to existing structures/properties. FEMA Worksheet #3a located in Appendix D shows the number and types of buildings found in Jefferson County, as well as the value of these structures/properties and the population. The following assets by jurisdiction could potentially be exposed to wildfire hazard: Jurisdiction Number of Structure/Properties Value Population Jefferson County (Unincorporated) 22,850 $1,039,928,700 9,219 Avera 745 $6,633,305 246 Bartow 677 $12,453,553 286 Louisville 4,551 $118,097,005 2,493 Stapleton 963 $13,083,513 438 Wadley 3,538 $95,608,332 2,061 Wrens 4,039 $112,293,040 2,187 TOTAL FOR COUNTY 37,363 $1,398,097,448 16,930 Source: Jefferson County Tax Assessor The following table reveals all critical facilities in the county by jurisdiction, number of facilities, hazard score, replacement value, and daily occupancy exposed to wildfire hazard. A complete breakdown of each jurisdiction by hazard can be found in Appendix A. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 36 Jurisdiction Hazard Score # of Critical Facilities Replacement Value $ Content Value $ Daily Occupancy Jefferson County 2 15 78,723,084 3,887,000 1,295 Jefferson County 1 8 82,623,076 3,309,600 1,371 Jefferson County 0 11 98,895,733 3,358,200 1,145 Avera 1 3 737,500 400,000 1 Bartow 1 12 3,615,377 402,000 6 Bartow 0 4 257,100 00 0 Louisville 2 6 6,825,000 1,200,000 14 Louisville 1 4 7,206,165 00 225 Louisville 0 5 4,111,225 500,000 30 Stapleton 0 4 1,778,500 730,000 2 Wadley 2 7 5,776,513 1,788,200 140 Wadley 0 2 1,100,000 00 0 Wrens 2 5 4,140,350 1,449,200 70 Wrens 1 7 2,450,000 25,000 0 Wrens 0 16 9,612,500 225,000 0 TOTAL 109 307,852,123.00 17,274,200 4,299 The GMIS has 33 critical facilities with a hazard score of two (low probability) and 34 with a hazard score of one (very low probability). These 77 critical facilities with a wildfire hazard score greater than zero have an estimated potential loss of more than $192 million. The loss for all critical facilities is $307,852,123. According to FEMA Worksheet #3a there are 37,363 structures/properties with a population of 16,930 with a value of more than $1.3 billion worth of assets countywide. If a wildfire started, it is not likely that all of these structures/properties would be affected (See Appendix A and Appendix D. Land Use and Development Trends: Jefferson County currently has no land use or development trends related to wildfire conditions. Land use codes do provide for fire protection to any proposed major and minor developments connected to the public water supply system, and minimum fire flows shall be computed based on standards promulgated by the Jefferson County Fire Department. For those proposed developments that will not have immediate access to the public water supply system, such standards and computations should be based on the National Fire Protection Association Standards on Water Supply for Suburban and Rural Fire Fighting. E. Multi-Jurisdictional Concerns: The majority of Jefferson County is timber, forest or agricultural land. If a wildfire occurs it is imperative that all emergency personal can communicate with each other throughout the entire planning area. The county and its jurisdictions have numerous dead spots throughout the area due to topography and lack of adequate communication equipment. The county and its emergency personnel are dependent on the private sector for towers to use for signals. If these towers are ever removed the county will be without any adequate means to transmit signals. The county and all jurisdictions are aware of the need to develop communication capabilities that will serve their county. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 37 Wildfire does have the potential to spread to urban areas thus affecting the entire county. As a result, any mitigation steps taken related to wildfire should be undertaken on a countywide basis and include all incorporated jurisdictions. F. Hazard Summary: Jefferson County has a total area of 339,991 acres of which 14,847 acres dedicated to agricultural and 287,186 acres (84.5%) dedicated to forestry. Given the right weather conditions and variables, wildfire due to natural causes creates a potential threat to the lives and property of residents in the planning area. According to Georgia Forestry data, from 1957 to 2013, there have been 2,814 fire events burning a total of 15,997 acres for an average extent of 5.68 acres. Of these 2,814 fire events 168 were a result of lightning strikes that burned 1,505 acres. Based on a 20-year hazard cycle there is a 455% chance of an annual wildfire due to a lightning strike or statistically the county can expect 4.5 wildfires as a result of lightning annually. The GMIS has 33 critical facilities with a hazard score of two (low probability) and 34 with a hazard score of one (very low probability). These 77 critical facilities with a wildfire hazard score greater than zero have an estimated potential loss of more than $192 million. The loss for all critical facilities is $307,852,123. According to FEMA Worksheet #3a there are 37,363 structures/properties with a population of 16,930 with a value of more than $1.3 billion worth of assets countywide. Mitigation Goals and Objectives concerning wildfires can be found in Chapter III, Section IV. Since the previous plan there has been no new development and no increase in population that would affect the overall vulnerability of the community to this hazard. The have been a total of 26 new fire hydrants installed in three jurisdictions. The County continues to follow GFC guidelines to service the construction of firebreaks around forests and structures, maintain fuel breaks along abandoned road beds and recommend a defensible space (30-ft minimum setbacks) between buildings and strictly follow guidelines for control burns and permits. Jefferson County EMA also started a Facebook Page since the previous plan to inform citizens about wildfire conditions. SECTION V. SEVERE WEATHER, INCLUDING TORNADOS, TROPICAL STORMS THUNDERSTORM WINDS, LIGHTNING, AND HAIL A. Hazard Identification: The committee reviewed historical data from the county’s own weather database, the NCDC, SHELDUSTM, newspapers and citizen interviews in researching the past effects of severe weather in Jefferson County. The month of February marks the beginning of the severe weather season in the South, which can last until the month of August. Five types of severe weather were identified by the mitigation team: tornados, tropical storms, thunderstorm winds, lightning and hail. A tornado is a violent windstorm characterized by a twisting, funnel-shaped cloud. It is spawned by a thunderstorm or the result of a hurricane and is produced when cool air overrides a layer of warm air, forcing the warm air to rise rapidly. Tornados are among the most unpredictable and destructive of weather phenomena and can strike at any time of the ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 38 year if the essential conditions are present. The damage from a tornado is a result of the high wind velocity and wind-blown debris. The positions of the subtropical and polar jet streams often are conducive to the formation of storms in the Gulf region. The table below shows the original Fujita Scale and the Enhanced Fujita Scale (in use since 2007) to rate the intensity of a tornado by examining the damage caused by the tornado after it has passed over a man- made structure. FUJITA SCALE DERIVED EF SCALE OPERATIONAL EF SCALE F Number Fastest 1/4- mile (mph) 3 Second Gust (mph) EF Number 3 Second Gust (mph) EF Number 3 Second Gust (mph) 0 40-72 45-78 0 65-85 0 65-85 1 73-112 79-117 1 86-109 1 86-110 2 113-157 118-161 2 110-137 2 111-135 3 158-207 162-209 3 138-167 3 136-165 4 208-260 210-261 4 168-199 4 166-200 5 261-318 262-317 5 200-234 5 Over 200 Source: NOAA The second type of severe weather is tropical storms. Tropical Storms are an organized system of strong thunderstorms with a defined surface circulation and maximum sustained winds of 39–73 MPH (34–63 knots). In this area they generally occur as a result of a hurricane or tropical system that has come inland. The third severe weather event, thunderstorm winds, can cause death and injury, power outages, property damage, and can disrupt telephone service, severely affect radio communications and surface/air transportation which may seriously impair the emergency management capabilities of the affected jurisdictions. Thunderstorm winds are winds that arise from convection (with or without lightning), with speeds of at least 50 knots (58 mph), or winds of any speed producing a fatality, injury, or damage. Severe thunderstorms develop powerful updrafts and downdrafts. An updraft of warm, moist air helps to fuel a towering cumulonimbus cloud reaching tens of thousands of feet into the atmosphere. A downdraft of relatively cool, dense air develops as precipitation begins to fall through the cloud. Winds in the downdraft can reach in excess of 100 miles per hour. When the downdraft reaches the ground it spreads out forming a gust front: the strong wind that kicks up just before the storm hits. As the thunderstorm moves through the area, the full force of the downdraft in a severe thunderstorm can be felt as horizontal, straight-line winds with speeds well over 50 miles per hour. Straight-line winds are often responsible for most of the damage associated with a severe thunderstorm. Damaging straight-line winds occur over a range of scales. At one extreme, a severe single-cell thunderstorm may cause localized damage from a microburst, a severe downdraft extending not more than about two miles across. In contrast, a powerful thunderstorm complex that develops as a squall line can produce damaging winds that carve a path as much as 100 miles wide and 500 miles long. The fourth severe weather event is lightning. Lightning results from the buildup and discharge of electrical energy between positively and negatively charged areas. Rising and descending air within a thunderstorm separates these positive and negative charges. Water ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 39 and ice particles also affect charge distribution. A cloud-to-ground lightning strike begins as an invisible channel of electrically charged air moving from the cloud toward the ground. When one channel nears an object on the ground, a powerful surge of electricity from the ground moves upward to the clouds and produces the visible lightning strike. Lightning often strikes outside of heavy rain and may occur as far as 10 miles away from any rainfall. The final severe weather event is hail. Hailstones are created when strong rising currents of air called updrafts carry water droplets high into the upper reaches of thunderstorms where they freeze. These frozen water droplets fall back toward the earth in downdrafts. In their descent, these frozen droplets bump into and coalesce with unfrozen water droplets and are then carried back up high within the storm where they refreeze into larger frozen drops. This cycle may repeat itself several times until the frozen water droplets become so large and heavy that the updraft can no longer support their weight. Eventually, the frozen water droplets fall back to earth as hailstones. Hail can also be a destructive aspect of severe thunderstorms. Hail causes more monetary loss than any other type of thunderstorm-spawned severe weather in the United States, annually producing about one billion dollars in crop damage. Storms that produce hailstones only the size of a dime can produce dents in the tops of vehicles, damage roofs, break windows and cause significant injury or even death. B. Hazard Profile: Tornados, tropical storms, thunderstorm winds, lightning and hail can affect the entire county given the right conditions. Since the exact time and location of a severe weather event is not always predictable, all of Jefferson County is vulnerable to the threats of severe weather. Based on historic data, there have been 13 reported tornados in the planning area. The highest magnitude reported was an F3. Reported property damages for all 13 events totaled more than $9.4 million in property and crop damages with 31 injuries reported. Tornados tend to strike in somewhat random fashion, making the task of calculating a recurrence interval extremely difficult. Using a 20-year hazard cycle, frequency tables calculates an annual chance for a tornado event at:  30% for Jefferson County as a whole and for the unincorporated areas;  10% for Wrens; and  5% for Avera, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton and Wadley. The following table was produced from interviews, The Jefferson Reporter, and the NCDC and SHELDUSTM databases and shows the event, severity and estimate cost of damages reported. (See Appendix A, Section I and Appendix Date Location Mag Inj PD CrD 7/22/1970 Jefferson F0 0 0 0 7/19/1971 Jefferson F1 0 25.00k 0.00K 1/13/1972 Jefferson F3 21 2500.00k 0.00K 3/18/1981 Jefferson F1 1 25.00k 0.00K 7/25/1981 Jefferson F1 0 250.00k 0.00K ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 40 Date Location Mag Inj PD CrD 12/4/1983 Jefferson 2 5.00k 0.00K 10/1/1989 Jefferson F1 2 25.0k 0.00K 3/7/1996 Wrens F1 5 1000.00k 0.00K 6/15/1996 Bartow F0 0 10.00k 0.00K 7/1/2003 Jefferson F1 0 0 3/15/2008 Jefferson EF2 0 500.00k 0.00K 5/11/2008 Grange EF0 0 5.000M 0.00K 4/10/2009 Stapleton EF1 0 100.00k 0.00K There have been 18 tropical storms reported in Jefferson County by the NCDC and SHELDUSTM with property and crop damages of approximately $155,994. Damages as a result of the storms were due to power outages, downed trees and flash flooding. The tropical storms affected the entire planning area. Data for each jurisdiction is not available. Based on the hazard frequency table there is a 65% chance of an annual tropical storm event for all jurisdictions (See Appendix Details Date PrD CrD as a result of Hurricane Cleo 8/28/1964 1136.36 113.6 as a result of Hurricane Dora 9/9/1964 147.05k 1.47k as a result of Hurricane Alma 6/8/1966 1.47k 1.47k as a result of Tropical Storm Abby 6/6/1968 0.14k 0.00K as a result of Hurricane Angus 6/19/1972 0.00K 314.5 as a result of Hurricane Opal 10/05/1995 0.00K 0.00K as a result of Result of Hurricane Floyd 9/14/1999 0.00K 0.00K as a result of Tropical Storm Hanna 9/14/2002 0.00K 0.00K as a result of Tropical Depression Bill 7/1/2003 0.00K 0.00K as a result of Hurricane Frances 9/6/2004 0.00K 0.00K as a result of Hurricane Ivan 9/16/2004 0.00K 0.00K as a result of Hurricane Jeanne 9/26/2004 0.00K 0.00K as a result of Tropical Storm Arlene 6/12/2005 0.00K 0.00K as a result of Hurricane Dennis 7/10/2005 0.00K 0.00K as a result of Hurricane Katrina 8/29/2005 0.00K 0.00K as a result of Tropical storm Tammy 10/5/2005 0.00K 0.00K as a result of Hurricane Ida 11/10/2009 0.00K 0.00K as a result of Hurricane Jeanne 09/04/2011 0.00K 0.00K Tropical Depression as a result of Debby 7/3/2012 0.00K 0.00K Source: NCDC and SHELDUS Thunderstorms normally occur during the spring and summer months and often carry strong winds. There have been 85 events recorded in the last 64 years with over $6.5 million in property and crop damages reported with seven injuries and one death. The table below breaks down the thunderstorm events by jurisdiction. A complete table of thunderstorm wind events can be found in Appendix A. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 41 Location # of Events County-Wide Events* Total # of events per jurisdiction Jefferson County(Unincorporated) 1 55 56 Avera 2 55 57 Bartow 2 55 57 Louisville 11 55 66 Stapleton 3 55 58 Wadley 7 55 62 Wrens 4 55 59 TOTAL FOR COUNTY 30 55 85 Source: NCDC and SHELDUS * It is assumed that all 55 county-wide events reported occurred in each jurisdiction While data was collected looking at 64 years of data, frequency rate was calculated using a 20-year hazard cycle per guidance from GEMA. Using a 20-year hazard cycle, frequency tables calculates an annual chance for a thunderstorm event producing high winds at:  115% for the unincorporated areas of the county, Avera and Bartow;  165% for Louisville;  120% for Stapleton;  145% for Wadley; and  130% for Wrens Jefferson County as a whole has an overall probability for a significant thunderstorm event of 260%. Hazard frequency tables for individual jurisdictions can be found in Appendix D. The fourth weather event is lightning. During the spring and summer months the county experiences numerous storms that can often produce lightning. The VAISALA National Lightning Detection Network has the average flash density per square mile between five and six from 1997 to 2010. There have been 19 reported lightning events to the NCDC and SHELDUS over 64 years with more than $290,000 in property and crop damages with three injury. There have been 168 lightning strikes recorded in the same time frame that resulted in wildfires. When these datasets are combined there has been 187 lightning strikes recorded. This data is incomplete as the exact location of the 19 NCDC reported events within the county is not available. Best available data has a 75% chance for Avera, Bartow, Stapleton and Wadley and an 80% chance for Louisville and Wrens of an annual lightning strike event. While data was collected looking at 64 years of data, frequency rate was calculated using a 20-year hazard cycle per guidance from GEMA. Based on a 20-year hazard cycle there is a 475% chance that a lightning strike will occur in Jefferson County. The fifth weather event is hail. In the last 64 years there have been 53 hail events reported to the NCDC and SHELDUS databases with less than $1 million in property and crop damages. These 53 events produced hailstones ranging .75 to 2.75 inches. While data was collected looking at 64 years of data, frequency rate was calculated using a 20-year hazard ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 42 cycle per guidance from GEMA. Using a 20-year hazard cycle, frequency tables calculates an annual chance for a hail event at:  20% for the unincorporated areas and Avera;  90% for Louisville;  25% for Bartow and Stapleton;  30% for Wadley; and  40% for Wrens. Overall, there is a 155% that a hail event will take place in Jefferson County. Hazard frequency tables for individual jurisdictions can be found in Appendix D. C. Assets Exposed to Hazard and Estimate of Potential Losses: In evaluating assets exposed to the natural hazard, the committee determined that all critical facilities, as well as all public, private and commercial property, are susceptible to tornados, tropical storms, thunderstorm winds, lightning and hail events. The GMIS has the entire county with a wind hazard score of two, where wind speed is between 90 to 99 mph. The table below provides data from FEMA Worksheet #3a that estimates the potential loss for each jurisdiction. Jurisdiction Number of Structure/Properties Value Population Jefferson County (Unincorporated) 22,850 $1,039,928,700 9,219 Avera 745 $6,633,305 246 Bartow 677 $12,453,553 286 Louisville 4,551 $118,097,005 2,493 Stapleton 963 $13,083,513 438 Wadley 3,538 $95,608,332 2,061 Wrens 4,039 $112,293,040 2,187 TOTAL FOR COUNTY 37,363 $1,398,097,448 16,930 Source: Jefferson County Tax Assessor All 109 critical facilities have a wind hazard score of two placing the critical facilities in Zone IV which has a wind speed of 90 to 99 mph. The table below shows the number of critical facilities by jurisdictions, hazard score, replacement value, content value, and daily occupancy. Jurisdiction Hazard Score # of Critical Facilities Replacement Value $ Content Value $ Daily Occupancy Jefferson County 2 34 260,241,893 10,554,800 3,811 Avera 2 3 737,500 400,000 1 Bartow 2 16 3,872,477 402,000 6 Louisville 2 15 18,142,390 1,700,000 269 Stapleton 2 4 1,778,500 730,000 2 Wadley 2 9 6,876,513 1,788,200 140 Wrens 2 21 16,202,850 1,699,200 70 TOTAL 109 307,852,123.00 17,274,200 4,299 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 43 GMIS critical facility reports for wind and FEMA Worksheet #3a are located in Appendix A for each individual jurisdiction and the county as a whole. D. Land Use & Development Trends: Jefferson County is located in FEMA wind zone III, which is associated with 200-mph wind speeds. Currently, the county has no land use or development trends related to tornados, tropical storm, thunderstorm winds, lightning, or hail events. Information on current land use and future land use projections can be found in Appendix B. E. Multi-Jurisdictional Concerns – All of Jefferson County has the same design wind speed of 200 mph as determined by the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) as evidenced by the map and table below. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 44 During a natural hazard it is imperative that all emergency personal can communicate with each other throughout the entire planning area. The county and its jurisdictions have numerous dead spots throughout the area due to topography and lack of adequate communication equipment. The county and its emergency personnel are dependent on the private sector for towers to use for signals. If these towers are ever removed the county will be without any adequate means to bounce signals. The county and all jurisdictions are aware of the need to develop communication capabilities that will serve their county. The entire county has the potential to be affected by tornados, tropical storms, thunderstorm winds, lightning and hail. As a result, any mitigation steps taken related for these five severe weather events should be considered on a county-wide basis to include all jurisdictions. F. Hazard Summary: Overall, severe weather in the form of thunderstorm winds poses one of the greatest threats to Jefferson County in terms of property damage, injuries, and loss of life. Therefore, the committee recommends that mitigation measures identified in this plan should be aggressively pursued. Tornados do not touch down as frequently; however, the unpredictability and the potential for excessive damage caused by tornados makes it imperative that mitigation measures identified in this plan receive full consideration. Weather Event # Fatalities Injuries Approximate Property/Crop Damage Tornados 13 0 31 $9,400,000 Tropical Storms 18 0 0 $155,994 Thunderstorm Winds 85 1 7 $6,500,000 Lightning 187 0 1 $290,000 Hail 53 0 0 $989,832 The GMIS has the entire county with a wind hazard score of two, where wind speed is between 90 to 99 mph. All 109 critical facilities have a wind hazard score of two with a replacement cost of more than $307 million. To summarize, there are approximately 37,363 structures/properties in the county totaling more than $1.3 billon with a population of 16,930. A breakdown of information for individual jurisdictions can be found in Appendix A and Appendix D. Specific mitigation actions for tornados, tropical storms, thunderstorm winds, lightning and hail events are identified in Chapter III, Section V. Since the previous plan there has been no new development and no increase in population that would affect the overall vulnerability of the community to this hazard. The city of Wadley has adopted the DCA required building codes. These codes will ensure that any new structures built in Wadley are built to meet the wind zone requirements. Jefferson County EMA also started a Facebook Page since the previous plan to inform citizens about current weather conditions. SECTION VI. WINTER STORMS A. Hazard Identification: Southeastern snow or ice storms often form when an area of low pressure moves eastward across the northern Gulf of Mexico. To produce a significant winter ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 45 storm in the south, not only must temperatures be cold enough, but there must also be enough moisture in the atmosphere to produce adequate precipitation. A major winter storm can last for several days and be accompanied by high winds, ice and freezing rain, heavy snowfall, and cold temperatures. These conditions can make driving conditions very dangerous, as well as bring down trees and power lines. B. Hazard Profile: Winter storms are not spatially defined and affect the entire planning equally. The committee researched historical data from the NCDC, SHELDUSTM, and SERCC, as well as information from past newspaper articles relating to winter storms in Jefferson County. There have been 41 winter storm events recorded in the county over the last 122 years with an estimated property damage of $417,089. Historical data shows snow depths ranging from .5 inches to 14.8 inches in 1973 and ice depths ranging from .3 to 2.5 inches. The most recent ice storm on February 11-13, 2014 had travel halted, schools and businesses were closed and approximately 9,000 customers were without power at the height of the storm. Power company officials called the devastation to their lines and the ensuing outages historical for this area, which reportedly took the hardest hit of any in the state. In the more rural parts of the County individuals were without power for up to 10 days. To date more than 432,000 cubic yards of storm debris has been collected county-wide. To date FEMA reimbursement claims for the cost of debris removal total more than $364,000. Damage calculations are still ongoing from this storm. The dairy and beef producers felt the effects as electric fences lost power, while others were downed by falling trees and limbs. Without power for their pumps many wells were inoperable. The dairy farms in the county relied on generators to milk their cows. Cows need to increase their calorie intake by 1 percent for every degree the temperature drops below 32 degrees. The other major after effect was to the timber industry. Jefferson County was one of the four counties hardest hit by the storm and had severe timber damage according to the GFC. The GFC examined the levels of damage within two types of pine that were most frequently damaged: the young pine stands and pine stands on which a first ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 46 thinning had recently occurred. The severe damage had more than 30 percent of stems broken, tops broken out across the stand, limbs stripped, and trees bent more than 45 degrees. Senior Forester Cathy Black stated that the timber industry is a business that takes decades to turn a profit. Some land owners will be set back 30 years. Some of the hardest hit areas crops of trees, called stands in the business, have been reduced to splinters. The tops were broken off the pine trees, some trees were snapped in half, and others blown over laying on the ground. When this happens all that can be done is to clear cut it and plant new trees. Although winter storms are infrequent in the south, they have the potential to cause excessive damage to a community and disrupt the lives of residents. Based on the hazard frequency table located in Appendix D there is an 80% chance of an annual winter storm event. The percentage is the same for all jurisdictions. C. Assets Exposed to Hazard and Estimate of Potential Losses: In evaluating assets that may potentially be impacted by the effects of winter storms, the committee determined that all critical facilities, as well as all public, private and commercial property, are susceptible. The table below shows assets by jurisdiction that could be at potential risk of damage from a winter storm event. Jurisdiction Number of Structure/Properties Value Population Jefferson County (Unincorporated) 22,850 $1,039,928,700 9,219 Avera 745 $6,633,305 246 Bartow 677 $12,453,553 286 Louisville 4,551 $118,097,005 2,493 Stapleton 963 $13,083,513 438 Wadley 3,538 $95,608,332 2,061 Wrens 4,039 $112,293,040 2,187 TOTAL FOR COUNTY 37,363 $1,398,097,448 16,930 Source: Jefferson County Tax Assessor The GMIS does not provide a report for winter storm damage but there is more than $6.2 billion worth of assets with potential loss to winter storm hazards countywide. The table below shows the number of critical facilities by jurisdiction, hazard score, replacement value and daily occupancy (See Appendix A, Section VI and Appendix Jurisdiction Hazard Score # of Critical Facilities Replacement Value $ Daily Occupancy Jefferson County 2 34 $260,241,893 3,811 Avera 2 3 $737,500 1 Bartow 2 16 $3,872,477 6 Louisville 2 15 $18,142,390 269 Stapleton 2 4 $1,778,500 2 Wadley 2 9 $6,876,513 140 Wrens 2 21 $16,202,850 70 TOTAL 109 $307,852,123.00 4,299 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 47 D. Land Use & Development Trends: Jefferson County currently has no land use or development trends related to winter storms. Projected changes in land use based on the county’s multi-jurisdictional comprehensive plan has minimal or no change to land use within the incorporated jurisdictions. The greatest change in land use and future development has a decrease in forest land that will be converted to residential. Since it is impossible to determine where future residents will move in the unincorporated areas of the county, vulnerability in terms of future buildings, infrastructure and critical facilities is not known at this time. It can be surmised that this will bring an increase in population and homes. Land use tables and projections can be found in Appendix B. E. Multi-Jurisdictional Concerns: Jefferson County currently has no land use or development trends related to winter storms. All of the county can potentially be negatively impacted by winter storms. As a result, any mitigation steps taken related to winter storms should be undertaken on a countywide basis and include all incorporated jurisdictions. A concern is the lack of available data for the county and all municipalities. A database needs to be created and maintained that provides information on past and future occurring winter storm events. Another major issue is county-wide communications capabilities. During a natural hazard it is imperative that all emergency personal can communicate with each other throughout the entire planning area. The county and its jurisdictions have numerous dead spots throughout the area due to topography and lack of adequate communication equipment. The county and its emergency personnel are dependent on the private sector for towers to use for signals. If these towers are ever removed the county will be without any adequate means to bounce signals. The county and all jurisdictions are aware of the need to develop communication capabilities that will serve the entire county. F. Hazard Summary: There have been 41 recorded winter storms. There is an 80% chance of an annual winter storm event. Winter storms can be more accurately predicted than most other natural hazards, making it possible to give advance warning to communities. The National Weather Service issues winter storm warnings and advisories as these storms make their way south. Given the infrequency of these types of storms, southern communities are still not properly equipped to sustain the damage and destruction caused by severe winter storms. To summarize, there are approximately 37,363 structures/properties in the county totaling more than $1.3 billon with a population of 16,930. The committee recognized the dangers posed by winter storms and identified specific mitigation actions in Chapter III, Section VI. Since the previous plan there has been no new development and no increase in population that would affect the overall vulnerability of the community to this hazard. Jefferson County EMA has started a Facebook Page since the previous plan to inform citizens about winter conditions. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 48 CHAPTER III. MITIGATION STRATEGIES Table 3.1 provides a brief description of each section in this chapter and a summary of the changes that have been made. Chapter III. Section Updates to Section I. Flooding Completed action steps were removed. Action Steps that apply to all jurisdictions were combined. New goals were added where necessary along with any existing or new multijurisdictional concerns. Goals, Objective, and Actions Steps were updated to new format. II. Dam Failure This hazard was added was not in last plan. Developed Goals, Objective, and Actions Steps. III. Drought Completed action steps were removed. Action Steps that apply to all jurisdictions were combined. New goals were added where necessary along with any existing or new multijurisdictional concerns. Goals, Objective, and Actions Steps were updated to new format. IV. Wildfire Completed action steps were removed. Action Steps that apply to all jurisdictions were combined. New goals were added where necessary along with any existing or new multijurisdictional concerns. Goals, Objective, and Actions Steps were updated to new format. V. Severe Weather Completed action steps were removed. Action Steps that apply to all jurisdictions were combined. New goals were added where necessary along with any existing or new multijurisdictional concerns. Goals, Objective, and Actions Steps were updated to new format. Added Lightning and Hail Events VI. Winter Completed action steps were removed. Action Steps that apply to all jurisdictions were combined. New goals were added where necessary along with any existing or new multijurisdictional concerns. Goals, Objective, and Actions Steps were updated to new format. VII. All Hazards Category added to take goals that apply to all Hazards to reduce redundancy. SECTION I. INTRODUCTION TO MITIGATION STRATEGY This chapter addresses the mitigation strategy requirements of 44 CFR Section 201.6 “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 existing tools. This section shall include: i) A description of mitigation goals to reduce or avoid long‐term vulnerabilities to the identified hazards. ii) 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. All plans approved by FEMA after October 1, 2008, must also address the jurisdiction’s ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 49 participation in the NFIP, and continued compliance with NFIP requirements, as appropriate. iii) An action plan describing how the actions identified in paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section 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. iv) For multi‐jurisdictional plans there must be identifiable action items specific to the jurisdiction requesting FEMA approval or credit of the plan.” A. Priority Changes from Previously Approved Plan There have been no significant priority changes from the previous plan. The goal of Jefferson County and its jurisdictions, is to protect the safety, health and well-being of all county citizens, and to protect public and private property and to lessen the overall effects of a hazard event. B. Capability Assessment The County identified current capabilities for implementing hazard mitigation activities. The capability assessment identifies administrative, technical, legal and fiscal capabilities. This includes a summary of departments and their responsibilities associated with hazard mitigation as well as codes, ordinances, and plans already in place that contain mitigation activities or programmatic structure. The second part of the assessment examined the County and all jurisdictions fiscal capabilities applicable to providing financial resources to implement identified mitigation action items. Below is the annual budgets for each jurisdiction: • Jefferson County: $16,820,915 • Avera: $140,000 • Bartow: $225,000 • Louisville: $2,643,230 • Stapleton: $355,726 • Wadley: $1,928,009 • Wrens: $12,246,023 The County, Louisville, and Wrens are the only three governmental bodies with the more than adequate fiscal, administrative and technical capabilities to implement mitigation strategies. Wadley can take on smaller mitigation actions but will need additional administrative, technical and funding sources to take on larger mitigations actions. Avera, Bartow, and Stapleton may be able to address small mitigation educational activities but any major project will require assistance from other agencies and additional funding sources. The three tables below identifies administrative, technical, legal and fiscal capabilities of each jurisdiction. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 50 Table 3. 2 Legal and Regulatory Capability (Y/N) Regulatory Tools (ordinances, codes, plans) Jefferson County Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Does State Prohibit Building code Y N N y N Y Y N Zoning ordinance N N N y N Y Y N Subdivision ordinance or regulations Y N N Y N N Y N Special purpose ordinances (floodplain management, storm water management, soil erosion) Y N Y Y Y Y Y N Growth management ordinances (also called “smart growth” or anti- sprawl programs) N N N N N N N N Site plan review requirements Y N N Y N N Y N General or comprehensive plan Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N A capital improvements plan Y N N Y N N Y N An economic development plan Y N N N N N N N An emergency response plan Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N A post-disaster recovery plan Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N A post-disaster recovery ordinance N N N N N N N N Real estate disclosure requirements N N N N N N N N Table 3. 3 Fiscal Capability Financial Resources Jefferson County Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Accessible or Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Capital improvements project funding Y N N Y N N Y Y Authority to levy taxes for specific purposes Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y – Vote required Fees for water, sewer, gas, or electric service N Y Y Y Y Y Y Y ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 51 Financial Resources Jefferson County Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Accessible or Eligible to Use (Yes/No) Impact fees for homebuyers or developers for new developments/homes N N N N N N N N Incur debt through general obligation bonds Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Incur debt through special tax and revenue bonds Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y – Vote required Withhold spending in hazard-prone areas N N N N N N N N Other Grants Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Table 3.4 Administrative and Technical Capacity Staff/Personnel Resources Jefferson County Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Dept./Agency and Position Planner(s) or engineer(s) with knowledge of land development and land management practices Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Building Dept./ Code Enforcement/ Public Works CSRA RC Engineer(s) or professional(s) trained in construction practices related to buildings and/or infrastructure Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Building Dept./ Code Enforcement Planners or Engineer(s) with an understanding of natural and/or manmade hazards Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Public Works/CSRA RC Staff Floodplain manager Y N N Y N Y Y Building Dept. Surveyors N N N N N N N Contracted as needed Staff with education or expertise to assess the Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Public Safety/EMA ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 52 Staff/Personnel Resources Jefferson County Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Dept./Agency and Position community’s vulnerability to hazards Personnel skilled in GIS and/or HAZUS Y Y Y Y Y Y Y CSRA RC Various Emergency manager Y Y Y Y Y Y Y EMA Grant writers Y Y Y Y Y Y Y CSRA RC C. Community Mitigation Goals Collectively, the jurisdictions reviewed the hazard profiles and the loss estimates information in Section II and used it as a basis for developing mitigation goals, objectives and action steps. Mitigation goals are preventive measures to lessen the effect of and losses due to hazard events and are typically long-range visions adapted toward jurisdictional policy. Mitigation objectives are strategies to attain identified goals. Goals and objectives are formulated by reviewing hazard historical data, existing local plans, policy documents, regulations, and public input. Each jurisdiction developed objectives and actions unique to specific vulnerabilities or concerns within its boundaries. Mitigation actions were developed as the means to carrying out the objectives and attain goals. All action steps should be compatible with the plans, policies, and regulations of each jurisdiction. The jurisdictions must also have the legal, administrative, fiscal, and technical capacities to perform each action. The capabilities assessment above aided in forming realistic mitigation actions. This capabilities assessment can then incorporate results of the STAPLEE worksheet to identified obstacles that may hinder the completion actions. Each jurisdiction identified and prioritized actions steps along with an implementation schedule, funding source, and coordinating individual or agency. Based on the capabilities assessment, the STAPLEE and six categories listed above the county and all jurisdictions identified the following goals:  Goal 1: Protect the safety, health and well-being of all county citizens;  Goal 2: Protect public infrastructure and private property;  Goal 3: Educate the community about natural hazards;  Goal 4: Manage development to minimize loss;  Goal 5: Natural Resources Protection; and  Goal 6: Structural modifications to reduce the impacts of hazard events. D. Identification & Analysis of Range of Mitigation Actions The framework used to guide jurisdictions in identifying mitigation measures was developed by FEMA and is captured by the following six categories: ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 53  Prevention: Government administrative or regulatory actions or processes that influence the way land and buildings are developed and built. These actions also include public activities that reduce hazard losses. Examples include building and construction code revisions; zoning regulation changes; and computer hazard modeling.  Property Protection: Actions that involve the medications of existing buildings or structures to protect them from a hazard, or removal from the hazard area. Examples include roadway elevations, improving wind and impact resistance, and flood proofing.  Public Education and Awareness: Action to inform and educate citizens, elected officials, and property owners about the hazards and potential ways to mitigate them. Examples include programs that target repetitive loss properties and vulnerable populations.  Natural Resources Protection: Actions that, in addition to minimizing hazard losses also preserve or restore the function of natural systems. Examples include projects to create open space, green space, and stream restoration.  Structural Projects: Actions that involve the construction of structures to reduce the impact of a hazard. Examples include projects that control floodwater, reconstruction of dams, and construction of regional retention areas.  Emergency Services: Actions that protect people and property during and immediately after a disaster event or hazard event. Examples include enhancements that provide advanced warning and redundant communications. i. Structural and Non-Structural Mitigation relates to concrete actions which are put into practice to reduce the risk of destruction and casualties. Mitigation is generally split into two main types of activities: structural and non-structural. Structural mitigation refers to any physical construction to reduce or avoid possible impacts of hazards, which include engineering measures and construction of hazard-resistant and protective structures and infrastructure. Non-structural mitigation refers to policies, awareness, knowledge development, public commitment, and methods and operating practices, including participatory mechanisms and the provision of information, which can reduce risk with related impacts. The committee has identified both structural and non-structural mitigation measures to ensure that the community adequately addresses all relevant dam failure issues. Structural and non-structural actions are identified in Table 3.7. ii. Existing Polices, Regulations, Ordinances, and Land Use Louisville, Wadley and Wrens has adopted the following Mandatory codes:  Georgia State Minimum Standard Building Code (International Building Code with Georgia State Amendments).  Georgia State Minimum Standard One- and Two-Family Dwelling Code (International Residential Code for One- and Two-Family Dwellings with Georgia State Amendments).  Georgia State Minimum Standard Fire Code (International Fire Code with Georgia State Amendments). ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 54  Georgia State Minimum Standard Plumbing Code (International Plumbing Code with Georgia State Amendments).  Georgia State Minimum Standard Mechanical Code (International Mechanical Code with Georgia State Amendments).  Georgia State Minimum Standard Gas Code (International Fuel Gas Code with Georgia State Amendments).  Georgia State Minimum Standard Electrical Code (National Electrical Code with Georgia State Amendments).  Georgia State Minimum Standard Energy Code (International Energy Conservation Code with Georgia State Supplements and Amendments).  Life Safety Code (NFPA 101). They have also adopted the Permissive codes:  International Property Maintenance Code.  International Existing Building Code. Other types of ordinances that have been adopted are:  Currently the cities of Louisville, Wadley and Wrens have zoning ordinances, which offer groundwater protection and ensure best practices.  Jefferson County has adopted a Wetlands Protection Ordinance.  Louisville has adopted historic preservation ordinances  Jefferson County, Wrens and Louisville has adopted a Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance  Jefferson County has adopted a Solid Waste Management Facility Ordinance  Jefferson County, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, Wadley and Wrens have flood plain ordinances.  Louisville and Wrens have adopted zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations. The Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan 2004-2024 was adopted by resolution by the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners and the City Councils of Avera, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, Wadley and Wrens. The planning process examines the current and future trends and assess the and opportunities available to achieve their community vision. This document drives the decision making process for the County and each municipality. The joint comprehensive plan also examines existing land use and projects future land use. iii. Community Values, Historic & Special Considerations Historical-Cultural There are four National Register of Historic Places in Jefferson County:  Cunningham Coleman House, listed 1984, southeast of Wadley. An 1825 sand hills house type with Greek Revival details. Raised, weatherboard, two over four room central hall house plan of one and half stories. Representative ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 55 of a middle-sized, antebellum cotton plantation and post-Civil War farm area known as “Cunningham Corner.”  Jefferson County Courthouse, listed 1980 in Georgia Courthouse Thematic NR nomination, built 1904, architect Willis Franklin Denny, builder F. P. Heifner. Style, Classical Revival. Courtroom remodeled in 1980; Elevator added and new windows in 1990s. Features prominent domed clock tower and two-story pediment porticos supported by classical columns. State level of significance.  Louisville Commercial Historic District, listed 1994. Includes 180 acres, 43 buildings, 1 structure (Old Market NR listed individually). Period of significance, 1750-1949. Architectural styles, Beaux Arts, Romanesque, Early Commercial. Includes Courthouse (NR thematic courthouse nomination). Extends four blocks NW to SE along Broad Street. Majority of buildings brick, typical of small commercial towns. Significant structures, post office designed by U.S. Supervising Architect Louis A. Simon, county jail, telephone exchange, former Baptist Church Sunday School, Jefferson Hotel, Abbot and Stone building, Planter’s Cotton Warehouse, Pal Theater. Native Louisville architect Willis F. Denny designed three of the two-story commercial buildings. State level of significance.  Old Market House, Louisville, built 1758. Constructed as a trading market pre-dating the city of Louisville. The open-air market is the only building of its kind still standing in Georgia and one of only a few such remaining in the United States. The market rests on a 24’-square foundation and features twelve heavy wooden piers supporting a pyramidal roof. A small cupola with pointed-arch gothic windows and vent openings rests atop the roof. The historic 1772 bell that hangs serves as a reminder of the gift that was intended for King Louis XVI, but was stolen by a pirate ship before it found its way in Louisville’s Market House. State level of significance. Willis Franklin Denny II (1874-1905) was an important transitional figure in the development of Georgia architecture at the turn of the 20th century. A native of ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 56 Louisville, he was one of the first trained architects in America. There are nine Willis Franklin Denny II buildings in Louisville that should be NR listed and noted for preservation opportunities. They are:  J.D. Polhill Sr. House, 9th and Peachtree, (moved to rural Jefferson County)  Ramsey-Smith-Ethridge House, 401 Broad  Rhodes-Stone House, 707 Peachtree (owned by United Methodist Church)  Abbott House, Mulberry and 8th  Phillips-Seebach House, 206 West 7th (demolished in 1990)  Wright-Livingston-Agel House, 208 East 8th  Denny Building (three storefronts), Broad Street, NR listed in Commercial HD  Enterprise Building, Broad Street, NR listed in Commercial HD  Jefferson County Courthouse, Broad Street, NR listed There is one residential NRHP listing located in Wadley. The Cunningham Coleman House, located southeast of Wadley, was listed on the National Register in 1984. This home is an 1825 sand hills house type with Greek Revival details. Potential National Register of Historic Places residential properties include:  McDaniel-Little-Patterson House, 702 Mulberry, circa 1880  Dixon-Cobb House, 718 Screven Street, circa 1880  Little Brewton House, 403 Broad Street, built 1873  Marion Little House, 401 Broad Street, built circa 1900  Ramsey-Smith-Ethridge House, 33 West Broad, built late 1870’s  Abbot House, Mulberry and 8th, built pre 1860  Sigmund Zacharias House, 115 8th street, built 1879 (owned by the Rollins)  Austin House, 208 8th street, circa 1830 (oldest house in Louisville)  Lowry-Edwards-Willie House, US 1, poet Harry Stillwell Edwards lived here with his son. . Recreation Jefferson County is home to a segment of the Ogeechee River. This 250-mile river runs through the center of Jefferson County and is the only major river in Georgia with no dam. The river serves many purposes including drinking water, wildlife habitat and recreation such as fishing and boating. The Ogeechee River has been designated as a protected river by the Georgia Department of Natural Resources and an Ogeechee River Corridor Protection plan was adopted by Jefferson County in 2000. The Ogeechee River Protection District includes the land within 100 feet, horizontally, on both sides of the river. The Atlanta Journal/Constitution and The Macon Telegraph call Bartow the smallest town in America with a thriving community theater. But, in truth, the Schoolhouse Players have evolved into a regional performing group that draws its actors and technicians, as well as its large audiences, from a wide radius. The Players, known for ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 57 their attention to sets, lighting, and costumes, present a full season of plays and musicals, as well as additional concerts, which range from classical to country. Economic Drivers Jefferson County offers a nationally favorable tax and a 100 percent Freeport inventory tax exemption for qualified companies. Under the Georgia Business Expansion Support Team (BEST) Act, qualified companies that expand in our state may be eligible for incentives to reduce costs and increase the bottom line. The Development Authority of Jefferson County is a driving force in the success of business development here, working with existing and new businesses to ensure quick response time in developing training, infrastructure capacities, or distribution supports. The Development Authority and The Chamber of Commerce have developed strategic partner programs to support local businesses. Jefferson County has:  Metal fabrication cluster with excess water and treatment capacity  Three industrial sites: o 353-acre industrial park adjacent to the airport o 650-acre park rail served o 170-acre industrial park  Two airports o a 5,000-foot paved runway, perfect for corporate aircraft, at a regionally designated airport with terminal o a second airport with a 3,500-foot paved runway with plans to extend to a 5,000-foot runway There is a network of well-maintained highways and airports, with quick access to one of the nation’s largest seaports, links Jefferson County to world markets. US Highways 1 (expanding to four lanes), 88 (four lanes), 221 and 319 traverse Jefferson County while Interstate 16 is just south and Interstate 20 to the north. These main routes are accented by seven different state highways. Currently expanding airports in Louisville and Wrens service private planes with lighted runways and hangars. Commercial flights are easily accessible at Augusta Airport roughly 35 miles away and two hours away at Savannah International Airport and Atlanta's Hartsfield-Jackson Airport. The existing Jefferson County business community is strong and diversified. Major Industries: agriculture, aquaculture, timber, kaolin, and metal fabrication Major Employers: Fulghum, Battle Lumber, ThermoKing, Glit/Microtron iv. Prioritization of Actions: Those Mitigation Actions given high priority are in two groups: life safety-related actions that can be accomplished relatively quickly and changes to protect critical facilities on which other emergency management systems are dependent, for example communications focal points. Those actions likely to require extended time frames to accomplish received medium priority status. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 58 The committee used the STAPLEE worksheet to select and prioritize the most appropriate mitigation alternatives. This methodology requires that seven categories be considered when reviewing potential actions. This process helped ensure that the most equitable and feasible actions would be undertaken based on each jurisdictions capabilities. Table 3.6 provides information regarding the review and selection criteria for alternatives. Table 3.6 STAPLEE REVIEW AND SELECTION CRITERIA FOR ALTERNATIVES  Is the proposed action acceptable by the community?  Is the action compatible with current and future community values?  Are equity concerns involved that would result in unjust treatment of any segment of the population?  Will the proposed action cause social disruption? TECHNICAL  Will the proposed action achieve the stated objective and further mitigation goals?  Will the proposed action create more problems than it solves?  Does the proposed action resolve the problem completely or partially?  It is the most useful action in light of other community values? ADMINISTRATIVE  Does the community have the capability to implement proposed action?  Is there someone to lead or coordinate the proposed action?  Is there sufficient funding, staff and technical support to implement the proposed action step?  Are there ongoing administrative needs that are required? POLITICAL  Is the proposed action politically acceptable?  Have political leaders participated in the planning process?  Who are the stakeholders for this proposed action?  Have all stakeholders been afforded an opportunity to participate in the planning process?  Is there public support to implement and maintain the action? LEGAL  Does the community have the authority to implement the proposed action?  Is there a clear legal basis for the proposed action?  Are there legal side effects? (i.e. could the action be construed as a taking)  IS the proposed action allowed in the general plan?  Will the community be liable for action or lack thereof?  Will the proposed action be challenged?? ECONOMIC  What is the cost-benefit of the proposed action (do the benefits exceed the cost)?  Have initial, maintenance and administrative costs been taken into account??  Has funding been secured for the proposed action? If not have funding sources been identified?  Will the proposed action affect the fiscal capabilities and/ or budget of the jurisdiction?  Will the proposed action place a tax burden on the community?  Does the proposed action contribute to other community goals? (capital improvements, economic development) ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 59 ENVIRONMENTAL  Will the proposed action have a positive or negative effect on the environment?  Does the proposed action require environmental regulatory approvals?  Does the proposed action meet local and state regulations?  Does the proposed action impact a threatened or endangered species? E. Introduction to Action Plan The next two sections of Chapter III., Section II. Natural Hazards and Section III. Mitigation Actions, comprise the strategies that Jefferson County together with Avera, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, Wadley and Wrens have identified to reduce the effects of natural hazards. Mitigation actions given high priority are in two groups: life safety-related actions that can be accomplished relatively quickly and changes to protect critical facilities on which other emergency management systems are dependent, for example communications focal points. Those actions likely to require extended time frames to accomplish received medium priority status. SECTION II. NATURAL HAZARDS A. Flooding Action Plan The committee determined that due to the presence of flood plains in the county efforts to reduce the level of exposure to flooding should be considered. In previous flooding instances, damage has been sustained primarily to roads, bridges and natural resources. Specific mitigation measures identified by the committee are designed to lessen the effects of such damage to new and existing structures in the future. Objective A1. Improve the effectiveness of existing flood insurance programs. Objective A2. Evaluate and improve the present drainage infrastructure. Objective A3. Warn citizens when the potential for flooding exist. Objective A4. Lessen the impact to existing buildings, critical facilities and infrastructure as a result of flooding. Objective A5. Limit future development in flood prone areas. Objective A6. Reduce the threat of water contamination caused by flooding. B. Dam Failure Action Plan Dam failure mainly affects areas that are of the event. Further study of this type event is required to determine where property damage and loss of life has the greatest potential to occur. Critical facilities and vulnerable populations are located in all jurisdictions as well as the unincorporated areas of the County. As a result, any mitigation steps taken related to dam failure events should be undertaken on a countywide basis and specifically include all incorporated jurisdictions. Objective B1. Identify at risk population and properties. Objective B2. Develop proposal to regulate protective measures for dam breach zones ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 60 C. Drought Action Plan As indicated in Chapter II, Section III, drought conditions can cause costly damage to crops. However, from a danger or hazard perspective, the greatest threat posed by drought conditions is from potential wildfires. As 84.5% of the county is made up of forest and woodlands, the possibility for wildfires is distinct and poses a significant threat. In general, wildfires are the result of dry conditions combined with lightning or carelessness. The committee determined that mitigation goals were necessary to prevent crop damage, as well as damage to new and existing structures. Objective C1. Ensure that there is an adequate water supply during periods of drought. Objective C2. Educate citizens on water conservation issues. D. Wildfire Action Plan As indicated in Chapter II, Section IV, wildfires have the potential to cause costly damage in Jefferson County. From a danger or hazard perspective, the greatest threat posed by wildfire is the damage to forest, woodlands and agriculture property. The possibility for wildfires is distinct and poses a significant threat to the county. Forest fires are generally the result of dry conditions combined with lightning or carelessness. The committee determined that mitigation goals were necessary to prevent damage to undeveloped areas of the county as well as damage to new and existing structures caused by wildfires. Objective D1. Ensure that adequate fire protection is available. Objective D2. Reduce threat of wildfire occurrence. Objective D3. Increase public awareness of wildfire dangers. E. Severe Weather (Tornados, Tropical Storms, Thunderstorm Winds, Lightning, Hail) As with many Georgia communities, if a tornado or tropical storm were to strike Jefferson County, significant damage to both property and agricultural crops could result. In addition, the potential for injuries and loss of life is substantial due to the unpredictability and violent nature of these storms. The committee recognizes the important role advance planning plays in the mitigation process. There is great benefit in identifying appropriate steps that can be taken to help minimize losses to new and existing structures in Jefferson County as a result of a severe weather event. As indicated in Chapter II, Section V, of all of the natural hazards profiled in this plan, tornados have the potential to inflict the greatest amount of damage while thunderstorm winds are the most frequently occurring natural hazard in the county and have the greatest chance of affecting the county each year. The committee has identified several courses of action that both local officials and citizens can use in their mitigation efforts against the effects of tornados, tropical storms, thunderstorm winds, lightning and hail to both new and existing structures. Objective E1. Minimize damage to property from severe weather events. Objective E2. Minimize damage to public buildings and critical facilities to ensure continual operations of vital services. Objective E3. Protect vulnerable populations from the effects of severe weather events. Objective E4. Educate the public including citizens and business owners on disaster preparedness and safety. F. Winter Storms Action Plan Within Jefferson County, and the southeast region in general, there is great concern over the threat of winter storms. Although this area does not typically receive the amounts of snow ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 61 and ice that other regions do, nor do they experience winter storms as frequently as other regions, Jefferson County and other southeastern communities must be prepared for the damage caused by winter storms. The fact that winter storms hit Jefferson County infrequently results in other problems, such as lack of equipment and supplies to combat treacherous winter storm conditions. In Jefferson County, the formation of ice on roads and bridges, tree limbs, and power lines is the cause of most damage. In Chapter II, Section VI additional winter storm hazards are addressed, as well as information related to potential losses for the county. The Committee has determined that several steps could be undertaken to minimize the effects of winter storms to protect the health and safety of citizens, as well as damage to new and existing structures. Objective F1. Educate the public on preparedness and safety issues for winter storm events. Objective F2. Prevent property damage as a result of a winter storm event. Objective F3. Minimize power outages during winter storms. G. All Hazard Action Steps The purpose of this section is to allow the committee to recommend mitigation measures within this plan that transcend individual hazards. Certain common mitigation measures are needed regardless of the specific hazard event. Rather than list these multiple times within each different hazard category, the committee decided to list these “all-hazards” mitigation measures within a separate section of the plan. The goal with these mitigation measures is again to minimize the loss of life and property, and to prevent disruption of services to the public to the greatest extent possible. Objective G1. Ensure communication capabilities exist between all Emergency Service Personnel and Agencies. Objective G2. Ensure the ability to travel for county residents, organizations, and providers of essential services such as Law Enforcement Personnel, hospitals and utilities after a hazard event. Objective G3. Protect critical facilities from the effects due to power outages as a result of all hazards to ensure a continuation of all vital services. Objective G4. Provide adequate notification to citizens of Jefferson County pertaining to hazard event. Objective G5. Guarantee all evacuation plans are up to date and adequate to meet the needs of the citizens of Jefferson County. Objective G6. Guarantee that all Emergency Response Plans are up to date and adequate to meet the needs of citizens of Jefferson County. Objective G7. Ensure all emergency shelters are ready to meet the needs of the population of Jefferson County and all jurisdictions. Objective G8. Provide the citizens of Jefferson County educational information on Emergency Preparedness. Objective G9. Provide the citizens of Jefferson County with accurate and timely information pertaining to Emergency Preparedness. Objective G10. Collect accurate and complete data pertaining to hazard events within Jefferson County and all jurisdictions. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 62 SECTION III. MITIGATION ACTIONS Action # Mitigation Action and Description Jurisdiction Responsible Agency/ Dept. Hazards Addressed Objective Supported Goal Structural/ Non- Structural Estimated Project Cost Possible Funding Source(s) Timeframe Status Priority 1 Have Flood Hazard Base Maps created. Jefferson County, Avera BOC, City Council Flood A1, A2 1, 2, 4, 5 Non- Structural $350,000 General Funds, FEMA 3 years Ongoing Medium 2 Investigate ways to increase Participation Level in the NFIP and CRS Jefferson County, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, Wadley and Wrens BOC/All City Councils Flood A1, A2 1, 2, 4, 5 Non- Structural Staff Time General Funds 3 years New Medium 3 Continue to assess stormwater runoff. Jefferson County/All Municipalities Road Dept./Public Works Flood A5, C2 2, 6 Non- Structural Staff time General Funds Continual Ongoing High 4 Construct as needed, more storm water retention facilities, storm drain improvements and channel improvements to protect existing and new developments. Jefferson County/All Municipalities Road Dept./Public Works Flood/ Drought A3, 2, 6 Structural Unknown General Funds Continual Ongoing High 5 Clear run-off and water retention ditches. Jefferson County/All Municipalities Road Dept./Public Works Flood A5 2, 1 Structural Staff Time Continual Ongoing High 6 Seek funding for communication towers and voice repeater systems. Jefferson County/All Municipalities EMA/ Police/ Sheriff All hazards G1, G9 1 Structural $750,000 General Fund, FEMA, CJCC, JAG, USDA, DOJ Continual Ongoing High 7 Adopt ordinances to limit and control building and development in known flood prone areas. Jefferson County/All Municipalities BOC, City Councils Flood A6 1, 2, 4, 5 Non- Structural Staff time General Fund 1 year Ongoing High ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 63 Action # Mitigation Action and Description Jurisdiction Responsible Agency/ Dept. Hazards Addressed Objective Supported Goal Structural/ Non- Structural Estimated Project Cost Possible Funding Source(s) Timeframe Status Priority 8 Promote the preservation of areas in and around watercourses. Jefferson County, Wadley, Louisville, Wrens BOC, City Councils, Code and Building Depts. Flood A6 1, 2, 4, 5 Non- Structural Staff time CDBG, USDA, EPA, DNR 2 years Ongoing High 9 Add greenspace to known flood prone areas. Jefferson County, Louisville, Wadley and Wrens BOC, City Councils, Code and Building Depts. Flood A6 1, 2, 4, 5 Non- Structural Staff time CDBG, USDA, EPA, DNR 2 years Ongoing Medium 10 Evaluate existing water systems upgrade as needed Jefferson County/All Municipalities Public Works Dept. Flood/ Drought/ Wildfire A7, C1 1, 2, 6 Structural Unknown General Fund, CDBG, USDA, EPA, DNR Continual Ongoing High 11 Investigate methods to reduce non-point source pollution. Jefferson County Public Works Flood A1 1, 2, 5 Non- Structural Unknown USDA, EPA, DNR 2 years New Medium 12 Promote increased surface water usage and surface artesian flow for irrigation. Jefferson County/All Municipalities Public Works Drought C1, C2 2, 3, 4 Structural/ Non- Structural Unknown USDA, EPA, DNR, General Funds 2 years and Continual Ongoing Medium 13 Enact a program to educate the residents about water conservation issues Jefferson County/All Municipalities BOC, City Councils, Public Works Drought C1, C2 1, 3 Non- Structural $2,000.00 USDA, EPA, DNR, General Funds 1year and Continual Ongoing High 14 Increase public awareness of watering restrictions and bans. Jefferson County/All Municipalities BOC, City Councils, Public Works Drought C1, C2 1, 3 Non- Structural Staff Time General Funds 1year and Continual Ongoing High 15 Develop a public awareness campaign to promote water-saving campaigns (i.e. low-flow water saving devices) Jefferson County/All Municipalities BOC, City Councils, Public Works Drought C1, C2 1, 3 Non- Structural 1year and Continual New High ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 64 Action # Mitigation Action and Description Jurisdiction Responsible Agency/ Dept. Hazards Addressed Objective Supported Goal Structural/ Non- Structural Estimated Project Cost Possible Funding Source(s) Timeframe Status Priority 16 Continue training of all firefighters to include wildland fire training. Jefferson County/All Municipalities EMA, Fire Depts. Wildfire D1 1, 2 Non- Structural 1year and Continual Ongoing High 17 Seek funding for needed firefighting equipment Jefferson County/All Municipalities EMA, Fire Depts. Wildfire D1 1, 2 Non- Structural Unknown General Funds, FEMA Continual Ongoing High 18 Inventory and replace or install more fire hydrants as needed. Jefferson County/All Municipalities EMA, Fire Depts., Public Works Wildfire D1 1, 2 Structural Unknown General Funds, FEMA 1year and Continual Ongoing High 19 Seek funding for more fire truckers and tankers for local fire departments. Jefferson County/All Municipalities EMA, Fire Depts. Wildfire D1 1, 2 Non- Structural $200,000 General Funds, FEMA 1year and Continual Ongoing High 20 Enforce defensible space (30-ft minimum setbacks) between buildings and flammable brush and forestland where possible. Jefferson County/All Municipalities Road Dept. and Public Works. Wildfire D2, D3 1, 2, 3 Structural unknown General Funds, FEMA Continual Ongoing Medium 21 Continue following GFC service of construction and maintenance of firebreaks around forests and structures, along abandoned roadbeds. Jefferson County/All Municipalities Road Dept. and Public Works., GFC Wildfire D2, D3 1, 2, 3 Non- Structural Staff Time General Fund Continual Ongoing High 22 Strictly follow GFC guidelines for control burns and permits. Jefferson County/All Municipalities Fire Depts., Road Dept. and Public Works. Wildfire D2, D3 1, 2, 3 Non- Structural unknown General Funds, Continual Ongoing High 23 Implement the Firewise Community Initiative where appropriate Jefferson County Commission, and all Municipalities Fire Depts. City Councils, BOC Wildfire D2, D3 1, 2, 3 Non- Structural $25,000.00 General Funds, GFC 3 years Ongoing Medium 24 Improve public awareness of wildfire techniques and awareness of wildfire dangers. Jefferson County Commission, and all Municipalities EMA, Fire Depts., GFC Wildfire D2, D3 1, 2, 3 Non- Structural $25,000.00 General Funds 2 years and Continual Ongoing High ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 65 Action # Mitigation Action and Description Jurisdiction Responsible Agency/ Dept. Hazards Addressed Objective Supported Goal Structural/ Non- Structural Estimated Project Cost Possible Funding Source(s) Timeframe Status Priority 25 Adopt Building Codes Avera, Bartow, Stapleton City Councils, Flood, Severe Weather, Winter Storm A5, A6, E1, E2 1, 2, 4, 6 Structural/ Non- Structural Staff Time General Fund 3 years New High 26 Adopt Zoning Regulations Jefferson County, Avera, Bartow, Stapleton, Wadley BOC, City Councils, County Planning Dept. Flood, Severe Weather, Winter Storm A5, A6, E1, E2 1, 2, 4, 6 Structural/ Non- Structural Staff Time General Fund 3 years New High 27 To the greatest extent possible, identify all owners of inadequately installed manufactured homes offer a financial incentive to retrofit them with an appropriate level of anchoring and support. Jefferson County/All Municipalities Building and Code Depts., Severe Weather E1, E4 1, 2, 3 Structural unknown General Fund 3 years New Medium 28 Equip all county and city recreation parks with adequate early severe weather warning and lightning detection devices. Jefferson County/All Municipalities Road Depts. And Public Works Severe Weather, Lightning E1, E2. E3 1, 2, 6 Structural unknown General Funds, FEMA 2 years New High 29 Inspects public buildings and critical facilities and retrofit to reinforce windows, doors, and roofs as needed Jefferson County/All Municipalities EMA, Fire Depts. Public Works, Building and Code Depts., Severe Weather, Winter Storms E1, E2. E3 1, 2, 6 Structural Unknown General Funds, FEMA 3 years Ongoing Medium 30 Enforce building codes for all new buildings and critical facilities. Jefferson County/All Municipalities Building and Code Depts., Flood, Severe Weather, Winter Storm A5, A6, E1, E2 1, 2, 6 Structural/ Non- Structural Unknown General Funds, FEMA Continual Ongoing High ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 66 Action # Mitigation Action and Description Jurisdiction Responsible Agency/ Dept. Hazards Addressed Objective Supported Goal Structural/ Non- Structural Estimated Project Cost Possible Funding Source(s) Timeframe Status Priority 31 Inspect all county and municipal critical facilities for proper grounding. Jefferson County/All Municipalities EMA, Fire Depts. Public Works, Building and Code Depts., Flood, Severe Weather, Winter Storm E1, E2. E3 1, 2, 6 Structural/ Non- Structural Staff Time General Fund 1 year New High 32 Install lightning rods in high value critical facilities. Jefferson County/All Municipalities EMA, Fire Depts. Public Works, Building and Code Depts., Severe Weather, Lightning E1, E2. E3 1, 2, 6 Structural 100,000 General Funds, FEMA 2 years New High 33 Install surge protectors on critical facilities' electronic equipment in essential county and city facilities. Jefferson County/All Municipalities EMA, Fire Depts. Public Works, Building and Code Depts., Severe Weather, Lightning, Winter Storm E2, G1 1, 2, 6 Structural $10,000 General Funds 3 years New High 34 Review current Emergency Response Plan and update when needed. Jefferson County EMA, RC All hazards G6, G8 1, 2, 3 Non- Structural Staff Time General Funds 2 years Ongoing High 35 Review current evacuation plans paying particular attention to vulnerable populations and update as needed. Jefferson County EMA, RC Flood, Wildfire, Dam Failure, Severe Weather, Winter Storm G5, G8 1, 2, 3 Non- Structural Staff Time General Funds 2 years Ongoing High 36 Provide boat owners with safety tie down procedures with boat registration. Jefferson County EMA, RC Severe Weather, Winter Storm F2, E1 1, 2, 3 Non- Structural 2,500 General Funds 1 year and continual New High ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 67 Action # Mitigation Action and Description Jurisdiction Responsible Agency/ Dept. Hazards Addressed Objective Supported Goal Structural/ Non- Structural Estimated Project Cost Possible Funding Source(s) Timeframe Status Priority 37 Develop a public awareness program about the installation of lightning grounding systems on critical infrastructure, residential and business properties. Jefferson County EMA, RC Severe Weather, Lightning E4 1, 2, 3 Non- Structural Staff Time General Funds 2 years New High 38 Install generators where needed. Jefferson County/All Municipalities BOC, City Councils, Fire Depts, EMA, Police, Sheriff, Public Works, Road Depts. All hazards G3 1, 2, 3, 6 Structural/ Non- Structural Unknown General Funds, FEMA 1 year and continual Ongoing High 39 Seek funding to ensure all current and future emergency shelters have back-up generators. Jefferson County/All Municipalities BOC, City Councils, Fire Depts, EMA, Police, Sheriff, All hazards G7 1, 2, 3, 6 Structural/ Non- Structural Unknown General Funds, FEMA 3 years New High 40 Educate the public on shelter locations and evacuation routes Jefferson County/All Municipalities Fire Depts, EMA, Police, Sheriff, Flood, Wildfire, Dam Failure, Severe Weather, Winter Storm G8, G9 3 Non- Structural Staff Time General Funds 1 year and continual Ongoing High 41 Develop public education and awareness programs regarding severe weather events to include home safety measures, purchase of weather radio and personal safety measures before, during and after an event. Jefferson County/All Municipalities EMA, BOC, City Councils, RC Flood, Wildfire, Dam Failure, Severe Weather, Winter Storm G8, G9 3 Non- Structural $10,000 General Funds, FEMA 2year and continual Ongoing High ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 68 Action # Mitigation Action and Description Jurisdiction Responsible Agency/ Dept. Hazards Addressed Objective Supported Goal Structural/ Non- Structural Estimated Project Cost Possible Funding Source(s) Timeframe Status Priority 42 Implement a winter storm education program to include winterization of home and/or business and what to do before, during and after. Jefferson County/All Municipalities EMA, BOC, City Councils, RC Winter Storm F1 3 Non- Structural $25,000 General Funds 2 year and continual Ongoing High 43 Review current codes to comply with and enforce the State building code with criteria for design snow load for buildings and structures. Jefferson County/All Municipalities Building and Code Enforcement Depts. Winter Storm F2 1, 2, 3, Non- Structural Staff Time General Funds 2 years New Medium 44 Create a data base to record hazard event information. Jefferson County/All Municipalities EMA, BOC, City Councils, RC All hazards G10 1, 2, 3, Non- Structural Staff Time General Funds 2 years Ongoing Medium 45 Conduct dam breach analysis to identify assets and population at risk in the event of a failure. Jefferson County, Wadley EMA, BOC, City Council, RC Dam Failure B1, B2 1, 2, Non- Structural Unknown General Funds, DNR 3 years New Medium 46 Draft ordinance prohibiting development in dam breach zone. Jefferson County, Wadley BOC, City Council, RC Dam Failure B2 1, 2, 4 Non- Structural Staff Time General Funds 2 years New Medium 47 Install dam failure alert systems. Jefferson County, Wadley BOC, City Council, Public Works Dam Failure G4 1, 2, 6 Structural Unknown General Funds, DNR 4 years New Medium 48 Inventory existing road equipment and purchase needed equipment to maintain roads before, during and after a hazard event. Jefferson County/All Municipalities BOC, City Council, Public Works, Road Depts. Flood, Severe Weather, Winter Storm G2 1, 2 Non- Structural Unknown General Funds, FEMA 2 years New Medium ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 69 Action # Mitigation Action and Description Jurisdiction Responsible Agency/ Dept. Hazards Addressed Objective Supported Goal Structural/ Non- Structural Estimated Project Cost Possible Funding Source(s) Timeframe Status Priority 49 Develop coordinated management strategies for deicing, snow plowing, and clearing roads of fallen trees and debris Jefferson County/All Municipalities BOC, City Council, EMA, Public Works, Road Depts. Flood, Severe Weather, Winter Storm G2 1, 2 Non- Structural Staff Time General Funds 2 years New High 50 Promote the construction of safe rooms in shelter areas and in public buildings. Jefferson County/All Municipalities BOC, City Council, EMA, Fire Depts., Sheriff, Police Flood, Wildfire, Dam Failure, Severe Weather, Winter Storm G3 1, 2, 6 Structural Unknown General Funds, FEMA 4 years New Medium 51 Update 911 equipment as needed. Jefferson County EMA All hazards G1, G3 1, 2, 6 Structural Unknown General Funds, FEMA Continual New High 52 Request that all new education facilities be designed to serve as public shelters for emergency purposes. Jefferson County BOC, BOE All hazards G7 1, 2, 6 Non- Structural Staff Time General Funds Continual New High 53 Promote and participate in the following American Red Cross Programs • Disaster Resistant Neighborhoods Program • Business and Industry Preparedness Seminar • Community Disaster Education Preparedness presentations Jefferson County/All Municipalities BOC, City Council, EMA, Fire Depts., Sheriff, Police All hazards G4, G8, G9 1, 2 ,3 Non- Structural Unknown General Funds, FEMA Continual Ongoing Medium 54 Continue update of EMA website with information pertaining to Emergency Preparedness. Jefferson County EMA All hazards G4, G5, G6, G7, G8, G9. 1, 2 ,3 Non- Structural Staff Time General Funds Continual New High ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 70 Action # Mitigation Action and Description Jurisdiction Responsible Agency/ Dept. Hazards Addressed Objective Supported Goal Structural/ Non- Structural Estimated Project Cost Possible Funding Source(s) Timeframe Status Priority 55 Work with local cable and radio providers to enhance and broadcast public education on Emergency Preparedness. Jefferson County BOC, City Council, EMA, Fire Depts., Sheriff, Police All hazards G8, G9 1, 2 ,3 Non- Structural Staff Time General Funds 1 year and Continual New High 56 Implement GIS technology on fire and emergency management vehicles so data can be readily available in the field so more accurate, timely assessments for future mitigation planning activities. Jefferson County/All Municipalities BOC, City Council, EMA, Fire Depts., Sheriff, Police Flood, Wildfire, Dam Failure, Severe Weather, Winter Storm G9, G10 1, 2, 6 Non- Structural 50,000 General Funds, FEMA 1 year and Continual New High 57 Purchase a portable sewer transfer pumping unit Wrens, Wadley, Louisville City Council Flood, Severe Weather, Winter Storm A7, E2, G3 1, 2 Non- Structural $150,000 General Funds, FEMA 2 years New Medium 58 Herman Nelson Warming System AIR HEATER w/TRAILER Jefferson County BOC. EMA Winter Storm G7 1, 2 Non- Structural $500,000 General Funds, FEMA 2 years New Medium 59 Run HAZUS scenarios once the software is updated and compatible to RC ArcGIS 10.2 and updated estimated losses. Jefferson County/ All Jurisdictions. RC Flood/ Severe Weather A2, A3, A5, A6, B1 1,4,5 Non- Structural Staff Time General Funds 1 year New High 60 Apply for funds to three portable generators for lift stations and wells Wrens City Council, Public Works All hazards G3 1, 2, 3, 6 Structural/ Non- Structural 140,000 General Funds, FEMA 6 months New High 61 Continue update of EMA website and Facebook page with information pertaining to Emergency Preparedness. Jefferson County EMA All hazards G4, G5, G6, G7, G8, G9. 1, 2 ,3 Non- Structural Staff Time General Funds Continual New High ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 71 Action # Mitigation Action and Description Jurisdiction Responsible Agency/ Dept. Hazards Addressed Objective Supported Goal Structural/ Non- Structural Estimated Project Cost Possible Funding Source(s) Timeframe Status Priority 62 Apply for funds for generators critical facilities such as city hall, police station, fire station, wells Wadley City Council, Fire Dept. Public Works All hazards G3 1, 2, 3, 6 Structural/ Non- Structural 275,000 General Funds, FEMA 6 months New High 63 Apply for funds for generator at Hospital Jefferson County BOC, EMA, Jefferson Hospital Engineer All hazards G3 1, 2, 3, 6 Structural/ Non- Structural 140,000 General Funds, FEMA 6 months New High 64 Apply for three stationary generators for tow lift stations and the Leisure Senior Center for use as a shelter. Jefferson County BOC, EMA All hazards G3 1, 2, 3, 6 Structural/ Non- Structural 300,000 General Funds, FEMA 6 months New High 65 Contract with the Regional Commission to create a Flood Mitigation Assistance Plan. Jefferson County RC, BOC, EMA Flood A6 1, 2, 4, 5 Non- Structural Unknown General Funds 2 years New Meduim 66 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 72 A. New Buildings and Infrastructure: All objectives and action steps are applicable to new buildings and infrastructure. B. Existing Buildings and Infrastructure: All objectives and action steps are applicable to existing buildings and infrastructure except adopt building codes. Enforcing building codes on existing buildings is not always feasible. Buildings maybe retrofitted but cannot always be brought up to stricter regulations. C. Special Multi-Jurisdictional Strategy and Considerations: During a natural hazard it is imperative that all emergency personal can communicate with each other throughout the entire planning area. The County and its jurisdictions have numerous dead spots throughout the area due to topography and lack of adequate communication equipment. The County and its emergency personnel are dependent on the private sector for towers to use for signals. If these towers are ever removed the County will be without any adequate means to transmit signals. The County and all jurisdictions are aware of the need to develop communication capabilities that will serve their County. Another concern is the lack of available data for the county and individual jurisdictions on hazard events. A database needs to be created and maintained that provides information on flooding events that occur. This database should include information such as location (road names, neighborhoods, GPS coordinates, etc.), damages reported, power outages, road closures, county and city personal that are dispatched to the area, etc. D. Completed and Deleted Action Steps from Original Plan: Flood  Determine the elevation of critical facilities in known flood areas and seek funding to relocate if necessary. Completed.  Update Floodplain Maps. FEMA updated all maps in 2010.  Review and adopt flood plain ordinances as needed. Completed for those that participate.  Review set back requirements from top of banks of creeks and from top of banks of major rivers. Completed set back requirements are consistent with the DNR guidelines.  Review existing comprehensive, development and land use plans to address flood prone areas. This was completed during the 2004-2024 Comprehensive Plan Update.  Install measuring devices in creeks, ponds, etc. to provide a warning when water levels become dangerously high. All have monitors.  Identify property owners who are located in areas continually subject to flooding and relocate or mitigate. There are no repetitive flood properties.  Cap wells not in use and increase wellhead waterproofing. Deleted deals with private property. Added back as an education component.  Ensure well head elevations are above known flooding levels. Handled by Health Dept. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 73 Drought  Identify and inventory all vulnerable agricultural properties to include livestock and develops a protective action plan.  Study the range of federal support programs available to assist Jefferson County’s agriculture community.  Water Use Ordinances was removed from the plan. All water departments have adopted GA EPD guidelines.  Seek funding for wells that have gone dry and been removed. Funding does not exist for this activity as a grant only a loan and must be applied for by private citizens. Wildfire  Seek funding for reverse 911 was removed from the plan as technology is obsolete and the county has implemented CODE RED Severe Weather  Seek funding for reverse 911 was removed from the plan as technology is obsolete and the county has implemented CODE RED  Review building codes for proper wind strength and safety regulations and for consistency with state and federal regulations. Building Codes are in compliance.  Provides NOAA weather radios to elderly and handicap populations. Promoting Code Red. Winter Weather  Seek funding for reverse 911 was removed from the plan as technology is obsolete and the county has implemented CODE RED  Inspect power lines to determine if trees need to be trimmed or cut down. This is performed by the electric companies. This action step was deleted. E. Unchanged and/or Continual Action Steps: The flowing mitigation steps remain in the plan. Based on the STAPLEE Criteria these unchanged action steps were found to be relevant in limiting the damage to people and property from a natural hazard. All action steps have been reformatted to meet the action step criteria established by GEMA and FEMA after the original plan was approved. The new table format from GEMA Plan Update Guidance Template 2012 has been used to organize action steps. STAPLEE worksheet can be found in Appendix D for each action step. Flood:  Continue to assess storm water run-off.  Seek funding to construct more storm water retention facilities, storm drain improvements and channel improvements to protect existing and new developments.  Seek funding to increase size of retention basins and run off canals.  Recommend that run-off and water retention ditches be cleared.  Adopt ordinances to control building and development in known flood prone areas. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 74  Seek funding to acquire flood prone properties and convert to low impact uses such as recreation areas.  Promote the preservation of areas in and around watercourses.  Add greenspace to known flood prone areas.  Investigate methods to reduce non-point source pollution.  Seek funding for communication towers and voice repeater systems. Drought  Evaluate existing water systems and upgrade as needed. o Wrens extend water system 3.5 miles. o Louisville completed a $1.7 million upgrade the water treatment plant, added a new well and rehabbed the water tank at the High School.  Increase public awareness of watering restrictions. o All cities post water restrictions.  Educate citizens on water conservation.  Promote increased surface water usage for irrigation.  Promote usage of surface artesian flow for irrigation.  Educate citizens on water conservation issues. Wildfire  Seek funding to install more fire hydrants. o Wrens installed 19 new hydrants. o Louisville installed 5 new hydrants. o Wadley added two new hydrants.  Review previous firefighter training and implements a schedule for the ongoing training of all firefighters to include wildland fire training. o All paid firefighters have had 240 hours of annual training. o All volunteer firefighters have completed annual fire training requirements.  Seek funding for needed firefighting equipment.  Inventory and install more fire hydrants as needed.  Upgraded water lines to meet FEMA recommendations for firefighting and install fire hydrants.  Seek funding for more fire tankers (2000 to 3000 gallons) for local fire departments.  Seek funding for communication towers and voice repeater systems.  Increase public awareness of wildfire dangers by publishing articles in the local newspaper and providing bulletins to local churches and the schools.  Continue hazardous fuel reduction by prescribed burning, mechanical or chemical treatment carried out and promoted by GFC guidelines.  Continue GFC service of construction of firebreaks around forests and structures.  Maintain fuel breaks along abandoned road beds.  Recommend a defensible space (30-ft minimum setbacks) between buildings and strictly follow GFC guidelines for control burns and permits.  Educate public during periods of drought; ask them to hold off on outside burning. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 75  Increase public awareness of wildfire dangers around the home and community, such as lighted matches, cigarettes, trash, and the process for obtaining burn permits by publishing articles in the local newspaper and providing bulletins to local schools.  Participate in the Firewise Community Initiative.  Continue GFC service of construction of firebreaks around forests and structures.  Maintain fire breaks along abandoned road beds. Severe Weather  Review building codes for proper wind strength and safety regulations and for consistency with state and federal regulations.  Inspect public buildings and critical facilities and retrofit to reinforce windows, doors, and roofs as needed.  Seek funding for communication towers and voice repeater systems (moved to all hazards).  Review current evacuation plans paying particular attention to vulnerable populations and update as needed (moved to all hazards).  Review and current Emergency Response Plan and update when needed (moved to all hazards).  Install generators where needed (moved to all hazards).  Install generators on all new critical facilities (moved to all hazards).  Seek funding to ensure all current and future emergency shelters have back-up generators (moved to all hazards).  Educate the public on shelter locations and evacuation routes (moved to all hazards).  Seek funding for communication towers and voice repeater systems (moved to all hazards).  Request that all new education facilities be designed to serve as public shelters for emergency purposes (moved to all hazards).  Develop public education and awareness programs regarding severe weather events to include home safety measures, purchase of weather radio and personal safety measures before, during and after severe event weather. o The EMA has set up a Facebook with educational information  Promote and participate in the following American Red Cross Programs i. Disaster Resistant Neighborhoods Program (educating communities) ii. Business and Industry Preparedness Seminar (educating businesses on business continuity planning) iii. Community Disaster Education Preparedness presentations (educating adults, children and families) Winter Weather  Implement a winter storm education program to include winterization of home and/or business and what to do before, during and after the winter storm event.  Seek funding for communication towers and voice repeater systems (moved to all hazards).  Road maintenance equipment. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 76  Inventory and assess generator needs at critical facilities and install generators where needed.  Install generators where needed (moved to all hazards) ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 77 CHAPTER IV. PLAN INTEGRATION AND MAINTENANCE The table below provides a brief description of each section in this chapter and a summary of the changes since 2009. Chapter I. Section Updates to Section I. Implementation Action Plan Revised to follow New GEMA planning template II. Evaluation, Monitoring, Updating Note whether the original method and schedule worked Revised to follow New GEMA planning template III. Plan update and maintenance Regulated update and maintenance schedule and public involvement SECTION I. Implementation Action Plan A. Administrative Actions: Jefferson County Emergency Management Agency was responsible for overseeing the original planning process and the plan update. Facilitation of the planning process was conducted by the Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission. The Jefferson County Board of Commissioners has authorized the submission of this plan to both GEMA and FEMA for their respective approvals. The Jefferson County Board of Commissioners and the City Councils of Avera, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, Wadley and Wrens have formally adopted this plan after approval from GEMA and FEMA. B. Authority and Responsibility: Upkeep and maintenance of the plan shall be the responsibility of the EMA Director, as determined during the planning process. It shall be the responsibility of the EMA Director to ensure that this plan is utilized as a guide for initiating the identified mitigation measures within the community. The Jefferson County Board of Commissioners and the Mayors of all incorporated jurisdictions will be responsible for assigning appropriate staff members to implement the action steps identified in this plan for their jurisdictions. The EMA Director, or his designee, shall be authorized to call the committee to review and update this plan periodically (at least annually) throughout the useful life of the plan, not to exceed five years. During the plan update process, the EMA Director and committee members shall identify projects that have been successfully undertaken in initiating mitigation measures within the community. These projects shall be noted within the planning document to indicate their completion. Additionally, the committee called together by the EMA Director shall discuss and identify any additional mitigation projects that are necessary in the community. C. Prioritization: The mitigation goals, objectives and related action items were initially compiled from the input of the committee, as well as from others in the community. The committee prioritized the mitigation actions based on what would be perceived as most beneficial to the community, and the action steps have been listed in this plan as the committee prioritized them. Several criteria were established to assist committee members in the prioritization of these suggested mitigation actions. Criteria included perceived cost ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 78 benefit or cost effectiveness, availability of potential funding sources, overall feasibility, measurable milestones, multiple objectives, and both public and political support for the proposed actions. 1. Methodology for prioritization: To assist with the prioritization of mitigation actions, the STAPLEE worksheet and criteria recommended by FEMA was used. STAPLEE is a tool used to assess the costs and benefits and overall feasibility of mitigation actions. STAPLEE stands for the following: i. Social: Will the action be acceptable to the community? Could it have an unfair effect on a particular segment of the population? ii. Technical: Is the action technically feasible? Are there secondary impacts? Does it offer a long-term solution? iii. Administrative: Are there adequate staffing, funding and maintenance capabilities to implement the project? iv. Political: Will there be adequate political and public support for the project? v. Legal: Does your jurisdiction have the legal authority to implement the action? vi. Economic: Is the action cost-beneficial? Is there funding available: Will the action contribute to the local economy? vii. Environmental: Will there be negative environmental consequences from the action? Does it comply with environmental regulations? Is it consistent with community environmental goals? The committee was asked to review the STAPLEE score sheet and list of mitigation actions and assign a High, Medium or Low score to each item to help determine the item’s priority. Each action item was discussed and a consensus reached by the group on the importance of each item. 2. Use of cost benefit refer to Worksheet Through the STAPLEE prioritization process, several projects emerged as being a greater priority than others. Some of the projects involved expending considerable amounts of funds to initiate the required actions. Other projects allowed the community to pursue completion of the project using potential grant funding. Still others required no significant financial commitment by the community. The determination of the cost benefit of a project was based upon the anticipated cost in relation to the perceived benefit of the action taken. A proposed action with a high price tag, but minimal benefit to the community, was considered to have a low cost benefit. Conversely, if minimal expenditures were required and the entire community would benefit, this received a favorable cost benefit rating. All proposed mitigation actions were evaluated to determine the favorability of the benefit in relation to the cost associated with completing the project. Determining the economic feasibility of mitigating hazards can provide decision makers with an understanding of the potential benefits and costs of an activity, as well as a basis upon which to compare alternative projects. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 79 3. Use of other calculations: Estimation of potential damages and costs in the event of a natural hazard achieves two ends: it enables the identification of critical economic targets for mitigation measures and to enhance the ability to prioritize post-disaster response in aiding the community to recover. 4. Use of other review structure: All goals were discussed in detail to determine what was considered a priority for the EMA personnel. D. Incorporation of Local PDM Plan into other plans/planning measures: During the 2009- 2014 partial update to the Joint Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan the 2009 plan was utilized it identified STWP goals with regards to mitigation. The partial comprehensive plan update the following actions were listed in the STWP:  Build new Fire Station  Make necessary storm water improvements  Purchase new Public Safety and Public Works equipment  Water system repair and upgrades  Water tank renovation  Fire hydrant installation and renovation  Develop and adopt uniform county-wide floodplain ordinance  Upgrade 911 system incorporating CAD and provide training  Purchase new fire truck  Flood, drainage and road improvements  Update and enforce environmental protection ordinances Jefferson County and all municipalities will begin an update to their STWP in June 2016. The 2014 plan will be reviewed to determine if any of the mitigation activities need to be added to the STWP. The planning agency responsible for updating the joint comprehensive plan will be provided with a copy of the update to aid in incorporating it in Jefferson County’s major planning document in 2017. In addition, relevant sections of the plan should be included in the next revision of the Jefferson County Local Emergency Operations Plan. SECTION II. EVALUATION, MONITORING AND UPDATING The original method for evaluation of the plan was unsuccessful. While the plan was discussed at EMA meetings, little attention was given to the monitoring and evaluation of the plan. Changes have been made to ensure a more successful and meaningful use of this plan. A. Method: The Plan is intended to be a ‘living’ document that informs stakeholders about hazard mitigation projects and plans undertaken by the county and their jurisdictions. In accordance with the requirements set forth in the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000, Jefferson County is required to review the PDM Plan annually and revise the plan every five years. The revision process will be consistent with the FEMA planning requirements as stipulated in the 44 CFR 201.6. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 80 B. Criteria to be used to monitor and evaluate the plan annually or after any natural disaster event. a. Each hazard will be reviewed. Any new information pertaining to new and/or previous events will be added to the plan. b. Any new critical facilities will be added to the plan. c. Critical facilities information will be updated as needed. d. All mitigation goals, objectives and action steps will be reviewed for relevance and completion status. All mitigation goals, objectives and action steps that have been completed or are no longer relevant will be documented. e. New mitigation activities will be added if necessary. f. Public participation will be monitored and documented. C. Responsibility: At the direction of the EMA Director, the committee shall be reconvened for the revision process which will include a schedule, timeline, and a list of the agencies or organizations participating in the plan revision. Jefferson County and all incorporated jurisdictions have designated the following participants of the committee to guide plan maintenance and update activities to ensure that the information in the plan is current. The update committee will also be responsible for disseminating information to stakeholders within their respective jurisdictions. Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Update Committee Review Point-of-Contact Schedule Jefferson County Emergency Management Director Annually Avera City Official Annually Bartow City Official Annually Louisville City Administrator Annually Stapleton City Official Annually Wadley City Official Annually Wrens City Administrator Annually D. Timeframe: The committee has set the first Thursday of every October for the annual review of the plan update and within two months after any natural disaster event. A public notice will be submitted to the legal organ of each jurisdiction and the notice will be published at all government and community buildings. SECTION III. PLAN UPDATE AND MAINTENANCE A. Public involvement: Jefferson County is committed to having active public participation during reviews and updates of the PDM Plan. Public participation will follow the guidelines set forth in 44 CFR 201.6. Future public involvement of the community will be more stringent. The original method was not as successful as anticipated in ensuring community involvement. With this in mind, two weeks before the annual April review meeting, a notice will be published in the legal organ of Jefferson County. Flyers will be placed at all government and community gathering places to ensure that citizens of the county are made aware of the annual review process. The new EMA website will also provide ongoing information about the plan and its implementation. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 81 B. Timeframe At the direction of the EMA Director, the committee will convene in order to accomplish the revisions the first Thursday of every October. The EMA Director will ensure the revised plan is presented to the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners and its jurisdictions for formal adoption. In addition, all holders of the County plan will be notified of affected changes. No later than the conclusion of the five-year period following initial approval of the update plan, the EMA Director shall submit the update PDM Plan to the Georgia Emergency Management Agency and the Federal Emergency Management Agency for their review and coordination. CHAPTER V. Conclusion SECTION I. Summary Through the update process of this plan, Jefferson County has developed a more thorough hazard history, an inventory of critical facilities, and an updated contact list for emergency contacts at critical facilities. Natural hazards have been identified countywide. Goals, objectives and mitigation actions have been compiled and prioritized that would reduce the risk of lives and property as a result of the identified hazards. The committee has been able to work together effectively and efficiently to produce this document and establish a greater awareness of our risks and our mitigation strategies. As a result of the update PDM planning process, Jefferson county officials have obtained more complete and accurate information and knowledge regarding the County’s disaster history, the presence of natural hazards, and the likelihood of each of these hazards occurring within the County, and the potential impacts and challenges these hazards present to the community. All meetings were open to the public and advertised in The Jefferson Reporter, providing Jefferson County citizens with the opportunity to comment on and offer suggestions concerning disaster mitigation actions within the community. The committee found that it is difficult to predict the geographic threat, and therefore the resulting impact of some natural disasters as compared to others. Tornados and related severe weather strike randomly, usually affecting a small, localized area. On the other hand, natural disasters such as winter ice storms and drought can blanket the entire county, affecting all businesses, public facilities, and residents. Recognizing this challenge, the committee identified both general and specific measures to aid in the mitigation of several natural hazards most likely to impact Jefferson County. These measures include, but are not limited to, the protection of critical facilities and infrastructure, progressive governmental policies, and the proactive use of codes and regulations. It is worth noting that local government policies can often be the single most important and cost efficient component of PDM. The mission of the Jefferson County Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee is to ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 82 “Make the citizens, businesses, communities and local governments of Jefferson County less vulnerable to the effects of natural hazards through the effective administration of hazard mitigation grant programs, hazard risk assessments, wise floodplain management and a coordinated approach to mitigation policy through state, regional and local planning activities.” The committee feels that this plan, when implemented, will help to make all of Jefferson County a safer place to live and work for all of its citizens. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 83 SECTION II – REFERENCES Numerous sources were utilized to ensure the most complete planning document could be assembled. In an effort to ensure that all data sources consulted are cited, references are listed in the following format: 1) Publications, 2) Web Sites, 3) Other Sources. Publications: FEMA Pre-Disaster Mitigation How-to Guides 2, 3, 7 (FEMA) GEMA Supplements to FEMA Pre-Disaster Mitigation How-to Guides (GEMA) The Jefferson Reporter The Augusta Chronicle Summary of Floods in the United States During 1990 and 1991 http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/wsp2474 FLOODS IN GEORGIA. FREQUENCY AND MAGNITUDE. By. R. W. Carter. Http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1951/0100/report.pdf Georgia Archives University System of Georgia http://cdm.sos.state.ga.us:2011/cdm/search/searchterm/FLOOD/mode/all/order/subjec/ad/desc Web Sites: FEMA www.fema.gov GEMA www.gema.state.ga.us Georgia Department of Community Affairs http://www.dca.state.ga.us/ Georgia Forestry Commission http://weather.gfc.state.ga.us National Climatic Data Center www.ncdc.noaa.gov SHELDUS™ I Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States http://webra.cas.sc.edu/hvri/products/sheldus.aspx National Inventory of Dams http://crunch.tec.army.mil/nid/webpages/nid.cfm http://www.placenames.com New Georgia Georgia Archives University System of Georgia http://cdm.sos.state.ga.us:2011/cdm/search/searchterm/FLOOD/mode/all/order/subjec/ad/desc United States Census Bureau http://www.census.gov/ USDA, NASS, 2012 CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE http://www.nass.usda.gov/Census_of_Agriculture/index.asp http://www.sercc.com/ The Southeast Regional Climate Center (SERCC) http://www.tornadohistoryproject.com/tornado/Georgia Tornado History Project http://www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov/stats/97-11Flash_Density_miles.png http://water.weather.gov/ahps/region.php?state=ga Other Sources: American Red Cross CSRA Regional Commission Georgia Department of Natural Resources Georgia Forestry Commission Jefferson County, Avera, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, Wadley and Wrens Jefferson County Board of Education Jefferson County Hospital Jefferson County Tax Assessor ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 84 APPENDICES Appendix A – Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment and Vulnerability (HRV) I. Hazard A - Flood a. Description b. Data – GEMA Critical Facility Inventory Report c. Maps II. Hazard B– Dam Failure a. Description b. Data– GEMA Critical Facility Inventory Report c. Maps III. Hazard C - Drought a. Description b. Data– GEMA Critical Facility Inventory Report c. Maps IV. Hazard D - Wildfire a. Description b. Data– GEMA Critical Facility Inventory Report c. Maps V. Hazard E – Severe Weather, Including Tornados, Tropical Storms, and Thunder Storms a. Description b. Data– GEMA Critical Facility Inventory Report c. Maps VI. Hazard F – Winter Storm a. Description b. Data– GEMA Critical Facility Inventory Report c. Maps VII. All Hazards a. Description b. Data– GEMA Critical Facility Inventory Report c. Maps Appendix B – Growth and Development Trends / Community Information I. Local Comp Plan Executive Summary II. Statistics/tables from Local Comp Plan III. Community Information Appendix C –Planning documents I. Executive Summary Local Emergency Operations II. Executive Summary CSRA Regional Commission Regional Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County 85 Appendix D – Worksheets used in planning process I. Completed GEMA/local worksheets II. Blank GEMA/local worksheets III. Other misc. worksheets or planning process documents Appendix E – Copies of Required Planning Documentation I. Public notice II. Meeting Agendas / Meeting Minutes III. Sign-in sheets IV. Local proclamations (copy of all resolution) V. GEMA/FEMA correspondence ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County APPENDIX A HAZARD IDENTIFICATION, RISK ASSESSMENT AND VULNERABILTY ---PAGE BREAK--- WADLEY WRENS LOUISVILLE STAPLETON BARTOW AVERA Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, TomTom, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, and the GIS User Community μ 0 4 8 2 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Jefferson County Base Map Legend Jefferson County City Limits Highways Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- State Hwy 17 US Hwy 1 State Hwy 80 State Hwy 171 State Hwy 24 State Hwy 296 State Hwy 78 State Hwy 88 US Hwy 319 US Hwy 221 State Hwy 4 Business State Hwy 4 US Hwy 1 Business State Hwy 16 State Hwy 171 US Hwy 319 State Hwy 24 State Hwy 17 State Hwy 80 US Hwy 1 State Hwy 80 State Hwy 296 State Hwy 17 US Hwy 1 US Hwy 221 μ 0 4 8 2 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Jefferson County Road Map Legend Jefferson County City Limits Highways Roads Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- μ 0 4 8 2 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Jefferson County Soil Map Legend Jefferson County Soils COWARTS-CUTHBERT-SAWYER CUTHBERT-SAWYER-CARNEGIE EUSTIS-LAKELAND-LUCY FACEVILLE-ORANGEBURG-GREENVILLE FACEVILLE-TIFTON-ORANGEBURG GRADY GREENVILLE-FACEVILLE GREENVILLE-FACEVILLE-ORANGEBURG IZAGORA-DEBRUCE KERSHAW-LAKELAND-EUSTIS KERSHAW-PLUMMER LAKELAND-FUQUAY-LUCY NORFOLK-FUQUAY-TIFTON NORFOLK-ORANGEBURG NORFOLK-TIFTON-FUQUAY ORANGEBURG-LUCY-FACEVILLE SWAMP-ALLUVIAL LAND,WET-RAINS TIFTON-NORFOLK-FACEVILLE ---PAGE BREAK--- FLOOD Flood plains are relatively flat lands that border streams and rivers that are normally dry, but are covered with water during floods. The severity of a flood is usually measured in terms of depth of flooding. Flooding occurs when the volume of water exceeds the ability of a water body (stream, river, or lake) to contain it within its normal banks. Floodplains serve three major purposes: Natural water storage and conveyance, water quality maintenance, and groundwater recharge. These three purposes are greatly inhibited when floodplains are misused or abused through improper and unsuitable land development. For example, if floodplains are filled in order to construct a building, then valuable water storage areas and recharge areas are lost. This causes unnecessary flooding in previously dry areas and can damage buildings or other structures. The susceptibility of a stream to flooding is dependent upon several different variables. Among these are topography, ground saturation, rainfall intensity and duration, soil types, drainage, drainage patterns of streams, and vegetative cover. A large amount of rainfall over a short time period can result in flash flood conditions. A small amount of rain can also result in floods in locations where the soil is saturated from a previous wet period or if the rain is concentrated in an area of impermeable surfaces such as large parking lots, paved roadways, etc. Topography and ground cover are contributing factors for floods in that water runoff is greater in areas with steep slopes and little or no vegetation. Severe flooding within Jefferson County is a relatively infrequent event. The county has 54 streams/rivers, 39 reservoirs and 3 lakes which makes the potential for flooding significant. The committee examined historical data from the NCDC, past newspaper articles and conducted interviews during its research on the effects of past flooding events. In the last 85 years there have been 10 reported flooding events where six occurred countywide and two in Wrens. There has been a total of approximately $568,000 in property and crop damages. The magnitude of a major flood event could have approximately 70% of the county experiencing some damage from flooding. Based on tax data, parcel and flood maps all or a portion of 208 known structures/properties valued at approximately $14 million and a population of 349 located in known floodplains. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATEEND_DATE EVTYPE FATALITIES INJURIES PROPDMG REMARKS 9/30/1929 10/3/1929 Flooding 0 0 0.00k A result of a hurricane that came ashore at Pensscola Florida 10/11/1990 10/12/1990 Flooding 3 0 2000.00k Flooding There was a 3-day rainfall of 19.89 inches in Louisville 10/13/1990 10/15/1990 Flooding 0 0 50.00k Flood 3/1/1991 3/1/1991 Flooding 0 0 5.00k Flash Flood 10/5/1995 Flash Flood 0 0 0.00k Tropical Storm Tammy caused heavy winds and minor flooding throughout the county 7/10/2005 Flash Flood 0 0 0.00k As a result of Hurricane Dennis widespread flooding throughout the county 5/6/2009 5/6/2009 Flooding 0 0 1.00k Flood 7/13/2013 Flooding 0 0 0.00k The Jefferson County emergency manager reported washed out roads near Avera. Almost two inches of rainfall in a 3 hour period on already wet soils quickly overwhelmed the drainage systems. ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Avera city City Hall Avera City Hall X 1000 $312,500 2014 $200,000 2,014 1 1 Avera city Water System Avera Water Tank X X 100 $325,000 2013 1 Avera city Fire Station Avera Fire Station X 4250 $100,000 2013 $200,000 2,013 1 5,350 $737,500 $400,000 $0 $0 1 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #4 X X X X 100 $60,500 2013 $0 1 100 $60,500 $0 $0 $0 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #5 X X X X 100 $90,200 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Sewage Treatment Pond X X X X 10307 $50,400 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Sewage Holding Pond X X X X 13509 $46,400 2013 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Sewage Effluent Pump Station X X X X 100 $63,700 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Other Bartow Community Center & Auditorium X X 11232 $1,342,200 2013 $250,000 2,013 1 0 Bartow town Other Bartow Fire Dept & Communications Bldg X X X 64 $17,100 2013 $60,000 2,013 0 Bartow town Other Bartow Museum X 2450 $826,847 2013 2,013 1 0 Bartow town City Hall Bartow City Hall X X X X 1920 $209,300 2013 $53,500 2,013 3 0 Bartow town Fire Station Bartow Fire Dept and Emergency Shelter X X X X 7500 $330,630 2013 $38,500 2,013 1 0 Bartow town Water System Bartow Water Tower X X X X 100 $393,000 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Water System Bartow Water Well X X X X 275 $111,800 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Water System Bartow Water Well #2 X X X X 275 $119,700 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow wastewater Lift Station #1 X X X X 100 $70,300 2013 $0 0 Totals for Avera city, Hazard Score = 1 Totals for Bartow town, Hazard Score = 1 Reporting for Flood Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Flood Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #2 X X X X 100 $71,400 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #3 X X X X 100 $69,000 2013 $0 0 48,132 $3,811,977 $402,000 $0 $0 6 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant Hillcrest Station X X 100 $45,700 2013 1 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant US # 1 Bypass Lift Station X X 100 $47,500 2013 1 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant Matthews Station X X 100 $47,500 2013 1 Jefferson County Other JC Fire TowerShop/Supply Building X 4072 $241,236 2013 $9,800 2,013 2 1 Jefferson County Other JC Recreation Dept X 1867 $1,300,621 2013 $29,600 2,013 1 Jefferson County Middle School Louisville Middle School X X 81642 $23,500,000 2013 $940,000 2,013 354 1 Jefferson County Emergency Services Lions Club Evac. Center X X X 1000 $12,000 2013 1 Jefferson County Landfill Jefferson County Landfill (New) X X 15000 $1,062,166 2013 $363,200 2,013 6 1 Jefferson County High School, Public Jefferson County High School X X X 179142 $55,000,000 2013 $2,200,000 2,013 937 1 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Bus Shop X 4920 $750,000 2013 $140,000 2,013 5 1 Jefferson County Public Vocational Technical School Sandersville Tech X X X 10000 $1,930,505 2013 75 1 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Health Dept X 6341 $841,815 2013 $191,700 2,013 20 1 Jefferson County C&D JEFFERSON CO-US 1 (AVERA RD) (SL) X X 10000 $1,500,000 2013 1 Jefferson County County Correctional Institution Jefferson Co. Correction Facility X X X X 42446 $5,261,231 2013 $833,800 2,013 200 1 Jefferson County Other Ogeechee Service Center X X X X 10650 $900,000 2013 2,013 50 1 Totals for Bartow town, Hazard Score = 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Flood Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Jefferson County Other Jefferson Co. Law Enforcement Center X X X X 39892 $8,041,785 2013 $1,139,700 2,013 225 1 Jefferson County Emergency Services Jefferson County Armory Transit EMA X 14040 $2,380,171 2013 $724,500 2,013 10 1 421,312 $102,862,230 $6,572,300 $0 $0 1,884 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Senior Center X X X 4924 $586,170 2013 $86,000 2,013 40 0 Jefferson County Emergency Services 1st Baptist Church Evac Center X X X 45075 $3,500,000 2013 5 0 Jefferson County Hospital, Admissions Entrance Jefferson Hospital X X X 76000 $57,000,000 2013 0 Jefferson County Other Hardeman Building (Swann) X X X 8278 $250,000 2013 $17,000 2,013 1 0 Jefferson County County Jail Old County Jail/IT/Purchasing X X X 7742 $500,000 2013 $28,000 2,013 1 0 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Chamber of Commerce/Murphy House X X 3281 $361,433 2013 $122,700 2,013 8 0 Jefferson County Library Jefferson County Library X 5000 $66,085 2013 $848,000 2,013 10 0 Jefferson County Courthouse Jefferson County Courthouse X X 6065 $5,147,708 2013 $125,000 2,013 0 Jefferson County Courthouse Jefferson County Magistrate and Juvenile Court X 22000 $24,001,242 2013 20 0 Jefferson County Elementary School Carver Elementary X X 6600 $12,750,000 2013 $510,000 2,013 292 0 Jefferson County Elementary School Louisville Academy Elementary X X X 25047 $15,250,000 2013 $610,000 2,013 568 0 Jefferson County Other Wrens Elementary 78216 $20,500,000 2013 $820,000 2,013 637 0 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Commissioners Office/Long House X 3080 $339,300 2013 $110,300 2,013 30 0 Jefferson County Middle School Wrens Middle School X X 59902 $17,000,000 2013 $680,000 2,013 315 0 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant McBride Lift Station X X 100 $48,750 2013 0 Jefferson County Other JC Radio Tower X 100 $27,885 2013 $8,000 2,013 0 Totals for Jefferson County, Hazard Score = 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Flood Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Jefferson County Other JC Building Department X 1000 $51,090 2013 $17,500 2,013 0 352,410 $157,379,663 $3,982,500 $0 $0 1,927 Louisville city Wastewater Treatment Plant Louisville Tech Lift Station X X 50 $125,000 2014 $125,000 $1,000 1 Louisville city Wastewater Treatment Plant Louisville Lift Station at HS X X 50 $150,000 2014 $150,000 $1,000 1 Louisville city Water System Booster pump station X X 100 $175,000 2013 1 Louisville city Water System Louisville Water Tower 100 $712,500 2014 1 Louisville city Water System Louisville City WaterTower X X X 100 $950,000 2014 1 Louisville city Airport Louisville City Airport X X 3200 $543,665 2013 1 3,600 $2,656,165 $0 $275,000 $2,000 0 Louisville city City Hall Louisville OLD City Hall X 10000 $500,000 2006 0 Louisville city Water System Louisville Water Works X X X 2400 $4,425,000 2014 0 Louisville city Other OCI Nursing Home X 45062 $5,000,000 2013 225 0 Louisville city Water System City of Louisville Water Tank X X 100 $500,000 2006 0 Louisville city Other Market House X X 600 $100,000 2013 0 Louisville city Other Physicians Health Group Louisville X 9560 $2,400,000 2014 $500,000 2,014 20 0 Louisville city Other NCA Northside Dialysis Center X X 7207 $1,261,225 2014 10 0 Louisville city City Hall Louisvill City Hall X 7200 $550,000 2013 $350,000 2,013 10 0 Louisville city Fire Station Louisville Fire Station X 7200 $750,000 2014 $850,000 2,014 4 0 89,329 $15,486,225 $1,700,000 $0 $0 269 Stapleton city Water System Stapleton Water Tank #2 X X X 100 $500,000 2012 $200,000 0 Stapleton city Fire Station Stapleton Fire house & Emergency Shelter X X X 6000 $394,800 2012 $700,000 2,012 $100,000 0 Stapleton city Water System Stapleton Water Tank #1 X X X 100 $500,000 2012 $200,000 0 Totals for Jefferson County, Hazard Score = 0 Totals for Louisville city, Hazard Score = 1 Totals for Louisville city, Hazard Score = 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Flood Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Stapleton city City Hall Stapleton City Hall & Emergency Shelter X 3000 $383,700 2012 $30,000 2,012 $150,000 2 0 9,200 $1,778,500 $730,000 $650,000 $0 2 Wadley city City Hall Wadley City Hall X X 3645 $1,500,000 2014 $250,000 2,014 5 0 Wadley city Other Physicans Health Group Wadley X 2318 $405,650 2013 $250,000 2,013 10 0 Wadley city Water System Wadley Well House X X 100 $600,000 2013 0 Wadley city Adult Edu. Center Wadley Community Complex X X X 6000 $700,000 2014 0 Wadley city Library Wadley Public Library X X 3114 $510,000 2013 $538,200 2,013 5 0 Wadley city Water System Wadley Elevated Water Tank X X 100 $650,000 2013 0 Wadley city Water System Wadley Water Tower #2 X X 100 $500,000 2013 0 Wadley city Other Glendale Nursing Home X X X X 26500 $1,610,863 2014 $750,000 2,014 120 0 Wadley city Other Wadley Gym X X 1200 $400,000 2014 0 43,077 $6,876,513 $1,788,200 $0 $0 140 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant West Walker St Lift Station X X 100 $300,000 2014 3 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Wrens Sewage Treatment Plant X X X 1400 $3,250,000 2014 $125,000 3 1,500 $3,550,000 $125,000 $0 $0 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X X 250 $687,500 2014 1 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Highway 88 Lift Station X X 100 $350,000 2014 1 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Stephens St Lift Station X X 100 $350,000 2014 1 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Waynesboro Highway Lift Station X X 100 $400,000 2014 1 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 800 $125,000 2014 $25,000 1 Wrens city Other Southern Tap #2 X X X 50 $750,000 2012 1 Wrens city Other KA-MIN #1 X X X X X 10 $250,000 2014 1 Totals for Stapleton city, Hazard Score = 0 Totals for Wadley city, Hazard Score = 0 Totals for Wrens city, Hazard Score = 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Flood Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Wrens city Other Border Regulator Station X X X X 100 $100,000 2012 1 Wrens city Other Calcine Meter Set X X X 100 $225,000 2012 1 Wrens city Other Southern Tap #1 X X X 50 $750,000 2014 1 Wrens city Water System King Mill Well (Well E) X X 50 $750,000 2014 1 Wrens city Other Ka-Min #2 X X X 1955 $250,000 2014 1 Wrens city Other IMERYS Meter Set X X 10 $300,000 2014 1 3,675 $5,287,500 $25,000 $0 $0 0 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Bushy Creek Lift Station X X 100 $400,000 2014 0 Wrens city Water System Water Booster Station X X 1000 $500,000 2012 0 Wrens city Other Wrens Medical Center X X 400 $875,000 2014 $200,000 20 0 Wrens city Library Wrens Old Library Building X X X 3000 $625,000 2013 $549,200 2,013 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X 200 $625,000 2014 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 800 $75,000 2014 $25,000 0 Wrens city Other Wrens Community Center X 3400 $500,000 2014 $50,000 20 0 Wrens city City Hall Wrens City Hall X X 7500 $1,125,000 2013 $150,000 10 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X X 200 $625,000 2014 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 144 $300,000 2014 $50,000 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X 150 $625,000 2014 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 64 $75,000 2014 $25,000 0 Wrens city Other Physicians Health Group Wrens X X 5802 $1,015,350 2013 $500,000 2,013 20 0 22,760 $7,365,350 $1,549,200 $0 $0 70 1,000,445 $307,852,123 $17,274,200 $925,000 $2,000 4,299 Totals for Wrens city, Hazard Score = 0 Grand Totals - Pre-Disaster Mitigation - Fiscal Year: 2009 - Report created: Aug 24, 2014 - For more information call GEMA Pre-Disaster Mitigation at 1-800-TRY-GEMA Totals for Wrens city, Hazard Score = 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Wrens Sewage Treatment Plant X X X 1400 $3,250,000 2014 $125,000 3 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant West Walker St Lift Station X X 100 $300,000 2014 3 1,500 $3,550,000 $125,000 $0 $0 0 Avera city Water System Avera Water Tank X X 100 $325,000 2013 1 Avera city Fire Station Avera Fire Station X 4250 $100,000 2013 $200,000 2,013 1 Wrens city Other Ka-Min #2 X X X 1955 $250,000 2014 1 Wrens city Other IMERYS Meter Set X X 10 $300,000 2014 1 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #4 X X X X 100 $60,500 2013 $0 1 Louisville city Wastewater Treatment Plant Louisville Tech Lift Station X X 50 $125,000 2014 $125,000 $1,000 1 Louisville city Wastewater Treatment Plant Louisville Lift Station at HS X X 50 $150,000 2014 $150,000 $1,000 1 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant Hillcrest Station X X 100 $45,700 2013 1 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant US # 1 Bypass Lift Station X X 100 $47,500 2013 1 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant Matthews Station X X 100 $47,500 2013 1 Louisville city Water System Booster pump station X X 100 $175,000 2013 1 Wrens city Water System King Mill Well (Well E) X X 50 $750,000 2014 1 Jefferson County Other JC Fire TowerShop/Supply Building X 4072 $241,236 2013 $9,800 2,013 2 1 Jefferson County Other JC Recreation Dept X 1867 $1,300,621 2013 $29,600 2,013 1 Wrens city Other Southern Tap #2 X X X 50 $750,000 2012 1 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X X 250 $687,500 2014 1 Jefferson County C&D JEFFERSON CO-US 1 (AVERA RD) (SL) X X 10000 $1,500,000 2013 1 Reporting for Flood Hazard Countywide Grouped by Hazard Score Totals for Jefferson County, Hazard Score = 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Flood Hazard Countywide Grouped by Hazard Score Avera city City Hall Avera City Hall X 1000 $312,500 2014 $200,000 2,014 1 1 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 800 $125,000 2014 $25,000 1 Jefferson County County Correctional Institution Jefferson Co. Correction Facility X X X X 42446 $5,261,231 2013 $833,800 2,013 200 1 Jefferson County Other Ogeechee Service Center X X X X 10650 $900,000 2013 2,013 50 1 Jefferson County Other Jefferson Co. Law Enforcement Center X X X X 39892 $8,041,785 2013 $1,139,700 2,013 225 1 Jefferson County Emergency Services Lions Club Evac. Center X X X 1000 $12,000 2013 1 Jefferson County Emergency Services Jefferson County Armory Transit EMA X 14040 $2,380,171 2013 $724,500 2,013 10 1 Louisville city Water System Louisville City WaterTower X X X 100 $950,000 2014 1 Louisville city Airport Louisville City Airport X X 3200 $543,665 2013 1 Jefferson County Landfill Jefferson County Landfill (New) X X 15000 $1,062,166 2013 $363,200 2,013 6 1 Jefferson County High School, Public Jefferson County High School X X X 179142 $55,000,000 2013 $2,200,000 2,013 937 1 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Bus Shop X 4920 $750,000 2013 $140,000 2,013 5 1 Jefferson County Public Vocational Technical School Sandersville Tech X X X 10000 $1,930,505 2013 75 1 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Health Dept X 6341 $841,815 2013 $191,700 2,013 20 1 Louisville city Water System Louisville Water Tower 100 $712,500 2014 1 Jefferson County Middle School Louisville Middle School X X 81642 $23,500,000 2013 $940,000 2,013 354 1 Wrens city Other KA-MIN #1 X X X X X 10 $250,000 2014 1 Wrens city Other Border Regulator Station X X X X 100 $100,000 2012 1 Wrens city Other Calcine Meter Set X X X 100 $225,000 2012 1 Wrens city Other Southern Tap #1 X X X 50 $750,000 2014 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Flood Hazard Countywide Grouped by Hazard Score Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Highway 88 Lift Station X X 100 $350,000 2014 1 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Stephens St Lift Station X X 100 $350,000 2014 1 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Waynesboro Highway Lift Station X X 100 $400,000 2014 1 434,037 $111,603,895 $6,997,300 $275,000 $2,000 1,885 Bartow town City Hall Bartow City Hall X X X X 1920 $209,300 2013 $53,500 2,013 3 0 Bartow town Fire Station Bartow Fire Dept and Emergency Shelter X X X X 7500 $330,630 2013 $38,500 2,013 1 0 Bartow town Water System Bartow Water Tower X X X X 100 $393,000 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Water System Bartow Water Well X X X X 275 $111,800 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Water System Bartow Water Well #2 X X X X 275 $119,700 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow wastewater Lift Station #1 X X X X 100 $70,300 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #2 X X X X 100 $71,400 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #3 X X X X 100 $69,000 2013 $0 0 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Bushy Creek Lift Station X X 100 $400,000 2014 0 Jefferson County Middle School Wrens Middle School X X 59902 $17,000,000 2013 $680,000 2,013 315 0 Louisville city Water System City of Louisville Water Tank X X 100 $500,000 2006 0 Louisville city Other Market House X X 600 $100,000 2013 0 Wrens city Other Wrens Medical Center X X 400 $875,000 2014 $200,000 20 0 Wadley city Water System Wadley Well House X X 100 $600,000 2013 0 Wadley city Adult Edu. Center Wadley Community Complex X X X 6000 $700,000 2014 0 Totals for Jefferson County, Hazard Score = 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Flood Hazard Countywide Grouped by Hazard Score Wadley city Library Wadley Public Library X X 3114 $510,000 2013 $538,200 2,013 5 0 Wadley city Water System Wadley Elevated Water Tank X X 100 $650,000 2013 0 Wadley city Water System Wadley Water Tower #2 X X 100 $500,000 2013 0 Jefferson County Elementary School Carver Elementary X X 6600 $12,750,000 2013 $510,000 2,013 292 0 Jefferson County Elementary School Louisville Academy Elementary X X X 25047 $15,250,000 2013 $610,000 2,013 568 0 Jefferson County Other Wrens Elementary 78216 $20,500,000 2013 $820,000 2,013 637 0 Louisville city City Hall Louisville OLD City Hall X 10000 $500,000 2006 0 Louisville city Water System Louisville Water Works X X X 2400 $4,425,000 2014 0 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Senior Center X X X 4924 $586,170 2013 $86,000 2,013 40 0 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Commissioners Office/Long House X 3080 $339,300 2013 $110,300 2,013 30 0 Jefferson County Emergency Services 1st Baptist Church Evac Center X X X 45075 $3,500,000 2013 5 0 Stapleton city Water System Stapleton Water Tank #2 X X X 100 $500,000 2012 $200,000 0 Stapleton city Fire Station Stapleton Fire house & Emergency Shelter X X X 6000 $394,800 2012 $700,000 2,012 $100,000 0 Stapleton city Water System Stapleton Water Tank #1 X X X 100 $500,000 2012 $200,000 0 Wadley city Other Physicans Health Group Wadley X 2318 $405,650 2013 $250,000 2,013 10 0 Wrens city Other Physicians Health Group Wrens X X 5802 $1,015,350 2013 $500,000 2,013 20 0 Jefferson County Hospital, Admissions Entrance Jefferson Hospital X X X 76000 $57,000,000 2013 0 Jefferson County Other Hardeman Building (Swann) X X X 8278 $250,000 2013 $17,000 2,013 1 0 Jefferson County County Jail Old County Jail/IT/Purchasing X X X 7742 $500,000 2013 $28,000 2,013 1 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Flood Hazard Countywide Grouped by Hazard Score Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Chamber of Commerce/Murphy House X X 3281 $361,433 2013 $122,700 2,013 8 0 Jefferson County Library Jefferson County Library X 5000 $66,085 2013 $848,000 2,013 10 0 Louisville city Other OCI Nursing Home X 45062 $5,000,000 2013 225 0 Stapleton city City Hall Stapleton City Hall & Emergency Shelter X 3000 $383,700 2012 $30,000 2,012 $150,000 2 0 Wrens city Other Wrens Community Center X 3400 $500,000 2014 $50,000 20 0 Wrens city City Hall Wrens City Hall X X 7500 $1,125,000 2013 $150,000 10 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X X 200 $625,000 2014 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 144 $300,000 2014 $50,000 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X 150 $625,000 2014 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 64 $75,000 2014 $25,000 0 Jefferson County Courthouse Jefferson County Courthouse X X 6065 $5,147,708 2013 $125,000 2,013 0 Jefferson County Courthouse Jefferson County Magistrate and Juvenile Court X 22000 $24,001,242 2013 20 0 Wadley city City Hall Wadley City Hall X X 3645 $1,500,000 2014 $250,000 2,014 5 0 Wrens city Library Wrens Old Library Building X X X 3000 $625,000 2013 $549,200 2,013 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X 200 $625,000 2014 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 800 $75,000 2014 $25,000 0 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant McBride Lift Station X X 100 $48,750 2013 0 Louisville city Other Physicians Health Group Louisville X 9560 $2,400,000 2014 $500,000 2,014 20 0 Louisville city Other NCA Northside Dialysis Center X X 7207 $1,261,225 2014 10 0 Jefferson County Other JC Radio Tower X 100 $27,885 2013 $8,000 2,013 0 Jefferson County Other JC Building Department X 1000 $51,090 2013 $17,500 2,013 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Flood Hazard Countywide Grouped by Hazard Score Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #5 X X X X 100 $90,200 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Sewage Treatment Pond X X X X 10307 $50,400 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Sewage Holding Pond X X X X 13509 $46,400 2013 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Sewage Effluent Pump Station X X X X 100 $63,700 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Other Bartow Community Center & Auditorium X X 11232 $1,342,200 2013 $250,000 2,013 1 0 Bartow town Other Bartow Fire Dept & Communications Bldg X X X 64 $17,100 2013 $60,000 2,013 0 Bartow town Other Bartow Museum X 2450 $826,847 2013 2,013 1 0 Wadley city Other Wadley Gym X X 1200 $400,000 2014 0 Louisville city City Hall Louisvill City Hall X 7200 $550,000 2013 $350,000 2,013 10 0 Louisville city Fire Station Louisville Fire Station X 7200 $750,000 2014 $850,000 2,014 4 0 Wadley city Other Glendale Nursing Home X X X X 26500 $1,610,863 2014 $750,000 2,014 120 0 Wrens city Water System Water Booster Station X X 1000 $500,000 2012 0 564,908 $192,698,228 $10,151,900 $650,000 $0 2,414 1,000,445 $307,852,123 $17,274,200 $925,000 $2,000 4,299 Grand Totals - Pre-Disaster Mitigation - Fiscal Year: 2009 - Report created: Aug 24, 2014 - For more information call GEMA Pre-Disaster Mitigation at 1-800-TRY-GEMA Totals for Jefferson County, Hazard Score = 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Jefferson County All Jurisdictions Hazard: Flood Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 25,744 87 0.338% 339,986,035 1,167,819 0.343% 16,930 191 1% Commercial 3,107 0 0.000% 128,821,310 0 0.000% 16,930 0 0% Industrial 369 3 0.813% 228,903,453 976,076 0.426% 1,865 114 6% Agricultural/Forestry 6,789 114 1.679% 495,536,008 8,353,352 1.686% 622 43 7% Religious/Non-profit 680 0 0.000% 28,022,263 0 0.000% 16,930 0 0% Government 587 0 0.000% 48,191,470 0 0.000% 278 0 0% Education 38 0 0.000% 10,745,091 0 0.000% 3,071 0 0% Utilities 49 4 8.163% 117,891,820 3,689,294 3.129% 30 1 3% Total 37,363 208 0.557% 1,398,097,448 14,186,540 1.015% 16,930 349 Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Unincorporated Jefferson County Hazard: Flood Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 14,580 15 0.103% 194,400,125 200,000 0.103% 9,219 48 1% Commercial 911 0 0.000% 41,068,853 0 0.000% 9,219 0 0% Industrial 165 0 0.000% 171,488,863 0 0.000% 781 0 0% Agricultural/Forestry 6,663 87 1.306% 488,564,273 6,379,272 1.306% 586 27 5% Religious/ Non- profit 373 0 0.000% 13,881,963 0 0.000% 9,219 0 0% Government 117 0 0.000% 18,480,838 0 0.000% 79 0 0% Education 22 0 0.000% 9,945,283 0 0.000% 1,259 0 0% Utilities 19 0 0.000% 102,098,505 0 0.000% 12 0 0% Total 22,850 102 0.446% 1,039,928,700 6,579,272 0.633% 9,219 75 Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Avera Hazard: Flood Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 648 0 0.000% 5,033,888 0 0.000% 246 0 0% Commercial 30 0 0.000% 79,148 0 0.000% 246 0 0% Industrial 0 0 0.000% 0 0 0.000% 0 0 0% Agricultural/Forestry 16 0 0.000% 485,968 0 0.000% 4 0 0% Religious/Non-profit 22 0 0.000% 458,000 0 0.000% 246 0 0% Government 26 0 0.000% 198,958 0 0.000% 7 0 0% Education 0 0 0.000% 0 0 0.000% 0 0 0% Utilities 3 0 0.000% 377,345 0 0.000% 2 0 0% Total 745 0 0.000% 6,633,305 0 0.000% 246 0 Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Louisville Hazard: Flood Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Flood Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 3,318 0 0.000% 46,372,040 0 0.000% 2,493 0 0% Commercial 902 0 0.000% 38,884,098 0 0.000% 2,493 0 0% Industrial 24 0 0.000% 1,299,218 0 0.000% 318 0 0% Agricultural/Forestry 23 8 34.783% 675,083 234,811 34.783% 8 0 0% Religious/Non-profit 97 0 0.000% 6,659,340 0 0.000% 2,493 0 0% Government 181 0 0.000% 20,256,798 0 0.000% 100 0 0% Education 3 0 0.000% 55,940 0 0.000% 568 0 0% Utilities 3 1 33.333% 3,894,490 1,298,163 33.333% 6 0 0% Total 4,551 9 0.198% 118,097,005 1,532,975 1.298% 2,493 0 0% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Bartow Hazard: Flood Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Flood Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 533 3 0.563% 6,397,115 36,006 0.563% 286 8 3% Commercial 94 0 0.000% 1,210,733 0 0.000% 286 0 0% Industrial 0 0 0.000% 0 0 0.000% 0 0 0% Agricultural/Forestry 4 2 50.000% 1,977,710 988,855 50.000% 0 0 0% Religious/Non-profit 15 0 0.000% 324,838 0 0.000% 286 0 0% Government 27 0 0.000% 565,448 0 0.000% 7 0 0% Education 0 0 0.000% 0 0 0.000% 0 0 0% Utilities 4 0 0.000% 1,977,710 0 0.000% 2 0 0% Total 677 5 0.739% 12,453,553 1,024,861 8.229% 286 8 Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Stapleton Hazard: Flood Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Flood Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 812 15 1.847% 8,880,363 164,046 1.847% 438 27 6% Commercial 75 0 0.000% 873,823 0 0.000% 438 0 0% Industrial 4 0 0.000% 19,825 0 0.000% 0 0 0% Agricultural/Forestry 6 1 16.667% 1,013,588 168,931 16.667% 4 4 100% Religious/ Non- profit 19 0 0.000% 423,808 0 0.000% 438 0 0% Government 32 0 0.000% 678,190 0 0.000% 12 0 0% Education 9 0 0.000% 180,330 0 0.000% 0 0 0% Utilities 6 0 0.000% 1,013,588 0 0.000% 2 0 0% Total 963 16 1.661% 13,083,513 332,977 2.545% 438 31 Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Wadley Hazard: Flood Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Flood Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 2,852 15 0.526% 33,301,175 175,146 0.526% 2,061 15 1% Commercial 364 0 0.000% 13,931,848 0 0.000% 2,061 0 0% Industrial 104 2 1.923% 36,872,950 709,095 1.923% 454 2 0% Agricultural/Forestry 50 12 24.000% 1,783,253 427,981 24.000% 12 12 100% Religious/ Non- profit 54 0 0.000% 1,726,628 0 0.000% 2,061 0 0% Government 102 0 0.000% 3,002,377 0 0.000% 36 0 0% Education 2 0 0.000% 305,201 0 0.000% 292 0 0% Utilities 10 1 10.000% 4,684,903 468,490 10.000% 3 1 33% Total 3,538 30 0.848% 95,608,333 1,780,712 1.863% 2,061 30 Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Wrens Hazard: Flood Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Flood Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 3,001 39 1.300% 45,601,330 592,620 1.300% 2,187 93 4% Commercial 731 0 0.000% 32,772,810 0 0.000% 2,187 0 0% Industrial 72 1 1.389% 19,222,598 266,981 1.389% 312 112 36% Agricultural/Forestry 27 4 14.815% 1,036,135 153,501 14.815% 8 0 0% Religious/ Non- profit 100 0 0.000% 4,547,688 0 0.000% 2,187 0 0% Government 102 0 0.000% 5,008,863 0 0.000% 37 0 0% Education 2 0 0.000% 258,338 0 0.000% 952 0 0% Utilities 4 2 50.000% 3,845,280 1,922,640 50.000% 3 0 0% Total 4,039 46 1.139% 112,293,040 2,935,742 2.614% 2,187 205 Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- μ 0 4 8 2 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Jefferson County FEMA 100 Year Flood Zone Legend Jefferson County City Limits Flood Zone Highways Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County Flood Plains Georgia Mitigation Information System Score Original Value Description 4 Floodway Floodway (within zone AE) V 1% with Velocity no Base Flood Elevation (BFE) VE 1% with Velocity BFE 3 A 1% Annual Chance no BFE A99 1% Federal flood protection system AE 1% has BFE AH 1% Ponding has BFE AO 1% Sheet Flow has depths AR 1% Federal flood protection system 2 X500 0.2% Annual Chance 1 ANI Area not included in survey D Undetermined but possible 0 UNDES Undesignated X Outside Flood Zones Keysville Midville Vidette Wayne Edge Hill Gibson Mitchell Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Hephzibah Davisboro Harrison Riddleville Sandersville Tennille Map Color Code from GMIS ---PAGE BREAK--- μ 0 0.1 0.2 0.05 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Avera FEMA 100 Year Flood Zone Legend Jefferson County City Limits FEMA Flood Zone Highways Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community μ 0 0.1 0.2 0.05 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Avera FEMA 100 Year Flood Zone Legend Jefferson County City Limits FEMA Flood Zone Highways Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- Avera Flood Plains Georgia Mitigation Information System Score Original Value Description 4 Floodway Floodway (within zone AE) V 1% with Velocity no Base Flood Elevation (BFE) VE 1% with Velocity BFE 3 A 1% Annual Chance no BFE A99 1% Federal flood protection system AE 1% has BFE AH 1% Ponding has BFE AO 1% Sheet Flow has depths AR 1% Federal flood protection system 2 X500 0.2% Annual Chance 1 ANI Area not included in survey D Undetermined but possible 0 UNDES Undesignated X Outside Flood Zones Avera Map Color Code from GMIS ---PAGE BREAK--- μ 0 0.2 0.4 0.1 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Bartow FEMA 100 Year Flood Zone Legend Jefferson County City Limits FEMA Flood Zone Highways Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community μ 0 0.2 0.4 0.1 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Bartow FEMA 100 Year Flood Zone Legend Jefferson County City Limits FEMA Flood Zone Highways Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- Bartow Flood Plains Georgia Mitigation Information System Score Original Value Description 4 Floodway Floodway (within zone AE) V 1% with Velocity no Base Flood Elevation (BFE) VE 1% with Velocity BFE 3 A 1% Annual Chance no BFE A99 1% Federal flood protection system AE 1% has BFE AH 1% Ponding has BFE AO 1% Sheet Flow has depths AR 1% Federal flood protection system 2 X500 0.2% Annual Chance 1 ANI Area not included in survey D Undetermined but possible 0 UNDES Undesignated X Outside Flood Zones Bartow Map Color Code from GMIS ---PAGE BREAK--- μ 0 0.5 1 0.25 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Louisville FEMA 100 Year Flood Zone Legend Jefferson County City Limits FEMA Flood Zone Highways Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community μ 0 0.5 1 0.25 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Louisville FEMA 100 Year Flood Zone Legend Jefferson County City Limits FEMA Flood Zone Highways Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- Louisville Flood Plains Georgia Mitigation Information System Score Original Value Description 4 Floodway Floodway (within zone AE) V 1% with Velocity no Base Flood Elevation (BFE) VE 1% with Velocity BFE 3 A 1% Annual Chance no BFE A99 1% Federal flood protection system AE 1% has BFE AH 1% Ponding has BFE AO 1% Sheet Flow has depths AR 1% Federal flood protection system 2 X500 0.2% Annual Chance 1 ANI Area not included in survey D Undetermined but possible 0 UNDES Undesignated X Outside Flood Zones Louisville Map Color Code from GMIS ---PAGE BREAK--- μ 0 0.25 0.5 0.125 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Stapleton FEMA 100 Year Flood Zone Legend Jefferson County City Limits FEMA Flood Zone Highways Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community μ 0 0.25 0.5 0.125 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Stapleton FEMA 100 Year Flood Zone Legend Jefferson County City Limits FEMA Flood Zone Highways Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- Stapleton Flood Plains Georgia Mitigation Information System Score Original Value Description 4 Floodway Floodway (within zone AE) V 1% with Velocity no Base Flood Elevation (BFE) VE 1% with Velocity BFE 3 A 1% Annual Chance no BFE A99 1% Federal flood protection system AE 1% has BFE AH 1% Ponding has BFE AO 1% Sheet Flow has depths AR 1% Federal flood protection system 2 X500 0.2% Annual Chance 1 ANI Area not included in survey D Undetermined but possible 0 UNDES Undesignated X Outside Flood Zones Stapleton Map Color Code from GMIS ---PAGE BREAK--- μ 0 0.3 0.6 0.15 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Wadley FEMA 100 Year Flood Zone Legend Jefferson County City Limits FEMA Flood Zone Highways Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community μ 0 0.3 0.6 0.15 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Wadley FEMA 100 Year Flood Zone Legend Jefferson County City Limits FEMA Flood Zone Highways Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- Wadley Flood Plains Georgia Mitigation Information System Score Original Value Description 4 Floodway Floodway (within zone AE) V 1% with Velocity no Base Flood Elevation (BFE) VE 1% with Velocity BFE 3 A 1% Annual Chance no BFE A99 1% Federal flood protection system AE 1% has BFE AH 1% Ponding has BFE AO 1% Sheet Flow has depths AR 1% Federal flood protection system 2 X500 0.2% Annual Chance 1 ANI Area not included in survey D Undetermined but possible 0 UNDES Undesignated X Outside Flood Zones Wadley Map Color Code from GMIS ---PAGE BREAK--- μ 0 0.3 0.6 0.15 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Wrens FEMA 100 Year Flood Zone Legend Jefferson County City Limits FEMA Flood Zone Highways Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, i-cubed, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community μ 0 0.3 0.6 0.15 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Wrens FEMA 100 Year Flood Zone Legend Jefferson County City Limits FEMA Flood Zone Highways Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- Wrens Flood Plains Georgia Mitigation Information System Score Original Value Description 4 Floodway Floodway (within zone AE) V 1% with Velocity no Base Flood Elevation (BFE) VE 1% with Velocity BFE 3 A 1% Annual Chance no BFE A99 1% Federal flood protection system AE 1% has BFE AH 1% Ponding has BFE AO 1% Sheet Flow has depths AR 1% Federal flood protection system 2 X500 0.2% Annual Chance 1 ANI Area not included in survey D Undetermined but possible 0 UNDES Undesignated X Outside Flood Zones Wrens Map Color Code from GMIS ---PAGE BREAK--- Dam Failures Dam failures and incidents involve unintended release or surges of impounded water. They can destroy property and cause injury and death While they may involve the total collapse of a dam, that is not always the case. Damaged spillways, overtopping of a dam or other problems may result in a hazardous situation. Dam failures may be caused by structural deficiencies in the dam itself. Dam failures may also come from other factors including but not limited to debris blocking spillways, flooding, earthquakes, improper operation and vandalism. Dam failures are potentially the worst flood events. When a dam fails, a large quantity of water is suddenly released destroying anything in its path and posing a threat to life and property. Dams are classified into three categories: • High Hazard – Dams where failure or disoperation will probably cause loss of human life. • Significant Hazard – Dams where failure or disoperation will probably not result in loss of life, but can cause economic loss, environmental damage, and disruption of lifeline facilities or other concerns. • Low Hazard – Dams where failure or disoperation will probably not result in loss of life and cause only low economic and/or environmental loss. A review of the 2013 National Inventory of Dams shows that Jefferson County has 41 dams with 40 classified as low hazard and 1 classified as high hazard. A high hazard classification is based upon the finding that a probable loss of life would occur in the event of a dam failure. If the 1 high hazard dam fails there is the potential for loss of life and property and economic losses. The remaining 40 dams are low hazard were potential losses are limited to minimal property damage. The potential losses due to dam failure flooding are unknown and cannot be estimated at this time. The GMIS report has critical facilities replacement at more than $307 million with a population of 4,299. The County has population of 16,930 and 37,363 structures/properties valued at less than $1.4 billion at risk of potential loss. (See Appendix A Section II and Appendix ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Wrens Hazard: Dam Failure Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 3,001 3,001 100.000% 45,601,330 45,601,330 100.000% 2,187 2,187 100% Commercial 731 731 100.000% 32,772,810 32,772,810 100.000% 2,187 2,187 100% Industrial 72 72 100.000% 19,222,598 19,222,598 100.000% 312 312 100% Agricultural/Forestry 27 27 100.000% 1,036,135 1,036,135 100.000% 8 8 100% Religious/ Non- profit 100 100 100.000% 4,547,688 4,547,688 100.000% 2,187 2,187 100% Government 102 102 100.000% 5,008,863 5,008,862 100.000% 37 37 100% Education 2 2 100.000% 258,338 258,338 100.000% 952 952 100% Utilities 4 4 100.000% 3,845,280 3,845,280 100.000% 3 3 100% Total 4,039 4,039 100.000% 112,293,040 112,293,039 100.000% 2,187 2,187 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? N 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? N 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? N 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? N 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? N 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? Y ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Wadley Hazard: Dam Failure Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 2,852 2,852 100.000% 33,301,175 33,301,175 100.000% 2,061 2,061 100% Commercial 364 364 100.000% 13,931,848 13,931,848 100.000% 2,061 2,061 100% Industrial 104 104 100.000% 36,872,950 36,872,950 100.000% 454 454 100% Agricultural/Forestry 50 50 100.000% 1,783,253 1,783,253 100.000% 12 12 100% Religious/ Non- profit 54 54 100.000% 1,726,628 1,726,628 100.000% 2,061 2,061 100% Government 102 102 100.000% 3,002,377 3,002,377 100.000% 36 36 100% Education 2 2 100.000% 305,201 305,201 100.000% 292 292 100% Utilities 10 10 100.000% 4,684,903 4,684,903 100.000% 3 3 100% Total 3,538 3,538 100.000% 95,608,333 95,608,333 100.000% 2,061 2,061 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? N 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? N 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? N 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? N 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? N 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? Y ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Unincorporated Jefferson County Hazard: Dam Failure Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 14,580 14,580 100.000% 194,400,125 194,400,125 100.000% 9,219 9,219 100% Commercial 911 911 100.000% 41,068,853 41,068,853 100.000% 9,219 9,219 100% Industrial 165 165 100.000% 171,488,863 171,488,863 100.000% 781 781 100% Agricultural/Forestry 6,663 6,663 100.000% 488,564,273 488,564,273 100.000% 586 586 100% Religious/ Non- profit 373 373 100.000% 13,881,963 13,881,963 100.000% 9,219 9,219 100% Government 117 117 100.000% 18,480,838 18,480,838 100.000% 79 79 100% Education 22 22 100.000% 9,945,283 9,945,283 100.000% 1,259 1,259 100% Utilities 19 19 100.000% 102,098,505 102,098,505 100.000% 12 12 100% Total 22,850 22,850 100.000% 1,039,928,700 1,039,928,700 100.000% 9,219 9,219 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? N 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? N 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? N 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? N 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? N 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? Y ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Stapleton Hazard: Dam Failure Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 812 812 100.000% 8,880,363 8,880,363 100.000% 438 438 100% Commercial 75 75 100.000% 873,823 873,823 100.000% 438 438 100% Industrial 4 4 100.000% 19,825 19,825 100.000% 0 0 100% Agricultural/Forestry 6 6 100.000% 1,013,588 1,013,588 100.000% 4 4 100% Religious/ Non- profit 19 19 100.000% 423,808 423,808 100.000% 438 438 100% Government 32 32 100.000% 678,190 678,190 100.000% 12 12 100% Education 9 9 100.000% 180,330 180,330 100.000% 0 0 100% Utilities 6 6 100.000% 1,013,588 1,013,588 100.000% 2 2 100% Total 963 963 100.000% 13,083,513 13,083,513 100.000% 438 438 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? N 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? N 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? N 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? N 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? N 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? Y ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Louisville Hazard: Dam Failure Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 3,318 3,318 100.000% 46,372,040 46,372,040 100.000% 2,493 2,493 100% Commercial 902 902 100.000% 38,884,098 38,884,098 100.000% 2,493 2,493 100% Industrial 24 24 100.000% 1,299,218 1,299,218 100.000% 318 318 100% Agricultural/Forestry 23 23 100.000% 675,083 675,083 100.000% 8 8 100% Religious/Non-profit 97 97 100.000% 6,659,340 6,659,340 100.000% 2,493 2,493 100% Government 181 181 100.000% 20,256,798 20,256,798 100.000% 100 100 100% Education 3 3 100.000% 55,940 55,940 100.000% 568 568 100% Utilities 3 3 100.000% 3,894,490 3,894,490 100.000% 6 6 100% Total 4,551 4,551 100.000% 118,097,005 118,097,005 100.000% 2,493 2,493 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? N 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? N 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? N 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? N 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? N 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? Y ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Jefferson County All Jurisdictions Hazard: Dam Failure Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 25,744 25,744 100.000% 339,986,035 339,986,035 100.000% 16,930 16,930 100% Commercial 3,107 3,107 100.000% 128,821,310 128,821,310 100.000% 16,930 16,930 100% Industrial 369 369 100.000% 228,903,453 228,903,453 100.000% 1,865 1,865 100% Agricultural/Forestry 6,789 6,789 100.000% 495,536,008 495,536,008 100.000% 622 622 100% Religious/Non-profit 680 680 100.000% 28,022,263 28,022,263 100.000% 16,930 16,930 100% Government 587 587 100.000% 48,191,470 48,191,469 100.000% 278 278 100% Education 38 38 100.000% 10,745,091 10,745,091 100.000% 3,071 3,071 100% Utilities 49 49 100.000% 117,891,820 117,891,820 100.000% 30 30 100% Total 37,363 37,363 100.000% 1,398,097,448 1,398,097,447 100.000% 16,930 16,930 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Bartow Hazard: Dam Failure Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 533 533 100.000% 6,397,115 6,397,115 100.000% 286 286 100% Commercial 94 94 100.000% 1,210,733 1,210,733 100.000% 286 286 100% Industrial 0 0 100.000% - - 100.000% 0 0 100% Agricultural/Forestry 4 4 100.000% 1,977,710 1,977,710 100.000% 0 0 100% Religious/Non-profit 15 15 100.000% 324,838 324,838 100.000% 286 286 100% Government 27 27 100.000% 565,448 565,448 100.000% 7 7 100% Education 0 0 100.000% - - 100.000% 0 0 100% Utilities 4 4 100.000% 1,977,710 1,977,710 100.000% 2 2 100% Total 677 677 100.000% 12,453,553 12,453,553 100.000% 286 286 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? N 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? N 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? N 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? N 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? N 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? Y ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Avera Hazard: Dam Failure Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 648 648 100.000% 5,033,888 5,033,888 100.000% 246 246 100% Commercial 30 30 100.000% 79,148 79,148 100.000% 246 246 100% Industrial 0 0 100.000% 0 0 100.000% 0 0 100% Agricultural/Forestry 16 16 100.000% 485,968 485,968 100.000% 4 4 100% Religious/Non-profit 22 22 100.000% 458,000 458,000 100.000% 246 246 100% Government 26 26 100.000% 198,958 198,958 100.000% 7 7 100% Education 0 0 100.000% 0 0 100.000% 0 0 100% Utilities 3 3 100.000% 377,345 377,345 100.000% 2 2 100% Total 745 745 100.000% 6,633,305 6,633,305 100.000% 246 246 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? N 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? N 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? N 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? N 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? N 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? Y ---PAGE BREAK--- !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v !v!v μ 0 4 8 2 Miles Central Savannah River Area Regional Commission GIS Department 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907-2016 www.csrarc.ga.gov Jefferson County Dam Map Legend !v High Hazard Dam !v Low Hazard Dam Highways ponds Lakes City Limits Jefferson County Streams ---PAGE BREAK--- RecordID Dam_name Other_dam_name River Owner _type Year_com pleted Hazard 7932 HENDERSON LAKE DAM HENDERSON LAKE UNKNOWN P 1957 L 7933 EVANS LAKE DAM EVANS LAKE DAM UNKNOWN P 1961 L 7934 STAPLETON MILLPOND DAM ADAMS FISH POND DUHART CREEK P 19 L 7935 PILCHER LAKE DAM MCDONALDS LAKE JORDAN BRANCH P 197 L 9738 WOMMACK LAKE DAM UNKNOWN P 1962 L 9739 MCNEELY ‐ HANNAH LAKE DAM MCNEELY LAKE DAM UNKNOWN P 1956 L 9740 WEEKS LAKE DAM RHENEY ‐ WEEKS UNKNOWN P 1964 L 9741 LOST LAKE DAM KELLY LAKE DAM MANSON BRANCH P 1966 L 9742 DAVIS LAKE DAM (LOWER) UNKNOWN P 1958 L 9743 CUNNINGHAM CORNER IRRIGATION POND DAM EASTERLIN LAKE DAM UNKNOWN P 1955 L 10038 HADDEN POND DAM CLEAR CREEK P 196 L 10039 NEWBERRY IRRIGATION POND DAM # 1 NEWBERRYS POND DAM UNKNOWN P 1978 L 10040 BATTLE LAKE DAM UNKNOWN P 196 L 10041 SMITH POND DAM SMITH POND DAM WILLIAMSON SWAMP 1954 L 10042 COBB IRRIGATION POND DAM UNKNOWN P 1976 L 10043 BRETT POND DAM THOMAS LAKE DAM UNKNOWN P 1979 L 10044 PENNINGTON IRRIGATION LAKE DAM UNKNOWN P 1976 L 10045 HANCOCK POND DAM UNKNOWN P 195 L 10046 SMITH FARMS IRRIGATION POND DAM SMITH LAKE DAM BAKER BRANCH P 1977 L 10047 ADAMS LAKE DAM UNKNOWN P 1968 L 10243 LAKE RABUN DAM HUBER LAKE DAM K SSITH BRANCH P 1975 L 10244 LAKE MARION DAM DAVIS LAKE DAM SAVANNAH BRACNH P 1946 H 10245 RACHELS MILLPOND DAM MILL CREEK P 1945 L 10342 UNION CAMP LAKE DAM (UPPER) UNKNOWN P L 11146 GAMBREL IRRIGATION POND DAM UNKNOWN P 196 L 11176 UNION CAMP LAKE DAM (LOWER) UNKNOWN P L 11177 DAVIS LAKE DAM (UPPER) UNKNOWN P L 11178 MCDONALDS LAKE DAM UNKNOWN P L ---PAGE BREAK--- 11179 CLARKS MILLPOND DAM DUHART CREEK P L 11180 KELLY S POND DAM BIG CREEK P 191 L 11182 HUBER WRENS PLANT WASTEWATER POND DAM UNKNOWN P 1962 L 11183 ROCKY COMFORT, INC. IRRIGATION DAM GARDNER LAKE DAM UNKNOWN P 1979 L 11184 SMITH POND DAM COAT CREEK P 1954 L 11185 REDFIELD FARMS, INC. IRRIGATION POND DAM SMITH BRANCH P 1977 L 11186 GEORGIA KAOLIN REJECT POND DAM YARA ENGINEERING REJECT POND DAM RAYBURN BRANCH P 1981 L 11187 RADCLIFFE FARM LAKE DAM # 03 UNKNOWN P 1985 L 11188 REDFIELD FARMS, INC. NEW IRRIGATION POND DAM UNKNOWN P 1984 L 11189 NEWBERRY IRRIGATION POND DAM # 2 UNKNOWN P 1981 L 11190 PENNINGTON TAILINGS POND UNKNOWN P 1991 L 11191 RADCLIFFE FARMS LAKE DAM # 02 UNKNOWN P 1985 L 11192 RADCLIFFE FARMS LAKE DAM # 01 UNKNOWN P 1985 L ---PAGE BREAK--- Drought Drought is not spatially defined and has the potential to affect the entire planning area equally. Of the approximate 339,991 acres in the county, 302,033 (88.9%) are dedicated to agricultural and forestry uses. According to the USDA 2012 Census of Agriculture, Jefferson County has 14,847 acres of agricultural land and 17,523 head of livestock. Agricultural losses due to drought have been the primary losses. No critical facilities have sustained any damage or functional downtime due to dry weather conditions. Losses due to drought conditions are primarily agricultural. No critical facilities have sustained any damage or functional downtime due to dry weather conditions. The last drought event in Jefferson County began in January 2012 and ended in October 2012. There have been 25 drought events in the county in the last 64 years with estimated crop losses at $9.7 million. According to the farm subsidies database there has been a total of more than $8.8 million dollars in disaster assistance from 1995-2012 Historical data is only for the county as a whole. A severe, prolonged drought would mainly affect the 88.9% of the county that makes up the timber and agriculture business. This could result in loss of crops, livestock and create the conditions for a major wildfire event. Based on a 20-year hazard cycle history there is a 120% chance of an annual drought event. The chance for an annual drought event is the same for the county as well as all jurisdictions In summary, for Jefferson County as a whole, there are a total of 6,789 agricultural/forestry properties in Jefferson County valued at more than $495 million with a population of 622 and includes 17,523 head of livestock that are at the greatest risk due to a drought event. There is a population of 16,930 and approximately 37,363 structures/properties in the county with a value just more than $1.3 billion which could be affected if wildfires break out as a result of drought conditions. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE PROPDMGEXP CROPDMG REMARKS 7/1/1986 7/31/1986 Drought ‐ Heat 314465.41 Heat, Drought 9/1/1997 9/22/1997 Drought 277777.78 DROUGHT 5/1/1999 8/1/1999 2/1/2000 Drought 0 Rainfall amounts for the month of February were well below normal for most of north and central Georgia. The driest area was across the central portion of the state from Columbus through Macon into the Louisville, Greensboro and Watkinsville areas. Most cooperative observer sites in this area reported less than an inch of rain. The airport at Macon recorded only .37 inches, while Columbus recorded 1.20 inches of rainfall for the month. This was the driest February ever recorded at both locations. Other spotty areas with less than an inch of rain for the month were in the east and south Atlanta metro area, and also in Gilmer county. Most of the rest of north and central Georgia received less than 2 inches of rain for the month, which was less than half the normal. 4/1/2000 Drought 0 Although rainfall amounts in March slowed the deficit across north and central Georgia, April saw a return to the below normal rainfall pattern that had persisted for the better part of 2 years. The Center for Climate Prediction and the U.S. Agriculture Department both indicated a severe drought for nearly all of Georgia except the extreme northern portion. Rainfall amounts in April averaged less than an inch in central Georgia, less than 2 inches in west central Georgia and between 1.7 and 2.6 inches for much of north Georgia except the northwestern counties. Overall rainfall amounts for the past year are on the order of 12 to 15 inches below normal. Long‐term precipitation anomalies since May 1998 show Georgia experiencing the 2nd driest such period statewide with over 20.5 inches below normal. 5/1/2000 Drought 0 The dry conditions, that had persisted for most of a 2 year period, continued through May over north and central Georgia. Rainfall amounts in central Georgia were only about 25 percent of normal, while 50 to 75 percent of normal amounts fell across the north. In Macon, the airport recorded only .30 inch of rain for the entire month, establishing this May as the driest May on record. The previous driest May was in 1936 when only .32 inch of rain fell. In Columbus, only .78 inch of rain was recorded for the month. Across north Georgia, rainfall amounts were around 2 inches, which was still between 2.5 and 3 inches below normal. Rainfall deficits for the year through May for most of north and central Georgia were between 7 and 10 inches. The Center for Climate Prediction and the U.S. Department of Agriculture classified most of central Georgia as being in an extreme drought for May. They classified most of the north as being in a severe drought, except for the northernmost counties which were placed in first stage drought conditions. In Georgia, corn and soybean crops were rated 43 percent poor to very poor, while cotton was rated at 37 percent poor to very poor. Dollar amounts were not available at this stage of the drought, but crops across the state would be in serious trouble without some relief from the dry conditions. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6/1/2000 6/30/2000 Drought 3161855.67 Extremely dry conditions continued across north and central Georgia through the month of June. These same dry conditions had persisted for most of the last 2 years. All rainfall was from spotty convective activity, with no widespread general rains occurring during the month. Most of the convection was concentrated across the southeast parts of WFO Peachtree City's County Warning Area. The west central and north central portions received only 25 to 50 percent of normal rainfall with northwest and east central portions faring better with 50 to 75 percent of normal. At the major airports in north and central Georgia, Atlanta reported 1.11 inches, Athens 1.98 inches, Macon 2.86 inches, and Columbus only 0.51 inches of rain for the month of June. These amounts were 2.45 inches, 1.95 inches, 0.72 inches, and 3.56 inches below normal, respectively. Yearly rainfall totals for most cooperative observer stations in north and central Georgia were between 10 and 15 inches below normal. The 2 year deficit exceeded 20 inches across much of the same area. The center for Climate Prediction and the U.S. Department of Agriculture classified most of central Georgia in an exceptional drought and most of north Georgia in an extreme drought state. The northern most counties were upgraded from a first stage drought to a severe drought status. Water supplies continued to dwindle in most areas. Streamflows were at or below the lowest 10th percentile of the historical distribution for June at 90 percent of Georgia's observing sites. Twenty‐nine percent of Georgia's cotton crop was rated in a poor to very poor condition. University of Georgia cumulative crop damage estimates for the whole state were placed at $689 million dollars, plus another $50 million dollars in increased irrigation costs, for a total estimate of $739 million in losses statewide. Of that total, over $309 million was estimated for the counties in the Peachtree City CWA. Of those counties, Sumter county suffered the most with over $20 million, and Dooly county had almost $16.5 million in losses. 6/1/2000 Drought 6,000,500 7/1/2000 Drought 0 Drought conditions continued during July over most of WFO Peachtree City's County Warning Area. Rainfall amounts were higher in July than in June. However climatological normals also increased during July, so there was still a substantial shortfall from the normal precipitation. Total rainfall for the month was generally in the 2 to 3 inch range, however spotty areas received between 4 and 6 inches, while other areas received an inch or less for the month. The net effect was too little, too late for farmers across North and Central Georgia. As of the end of July, the U.S. Department of Agriculture placed all of the CWA in the range of severe to exceptional drought. The area with the largest departure from normal precipitation during July was a swath from west central Georgia across the state, generally along and south of a line from Atlanta to Athens, and north of a line from Columbus to Macon to Augusta. No new crop damage or loss estimates were available, but the previous estimates in June seem to represent the entire 2000 growing season. That estimate placed the total for Peachtree City's county warning area at $306.7 million. An increase in precipitation toward the latter part of the month, and forecasts for the continued weakening of La Nina. brought hope that drought conditions that had lasted for over 2 years were beginning to ease. The latest 90 day forecasts called for near normal precipitation over the southeastern U.S. ---PAGE BREAK--- 10/1/2000 Drought 0 After a couple of months of relief from the prolonged dry conditions of the past 2 to 3 years, very dry conditions returned to north and central Georgia during October. A strong cold front moved through the state on the 6'th, preceded by a line of thunderstorms. For most locations, this represented the only rain day during the month. Following the cold front, an unseasonably large and cold dome of high pressure settled over the state. A stagnant pattern in the upper‐levels of the atmosphere set up thereafter which allowed the strong surface high to remain over the area for an extended period of time, essentially blocking off any significant Gulf moisture for the remainder of the month. By the end of the month, many locations were nearing records for the longest consecutive number of days without measurable rainfall. Measurable rain fell on only one day at many locations throughout the region, with rainfall less than one inch at most reporting stations. Rainfall deficits exceeding 3 inches were common across most of north Georgia, with rainfall deficits around 2 inches common in the central portion of the state. Of the four major reporting stations in north Georgia, rainfall totals of only 0.23 inch were observed at Athens, 0.87 at Atlanta, 0.62 at Columbus, and 1.08 at Macon, with deficits of 3.05 inches, 2.18 inches, 1.60 inches, and 1.10 inches respectively. 10/1/2001 Drought 0 A very dry weather pattern, which actually began in mid‐August, continued into October. The synoptic pattern was dominated by northwest flow aloft and a series of large Canadian high pressure systems which brought repeated spells of cool, dry weather to Georgia during the month. October was the driest month of the year at all reporting stations and the driest month observed at most locations since October 2000, near the all time record driest for Macon. Less than 1 inch of rainfall was recorded at all of the major airport reporting locations in north and central Georgia with 0.87 inches at Atlanta, 0.82 inches at Columbus, 0.42 inches at Athens, and 0.12 inches at Macon. Normal rainfall values for the month of October are 3.05 inches for Atlanta, 2.22 inches for Columbus, 3.28 inches for Athens, and 2.18 inches for Macon. While all stations have in the past had at least one October with no measurable rainfall, 2001 ranked as the 2nd driest October at Macon since 1931 and the 11th driest at Athens since 1931. What little rain that fell, in all cases less than 1 inch, occurred along and ahead of three fairly strong cold fronts, one passing through the state the 5th and 6th, another on the 13th and 14th, and a third on the 25th. In most cases, rainfall amounts were less than 0.10 inch on these days. Long consecutive stretches of days with no measurable rain were observed, especially during the latter half of the month. Athens and Macon both recorded 17 consecutive days (15th ‐ 31st) with no measurable rainfall. The abnormally dry October, combined with below normal rainfall at most locations in September and October, brought rainfall deficits in excess of 5.00 inches for the year at many locations. By October 31st, the rainfall deficit for Atlanta had exceeded 7.00 inches and in Columbus had exceeded 8.00 inches. This is the 4th consecutive year that rainfall amounts were well below normal for the year at the end of October. However, overall deficits averaged 6 to 8 inches less than at this same time in 2000. ---PAGE BREAK--- 11/1/2001 Drought 0 Very dry conditions, which actually began during the late summer, continued and intensified during November. Many reporting stations in North and Central Georgia received less than 1 inch of rain during November for the second consecutive month. Rainfall during the month was confined to only two principal events, one on the 23rd and a second on the 25th, with most of this rainfall confined to the northwest corner and an area along and south of a line from Columbus to Macon. The area from Atlanta to Athens remained particularly dry during the month. Atlanta recorded its eighth driest November since 1930 with only 0.93 inch of rain falling during the month. This brought the 2‐month total for October and November for Atlanta to only 1.8 inches, creating a deficit of 5.11 inches for the 61‐day period and an annual deficit in excess of 10 inches for the year. There were 28 consecutive days in Atlanta between October 26th and November 22nd on which no measurable rain fell. Athens was even drier during the month, recording only 0.65 of an inch of rain, with a 2‐month total of only 1.07 inch. This value represents a deficit of 5.87 inches for the 60‐day period (October and November) and an annual deficit around 8.0 inches. 12/1/2001 Drought 0 Very dry weather continued throughout December across all of north and central Georgia. December marked the 5th consecutive month of below normal rainfall for many locations, and the third consecutive month of much below normal rainfall for most of north and central Georgia. Significant rain fell on only 4 days at most locations across north and central Georgia, with daily amounts on these days averaging 0.50 inch or less. rainfall amounts for December were generally less than 2 inches. Specifically, rainfall amounts at the major reporting sites included 2.22 inches at Atlanta, 1.81 inches at Columbus, 1.58 inches at Macon, and 1.48 inches for Athens. October through December rainfall ranked among some of the lowest in history. Three month totals included 4.63 inches at Columbus, 4.18 inches at Macon, 4.02 inches at Atlanta, and 2.55 inches for Athens. The 3‐month total of 2.55 inches recorded in Athens was the lowest amount of rainfall ever observed during these three months since 1931. For Atlanta, Macon, and Columbus, the October through December period ranked as the 2nd, 5th, and 3rd driest since 1931. Annual rainfall amounts for 2001 were below normal at many stations for the 4th consecutive year. Annual deficits averaged between 10 and 15 inches. 4/1/2002 Drought 0 A summerlike weather pattern dominated north Georgia much of the month, resulting in several days of above normal temperatures and a lack of organized precipitation producing systems. Most major weather systems were shunted to the northwest of Georgia during the month, resulting in below normal rainfall at most reporting stations. The rainfall deficits were most noticeable across the northern part of the state with Atlanta recording only 1.83 inches of rain during the month, 1.79 inches below normal, and Athens recording only 1.65 inches of rain during the month, which was 1.70 inches below normal. These rainfall deficits continued to add to the overall rainfall deficit which had been prevalent across north and central Georgia since mid‐summer 1998. ---PAGE BREAK--- 8/1/2002 Drought 0 Very dry conditions persisted across much of north and central Georgia during the month. Rainfall totals of less than one inch were observed at several reporting stations. Athens received only 0.14 inch of rain during the month making it the 2nd driest August on record. Atlanta was close with only 0.77 inch of rain, marking it as the 3rd driest August on record. Other locations in north and central Georgia receiving less than one inch of rain for the month included Fairmont with 0.01 inch, Byron with 0.09 inch, Mareitta with 0.26 inch, Peachtree City with 0.35 inch, Atlanta Bolton with 0.51 inch, Experiment (Griffin) with 0.53 inch, Woodbury with 0.59 inch, Gainesville with 0.63 inch, Mullberry Grove with 0.69 inch, Franklin with 0.70 inch, Douglasville with 0.73 inch, Barnesville with 0.79 inch, Mableton with 0.83 inch, Resaca with 0.94 inch, and Fulton County Airport with 0.98 inch. These rainfall amounts average between two and three inches below normal for the month of August. The minimal rainfall amounts simply aggravate the long term drought conditions that had persisted across north and central Georgia since 1998. Annual rainfall deficits were in excess of 10 inches at many locations. The June through August period was ranked for the state as a whole as the driest June through August period in history. Despite these facts, however, as typical for summer in the southeast, some locations received copious amounts of rainfall from isolated thunderstorms, especially in the extreme southeast portion of Middle Georgia and the northwest corner of the state. Lyons received an impressive 9.81 inches of rain during the month, while Cartersville recorded 5.09 inches and Summerville with 6.50 inches. There were several other locations, mainly in the far north part of the state, with rainfall in excess of four inches. Much of this rainfall at these locations was received during a single thunderstorm. 1/1/2003 Drought 0 A large Polar vortex, anchored over the Hudson Bay region of Canada and the northeastern United States, dominated the eastern United States nearly the entire month. As a result, a cold, dry northwest flow prevailed into the southeastern United States throughout the month. Gulf moisture was virtually shut off from weather systems as disturbances moved down into the area from the Northern Plains and Ohio Valley. This pattern resulted in very little precipitation during the first 28 days of the month. During the last three days of the month, a stronger southern jet stream brought rain back into the area. Many locations in north and central Georgia were having their driest January in history prior to the 29th, when 1.00 to 2.00 inches of rain fell across much of the area. For the first 28 days of the month, many areas had not even received 0.50 inch of rain or liquid equivalent of snow. Nonetheless, the lack of rain during the first 28 days left most areas with a substantial rainfall deficit for the month, including Macon with a deficit of 3.55 inches, Atlanta with a deficit of 3.03 inches, Athens with a deficit of 2.95 inches, and Columbus with a deficit of 2.66 inches. January is normally a rainy month for north and central Georgia with normal rainfall amounts in the 4.00 to 5.00 inch range. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3/1/2004 Drought 0 North and Central Georgia endured one of the driest March's on record. With only near to below normal rainfall during January and February, by the end of March, most of the area was classified in a mild drought. Most areas of the state only received around one inch of rain during the entire month. Climatologically, March is the wettest month of the year across most of the area. Columbus recorded their driest March ever since records began in the late 1800s with only 0.56 inch of rain. This is 5.19 inches below normal for the month. The other major reporting sites all reported similar stories. Atlanta received only 1.04 inches of rain, which is 4.34 inches below normal for the month and the third driest March since records began in the late 1800s. Athens recorded only 1.05 inches of rain, which is 3.94 inches below normal for the month and the second driest March on record. For Macon, only 0.43 inches of rain fell during the month, also marking it as the second driest March on record and leaving that site 4.47 inches below normal for the month. In addition, with the exception of Macon, the January through March 2004 period ranked as being in the top driest 10 for this period since records began. 5/1/2007 Drought 0 Drought conditions continued to worsen across the entire state during May. Rainfall deficits across many counties of north and central Georgia continued to grow as well as the number of counties classified in severe and extreme drought conditions. By the end of May 2007, 74 Georgia counties were classified as being in extreme drought, 79 in severe drought, and six in moderate drought. Counties within the Peachtree City, Georgia forecast area classified as being in extreme drought include Bartow, Carroll, Catoosa, Chattooga, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, Dade, DeKalb, Douglas, Fannin, Fayette, Floyd, Fulton, Gilmer, Gordon, Haralson, Harris, Heard, Meriwether, Murray, Paulding, Pickens, Polk, Towns, Troup, Union, Walker and Whitfield. Drought conditions in all remaining counties within the Peachtree City, Georgia forecast area were classified as severe. Rainfall deficits as of May 31, 2007 for some of the major north and central Georgia cities were:Record to near‐record low stream flows were reported by the end of May across the state, including the Coosawattee River near Ellijay, the Oostanaula at Resaca and Rome, the Middle Oconee near Athens, Oconee at Milledgeville and Dublin, and the Ocmulgee near Jackson and at Lumber City. Groundwater levels were dropping statewide. Many wells are approaching their average yearly low water level, normally reached in late summer or early fall. Much of the state remained under level‐2 outdoor water restrictions, with total bans on outdoor watering in some west central Georgia counties. ---PAGE BREAK--- 9/1/2007 Drought 0 Drought conditions continued to worsen through the summer months across north and central Georgia. Many areas of the state were nearing historical drought conditions by the end of the summer. By the end of September, rainfall deficits of 15 to 20 inches across north and west Georgia were common, with many of these areas only having received 30 to 40 percent of normal rainfall. Many lakes were nearing all time record low levels and above ground water supplies were being significantly impacted in many of the larger cities, especially Atlanta.By the end of the summer, crop losses for the state as a whole were estimated at $787.2 million. Approximately 44% or $344 million of this occurred within the Peachtree City, Georgia Weather Forecast Office (WFO) County Warning Area (CWA). Crop losses were greatest for hay and pasture, cotton, peanuts, and corn. The balance was a result of losses to the pecan, tobacco, fruit, and soybean crops. Total economic output impact of the drought for the state was estimated to be $1.3 billion. It is also interesting to note that there were over 14,000 agricultural jobs impacted by the drought conditions. 10/1/2007 Drought 0 Drought conditions persisted and actually worsened during September and October. October, climatologically the driest month of the year anyway, fell even short of normal values at most locations in north and central Georgia. Rainfall deficits of 15 to 20 inches were common in the north and rainfall deficits of 6 to 12 inches were common in central areas. Most areas of the state had only received 30 to 40 percent of normal annual rainfall by the end of October. Many lakes and rivers across north and central Georgia were nearing all time record low levels and above ground water supplies were being significantly impacted in many of the larger cities, especially Atlanta. A number of stream gage locations on creeks and river in north and central Georgia had established new record low water levels during October, including the major river basins of the Coosa, Chattahoochee, upper Oconee, upper Ocmulgee and Flint. Significant water conservation measures were being implemented in many cities across north and central Georgia. 11/1/2007 Drought 0 Drought conditions continued to worsen across north and central Georgia during November. Rainfall deficits continued to grow, with many locations across the north and central part of the state reporting rainfall deficits of 15 to 20 inches. With the exception of the Columbus area and the far northern part of the state, most of north and central Georgia received only about 50 percent of their normal rainfall during the month. Many lake and river levels across north and central Georgia continued near all time record low levels. Above ground water supplies were severely taxed. Lake Lanier in northeast Georgia, the main water source for metropolitan Atlanta reached a new record low level of 1052.63 feet on November 20th. This was the lowest reading recorded since December 24th of 1981, when a level of 1052.66 feet was observed. Lake Allatoona in northwest Georgia and West Point Lake in west central Georgia were also nearing record levels, but fell several feet short of record values. Significant water restrictions remained in place across many counties in north Georgia. Only a minor recovery from the record low stream gage levels recorded on creeks and rivers in north and central Georgia during October was noted, mainly as a result of reduced evaporation rates attending the late fall period. ---PAGE BREAK--- 12/1/2007 Drought 0 Drought conditions persisted and actually continued to worsen during December. This was especially true during the first half of the month when unseasonably warm, dry weather prevailed across the region thanks to a large upper‐level ridge of high pressure. Rainfall deficits continued to grow during this time and lake levels fell to record or near record low levels. Lake Lanier in northeast Georgia and the main water supply for the Atlanta metropolitan area, dropped to its lowest level in history on December 28, 2007 with a reading of 1050.75 feet. New records were set nearly every day after November 20th, when the previous record low‐level of 1052.63 feet was reached. Lake Allatoona in northwest Georgia and West Point Lake in west central Georgia were also near record low levels, but never reached previously established record low levels. While rivers and streams remained near record low levels as well, lower evaporation rates and better overall rainfall allowed minor rises at many locations. Significant water conservation measures were being implemented in many cities across north and central Georgia. 4/15/2011 Drought 0 9/1/2011 Drought 0 Jefferson County declared Primary Natural Disaster Area from summer months of excessive heat and drought, which essentially began April 15, 2011. Crop loss was deemed at the 30 percent or greater level. ---PAGE BREAK--- D0 D1 D2 D3 D4 January, 2000 1 1 1 February, 2000 1 1 1 March, 2000 1 1 1 April, 2000 1 1 1 May, 2000 1 1 1 June, 2000 3 1 1 July, 2000 4 1 1 August, 2000 3 1 1 September, 2000 3 1 1 October, 2000 1 1 1 November, 2000 1 1 1 December, 2000 2 1 1 January, 2001 1 1 1 February, 2001 1 1 1 March, 2001 1 1 1 April, 2001 1 1 1 May, 2001 1 1 1 June, 2001 2 1 1 July, 2001 1 1 1 August, 2001 0 1 September, 2001 October, 2001 1 1 1 November, 2001 2 1 1 December, 2001 2 1 1 January, 2002 2 1 1 February, 2002 3 1 1 March, 2002 3 1 1 April, 2002 2 1 1 May, 2002 3 1 1 June, 2002 3 1 1 July, 2002 3 1 1 August, 2002 3 1 1 September, 2002 4 1 1 October, 2002 2 1 1 November, 2002 2 1 1 December, 2002 1 1 1 January, 2003 0 1 February, 2003 0 1 March, 2003 0 1 April, 2003 May, 2003 June, 2003 Week U.S. Drought Monitor Rating Drought? (Read Only) Extent Calculators (Read Only) ---PAGE BREAK--- D0 D1 D2 D3 D4 Week U.S. Drought Monitor Rating Drought? (Read Only) Extent Calculators (Read Only) July, 2003 August, 2003 September, 2003 October, 2003 November, 2003 December, 2003 January, 2004 February, 2004 March, 2004 April, 2004 0 1 May, 2004 1 1 1 June, 2004 2 1 1 July, 2004 0 1 August, 2004 0 1 September, 2004 October, 2004 November, 2004 December, 2004 January, 2005 February, 2005 March, 2005 April, 2005 May, 2005 June, 2005 July, 2005 August, 2005 September, 2005 October, 2005 November, 2005 December, 2005 January, 2006 February, 2006 March, 2006 1 April, 2006 0 1 May, 2006 0 1 June, 2006 0 1 July, 2006 0 1 August, 2006 1 1 1 September, 2006 1 1 1 October, 2006 1 1 1 November, 2006 1 1 1 December, 2006 ---PAGE BREAK--- D0 D1 D2 D3 D4 Week U.S. Drought Monitor Rating Drought? (Read Only) Extent Calculators (Read Only) January, 2007 1 1 1 February, 2007 March, 2007 April, 2007 0 1 May, 2007 1 1 1 June, 2007 1 1 1 July, 2007 0 1 August, 2007 1 1 1 September, 2007 1 1 1 October, 2007 0 1 November, 2007 1 1 1 December, 2007 2 1 1 January, 2008 2 1 1 February, 2008 2 1 1 March, 2008 1 1 1 April, 2008 0 1 May, 2008 0 1 June, 2008 0 1 July, 2008 2 1 1 August, 2008 2 1 1 September, 2008 2 1 1 October, 2008 3 1 1 November, 2008 2 1 1 December, 2008 1 1 1 January, 2009 February, 2009 March, 2009 1 1 1 April, 2009 May, 2009 June, 2009 July, 2009 0 1 August, 2009 0 1 September, 2009 0 1 October, 2009 November, 2009 December, 2009 January, 2010 February, 2010 March, 2010 April, 2010 May, 2010 June, 2010 ---PAGE BREAK--- D0 D1 D2 D3 D4 Week U.S. Drought Monitor Rating Drought? (Read Only) Extent Calculators (Read Only) July, 2010 August, 2010 September, 2010 October, 2010 0 1 November, 2010 0 1 December, 2010 1 1 1 January, 2011 1 1 1 February, 2011 1 1 1 March, 2011 0 1 April, 2011 1 1 1 May, 2011 1 1 1 June, 2011 2 1 1 July, 2011 3 1 1 August, 2011 3 1 1 September, 2011 3 1 1 October, 2011 3 1 1 November, 2011 3 1 1 December, 2011 2 1 1 January, 2012 3 1 1 February, 2012 3 1 1 March, 2012 3 1 1 April, 2012 3 1 1 May, 2012 4 1 1 June, 2012 3 1 1 July, 2012 3 1 1 August, 2012 3 1 1 September, 2012 2 1 1 October, 2012 3 1 1 November, 2012 2 1 1 December, 2012 3 1 1 January, 2013 3 1 1 February, 2013 3 1 1 March, 2013 2 1 1 April, 2013 0 1 May, 2013 June, 2013 July, 2013 August, 2013 September, 2013 October, 2013 November, 2013 0 1 December, 2013 0 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- D0 D1 D2 D3 D4 Week U.S. Drought Monitor Rating Drought? (Read Only) Extent Calculators (Read Only) January, 2014 February, 2014 March, 2014 April, 2014 May, 2014 June, 2014 July, 2014 August, 2014 September, 2014 October, 2014 November, 2014 December, 2014 Totals by D rating 27 34 21 26 3 Number months in drought status 84 Key: No Number = not rated 0 = D0 - Abnormally Dry 1 = D1 - Moderate Drought 2 = D2 - Severe Drought 3 = D3 - Extreme Drought 4 = D4 - Exceptional Drought "Drought?" and "Extent Calculators" Columns: (Automatically filled in) 0 = Not considered to be in a drought by US Drought Monitor (D0 or no rating) 1 = Considered to be in a drought by US Drought Monitor (D1 or greater) "U.S. Drought Monitor rating" column: (Number correspondes to the rating used by the U.S. Drought Monitoring Service) ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Jefferson County All Jurisdictions Hazard: Drought, Wildfire, Severe Weather, Winter Storm Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 25,744 25,744 100.000% 339,986,035 339,986,035 100.000% 16,930 16,930 100% Commercial 3,107 3,107 100.000% 128,821,310 128,821,310 100.000% 16,930 16,930 100% Industrial 369 369 100.000% 228,903,453 228,903,453 100.000% 1,865 1,865 100% Agricultural/Forestry 6,789 6,789 100.000% 495,536,008 495,536,008 100.000% 622 622 100% Religious/Non-profit 680 680 100.000% 28,022,263 28,022,263 100.000% 16,930 16,930 100% Government 587 587 100.000% 48,191,470 48,191,469 100.000% 278 278 100% Education 38 38 100.000% 10,745,091 10,745,091 100.000% 3,071 3,071 100% Utilities 49 49 100.000% 117,891,820 117,891,820 100.000% 30 30 100% Total 37,363 37,363 100.000% 1,398,097,448 1,398,097,447 100.000% 16,930 16,930 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Unincorporated Jefferson County Hazard: Drought, Wildfire, Severe Weather, Winter Storm Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 14,580 14,580 100.000% 194,400,125 194,400,125 100.000% 9,219 9,219 100% Commercial 911 911 100.000% 41,068,853 41,068,853 100.000% 9,219 9,219 100% Industrial 165 165 100.000% 171,488,863 171,488,863 100.000% 781 781 100% Agricultural/Forestry 6,663 6,663 100.000% 488,564,273 488,564,273 100.000% 586 586 100% Religious/ Non- profit 373 373 100.000% 13,881,963 13,881,963 100.000% 9,219 9,219 100% Government 117 117 100.000% 18,480,838 18,480,838 100.000% 79 79 100% Education 22 22 100.000% 9,945,283 9,945,283 100.000% 1,259 1,259 100% Utilities 19 19 100.000% 102,098,505 102,098,505 100.000% 12 12 100% Total 22,850 22,850 100.000% 1,039,928,700 1,039,928,700 100.000% 9,219 9,219 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Avera Hazard: Drought, Wildfire, Severe Weather, Winter Storm Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 648 648 100.000% 5,033,888 5,033,888 100.000% 246 246 100% Commercial 30 30 100.000% 79,148 79,148 100.000% 246 246 100% Industrial 0 0 100.000% 0 0 100.000% 0 0 100% Agricultural/Forestry 16 16 100.000% 485,968 485,968 100.000% 4 4 100% Religious/Non-profit 22 22 100.000% 458,000 458,000 100.000% 246 246 100% Government 26 26 100.000% 198,958 198,958 100.000% 7 7 100% Education 0 0 100.000% 0 0 100.000% 0 0 100% Utilities 3 3 100.000% 377,345 377,345 100.000% 2 2 100% Total 745 745 100.000% 6,633,305 6,633,305 100.000% 246 246 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Bartow Hazard: Drought, Wildfire, Severe Weather, Winter Storm Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 533 533 100.000% 6,397,115 6,397,115 100.000% 286 286 100% Commercial 94 94 100.000% 1,210,733 1,210,733 100.000% 286 286 100% Industrial 0 0 100.000% - - 100.000% 0 0 100% Agricultural/Forestry 4 4 100.000% 1,977,710 1,977,710 100.000% 0 0 100% Religious/Non-profit 15 15 100.000% 324,838 324,838 100.000% 286 286 100% Government 27 27 100.000% 565,448 565,448 100.000% 7 7 100% Education 0 0 100.000% - - 100.000% 0 0 100% Utilities 4 4 100.000% 1,977,710 1,977,710 100.000% 2 2 100% Total 677 677 100.000% 12,453,553 12,453,553 100.000% 286 286 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Louisville Hazard: Drought, Wildfire, Severe Weather, Winter Storm Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 3,318 3,318 100.000% 46,372,040 46,372,040 100.000% 2,493 2,493 100% Commercial 902 902 100.000% 38,884,098 38,884,098 100.000% 2,493 2,493 100% Industrial 24 24 100.000% 1,299,218 1,299,218 100.000% 318 318 100% Agricultural/Forestry 23 23 100.000% 675,083 675,083 100.000% 8 8 100% Religious/Non-profit 97 97 100.000% 6,659,340 6,659,340 100.000% 2,493 2,493 100% Government 181 181 100.000% 20,256,798 20,256,798 100.000% 100 100 100% Education 3 3 100.000% 55,940 55,940 100.000% 568 568 100% Utilities 3 3 100.000% 3,894,490 3,894,490 100.000% 6 6 100% Total 4,551 4,551 100.000% 118,097,005 118,097,005 100.000% 2,493 2,493 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Stapleton Hazard: Drought, Wildfire, Severe Weather, Winter Storm Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 812 812 100.000% 8,880,363 8,880,363 100.000% 438 438 100% Commercial 75 75 100.000% 873,823 873,823 100.000% 438 438 100% Industrial 4 4 100.000% 19,825 19,825 100.000% 0 0 100% Agricultural/Forestry 6 6 100.000% 1,013,588 1,013,588 100.000% 4 4 100% Religious/ Non- profit 19 19 100.000% 423,808 423,808 100.000% 438 438 100% Government 32 32 100.000% 678,190 678,190 100.000% 12 12 100% Education 9 9 100.000% 180,330 180,330 100.000% 0 0 100% Utilities 6 6 100.000% 1,013,588 1,013,588 100.000% 2 2 100% Total 963 963 100.000% 13,083,513 13,083,513 100.000% 438 438 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Wadley Hazard: Drought, Wildfire, Severe Weather, Winter Storm Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 2,852 2,852 100.000% 33,301,175 33,301,175 100.000% 2,061 2,061 100% Commercial 364 364 100.000% 13,931,848 13,931,848 100.000% 2,061 2,061 100% Industrial 104 104 100.000% 36,872,950 36,872,950 100.000% 454 454 100% Agricultural/Forestry 50 50 100.000% 1,783,253 1,783,253 100.000% 12 12 100% Religious/ Non- profit 54 54 100.000% 1,726,628 1,726,628 100.000% 2,061 2,061 100% Government 102 102 100.000% 3,002,377 3,002,377 100.000% 36 36 100% Education 2 2 100.000% 305,201 305,201 100.000% 292 292 100% Utilities 10 10 100.000% 4,684,903 4,684,903 100.000% 3 3 100% Total 3,538 3,538 100.000% 95,608,333 95,608,333 100.000% 2,061 2,061 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #3a Inventory of Assets Jurisdiction: Wrens Hazard: Drought, Wildfire, Severe Weather, Winter Storm Task A. Determine the proportion of buildings, the value of buildings, and the population in your community or state that are located in hazard areas. Number of Structures Value of Structures Number of People Type of Structure (Occupancy Class) # in Community of State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area $ in Community or State $ in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area # in Community or State # in Hazard Area % in Hazard Area Residential 3,001 3,001 100.000% 45,601,330 45,601,330 100.000% 2,187 2,187 100% Commercial 731 731 100.000% 32,772,810 32,772,810 100.000% 2,187 2,187 100% Industrial 72 72 100.000% 19,222,598 19,222,598 100.000% 312 312 100% Agricultural/Forestry 27 27 100.000% 1,036,135 1,036,135 100.000% 8 8 100% Religious/ Non- profit 100 100 100.000% 4,547,688 4,547,688 100.000% 2,187 2,187 100% Government 102 102 100.000% 5,008,863 5,008,862 100.000% 37 37 100% Education 2 2 100.000% 258,338 258,338 100.000% 952 952 100% Utilities 4 4 100.000% 3,845,280 3,845,280 100.000% 3 3 100% Total 4,039 4,039 100.000% 112,293,040 112,293,039 100.000% 2,187 2,187 100% Task B. Determine whether (and where) you want to collect additional inventory data. Y N 1. Do you know where the greatest damages may occur in your area? Y 2. Do you know whether your critical facilities will be operational after a hazard event? Y 3. Is there enough data to determine which assets are subject to the greatest potential damages? Y 4. Is there enough data to determine whether significant elements of the community are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 5. Is there enough data to determine whether certain areas of historic, environmental, political, or cultural significance are vulnerable to potential hazards? Y 6. Is there concern about a particular hazard because of its severity, repetitiveness, or likelihood of occurrence? Y 7. Is additional data needed to justify the expenditure of community or state funds for mitigation initiatives? N ---PAGE BREAK--- Drought Severity D0 - Abnormally Dry D1 Drought - Moderate D2 Drought - Severe D3 Drought - Extreme D4 Drought - Exceptional Week Nothing D0-D4 D1-D4 D2-D4 D3-D4 D4 January 8, 2013 2.36 97.64 87.21 63.68 36.61 10.25 January 1, 2013 1.63 98.37 89.49 64.87 36.96 10.25 December 25, 2012 0.69 99.31 90.61 68.55 37.41 13.53 December 18, 2012 3.24 96.76 88.18 69.78 38.48 13.53 December 11, 2012 3.24 96.76 88.18 69.31 38.48 13.53 December 4, 2012 3.25 96.75 88.10 68.41 37.90 13.53 November 27, 2012 3.92 96.08 86.93 64.73 34.15 13.53 November 20, 2012 6.93 93.07 71.79 53.10 31.81 13.53 November 13, 2012 9.02 90.98 59.92 49.22 27.24 13.53 November 6, 2012 11.09 88.91 55.17 42.56 26.70 13.98 October 30, 2012 19.23 80.77 53.00 40.78 23.25 10.03 October 23, 2012 39.60 60.40 47.11 40.12 23.25 10.03 October 16, 2012 40.73 59.27 46.56 39.53 22.69 9.93 October 9, 2012 44.69 55.31 45.58 37.07 21.78 9.03 October 2, 2012 42.42 57.58 47.77 38.67 21.78 9.03 September 25, 2012 37.30 62.70 52.44 42.66 34.04 17.18 September 18, 2012 37.30 62.70 52.44 42.66 33.74 16.14 September 11, 2012 37.30 62.70 52.44 42.66 33.74 16.88 September 4, 2012 38.07 61.93 52.44 42.66 33.74 16.88 August 28, 2012 37.76 62.24 52.85 44.03 34.36 16.88 August 21, 2012 31.03 68.97 57.36 45.36 37.67 16.98 August 14, 2012 30.90 69.10 57.36 45.36 37.67 16.98 August 7, 2012 21.82 78.18 66.64 54.41 40.24 24.23 July 31, 2012 18.57 81.43 71.38 56.47 40.95 24.57 July 24, 2012 18.45 81.55 71.38 56.47 40.95 23.43 July 17, 2012 17.09 82.91 71.46 55.40 37.90 21.19 July 10, 2012 12.29 87.71 75.71 59.14 38.44 21.73 July 3, 2012 13.82 86.18 74.86 59.14 37.24 19.98 June 26, 2012 13.91 86.09 67.20 54.97 31.72 19.98 June 19, 2012 15.67 84.33 70.19 56.76 26.75 13.82 June 12, 2012 11.48 88.52 78.80 65.41 26.37 13.21 June 5, 2012 10.49 89.51 82.65 68.45 49.97 26.43 May 29, 2012 7.54 92.46 83.61 75.12 58.37 26.92 ---PAGE BREAK--- May 22, 2012 7.54 92.46 86.05 79.30 67.95 28.31 May 15, 2012 7.54 92.46 86.05 80.85 69.35 28.44 May 8, 2012 3.51 96.49 88.24 83.05 70.89 25.81 May 1, 2012 3.50 96.50 88.56 84.28 70.94 25.85 April 24, 2012 7.11 92.89 84.28 79.01 66.35 20.15 April 17, 2012 4.39 95.61 84.94 79.01 66.35 20.15 April 10, 2012 4.52 95.48 84.22 77.66 63.07 11.32 April 3, 2012 8.30 91.70 83.12 77.59 57.19 5.61 March 27, 2012 8.30 91.70 83.12 77.59 57.16 5.57 March 20, 2012 9.28 90.72 83.12 77.59 57.16 5.57 March 13, 2012 12.49 87.51 83.12 77.48 57.16 5.57 March 6, 2012 12.49 87.51 83.12 77.48 57.16 5.57 February 28, 2012 12.49 87.51 83.12 77.55 69.01 30.35 February 21, 2012 12.83 87.17 83.12 77.55 69.01 30.35 February 14, 2012 13.88 86.12 83.12 77.55 69.01 34.06 February 7, 2012 14.41 85.59 83.07 77.55 68.97 29.54 January 31, 2012 14.41 85.59 83.07 77.34 67.38 16.52 January 24, 2012 14.41 85.59 83.07 77.34 67.38 4.34 January 17, 2012 12.21 87.79 85.28 82.55 74.99 4.48 January 10, 2012 12.07 87.93 85.36 81.00 63.92 0.00 January 3, 2012 12.07 87.93 85.36 81.00 63.92 0.00 Week Nothing D0-D4 D1-D4 D2-D4 D3-D4 D4 January 3, 2012 12.07 87.93 85.36 81.00 63.92 0.00 February 7, 2012 14.41 85.59 83.07 77.55 68.97 29.54 ---PAGE BREAK--- Week Nothing D0-D4 D1-D4 D2-D4 D3-D4 D4 February 14, 2012 13.88 86.12 83.12 77.55 69.01 34.06 March 13, 2012 12.49 87.51 83.12 77.48 57.16 5.57 Week Nothing D0-D4 D1-D4 D2-D4 D3-D4 D4 February 21, 2012 12.83 87.17 83.12 77.55 69.01 30.35 March 27, 2012 8.30 91.70 83.12 77.59 57.16 5.57 ---PAGE BREAK--- Week Nothing D0-D4 D1-D4 D2-D4 D3-D4 D4 April 3, 2012 8.30 91.70 83.12 77.59 57.19 5.61 May 1, 2012 3.50 96.50 88.56 84.28 70.94 25.85 Week Nothing D0-D4 D1-D4 D2-D4 D3-D4 D4 May 8, 2012 3.51 96.49 88.24 83.05 70.89 25.81 June 5, 2012 10.49 89.51 82.65 68.45 49.97 26.43 ---PAGE BREAK--- Week Nothing D0-D4 D1-D4 D2-D4 D3-D4 D4 June 12, 2012 11.48 88.52 78.80 65.41 26.37 13.21 July 10, 2012 12.29 87.71 75.71 59.14 38.44 21.73 Week Nothing D0-D4 D1-D4 D2-D4 D3-D4 D4 June 19, 2012 15.67 84.33 70.19 56.76 26.75 13.82 July 3, 2012 13.82 86.18 74.86 59.14 37.24 19.98 ---PAGE BREAK--- Week Nothing D0-D4 D1-D4 D2-D4 D3-D4 D4 July 10, 2012 12.29 87.71 75.71 59.14 38.44 21.73 August 7, 2012 21.82 78.18 66.64 54.41 40.24 24.23 Week Nothing D0-D4 D1-D4 D2-D4 D3-D4 D4 August 14, 2012 30.90 69.10 57.36 45.36 37.67 16.98 September 11, 2012 37.30 62.70 52.44 42.66 33.74 16.88 ---PAGE BREAK--- Week Nothing D0-D4 D1-D4 D2-D4 D3-D4 D4 September 18, 2012 37.30 62.70 52.44 42.66 33.74 16.14 October 16, 2012 40.73 59.27 46.56 39.53 22.69 9.93 Week Nothing D0-D4 D1-D4 D2-D4 D3-D4 D4 October 23, 2012 39.60 60.40 47.11 40.12 23.25 10.03 November 20, 2012 6.93 93.07 71.79 53.10 31.81 13.53 ---PAGE BREAK--- Week Nothing D0-D4 D1-D4 D2-D4 D3-D4 D4 November 27, 2012 3.92 96.08 86.93 64.73 34.15 13.53 December 25, 2012 0.69 99.31 90.61 68.55 37.41 13.53 ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Wildfire Jefferson County is comprised of 339,991 acres in the county. There are 302,033 (88.9%) acres dedicated to agricultural and forestry uses. Given the right weather conditions and variables, wildfire, due to natural causes, creates a potential threat to the lives of residents and property in the planning area. The NCDC has never reported a significant wildfire event in Jefferson County. The committee reviewed historical data from the Georgia Forestry Commission, which is not found in the NCDC database, to research wildfire events in Jefferson County. The GFC provides wildfire data on man-made and natural wildfire occurrences for the county as a whole and not for individual jurisdictions. This plan will address only natural disasters. According to Georgia Forestry data, from 1957 to 2013, there have been 2,814 fire events burning a total of 15,997 acres for an average extent of 5.68 acres. Of these 2,814 fire events 168 were a result of lightning strikes that burned 1,505 acres. Based on best available data 168 wildfire events as a result of lightning occurred in the unincorporated areas of the county. While data was collected looking at 57 years of data, frequency rate was calculated using a 20-year hazard cycle per guidance from GEMA. Based on a 20-year hazard cycle there is a 455% chance of an annual wildfire due to a lightning strike or statistically the county can expect 4.5 wildfires as a result of lightning annually. The GMIS has 33 critical facilities with a hazard score of two (low probability) and 34 with a hazard score of one (very low probability). These 77 critical facilities with a wildfire hazard score greater than zero have an estimated potential loss of more than $192 million. The loss for all critical facilities is $307,852,123. According to FEMA Worksheet #3a there are 37,363 structures/properties with a population of 16,930 with a value of more than $1.3 billion worth of assets countywide. If a wildfire started, it is not likely that all of these structures/properties would be affected. ---PAGE BREAK--- Total LIGHT MACHI CAMP SMOKE DEBRI ARSON RAIL CHILD MISC 1957 41 0 1 6 8 23 0 0 0 3 1958 44 1 3 12 10 10 5 0 0 3 1959 35 0 1 3 5 18 2 0 0 6 1960 55 1 2 4 12 28 1 0 0 7 1961 60 0 3 8 11 32 1 1 0 4 1962 49 5 3 0 16 24 1 0 0 0 1963 47 0 4 0 18 22 0 3 0 0 1964 40 0 5 0 14 20 1 0 0 0 1965 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1966 76 0 2 0 17 28 27 2 0 0 1967 54 0 6 0 14 18 15 1 0 0 1968 53 1 5 0 7 30 7 3 0 0 1969 51 2 4 0 14 23 3 5 0 0 1970 39 4 3 1 4 24 1 2 0 0 1971 29 0 1 0 3 18 3 4 0 0 1972 45 2 2 0 10 24 5 2 0 0 1973 53 1 2 0 10 26 12 2 0 0 1974 59 1 5 0 7 32 8 6 0 0 1975 45 1 5 0 5 22 8 1 2 1 1976 61 3 11 0 3 37 5 0 2 0 1977 51 5 10 0 9 21 1 0 1 4 1978 54 2 9 0 6 31 3 0 0 3 1979 43 0 3 1 10 22 7 0 0 0 1980 46 2 4 1 9 27 1 0 0 2 1981 61 1 6 0 5 33 8 0 2 6 1982 24 0 4 0 5 11 1 0 0 3 1983 57 3 29 1 3 17 1 0 0 3 1984 43 0 9 0 9 22 0 0 0 3 1985 58 2 2 0 13 30 2 4 1 4 1986 44 10 5 1 7 12 0 0 2 7 1987 55 8 2 0 13 22 1 1 0 8 1988 39 2 0 0 4 25 1 0 3 4 1989 24 0 0 0 6 14 1 0 1 2 1990 51 4 1 0 9 19 2 0 3 13 ---PAGE BREAK--- Total LIGHT MACHI CAMP SMOKE DEBRI ARSON RAIL CHILD MISC 1991 35 0 1 0 2 22 5 3 0 2 1992 20 1 0 0 0 11 4 0 0 4 1993 62 15 6 0 4 25 1 0 3 8 1994 33 1 2 0 5 18 4 0 1 2 1995 39 5 0 0 6 20 0 0 2 6 1996 44 3 4 0 7 26 1 0 0 3 1997 40 1 4 0 3 23 4 0 0 5 1998 34 4 4 0 6 17 2 0 0 1 1999 69 3 3 1 13 28 15 0 1 5 2000 34 5 6 0 2 12 1 0 1 7 2001 39 2 5 0 5 20 0 0 2 5 2002 56 14 4 1 3 15 3 0 1 15 2003 13 1 1 0 0 9 0 0 0 2 2004 69 2 13 0 1 41 1 0 3 8 2005 72 3 26 0 0 28 0 1 2 12 2006 101 5 23 2 4 47 1 1 6 12 2007 92 7 19 2 0 38 9 1 3 13 2008 74 6 18 0 2 38 0 0 3 7 2009 41 4 6 0 0 26 1 0 1 3 2010 60 4 10 3 0 28 1 0 5 9 2011 112 13 17 2 2 42 0 1 13 22 2012 48 8 5 0 0 20 0 2 3 10 2013 41 0 5 1 0 26 1 2 1 5 2014 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2773 168 ---PAGE BREAK--- Total LIGHT MACHI CAMP SMOKE DEBRI ARSON RAIL CHILD MISC CY 1957 413.41 0 11 67.1 194.21 130.3 0.00 0 0.00 10.8 1958 533.80 10.14 97.12 115.81 56.83 143.84 81.72 0.00 0.00 28.34 1959 443.74 0.00 5.00 131.61 21.89 179.95 3.79 0.00 0.00 101.50 1960 543.54 19.04 0.92 41.78 100.20 236.32 0.67 0.00 0.00 144.61 1961 420.30 0.00 20.77 38.62 59.80 290.24 0.81 1.89 0.00 8.17 1962 412.22 16.59 12.05 0.00 78.88 268.38 36.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 1963 201.70 0.00 13.48 0.00 67.97 107.82 0.00 12.43 0.00 0.00 1964 218.27 0.00 39.95 0.00 95.85 57.64 24.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 1965 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1966 747.03 0.00 1.24 0.00 159.08 117.98 461.23 7.50 0.00 0.00 1967 315.77 0.00 12.33 0.00 60.80 161.70 48.16 32.78 0.00 0.00 1968 262.85 7.91 11.26 0.00 27.02 126.85 82.25 7.56 0.00 0.00 1969 259.42 1.38 28.18 0.00 62.50 126.13 16.24 24.99 0.00 0.00 1970 139.94 28.19 12.45 9.27 15.67 70.51 1.47 2.38 0.00 0.00 1971 102.15 0.00 0.94 0.00 13.31 59.94 25.69 2.27 0.00 0.00 1972 140.04 4.66 2.92 0.00 41.36 56.16 32.56 2.38 0.00 0.00 1973 237.89 4.76 1.35 0.00 83.68 131.67 12.87 3.56 0.00 0.00 1974 222.75 8.21 13.63 0.00 48.98 125.09 20.92 5.92 0.00 0.00 1975 130.91 33.32 11.87 0.00 11.83 45.55 22.13 4.51 0.14 1.56 1976 205.18 9.48 21.72 0.00 9.67 143.90 19.90 0.00 0.51 0.00 1977 232.25 63.11 69.93 0.00 34.14 45.11 2.31 0.00 11.22 6.43 1978 217.14 2.34 20.38 0.00 8.18 172.47 2.26 0.00 0.00 11.51 1979 161.73 0.00 1.78 0.07 20.91 129.41 9.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 1980 392.81 3.42 5.27 0.13 39.39 336.93 5.22 0.00 0.00 2.45 1981 210.83 5.16 5.09 0.00 8.04 145.57 15.88 0.00 2.02 29.07 1982 92.61 0.00 44.51 0.00 11.66 17.11 2.71 0.00 0.00 16.62 1983 183.74 15.41 35.04 0.93 1.52 123.79 1.35 0.00 0.00 5.70 1984 183.64 0.00 55.92 0.00 19.51 32.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 76.01 1985 346.92 62.60 4.35 0.00 69.15 105.26 11.64 64.19 1.12 28.61 ---PAGE BREAK--- Total LIGHT MACHI CAMP SMOKE DEBRI ARSON RAIL CHILD MISC 1986 161.64 47.07 9.58 0.84 31.27 48.48 0.00 0.00 7.88 16.52 1987 158.35 36.48 9.40 0.00 50.46 36.05 0.26 0.45 0.00 25.25 1988 177.73 23.70 0.00 0.00 9.32 129.83 2.94 0.00 5.30 6.64 1989 99.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.55 55.30 0.00 0.00 0.45 3.84 1990 186.05 37.45 0.12 0.00 36.95 47.92 0.83 0.00 5.58 57.20 1991 295.07 0.00 0.79 0.00 12.65 114.22 82.22 1.77 0.00 83.42 1992 182.20 1.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.98 143.91 0.00 0.00 6.57 1993 372.05 196.21 12.26 0.00 5.76 147.60 0.00 0.00 1.81 8.41 1994 143.15 47.05 36.19 0.00 13.49 43.24 0.34 0.00 2.08 0.76 1995 109.18 21.86 0.00 0.00 26.32 37.78 0.00 0.00 6.13 17.09 1996 173.59 0.79 8.18 0.00 16.76 69.27 1.89 0.00 0.00 76.70 1997 202.84 0.66 20.62 0.00 32.79 100.43 20.09 0.00 0.00 28.25 1998 181.56 33.69 10.30 0.00 12.58 119.54 4.64 0.00 0.00 0.81 1999 241.71 35.06 2.05 0.00 74.80 105.67 18.94 0.00 1.50 3.69 1987 158.35 36.48 9.40 0.00 50.46 36.05 0.26 0.45 0.00 25.25 1988 177.73 23.70 0.00 0.00 9.32 129.83 2.94 0.00 5.30 6.64 1989 99.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 38.43 55.30 1.12 0.00 0.45 3.84 1990 186.05 37.45 0.12 0.00 36.95 47.92 25.28 0.00 5.58 32.75 1991 295.07 0.00 0.79 0.00 12.65 114.22 82.22 1.77 0.00 83.42 1992 182.20 1.74 0.00 0.00 0.00 29.98 143.91 0.00 0.00 6.57 1993 372.05 196.21 12.26 0.00 5.76 147.60 0.03 0.00 1.81 8.38 1994 143.15 47.05 36.19 0.00 12.48 43.24 1.59 0.00 1.84 0.76 1995 109.18 21.86 0.00 0.00 26.32 37.78 0.00 0.00 6.13 17.09 1996 173.59 0.79 8.18 0.00 16.76 69.27 1.89 0.00 0.00 76.70 1997 202.84 0.66 20.62 0.00 32.79 100.43 20.09 0.00 0.00 28.25 1998 181.56 33.69 10.30 0.00 12.58 119.54 4.64 0.00 0.00 0.81 1999 326.61 61.10 4.96 0.60 78.48 126.41 47.12 0.00 0.68 7.26 2000 262.55 24.48 108.05 0.00 3.31 93.52 0.10 0.00 0.56 32.53 2001 221.93 64.91 38.52 0.00 3.77 100.06 0.00 0.00 4.70 9.97 2002 333.93 55.29 22.82 11.22 10.18 79.59 5.32 0.00 0.11 149.40 2003 37.01 3.10 2.41 0.00 0.00 29.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.41 ---PAGE BREAK--- Total LIGHT MACHI CAMP SMOKE DEBRI ARSON RAIL CHILD MISC 2004 245.47 19.13 35.05 0.00 1.40 182.92 0.15 0.00 3.72 3.10 2005 171.89 0.67 42.59 0.00 0.00 86.36 0.00 9.30 2.36 30.61 2006 233.34 4.20 98.00 1.56 5.88 93.72 0.01 0.22 0.90 28.85 2007 223.88 19.86 42.55 2.91 0.00 60.81 40.12 0.37 1.67 55.59 2008 234.22 7.66 30.94 0.00 3.33 178.97 0.00 0.00 0.97 12.35 2009 137.13 0.74 9.16 0.00 0.00 123.47 0.52 0.00 0.03 3.21 2010 165.06 9.01 6.26 20.58 0.00 122.42 0.20 0.00 1.50 5.09 2011 266.61 34.18 96.63 0.52 0.02 106.03 0.00 1.90 4.77 22.56 2012 99.05 23.06 2.17 0.00 0.00 45.34 0.00 4.13 0.58 23.77 2013 100.80 0.00 7.65 0.01 0.00 69.44 0.79 7.64 2.30 12.97 15997.23 1504.50 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Jefferson County Courthouse Jefferson County Courthouse X X 6065 $5,147,708 2013 $125,000 2,013 2 Jefferson County Courthouse Jefferson County Magistrate and Juvenile Court X 22000 $24,001,242 2013 20 2 Wadley city City Hall Wadley City Hall X X 3645 $1,500,000 2014 $250,000 2,014 5 2 Wrens city Other Wrens Community Center X 3400 $500,000 2014 $50,000 20 2 Wrens city City Hall Wrens City Hall X X 7500 $1,125,000 2013 $150,000 10 2 Wrens city Library Wrens Old Library Building X X X 3000 $625,000 2013 $549,200 2,013 2 Jefferson County Other Hardeman Building (Swann) X X X 8278 $250,000 2013 $17,000 2,013 1 2 Jefferson County County Jail Old County Jail/IT/Purchasing X X X 7742 $500,000 2013 $28,000 2,013 1 2 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Chamber of Commerce/Murphy House X X 3281 $361,433 2013 $122,700 2,013 8 2 Jefferson County Library Jefferson County Library X 5000 $66,085 2013 $848,000 2,013 10 2 Jefferson County Emergency Services Lions Club Evac. Center X X X 1000 $12,000 2013 2 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Commissioners Office/Long House X 3080 $339,300 2013 $110,300 2,013 30 2 Jefferson County Emergency Services Jefferson County Armory Transit EMA X 14040 $2,380,171 2013 $724,500 2,013 10 2 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Senior Center X X X 4924 $586,170 2013 $86,000 2,013 40 2 Wadley city Other Physicans Health Group Wadley X 2318 $405,650 2013 $250,000 2,013 10 2 Wrens city Other Physicians Health Group Wrens X X 5802 $1,015,350 2013 $500,000 2,013 20 2 Louisville city City Hall Louisville OLD City Hall X 10000 $500,000 2006 2 Louisville city Water System Louisville Water Works X X X 2400 $4,425,000 2014 2 Louisville city Water System City of Louisville Water Tank X X 100 $500,000 2006 2 Louisville city Other Market House X X 600 $100,000 2013 2 Jefferson County Elementary School Carver Elementary X X 6600 $12,750,000 2013 $510,000 2,013 292 2 Reporting for Wildfire Hazard Countywide Grouped by Hazard Score ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wildfire Hazard Countywide Grouped by Hazard Score Jefferson County Elementary School Louisville Academy Elementary X X X 25047 $15,250,000 2013 $610,000 2,013 568 2 Jefferson County Middle School Wrens Middle School X X 59902 $17,000,000 2013 $680,000 2,013 315 2 Wrens city Other Wrens Medical Center X X 400 $875,000 2014 $200,000 20 2 Wadley city Adult Edu. Center Wadley Community Complex X X X 6000 $700,000 2014 2 Wadley city Library Wadley Public Library X X 3114 $510,000 2013 $538,200 2,013 5 2 Wadley city Water System Wadley Elevated Water Tank X X 100 $650,000 2013 2 Wadley city Other Glendale Nursing Home X X X X 26500 $1,610,863 2014 $750,000 2,014 120 2 Wadley city Other Wadley Gym X X 1200 $400,000 2014 2 Louisville city City Hall Louisvill City Hall X 7200 $550,000 2013 $350,000 2,013 10 2 Louisville city Fire Station Louisville Fire Station X 7200 $750,000 2014 $850,000 2,014 4 2 Jefferson County Other JC Radio Tower X 100 $27,885 2013 $8,000 2,013 2 Jefferson County Other JC Building Department X 1000 $51,090 2013 $17,500 2,013 2 258,538 $95,464,947 $8,324,400 $0 $0 1,519 Jefferson County Other JC Recreation Dept X 1867 $1,300,621 2013 $29,600 2,013 1 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant McBride Lift Station X X 100 $48,750 2013 1 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant Hillcrest Station X X 100 $45,700 2013 1 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant US # 1 Bypass Lift Station X X 100 $47,500 2013 1 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Sewage Effluent Pump Station X X X X 100 $63,700 2013 $0 1 Bartow town Other Bartow Community Center & Auditorium X X 11232 $1,342,200 2013 $250,000 2,013 1 1 Totals for Jefferson County, Hazard Score = 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wildfire Hazard Countywide Grouped by Hazard Score Bartow town Other Bartow Fire Dept & Communications Bldg X X X 64 $17,100 2013 $60,000 2,013 1 Bartow town Other Bartow Museum X 2450 $826,847 2013 2,013 1 1 Wrens city Other Ka-Min #2 X X X 1955 $250,000 2014 1 Avera city Water System Avera Water Tank X X 100 $325,000 2013 1 Avera city Fire Station Avera Fire Station X 4250 $100,000 2013 $200,000 2,013 1 Wrens city Water System Water Booster Station X X 1000 $500,000 2012 1 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #4 X X X X 100 $60,500 2013 $0 1 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #5 X X X X 100 $90,200 2013 $0 1 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Sewage Treatment Pond X X X X 10307 $50,400 2013 $0 1 Wrens city Other KA-MIN #1 X X X X X 10 $250,000 2014 1 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Stephens St Lift Station X X 100 $350,000 2014 1 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Waynesboro Highway Lift Station X X 100 $400,000 2014 1 Bartow town City Hall Bartow City Hall X X X X 1920 $209,300 2013 $53,500 2,013 3 1 Bartow town Fire Station Bartow Fire Dept and Emergency Shelter X X X X 7500 $330,630 2013 $38,500 2,013 1 1 Bartow town Water System Bartow Water Tower X X X X 100 $393,000 2013 $0 1 Bartow town Water System Bartow Water Well X X X X 275 $111,800 2013 $0 1 Bartow town Water System Bartow Water Well #2 X X X X 275 $119,700 2013 $0 1 Jefferson County Middle School Louisville Middle School X X 81642 $23,500,000 2013 $940,000 2,013 354 1 Jefferson County High School, Public Jefferson County High School X X X 179142 $55,000,000 2013 $2,200,000 2,013 937 1 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Bus Shop X 4920 $750,000 2013 $140,000 2,013 5 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wildfire Hazard Countywide Grouped by Hazard Score Jefferson County Public Vocational Technical School Sandersville Tech X X X 10000 $1,930,505 2013 75 1 Louisville city Water System Louisville Water Tower 100 $712,500 2014 1 Louisville city Water System Louisville City WaterTower X X X 100 $950,000 2014 1 Louisville city Airport Louisville City Airport X X 3200 $543,665 2013 1 Louisville city Other OCI Nursing Home X 45062 $5,000,000 2013 225 1 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X 150 $625,000 2014 1 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 64 $75,000 2014 $25,000 1 Avera city City Hall Avera City Hall X 1000 $312,500 2014 $200,000 2,014 1 1 369,485 $96,632,118 $4,136,600 $0 $0 1,603 Stapleton city City Hall Stapleton City Hall & Emergency Shelter X 3000 $383,700 2012 $30,000 2,012 $150,000 2 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X X 200 $625,000 2014 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 144 $300,000 2014 $50,000 0 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Wrens Sewage Treatment Plant X X X 1400 $3,250,000 2014 $125,000 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X 200 $625,000 2014 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 800 $75,000 2014 $25,000 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X X 250 $687,500 2014 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 800 $125,000 2014 $25,000 0 Stapleton city Water System Stapleton Water Tank #2 X X X 100 $500,000 2012 $200,000 0 Stapleton city Fire Station Stapleton Fire house & Emergency Shelter X X X 6000 $394,800 2012 $700,000 2,012 $100,000 0 Stapleton city Water System Stapleton Water Tank #1 X X X 100 $500,000 2012 $200,000 0 Totals for Jefferson County, Hazard Score = 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wildfire Hazard Countywide Grouped by Hazard Score Jefferson County County Correctional Institution Jefferson Co. Correction Facility X X X X 42446 $5,261,231 2013 $833,800 2,013 200 0 Jefferson County Other Ogeechee Service Center X X X X 10650 $900,000 2013 2,013 50 0 Jefferson County Other Jefferson Co. Law Enforcement Center X X X X 39892 $8,041,785 2013 $1,139,700 2,013 225 0 Jefferson County Emergency Services 1st Baptist Church Evac Center X X X 45075 $3,500,000 2013 5 0 Jefferson County Hospital, Admissions Entrance Jefferson Hospital X X X 76000 $57,000,000 2013 0 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Health Dept X 6341 $841,815 2013 $191,700 2,013 20 0 Jefferson County Other Wrens Elementary 78216 $20,500,000 2013 $820,000 2,013 637 0 Jefferson County Landfill Jefferson County Landfill (New) X X 15000 $1,062,166 2013 $363,200 2,013 6 0 Jefferson County C&D JEFFERSON CO-US 1 (AVERA RD) (SL) X X 10000 $1,500,000 2013 0 Wadley city Water System Wadley Well House X X 100 $600,000 2013 0 Wadley city Water System Wadley Water Tower #2 X X 100 $500,000 2013 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow wastewater Lift Station #1 X X X X 100 $70,300 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #2 X X X X 100 $71,400 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #3 X X X X 100 $69,000 2013 $0 0 Wrens city Other Border Regulator Station X X X X 100 $100,000 2012 0 Wrens city Other Calcine Meter Set X X X 100 $225,000 2012 0 Wrens city Other Southern Tap #1 X X X 50 $750,000 2014 0 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Bushy Creek Lift Station X X 100 $400,000 2014 0 Wrens city Other Southern Tap #2 X X X 50 $750,000 2012 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wildfire Hazard Countywide Grouped by Hazard Score Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant West Walker St Lift Station X X 100 $300,000 2014 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Sewage Holding Pond X X X X 13509 $46,400 2013 0 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Highway 88 Lift Station X X 100 $350,000 2014 0 Wrens city Other IMERYS Meter Set X X 10 $300,000 2014 0 Louisville city Wastewater Treatment Plant Louisville Tech Lift Station X X 50 $125,000 2014 $125,000 $1,000 0 Louisville city Wastewater Treatment Plant Louisville Lift Station at HS X X 50 $150,000 2014 $150,000 $1,000 0 Louisville city Other Physicians Health Group Louisville X 9560 $2,400,000 2014 $500,000 2,014 20 0 Louisville city Other NCA Northside Dialysis Center X X 7207 $1,261,225 2014 10 0 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant Matthews Station X X 100 $47,500 2013 0 Louisville city Water System Booster pump station X X 100 $175,000 2013 0 Wrens city Water System King Mill Well (Well E) X X 50 $750,000 2014 0 Jefferson County Other JC Fire TowerShop/Supply Building X 4072 $241,236 2013 $9,800 2,013 2 0 372,422 $115,755,058 $4,813,200 $925,000 $2,000 1,177 1,000,445 $307,852,123 $17,274,200 $925,000 $2,000 4,299 Grand Totals - Pre-Disaster Mitigation - Fiscal Year: 2009 - Report created: Aug 24, 2014 - For more information call GEMA Pre-Disaster Mitigation at 1-800-TRY-GEMA Totals for Jefferson County, Hazard Score = 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Avera city City Hall Avera City Hall X 1000 $312,500 2014 $200,000 2,014 1 1 Avera city Water System Avera Water Tank X X 100 $325,000 2013 1 Avera city Fire Station Avera Fire Station X 4250 $100,000 2013 $200,000 2,013 1 5,350 $737,500 $400,000 $0 $0 1 Bartow town City Hall Bartow City Hall X X X X 1920 $209,300 2013 $53,500 2,013 3 1 Bartow town Fire Station Bartow Fire Dept and Emergency Shelter X X X X 7500 $330,630 2013 $38,500 2,013 1 1 Bartow town Water System Bartow Water Tower X X X X 100 $393,000 2013 $0 1 Bartow town Water System Bartow Water Well X X X X 275 $111,800 2013 $0 1 Bartow town Water System Bartow Water Well #2 X X X X 275 $119,700 2013 $0 1 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #4 X X X X 100 $60,500 2013 $0 1 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #5 X X X X 100 $90,200 2013 $0 1 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Sewage Treatment Pond X X X X 10307 $50,400 2013 $0 1 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Sewage Effluent Pump Station X X X X 100 $63,700 2013 $0 1 Bartow town Other Bartow Community Center & Auditorium X X 11232 $1,342,200 2013 $250,000 2,013 1 1 Bartow town Other Bartow Fire Dept & Communications Bldg X X X 64 $17,100 2013 $60,000 2,013 1 Bartow town Other Bartow Museum X 2450 $826,847 2013 2,013 1 1 34,423 $3,615,377 $402,000 $0 $0 6 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Sewage Holding Pond X X X X 13509 $46,400 2013 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow wastewater Lift Station #1 X X X X 100 $70,300 2013 $0 0 Reporting for Wildfire Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Totals for Avera city, Hazard Score = 1 Totals for Bartow town, Hazard Score = 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wildfire Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #2 X X X X 100 $71,400 2013 $0 0 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #3 X X X X 100 $69,000 2013 $0 0 13,809 $257,100 $0 $0 $0 0 Jefferson County Elementary School Carver Elementary X X 6600 $12,750,000 2013 $510,000 2,013 292 2 Jefferson County Elementary School Louisville Academy Elementary X X X 25047 $15,250,000 2013 $610,000 2,013 568 2 Jefferson County Middle School Wrens Middle School X X 59902 $17,000,000 2013 $680,000 2,013 315 2 Jefferson County Courthouse Jefferson County Courthouse X X 6065 $5,147,708 2013 $125,000 2,013 2 Jefferson County Courthouse Jefferson County Magistrate and Juvenile Court X 22000 $24,001,242 2013 20 2 Jefferson County Other Hardeman Building (Swann) X X X 8278 $250,000 2013 $17,000 2,013 1 2 Jefferson County County Jail Old County Jail/IT/Purchasing X X X 7742 $500,000 2013 $28,000 2,013 1 2 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Chamber of Commerce/Murphy House X X 3281 $361,433 2013 $122,700 2,013 8 2 Jefferson County Library Jefferson County Library X 5000 $66,085 2013 $848,000 2,013 10 2 Jefferson County Emergency Services Lions Club Evac. Center X X X 1000 $12,000 2013 2 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Commissioners Office/Long House X 3080 $339,300 2013 $110,300 2,013 30 2 Jefferson County Emergency Services Jefferson County Armory Transit EMA X 14040 $2,380,171 2013 $724,500 2,013 10 2 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Senior Center X X X 4924 $586,170 2013 $86,000 2,013 40 2 Jefferson County Other JC Radio Tower X 100 $27,885 2013 $8,000 2,013 2 Jefferson County Other JC Building Department X 1000 $51,090 2013 $17,500 2,013 2 168,059 $78,723,084 $3,887,000 $0 $0 1,295 Totals for Bartow town, Hazard Score = 0 Totals for Jefferson County, Hazard Score = 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wildfire Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Jefferson County Other JC Recreation Dept X 1867 $1,300,621 2013 $29,600 2,013 1 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant McBride Lift Station X X 100 $48,750 2013 1 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant Hillcrest Station X X 100 $45,700 2013 1 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant US # 1 Bypass Lift Station X X 100 $47,500 2013 1 Jefferson County High School, Public Jefferson County High School X X X 179142 $55,000,000 2013 $2,200,000 2,013 937 1 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Bus Shop X 4920 $750,000 2013 $140,000 2,013 5 1 Jefferson County Public Vocational Technical School Sandersville Tech X X X 10000 $1,930,505 2013 75 1 Jefferson County Middle School Louisville Middle School X X 81642 $23,500,000 2013 $940,000 2,013 354 1 277,871 $82,623,076 $3,309,600 $0 $0 1,371 Jefferson County Landfill Jefferson County Landfill (New) X X 15000 $1,062,166 2013 $363,200 2,013 6 0 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Health Dept X 6341 $841,815 2013 $191,700 2,013 20 0 Jefferson County Other Wrens Elementary 78216 $20,500,000 2013 $820,000 2,013 637 0 Jefferson County C&D JEFFERSON CO-US 1 (AVERA RD) (SL) X X 10000 $1,500,000 2013 0 Jefferson County Hospital, Admissions Entrance Jefferson Hospital X X X 76000 $57,000,000 2013 0 Jefferson County County Correctional Institution Jefferson Co. Correction Facility X X X X 42446 $5,261,231 2013 $833,800 2,013 200 0 Jefferson County Other Ogeechee Service Center X X X X 10650 $900,000 2013 2,013 50 0 Jefferson County Other Jefferson Co. Law Enforcement Center X X X X 39892 $8,041,785 2013 $1,139,700 2,013 225 0 Jefferson County Emergency Services 1st Baptist Church Evac Center X X X 45075 $3,500,000 2013 5 0 Totals for Jefferson County, Hazard Score = 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wildfire Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant Matthews Station X X 100 $47,500 2013 0 Jefferson County Other JC Fire TowerShop/Supply Building X 4072 $241,236 2013 $9,800 2,013 2 0 327,792 $98,895,733 $3,358,200 $0 $0 1,145 Louisville city City Hall Louisvill City Hall X 7200 $550,000 2013 $350,000 2,013 10 2 Louisville city Fire Station Louisville Fire Station X 7200 $750,000 2014 $850,000 2,014 4 2 Louisville city City Hall Louisville OLD City Hall X 10000 $500,000 2006 2 Louisville city Water System Louisville Water Works X X X 2400 $4,425,000 2014 2 Louisville city Water System City of Louisville Water Tank X X 100 $500,000 2006 2 Louisville city Other Market House X X 600 $100,000 2013 2 27,500 $6,825,000 $1,200,000 $0 $0 14 Louisville city Water System Louisville Water Tower 100 $712,500 2014 1 Louisville city Water System Louisville City WaterTower X X X 100 $950,000 2014 1 Louisville city Airport Louisville City Airport X X 3200 $543,665 2013 1 Louisville city Other OCI Nursing Home X 45062 $5,000,000 2013 225 1 48,462 $7,206,165 $0 $0 $0 225 Louisville city Wastewater Treatment Plant Louisville Tech Lift Station X X 50 $125,000 2014 $125,000 $1,000 0 Louisville city Wastewater Treatment Plant Louisville Lift Station at HS X X 50 $150,000 2014 $150,000 $1,000 0 Louisville city Other Physicians Health Group Louisville X 9560 $2,400,000 2014 $500,000 2,014 20 0 Louisville city Other NCA Northside Dialysis Center X X 7207 $1,261,225 2014 10 0 Louisville city Water System Booster pump station X X 100 $175,000 2013 0 16,967 $4,111,225 $500,000 $275,000 $2,000 30 Stapleton city Water System Stapleton Water Tank #2 X X X 100 $500,000 2012 $200,000 0 Totals for Jefferson County, Hazard Score = 0 Totals for Louisville city, Hazard Score = 2 Totals for Louisville city, Hazard Score = 1 Totals for Louisville city, Hazard Score = 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wildfire Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Stapleton city Fire Station Stapleton Fire house & Emergency Shelter X X X 6000 $394,800 2012 $700,000 2,012 $100,000 0 Stapleton city Water System Stapleton Water Tank #1 X X X 100 $500,000 2012 $200,000 0 Stapleton city City Hall Stapleton City Hall & Emergency Shelter X 3000 $383,700 2012 $30,000 2,012 $150,000 2 0 9,200 $1,778,500 $730,000 $650,000 $0 2 Wadley city Other Physicans Health Group Wadley X 2318 $405,650 2013 $250,000 2,013 10 2 Wadley city City Hall Wadley City Hall X X 3645 $1,500,000 2014 $250,000 2,014 5 2 Wadley city Other Glendale Nursing Home X X X X 26500 $1,610,863 2014 $750,000 2,014 120 2 Wadley city Adult Edu. Center Wadley Community Complex X X X 6000 $700,000 2014 2 Wadley city Library Wadley Public Library X X 3114 $510,000 2013 $538,200 2,013 5 2 Wadley city Water System Wadley Elevated Water Tank X X 100 $650,000 2013 2 Wadley city Other Wadley Gym X X 1200 $400,000 2014 2 42,877 $5,776,513 $1,788,200 $0 $0 140 Wadley city Water System Wadley Well House X X 100 $600,000 2013 0 Wadley city Water System Wadley Water Tower #2 X X 100 $500,000 2013 0 200 $1,100,000 $0 $0 $0 0 Wrens city Other Wrens Medical Center X X 400 $875,000 2014 $200,000 20 2 Wrens city Library Wrens Old Library Building X X X 3000 $625,000 2013 $549,200 2,013 2 Wrens city Other Physicians Health Group Wrens X X 5802 $1,015,350 2013 $500,000 2,013 20 2 Wrens city Other Wrens Community Center X 3400 $500,000 2014 $50,000 20 2 Wrens city City Hall Wrens City Hall X X 7500 $1,125,000 2013 $150,000 10 2 20,102 $4,140,350 $1,449,200 $0 $0 70 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X 150 $625,000 2014 1 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 64 $75,000 2014 $25,000 1 Wrens city Other KA-MIN #1 X X X X X 10 $250,000 2014 1 Totals for Stapleton city, Hazard Score = 0 Totals for Wadley city, Hazard Score = 2 Totals for Wadley city, Hazard Score = 0 Totals for Wrens city, Hazard Score = 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wildfire Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Wrens city Water System Water Booster Station X X 1000 $500,000 2012 1 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Stephens St Lift Station X X 100 $350,000 2014 1 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Waynesboro Highway Lift Station X X 100 $400,000 2014 1 Wrens city Other Ka-Min #2 X X X 1955 $250,000 2014 1 3,379 $2,450,000 $25,000 $0 $0 0 Wrens city Other IMERYS Meter Set X X 10 $300,000 2014 0 Wrens city Water System King Mill Well (Well E) X X 50 $750,000 2014 0 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Highway 88 Lift Station X X 100 $350,000 2014 0 Wrens city Other Border Regulator Station X X X X 100 $100,000 2012 0 Wrens city Other Calcine Meter Set X X X 100 $225,000 2012 0 Wrens city Other Southern Tap #1 X X X 50 $750,000 2014 0 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Bushy Creek Lift Station X X 100 $400,000 2014 0 Wrens city Other Southern Tap #2 X X X 50 $750,000 2012 0 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant West Walker St Lift Station X X 100 $300,000 2014 0 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Wrens Sewage Treatment Plant X X X 1400 $3,250,000 2014 $125,000 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X 200 $625,000 2014 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 800 $75,000 2014 $25,000 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X X 250 $687,500 2014 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X X 200 $625,000 2014 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 144 $300,000 2014 $50,000 0 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 800 $125,000 2014 $25,000 0 4,454 $9,612,500 $225,000 $0 $0 0 Totals for Wrens city, Hazard Score = 1 Totals for Wrens city, Hazard Score = 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wildfire Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score 1,000,445 $307,852,123 $17,274,200 $925,000 $2,000 4,299 Grand Totals - Pre-Disaster Mitigation - Fiscal Year: 2009 - Report created: Aug 24, 2014 - For more information call GEMA Pre-Disaster Mitigation at 1-800-TRY-GEMA ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County Wildfire Hazard Map from Georgia Mitigation Information System. Score Description 4 High 3 Moderate 2 Low 1 Very Low 0 No Houses Agriculture Water City Keysville Midville Vidette Waynesboro Summertown Edge Hill Gibson Mitchell Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Hephzibah Davisboro Harrison Riddleville Sandersville Tennille ---PAGE BREAK--- Avera Wildfire Hazard Map from Georgia Mitigation Information System. Score Description 4 High 3 Moderate 2 Low 1 Very Low 0 No Houses Agriculture Water City Avera City Hall City Hall Avera Water Tank Water System Avera Fire Station Fire Station Avera ---PAGE BREAK--- Bartow Wildfire Hazard Map from Georgia Mitigation Information System. Score Description 4 High 3 Moderate 2 Low 1 Very Low 0 No Houses Agriculture Water City Bartow ---PAGE BREAK--- Louisville Wildfire Hazard Map from Georgia Mitigation Information System. Score Description 4 High 3 Moderate 2 Low 1 Very Low 0 No Houses Agriculture Water City Louisville ---PAGE BREAK--- Stapleton Wildfire Hazard Map from Georgia Mitigation Information System. Score Description 4 High 3 Moderate 2 Low 1 Very Low 0 No Houses Agriculture Water City Stapleton ---PAGE BREAK--- Wadley Wildfire Hazard Map from Georgia Mitigation Information System. Score Description 4 High 3 Moderate 2 Low 1 Very Low 0 No Houses Agriculture Water City Wadley ---PAGE BREAK--- Wrens Wildfire Hazard Map from Georgia Mitigation Information System. Score Description 4 High 3 Moderate 2 Low 1 Very Low 0 No Houses Agriculture Water City Wrens ---PAGE BREAK--- Severe Weather The Jefferson County Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation Committee reviewed historical data from the county’s own weather database, the National Climatic Data Center, newspapers and citizen interviews in researching the past effects of severe weather in Jefferson County. The month of February marks the beginning of the severe weather season in the South, which can last until the month of August. Five types of severe weather were identified by the mitigation team: tornados, tropical storms, thunderstorm winds, lightning, and hail. A tornado is a violent windstorm characterized by a twisting, funnel-shaped cloud. It is spawned by a thunderstorm or the result of a hurricane and is produced when cool air overrides a layer of warm air, forcing the warm air to rise rapidly. The damage from a tornado is a result of the high wind velocity and wind-blown debris. Tornados are among the most unpredictable and destructive of weather phenomena and can strike at any time of the year if the essential conditions are present. The positions of the subtropical and polar jet streams often are conducive to the formation of storms in the Gulf region. The second type of severe weather is tropical storms. Tropical Storms are an organized system of strong thunderstorms with a defined surface circulation and maximum sustained winds of 39–73 MPH (34–63 knots). In this area they generally occur as a result of a hurricane or tropical system that has come inland. The third severe weather event, thunderstorm winds, can cause death and injury, power outages, property damage, and can disrupt telephone service, severely affect radio communications and surface/air transportation which may seriously impair the emergency management capabilities of the affected jurisdictions. Thunderstorm winds are winds that arise from convection (with or without lightning), with speeds of at least 50 knots (58 mph), or winds of any speed producing a fatality, injury, or damage. Severe thunderstorms develop powerful updrafts and downdrafts. An updraft of warm, moist air helps to fuel a towering cumulonimbus cloud reaching tens of thousands of feet into the atmosphere. A downdraft of relatively cool, dense air develops as precipitation begins to fall through the cloud. Winds in the downdraft can reach in excess of 100 miles per hour. When the downdraft reaches the ground it spreads out forming a gust front: the strong wind that kicks up just before the storm hits. As the thunderstorm moves through the area, the full force of the downdraft in a severe thunderstorm can be felt as horizontal, straight-line winds with speeds well over 50 miles per hour. Straight-line winds are often responsible for most of the damage associated with a severe thunderstorm. Damaging straight-line winds occur over a range of scales. At one extreme, a severe single-cell thunderstorm may cause localized damage from a microburst, a severe downdraft extending not more than about two miles across. In contrast, a powerful thunderstorm complex that develops as a squall line can produce damaging winds that carve a path as much as 100 miles wide and 500 miles long. The fourth severe weather event is lightning. Lightning results from the buildup and discharge of electrical energy between positively and negatively charged areas. Rising and descending air within a thunderstorm separates these positive and negative charges. Water and ice particles also ---PAGE BREAK--- affect charge distribution. A cloud-to-ground lightning strike begins as an invisible channel of electrically charged air moving from the cloud toward the ground. When one channel nears an object on the ground, a powerful surge of electricity from the ground moves upward to the clouds and produces the visible lightning strike. Lightning often strikes outside of heavy rain and may occur as far as 10 miles away from any rainfall. The final severe weather event is hail. Hailstones are created when strong rising currents of air called updrafts carry water droplets high into the upper reaches of thunderstorms where they freeze. These frozen water droplets fall back toward the earth in downdrafts. In their descent, these frozen droplets bump into and coalesce with unfrozen water droplets and are then carried back up high within the storm where they refreeze into larger frozen drops. This cycle may repeat itself several times until the frozen water droplets become so large and heavy that the updraft can no longer support their weight. Eventually, the frozen water droplets fall back to earth as hailstones. Hail can also be a destructive aspect of severe thunderstorms. Hail causes more monetary loss than any other type of thunderstorm-spawned severe weather in the United States, annually producing about one billion dollars in crop damage. Storms that produce hailstones only the size of a dime can produce dents in the tops of vehicles, damage roofs, break windows and cause significant injury or even death. Based on historic data, there have been 13 reported tornados in the planning area: 13 in the unincorporated areas of the county, one in Avera, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, and Wadley and two in Wrens. The highest magnitude reported was an F3. Reported property damages for all 13 events totaled more than $9.4 million in property and crop damages with 31 injuries reported. Tornados tend to strike in somewhat random fashion, making the task of calculating a recurrence interval extremely difficult. There have been 18 tropical storms reported in Jefferson County by the NCDC and SHELDUS with property and crop damages of approximately $155,994. Damages as a result of the storms were due to power outages, downed trees and flash flooding. The tropical storms affected the entire planning area. Thunderstorms are much more prevalent in Jefferson County and during the spring and summer months there are numerous storms that often carry strong winds. There have been 85 events recorded in the last 64 years with over $6.5 million in property and crop damages reported with seven injuries and one death. During the spring and summer months the county experiences numerous storms that can often produce lightning. There have been 19 reported lightning events to the NCDC and SHELDUS over 64 years with more than $290,000 in property and crop damages with three injury. There have been 168 lightning strikes recorded in the same time frame that resulted in wildfires. When these datasets are combined there has been 187 lightning strikes recorded. In the last 64 years there have been 53 hail events reported to the NCDC and SHELDUS databases with less than $1 million in property and crop damages. ---PAGE BREAK--- The GMIS has the entire county with a wind hazard score of two, where wind speed is between 90 to 99 mph. All 109 critical facilities have a wind hazard score of two with a replacement cost of more than $307 million. To summarize, there are approximately 37,363 structures/properties in the county totaling more than $1.3 billon with a population of 16,930. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE COUNTY BGN_LOC ATI MAG FATA LITIE S INJU RIES PROPDM G CROP DMG REMARKS 7/22/1970 7/22/1970 Jefferson F0 0 0 0 Tornado 7/19/1971 7/19/1971 Jefferson F1 0 0 25.00k 0.00K Tornado Trees were uprooted and twisted off. One residences was picked up and moved about 15 feet. 1/13/1972 1/13/1972 Jefferson F3 0 21 2500.00k 0.00K Tornado 3/18/1981 3/18/1981 Jefferson F1 0 1 25.00k 0.00K Tornado Snapped off pine trees and demolished a restaurant Three homes were damaged/ 7/25/1981 7/25/1981 Jefferson F1 0 0 250.00k 0.00K Tornado (F1) 12/4/1983 12/4/1983 Jefferson 0 2 5.00k 0.00K Tornado (F0) 10/1/1989 10/1/1989 Jefferson F1 0 2 25.0k 0.00K Tornado (F1) Dipped down at Bartow and almost completely destroyed a house. The winds lifted the roof and uprooted numberous large trees around the house 3/7/1996 3/7/1996 Jefferson Wrens F1 0 5 1000.00k 0.00K Tornado (F1) A tornado destroyed 2 brick homes and 7 mobile homes. 15 other homes were heavily damaged and 10 others had minor damage. The path and duration of the tornado was estimated. There were intermittent touchdowns. 6/15/1996 6/15/1996 Jefferson Bartow F0 0 0 10.00k 0.00K Tornado (F0) A possible tornado touched down briefly on Baldee Road between Bartow and Louisville. It damaged a cattle barn and power poles. A tree was downed and there was debris over the road. The length and width are estimated. 7/1/2003 7/1/2003 Jefferson F1 0 0 Tornado (F1) Several residents in the area reported seeing a tornado that was approximately 10 to 15 feet wide and traveled about 60 to 75 feet above the ground. One resident about four miles west of Louisville reported seeing two tornadoes. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE COUNTY BGN_LOC ATI MAG FATA LITIE S INJU RIES PROPDM G CROP DMG REMARKS 3/15/2008 3/15/2008 Jefferson Wrens EF2 0 0 500.00k 0.00K Tornado (EF2) A damage survey conducted by the National Weather Service Forecast office in Peachtree City, Georgia confirmed that an EF2 tornado touched down in northern Jefferson county. The tornado touched down approximately one mile northwest of Wrens and traveled east a little less than nine miles across northeastern Jefferson county and the town of Matthews, before crossing into Burke county just south of the town of Keysville. The tornado continued on the ground an additional eight to nine miles into Burke county before finally lifting near the Applewood County Club in Burke county. The total tornado path length was 19 miles. The maximum path width was one‐quarter mile and maximum sustained winds were estimated at 120 mph. The most significant damage occurred in Matthews, where several mobile homes were destroyed. Two businesses in Wrens were destroyed and several others sustained damage. A church and an elementary school, and several homes in Wrens also suffered at least minor damage from wind and numerous downed trees. ficant roof damage. No serious injuries or fatalities were reported from this tornado. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE COUNTY BGN_LOC ATI MAG FATA LITIE S INJU RIES PROPDM G CROP DMG REMARKS 5/11/2008 5/11/2008 Jefferson Grange EF0 0 0 5.000M 0.00K Tornado (EF0) A damage survey conducted by the National Weather Service Forecast Office in Peachtree City, Georgia confirmed that the EF0 tornado that originally touched down in north central Washington county, just northeast of Sandersville, continued on a long 33 mile track across eastern Washington, central Jefferson, and into far western Burke county before lifting one mile south of Vidette. The tornado entered Jefferson county approximately 10 miles west‐northwest of Louisville and skirted across the northern part of Louisville, then continued eastward, exiting the county about seven miles east‐northeast of Louisville. A little over 17 miles of the tornado path occurred within Jefferson county. The maximum path width of the tornado was estimated to be 440 yards or around 1/2 mile. Homes on the northern side of Louisville sustained considerable damage from the tornado, including both mobile homes and single/multiple‐family homes. All together, 55 mobile homes were affected, two of which were destroyed and 50 had major damage. Approximately 185 single‐family homes suffered damage. Of these, 70 were destroyed and 115 sustained major damage. In addition 13 businesses, six government facilities, and two non‐profit organization building structures were damaged. Of the six government facilities, two of them were county schools. Hundreds of trees and power lines were also downed along the path of the tornado. At least 5600 residents of the area were left without power following the storm. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE COUNTY BGN_LOC ATI MAG FATA LITIE S INJU RIES PROPDM G CROP DMG REMARKS 4/10/2009 4/10/2009 Jefferson Stapleton EF1 0 0 100.00k 0.00K Tornado (EF1) A damage survey conducted by the National Weather Service Forecast Office in Peachtree City, Georgia confirmed that the EF1 tornado that initially touched down in extreme eastern Glascock county continued into far northern Jefferson county along a five mile‐long path before lifting approximately three miles northeast of Stapleton. The tornado was determined to have a maximum path width of 200 yards with maximum winds estimated at 110 mph. The majority of the damage associated with this tornado occurred in Jefferson county. Significant damage was observed to the Baptist Church at the intersection of Georgia Highways 80 and 296, just across from the Glascock county line. Part of the roof, brick siding, and the chimney were removed from the structure. Several granite headstones in the adjacent cemetery were tipped over. Many trees were down along the path of the tornado, especially along a 3/4 mile‐long path east of the damaged church. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE INJURIES PROPDMG CROPDMG REMARKS 8/28/1964 8/30/1964 Hurricane/T ropical Storm 0 1136.36 113.64 Hurricane Cleo 9/9/1964 9/12/1964 Hurricane/T ropical Storm 0 147058.82 1470.59 HURRICANE DORA 6/8/1966 6/9/1966 Hurricane/T ropical Storm 0 1470.59 1470.59 HURRICANE ALMA 6/6/1968 6/7/1968 Hurricane/T ropical Storm 0 147.06 0 Tropical Storm Abby 6/19/1972 6/20/1972 Hurricane/T ropical Storm 0 0 314.46 HURRICANE AGNES 10/5/1995 10/5/1995 Hurricane/T ropical Storm 0 Hurrican Opal 9/14/2002 Tropical Storm 0 0.00K 0.00K Tropical Storm Hanna moved inland near Mobile, Alabama around 5 pm EDT Saturday, September 14, 2002. The remnants of Hanna then moved northeast across central Alabama during the day Saturday and then across north Georgia Saturday evening into Sunday morning. The center of the remnants of Hanna passed near Carrollton, Georgia around 2 AM EDT Sunday morning, then exited the state near Clayton, Georgia Sunday morning, September 15th, around 10 am EDT. Hanna moved across north and central Georgia during the mid and late afternoon Saturday. Wind gusts of 45 to 50 mph and very heavy tropical thunderstorms accompanied the feeder band. Numerous trees and power lines were blown down as the feeder band moved rapidly northeast through the afternoon. Many residents of north Georgia were left without power for at least a few hours. In the Atlanta metropolitan area alone, 48,000 residents were left without power. There were also scattered areas of urban and street flooding as up to 2 inches or more of rain fell in association with the feeder band in a one to two hour period. The heaviest rain fell across the counties north of a line from Atlanta to Athens. Additional rain fell across the region Saturday night and Sunday morning, but was considerably less intense, confined mainly to central Georgia, and was not accompanied with damaging winds. Three day rainfall totals in association with Hanna were in excess of 3 inches across much of northeast, east central, and the southern portions of middle Georgia. Athens reported 3.54 inches on September 14th alone, with a 3‐day total of 5.03 inches. The average rainfall amount for north Georgia stations for the month was in excess of 7 inches, and was nearly 5 inches for middle Georgia. These rainfall amounts are approximately 3.5 and 1.5 inches above normal, respectively. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE INJURIES PROPDMG CROPDMG REMARKS 7/1/2003 Tropical Storm 0 0.00K 0.00K Tropical Depression Bill, which was earlier Tropical Storm Bill, tracked across north and central Georgia during the day bringing heavy rain, flooding, wind damage, and even an isolated tornado to the region. The storm, which formed in the Gulf of Mexico Sunday morning, June 29th, moved inland between New Orleans, Louisiana and Mobile, Alabama on Monday June 30th, then tracked northeast to near Tuscaloosa, Alabama by the morning of July 30th, then turned east‐northeast and accelerated. The depression moved between Birmingham, Alabama and Atlanta, Georgia during the afternoon of July 1st, exiting northeast Georgia after midnight on July 2nd. Twenty‐four rainfall totals of four to six inches were common on July 1st across much of north and portions of central Georgia, roughly north of a line from Columbus to Athens. Rainfall amounts were generally in the 1 to 2 inch range south of this line. There were numerous reports of flooding, especially in the Atlanta metropolitan area, and a number of roads were rendered impassable and closed. The ground across north and central Georgia was saturated from a number of weeks of above normal rainfall and the tropical storm rainfall just exacerbated the situation. As the center of circulation associated with the tropical depression tracked across north Georgia, a brief F1 tornado spinup occurred in Morgan county southwest of Madison in east central Georgia. There were also other isolated wind damage reports in areas east and southeast of Atlanta from Stockbridge to Madison to Athens. 9/6/2004 Tropical Storm 0 0.00K 0.00K Hurricane Frances, at one point a category four hurricane (on the Saffir‐Simpson scale) with sustained winds of 145 mph, reached the east coast of Florida just north of West Palm Beach, Florida early on September 5th. The storm weakened to a Tropical Storm as it continued west‐northwest across the Central Florida Peninsula reemerging over the northwest Gulf of Mexico early on September 6th. The storm then took on more of a northwestward movement, making landfall later on the 6th near Saint Marks Florida along the Florida Panhandle Gulf Coast. Continuing north‐ northwestward from this point, Tropical Storm Frances entered far southwest Georgia near Bainbridge late in the evening on the 6th. The storm continued moving north‐northwest through far western Georgia on the 7th to near Atlanta around midnight on the 7th, then to near Chattanooga, Tennessee early on the 8th. By far the most significant problem with Frances for Georgia was strong, sustained winds of 35 to 40 mph with gusts in excess of 50 mph. Most of the high winds were concentrated in a large east‐west oriented rain band that moved north across Georgia during the evening of the 6th and the early morning hours of the 7th. It was during this period of time that significant damage occurred across many Central, East Central, and North Central Georgia counties. The strongest winds and most significant damage occurred in the areas east and south of a line from Americus, to Atlanta, to Athens. Many of the counties within this area suffered extensive wind damage. Dozens to hundreds of trees were blown down, also bringing down dozens to hundreds of power lines. Nearly 300,000 people were left without power during the storm, several thousand for several days. Dozens of homes suffered major damage throughout Central and North Central Georgia, with dozens more sustaining minor damage. The most significant damage took place in an area bounded by Macon, Atlanta, Greensboro, Dublin, Americus, and back to Macon. Damages in the millions were observed in several of these counties, including several large pecan orchards which were virtually destroyed. Estimated total damage with Frances $14.9 million to property and $26.5 million to crops (mostly pecan, but some peanut and cotton). Forty‐one counties in the Peachtree City forecast area received a disaster declaration from the Federal Emergency Management Agency. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE INJURIES PROPDMG CROPDMG REMARKS 9/16/2004 Tropical Storm 0 0.00K 0.00K Hurricane Ivan, a classic long‐lived Cape Verde hurricane and at three times within its life cycle a category five hurricane, developed from a tropical wave which moved off the African coast on August 31st. The system became a tropical depression on September 2nd, and tropical storm on September 3rd, and a hurricane early on September 5th. Later that same day, it became a major hurricane. Ivan moved westward for several days and passed over the southern Windward islands, then moved west‐northwest through the southern Caribbean passing just north of Venezuela and the Netherlands Antilles. The hurricane reached category five strength on September 9th as it neared Jamaica. The hurricane weakened to a category four storm as it passed near Jamaica. The storm maintained its category four strength as it turned west of north until the 11th when it briefly strengthed once again to a category five storm. The storm passed near Grand Cayman and the west tip of Cuba from September 11th to the 12th as mostly a category four hurricane. The storm then turned to the northwest and moved through the Yucatan Channel. It briefly regained category five strength one more time as it moved through the Gulf, but weakened to a category three hurricane by the time it struck the U.S. Gulf Coast near Gulf Shores, Alabama around 2 am September 16th. From here, the weakening hurricane moved nearly due north to near Birmingham by the evening of the 16th. By this time it had weakened to a tropical storm. The storm then turned northeast across northwest Georgia during the early morning hours of the 17th as it weakened to a tropical depression. Ivan brought tornadoes, high winds, and significant to record flooding to north and central Georgia. The track of Ivan across central and northeast Alabama also put much of central and eastern Georgia in the favorable quadrant for strong spiral feeder bands and tornadoes. Six tornadoes were confirmed with Ivan causing an estimated $3.4 million dollars in damages. These tornadoes consisted of two F1 tornadoes, one each in Madison and Wilkes county in northeast Georgia, with one F0 tornado reported in Cherokee, Madison, Spalding, and Upson counties. Numerous reports of funnel clouds and other tornado sightings were reported, but no other tornado touchdowns were confirmed. Flooding was extensive and widespread across the west central, north central, and northwest parts of the state. Average rainfall of 5‐8 inches was reported in much of the area northwest of a Columbus, to Athens line, with some areas from Atlanta northwest to Trenton reporting in excess of 10 inches of rain. This rain fell just a little over a week from the 3‐5 inches of rain which occurred from Tropical Storm Frances. Catastrophic and historical flooding occurred in the Atlanta area, where the excessive rainfall forced many creeks and rivers to record levels. Dozens of homes and businesses in Fulton, Cobb, DeKalb, and Cherokee counties were submerged in flood waters, some for several days thereafter. Extensive flooding was also reported further north and west, especially in Dade and Gilmer counties, where homes and vehicles were washed away by flood waters. Damage estimates from flooding in the Peachtree City forecast area were $40.9 million dollars. Overall, sustained high winds with Ivan affected less of north and central Georgia than was observed with Frances, just 10 days prior. However, with Ivan the problem was more with wind gusts than it was with sustained winds, such as were observed with Frances. Wind gusts of 50‐60 mph were common with one main southeast‐northwest oriented spiral rain band that swept across the area during the mid and late afternoon. This left ti i th d t l G i ith d d t li d t h b i d ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE INJURIES PROPDMG CROPDMG REMARKS 9/26/2004 Tropical Storm 0 0.00K 0.00K Hurricane Jeanne was the third major southeast U.S. land falling hurricane to affect Georgia within a three week period, following just 10 days after Hurricane Ivan, which followed just 10 days after Hurricane Frances. Jeanne caused the least damage to north and central Georgia counties of the three tropical systems to affect the state during the month of September. High winds were limited mainly to the southeast portions of middle Georgia and flooding rains were limited to the Atlanta area and south middle Georgia counties. No tornadoes were observed with Jeanne as the favorable tornado‐producing spiral feeder bands remained well east over the Carolinas and western Atlantic. Hurricane Jeanne developed on September 13th from a tropical wave over the Leeward Islands. Jeanne moved slowly across the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico on the 15th, then slowly over the Dominican Republic and Haiti the 16th and 17th. Most of this time, the storm maintained only strong tropical storm strength. Jeanne then took a northward turn on the 18th and moved across the southeastern Bahamas as a tropical storm. From this point, Jeanne meandered through a slow clockwise loop from the 20th through 23rd, when the loop was finally completed. During this time the storm strengthened to a category two hurricane. Jeanne then began a slow westward track on the 23rd and strengthened to a category three hurricane. The storm then made landfall on the 25th, just north of West Palm Beach, Florida, at almost the exact same location as Hurricane Frances had done 20 days prior. Jeanne weakened to a tropical storm as it turned north‐northwest across central Florida on the 26th and then weakened into a tropical depression as it moved into southern Georgia early on the 27th. The storm tracked from near Valdosta during the early morning hours of the 27th, reaching Macon around sunset on the 27th, then accelerating into northeast Georgia near Athens by midnight and out of the state early on the 28th. High winds of 35 to 40 mph with some higher gusts were confined mainly to the central and southeast portions of middle Georgia, roughly southeast of a line from Macon to Sandersville. Rainfall of 4‐6 inches was also common in much of middle Georgia, but flooding problems observed in these areas were minor. However, during the evening, a deformation zone developed on the northwest side of the center of circulation around Jeanne over the Atlanta metropolitan area. This unfortunately brought excessive rainfall of 4 to 8 inches to some of the same areas that received in excess of 10 inches of rain just 10 days prior with Ivan. Once again major to record flooding was observed along several creeks on the north side of Atlanta and subsequently the Chattahoochee River. Many homes that were in the stages of cleanup from Ivan, were severely impacted once again with major flooding. Overall damages from flooding and high winds were estimated at $5,000,000. 6/12/2005 Tropical Storm 0 0.00K 0.00K Tropical Storm Arlene, which formed on June 8th near the northeast coast of Honduras, became a tropical storm on the 9th southwest of Grand Cayman. Arlene moved slowly northward and steadily intensified as it crossed western Cuba. The storm continued northward over the eastern Gulf of Mexico where it reached its peak intensity with a wind speed of 70 mph. The storm made landfall near Pensacola, Florida with 60 mph on the 10th. The storm moved slowly northward through central and western Alabama on the 11th and 12th. Damage to Georgia from the storm was minimal. While rain occurred in many areas, only one flash flooding event was reported in association with Arlene, namely in Towns county on the 12th. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE INJURIES PROPDMG CROPDMG REMARKS 7/10/2005 Hurricane (Typhoon) 0 0.00K 0.00K Hurricane Dennis, which began as a tropical depression near the southern Windward Islands on July 4th quickly gained strength as it tracked west‐northwest across the Caribbean. It became a tropical storm on the 5th and a hurricane on the 6th as it moved near the southern end of Haiti. Hurricane Dennis made its first landfall near central Cuba as a category 4 storm on the Saffir‐Simpson scale. The storm emerged into the Gulf of Mexico off the western end of Cuba on July 9th as a category 1 storm, then tracked northwest toward the Gulf Coast. Hurricane Dennis made its U.S. landfall near Pensacola, Florida around 3 pm on July 10th, then tracked north‐northwest across western Alabama into northeast Mississippi and western Tennessee on July 11th. The effects of Dennis with respect to flooding were far reaching, especially on the east and north side of the storm. The first outer spiral band affected north and central Georgia during the afternoon and evening of July 9th. Numerous thunderstorms, some with very heavy rain tracked east to west across central and north Georgia. Rainfall amounts of two to four inches were reported on the south and west side of Atlanta. Flash flooding was reported in Carroll county where rainfall exceeded four inches in spots. Several roads were washed out. After a break in the rainfall overnight, widespread rain began to spread into the area from the south late in the morning on the 10th and overspread the entire region by late afternoon. Rainfall during the afternoon and early evening was mostly light to moderate with rainfall amounts prior to 8 pm were generally in the one to two inch range. However, as the evening progressed, the rain became increasingly concentrated in a south‐to‐north oriented 50‐mile wide feeder band. The tropical feeder band set up from near Americus to Chatsworth and persisted over the same areas for a period of 12 to 15 hours. Torrential rainfall amounts fell in areas affected by the feeder band as very heavy tropical showers repeatedly tracked over the same areas. Rainfall amounts of six to eight inches were common within the feeder band, with 10‐12 inch rainfall amounts reported across the southern and western portions of the Atlanta metropolitan area. Widespread flash flooding and flooding were reported, especially in Coweta, Douglas, Fayette, Fulton, and Cobb counties. Hundreds of roads were washed out and hundreds of homes experienced some degree of flooding, some major. Several rescues were required, particularly in Douglas and Cobb counties.Wind was also a problem, but with the center of the storm tracking some 200 miles to the west of the area, sustained winds were mostly in the 20‐25 mph range, with some gusts observed to near 40 mph. A number of counties in west Georgia reported downed trees and power lines, with widespread power outages reported across the region.Overall damage caused by Hurricane Dennis to north and central Georgia was approximately $12,000,000, most of which was the result of flash flooding or flooding. However, nearly $250,000 was attributed to strong winds. One death occurred as a result of strong winds during Hurricane Dennis. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE INJURIES PROPDMG CROPDMG REMARKS 8/29/2005 Hurricane (Typhoon) 0 0.00K 0.00K Hurricane Katrina, a horrific category 4 hurricane with winds of 140 mph made landfall just east of New Orleans around 8 am August 29th, continued north-northeast as a hurricane across eastern Mississippi during the day on the 29th, then moved into western and middle Tennessee by early morning on August 30th. While this storm will be most remembered for the extensive devastation that was done to southeast Louisiana, particularly New Orleans, and eastward along the Mississippi Gulf Coast, Katrina was a very large and powerful storm with far reaching effects to the east. By mid-afternoon on August 29th, strong spiral bands of showers and thunderstorms made their way into west Georgia. These spiral bands gradually propagated eastward through the state during the evening and overnight hours. Between 4 pm EDT and 1 am EDT, a total of 16 confirmed tornadoes touched down in north and central Georgia. The first tornado struck northern Heard county at 424 pm EDT, while the last tornado struck the town of Helen in the northeast Georgia mountains shortly after midnight at 1230 am EDT. All together there were three F2 tornadoes, three F1 tornadoes, and ten F0 tornadoes within north and central Georgia. These tornadoes resulted in one fatality and six injuries. Dozens of homes and businesses were destroyed with property damage estimated at $12,860,000. The poultry industry was particularly hard hit, especially in west Georgia, where the tornadoes in Heard and Carroll counties destroyed over 300,000 chickens in nearly a dozen chicken houses. Strong thunderstorms with damaging winds were also reported in several counties that did not experience any tornadoes. Overall damage associated with Katrina in north and central Georgia was approximately $14,000,000. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE INJURIES PROPDMG CROPDMG REMARKS 10/5/2005 Tropical Storm 0 0.00K 0.00K Hurricane Ivan, a classic long‐lived Cape Verde hurricane and at three times within its life cycle a category five hurricane, developed from a tropical wave which moved off the African coast on August 31st. The system became a tropical depression on September 2nd, and tropical storm on September 3rd, and a hurricane early on September 5th. Later that same day, it became a major hurricane. Ivan moved westward for several days and passed over the southern Windward islands, then moved west‐northwest through the southern Caribbean passing just north of Venezuela and the Netherlands Antilles. By this time it had weakened to a tropical storm. The storm then turned northeast across northwest Georgia during the early morning hours of the 17th as it weakened to a tropical depression. Ivan brought tornadoes, high winds, and significant to record flooding to north and central Georgia. The track of Ivan across central and northeast Alabama also put much of central and eastern Georgia in the favorable quadrant for strong spiral feeder bands and tornadoes. Six tornadoes were confirmed with Ivan causing an estimated $3.4 million dollars in damages. These tornadoes consisted of two F1 tornadoes, one each in Madison and Wilkes county in northeast Georgia, with one F0 tornado reported in Cherokee, Madison, Spalding, and Upson counties. Numerous reports of funnel clouds and other tornado sightings were reported, but no other tornado touchdowns were confirmed. Flooding was extensive and widespread across the west central, north central, and northwest parts of the state. Average rainfall of 5‐8 inches was reported in much of the area northwest of a Columbus, to Athens line, with some areas from Atlanta northwest to Trenton reporting in excess of 10 inches of rain. This rain fell just a little over a week from the 3‐5 inches of rain which occurred from Tropical Storm Frances. Catastrophic and historical flooding occurred in the Atlanta area, where the excessive rainfall forced many creeks and rivers to record levels. Dozens of homes and businesses in Fulton, Cobb, DeKalb, and Cherokee counties were submerged in flood waters, some for several days thereafter. Extensive flooding was also reported further north and west, especially in Dade and Gilmer counties, where homes and vehicles were washed away by flood waters. Damage estimates from flooding in the Peachtree City forecast area were $40.9 million dollars. Overall, sustained high winds with Ivan affected less of north and central Georgia than was observed with Frances, just 10 days prior. However, with Ivan the problem was more with wind gusts than it was with sustained winds, such as were observed with Frances. Wind gusts of 50‐60 mph were common with one main southeast‐northwest oriented spiral rain band that swept across the area during the mid and late afternoon. This left many counties in north and central Georgia with downed trees, power lines, damages to homes, businesses, and vehicles, as well as widespread power outages. Strong winds continued well into the 18th across the north causing even more trees and some power lines to fall. Damages estimates from high winds were $14.3 million dollars. Another $5.0 million in damages was caused by river flooding in Cobb county which continued for several days after Ivan exited the area. Twenty‐three counties in the Peachtree City, Georgia forecast area of north and central Georgia were given a disaster declaration by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE INJURIES PROPDMG CROPDMG REMARKS 11/10/2009 Tropical Storm 0 0.00K 0.00K Hurricane IdaOn November 2nd, a small section of the Intertropical Convergence Zone developed convection north of Panama. A small surface low formed the next day offshore Costa Rica, as the system drifted northwest. By the 4th, the circulation developed a well‐defined circulation and enough convective organization to be considered a tropical depression. The system developed into a tropical storm, named Ida, later that day. Continuing its northwest movement, Ida strengthened into a weak hurricane before moving ashore Nicaragua on the 5th. Weakened back into a tropical depression, Ida turned to the north moving through eastern Nicaragua and Honduras. When its center re‐ emerged into the northwest Caribbean sea, Ida strengthened back into a tropical storm on the 6th and eventually peaked as a category two hurricane in the northwest Caribbean sea. Vertical wind shear from a mid to upper level low to its southwest led to weakening, and Ida weaked to a tropical storm on the 9th, and became an extratropical cyclone as it moved ashore far southern Alabama later that day. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE INJURIES PROPDMG CROPDMG REMARKS 9/4/2011 Tropical Storm 0 0.00K 0.00K Hurricane Jeanne was the third major southeast U.S. land falling hurricane to affect Georgia within a three week period, following just 10 days after Hurricane Ivan, which followed just 10 days after Hurricane Frances. Jeanne caused the least damage to north and central Georgia counties of the three tropical systems to affect the state during the month of September. High winds were limited mainly to the southeast portions of middle Georgia and flooding rains were limited to the Atlanta area and south middle Georgia counties. No tornadoes were observed with Jeanne as the favorable tornado‐producing spiral feeder bands remained well east over the Carolinas and western Atlantic. Hurricane Jeanne developed on September 13th from a tropical wave over the Leeward Islands. Jeanne moved slowly across the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico on the 15th, then slowly over the Dominican Republic and Haiti the 16th and 17th. Most of this time, the storm maintained only strong tropical storm strength. Jeanne then took a northward turn on the 18th and moved across the southeastern Bahamas as a tropical storm. From this point, Jeanne meandered through a slow clockwise loop from the 20th through 23rd, when the loop was finally completed. During this time the storm strengthened to a category two hurricane. Jeanne then began a slow westward track on the 23rd and strengthened to a category three hurricane. The storm then made landfall on the 25th, just north of West Palm Beach, Florida, at almost the exact same location as Hurricane Frances had done 20 days prior. Jeanne weakened to a tropical storm as it turned north‐northwest across central Florida on the 26th and then weakened into a tropical depression as it moved into southern Georgia early on the 27th. The storm tracked from near Valdosta during the early morning hours of the 27th, reaching Macon around sunset on the 27th, then accelerating into northeast Georgia near Athens by midnight and out of the state early on the 28th. High winds of 35 to 40 mph with some higher gusts were confined mainly to the central and southeast portions of middle Georgia, roughly southeast of a line from Macon to Sandersville. Rainfall of 4‐6 inches was also common in much of middle Georgia, but flooding problems observed in these areas were minor. However, during the evening, a deformation zone developed on the northwest side of the center of circulation around Jeanne over the Atlanta metropolitan area. This unfortunately brought excessive rainfall of 4 to 8 inches to some of the same areas that received in excess of 10 inches of rain just 10 days prior with Ivan. Once again major to record flooding was observed along several creeks on the north side of Atlanta and subsequently the Chattahoochee River. Many homes that were in the stages of cleanup from Ivan, were severely impacted once again with major flooding. Overall damages from flooding and high winds were estimated at $5,000,000. 9/14/1999 as a result of Hurrican Floyd ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE BGN_LOCATI MAG FAT ALI TIE S INJUR IES PROPD MG CROPDM G REMARKS 3/8/1961 Thunderstorm Jefferson 0 0 4/2/1964 4/8/1964 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 0 0 5.26k 0.52k Heavy Rains 5/2/1964 5/3/1964 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 0 0 3.14k 3.14k RAINS 8/8/1965 8/8/1965 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 2 0 0 0 Thunderstorm 9/28/1965 9/30/1965 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 0.31k 0.00k RAIN AND WIND 2/13/1966 2/13/1966 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0.06 3.14k 0.31k WIND AND RAIN 3/1/1966 3/5/1966 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 3.14k 0.31k RAIN AND WIND 5/16/1966 5/28/1966 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 0 0 1.47k 1.47k RAINS 7/4/1966 7/4/1966 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 0 0 0 0 5/18/1969 5/19/1969 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 0 0 1.47k 0 HEAVY RAINS 10/31/1969 11/1/1969 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 0 0.06 1.47k 0 HEAVY RAINS 3/1/1971 3/4/1971 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 0 0 3.14k 0.031k HEAVY RAINS 6/14/1971 6/14/1971 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 0 0 0.31k 0 SEVERE THUNDERSTORM 6/15/1971 6/15/1971 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 0 0 0.208k 0 Thunderstorms 6/28/1972 6/28/1972 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 0 0 0.31k 0 THUNDERSTORMS 2/1/1973 2/2/1973 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 0 0 3.14k 0 HEAVY RAINS 3/21/1974 3/21/1974 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0.03 0.31 31.44k 0 THUNDERSTORM & WIND 5/15/1975 5/16/1975 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 0 0 1.04k 0.10k Thunderstorms 6/6/1977 6/6/1977 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 0 0.04 6.66k 0.06k Severe thunderstorms 4/13/1979 4/13/1979 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 2/16/1982 2/16/1982 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 4/23/1983 4/23/1983 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 7/29/1986 7/29/1986 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 High winds moderate damage to rooftops, downed trees, and powerlines 7/24/1987 7/24/1987 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 High winds with little damage 6/26/1988 6/26/1988 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 1 5.00k 0 Thunderstorm Wind 2/28/1989 2/28/1989 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 5.00k 0 Thunderstorm winds reports of trees down in South and North Jefferson County 4/28/1990 4/28/1990 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 2 0 0 Thunderstorm Wind 8/21/1990 8/21/1990 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 56 kts. 0 0 0.50k 0 Thunderstorm Wind 10/11/1990 10/12/1990 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 0 0 0 5000.00k Heavy Rainfall 3/1/1991 3/1/1991 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 5.00k 0 Powerlines down along Hwy 221 7/1/1992 7/1/1992 Thunderstorm Wind Jefferson 0 0 Winds toppled trees in Jefferson County ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE BGN_LOCATI MAG FAT ALI TIE S INJUR IES PROPD MG CROPDM G REMARKS 7/3/1992 7/3/1992 Thunderstorm Wind Jefferson Winds in excess of 48 mph trees down and roof damage. 6/10/1993 6/10/1993 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 50.00k 0 Thunderstorm Winds 7/16/1995 7/16/1995 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 1.00k 0 Thunderstorm winds knocked down trees and powerlines across northern portions of Jefferson County between Wrens and Louisville. 7/24/1995 7/24/1995 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 20.00k 0 Thunderstorm winds blew trees down on house. 1/2/1996 1/2/1996 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 60.00k 0 Thunderstorm winds destroyed 4 mobile homes and 2 RVs in Meadowland Estates outside of Wrens on Highway 1. 6/26/1996 6/26/1996 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 1.00k 0 Thunderstorm winds knocked a telephone pole down on MLK Drive. 4/22/1997 4/22/1997 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 2.00k 0 Several trees were downed by thunderstorm winds in the northern and southern portions of the county. 6/18/1997 6/18/1997 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 2.00k 0 Thunderstorm winds knocked down trees and tree limbs along Georgia Highway 17. 7/16/1997 7/16/1997 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 2.00k 0 Several trees were knocked down on Old Cornith Road by thunderstorm winds. 7/27/1997 7/27/1997 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 1.50k 0 Thunderstorm winds knocked down several trees southeast of Wadley 4/17/1998 4/17/1998 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 2.00k 0 Several trees were blown down and there were power outages near Wadley. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE BGN_LOCATI MAG FAT ALI TIE S INJUR IES PROPD MG CROPDM G REMARKS 6/9/1998 6/9/1998 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 5.00k 0 Jefferson county 911 reported trees and power lines down at 3 different locations between Wrens and Louisville. 8/18/1998 8/18/1998 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 1.00k 0 Louisville 911 reported 3 trees down on highway 296 north of Louisville. Widespread power outages were also reported. 6/29/1999 6/29/1999 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 1.00k 0 The Wrens police department reported trees down and power outages. 8/19/1999 8/19/1999 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 5.00k 0 Jefferson county 911 reported trees and power lines down. A newspaper reported the wind blew over a gas pump at a convenience store in Wrens. Some roofing was also ripped away at an auto parts store about a mile to the south. 6/22/2000 6/22/2000 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 5.00k 0 The Jefferson County Emergency Management Coordinator reported trees down on power lines all across the county. In addition, a tree was reported down and blocking Georgia Highway 102 between Avera and Stapleton in the north part of the county. 8/1/2000 8/1/2000 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Wadley 0 0 3.00k 0 The Jefferson county 911 center reported that trees were knocked down on Moxley-Bartow Road. 1/19/2001 1/19/2001 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Louisville 0 0 2.00k 0 The Jefferson county 911 center reported that trees were blown down. 6/3/2001 6/3/2001 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Wadley 0 0 2.00k 0 The Jefferson County 911 center reported that trees were down. 8/24/2001 Thunderstorm Wind Avera 56 kts. E 0 0 0.00K 0.00K The Avera Post Office estimated wind gusts at 65 mph. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE BGN_LOCATI MAG FAT ALI TIE S INJUR IES PROPD MG CROPDM G REMARKS 7/21/2002 Thunderstorm Wind Wadley 0 0 0.00K 0.00K The Wadley Fire and Police Department reported that one tree was down. 7/31/2002 7/31/2002 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Stapleton 50 kts. 0 0 1.00k 0 The Jefferson county 911 center reported that some trees were down from Jefferson to Wrens. 2/22/2003 2/22/2003 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Louisville 50 kts. 0 0 3.00k 0 The Jefferson county 911 center reported that power lines were down. 3/22/2003 3/22/2003 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 50 kts. 0 0 3.00k 0 5/2/2003 5/2/2003 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Louisville 50 kts. 0 0 2.00k 0 The Jefferson county 911 center reported that some trees were down. 5/17/2003 Thunderstorm Wind Wadley 50 kts. EG 0 0 0.00K 0.00K The Jefferson county 911 center reported that a number of trees had been blown down. 7/1/2003 7/1/2003 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Louisville 50 kts. 0 0 30.00k 0 The News and Farmer-Jefferson Reporter of Louisville reported that thunderstorm winds, associated with the remnants of Tropical Storm Bill, caused considerable damage to a home west of Louisville on Grange Road. A portion of the roof over the garage collapsed. The house also sustained other minor damage. A number of trees were blown down or split in half across the street and even up to one-third of a mile away. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE BGN_LOCATI MAG FAT ALI TIE S INJUR IES PROPD MG CROPDM G REMARKS 9/6/2004 Thunderstorm Wind Jefferson 75.0k The News and Farmer Jefferson Reporter reported that numerous trees and power lines were blown down throughout the county. At least 30 roads in the county were blocked. In addition, WPEH radio in Louisville reported that 5.15 inches of rain fell. 9/27/2004 Thunderstorm Wind Jefferson .5k The Jefferson County 911 Center reported that a couple of trees were blown down in the county. 10/3/2004 10/3/2004 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Wrens 61 kts. 0 0 30.00k 0 A large tree was blown down in the Hidden Lakes Subdivision. An adjacent car sustained minor damage. 4/2/2005 4/2/2005 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 2 2.5k The Jefferson County 911 Center reported that a couple of power lines were blown down. 8/22/2005 8/22/2005 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Louisville 36 kts. 0 0 1.00k 0 The Jefferson County 911 Center reported that a couple of power lines were blown down. 1/2/2006 1/2/2006 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Wadley 0 kts. EG 0 0 2.00k 0 The Georgia State Patrol reported that several trees were down on U.S. Highway 1 just south of Wadley. 7/2/2006 7/2/2006 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson Trees toppled power lines downed due to a band of thunderstorms 7/1/2007 7/1/2007 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Stapleton 0 0 2.00k 0 Thunderstorm Wind (39EG) 8/17/2007 8/17/2007 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 52 kts. EG 0 0 10.0k 0 Thunderstorm Wind (52EG) 5/11/2008 5/11/2008 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Almira 0 0 500.00k 0 Thunderstorm Wind (56EG) 5/20/2008 5/20/2008 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Louisville 0 0 10.00k 0 Thunderstorm Wind (52EG) 6/11/2008 6/11/2008 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 3.00k 0 Thunderstorm Wind (52EG) 7/5/2008 7/5/2008 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Wrens 0 0 0.50k 0 Thunderstorm wind (37EG) 5/6/2009 Flood Bartow 0 0 1.00K 0.00K 6/20/2010 6/20/2010 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Louisville 0 0 5.00k 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE BGN_LOCATI MAG FAT ALI TIE S INJUR IES PROPD MG CROPDM G REMARKS 6/15/2011 6/15/2011 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 2.00k 0 8/9/2011 Thunderstorm Wind Wadley 50 kts. EG 0 0 3.00K 0.00K 8/9/2011 8/9/2011 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Wrens 0 0 3.00k 0 11/16/2011 Thunderstorm Wind Stapleton 50 kts. EG 0 0 7.00K 0.00K 5/31/2012 5/31/2012 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Louisville 5 kts. EG 0 0 0.50k 0 6/10/2012 6/10/2012 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Louisville 0 kts. EG 0 0 0.50k 0 6/10/2012 6/10/2012 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Wadley 5 kts. EG 0 0 0.25k 0 7/3/2012 7/3/2012 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Louisville 0 kts. EG 0 0 0.75k 0 8/14/2012 8/14/2012 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Bartow 0 kts. EG 0 0 2.00k 0 9/2/2012 9/2/2012 Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Avera 0 kts. EG 0 0 1.50k 0 7/17/2013 Thunderstorm Wind Louisville The Jefferson County 911 Center reported numerous trees and power lines down across the county. 1/11/2014 Thunderstorm Wind Wrens The Jefferson County Emergency Manager reported a tree down in Wrens. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE BGN_LOCATI FATA LITIE S INJU RIES PROPDMG CROPDMG REMARKS 8/6/2011 8/6/2011 Lightning Magnolia 0 0 500 0 8/10/2003 8/10/2003 Lightning Louisville 0 0 25000 0 center reported that lightning struck a house and 8/20/1999 8/20/1999 Lightning Wrens 0 0 10000 0 Lightning caused a fire that spread throughout the attic of a home on North Main Street. There was damage to the roof and its support 7/23/1997 7/23/1997 Lightning Zebina 0 0 200000 0 Lightning was responsible for at least three house fires in Jefferson County. The 8/1/1973 8/1/1973 Lightning Jefferson 0 0 50000 0 ELECTRICAL 3/18/1970 3/22/1970 Lightning - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 314.47 0 HEAVY RAINS, WIND AND LIGHTNING 6/29/1969 6/29/1969 Lightning - Wind Jefferson 0 0 1020.41 0 Wind and lightning 7/22/1967 7/22/1967 Lightning - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 420.17 0 Wind, rain, and lightning 3/15/1964 3/15/1964 Lightning - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0.03 0 1470.59 0 WIND, RAIN, ELECRICAL 6/14/1963 6/14/1963 Lightning - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 138.89 138.89 Wind, rain and electrical 8/7/1962 8/8/1962 Lightning - Wind Jefferson 0 0.01 427.35 0 Wind and lightning 6/2/1968 6/2/1968 Hail - Lightning - Wind Jefferson 0 0 314.47 0 Wind, hail, and lightning 11/21/1965 11/22/1965 Hail - Lightning - Wind Jefferson 0 0 31.45 0 electrical, wind and hail 5/16/1962 5/16/1962 Hail - Lightning - Wind Jefferson 0 0.02 43.1 43.1 WIND, HAIL, ELECTRICAL 5/25/1960 5/26/1960 Hail - Lightning - Wind Jefferson 0 0 31.45 31.45 WIND, HAIL, ELECTRICAL 4/23/1971 4/23/1971 Hail - Lightning - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 314.47 314.47 WIND, RAIN, HAIL, AND LIGHTNING 7/9/1967 7/9/1967 Hail - Lightning - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 31.45 314.47 Wind, rain, hail, and lightning 5/27/1963 5/27/1963 Hail - Lightning - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 66.67 6.67 Rain, wind, hail and electrical 7/17/1962 7/17/1962 Hail - Lightning - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 31.45 31.45 Wind, hail, rain, and lightning ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DAT E END_DAT E EVTYPE BGN_LOC ATI MAG FATA LITIE S INJU RIES PROPD MG CROPD MG REMARKS 6/3/1959 Hail Jefferson 1.50 inch 2/10/1960 2/10/1960 Hail - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 31.45 0 WIND, RAIN, HAIL 3/30/1960 3/30/1960 Hail - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 31.45 0 WIND, HAIL, RAIN 5/25/1960 5/26/1960 Hail - Lightning - Wind Jefferson 0 0 31.45 31.45 WIND, HAIL, ELECTRICAL 5/25/1961 5/25/1961 Hail - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 7.69 76.92 Hail, wind and rain 6/11/1961 6/11/1961 Hail - Wind Jefferson 0 0 147.06 14.71 Wind and hail 5/16/1962 5/16/1962 Hail - Lightning - Wind Jefferson 0 0.02 43.1 43.1 WIND, HAIL, ELECTRICAL 5/28/1962 5/28/1962 Hail - Wind Jefferson 0 0 111.11 11.11 WIND AND HAIL 7/17/1962 7/17/1962 Hail - Lightning - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 31.45 31.45 Wind, hail, rain, and lightning 7/24/1962 7/24/1962 Hail - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 51.02 5.1 Wind, hail, and rain 5/27/1963 5/27/1963 Hail - Lightning - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 66.67 6.67 Rain, wind, hail and electrical 7/11/1963 7/11/1963 Hail - Wind Jefferson 0 0 14.71 14.71 Hail and wind 5/21/1964 5/21/1964 Hail - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 2380.95 238.1 WIND, RAIN, AND HAIL 4/12/1965 4/12/1965 Hail - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm Jefferson 0 0 45.05 45.05 Hail and rain 11/21/1965 11/22/1965 Hail - Lightning - Wind Jefferson 0 0 31.45 0 electrical, wind and hail 7/9/1967 7/9/1967 Hail - Lightning - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 31.45 314.47 Wind, rain, hail, and lightning 6/2/1968 6/2/1968 Hail - Lightning - Wind Jefferson 0 0 314.47 0 Wind, hail, and lightning 4/18/1969 Hail Jefferson .75 inch 4/23/1971 4/23/1971 Hail - Lightning - Severe Storm/Thunder Storm - Wind Jefferson 0 0 314.47 314.47 WIND, RAIN, HAIL, AND LIGHTNING 5/8/1971 5/8/1971 Hail Jefferson 0 0 0 25000 Hail 4/14/1984 4/14/1984 Hail Jefferson 0 0 0 50000 Hail 6/10/1993 6/10/1993 Hail Jefferson 0 0 0 50000 Hail 4/26/1996 Hail Louisville 1.75 in. Jefferson County 911 reported golfball size hail near Clarksmill Road. 4/3/1998 Hail Bartow 1.00 in. 4/17/1998 Hail Louisville 0.75 in. 4/22/1998 Hail Louisville 1.00 in. Jefferson county 911 reported quarter size hail between Louisville and Wrens. 4/24/1999 Hail Louisville 1.75 in. The public reported hail a little larger than golf ball size, strong winds, and power out in Louisville. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DAT E END_DAT E EVTYPE BGN_LOC ATI MAG FATA LITIE S INJU RIES PROPD MG CROPD MG REMARKS 8/24/2001 Hail Avera 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 The Avera Post Office reported dime size hail. 5/3/2002 Hail Louisville 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 The Jefferson county 911 center reported dime to quarter size hail. 7/6/2002 Hail Wrens 1.75 in. 0 0 0 0 The Wrens police department reported golf ball size hail. 7/21/2002 Wadley 3392.8 125981 129373.93 3/19/2003 Hail Louisville 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 The Jefferson county 911 center and the public both reported penny size hail. 4/7/2003 Hail Wrens 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 The Wrens Police Department reported quarter-sized hail. 5/2/2003 Hail Louisville 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 The Jefferson county 911 center reported penny-sized hail. 5/11/2003 Hail Louisville 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 The public reported nickel to quarter-sized hail halfway between Louisville and Wrens. 6/12/2004 Hail Stellaville 1.75 in. 0 0 0 0 The Jefferson County 911 center reported golf ball-sized hail in the Stellaville area. 4/13/2005 Hail Louisville 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 The Jefferson County 911 Center reported quarter-sized hail. 12/28/2005 12/28/2005 Hail Louisville 0 0 5000 0 The Columbia, SC Weather Forecast Office relayed a report from a storm spotter of golf ball- sized hail. 12/28/2005 Hail Louisville 1.75 in. 0 0 5000 0 The public reported penny-sized hail. 5/14/2006 Hail Louisville 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 The Jefferson County Emergency Management Director reported penny-sized hail. 5/14/2006 Hail Louisville 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 The public observed penny-sized hail. 7/28/2006 Hail Bartow 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 3/15/2008 3/15/2008 Hail Jefferson 0 0 300000 0 Hail (2.75) ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DAT E END_DAT E EVTYPE BGN_LOC ATI MAG FATA LITIE S INJU RIES PROPD MG CROPD MG REMARKS 3/15/2008 Hail Stapleton 2.75 in. 0 0 300000 0 7/22/2008 Hail Louisville 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 7/28/2008 7/28/2008 Hail Jefferson 1.75 in. 0 0 80000 0 Hail (1.75) 7/28/2008 Hail Wrens 1.75 in. 0 0 80000 0 8/4/2008 Hail Wadley 0.75 in. 0 0 0 0 6/20/2010 Hail Louisville 1.00 in. 0 0 0 0 9/25/2011 Hail Wrens 0.88 in. 0 0 0 0 9/27/2011 9/27/2011 Hail Jefferson 0 0 45000 0 9/27/2011 Hail Wadley 1.75 in. 0 0 45000 0 5/21/2013 Hail Wrens 0.88 in. 0 0 0 0 The public reported nickel sized hail in Wrens. ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Avera city City Hall Avera City Hall X 1000 $312,500 2014 $200,000 2,014 1 2 Avera city Water System Avera Water Tank X X 100 $325,000 2013 2 Avera city Fire Station Avera Fire Station X 4250 $100,000 2013 $200,000 2,013 2 5,350 $737,500 $400,000 $0 $0 1 Bartow town City Hall Bartow City Hall X X X X 1920 $209,300 2013 $53,500 2,013 3 2 Bartow town Fire Station Bartow Fire Dept and Emergency Shelter X X X X 7500 $330,630 2013 $38,500 2,013 1 2 Bartow town Water System Bartow Water Tower X X X X 100 $393,000 2013 $0 2 Bartow town Water System Bartow Water Well X X X X 275 $111,800 2013 $0 2 Bartow town Water System Bartow Water Well #2 X X X X 275 $119,700 2013 $0 2 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow wastewater Lift Station #1 X X X X 100 $70,300 2013 $0 2 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #2 X X X X 100 $71,400 2013 $0 2 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #3 X X X X 100 $69,000 2013 $0 2 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #4 X X X X 100 $60,500 2013 $0 2 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Lift Station #5 X X X X 100 $90,200 2013 $0 2 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Sewage Treatment Pond X X X X 10307 $50,400 2013 $0 2 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Sewage Holding Pond X X X X 13509 $46,400 2013 2 Bartow town Wastewater Treatment Plant Bartow Wastewater Sewage Effluent Pump Station X X X X 100 $63,700 2013 $0 2 Bartow town Other Bartow Community Center & Auditorium X X 11232 $1,342,200 2013 $250,000 2,013 1 2 Reporting for Wind Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Totals for Avera city, Hazard Score = 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wind Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Bartow town Other Bartow Fire Dept & Communications Bldg X X X 64 $17,100 2013 $60,000 2,013 2 Bartow town Other Bartow Museum X 2450 $826,847 2013 2,013 1 2 48,232 $3,872,477 $402,000 $0 $0 6 Jefferson County Hospital, Admissions Entrance Jefferson Hospital X X X 76000 $57,000,000 2013 2 Jefferson County Other Hardeman Building (Swann) X X X 8278 $250,000 2013 $17,000 2,013 1 2 Jefferson County County Jail Old County Jail/IT/Purchasing X X X 7742 $500,000 2013 $28,000 2,013 1 2 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Chamber of Commerce/Murphy House X X 3281 $361,433 2013 $122,700 2,013 8 2 Jefferson County Library Jefferson County Library X 5000 $66,085 2013 $848,000 2,013 10 2 Jefferson County C&D JEFFERSON CO-US 1 (AVERA RD) (SL) X X 10000 $1,500,000 2013 2 Jefferson County Courthouse Jefferson County Courthouse X X 6065 $5,147,708 2013 $125,000 2,013 2 Jefferson County Courthouse Jefferson County Magistrate and Juvenile Court X 22000 $24,001,242 2013 20 2 Jefferson County County Correctional Institution Jefferson Co. Correction Facility X X X X 42446 $5,261,231 2013 $833,800 2,013 200 2 Jefferson County Other Ogeechee Service Center X X X X 10650 $900,000 2013 2,013 50 2 Jefferson County Other Jefferson Co. Law Enforcement Center X X X X 39892 $8,041,785 2013 $1,139,700 2,013 225 2 Jefferson County Emergency Services 1st Baptist Church Evac Center X X X 45075 $3,500,000 2013 5 2 Jefferson County Emergency Services Lions Club Evac. Center X X X 1000 $12,000 2013 2 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Commissioners Office/Long House X 3080 $339,300 2013 $110,300 2,013 30 2 Jefferson County Emergency Services Jefferson County Armory Transit EMA X 14040 $2,380,171 2013 $724,500 2,013 10 2 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Senior Center X X X 4924 $586,170 2013 $86,000 2,013 40 2 Totals for Bartow town, Hazard Score = 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wind Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Jefferson County Landfill Jefferson County Landfill (New) X X 15000 $1,062,166 2013 $363,200 2,013 6 2 Jefferson County Elementary School Carver Elementary X X 6600 $12,750,000 2013 $510,000 2,013 292 2 Jefferson County Elementary School Louisville Academy Elementary X X X 25047 $15,250,000 2013 $610,000 2,013 568 2 Jefferson County Other Wrens Elementary 78216 $20,500,000 2013 $820,000 2,013 637 2 Jefferson County Middle School Louisville Middle School X X 81642 $23,500,000 2013 $940,000 2,013 354 2 Jefferson County Middle School Wrens Middle School X X 59902 $17,000,000 2013 $680,000 2,013 315 2 Jefferson County High School, Public Jefferson County High School X X X 179142 $55,000,000 2013 $2,200,000 2,013 937 2 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Bus Shop X 4920 $750,000 2013 $140,000 2,013 5 2 Jefferson County Public Vocational Technical School Sandersville Tech X X X 10000 $1,930,505 2013 75 2 Jefferson County Other Jefferson County Health Dept X 6341 $841,815 2013 $191,700 2,013 20 2 Jefferson County Other JC Radio Tower X 100 $27,885 2013 $8,000 2,013 2 Jefferson County Other JC Building Department X 1000 $51,090 2013 $17,500 2,013 2 Jefferson County Other JC Fire TowerShop/Supply Building X 4072 $241,236 2013 $9,800 2,013 2 2 Jefferson County Other JC Recreation Dept X 1867 $1,300,621 2013 $29,600 2,013 2 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant McBride Lift Station X X 100 $48,750 2013 2 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant Hillcrest Station X X 100 $45,700 2013 2 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant US # 1 Bypass Lift Station X X 100 $47,500 2013 2 Jefferson County Wastewater Treatment Plant Matthews Station X X 100 $47,500 2013 2 773,722 $260,241,893 $10,554,800 $0 $0 3,811 Totals for Jefferson County, Hazard Score = 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wind Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Louisville city Water System Booster pump station X X 100 $175,000 2013 2 Louisville city City Hall Louisvill City Hall X 7200 $550,000 2013 $350,000 2,013 10 2 Louisville city Fire Station Louisville Fire Station X 7200 $750,000 2014 $850,000 2,014 4 2 Louisville city Wastewater Treatment Plant Louisville Tech Lift Station X X 50 $125,000 2014 $125,000 $1,000 2 Louisville city Wastewater Treatment Plant Louisville Lift Station at HS X X 50 $150,000 2014 $150,000 $1,000 2 Louisville city Other Physicians Health Group Louisville X 9560 $2,400,000 2014 $500,000 2,014 20 2 Louisville city Other NCA Northside Dialysis Center X X 7207 $1,261,225 2014 10 2 Louisville city Water System Louisville City WaterTower X X X 100 $950,000 2014 2 Louisville city Airport Louisville City Airport X X 3200 $543,665 2013 2 Louisville city City Hall Louisville OLD City Hall X 10000 $500,000 2006 2 Louisville city Water System Louisville Water Works X X X 2400 $4,425,000 2014 2 Louisville city Water System Louisville Water Tower 100 $712,500 2014 2 Louisville city Water System City of Louisville Water Tank X X 100 $500,000 2006 2 Louisville city Other Market House X X 600 $100,000 2013 2 Louisville city Other OCI Nursing Home X 45062 $5,000,000 2013 225 2 92,929 $18,142,390 $1,700,000 $275,000 $2,000 269 Stapleton city Water System Stapleton Water Tank #2 X X X 100 $500,000 2012 $200,000 2 Stapleton city Fire Station Stapleton Fire house & Emergency Shelter X X X 6000 $394,800 2012 $700,000 2,012 $100,000 2 Stapleton city Water System Stapleton Water Tank #1 X X X 100 $500,000 2012 $200,000 2 Stapleton city City Hall Stapleton City Hall & Emergency Shelter X 3000 $383,700 2012 $30,000 2,012 $150,000 2 2 9,200 $1,778,500 $730,000 $650,000 $0 2 Wadley city Other Physicans Health Group Wadley X 2318 $405,650 2013 $250,000 2,013 10 2 Totals for Stapleton city, Hazard Score = 2 Totals for Louisville city, Hazard Score = 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wind Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Wadley city City Hall Wadley City Hall X X 3645 $1,500,000 2014 $250,000 2,014 5 2 Wadley city Water System Wadley Well House X X 100 $600,000 2013 2 Wadley city Adult Edu. Center Wadley Community Complex X X X 6000 $700,000 2014 2 Wadley city Library Wadley Public Library X X 3114 $510,000 2013 $538,200 2,013 5 2 Wadley city Water System Wadley Elevated Water Tank X X 100 $650,000 2013 2 Wadley city Water System Wadley Water Tower #2 X X 100 $500,000 2013 2 Wadley city Other Glendale Nursing Home X X X X 26500 $1,610,863 2014 $750,000 2,014 120 2 Wadley city Other Wadley Gym X X 1200 $400,000 2014 2 43,077 $6,876,513 $1,788,200 $0 $0 140 Wrens city Water System King Mill Well (Well E) X X 50 $750,000 2014 2 Wrens city Other KA-MIN #1 X X X X X 10 $250,000 2014 2 Wrens city Other Border Regulator Station X X X X 100 $100,000 2012 2 Wrens city Other Calcine Meter Set X X X 100 $225,000 2012 2 Wrens city Other Southern Tap #1 X X X 50 $750,000 2014 2 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Bushy Creek Lift Station X X 100 $400,000 2014 2 Wrens city Other Southern Tap #2 X X X 50 $750,000 2012 2 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant West Walker St Lift Station X X 100 $300,000 2014 2 Wrens city Water System Water Booster Station X X 1000 $500,000 2012 2 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Highway 88 Lift Station X X 100 $350,000 2014 2 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Stephens St Lift Station X X 100 $350,000 2014 2 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Waynesboro Highway Lift Station X X 100 $400,000 2014 2 Wrens city Other Ka-Min #2 X X X 1955 $250,000 2014 2 Wrens city Other IMERYS Meter Set X X 10 $300,000 2014 2 Totals for Wadley city, Hazard Score = 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- Government Jurisdiction Type Name or Structure Description Essential Facility" src="img/rpt_essfa Transportation System" Lifeline System" src="img/rpt_lifelin High Potential Loss" Haz Mat Facility" src="img/rpt_hazm Important Facility" src="img/rpt_imp2.j Vulnerable Population" Economic Assets" src="img/rpt_ecoas Special Considerations" Historic Considerations" Other " src="img/rpt_other Size of Bldg. (sq. ft.) Replace Value Replace Value Year Contents Value Contents Value Year Functional Value Displace Cost per day) Occupancy Hazard Score Reporting for Wind Hazard by Jurisdiction Grouped by Hazard Score Wrens city Other Physicians Health Group Wrens X X 5802 $1,015,350 2013 $500,000 2,013 20 2 Wrens city Other Wrens Community Center X 3400 $500,000 2014 $50,000 20 2 Wrens city City Hall Wrens City Hall X X 7500 $1,125,000 2013 $150,000 10 2 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X X 200 $625,000 2014 2 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 144 $300,000 2014 $50,000 2 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X 150 $625,000 2014 2 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 64 $75,000 2014 $25,000 2 Wrens city Wastewater Treatment Plant Wrens Sewage Treatment Plant X X X 1400 $3,250,000 2014 $125,000 2 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X 200 $625,000 2014 2 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 800 $75,000 2014 $25,000 2 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Tank X X X 250 $687,500 2014 2 Wrens city Library Wrens Old Library Building X X X 3000 $625,000 2013 $549,200 2,013 2 Wrens city Water System Wrens Water Pumping Station X X X 800 $125,000 2014 $25,000 2 Wrens city Other Wrens Medical Center X X 400 $875,000 2014 $200,000 20 2 27,935 $16,202,850 $1,699,200 $0 $0 70 1,000,445 $307,852,123 $17,274,200 $925,000 $2,000 4,299 Totals for Wrens city, Hazard Score = 2 Grand Totals - Pre-Disaster Mitigation - Fiscal Year: 2009 - Report created: Aug 24, 2014 - For more information call GEMA Pre-Disaster Mitigation at 1-800-TRY-GEMA ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County Wind Hazard Map from Georgia Mitigation Information System. Score Original Value Description 5 > 120 mph 3 second gust greater than 120 mph 4 110 to 119 mph 3 100 to 109 mph 2 90 to 99 mph (or ZONE IV) This score is also given to an area with Zone IV of the "Design Wind Speed Map for Community Shelters," representing an area exposed to 250 mph winds. This area is the Northwestern corner of the state. 1 < 90 mph Keysville Midville Vidette Waynesboro Summertown Edge Hill Gibson Mitchell Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Hephzibah Davisboro Harrison Riddleville Sandersville Tennille ---PAGE BREAK--- Avera Wind Hazard Map from Georgia Mitigation Information System. Score Original Value Description 5 > 120 mph 3 second gust greater than 120 mph 4 110 to 119 mph 3 100 to 109 mph 2 90 to 99 mph (or ZONE IV) This score is also given to an area with Zone IV of the "Design Wind Speed Map for Community Shelters," representing an area exposed to 250 mph winds. This area is the Northwestern corner of the state. 1 < 90 mph Avera City Hall City Hall Avera Water Tank Water System Avera Fire Station Fire Station Avera ---PAGE BREAK--- Bartow Wind Hazard Map from Georgia Mitigation Information System. Score Original Value Description 5 > 120 mph 3 second gust greater than 120 mph 4 110 to 119 mph 3 100 to 109 mph 2 90 to 99 mph (or ZONE IV) This score is also given to an area with Zone IV of the "Design Wind Speed Map for Community Shelters," representing an area exposed to 250 mph winds. This area is the Northwestern corner of the state. 1 < 90 mph Bartow ---PAGE BREAK--- Louisville Wind Hazard Map from Georgia Mitigation Information System. Score Original Value Description 5 > 120 mph 3 second gust greater than 120 mph 4 110 to 119 mph 3 100 to 109 mph 2 90 to 99 mph (or ZONE IV) This score is also given to an area with Zone IV of the "Design Wind Speed Map for Community Shelters," representing an area exposed to 250 mph winds. This area is the Northwestern corner of the state. 1 < 90 mph Louisville ---PAGE BREAK--- Stapleton Wind Hazard Map from Georgia Mitigation Information System. Score Original Value Description 5 > 120 mph 3 second gust greater than 120 mph 4 110 to 119 mph 3 100 to 109 mph 2 90 to 99 mph (or ZONE IV) This score is also given to an area with Zone IV of the "Design Wind Speed Map for Community Shelters," representing an area exposed to 250 mph winds. This area is the Northwestern corner of the state. 1 < 90 mph Stapleton ---PAGE BREAK--- Wadley Wind Hazard Map from Georgia Mitigation Information System. Score Original Value Description 5 > 120 mph 3 second gust greater than 120 mph 4 110 to 119 mph 3 100 to 109 mph 2 90 to 99 mph (or ZONE IV) This score is also given to an area with Zone IV of the "Design Wind Speed Map for Community Shelters," representing an area exposed to 250 mph winds. This area is the Northwestern corner of the state. 1 < 90 mph Wadley ---PAGE BREAK--- Wrens Wind Hazard Map from Georgia Mitigation Information System. Score Original Value Description 5 > 120 mph 3 second gust greater than 120 mph 4 110 to 119 mph 3 100 to 109 mph 2 90 to 99 mph (or ZONE IV) This score is also given to an area with Zone IV of the "Design Wind Speed Map for Community Shelters," representing an area exposed to 250 mph winds. This area is the Northwestern corner of the state. 1 < 90 mph Wrens ---PAGE BREAK--- Winter Storm Southeastern snow or ice storms often form when an area of low pressure moves eastward across the northern Gulf of Mexico. To produce a significant winter storm in the south, not only must temperatures be cold enough, but there must also be enough moisture in the atmosphere to produce adequate precipitation. A major winter storm can last for several days and be accompanied by high winds, ice and freezing rain, heavy snowfall, and cold temperatures. These conditions can make driving conditions very dangerous, as well as bring down trees and power lines. Winter storms are not spatially defined and affect the entire planning equally. The committee researched historical data from the NCDC, SHELDUS, the National Weather Service, as well as information from past newspaper articles relating to winter storms in Jefferson County. There have been 41 winter storm events recorded in the county over the last 122 years with an estimated property damage of $417,089. Although winter storms are infrequent in the south, they have the potential to cause excessive damage to a community and disrupt the lives of residents. Based on the hazard frequency table located in Appendix D there is an 80% chance of an annual winter storm event. The percentage is the same for all jurisdictions. There have been 41 recorded winter storms. There is an 80% chance of an annual winter storm event. Winter storms can be more accurately predicted than most other natural hazards, making it possible to give advance warning to communities. The National Weather Service issues winter storm warnings and advisories as these storms make their way south. Given the infrequency of these types of storms, southern communities are still not properly equipped to sustain the damage and destruction caused by severe winter storms. To summarize, there are approximately 37,363 structures/properties in the county totaling more than $1.3 billon with a population of 16,930. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE FATALI TIES INJURI ES PROPDMG CROPDMG REMARKS 01/1893 Snow 4 inches 02/1894 Snow 3 inches 1/00/1900 Snow 3 inches 02/00/1901 Snow 8 inches 01/00/1912 Snow 2.5 inches 02/00/1912 Snow 1.5 inches 02/00/1914 Snow 9 inches 12/00/1935 Snow 3.00 inches 01/00/1936 Snow 2 inches 11/00/1950 Snow .5 inches 02/00/1958 Snow .5 inches 3/1/1960 3/2/1960 Winter Weather 0 0 69444.44 0 GLAZE, SLEET, SNOW 1/25/1961 1/26/1961 Winter Weather 0 0 314.46 0 GLAZE AND SLEET 3/2/1962 3/3/1962 Winter Weather 0 0 238.1 0 Glaze 12/31/1963 12/31/1963 Winter Weather 0 0 31446.54 0 SNOW AND ICE STORM 1/13/1964 1/13/1964 Winter Weather 0 0 3.14 0 Snow and sleet 1/29/1966 1/31/1966 Winter Weather 0 0 314.47 314.47 SNOW AND COLDWAVE 1/8/1970 1/10/1970 Winter Weather 0 0 314.46 0 COLD WAVE 2/9/1973 2/10/1973 Winter Weather 0 0 40000 0 14.8 in 1/1/1977 1/31/1977 Winter Weather 0 0 31446.54 0 Extreme Cold 2.5 inches 2/17/1979 2/18/1979 Winter Weather 0 0 5208.33 520.83 snow and sleet 2 inches 2/5/1980 2/6/1980 Winter Weather 0 0 549.45 0 Snow 1 inch 1/20/1983 1/21/1983 Winter Weather 0 0 5208.33 0 Winter Storm .30 inhes 12/00/1993 Snow 2.20 inches 1/15/1994 1/15/1994 Winter Weather 0 0 515.46 0 FREEZE 02/00/1996 Snow 1.3 inches ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE FATALI TIES INJURI ES PROPDMG CROPDMG REMARKS 1/2/2002 1/2/2002 Winter Weather 0 0 83333.33 0 Most of the precipitation fell as snow, except for the far southeastern counties of central Georgia, where a mixture of sleet, snow, and freezing rain occurred. Schools were closed in many counties for two to three days. 1/2/2002 Winter Storm 0 0 0 0.00K From early morning through mid‐evening on the 2nd about a 12 hour period of wet snow, sleet, and light freezing rain affected these areas. Ice accumulations averaged less than one‐ quarter inch, but were significant enough, when combined with a wet snow in some areas, to cause large tree limbs, and even some trees (especially pines), to fall on power lines, roads, and even some homes. Several power outages resulted. The hardest hit counties with glaze ice accumulations from freezing rain, freezing drizzle, and snow were Washington, Johnson, Jefferson, Emanuel, and Laurens counties. All together, several hundred trees were damaged or destroyed and thousands of people in these counties lost power during the 2‐day storm. Many people did not have any power for 3 days or more. Emergency electrical crews were called out from out‐of‐state to assist with the cleanup and restoration of power. 2/26/2002 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill 0 0 0 0.00K ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE FATALI TIES INJURI ES PROPDMG CROPDMG REMARKS 3/1/2002 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill 0 0 0 0.00K 5/18/2002 Cold/Wind Chill 0 0 0 0.00K 1/11/2003 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill 0 0 0 0.00K 1/23/2003 Extreme Cold/Wind Chill 0 0 0 0.00K 1/6/2004 Ice Storm 0 400 cutomers without power 12/26/2004 Ice Storm 3000 cutomers without power trees and limbs down 1/28/2005 1/30/2005 Winter Weather 0 0 97916.66 0 Jefferson: 1/4 inch of glaze ice, < 1.0 inch of sleet ‐ Numerous trees and power lines were down throughout the county. More than 14,000 residents of the county, which includes most of the county, were left without power. 1/28/2005 Winter Storm 0 0 50000 0.00K 2/12/2010 Heavy Snow 0 0 0 0.00K The Jefferson County 911 Center reported 2.0 inches of snow. 12/25/2010 Winter Weather 0 0 0 0.00K The Jefferson County 911 Center reported only trace amounts of snowfall across the county. 1/28/2014 A low pressure system moving up the GA/SC coast produced freezing rain, sleet, and snow over the CSRA closing schools, businesses, and some highways. Snow amounts of 1 to 3 inches were common across the area. ---PAGE BREAK--- BGN_DATE END_DATE EVTYPE FATALI TIES INJURI ES PROPDMG CROPDMG REMARKS 2/12/2014 Ice Storm A significant winter storm impacted north and portions of central Georgia on Tuesday the 11th and Wednesday the 12th. For areas south of the Atlanta Metropolitan area and into central Georgia, the event began Wednesday morning the 12th. Rain mixed with and changed over to freezing rain through the morning hours, resulting in catastrophic ice accretions of a half to one inch of ice, with localized higher amounts, especially along the Interstate 20 corridor. Thousands of trees were downed and widespread power outages were reported, with some customers without power for days. The event ended as a round of light snow Wednesday evening. ---PAGE BREAK--- Total Snowfall, LOUISVILLE 1 E, GEORGIA 11:26:59 AM] LOUISVILLE 1 E, GEORGIA Total Snowfall (Inches) (095314) File last updated on May 16, Note Provisional Data After Year/Month 201205 a = 1 day missing, b = 2 days missing, c = 3 days, z = 26 or more days missing, A = Accumulations present Long-term means based on columns; thus, the row may not sum (or average) to the long-term annual value. MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE NUMBER OF MISSING DAYS : 5 Individual Months not used for annual or statistics if more than 5 days are missing. Individual Years not used for annual statistics if any month in that year has more than 5 days missing. YEAR(S) JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN ANN 1892-93 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 4.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 4.00 1893-94 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 3.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 3.00 1894-95 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.40 0.00 z 1.50 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 1.90 1895-96 5.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1896-97 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1897-98 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1898-99 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1899-00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 3.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 3.00 1900-01 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 8.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 8.00 1901-02 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 2.50 0.00 z 0.30 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 2.80 1902-03 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1903-04 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1904-05 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1905-06 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1906-07 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1907-08 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1908-09 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1909-10 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.30 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.30 1910-11 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1911-12 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 2.50 1.50 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 4.00 ---PAGE BREAK--- Total Snowfall, LOUISVILLE 1 E, GEORGIA 11:26:59 AM] 1912-13 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1913-14 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 9.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 9.00 1914-15 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1915-16 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1916-17 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1917-18 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1918-19 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1919-20 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1920-21 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1921-22 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1922-23 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1923-24 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1924-25 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1925-26 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1926-27 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1927-28 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1928-29 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1929-30 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1930-31 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1931-32 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1932-33 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1933-34 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1934-35 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 1.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 1.00 1935-36 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 3.00 2.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 5.00 1936-37 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1937-38 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1938-39 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1939-40 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1940-41 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.10 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1941-42 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 0.00 1942-43 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1943-44 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 1.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 1.00 1944-45 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1945-46 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1946-47 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1947-48 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 1948-49 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1949-50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1950-51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 1951-52 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1952-53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1953-54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1954-55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 a 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1955-56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 a 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1956-57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1957-58 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 1958-59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 a 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1959-60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ---PAGE BREAK--- Total Snowfall, LOUISVILLE 1 E, GEORGIA 11:26:59 AM] 1960-61 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 b 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1961-62 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1962-63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1963-64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 b 0.00 a 0.00 c 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1964-65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1965-66 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1966-67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1967-68 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 c 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1968-69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1969-70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1970-71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1971-72 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 1972-73 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 14.80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.80 1973-74 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1974-75 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1975-76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1976-77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.50 1977-78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1978-79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1979-80 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1980-81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1981-82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1982-83 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 1983-84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1984-85 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1985-86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1986-87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1987-88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 a 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1988-89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 a 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1989-90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1990-91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1991-92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1992-93 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1993-94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.20 1994-95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1995-96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 a 1.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.30 1996-97 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1997-98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1998-99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1999-00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2000-01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2001-02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.10 2002-03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2003-04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2004-05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2005-06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2006-07 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 z 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2007-08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 ---PAGE BREAK--- Total Snowfall, LOUISVILLE 1 E, GEORGIA 11:26:59 AM] 2008-09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2009-10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 2010-11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.60 2011-12 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 z 0.00 Period of Record Statistics MEAN 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.14 0.25 0.60 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.34 S.D. 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.54 0.81 2.19 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.81 SKEW 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.68 4.21 3.25 4.85 7.68 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.33 MAX 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 3.00 4.00 14.80 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.10 MIN 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NO YRS 63 63 63 63 62 70 74 78 62 63 62 63 54 ---PAGE BREAK--- GA SC FL NC AL TN Ware Burke Clinch Hall Early Laurens Worth Bulloch Lee Coffee Wayne Charlton Floyd Tift Fulton Long Decatur Harris Screven Troup Emanuel Liberty Carroll Irwin Dodge Camden Polk Telfair Grady Bryan Colquitt Wilkes Brooks Dooly Appling Thomas Sumter Mitchell Tattnall Bartow Jones Cobb Gilmer Walker Taylor Elbert Talbot Echols Berrien Stewart Coweta Fannin Washington Rabun Macon Bibb Jasper Baker Wilcox Hart Union Brantley Terrell Monroe Hancock Crisp Miller Pierce Greene Henry Upson Gwinnett Heard Pike Walton Gordon Clay Morgan Jenkins Putnam Randolph Cook Bacon Turner Cherokee Jackson Atkinson Butts Calhoun Dougherty Ben Hill Towns Pickens Jefferson Lowndes Marion Murray Twiggs Chatham Effingham Toombs McIntosh Wilkinson Meriwether Houston White Oglethorpe Warren Banks Paulding Wheeler Johnson Crawford Newton Baldwin Pulaski Dade DeKalb Lincoln Jeff Davis Whitfield Madison Lumpkin Richmond Franklin Candler Haralson Lanier Columbia Evans Lamar Chattooga McDuffie Seminole Dawson Bleckley Fayette Webster Schley Treutlen Barrow Oconee Douglas Peach Habersham Spalding Catoosa Muscogee Taliaferro Clarke Clayton Montgomery Stephens Quitman Chattahoochee Glascock Rockdale 0 20 40 60 80 10 Miles Ü February 9-11, 1973 Winter Storm NOAA Created by Brian Laughlin, August 14, 2013. Snowfall (inches) < 2" 2-5" 5-10" 10-15" > 15" RSI = 12.52, Category 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- GA SC FL NC AL TN Ware Burke Clinch Hall Early Laurens Worth Bulloch Lee Coffee Wayne Charlton Floyd Tift Fulton Long Decatur Harris Screven Troup Emanuel Liberty Carroll Irwin Dodge Camden Polk Telfair Grady Bryan Colquitt Wilkes Brooks Dooly Appling Thomas Sumter Mitchell Tattnall Bartow Jones Cobb Gilmer Walker Taylor Elbert Talbot Echols Berrien Stewart Coweta Fannin Washington Rabun Macon Bibb Jasper Baker Wilcox Hart Union Brantley Terrell Monroe Hancock Crisp Miller Pierce Greene Marion Henry Upson Gwinnett Heard Pike Walton Gordon Clay Morgan Jenkins Putnam Randolph Cook Bacon Turner Cherokee Jackson Atkinson Banks Butts Newton Calhoun Dougherty Ben Hill Towns Pickens Jefferson Lowndes Murray Twiggs Chatham Effingham Toombs McIntosh Wilkinson Meriwether Houston White Oglethorpe Warren Paulding Wheeler Johnson Crawford Baldwin Pulaski Dade DeKalb Lincoln Jeff Davis Whitfield Madison Lumpkin Richmond Franklin Candler Haralson Lanier Columbia Evans Lamar Chattooga McDuffie Seminole Dawson Bleckley Fayette Webster Schley Treutlen Barrow Oconee Douglas Peach Habersham Spalding Catoosa Muscogee Taliaferro Clarke Clayton Montgomery Stephens Quitman Chattahoochee Glascock Rockdale 0 20 40 60 80 10 Miles Ü March 12-15, 1993 Winter Storm Text NOAA Created by Brian Laughlin, August 14, 2013. Snowfall (inches) < 2" 2-5" 5-10" 10-15" > 15" RSI = 20.572, Category 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- GA SC FL AL NC TN Ware Burke Clinch Hall Early Laurens Worth Bulloch Lee Coffee Wayne Charlton Floyd Tift Fulton Long Decatur Harris Screven Troup Emanuel Liberty Carroll Irwin Dodge Camden Polk Telfair Grady Bryan Colquitt Wilkes Brooks Dooly Appling Thomas Sumter Mitchell Tattnall Bartow Jones Cobb Gilmer Walker Taylor Elbert Talbot Echols Berrien Stewart Coweta Fannin Washington Rabun Macon Bibb Jasper Baker Wilcox Hart Union Brantley Terrell Monroe Hancock Crisp Miller Pierce Greene Marion Henry Upson Gwinnett Heard Pike Walton Gordon Clay Morgan Jenkins Putnam Randolph Cook Bacon Turner Cherokee Jackson Atkinson Banks Butts Newton Calhoun Dougherty Ben Hill Towns Pickens Jefferson Lowndes Murray Twiggs Chatham Effingham Toombs McIntosh Wilkinson Meriwether Houston White Oglethorpe Warren Paulding Wheeler Johnson Crawford Baldwin Pulaski Dade DeKalb Lincoln Jeff Davis Whitfield Madison Lumpkin Richmond Franklin Candler Haralson Lanier Columbia Evans Lamar Chattooga McDuffie Seminole Dawson Bleckley Fayette Webster Schley Treutlen Barrow Oconee Douglas Peach Habersham Spalding Catoosa Muscogee Taliaferro Clarke Clayton Montgomery Stephens Quitman Chattahoochee Glascock Rockdale 0 20 40 60 80 10 Miles Ü January 9-11, 2011 Winter Storm Text NOAA Created by Brian Laughlin, August 14, 2013. Snowfall (inches) < 2" 2-5" 5-10" 10-15" > 15" RSI = 4.158, Category 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County APPENDIX B GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT TRENDS COMMUNITY INFORMATION ---PAGE BREAK--- JEFFERSON COUNTY Joint Comprehensive Plan 2004-2024 Prepared by the Central Savannah River Area Regional Development Center for Jefferson County, Georgia and the cities of Avera, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, Wadley and Wrens, Georgia. ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 1 P O P U L A T I O N INTRODUCTION Taking a broad look at a community’s population growth from the past, to the present and into the future is essential to any comprehensive planning process. This section provides a basis for the Economic Development, Transportation, Community Facilities, Housing and Land Use elements of Jefferson County’s 10-year Comprehensive Plan update. The dynamics of Jefferson County’s past population trends, present population conditions and future estimates of population growth will lay the groundwork for the community’s initiatives for growth in the next ten years. Future population forecasts supply a vital picture for the planning of infrastructure improvements and land development patterns that are consistent with the goals and policies established in the other elements of this Plan. A combination of data resources, including the United States 2000 Census Bureau, Woods and Poole Economics, Inc., Georgia Department of Labor, and Georgia Department of Education are utilized to create the most accurate portrait of Jefferson County’s population dynamics. The methodology used in population projections greatly affects their outcome. The most simple and least time-consuming method is trend analysis of population change. This method utilized past tendencies to make projections about the future. Cohort component analysis makes estimates based on three main factors affecting population change: birth rate, death rate, and migration. Neither method considers more comprehensive factors affecting population changes. The Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. method is based on a large computer aggregation that contains historic census data and models population growth on natural increase and migration based on job creation. The model balances projections across the state and the nation so that changes in one region are reflected in another. The planning process requires that one population projection method be consistently used to determine plan requirements. Woods & Poole Economics (2002) projections will be used throughout the comprehensive plan. Where municipal population projections are unavailable, the county growth or decline rate will be used to determine trends. Setting Jefferson County is one of 14 counties that comprise the Central Savannah River Area (CSRA). The county is a member of the Central Savannah River Area Regional Development Center (RDC) located in Augusta. Eighty-two (82) percent of the CSRA’s population resides in Augusta-Richmond, Columbia and McDuffie Counties. This tri- county metropolis is part of the five county Augusta-Aiken Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). Aiken and Edgefield Counties comprise the South Carolina portion of the Augusta-Aiken MSA. The counties surrounding the CSRA’s center hub, Augusta, have traditionally been its bedroom communities. Yet, each surrounding county is working diligently to improve their employment base so as not to be economically dependent on Richmond County. The area outside of the Augusta-Aiken MSA is rural and economically dependent on agriculture and manufacturing. Jefferson, Washington and Johnson Counties as well as the western half of McDuffie County are Kaolin dependant areas. Timber is the prime agricultural commodity in Jefferson County and in the surrounding rural areas. The ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 2 P O P U L A T I O N manufacturing of kaolin is a focus of the region’s industry. These three areas, as well as Burke, Emmanuel, Jenkins, Johnson and Screven Counties, are also impacted by the Floridian Aquifer. The aquifer supplies approximately 50% of Georgia’s water supply. The northern and southern tips of Jefferson County are Enterprise Communities. Based on census tract analysis and a designation by the federal government, the Enterprise Community classification deems these two areas in the county as some of the poorest of the region and thus, warranting special attention. An Enterprise Community receives money from the federal government for the implementation of new and innovative projects to help the area. Other Enterprise Communities in the CSRA include the entire lower half of Warren County, the northeastern portion of Hancock County, the western majority of Taliaferro County and one-third of eastern Burke County. POPULATION Jefferson County and the municipalities have undergone slow but gradual population decline over the last two decades (Table P-1). The county has lost 1,137 of its population, representing a 6.1% decline. In percentage terms, Wadley has lost the most population at 14.3% while Wrens’ population decline was the lowest at 4.1%. Only Louisville among the municipalities has regained some of the population losses of the 1980s in the 1990s. Population projections for the county and municipalities highlight very limited population growth through the planning period. Population in Jefferson County and the municipalities is projected to increase 1.2% through 2025 (Table P-2), significantly below the projected rural CSRA growth rate of 10.5% and state (+35.9) and national (+27) averages. Table P-2: Population Change, 1980-2025 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Jefferson County N/A -2.7% -2.8% 0.4% -0.4% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Avera N/A -7.2% -7.8% 1.4% 0.9% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Bartow N/A -5.3% -5.6% -15% -17% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Louisville N/A -7.1% -7.6% 6.1% 5.6% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Stapleton N/A -4.6% -5.1% -4.5% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Wadley N/A 0.1% 0.1% 7.3% -7.9% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Wrens N/A 0.4% 0.3% -1.7% 1.7% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole (2002); Calculations by CSRA RDC N/A: Not Available Table P-1: Total Population, 1980-2025 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Jefferson County 18,403 17,906 17,408 17,337 17,266 17,214 17,234 17,264 17,358 17,448 Avera 248 230 212 215 217 216 217 218 219 220 Bartow 357 338 319 312 304 303 306 308 309 311 Louisville 2,823 2,622 2,421 2,567 2,712 2,704 2,707 2,712 2,726 2,739 Stapleton 388 370 351 335 318 317 318 319 320 321 Wadley 2,438 2,442 2,446 2,267 2,088 2,082 2,085 2,090 2,103 2,116 Wrens 2,415 2,405 2,396 2,355 2,314 2,307 2,310 2,316 2,328 2,330 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole (2002) ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 3 P O P U L A T I O N Households Household growth change varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction in Jefferson County and the municipalities. In the unincorporated area, household growth has been continual in the past two decades, increasing 5.8% between 1980 and 2000. Among the municipalities, only Louisville Wrens, and Avera reported an increase in households since 1980. Household growth in Louisville and Wrens reflects a trend of more single people and couples without children residing in the county’s two most populous cities. Household growth in the county and municipalities is projected to increase 1.1% through 2025. Table P-3: Total Households, 1980-2025 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Jefferson County 5,993 6,359 6,130 6,234 6,344 6,410 6,458 6,485 6,469 6,419 Avera 92 92 92 95 99 100 111 111 110 109 Bartow 120 112 104 100 95 96 97 97 96 95 Louisville 985 930 875 935 994 1,004 1,111 1,115 1,112 1,093 Stapleton 146 139 131 120 110 111 112 112 111 110 Wadley 778 808 838 802 765 772 776 779 777 761 Wrens 849 867 888 896 903 1,003 1,110 1,114 1,111 1,092 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole (2002); Calculations by CSRA RDC Average household size has continually declined in Jefferson County and the municipalities in the past two decades (Table P-4). Between 1980 and 2000, average household size declined by 0.36 in the unincorporated area, 0.26 in Louisville, 0.41 in Wadley and 0.21 in Wrens. Since 1990, average household size has decreased by 0.42 in Avera, 0.4 in Bartow, and 0.39 in Stapleton. Average household size throughout the county and municipalities is projected to decline by an average of 0.03 through 2025. Table P-4: Average Household Size, 1980-2025 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Jefferson County 3.01 2.81 2.77 2.72 2.65 2.61 2.59 2.58 2.59 2.62 Avera N/A N/A 2.30 2.09 1.88 1.84 1.82 1.81 1.82 1.85 Bartow N/A N/A 2.90 2.70 2.50 2.46 2.44 2.43 2.44 2.47 Louisville 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.57 2.44 2.40 2.38 2.37 2.38 2.41 Stapleton N/A N/A 2.70 N/A 2.31 2.27 2.25 2.24 2.25 2.28 Wadley 3.02 2.91 2.80 2.70 2.61 2.57 2.55 2.54 2.55 2.58 Wrens 2.85 2.78 2.70 2.67 2.64 2.60 2.58 2.57 2.58 2.61 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole (2002); Calculations by CSRA RDC N/A: Not Available Age Table P-5 presents historical trends and projections in the age distribution of Jefferson County and municipalities residents. Overall, there are significant differences in the distribution of ages within the county and the municipalities. The unincorporated area as well as Louisville Wadley and Wrens have, on average, 10% more residents in the 0-17 and 18-34 age brackets than the other municipalities. The number of residents in the 45- ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 4 P O P U L A T I O N 64 age bracket has increased in proportion to the decline of younger age groups. There are no significant differences in the distribution of ages among other age groups. Since 1980, there was been a continual decline of residents in the 0-17 age bracket among all jurisdictions, ranging from a low of 0.1% in Wadley to a high of 15% in Bartow. Through 2025, residents in the 0-17 and 35-44 age brackets are projected to decline. A decline in the 35-44 age bracket is almost always correlated with a decline in lower age groups since they account for most of the children residents. Senior age groups are projected to increase by 5% through the planning period and will account for most of the relative population growth in the county and municipalities. Table P-5: Age Distribution Jefferson Co. Age Distribution % 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0-17 Years Old 33.5% 32% 30.4% 29.4% 28.4% 25.9% 25.7% 26.1% 26.2% 26.1% 18-34 Years Old 25.4% 24.9% 24.5% 23% 21.4% 22.4% 23.1% 23.3% 22.6% 21.6% 35-44 Years Old 9.4% 11.3% 13.3% 14.1% 15% 13.4% 12% 11.4% 11.5% 12.3% 45-64 Years Old 17.9% 17.5% 17% 19.1% 21.3% 24% 25.6% 25.4% 23.9% 22.6% 65+ Years Old 13.6% 14.1% 14.6% 14.1% 13.7% 12.9% 13% 14% 15.8% 17.2% Avera Age Distribution % 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0-17 Years Old 26.2% 23.4% 20.7% 19.8% 18.9% 16.4% 16.2% 16.6% 16.7% 16.6% 18-34 Years Old 19.7% 20.4% 21.2% 20.1% 19.1% 20.1% 20.8% 21% 20.3% 19.3% 35-44 Years Old 12.5% 10.9% 9.4% 13% 16.6% 15% 13.6% 13% 13.1% 13.9% 45-64 Years Old 16.9% 20% 23.1% 26% 29% 31.7% 33.3% 33.1% 31.6% 30.3% 65+ Years Old 24.6% 25.1% 25.7% 20.4% 15.2% 14.4% 14.5% 15.5% 17.3% 18.7% Bartow Age Distribution % 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0-17 Years Old 36.9% 30.3% 23.7% 22.8% 21.9% 19.4 19.2 19.6% 19.7% 19.6% 18-34 Years Old 21% 28% 35.1% 28% 21% 22 22.7 22.9% 22.2% 21.2% 35-44 Years Old 8.9% 7.5% 6.2% 11.8% 17.4% 15.8 14.4 13.8% 13.9% 14.7% 45-64 Years Old 17.6% 19.7% 21.9% 26.6% 31.4% 34.1 35.7 35.5% 33% 31.7% 65+ Years Old 15.4% 14.1% 12.8% 14.2% 15.7% 14.9 15 16% 17.8% 19.2% Louisville Age Distribution % 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0-17 Years Old 27.6% 27.2% 26.9% 25.5% 24.1% 21.6 21.4% 21.8% 21.9% 21.8% 18-34 Years Old 24.7% 25.1% 25.6% 21% 16.5% 17.5 18.2% 18.4% 17.7% 16.7% 35-44 Years Old 7.6% 9.2% 10.9% 13.2% 15.6% 14 12.6% 12% 12.1% 12.9% 45-64 Years Old 21.3% 19.9% 18.6% 18.8% 18.9% 21.6 23.2% 23% 21.5% 20.2% 65+ Years Old 18.7% 18.2% 17.8% 17.6% 17.5% 16.7 16.8% 17.8% 19.6% 21% ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 5 P O P U L A T I O N Table P-5: Age Distribution Continued Stapleton Age Distribution % 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0-17 Years Old 30.4% 28.8% 27.3% 23.2% 19.1% 16.6 16.4% 16.8% 16.9% 16.8% 18-34 Years Old 20.6% 18.8% 17% 17.2% 17.5% 18.5 19.2% 19.4% 18.7% 17.7% 35-44 Years Old 8.5% 11.9% 15.3% 14.2% 13.2% 11.6 10.2% 9.8% 9.9% 10.7% 45-64 Years Old 13.6% 19.6% 25.6% 21.4% 17.2% 19.9 21.5% 21.3% 19.8% 18.5% 65+ Years Old 17.7% 15.9% 14.2% 12.7% 11.3% 10.5 10.6% 11.6% 13.4% 14.8% Wadley Age Distribution % 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0-17 Years Old 34.2% 33% 31.9% 32.1% 32.1% 29.8% 29.6% 30% 30.1% 30% 18-34 Years Old 25.6% 25% 24.4% 24.6% 24.7% 25.7% 26.4% 26.6% 25.9% 24.9% 35-44 Years Old 7.7% 10.4% 13.1% 12.7% 12.4% 10.8% 9.4% 8.8% 8.9% 9.7% 45-64 Years Old 15.7% 14.9% 14.2% 14.6% 15.1% 17.8% 19.4% 19.4% 17.9% 16.6% 65+ Years Old 16.6% 16.5% 16.2% 16% 15.9% 15.1% 15.2% 16.2% 18% 19.4% Wrens Age Distribution % 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0-17 Years Old 32.9% 32.7% 32.6% 32.4% 32.2% 29.7% 29.5% 29.4% 29.5% 29.4% 18-34 Years Old 25.9% 25% 23.1% 21.5% 20% 21% 21.7% 21.9% 21.2% 20.2% 35-44 Years Old 10.1% 11.9% 13.8% 13.8% 13.8% 12.2% 10.8% 10.2% 10.3% 10.1% 45-64 Years Old 17.1% 16.5% 15.9% 18.1% 20.4% 23.1% 24.7% 24.5% 23% 21.7% 65+ Years Old 13.9% 14.1% 14.3% 16% 17.8% 17% 17.1% 18.1% 19.9% 21.3% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole (2002); Calculations by CSRA RDC Race In 2000, the population of Jefferson County was compromised of 42% white, 56.2% black, 1.4% Hispanic, 0.01% Asian or Pacific Islander, and 0.01% Native American (Table P-6). Between 1980 and 2000, the proportional population of all racial groups has remained relatively constant in the unincorporated area but has changed significantly in the municipalities. The change is more evident in Louisville and Wadley where the percentage of black residents has increased approximately 11% and 14% respectively between 1980 and 2000. In Bartow, Stapleton and Wrens, the black population has increased by approximately 8% while in Avera, the black population declined by There has not been significant change in other population groups in the past two decades. Table P-6 : Racial Composition Jefferson Co. Racial Composition 1980 % 1985 % 1990 % 1995 % 2000 % White 8,296 45 7,976 43.9 7,656 43.9 7,461 42.6 7,267 42 Black 10,058 54.6 9,905 54.5 9,753 55.9 9,735 55.6 9,717 56.2 Hispanic 268 1.4 264 1.4 259 1.4 259 1.4 259 1.4 Native 9 0.01 5 0.01 1 0.01 10 0.01 21 0.01 Asian & Pacific Islander 20 0.01 15 0.01 9 0.01 18 0.01 28 0.01 ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 6 P O P U L A T I O N Table P-6 : Racial Composition Continued Avera Racial Composition 1980 % 1985 % 1990 % 1995 % 2000 % White 199 80.2 195 83.6 189 89.1 190 89.2 192 88.4 Black 49 19.7 36 15.5 23 10.8 23 10.8 23 10.6 Hispanic 4 1.6 2 0.8 0 0 0 0 1 0.4 Native 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Asian & Pacific Islander 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bartow Racial Composition 1980 % 1985 % 1990 % 1995 % 2000 % White 188 52.6 164 47.8 140 43.9 115 42.1 90 40.3 Black 169 47.3 175 51 179 56.1 156 57.1 133 59.6 Hispanic 7 2 4 1.1 2 0.6 2 0.8 3 0.6 Native 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Asian & Pacific Islander 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Louisville Racial Composition 1980 % 1985 % 1990 % 1995 % 2000 % White 1,262 44.7 1,157 44 1,052 43.5 982 38.2 912 33.6 Black 1,553 55 1,461 55.5 1,369 56.5 1,579 61.4 1,788 65.9 Hispanic 20 0.7 10 0.3 0 0 5 0.2 10 0.3 Native 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.1 Asian & Pacific Islander 8 0.3 4 0.1 0 0 3 0.1 6 0.2 Stapleton Racial Composition 1980 % 1985 % 1990 % 1995 % 2000 % White 302 77.8 302 81.4 302 79.1 263 78.9 223 70.1 Black 80 20.6 65 17.5 49 18.5 70 21 91 28.6 Hispanic 3 0.7 1 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Native 6 1.5 3 0.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 Asian & Pacific Islander 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Wadley Racial Composition 1980 % 1985 % 1990 % 1995 % 2000 % White 859 35.3 739 29.8 619 25.3 521 22.9 423 20.2 Black 1,573 64.5 1,701 68.7 1,827 74.6 1,718 75.6 1,610 77.1 Hispanic 57 2.3 32 1.3 7 0.3 30 1.3 52 2.5 Native 1 0.04 0 0 0 0 1 0.01 3 0.1 Asian & Pacific Islander 5 0.2 2 0.01 0 0 0 0 1 0.05 Wrens Racial Composition 1980 % 1985 % 1990 % 1995 % 2000 % White 1,018 42.1 964 39.7 909 37.9 839 35.7 768 33.2 Black 1,380 57.1 1,429 58.9 1,477 61.6 1,493 63.6 1,508 65.1 Hispanic 46 1.9 24 1 2 0.08 10 0.4 18 0.8 Native 2 0.1 2 0.1 1 0.04 1 0.05 2 0.1 Asian & Pacific Islander 7 0.3 8 0.3 9 0.3 5 0.2 4 0.1 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 8 P O P U L A T I O N County stands at 58.3%, significantly lower than the CSRA average of 66.4% and the state average of 78.6%. The percentage of population with a Bachelor’s degree or more in Jefferson County is while the CSRA average is 11.95%, and the state average is 24.3%. Table P-7: Educational Attainment, 1980-2000 1980 Jefferson Co. Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Less than 9th grade 41.3% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 9th to 12th grade (no diploma) 22.2% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A High school graduate 21.6% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Some college (no degree) 7.9% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Associate degree N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Bachelor’s degree 6.8% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Graduate or professional degree N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1990 Jefferson Co. Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Less than 9th grade 27% 24% 28.1% 29.4% 46.6% 39.5% 32.3% 9th to 12th grade (no diploma) 23.3% 31.8% 29.4% 17.5% 35.1% 37.6% 29.1% High school graduate 30.1% 41.8% 24.1% 43.4% 36.9% 32.5% 39.3% Some college (no degree) 9.9% 8.5% 16.3% 13.2% 5.4% 9.6% 14.7% Associate degree 3.4% 7.7% 1.3% 3.9% 1.8% 3.7% 4.2% Bachelor’s degree 4.4% 1.5% 9.1% 9% 6% 4.5% 8.1% Graduate or professional degree 1.8% 0% 4.5% 4% 0.6% 2.1% 3.8% 2000 Jefferson Co. Avera Bartow Louisville Stapelton Wadley Wrens Less than 9th grade 16.7% 5% 20.6% 15.1% 21.4% 25.6% 17.2% 9th to 12th grade (no diploma) 24.7% 37.9% 28.8% 25.7% 15.9% 28% 23.3% High school graduate 33.9% 41.7% 18.8% 30.8% 36.8% 27.5% 34.4% Some college (no degree) 11.8% 6.9% 18.8% 11% 14.1% 8.7% 12.5% Associate degree 3.6% 3.8% 1.7% 2% 2.4% 5.1% 3.7% Bachelor’s degree 6.2% 4.4% 3.5% 10% 2.4% 3.5% 4.6% Graduate or professional degree 2.8% 0% 7.6% 5.1% 6.7% 1.5% 4% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census N/A: Not Available The number of Jefferson County high school graduates attending Georgia public colleges and technical schools has varied since 1995 (Table P-8). With the exception of 1997 and 1998, public college attendance has averaged between 18% and 20%. Public college attendance is significantly below neighboring Burke and Washington Counties and the state average. Similarly, public technical college attendance has varied since 1985. On average, Jefferson County high school graduates attend public technical colleges at a rate of twice the state average. The county’s public technical college attendance is on par with neighboring Burke and Washington Counties. ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 9 P O P U L A T I O N Table P-8: Post-Secondary Education Attendance Georgia Public Colleges 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Jefferson County 18.3% 19.9% 14.3% 15.6% 20.9% N/A N/A Burke County 24.4% 25.2% 26.3% 21.8% 22.5% N/A N/A Washington County 15.2% 29.1% 30.2% 27.9% 27.6% N/A N/A Georgia 35% 30% 30.2% 38.8% 37.5% 37.3% 36.1% Georgia Public Technical Colleges 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Jefferson County 11.7% 10.9% 11.8% 15.1% 10.2% 16% N/A Burke County 8.1% 13.8% 7.3% 12.2% 14.7% 22.7% N/A Washington County 2.7% 21.8% 34.6% 13.3% 9.7% 16% N/A Georgia 5.4% 6.2% 7.1% 6.5% 6.4% 7.4% 8.8% Source: Georgia Department of Education N/A: Not Available Test Scores and Dropout Rates High School graduation test scores decreased continually in Jefferson County from 1995 to 2001, mirroring a statewide trend of declining test scores (Table P-9). Overall, test scores are 29% lower in Jefferson County than the state average and approximately 20% below neighboring Burke and Washington Counties. In 1995, the peak test attainment year in county, Jefferson test scores were close to the state average and significantly above neighboring jurisdictions. Table P-9: Test Scores and Dropout Rates High School Test Scores 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Jefferson County 76% 55% 47% 34% 36% 39% 36% Burke County 70% 62% 63% 58% 63% 54% 55% Washington County 65% 53% 51% 48% 54% 56% 56% Georgia 82% 76% 67% 68% 66% 68% 65% High School Drop Out Rate 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Jefferson County 7.9% 8.6% 8.4% 7% 6.3% 5.4% 4.6% Burke County 12.2% 10.7% 8.8% 9% 11.3% 8.9% 9.9% Washington County 16.7% 11.8% 12% 11% 9.4% 7.6% 7.7% Georgia 9.2% 8.6% 7.3% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.4% Source: Georgia Department of Education The high school dropout rate in Jefferson County declined from 7.9% in 1995 to 4.6% in 2001 and is currently below the state average (6.4) and significantly below neighboring Burke and Washington Counties (Table P-9). ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 2 P O P U L A T I O N manufacturing of kaolin is a focus of the region’s industry. These three areas, as well as Burke, Emmanuel, Jenkins, Johnson and Screven Counties, are also impacted by the Floridian Aquifer. The aquifer supplies approximately 50% of Georgia’s water supply. The northern and southern tips of Jefferson County are Enterprise Communities. Based on census tract analysis and a designation by the federal government, the Enterprise Community classification deems these two areas in the county as some of the poorest of the region and thus, warranting special attention. An Enterprise Community receives money from the federal government for the implementation of new and innovative projects to help the area. Other Enterprise Communities in the CSRA include the entire lower half of Warren County, the northeastern portion of Hancock County, the western majority of Taliaferro County and one-third of eastern Burke County. POPULATION Jefferson County and the municipalities have undergone slow but gradual population decline over the last two decades (Table P-1). The county has lost 1,137 of its population, representing a 6.1% decline. In percentage terms, Wadley has lost the most population at 14.3% while Wrens’ population decline was the lowest at 4.1%. Only Louisville among the municipalities has regained some of the population losses of the 1980s in the 1990s. Population projections for the county and municipalities highlight very limited population growth through the planning period. Population in Jefferson County and the municipalities is projected to increase 1.2% through 2025 (Table P-2), significantly below the projected rural CSRA growth rate of 10.5% and state (+35.9) and national (+27) averages. Table P-2: Population Change, 1980-2025 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Jefferson County N/A -2.7% -2.8% 0.4% -0.4% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Avera N/A -7.2% -7.8% 1.4% 0.9% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Bartow N/A -5.3% -5.6% -15% -17% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Louisville N/A -7.1% -7.6% 6.1% 5.6% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Stapleton N/A -4.6% -5.1% -4.5% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Wadley N/A 0.1% 0.1% 7.3% -7.9% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Wrens N/A 0.4% 0.3% -1.7% 1.7% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole (2002); Calculations by CSRA RDC N/A: Not Available Table P-1: Total Population, 1980-2025 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Jefferson County 18,403 17,906 17,408 17,337 17,266 17,214 17,234 17,264 17,358 17,448 Avera 248 230 212 215 217 216 217 218 219 220 Bartow 357 338 319 312 304 303 306 308 309 311 Louisville 2,823 2,622 2,421 2,567 2,712 2,704 2,707 2,712 2,726 2,739 Stapleton 388 370 351 335 318 317 318 319 320 321 Wadley 2,438 2,442 2,446 2,267 2,088 2,082 2,085 2,090 2,103 2,116 Wrens 2,415 2,405 2,396 2,355 2,314 2,307 2,310 2,316 2,328 2,330 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole (2002) ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 3 P O P U L A T I O N Households Household growth change varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction in Jefferson County and the municipalities. In the unincorporated area, household growth has been continual in the past two decades, increasing 5.8% between 1980 and 2000. Among the municipalities, only Louisville Wrens, and Avera reported an increase in households since 1980. Household growth in Louisville and Wrens reflects a trend of more single people and couples without children residing in the county’s two most populous cities. Household growth in the county and municipalities is projected to increase 1.1% through 2025. Table P-3: Total Households, 1980-2025 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Jefferson County 5,993 6,359 6,130 6,234 6,344 6,410 6,458 6,485 6,469 6,419 Avera 92 92 92 95 99 100 111 111 110 109 Bartow 120 112 104 100 95 96 97 97 96 95 Louisville 985 930 875 935 994 1,004 1,111 1,115 1,112 1,093 Stapleton 146 139 131 120 110 111 112 112 111 110 Wadley 778 808 838 802 765 772 776 779 777 761 Wrens 849 867 888 896 903 1,003 1,110 1,114 1,111 1,092 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole (2002); Calculations by CSRA RDC Average household size has continually declined in Jefferson County and the municipalities in the past two decades (Table P-4). Between 1980 and 2000, average household size declined by 0.36 in the unincorporated area, 0.26 in Louisville, 0.41 in Wadley and 0.21 in Wrens. Since 1990, average household size has decreased by 0.42 in Avera, 0.4 in Bartow, and 0.39 in Stapleton. Average household size throughout the county and municipalities is projected to decline by an average of 0.03 through 2025. Table P-4: Average Household Size, 1980-2025 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Jefferson County 3.01 2.81 2.77 2.72 2.65 2.61 2.59 2.58 2.59 2.62 Avera N/A N/A 2.30 2.09 1.88 1.84 1.82 1.81 1.82 1.85 Bartow N/A N/A 2.90 2.70 2.50 2.46 2.44 2.43 2.44 2.47 Louisville 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.57 2.44 2.40 2.38 2.37 2.38 2.41 Stapleton N/A N/A 2.70 N/A 2.31 2.27 2.25 2.24 2.25 2.28 Wadley 3.02 2.91 2.80 2.70 2.61 2.57 2.55 2.54 2.55 2.58 Wrens 2.85 2.78 2.70 2.67 2.64 2.60 2.58 2.57 2.58 2.61 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole (2002); Calculations by CSRA RDC N/A: Not Available Age Table P-5 presents historical trends and projections in the age distribution of Jefferson County and municipalities residents. Overall, there are significant differences in the distribution of ages within the county and the municipalities. The unincorporated area as well as Louisville Wadley and Wrens have, on average, 10% more residents in the 0-17 and 18-34 age brackets than the other municipalities. The number of residents in the 45- ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 4 P O P U L A T I O N 64 age bracket has increased in proportion to the decline of younger age groups. There are no significant differences in the distribution of ages among other age groups. Since 1980, there was been a continual decline of residents in the 0-17 age bracket among all jurisdictions, ranging from a low of 0.1% in Wadley to a high of 15% in Bartow. Through 2025, residents in the 0-17 and 35-44 age brackets are projected to decline. A decline in the 35-44 age bracket is almost always correlated with a decline in lower age groups since they account for most of the children residents. Senior age groups are projected to increase by 5% through the planning period and will account for most of the relative population growth in the county and municipalities. Table P-5: Age Distribution Jefferson Co. Age Distribution % 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0-17 Years Old 33.5% 32% 30.4% 29.4% 28.4% 25.9% 25.7% 26.1% 26.2% 26.1% 18-34 Years Old 25.4% 24.9% 24.5% 23% 21.4% 22.4% 23.1% 23.3% 22.6% 21.6% 35-44 Years Old 9.4% 11.3% 13.3% 14.1% 15% 13.4% 12% 11.4% 11.5% 12.3% 45-64 Years Old 17.9% 17.5% 17% 19.1% 21.3% 24% 25.6% 25.4% 23.9% 22.6% 65+ Years Old 13.6% 14.1% 14.6% 14.1% 13.7% 12.9% 13% 14% 15.8% 17.2% Avera Age Distribution % 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0-17 Years Old 26.2% 23.4% 20.7% 19.8% 18.9% 16.4% 16.2% 16.6% 16.7% 16.6% 18-34 Years Old 19.7% 20.4% 21.2% 20.1% 19.1% 20.1% 20.8% 21% 20.3% 19.3% 35-44 Years Old 12.5% 10.9% 9.4% 13% 16.6% 15% 13.6% 13% 13.1% 13.9% 45-64 Years Old 16.9% 20% 23.1% 26% 29% 31.7% 33.3% 33.1% 31.6% 30.3% 65+ Years Old 24.6% 25.1% 25.7% 20.4% 15.2% 14.4% 14.5% 15.5% 17.3% 18.7% Bartow Age Distribution % 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0-17 Years Old 36.9% 30.3% 23.7% 22.8% 21.9% 19.4 19.2 19.6% 19.7% 19.6% 18-34 Years Old 21% 28% 35.1% 28% 21% 22 22.7 22.9% 22.2% 21.2% 35-44 Years Old 8.9% 7.5% 6.2% 11.8% 17.4% 15.8 14.4 13.8% 13.9% 14.7% 45-64 Years Old 17.6% 19.7% 21.9% 26.6% 31.4% 34.1 35.7 35.5% 33% 31.7% 65+ Years Old 15.4% 14.1% 12.8% 14.2% 15.7% 14.9 15 16% 17.8% 19.2% Louisville Age Distribution % 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0-17 Years Old 27.6% 27.2% 26.9% 25.5% 24.1% 21.6 21.4% 21.8% 21.9% 21.8% 18-34 Years Old 24.7% 25.1% 25.6% 21% 16.5% 17.5 18.2% 18.4% 17.7% 16.7% 35-44 Years Old 7.6% 9.2% 10.9% 13.2% 15.6% 14 12.6% 12% 12.1% 12.9% 45-64 Years Old 21.3% 19.9% 18.6% 18.8% 18.9% 21.6 23.2% 23% 21.5% 20.2% 65+ Years Old 18.7% 18.2% 17.8% 17.6% 17.5% 16.7 16.8% 17.8% 19.6% 21% ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 5 P O P U L A T I O N Table P-5: Age Distribution Continued Stapleton Age Distribution % 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0-17 Years Old 30.4% 28.8% 27.3% 23.2% 19.1% 16.6 16.4% 16.8% 16.9% 16.8% 18-34 Years Old 20.6% 18.8% 17% 17.2% 17.5% 18.5 19.2% 19.4% 18.7% 17.7% 35-44 Years Old 8.5% 11.9% 15.3% 14.2% 13.2% 11.6 10.2% 9.8% 9.9% 10.7% 45-64 Years Old 13.6% 19.6% 25.6% 21.4% 17.2% 19.9 21.5% 21.3% 19.8% 18.5% 65+ Years Old 17.7% 15.9% 14.2% 12.7% 11.3% 10.5 10.6% 11.6% 13.4% 14.8% Wadley Age Distribution % 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0-17 Years Old 34.2% 33% 31.9% 32.1% 32.1% 29.8% 29.6% 30% 30.1% 30% 18-34 Years Old 25.6% 25% 24.4% 24.6% 24.7% 25.7% 26.4% 26.6% 25.9% 24.9% 35-44 Years Old 7.7% 10.4% 13.1% 12.7% 12.4% 10.8% 9.4% 8.8% 8.9% 9.7% 45-64 Years Old 15.7% 14.9% 14.2% 14.6% 15.1% 17.8% 19.4% 19.4% 17.9% 16.6% 65+ Years Old 16.6% 16.5% 16.2% 16% 15.9% 15.1% 15.2% 16.2% 18% 19.4% Wrens Age Distribution % 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0-17 Years Old 32.9% 32.7% 32.6% 32.4% 32.2% 29.7% 29.5% 29.4% 29.5% 29.4% 18-34 Years Old 25.9% 25% 23.1% 21.5% 20% 21% 21.7% 21.9% 21.2% 20.2% 35-44 Years Old 10.1% 11.9% 13.8% 13.8% 13.8% 12.2% 10.8% 10.2% 10.3% 10.1% 45-64 Years Old 17.1% 16.5% 15.9% 18.1% 20.4% 23.1% 24.7% 24.5% 23% 21.7% 65+ Years Old 13.9% 14.1% 14.3% 16% 17.8% 17% 17.1% 18.1% 19.9% 21.3% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole (2002); Calculations by CSRA RDC Race In 2000, the population of Jefferson County was compromised of 42% white, 56.2% black, 1.4% Hispanic, 0.01% Asian or Pacific Islander, and 0.01% Native American (Table P-6). Between 1980 and 2000, the proportional population of all racial groups has remained relatively constant in the unincorporated area but has changed significantly in the municipalities. The change is more evident in Louisville and Wadley where the percentage of black residents has increased approximately 11% and 14% respectively between 1980 and 2000. In Bartow, Stapleton and Wrens, the black population has increased by approximately 8% while in Avera, the black population declined by There has not been significant change in other population groups in the past two decades. Table P-6 : Racial Composition Jefferson Co. Racial Composition 1980 % 1985 % 1990 % 1995 % 2000 % White 8,296 45 7,976 43.9 7,656 43.9 7,461 42.6 7,267 42 Black 10,058 54.6 9,905 54.5 9,753 55.9 9,735 55.6 9,717 56.2 Hispanic 268 1.4 264 1.4 259 1.4 259 1.4 259 1.4 Native 9 0.01 5 0.01 1 0.01 10 0.01 21 0.01 Asian & Pacific Islander 20 0.01 15 0.01 9 0.01 18 0.01 28 0.01 ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 6 P O P U L A T I O N Table P-6 : Racial Composition Continued Avera Racial Composition 1980 % 1985 % 1990 % 1995 % 2000 % White 199 80.2 195 83.6 189 89.1 190 89.2 192 88.4 Black 49 19.7 36 15.5 23 10.8 23 10.8 23 10.6 Hispanic 4 1.6 2 0.8 0 0 0 0 1 0.4 Native 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Asian & Pacific Islander 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Bartow Racial Composition 1980 % 1985 % 1990 % 1995 % 2000 % White 188 52.6 164 47.8 140 43.9 115 42.1 90 40.3 Black 169 47.3 175 51 179 56.1 156 57.1 133 59.6 Hispanic 7 2 4 1.1 2 0.6 2 0.8 3 0.6 Native 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Asian & Pacific Islander 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Louisville Racial Composition 1980 % 1985 % 1990 % 1995 % 2000 % White 1,262 44.7 1,157 44 1,052 43.5 982 38.2 912 33.6 Black 1,553 55 1,461 55.5 1,369 56.5 1,579 61.4 1,788 65.9 Hispanic 20 0.7 10 0.3 0 0 5 0.2 10 0.3 Native 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.1 Asian & Pacific Islander 8 0.3 4 0.1 0 0 3 0.1 6 0.2 Stapleton Racial Composition 1980 % 1985 % 1990 % 1995 % 2000 % White 302 77.8 302 81.4 302 79.1 263 78.9 223 70.1 Black 80 20.6 65 17.5 49 18.5 70 21 91 28.6 Hispanic 3 0.7 1 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Native 6 1.5 3 0.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 Asian & Pacific Islander 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Wadley Racial Composition 1980 % 1985 % 1990 % 1995 % 2000 % White 859 35.3 739 29.8 619 25.3 521 22.9 423 20.2 Black 1,573 64.5 1,701 68.7 1,827 74.6 1,718 75.6 1,610 77.1 Hispanic 57 2.3 32 1.3 7 0.3 30 1.3 52 2.5 Native 1 0.04 0 0 0 0 1 0.01 3 0.1 Asian & Pacific Islander 5 0.2 2 0.01 0 0 0 0 1 0.05 Wrens Racial Composition 1980 % 1985 % 1990 % 1995 % 2000 % White 1,018 42.1 964 39.7 909 37.9 839 35.7 768 33.2 Black 1,380 57.1 1,429 58.9 1,477 61.6 1,493 63.6 1,508 65.1 Hispanic 46 1.9 24 1 2 0.08 10 0.4 18 0.8 Native 2 0.1 2 0.1 1 0.04 1 0.05 2 0.1 Asian & Pacific Islander 7 0.3 8 0.3 9 0.3 5 0.2 4 0.1 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 8 P O P U L A T I O N County stands at 58.3%, significantly lower than the CSRA average of 66.4% and the state average of 78.6%. The percentage of population with a Bachelor’s degree or more in Jefferson County is while the CSRA average is 11.95%, and the state average is 24.3%. Table P-7: Educational Attainment, 1980-2000 1980 Jefferson Co. Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Less than 9th grade 41.3% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 9th to 12th grade (no diploma) 22.2% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A High school graduate 21.6% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Some college (no degree) 7.9% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Associate degree N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Bachelor’s degree 6.8% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Graduate or professional degree N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1990 Jefferson Co. Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Less than 9th grade 27% 24% 28.1% 29.4% 46.6% 39.5% 32.3% 9th to 12th grade (no diploma) 23.3% 31.8% 29.4% 17.5% 35.1% 37.6% 29.1% High school graduate 30.1% 41.8% 24.1% 43.4% 36.9% 32.5% 39.3% Some college (no degree) 9.9% 8.5% 16.3% 13.2% 5.4% 9.6% 14.7% Associate degree 3.4% 7.7% 1.3% 3.9% 1.8% 3.7% 4.2% Bachelor’s degree 4.4% 1.5% 9.1% 9% 6% 4.5% 8.1% Graduate or professional degree 1.8% 0% 4.5% 4% 0.6% 2.1% 3.8% 2000 Jefferson Co. Avera Bartow Louisville Stapelton Wadley Wrens Less than 9th grade 16.7% 5% 20.6% 15.1% 21.4% 25.6% 17.2% 9th to 12th grade (no diploma) 24.7% 37.9% 28.8% 25.7% 15.9% 28% 23.3% High school graduate 33.9% 41.7% 18.8% 30.8% 36.8% 27.5% 34.4% Some college (no degree) 11.8% 6.9% 18.8% 11% 14.1% 8.7% 12.5% Associate degree 3.6% 3.8% 1.7% 2% 2.4% 5.1% 3.7% Bachelor’s degree 6.2% 4.4% 3.5% 10% 2.4% 3.5% 4.6% Graduate or professional degree 2.8% 0% 7.6% 5.1% 6.7% 1.5% 4% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census N/A: Not Available The number of Jefferson County high school graduates attending Georgia public colleges and technical schools has varied since 1995 (Table P-8). With the exception of 1997 and 1998, public college attendance has averaged between 18% and 20%. Public college attendance is significantly below neighboring Burke and Washington Counties and the state average. Similarly, public technical college attendance has varied since 1985. On average, Jefferson County high school graduates attend public technical colleges at a rate of twice the state average. The county’s public technical college attendance is on par with neighboring Burke and Washington Counties. ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 9 P O P U L A T I O N Table P-8: Post-Secondary Education Attendance Georgia Public Colleges 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Jefferson County 18.3% 19.9% 14.3% 15.6% 20.9% N/A N/A Burke County 24.4% 25.2% 26.3% 21.8% 22.5% N/A N/A Washington County 15.2% 29.1% 30.2% 27.9% 27.6% N/A N/A Georgia 35% 30% 30.2% 38.8% 37.5% 37.3% 36.1% Georgia Public Technical Colleges 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Jefferson County 11.7% 10.9% 11.8% 15.1% 10.2% 16% N/A Burke County 8.1% 13.8% 7.3% 12.2% 14.7% 22.7% N/A Washington County 2.7% 21.8% 34.6% 13.3% 9.7% 16% N/A Georgia 5.4% 6.2% 7.1% 6.5% 6.4% 7.4% 8.8% Source: Georgia Department of Education N/A: Not Available Test Scores and Dropout Rates High School graduation test scores decreased continually in Jefferson County from 1995 to 2001, mirroring a statewide trend of declining test scores (Table P-9). Overall, test scores are 29% lower in Jefferson County than the state average and approximately 20% below neighboring Burke and Washington Counties. In 1995, the peak test attainment year in county, Jefferson test scores were close to the state average and significantly above neighboring jurisdictions. Table P-9: Test Scores and Dropout Rates High School Test Scores 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Jefferson County 76% 55% 47% 34% 36% 39% 36% Burke County 70% 62% 63% 58% 63% 54% 55% Washington County 65% 53% 51% 48% 54% 56% 56% Georgia 82% 76% 67% 68% 66% 68% 65% High School Drop Out Rate 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Jefferson County 7.9% 8.6% 8.4% 7% 6.3% 5.4% 4.6% Burke County 12.2% 10.7% 8.8% 9% 11.3% 8.9% 9.9% Washington County 16.7% 11.8% 12% 11% 9.4% 7.6% 7.7% Georgia 9.2% 8.6% 7.3% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.4% Source: Georgia Department of Education The high school dropout rate in Jefferson County declined from 7.9% in 1995 to 4.6% in 2001 and is currently below the state average (6.4) and significantly below neighboring Burke and Washington Counties (Table P-9). ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 2 P O P U L A T I O N manufacturing of kaolin is a focus of the region’s industry. These three areas, as well as Burke, Emmanuel, Jenkins, Johnson and Screven Counties, are also impacted by the Floridian Aquifer. The aquifer supplies approximately 50% of Georgia’s water supply. The northern and southern tips of Jefferson County are Enterprise Communities. Based on census tract analysis and a designation by the federal government, the Enterprise Community classification deems these two areas in the county as some of the poorest of the region and thus, warranting special attention. An Enterprise Community receives money from the federal government for the implementation of new and innovative projects to help the area. Other Enterprise Communities in the CSRA include the entire lower half of Warren County, the northeastern portion of Hancock County, the western majority of Taliaferro County and one-third of eastern Burke County. POPULATION Jefferson County and the municipalities have undergone slow but gradual population decline over the last two decades (Table P-1). The county has lost 1,137 of its population, representing a 6.1% decline. In percentage terms, Wadley has lost the most population at 14.3% while Wrens’ population decline was the lowest at 4.1%. Only Louisville among the municipalities has regained some of the population losses of the 1980s in the 1990s. Population projections for the county and municipalities highlight very limited population growth through the planning period. Population in Jefferson County and the municipalities is projected to increase 1.2% through 2025 (Table P-2), significantly below the projected rural CSRA growth rate of 10.5% and state (+35.9) and national (+27) averages. Table P-2: Population Change, 1980-2025 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Jefferson County N/A -2.7% -2.8% 0.4% -0.4% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Avera N/A -7.2% -7.8% 1.4% 0.9% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Bartow N/A -5.3% -5.6% -15% -17% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Louisville N/A -7.1% -7.6% 6.1% 5.6% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Stapleton N/A -4.6% -5.1% -4.5% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Wadley N/A 0.1% 0.1% 7.3% -7.9% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Wrens N/A 0.4% 0.3% -1.7% 1.7% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole (2002); Calculations by CSRA RDC N/A: Not Available Table P-1: Total Population, 1980-2025 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Jefferson County 18,403 17,906 17,408 17,337 17,266 17,214 17,234 17,264 17,358 17,448 Avera 248 230 212 215 217 216 217 218 219 220 Bartow 357 338 319 312 304 303 306 308 309 311 Louisville 2,823 2,622 2,421 2,567 2,712 2,704 2,707 2,712 2,726 2,739 Stapleton 388 370 351 335 318 317 318 319 320 321 Wadley 2,438 2,442 2,446 2,267 2,088 2,082 2,085 2,090 2,103 2,116 Wrens 2,415 2,405 2,396 2,355 2,314 2,307 2,310 2,316 2,328 2,330 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole (2002) ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 2 P O P U L A T I O N manufacturing of kaolin is a focus of the region’s industry. These three areas, as well as Burke, Emmanuel, Jenkins, Johnson and Screven Counties, are also impacted by the Floridian Aquifer. The aquifer supplies approximately 50% of Georgia’s water supply. The northern and southern tips of Jefferson County are Enterprise Communities. Based on census tract analysis and a designation by the federal government, the Enterprise Community classification deems these two areas in the county as some of the poorest of the region and thus, warranting special attention. An Enterprise Community receives money from the federal government for the implementation of new and innovative projects to help the area. Other Enterprise Communities in the CSRA include the entire lower half of Warren County, the northeastern portion of Hancock County, the western majority of Taliaferro County and one-third of eastern Burke County. POPULATION Jefferson County and the municipalities have undergone slow but gradual population decline over the last two decades (Table P-1). The county has lost 1,137 of its population, representing a 6.1% decline. In percentage terms, Wadley has lost the most population at 14.3% while Wrens’ population decline was the lowest at 4.1%. Only Louisville among the municipalities has regained some of the population losses of the 1980s in the 1990s. Population projections for the county and municipalities highlight very limited population growth through the planning period. Population in Jefferson County and the municipalities is projected to increase 1.2% through 2025 (Table P-2), significantly below the projected rural CSRA growth rate of 10.5% and state (+35.9) and national (+27) averages. Table P-2: Population Change, 1980-2025 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Jefferson County N/A -2.7% -2.8% 0.4% -0.4% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Avera N/A -7.2% -7.8% 1.4% 0.9% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Bartow N/A -5.3% -5.6% -15% -17% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Louisville N/A -7.1% -7.6% 6.1% 5.6% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Stapleton N/A -4.6% -5.1% -4.5% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Wadley N/A 0.1% 0.1% 7.3% -7.9% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Wrens N/A 0.4% 0.3% -1.7% 1.7% -0.3% 0.1% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole (2002); Calculations by CSRA RDC N/A: Not Available Table P-1: Total Population, 1980-2025 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Jefferson County 18,403 17,906 17,408 17,337 17,266 17,214 17,234 17,264 17,358 17,448 Avera 248 230 212 215 217 216 217 218 219 220 Bartow 357 338 319 312 304 303 306 308 309 311 Louisville 2,823 2,622 2,421 2,567 2,712 2,704 2,707 2,712 2,726 2,739 Stapleton 388 370 351 335 318 317 318 319 320 321 Wadley 2,438 2,442 2,446 2,267 2,088 2,082 2,085 2,090 2,103 2,116 Wrens 2,415 2,405 2,396 2,355 2,314 2,307 2,310 2,316 2,328 2,330 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole (2002) ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 10 P O P U L A T I O N INCOME Per Capita and Average Household Income Per capita income in Jefferson County has risen significantly in the past two decades, from $10,525 in 1980 to $17,664 in 2000 (1996 dollars) (Table P-10). Per capita income is projected to increase further to $24,938 by 2025. The statewide per capita income increased from $15,353 in 1980 to $25,433 by 2000, and is expected to rise to $33,413 by 2025. Although both county and state incomes are projected to rise through the planning period, per capita income will rise much faster in the county (41.1%) than the statewide average Jefferson County has a higher per capita income than all of the municipalities. Wadley and Bartow have the lowest incomes at $9,369 and $11,873 respectively, while Louisville and Stapleton are in the $15,000 range, just shy of the county average. All of the municipalities posted significant per capita income increases since 1990, outpacing both the county and statewide growth rate. Overall, increases in per capita income since 1990 have averaged 50%, with a high of low of 34.8% in Wadley and a high of 62% in Bartow. Table P-10: Per Capita and Household Income Per Capita Income (1996 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2025 Jefferson County $10,525 $12,533 $14,198 $16,093 $17,664 $24,938 Avera N/A N/A $9,358 $11,980 $14,613 N/A Bartow N/A N/A $7,320 $9,597 $11,873 N/A Louisville N/A N/A $9,948 $12,488 $15,028 N/A Stapleton N/A N/A $9,305 $12,567 $15,829 N/A Wadley N/A N/A $6,948 $8,159 $9,369 N/A Wrens N/A N/A $8,488 $10,457 $12,425 N/A Georgia $15,353 $18,512 $20,715 $22,287 $25,433 $33,413 Average Household Income (current 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2025 Jefferson County N/A N/A $18,005 $25,719 $28,088 $45,060 Avera N/A N/A $18,000 $23,115 $28,229 N/A Bartow N/A N/A $18,281 $21,016 $23,750 N/A Louisville N/A N/A $20,915 $20,399 $19,883 N/A Stapleton N/A N/A $19,231 $27,260 $35,288 N/A Wadley N/A N/A $12,107 $13,704 $15,300 N/A Wrens N/A N/A $16,322 $19,973 $23,623 N/A Georgia N/A N/A $33,259 $35,692 $42,158 $59,049 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole (2002); Calculations by CSRA RDC N/A= Not Available A similar trend can be seen with the mean household income: both the county and state mean household incomes increased between 1990 to 2000, but county household income rose more rapidly than the state average (Table P-10). In 1990, county mean household income was $18,005 (in current dollars) while the ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 11 P O P U L A T I O N statewide average was $33,259, a difference of approximately $15,000 higher. By 2000, county mean household income reached $28,088 while the statewide average toped $42,158, a difference of close to $14,000. Unlike per capita income, average household income for most municipalities is closer in line with the county average. In Avera ($28,229) and Stapleton ($35,288) income are actually higher than the county. Household incomes in Louisville ($19,883) and Wadley ($15,300) are lower, reflecting a trend identified in the per capita income section. Overall, the rise in household income is on par with per capita income rates. Distribution of Households by Income The distribution of income in Jefferson County and the municipalities has continually increased in the past two decades. In 1980, over 51.7% of Jefferson County residents earned less than $9,999. By 2000, this number dropped to 20.2%. The most significant changes are found in the municipalities. In Bartow, Louisville, Wadley and Wrens, the percentage of residents currently earning less than $9,999 is less than half the 1980 rate. The percentage of residents earning less than $9,999 in Bartow declined from 45.6% in 1980 to 3.2% in 2000, and dropped from 31.3% to 8.7% in Stapleton during that same period. Both Bartow and Stapleton have significantly less residents in that income bracket than the statewide average. Table P-11: Households by Income 1980-2000 1980 Jefferson Co. Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Georgia Less than $9,999 51.7% 43.4% 45.6% 43.2% 31.3% 61.9% 49.4% 33.3% $10,000-$29,999 36% 33.2% 26.4% 31.7% 23.3% 35.6% 36.5% 42% $30,000-$49,999 9.4% 9% 5.6% 9.7% 5.6% 6.9% 9.4% 17.1% $50,000-$74,999 0.6% 0% 0% 0.8% 0% 1.4% 0.1% 3.5% $75,000 + 2.1% 3% 1.6% 1.1% 2% 1.3% 2.7% 4% 1990 Jefferson Co. Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Georgia Less than $9,999 35.2% 18.2% 17.5% 30.1% 16.5% 42.9% 35.2% 16.7% $10,000-$29,999 41% 26% 41.3% 36.9% 37.8% 38.2% 38.8% 34.6% $30,000-$49,999 18.4% 20.6% 26.6% 20.9% 31% 13.1% 15.2% 25.7% $50,000-$74,999 6.6% 6.5% 4.5% 6.6% 2.2% 3.7% 8.5% 14.4% $75,000 + 1.5% 4.3% 0% 5.4% 2.2% 2% 2.1% 8.4% 2000 Jefferson Co. Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Georgia Less than $9,999 20.2% 3.2% 24% 26.1% 8.7% 33.6% 24.4% 10.1% $10,000-$29,999 37% 55.7% 35.6% 32.2% 34.8% 41.2% 37.5% 24.6% $30,000-$49,999 22.3% 29.5% 23% 19.8% 29.1% 15% 19.3% 23% $50,000-$74,999 13% 7.4% 11.5% 9.9% 15.6% 5.7% 11.9% 19.7% $75,000 + 7.6% 4.2% 5.8% 11.9% 11.7% 4.8% 6.8% 22.7% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 20 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T Table E-2: Employment by Sector For Jefferson County 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 TOTAL EMPLOYMENT 7,288 7,684 7,764 8,150 7,571 7,793 8,044 8,313 8,603 8,915 FARM EMPLOYMENT 921 802 656 561 544 526 505 488 475 467 AGRICULTURAL SERVICES, OTHER 135 109 227 352 417 472 505 533 561 592 MINING 96 47 76 55 55 51 49 47 47 46 CONSTRUCTION 330 363 251 297 363 371 381 391 399 407 MANUFACTURING 2,189 2,729 2,683 2,799 1,980 1,968 1,980 1,996 2,014 2,037 TRANSPORT, COMM. & PUBLIC UTIL 216 235 203 235 257 263 287 310 331 349 WHOLESALE TRADE 231 333 345 363 254 293 315 334 353 371 RETAIL TRADE 689 713 840 978 996 989 1,009 1,036 1,066 1,097 FINANCE, INS. & REAL ESTATE 266 245 232 266 319 342 359 374 390 407 SERVICES 1,006 977 996 1,093 1,152 1,205 1,264 1,332 1,409 1,494 FEDERAL CIVILIAN GOVT 56 51 54 50 60 60 61 61 62 61 FEDERAL MILITARY GOVT 76 89 77 73 62 63 64 65 65 66 STATE AND LOCAL GOVT 1,077 991 1,124 1,028 1,112 1,190 1,265 1,346 1,431 1,521 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole Economics Table E-3 employment by sector for Jefferson County broken down into percentages: Table E-3: Employment by Sector for Jefferson County 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 FARM EMPLOYMENT 12.64 10.44 8.45 6.88 7.19 6.75 6.28 5.87 5.52 5.24 AGRICULTURAL SERVICES, OTHER 1.85 1.42 2.92 4.32 5.51 6.06 6.28 6.41 6.52 6.64 MINING 1.32 0.61 0.98 0.67 0.73 0.65 0.61 0.57 0.55 0.52 CONSTRUCTION 4.53 4.72 3.23 3.64 4.79 4.76 4.74 4.7 4.64 4.57 MANUFACTURING 30.04 35.52 34.56 34.34 26.15 25.25 24.61 24.01 23.41 22.85 TRANSPORT, COMM. & PUBLIC UTIL 2.96 3.06 2.61 2.88 3.39 3.37 3.57 3.73 3.85 3.91 WHOLESALE TRADE 3.17 4.33 4.44 4.45 3.35 3.76 3.92 4.02 4.1 4.16 RETAIL TRADE 9.45 9.28 10.82 12 13.16 12.69 12.54 12.46 12.39 12.31 FINANCE, INS. & REAL ESTATE 3.65 3.19 2.99 3.26 4.21 4.39 4.46 4.5 4.53 4.57 SERVICES 13.8 12.71 12.83 13.41 15.22 15.46 15.71 16.02 16.38 16.76 FEDERAL CIVILIAN GOVT 0.77 0.66 0.7 0.61 0.79 0.77 0.76 0.73 0.72 0.68 FEDERAL MILITARY GOVT 1.04 1.16 0.99 0.9 0.82 0.81 0.8 0.78 0.76 0.74 STATE AND LOCAL GOVT 14.78 12.9 14.48 12.61 14.69 15.27 15.73 16.19 16.63 17.06 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole Economics Table E-3 shows that the 3 highest sectors of employment for the county in the year 2000 were: manufacturing, services and state and local government. Over the course of the next 20 years that is expected to change somewhat where state and local government will replace the service sector in second place. However, manufacturing will continue to be the sector with the highest percentage of employees in Jefferson County. This graph also shows how the farm employment sector is decreasing and will continue to do so. This sector has decreased by almost half in the last 20 years. ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 21 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T Neighboring Washington and Burke Counties have similar patterns in the various employment sectors, however it is important to note that neither of these counties shows a forecasted decrease in total employment numbers like Jefferson County. Tables E-4 and E-5 display the six incorporated cities within Jefferson County in the year 2000. The first graph shows the six incorporated cities and total number of employees in each sector. Table E-4: Percentage of Employees in each Sector, 2000 Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining 10.3 15.1 2.4 1.2 0.6 4.5 Construction 6.2 11.6 3.4 2.5 7.5 6.3 Manufacturing 38.1 20.9 32.9 25.9 40.1 19.5 Wholesale trade 3.1 0 1 2.5 2.6 4 Retail trade 15.5 0 11 22.2 7 8 Transportation and warehousing, and utilities 8.2 7 4 6.2 7.2 3.8 Information 0 0 1.7 3.7 1.4 0.8 Finance, insurance, real estate, and rental and leasing 3.1 3.5 4.3 2.5 1.4 2.8 Professional, scientific, management, administrative, and waste management services 0 3.5 7.5 3.7 5.1 4.3 Educational, health and social services 9.3 14 22.5 8.6 12.1 23 Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation and food services 0 14 5.6 0 3.7 8.3 Other services (except public administration) 6.2 4.7 1.3 8.6 2 6.2 Public administration 0 5.8 2.3 12.3 9.3 8 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census Manufacturing has the highest percentage of employees in each sector. This can be explained by the numerous small factories and manufacturing plants within the county. Many of the numbers are easy to explain. The Bartow Community Center and the activities that are offered there could explain the 14% in Bartow in the arts and entertainment sector. This table shows us that the three largest sectors were manufacturing; educational, health and social services, and retail trade. ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 22 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T Table E-5: Number of Employees Per Sector, 2000 Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens TOTAL EMPLOYMENT 97 86 875 81 653 599 Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, and mining 10 13 21 1 4 27 Construction 6 10 30 2 49 38 Manufacturing 37 18 288 21 262 117 Wholesale trade 3 0 9 2 17 24 Retail trade 15 0 96 18 46 48 Transportation and warehousing, and utilities 8 6 35 5 47 23 Information 0 0 15 3 9 5 Finance, insurance, real estate, and rental and leasing 3 3 38 2 9 17 Professional, scientific, management, administrative, and waste management services 0 3 66 3 33 26 Educational, health and social services 9 12 197 7 79 138 Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation and food services 0 12 49 0 24 50 Other services (except public administration) 6 4 11 7 13 37 Public administration 0 5 20 10 61 49 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census Table E-6 shows the percentage of employees in each sector for Jefferson County, Burke County, Washington County, the state of Georgia, and the United States of America. Table E-6: Percentage of Employees per Sector, 2000 Jefferson Burke Washington Georgia U.S.A FARM EMPLOYMENT 7.19 15.68 4.66 1.37 1.85 AGRICULTURAL SERVICES, OTHER 5.51 0.6 1.00 1.16 1.29 MINING 0.73 0.11 15.41 0.19 0.47 CONSTRUCTION 4.79 12.22 4.86 6.24 5.74 MANUFACTURING 26.15 19.62 6.62 12.23 11.41 TRANSPORT, COMM. & PUBLIC UTIL 3.39 9.11 10.93 6.17 4.92 WHOLESALE TRADE 3.35 2.02 1.91 5.61 4.53 RETAIL TRADE 13.16 10.54 12.73 16.72 16.33 FINANCE, INS. & REAL ESTATE 4.21 2.87 2.66 7.1 8.06 SERVICES 15.22 12.63 17.1 29.08 31.81 FEDERAL CIVILIAN GOVT 0.79 0.71 0.52 1.97 1.73 FEDERAL MILITARY GOVT 0.82 1.02 0.64 1.92 1.24 STATE AND LOCAL GOVT 14.69 12.87 20.96 10.25 10.61 TOTAL EMPLOYMENT 100 100 100 100 100 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census It is important to note that while over one quarter of all the jobs held by Jefferson county residents are manufacturing, the national average is only around ten percent. In addition, while approximately 30% of the U.S. population works in the service industry; only 15% do so in Jefferson County. ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 23 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T In the service sector, it can be seen that Jefferson County has half of the national average percentage. In the agricultural services, it is seen that Jefferson County’s percentage of employees in the agricultural sector is five times greater than the national average, the State of Georgia and the two peer counties. Table E-7 offers a comparison of the percent of jobs by sector in the County and the State of Georgia for the years 2000, 2010, 2020 and 2025. One of the primary differences between Jefferson County and the State of Georgia is in the Manufacturing sector. Jefferson County’s numbers are more than double the state percentage. In addition, the services sector is another sector where Jefferson County and the State of Georgia differ greatly. While there is forecasted growth for the State of Georgia, Jefferson County is expected to experience little growth in this sector. Table E-7: Comparison of Jobs by Sector PERCENTAGES 2000 2010 2020 2025 Jefferson County Georgia Jefferson County Georgia Jefferson County Georgia Jefferson County Georgia FARM EMPLOYMENT 7.19 1.37 6.28 1.13 5.52 0.95 5.24 0.88 AGRICULTURAL SERVICES, OTHER 5.51 1.16 6.28 1.22 6.52 1.23 6.64 1.23 MINING 0.73 0.19 0.61 0.17 0.55 0.16 0.52 0.15 CONSTRUCTION 4.79 6.24 4.74 6.22 4.64 6.1 4.57 5.98 MANUFACTURING 26.15 12.23 24.61 11.13 23.41 10.08 22.85 9.58 TRANSPORT, COMM. & PUBLIC UTIL 3.39 6.17 3.57 6.38 3.85 6.34 3.91 6.22 WHOLESALE TRADE 3.35 5.61 3.92 5.71 4.1 5.71 4.16 5.7 RETAIL TRADE 13.16 16.72 12.54 16.45 12.39 16.27 12.31 16.15 FINANCE, INS. & REAL ESTATE 4.21 7.1 4.46 7 4.53 6.87 4.57 6.78 SERVICES 15.22 29.08 15.71 30.89 16.38 33.12 16.76 34.42 FEDERAL CIVILIAN GOVT 0.79 1.97 0.76 1.66 0.72 1.46 0.68 1.38 FEDERAL MILITARY GOVT 0.82 1.92 0.8 1.72 0.76 1.53 0.74 1.44 STATE AND LOCAL GOVT 14.69 10.25 15.73 10.31 16.63 10.17 17.06 10.08 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole Economics Of the businesses in Jefferson County, only 5.4% of them have 50 or more employees. This translates into 94.6% of the businesses having fewer than 50 employees. Earnings by Sector Much of the following analysis uses the term “economic sector”. According to the 2002 Woods and Poole Georgia State profile, the following industries existed in Jefferson County in 2000: • Farm Employment • Agricultural Services, Other • Mining • Construction • Manufacturing • Transport, Comm. & Public Utilities • Wholesale Trade ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 24 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T • Retail Trade • Finance, Insurance and Real Estate • Services • Federal Civilian Government • Federal Military Government • State and Local Government According to the 2002 Woods and Poole Economics inc. Georgia State Profile, there are approximately 350 businesses in Jefferson County. Of these businesses, 24.3% are classified as retail trade; 11.4% are classified as health care and 10.4% are classified as services. Tables E-8 and E-9 present earnings that include the total of wages, salaries and other earned income paid to persons working for the businesses or industries located in a given geographic area. In addition there are comparisons to the peer counties, and the State of Georgia. Table E-8: Jefferson County: Earnings by Sector Category 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Total (1996 $119,870,000 $143,206,000 $151,365,000 $172,677,000 $173,658,000 $187,598,000 $202,319,000 $218,080,000 $235,004,000 $253,304,000 Farm (1996 ($603,000) $4,860,000 $5,686,000 $9,333,000 $7,746,000 $8,371,000 $8,960,000 $9,624,000 $10,390,000 $11,280,000 Agricultural Services, Other (1996 $2,393,000 $1,514,000 $4,083,000 $8,682,000 $6,013,000 $6,820,000 $7,563,000 $8,306,000 $9,095,000 $9,960,000 Mining (1996 $7,087,000 $4,134,000 $6,518,000 $5,615,000 $4,330,000 $4,634,000 $4,914,000 $5,196,000 $5,489,000 $5,798,000 Construction (1996 $5,013,000 $7,611,000 $4,319,000 $6,219,000 $8,495,000 $8,736,000 $8,989,000 $9,260,000 $9,540,000 $9,833,000 Manufacturing (1996 $48,914,000 $61,886,000 $61,455,000 $70,444,000 $60,161,000 $62,803,000 $65,985,000 $69,405,000 $73,004,000 $76,810,000 Trans, Comm, & Public Utilities (1996 $6,718,000 $7,451,000 $6,321,000 $8,184,000 $13,646,000 $15,545,000 $17,472,000 $19,463,000 $21,475,000 $23,482,000 Wholesale Trade (1996 $4,454,000 $5,665,000 $7,349,000 $7,993,000 $6,056,000 $6,676,000 $7,289,000 $7,949,000 $8,666,000 $9,447,000 Retail Trade (1996 $9,625,000 $10,470,000 $9,995,000 $11,344,000 $13,338,000 $14,737,000 $16,030,000 $17,279,000 $18,535,000 $19,837,000 Finance, Insurance, & Real Estate (1996 $3,008,000 $3,172,000 $3,751,000 $4,537,000 $5,887,000 $6,880,000 $7,750,000 $8,645,000 $9,622,000 $10,720,000 Services (1996 $11,788,000 $11,608,000 $14,286,000 $14,821,000 $17,441,000 $19,753,000 $22,423,000 $25,443,000 $28,833,000 $32,629,000 Federal Civilian Government (1996 $2,188,000 $1,933,000 $1,908,000 $2,016,000 $2,077,000 $2,071,000 $2,095,000 $2,136,000 $2,187,000 $2,245,000 Federal Military Government (1996 $533,000 $1,037,000 $842,000 $823,000 $865,000 $919,000 $972,000 $1,025,000 $1,077,000 $1,128,000 State & Local Government (1996 $18,752,000 $21,865,000 $24,852,000 $22,666,000 $27,603,000 $29,653,000 $31,877,000 $34,349,000 $37,091,000 $40,135,000 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole Economics ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 25 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T Table E-9: Jefferson County: Earnings by Sector Category 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Total (1996 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Farm (1996 -0.50% 3.39% 3.76% 5.40% 4.46% 4.46% 4.43% 4.41% 4.42% 4.45% Agricultural Services, Other (1996 2.00% 1.06% 2.70% 5.03% 3.46% 3.64% 3.74% 3.81% 3.87% 3.93% Mining (1996 5.91% 2.89% 4.31% 3.25% 2.49% 2.47% 2.43% 2.38% 2.34% 2.29% Construction (1996 4.18% 5.31% 2.85% 3.60% 4.89% 4.66% 4.44% 4.25% 4.06% 3.88% Manufacturing (1996 40.81% 43.21% 40.60% 40.80% 34.64% 33.48% 32.61% 31.83% 31.07% 30.32% Trans, Comm, & Public Utilities (1996 5.60% 5.20% 4.18% 4.74% 7.86% 8.29% 8.64% 8.92% 9.14% 9.27% Wholesale Trade (1996 3.72% 3.96% 4.86% 4.63% 3.49% 3.56% 3.60% 3.64% 3.69% 3.73% Retail Trade (1996 8.03% 7.31% 6.60% 6.57% 7.68% 7.86% 7.92% 7.92% 7.89% 7.83% Finance, Insurance, & Real Estate (1996 2.51% 2.21% 2.48% 2.63% 3.39% 3.67% 3.83% 3.96% 4.09% 4.23% Services (1996 9.83% 8.11% 9.44% 8.58% 10.04% 10.53% 11.08% 11.67% 12.27% 12.88% Federal Civilian Government (1996 1.83% 1.35% 1.26% 1.17% 1.20% 1.10% 1.04% 0.98% 0.93% 0.89% Federal Military Government (1996 0.44% 0.72% 0.56% 0.48% 0.50% 0.49% 0.48% 0.47% 0.46% 0.45% State & Local Government (1996 15.64% 15.27% 16.42% 13.13% 15.90% 15.81% 15.76% 15.75% 15.78% 15.84% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole Economics Table E-10: Georgia – Earnings by Sector Category 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Total (1996 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Farm (1996 0.16% 1.27% 1.36% 1.40% 0.98% 0.93% 0.89% 0.85% 0.82% 0.79% Agricultural Services, Other (1996 0.37% 0.41% 0.46% 0.53% 0.59% 0.60% 0.61% 0.62% 0.62% 0.62% Mining (1996 0.65% 0.48% 0.36% 0.29% 0.27% 0.25% 0.22% 0.21% 0.19% 0.18% Construction (1996 5.66% 6.57% 5.82% 5.39% 6.00% 5.86% 5.67% 5.46% 5.26% 5.06% Manufacturing (1996 22.54% 20.03% 17.51% 16.84% 14.86% 14.45% 14.05% 13.59% 13.08% 12.53% Trans, Comm, & Public Utilities (1996 9.33% 8.85% 8.75% 9.43% 9.89% 9.99% 10.01% 9.96% 9.84% 9.63% Wholesale Trade (1996 8.87% 9.04% 8.86% 8.17% 8.44% 8.36% 8.21% 8.05% 7.88% 7.71% Retail Trade (1996 10.33% 10.64% 9.17% 9.08% 8.99% 8.97% 8.93% 8.87% 8.80% 8.71% Finance, Insurance, & Real Estate (1996 5.44% 5.59% 6.43% 6.86% 7.57% 7.66% 7.73% 7.78% 7.81% 7.82% Services (1996 15.63% 17.36% 21.95% 24.33% 26.77% 27.78% 29.02% 30.44% 32.02% 33.73% Federal Civilian Government (1996 5.64% 5.11% 4.66% 4.17% 3.39% 3.11% 2.87% 2.67% 2.49% 2.33% Federal Military Government (1996 3.72% 3.68% 2.69% 2.49% 2.06% 1.94% 1.83% 1.72% 1.62% 1.53% State & Local Government (1996 11.67% 10.97% 11.97% 11.01% 10.18% 10.10% 9.95% 9.78% 9.58% 9.37% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole Economics Table E-10 highlights current statewide sector earnings. Similar to sector employment rates, the Georgia economy is much more diverse than that of Jefferson County and no sector accounts for more than a quarter of total earnings. The widest gap is found in manufacturing, where sector earnings account for over 10% more in Jefferson County than the state average. The service sector, on the other hand, contributes a higher share ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 26 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T of earnings statewide. Whereas the service sector accounts for 24.3% of earnings in Georgia, it accounts for less than 10% in Jefferson County. Wages In 1999, the average weekly wage paid in Jefferson County was $452, significantly lower than the Georgia average of $629 (Tables E-11, E-12). Between 1989 and 1999, average weekly wages have increased 52.5%. Current average weekly wages paid by sector range from a low of $324 in services to a high of $914 in Mining. Historically, these sectors have always been at the higher and lower ends of the wage scale. The highest wage growth rates between 1990 and 2000 were in construction retail trade manufacturing and Agriculture Table E-11: Jefferson – Average Weekly Wages Category 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 All Industries $316 $322 $328 $347 $347 $362 $379 $399 $429 $433 $452 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing 277 329 367 436 NA 382 NA NA NA NA NA Mining NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Construction NA 242 312 329 273 NA 268 309 NA 399 440 Manufacturing NA 328 343 371 365 392 417 453 517 501 522 Transportation, Comm, Util NA 468 498 499 516 534 558 535 579 557 NA Wholesale NA 307 323 354 338 374 376 384 386 400 437 Retail NA 181 183 200 201 203 210 220 239 251 255 Financial, Insurance, Real Estate NA 396 377 351 384 394 399 409 418 425 444 Services NA 252 247 269 264 269 277 280 275 293 314 Federal Gov NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA State Gov NA 416 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Local Gov NA 244 NA NA NA 280 287 290 311 332 338 Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; NA: Not Available Table E-12: Georgia— Average Weekly Wages Category 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 All Industries $404 $424 $444 $471 $480 $488 $509 $531 $562 $598 $629 Agri, Forestry, Fishing 267 276 285 297 304 312 322 336 347 373 390 Mining 561 589 605 NA NA 698 734 741 781 832 866 Construction NA 434 439 451 461 479 508 534 556 590 623 Manufacturing NA 450 473 503 511 531 555 588 620 656 684 Transportation, Comm, Util NA 603 635 689 709 720 737 769 805 842 895 Wholesale NA 603 632 669 695 711 729 762 809 873 932 Retail NA 236 244 255 260 267 275 286 299 318 335 Financial, Insurance, Real Estate NA 544 569 627 648 648 693 741 799 872 900 Services NA 414 439 464 471 475 501 519 551 580 611 Federal Gov NA 543 584 612 651 667 666 701 774 791 808 State Gov NA 451 462 460 471 NA 493 517 533 561 579 Local Gov NA 387 401 401 410 420 440 461 480 506 523 Source: U.S. Bureau Labor Statistics NA: Not Available ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 27 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T In 2001 the average weekly wage paid in Jefferson County was $488, which was considerably lower than the statewide average of $676 during that same time period. Average weekly pay was considerably higher for neighboring Burke and Washington Counties at $599 and $561 respectively (Table E-13). In Jefferson County the Mining sector had the highest weekly wages at $ 914. The lowest sector was retail trade at $324 dollars a week. In Jefferson County the wholesale trade sector averaged $519 a week while the State of Georgia averaged $1,022, almost twice as much. Table E-13: Average Weekly Wage By Sector, 2001 INDUSTRY Jefferson County Burke County Washington County State of Georgia Agriculture, forestry $446.00 $350.00 $482.00 $417.00 Construction $446.00 $397.00 $383.00 $687.00 Manufacturing $586.00 $508.00 $546.00 $711.00 Wholesale Trade $519.00 $496.00 $528.00 $1,022.00 Retail Trade $324.00 $311.00 $303.00 $433.00 Finance and insurance $513.00 $485.00 $516.00 $1,051.00 Real estate and rental and leasing $335.00 $252.00 $312.00 $670.00 Transportation and warehousing $534.00 $463.00 $527.00 $808.00 Services $376.00 $635.00 $473.00 $680.00 Mining $914.00 NA $1,064.00 $876.00 Average Weekly Wage (all Sectors) $488.00 $559.00 $561.00 $676.00 Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics NA: Not Available The overall 1990 to 2002 increases in Jefferson County wages were below the state average and local wages remain significantly lower than elsewhere in Georgia. The only sectors comparable in actual wages were agriculture/forestry and mining where county wages exceeded the state average. The largest local-statewide wage gaps are found in finance and insurance and wholesale trade where the state wage doubles the county wage. Sources of Personal Income The sources of personal income are indicators of how a community receives its income. The state of Georgia Department of Community Affairs, with the assistance of Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. has developed categories of personal income. These five categories of personal income include the following: 1) Wage and Salary-Total income earned as compensation for working or rendering services; 2) Other Labor Income-Total employer contributions to private pension or worker’s compensation funds; 3) Proprietor’s Income-Proprietor’s Income measured total profits earned from partnership and sole proprietorships; 4) Dividends-Investments-Rent-Interest Payments and Interest Income-total income from investments and rental property; and 5) Transfer Payments-Total income from payments by the government under many different programs that include Social Security, unemployment insurance, food stamps, veterans benefits and countless others. ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 28 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T Associated with these figures is a Residence Adjustment Category, which measures the net amount of personal income of residents of the county that is earned outside the county. When the number is positive, as in Jefferson County it means the amount of income earned outside the county by residents of the county is greater than the amount of income earned in the county by non-residents. This confirms the data trends seen in the previous chart that states that incomes are higher outside the county. Table E-14 provides sources of income data for Jefferson County, the state and the nation. Table E-14: Sources of Personal Income PERCENTAGES 1990 1995 2000 Jefferson Georgia U.S.A Jefferson Georgia U.S.A Jefferson Georgia U.S.A PERSONAL INCOME 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 WAGES AND SALARIES 49.01 60.36 56.16 48.5 59.07 55.25 45.06 61.54 58.16 OTHER LABOR INCOME 6.99 8.68 7.85 6.78 8.63 7.96 5.24 7.05 6.37 PROPRIETORS INCOME 5.29 7.11 7.8 6.38 7.96 8.04 7.24 8.36 8.61 DIVIDENDS, INTEREST & RENT 16.15 17.34 20.18 14.89 16.31 18.79 16.77 16.64 18.29 TRANSFER PMTS. TO PERSONS 24.6 10.94 12.17 27.62 12.62 14.31 26.51 11.04 12.87 LESS SOCIAL INS. CONTRIBUTIONS 3.66 4.33 4.15 4 4.45 4.33 3.36 4.42 4.3 RESIDENCE ADJUSTMENT 1.61 -0.1 -0.02 -0.18 -0.15 -0.01 2.54 -0.21 -0.01 PERCENTAGES 2010 2020 2025 Jefferson Georgia U.S.A Jefferson Georgia U.S.A Jefferson Georgia U.S.A PERSONAL INCOME 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 WAGES AND SALARIES 46.05 61.72 58.69 46.82 61.62 58.93 47.07 61.51 58.96 OTHER LABOR INCOME 4.79 6.59 6.24 4.74 6.37 6.08 4.71 6.26 6 PROPRIETORS INCOME 6.56 8.22 8.49 6.47 8.06 8.37 6.41 7.97 8.29 DIVIDENDS, INTEREST & RENT 16.12 16.28 17.95 15.31 16.05 17.8 14.99 16.05 17.78 TRANSFER PMTS. TO PERSONS 27.6 11.34 13.3 28.09 11.71 13.82 28.37 11.96 14.1 LESS SOCIAL INS. CONTRIBUTIONS 3.61 4.77 4.68 3.89 5.09 5.01 4 5.21 5.14 RESIDENCE ADJUSTMENT 2.49 0.63 0 2.46 1.27 0 2.44 1.47 0 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole Economics When comparing Jefferson County to the State of Georgia and the United States as a whole several differences become apparent. During the period from 1990-2000 Jefferson County’s percentage of wages and salary is considerably lower than the state or national percentages. This can be attributed to the fact that Jefferson County has a lower average income and salary than the state or national averages. Similar comparisons can be made in the “other labor” category. The most dramatic difference between Jefferson County and the state and nation is in the transfer payments category. This category reflects a variety of government programs such as social security, food stamps and unemployment insurance. This number, which over the course of the past 10 years has been more than double the state and national average is reflective of the county’s poverty rate which is 23%, higher than the state rate at 13% and more than double the national rate at Jefferson County’s residence adjustment will continue to be positive through the year 2025. This suggests the continuing trend of residents of Jefferson County earning more money outside the county than the money being earned in Jefferson County by residents. The state residence adjustment has remained steady since 1990 and that trend is ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 29 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T projected to continue through 2025. The resident who earns income in one county but lives in a different county would have that income counted under positive residential adjustment in the county in which the resident lives, and the county in which the resident works would have a negative adjustment. Although higher than the state averages, Jefferson County’s increasing amount of personal income earned outside the county by residents compared to the amount of income earned in the county by nonresidents demonstrates a decrease in the job base in Jefferson County. The State of Georgia’s numbers are extremely close to which shows that almost all residents of Georgia earn their income in the state. The same can be said for the United States. Table E-15: Sources of Personal Income, Percentage 1990 1995 2000 Jefferson Burke Washington Jefferson Burke Washington Jefferson Burke Washington PERSONAL INCOME 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 WAGES AND SALARIES 49.01 60.51 60.51 48.5 48.93 48.93 45.06 49.76 49.76 OTHER LABOR INCOME 6.99 8.77 8.77 6.78 7.49 7.49 5.24 6.13 6.13 PROPRIETORS INCOME 5.29 6.48 6.48 6.38 5.26 5.26 7.24 6.76 6.76 DIVIDENDS, INTEREST & RENT 16.15 14.75 14.75 14.89 13.91 13.91 16.77 14.38 14.38 TRANSFER PMTS. TO PERSONS 24.6 21.68 21.68 27.62 24.76 24.76 26.51 22.48 22.48 LESS SOCIAL INS. CONTRIBUTIONS 3.66 4.36 4.36 4 3.69 3.69 3.36 3.59 3.59 RESIDENCE ADJUSTMENT 1.61 -7.84 -7.84 -0.18 3.35 3.35 2.54 4.09 4.09 2010 2020 2025 Jefferson Burke Washington Jefferson Burke Washington Jefferson Burke Washington PERSONAL INCOME 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 WAGES AND SALARIES 46.05 50 50 46.82 49.91 49.91 47.07 49.74 49.74 OTHER LABOR INCOME 4.79 5.47 5.47 4.74 5.33 5.33 4.71 5.24 5.24 PROPRIETORS INCOME 6.56 6.91 6.91 6.47 6.68 6.68 6.41 6.57 6.57 DIVIDENDS, INTEREST & RENT 16.12 13.94 13.94 15.31 13.62 13.62 14.99 13.53 13.53 TRANSFER PMTS. TO PERSONS 27.6 23.59 23.59 28.09 24.7 24.7 28.37 25.32 25.32 LESS SOCIAL INS. CONTRIBUTIONS 3.61 3.85 3.85 3.89 4.07 4.07 4 4.15 4.15 RESIDENCE ADJUSTMENT 2.49 3.94 3.94 2.46 3.82 3.82 2.44 3.76 3.76 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole Economics When comparing Jefferson County sources of personal income to the sources of neighboring counties, Jefferson county’s wages and salaries were significantly lower than the neighboring counties in 1990, but in the years after, the neighboring counties wages and salaries actually decreased to a similar level as Jefferson County’s (Table E-15). MAJOR ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES The Jefferson County area has seen some increase in economic activity since 1970; however, growth has slowed somewhat during the last decade. Jefferson County’s proximity to the Augusta and Atlanta metro areas is one of the main reasons for the growth that has occurred. Below is a detailed description of economic development opportunities by sector within the County and region. ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 30 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T Retail Trade and Services Service employment in Jefferson County increased from 966 jobs in 1990 to 1,152 jobs in 2000. This is an increase of 156 jobs. The retail trade also saw an increase of 156 jobs increasing from 840 to 996. Besides agricultural services, these two sectors saw the greatest increase. Jefferson County has the potential to increase these numbers with the numerous recreational and historical opportunities in the county by increasing and promoting more tourism. Manufacturing and Wholesale Trade Manufacturing and wholesale trade are reviewed in this section together because these sectors share many of the same characteristics such as land use, employee education and skill levels. Manufacturing employment in Jefferson County went from 2,683 in 1990 to 1980 in the year 2000 this is a loss of 703 jobs, the largest loss. The percentage of jobs in the manufacturing sector remained almost the same, which shows that almost all of the jobs lost in the county were in the manufacturing sector. Wholesale trade also saw a loss of jobs from 345 to 254. Regaining these jobs will be important in the future. The widening of US Route 1 will bring potential for these sectors to increase greatly. Small and medium firms manufacturing a variety of products represent the manufacturing sector in Jefferson County such as those located in the Louisville Airport Industrial Park. Key Manufacturers in Jefferson County are included in Table E-16. Table E-16: Major Manufacturers in Jefferson County Company City # of Employees Thermo King Corp. Louisville 437 Battle Lumber Co., Inc. Wadley 240 Glit, Inc. Wrens 207 J. M. Huber Corp., Engineered Materials Division Wrens 178 Cadet Mfg. Corp. Louisville 175 Wadley Shirt Co. Wadley 138 Fulghum Industries, Inc. Wadley 125 Lewis Steel Works Wrens 122 Air Balance, Inc., Div. of MESTEK, Inc. Wrens 119 A & M Products Manufacturing Company Wrens 88 Lamb Lumber Holding Co., Inc. Wrens 72 Georgia Tennessee Mining & Chem. Co. Wrens 42 Dixieland Wood Products, Inc. Louisville 26 L T & E, Inc. Wrens 25 Atwell Pecan Co., Inc. Wrens 20 Central Steel Building System Louisville 20 Cooper Machine Co, Inc. Wadley 18 Helena Chemical Co. Louisville 12 Rachels Machine & Fabrication, Inc. Wadley 10 Fall Line Publishing, Inc. Louisville 9 The News & Farmer/Jefferson Reporter Louisville 7 A. P. Jones Timber Co. Louisville 5 Hodges Machine Shop, Inc. Bartow 4 C & G Machining & Welding Stapleton 2 Riverside Mfg. Co. Wadley 5 Source: Georgia Department of Industry, Trade & Tourism ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 31 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T Special and Unique Economic Activities The Jefferson County Development Authority and the chamber of commerce are the primary vehicles to attract and provide available locations and opportunities for industrial development. The Development Authority has had success as of late. The Development Authority was responsible for the retention and growth of Glit/Microtron. In addition the Development Authority has been successful in obtaining grants from a variety of sources for the expansion of both the Louisville and Wrens airports and the Louisville Industrial Park. Other accomplishments include creating the Shake Rag Industrial site. Tourism Jefferson County is well positioned to capitalize on tourism. In addition to the Ogeechee River, numerous historical and recreation qualities provide good tourism opportunities. The county has applied for various state and federal grants aimed at enhancing potential tourist areas such as the Louisville downtown historic district. Wrens is home to the largest gourd farm this side of the Mississippi River. The farm is located on Highway One and is a gem in the community. It attracts many people and is well known nationally and internationally. LABOR FORCE ANALYSIS Employment by Occupation This section includes an inventory and assessment of the employment of Jefferson County’s labor force. Work force characteristics include gender, amount of participation in the work force, and occupation and sector of the workers. Table E-17 shows the percentages of total employment by occupational classifications for 2000 in Jefferson County. Comparisons are also made with Burke and Washington Counties, the State of Georgia and the United States. Also included is a breakdown of the six incorporated municipalities in the county. This analysis looks at the occupations of the residents of the county, regardless of where they work. Table E-17: Percentages of Total Employment by Occupation, 2000 Jefferson Burke Washington Georgia U.S.A Employed civilian population 16 years and over 100 100 100 100 100 OCCUPATION Management, professional, and related occupations 22.8 21.4 22.8 32.7 33.6 Service occupations 15.6 15.7 20.1 13.4 14.9 Sales and office occupations 17.9 20.3 19.4 26.8 26.7 Farming, fishing, and forestry occupations 2.7 1.7 1.5 0.6 0.7 Construction, extraction, and maintenance occupations 10.6 11.4 13.4 10.8 9.4 Production, transportation, and material moving occupations 30.4 29.5 22.8 15.7 14.6 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 32 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T Table E-18 shows the information for the six incorporated cities in Jefferson County Table E-18: Percentages of Total Employment by Occupation—Jefferson County, 2000 Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Employed civilian population 16 years and over 100 100 100 100 100 100 OCCUPATION Management, professional, and related occupations 7.2 24.4 27.3 21 11.6 27.2 Service occupations 4.1 22.1 14.2 8.6 17.6 21 Sales and office occupations 24.7 14 25.6 24.7 10.9 21.5 Farming, fishing, and forestry occupations 0 3.5 1.4 0 1.4 1.2 Construction, extraction, and maintenance occupations 23.7 11.6 5.5 23.5 12.1 5.5 Production, transportation, and material moving occupations 40.2 24.4 26.1 22.2 46.4 23.5 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole Economics Tables E-19 - E-22 provide local, state and national employment data. The three top occupations of County residents in the year 2000 were production, transportation, and material moving occupations management, professional and related occupations (22.8%) and sales and office occupations These occupations account for over 70 % of the working residents of Jefferson County. Jefferson County has similar percentages to both Burke and Washington County. However the difference is more noticeable when compared to state and national figures. It can be seen from these two graphs that in the two skilled labor categories, management and professional and sales and office, Jefferson County falls below both the state and national averages. However in the production, transportation and material moving category Jefferson County has more than twice the percentage of employees in that sector. Continued development of industrial and commercial facilities may have a future impact on where residents work. Table E-19: Employment by Occupation Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Category 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 TOTAL All Occupations 70 97 132 86 1083 875 153 81 826 653 919 599 Executive, Administrative and Managerial (not Farm) 4 0 14 9 26 121 5 6 51 12 69 56 Professional and Technical Specialty 2 7 8 12 142 118 10 11 58 64 103 107 Technicians & Related Support 2 NA 2 NA 12 NA 2 NA 9 NA 18 NA Sales 3 6 12 0 146 96 10 3 65 21 95 41 Clerical and Administrative Support 11 18 19 12 107 128 17 17 69 50 115 88 Private Household Services 0 NA 0 NA 7 NA 0 NA 6 NA 8 NA Protective Services 2 NA 2 NA 16 NA 0 NA 8 NA 20 NA Service Occupations (not Protective & Household) 2 6 19 6 96 89 25 6 86 35 114 50 Farming, Fishing and Forestry 0 0 7 3 29 12 3 0 17 9 11 7 Precision Production, Craft, and Repair 17 27 13 18 142 189 27 10 99 218 68 71 ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 33 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T Table E-19: Employment by Occupation Continued Machine Operators, Assemblers & Inspectors 17 23 29 10 201 48 27 19 249 79 194 33 Transportation & Material Moving 8 12 2 3 55 39 14 8 50 85 43 70 Handlers, Equipment Cleaners, helpers & Laborers 2 NA 5 NA 104 NA 13 NA 59 NA 61 NA Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; NA: Not Available Table E-20: Employment by Occupation Avera Bartow Louisville Stapleton Wadley Wrens Category 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 1990 2000 TOTAL All Occupations 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Executive, Administrative and Managerial (not Farm) 5.71% 0.00% 10.61% 10.47% 2.40% 13.83% 3.27% 7.41% 6.17% 1.84% 7.51% 9.35% Professional and Technical Specialty 2.86% 7.22% 6.06% 13.95% 13.11% 13.49% 6.54% 13.58% 7.02% 9.80% 11.21% 17.86% Technicians & Related Support 2.86% NA 1.52% NA 1.11% NA 1.31% NA 1.09% NA 1.96% NA Sales 4.29% 6.19% 9.09% 0.00% 13.48% 10.97% 6.54% 3.70% 7.87% 3.22% 10.34% 6.84% Clerical and Administrative Support 15.71% 18.56% 14.39% 13.95% 9.88% 14.63% 11.11% 20.99% 8.35% 7.66% 12.51% 14.69% Private Household Services 0.00% NA 0.00% NA 0.65% NA 0.00% NA 0.73% NA 0.87% NA Protective Services 2.86% NA 1.52% NA 1.48% NA 0.00% NA 0.97% NA 2.18% NA Service Occupations (not Protective & Household) 2.86% 6.19% 14.39% 6.98% 8.86% 10.17% 16.34% 7.41% 10.41% 5.36% 12.40% 8.35% Farming, Fishing and Forestry 0.00% 0.00% 5.30% 3.49% 2.68% 1.37% 1.96% 0.00% 2.06% 1.38% 1.20% 1.17% Precision Production, Craft, and Repair 24.29% 27.84% 9.85% 20.93% 13.11% 21.60% 17.65% 12.35% 11.99% 33.38% 7.40% 11.85% Machine Operators, Assemblers & Inspectors 24.29% 23.71% 21.97% 11.63% 18.56% 5.49% 17.65% 23.46% 30.15% 12.10% 21.11% 5.51% Transportation & Material Moving 11.43% 12.37% 1.52% 3.49% 5.08% 4.46% 9.15% 9.88% 6.05% 13.02% 4.68% 11.69% Handlers, Equipment Cleaners, helpers & Laborers 2.86% NA 3.79% NA 9.60% NA 8.50% NA 7.14% NA 6.64% NA Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; NA: Not Available Table E-21: Employment by Occupation Jefferson County Georgia Category 1990 2000 1990 2000 TOTAL All Occupations 6,780 100% 5,952 100% 3,092,057 100% 3,839,756 100% Executive, Administrative and Managerial (not Farm) 331 4.88% 576 9.68% 378,984 12.26% 538,647 14.03% Professional and Technical Specialty 496 7.32% 784 13.17% 383,012 12.39% 717,312 18.68% Technicians & Related Support 207 3.05% NA NA 110,766 3.58% NA NA Sales 598 8.82% 440 7.39% 379,746 12.28% 446,876 11.64% Clerical and Administrative Support 642 9.47% 624 10.48% 494,823 16.00% 581,364 15.14% Private Household Services 52 0.77% NA NA 15,882 0.51% NA NA Protective Services 94 1.39% NA NA 52,596 1.70% NA NA ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 34 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T Table E-21: Employment by Occupation Continued Service Occupations (not Protective & Household) 774 11.42% 556 9.34% 302,084 9.77% 444,077 11.57% Farming, Fishing and Forestry 349 5.15% 158 2.65% 68,111 2.20% 24,489 0.64% Precision Production, Craft, and Repair 860 12.68% 1,209 20.31% 366,819 11.86% 346,326 9.02% Machine Operators, Assemblers & Inspectors 1,486 21.92% 630 10.58% 262,930 8.50% 415,849 10.83% Transportation & Material Moving 392 5.78% 602 10.11% 142,189 4.60% 254,652 6.63% Handlers, Equipment Cleaners, helpers & Laborers 499 7.36% NA NA 134,115 4.34% NA NA Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; NA: Not Available Table E-22: US Employment by Occupation Category 1990 2000 TOTAL All Occupations 115,452,905 100% 129,721,512 100% Executive, Administrative and Managerial (not Farm) 14,227,916 12.32% 17,448,038 13.45% Professional and Technical Specialty 16,287,187 14.11% 26,198,693 20.20% Technicians & Related Support 4,251,007 3.68% NA NA Sales 13,606,870 11.79% 14,592,699 11.25% Clerical and Administrative Support 18,769,526 16.26% 20,028,691 15.44% Private Household Services 520,183 0.45% NA NA Protective Services 1,981,723 1.72% NA NA Service Occupations (not Protective & Household) 12,746,927 11.04% 15,575,101 12.01% Farming, Fishing and Forestry 2,835,950 2.46% 951,810 0.73% Precision Production, Craft, and Repair 13,077,829 11.33% 11,008,625 8.49% Machine Operators, Assemblers & Inspectors 7,886,595 6.83% 12,256,138 9.45% Transportation & Material Moving 4,715,847 4.08% 7,959,871 6.14% Handlers, Equipment Cleaners, helpers & Laborers 4,545,345 3.94% NA NA Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; NA: Not Available Employment Status Table E-23 outlines labor force participation in Jefferson, Burke and Washington Counties, the State of Georgia and the United states in 2000. Table E-23: Labor Force Participation, 2000 Jefferson U.S.A. Georgia Burke Washington Total in Labor Force 52.2 63.9 66.1 56.5 53.7 Civilian Labor Force 52.2 63.4 65 56.2 53.7 Military Labor Force 0 0.5 1.1 0.3 0 Males in Labor Force 52.4 42.5 40.6 47.7 53.7 Females in Labor Force 47.6 57.4 59.4 52.3 46.3 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 35 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T It can be seen from this chart that Jefferson County has the lowest percentage of the total population 16 years or older (labor force) that are participants in the labor force. Jefferson County has a total force of 52.2 % of 16 year olds that are working. This is somewhat lower than Burke (56.5%) and Washington (53.7%) counties and considerably lower than the State of Georgia (66.1%) and the United States (63.9) It is also interesting to point out that Jefferson County and Washington County both have a greater percentage of males in the labor force while Burke County, the state of Georgia and the United States have a greater percentage of females. Unemployment Table E-24 shows information about labor force participation and unemployment in Jefferson County in 1990. These figures are compared to Burke and Washington Counties, the State of Georgia and the United States. The unemployment rate in 1990 in Jefferson County was higher than the state and national unemployment rate, but was very similar to neighboring counties. This illustrates the regional distress in the economy, in and around Jefferson County. It is important to point out that between 1990 and 2000 the state and national unemployment rates dropped while the three counties increased, with Jefferson County seeing the largest increase from 7.9% to 11.75%. Table E-24: Labor Force Participation and Unemployment, 1990 Jefferson U.S.A. Georgia Burke Washington Labor Force 7,362 123,473,450 3,278,378 8,614 8,703 Employed 6,780 115,681,202 3,090,276 7,905 8,053 Unemployed 582 7,792,248 188,102 709 650 Unemployed rate of Labor Force 7.9 6.31 5.73 8.23 7.4 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole Economics Table E-25: Labor Force Participation and Unemployment, 2000 Jefferson U.S.A. Georgia Burke Washington Labor Force 6,747 138,820,935 4,129,666 9,108 8,626 Employed 5,952 129,721,512 3,839,756 8,220 7,804 Unemployed 793 7,947,286 223,052 842 822 Unemployed Rate of Labor Force 11.75% 5.70% 5.40% 9.24% 9.52% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole Economics Table E-25 represents the labor force participation and unemployment in 2000. The table shows that Jefferson County has an unemployment rate of 11.75%. Ten years later, the unemployment rate in Jefferson County has increase 4 percentage points and remains higher than the state and national rates. The rate is also higher than Burke and Washington Counties by 2% and more than double the State and national rates. These rates are even higher after the labor force decreased, but the number of unemployed workers increased by 211. The neighboring counties’ unemployment rates increased, but only half of the increase that Jefferson County saw. ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 36 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T Table E-26 shows a year -by -year breakdown of unemployment rates for Jefferson County, Burke County, Washington County, the state of Georgia and the nation. The three counties have consistently fluctuated over the past twelve years, while the state and nation have remained quite steady, not increasing or decreasing by more than 2% from any year to the other. This illustrates that a small economy like Jefferson County with relatively few employers, is much more sensitive to economic shifts such as plant closings, lay-offs, or downsizing than is a large economy like the Georgia economy or the U.S. economy. Commuting Patterns Employment opportunities within the county are primarily service or public administration geared to the needs of the immediate population. In 2002 approximately 66% of the working population of Jefferson County worked within the county. This number is higher than the state average but lower than the national average. Table E-27: Jefferson County: Labor Force by Place of Work Category 1990 2000 Worked in County of Residence 5219 3842 Worked outside county of Residence 1399 1924 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole Economics Overall there is a trend for more and more people to work outside of their county of residence. It can be seen that Jefferson County experienced a greater percentage loss than its peer counties, the State of Georgia and the Nation as a whole. Although the county will continue to actively promote and encourage non- residential development in appropriate locations, it will most likely increase its commuter/bedroom community orientation. The table below takes a closer look as to where Jefferson County residents are commuting to work: Table E-26: Year-By-Year Breakdown of Unemployment Rates Jefferson Burke Washington Georgia U.S.A. 1990 8.2 10.9 5.9 5.5 5.6 1991 6.7 11.2 5.1 5.0 6.8 1992 8.7 15.8 5.6 7.0 7.5 1993 7.6 12.0 4.5 5.8 6.9 1994 7.2 12.3 3.8 5.2 6.1 1995 11.3 13.9 5.5 4.9 5.6 1996 13.6 16.4 6.0 4.6 5.4 1997 13.3 14.7 9.0 4.5 4.9 1998 12.3 13.1 8.4 4.2 4.5 1999 13.4 9.6 7.5 4.0 4.2 2000 9.2 7.7 5.1 3.7 4.0 2001 9.8 7.8 4.8 4.0 4.7 2002 10.6 8.8 5.4 5.1 5.8 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; Woods & Poole Economics ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 37 E C O N O M I C D E V E L P O M E N T Table E-28: Number of Commuters From Jefferson County and Destination County Number of Workers County of Employment County of Residence 3,842 Jefferson County Jefferson County 507 Richmond County Jefferson County 315 Washington County Jefferson County 220 McDuffie County Jefferson County 192 Burke County Jefferson County 153 Columbia County Jefferson County 153 Emanuel County Jefferson County 106 Johnson County Jefferson County 51 Baldwin County Jefferson County 40 Glascock County Jefferson County 34 Jefferson County Jefferson County 26 Bibb County Jefferson County 26 Hancock County Jefferson County 16 Laurens County Jefferson County 14 Bulloch County Jefferson County 14 Jenkins County Jefferson County 13 Fulton County Jefferson County 13 Tattnall County Jefferson County 10 Chatham County Jefferson County 8 Wilkinson County Jefferson County 6 Houston County Jefferson County 4 Toombs County Jefferson County 3 Hall County Jefferson County Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census Table E-29: Persons Working in Jefferson County County of Residence Number of Workers % of Workers Jefferson County 3842 69.9% Richmond County 292 5.5% McDuffie County 220 4.0% Burke County 192 3.5% Glascock County 175 3.2% Emanuel County 170 3.1% Columbia County 132 2.4% Washington County 67 1.2% Other 409 7.4% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 54 H O U S I N G The cities of Avera, Bartow, Louisville, Stapleton, Wadley and Wrens experienced similar housing trends since 1980. In all cases, the number and percentage of single-family units declined while the share of mobile home units increased. The most dramatic change occurred in Bartow where the percentage of single-family units dropped from 92.8% to 69.4%. Throughout the municipalities, the number of multi-family units has remained relatively stable, with the exception of increases in both Wadley and Wrens The increase in multi-family units in Wadley and Wrens is a direct result of affordable and public housing initiatives undertaken since the 1980s. Table H-1: Housing Stock by Type, 1980-2000 1980 1990 2000 Total % Total % Total % Jefferson Co. Single-Family 5,174 79.7% 4,727 66.9% 4,560 63.1% Multi-Family 630 9.7% 556 7.9% 671 9.3% Mobile Home 688 10.6% 1782 25.2% 1990 27.6% Total 6,492 100.0% 7,065 100.0% 7,221 100.0% Avera Single-Family 111 84.1% 95 77.2% 120 74.1% Multi-Family 3 2.3% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Mobile Home 18 13.6% 28 22.8% 42 25.9% Total 132 100.0% 123 100.0% 162 100.0% Bartow Single-Family 128 92.8% 114 85.1% 75 69.4% Multi-Family 6 4.3% 1 0.7% 6 5.6% Mobile Home 4 2.9% 19 14.2% 27 25.0% Total 138 100.0% 134 100.0% 108 100.0% Louisville Single-Family 845 78.2% 719 76.9% 833 76.4% Multi-Family 167 15.5% 108 11.6% 137 12.6% Mobile Home 68 6.3% 108 11.6% 120 11.0% Total 1080 100.0% 935 100.0% 1090 100.0% Stapleton Single-Family 141 75.8% 104 61.9% 86 71.7 Multi-Family 22 11.7% 13 7.4% 8 6.6 Mobile Home 23 12.5% 51 30.7% 26 21.7 Total 186 100.0% 168 100.0% 120 100.0% Wadley Single-Family 711 85.7% 606 63.3% 519 59.1% Multi-Family 79 9.5% 107 11.1% 155 17.6% Mobile Home 39 4.8% 235 25.6% 204 23.3% Total 829 100.0% 958 100.0% 878 100.0% ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 55 H O U S I N G Table H-1: Housing Stock by Type, 1980-2000 Continued Wrens Single-Family 678 73.1% 666 68.6% 677 64% Multi-Family 187 20.2% 180 18.5% 252 23.8% Mobile Home 62 6.7% 112 12.9% 128 12.2% Total 927 100.0% 970 100.0% 1,057 100.0% Georgia Single-Family 1,525,070 75.8% 1,712,259 64.9% 2,201,467 67.1% Multi-Family 334,622 16.6% 598,271 22.7% 681,019 20.8% Mobile Home 152,948 7.6% 327,888 12.4% 399,251 12.1% Total 2,012,640 100.0% 2,638,418 100.0% 3,281,737 100.0% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census Age and Condition of Housing Supply There is a great variety in age of the housing supply in Jefferson County, as seen in Table H-2. Over 60% of the houses were built prior to 1980. The largest decade of growth was from 1990 to 2000 when 23.2%, a total of 1676 houses were built. This growth occurred after a decline during the 1980’s. The City of Avera, which has the smallest percentage of homes built before 1939 saw the most growth during the period of 1990-2000. Over 58% or 94 of Wrens’ housing were constructed during that period. The City of Wrens saw the smallest percentage of growth during that same time period with only 13.1% of the stock being constructed then. The town of Bartow has the highest percentage of houses built before 1939 As a whole Jefferson County saw a smaller percentage of new housing (23.2%) built during the 1990-2000 decade than did the state of Georgia (27.3%) Table H-2: Housing Stock by Age, 1980-2000 Jefferson County HOUSING UNITS ACCUMULATED UNITS year structure built number percent number percent 1939 or earlier 755 10.5 775 10.5 more than 60 years old 1940-1959 1135 15.7 1890 26.1 more than 40 years old 1960-1969 982 13.6 2872 39.8 more than 30 years old 1970-1979 1479 20.5 4351 60.3 more than 20 years old 1980-1989 1194 16.5 5545 76.8 more than 10 years old 1990-march 2000 1676 23.2 1676 23.2 less than 10 years old Total 7221 100 7221 100 Avera HOUSING UNITS ACCUMULATED UNITS year structure built number percent number percent 1939 or earlier 8 4.9 8 4.9 more than 60 years old 1940-1959 21 13 29 17.9 more than 40 years old 1960-1969 11 6.8 40 24.7 more than 30 years old 1970-1979 15 9.3 55 40 more than 20 years old 1980-1989 13 8 68 42 more than 10 years old 1990-march 2000 94 58 94 58 less than 10 years old Total 162 100 162 100 ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 56 H O U S I N G Table H-2: Housing Stock by Age, 1980-2000 Continued Bartow HOUSING UNITS ACCUMULATED UNITS year structure built number percent number percent 1939 or earlier 36 33.3 36 33.3 more than 60 years old 1940-1959 23 21.3 59 54.6 more than 40 years old 1960-1969 9 8.3 68 63 more than 30 years old 1970-1979 9 8.4 77 71.3 more than 20 years old 1980-1989 16 14.8 93 86.1 more than 10 years old 1990-march 2000 15 13.9 15 13.9 less than 10 years old Total 108 100 108 100 Louisville HOUSING UNITS ACCUMULATED UNITS year structure built number percent number percent 1939 or earlier 100 9.2 100 9.2 more than 60 years old 1940-1959 380 34.9 480 44 more than 40 years old 1960-1969 176 16.1 656 60.2 more than 30 years old 1970-1979 190 17.4 846 77.6 more than 20 years old 1980-1989 117 10.7 963 88.3 more than 10 years old 1990-march 2000 127 11.7 127 11.7 less than 10 years old Total 1090 100 1090 100 Stapleton HOUSING UNITS ACCUMULATED UNITS year structure built number percent number percent 1939 or earlier 21 17.5 21 17.5 more than 60 years old 1940-1959 12 10 33 27.5 more than 40 years old 1960-1969 22 18.3 55 45.8 more than 30 years old 1970-1979 29 24.2 84 70 more than 20 years old 1980-1989 8 6.7 92 76.7 more than 10 years old 1990-march 2000 28 23.3 28 23.3 less than 10 years old Total 120 100 120 100 Wadley HOUSING UNITS ACCUMULATED UNITS year structure built number percent number percent 1939 or earlier 137 15.6 137 15.6 more than 60 years old 1940-1959 172 19.6 309 35.2 more than 40 years old 1960-1969 89 10.1 398 45.3 more than 30 years old 1970-1979 119 13.6 517 58.9 more than 20 years old 1980-1989 125 14.2 642 73.1 more than 10 years old 1990-march 2000 236 26.9 236 26.9 less than 10 years old Total 878 100 878 100 Wrens HOUSING UNITS ACCUMULATED UNITS year structure built number percent number percent 1939 or earlier 119 11.3 119 11.3 more than 60 years old 1940-1959 188 17.8 307 29 more than 40 years old 1960-1969 131 12.4 438 41.4 more than 30 years old 1970-1979 297 28.1 735 69.5 more than 20 years old 1980-1989 183 17.3 918 86.9 more than 10 years old 1990-march 2000 139 13.1 139 13.1 less than 10 years old Total 1057 100 1057 100 ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 57 H O U S I N G Table H-2: Housing Stock by Age, 1980-2000 Continued Georgia HOUSING UNITS ACCUMULATED UNITS year structure built number percent number percent 1939 or earlier 192972 5.9 192972 5.9 more than 60 years old 1940-1959 427488 13 620420 18.9 more than 40 years old 1960-1969 416047 12.7 1036467 31.6 more than 30 years old 1970-1979 608926 18.6 1645393 50.1 more than 20 years old 1980-1989 721174 22 2366567 72.1 more than 10 years old 1990-march 2000 915130 27.9 915130 27.9 less than 10 years old Total 3281737 [PHONE REDACTED] 100 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census The availability of plumbing facilities and percentage of homes built prior to 1939 are often used as indicators of substandard housing. Overall, housing conditions throughout Jefferson County and the municipalities is adequate and comparable to state levels (Table H-3). This represents a significant improvement, particularly for the county, which managed to cut the number of housing units without complete plumbing facilities from 13.3% in 1980 to 1.7% in 2000. The only exception is Bartow where the percentage of housing units without adequate plumbing facilities is 10 to 15 times higher than countywide, regional and statewide figures. The higher percentage of pre-1939 units highlights increased usage of historic homes and buildings in the municipalities, particularly within the cities’ historic districts. Given the number and importance of historic districts in Jefferson County, date of construction is not an accurate indicator of housing conditions. Table H-3: Housing Conditions Lack Plumbing Pre-1939 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 Jefferson Co. 13.34% 4.36% 1.72% 24.21% 13.04% 10.46% Avera 2.27% 7.32% 0.00% 37.12% 47.97% 4.94% Bartow 36.96% 20.15% 16.67% 51.45% 22.39% 33.33% Louisville 9.91% 1.07% 1.19% 23.89% 8.66% 9.17% Stapleton 6.45% 1.79% 0.00% 38.17% 24.40% 17.50% Wadley 7.84% 5.01% 1.71% 19.42% 9.71% 15.60% Wrens 5.07% 1.03% 0.47% 21.47% 17.22% 11.26% CSRA N/A 2.10% 1.50% N/A 9.40% 7.40% Georgia N/A 1.10% 0.90% 15.00% 8.00% 5.90% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; N/A = Not Available OCCUPANCY AND TENURE Housing occupancy and tenure characteristics are important variables in determining the adequacy of the existing housing stock. Owner-occupied housing in Jefferson County and the cities of Bartow, Louisville, Wadley and Wrens is on par with the CSRA and state averages (Table H-4). Avera and Stapleton have significantly higher rates of owner- occupied housing, reflecting typically higher home ownership rates found in smaller rural communities. The percentage of owner-occupied housing units has remained ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Comprehensive Plan Page 58 H O U S I N G relatively stable throughout Jefferson County and the municipalities. Bartow is the only jurisdiction to experience a sharp rise in the percentage of owner-occupied units. The owner to renter ratio mirrors the above-mentioned trends and highlights either stable or increased home ownership throughout most jurisdictions in the county (Table H-4). In the unincorporated areas, the ratio has increased from 2.00:1 to 2.59:1 in the past decade, indicating that for every renter-occupied unit, there are 2.59 owner- occupied units. The trend of high owner to renter ratios is also seen in the municipalities, as well as the CSRA and elsewhere in the state. The only exception is Avera, where the ratio dropped from 6.62:1 to 4.63:1 since 1980. Table H-4: Occupancy and Tenure of Housing, 1980-2000 Occupied Units Vacancy Rate Owner-Occupied % 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 1980 1990 2000 Jefferson Co. 5,946 6,093 6,339 N/A 15.93% 14.00% 61.09% 59.63% 63.34% Avera 99 92 95 N/A 36.96% 57.89% 86.87% 67.39% 92.63% Bartow 125 109 104 N/A 27.52% 11.54% 54.40% 53.21% 71.15% Louisville 973 843 962 N/A 13.17% 12.06% 65.47% 64.89% 66.94% Stapleton 150 132 103 N/A 21.97% 16.50% 78.00% 88.64% 78.64% Wadley 775 830 764 N/A 14.46% 14.14% 63.61% 63.25% 62.96% Wrens 848 893 932 N/A 9.74% 15.13% 61.91% 57.22% 54.94% CSRA 117,685 139,071 158,840 N/A 13.10% 12.40% 65.10% 65.70% 68.40% Georgia 1,871,700 2,366,600 3,006,400 7.00% 10.30% 8.40% 60.40% 58.20% 67.50% Owner Renter Vacancy % Renter-Occupied % Vacancy % Owner-Renter Ratio 2000 1980 1990 2000 2000 1980 1990 2000 Jefferson Co. 0.02% 33.30% 30.81% 28.01% 0.15% 2.00: 1 2.24: 1 2.59: 1 Avera 0.00% 13.13% 29.35% 20.00% 0.00% 6.62: 1 2.30: 1 4.63: 1 Bartow 4.93% 45.60% 42.20% 21.15% 0.00% 1.19: 1 1.26: 1 3.36: 1 Louisville 0.27% 34.53% 32.86% 34.30% 0.48% 1.90: 1 1.97: 1 1.95: 1 Stapleton 8.73% 22.00% 16.67% 21.36% 0.00% 3.55: 1 5.32: 1 3.68: 1 Wadley 0.84% 36.39% 37.71% 37.83% 1.34% 1.75: 1 1.68: 1 1.66: 1 Wrens 0.31% 38.09% 41.66% 43.35% 0.92% 1.63: 1 1.37: 1 1.27: 1 CSRA 2.10% 34.90% 34.30% 31.60% 7.90% 1.89 : 1 1.91 : 1 2.17 : 1 Georgia 2.20% 32.00% 31.50% 32.50% 8.40% 1.85 : 1 0.100706019 2.0 : 1 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census; N/A = Not Available Vacant homes and apartment units are necessary to provide a choice of location and price for housing consumers. A healthy vacancy rate is approximately 5% and fluctuates according to the housing market. Too few vacant units drive up prices and limit housing choices, while too many reduces the demand for new units. Vacancy rates throughout Jefferson County are above both the CSRA and state average (Table H-4). In 2000, the vacancy rate in the county was 14% and ranged from 11.5% to 16.5% in the municipalities. The only exception is Avera where the vacancy rate is unusually high at 57.8%. In the past decade, vacancy rates declined in the county and Bartow, Louisville, ---PAGE BREAK--- GA 102 GA 102 0 0.5 1 0.25 Miles CSRA Regional Development Center GIS Department 2003 City of Avera Current Land Use Legend Railways Highways Cities County Boundaries Existing Land Use Agriculture Commercial Forestry Industrial Public/Institutional Parks/Recreation Residential Transportation/Communication/Utilities ---PAGE BREAK--- GA 102 GA 102 Legend Railways Highways Cities County Boundaries Future Land Use Agriculture Commercial Forestry Industrial Public/Institutional Parks/Recreation Residential Transportation/Communication/Utilities City of Avera Future Land Use CSRA Regional Development Center GIS Department 2003 ---PAGE BREAK--- US 319 US 319 US 221 US 221 GA 242 GA 242 US 221 US 221 US 221 US 221 0 0.5 1 0.25 Miles CSRA Regional Development Center GIS Department 2003 City of Bartow Current Land Use Legend Railways Highways Cities County Boundaries Existing Land Use Agriculture Commercial Forestry Industrial Public/Institutional Parks/Recreation Residential Transportation/Communication/Utilities ---PAGE BREAK--- US 221 US 221 US 319 US 319 GA 242 GA 242 US 221 US 221 US 221 US 221 Legend Railways Highways Cities Future Land Use Agriculture Commercial Forestry Industrial Public/Institutional Parks/Recreation Residential Transportation/Communication/Utilities City of Bartow Future Land Use CSRA Regional Development Center GIS Department 2003 ---PAGE BREAK--- GA 24 GA 24 GA 171 GA 171 BROAD BROAD US 1 US 1 GA 17 GA 17 US 221 US 221 US 1 US 1 US 1 US 1 US 1 US 1 US 1 US 1 US 221 US 221 GA 24 GA 24 GA 24 GA 24 GA 17 GA 17 GA 24 GA 24 US 1 US 1 0 1 2 0.5 Miles CSRA Regional Development Center GIS Department 2003 City of Louisville Current Land Use Legend Railways Highways Cities County Boundaries Existing Land Use Agriculture Commercial Forestry Industrial Public/Institutional Parks/Recreation Residential Transportation/Communication/Utilities ---PAGE BREAK--- Legend Railways Cities County Boundaries Future Land Use Agriculture Commercial Forestry Industrial Public/Institutional Parks/Recreation Residential Transportation/Communicatons/Utilities City of Louisville Future Land Use CSRA Regional Development Center GIS Department 2003 ---PAGE BREAK--- GA 102 GA 102 GA 296 GA 296 GA 296 GA 296 GA 102 GA 102 0 0.5 1 0.25 Miles CSRA Regional Development Center GIS Department 2003 City of Stapleton Current Land Use Legend Railways Highways Cities County Boundaries Existing Land Use Agriculture Commercial Forestry Industrial Public/Institutional Parks/Recreation Residential Transportation/Communication/Utilities ---PAGE BREAK--- GA 296 GA 296 GA 102 GA 102 GA 296 GA 296 GA 102 GA 102 CSRA Regional Development Center GIS Department 2003 City of Stapleton Future Land Use Legend Railways Highways Future Land Use Agriculture Commercial Forestry Industrial Public/Institutional Parks/Recreation Residential Transportation/Communication/Utilities City Limits, Tax Records ---PAGE BREAK--- GA 78 GA 78 US 1 US 1 US 319 US 319 US 1 BUSINESS US 1 BUSINESS US 1 BUSINESS US 1 BUSINESS US 1 US 1 US 319 US 319 0 0.5 1 0.25 Miles CSRA Regional Development Center GIS Department 2003 City of Wadley Current Land Use Legend Railways Highways Cities County Boundaries Existing Land Use Agriculture Commercial Forestry Industrial Public/Institutional Parks/Recreation Residential Transportation/Communication/Utilities ---PAGE BREAK--- US 1 US 1 GA 78 GA 78 US 1 BUSINESS US 1 BUSINESS US 319 US 319 US 319 US 319 US 1 US 1 US 1 US 1 US 1 BUSINESS US 1 BUSINESS Legend Railways Highways Cities County Boundaries Future Land Use Agriculture Commercial Forestry Industrial Public/Institutional Parks/Recreation Residential Transportation/Communicatons/Utilities City of Wadley Future Land Use CSRA Regional Development Center GIS Department 2003 ---PAGE BREAK--- GA 88 GA 88 GA 102 GA 102 GA 80 GA 80 US 221 US 221 GA 17 GA 17 US 1 US 1 B R O AD B R O AD GA 88 GA 88 GA 80 GA 80 US 1 US 1 US 1 US 1 GA 17 GA 17 US 1 US 1 GA 17 GA 17 0 0.75 1.5 0.375 Miles CSRA Regional Development Center GIS Department 2003 City of Wrens Current Land Use Legend Railways Highways Cities County Boundaries Existing Land Use Agriculture Commercial Forestry Industrial Public/Institutional Parks/Recreation Residential Transportation/Communication/Utilities ---PAGE BREAK--- Legend Railways Cities County Boundaries Future Land Use Agriculture Commercial Forestry Industrial Public/Institutional Parks/Recreation Residential Transportation/Communicatons/Utilities City of Wrens Future Land Use CSRA Regional Development Center GIS Department 2003 ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 1 of 7 Version 3.0 Jefferson Area Updated: Jul 2014 County Jefferson 0$5.%87/(5&200,66,21(5*(25*,$'(3$570(172)/$%25 (PDLO :RUNIRUFHB,QIR#JGROJDJRY3KRQH  Population Estimates Jefferson 16,930 105 16,320 -3.6 16,028 -5.3 Georgia 9,687,653 9,992,167 3.1 13,426,590 38.6 Jefferson Area 325,351 324,781 -0.2 370,090 13.8 City of Louisville 2,493 United States 308,745,538 316,128,839 2.4 349,439,199 13.2 Source: Population Division, U.S. Census Bureau, *Governor's Office of Planning and Budget. Population 2010 Census 2013 Rank 2013 Estimate % Change 2010-2013 2025 Projected* % Change 2010-2025 Jefferson Area 138,632 124,570 14,062 10.1% Glascock 1,128 1,001 127 11.3% Emanuel 9,909 8,782 1,127 11.4% McDuffie 10,007 9,073 934 9.3% Washington 7,332 6,538 794 10.8% Warren 2,632 2,302 330 12.5% Richmond 87,923 79,662 8,261 9.4% United States 155,389,000 143,929,000 11,460,000 7.4% Johnson 3,501 3,055 446 12.7% Georgia 4,767,323 4,378,029 389,294 8.2% Burke 9,581 8,508 1,073 11.2% Jefferson 6,619 5,649 970 14.7% Note: This series reflects the latest information available. Labor Force includes residents of the county who are employed or actively seeking employment. Source: Georgia Department of Labor; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Labor Force Activity - 2013 2013 ANNUAL AVERAGES Labor Force Employed Unemployed Rate Employment Trends Unemployment Rate Trends ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 2 of 7 Version 3.0 Jefferson Area ALL INDUSTRIES 363 4,428 100.0 600 7,077 133,572 100.0 766 Local Government 18 971 21.9 554 183 14,418 10.8 645 State Government 13 70 1.6 526 153 10,740 8.0 922 Federal Government 12 40 0.9 925 126 7,637 5.7 1,128 Total - Government 43 1,081 24.4 566 462 32,795 24.6 849 Total - Private Sector 320 3,347 75.6 611 6,615 100,777 75.4 738 Unclassified - industry not assigned 7 * * * 190 120 0.1 818 Other Services (except Public Administration) 24 70 1.6 328 538 3,128 2.3 510 Accommodation and Food Services 23 249 5.6 238 579 11,668 8.7 274 Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 2 * * * 69 1,687 1.3 589 Health Care and Social Assistance 20 347 7.8 432 863 20,018 15.0 884 Educational Services 1 * * * 47 984 0.7 567 Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services 7 36 0.8 540 321 8,881 6.6 446 Management of Companies and Enterprises 2 * * * 33 758 0.6 1,263 Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services 15 48 1.1 899 602 4,845 3.6 1,153 Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 11 45 1.0 476 275 1,260 0.9 712 Finance and Insurance 18 103 2.3 736 363 2,647 2.0 987 Information 4 20 0.5 401 95 2,291 1.7 949 Transportation and Warehousing 11 59 1.3 708 178 3,184 2.4 771 Retail Trade 60 583 13.2 397 1,198 14,306 10.7 455 Wholesale Trade 13 206 4.7 588 301 3,863 2.9 984 Utilities 5 * * * 22 1,909 1.4 1,893 Service-Providing 216 2,008 45.3 508 5,484 81,421 61.0 695 Chemical 0 0 0.0 0 23 1,349 1.0 1,597 Transportation Equipment 0 0 0.0 0 23 1,027 0.8 1,107 Miscellaneous 0 0 0.0 0 16 789 0.6 916 Textile Product Mills 0 0 0.0 0 8 587 0.4 393 Electrical Equipment, Appliance, and Component 0 0 0.0 0 6 598 0.4 732 Plastics and Rubber Products 0 0 0.0 0 5 334 0.3 777 Textile Mills 0 0 0.0 0 4 583 0.4 760 Computer and Electronic Product 0 0 0.0 0 2 * * * Beverage and Tobacco Product 0 0 0.0 0 2 * * * Primary Metal 0 0 0.0 0 2 * * * Petroleum and Coal Products 0 0 0.0 0 1 * * * Furniture and Related Product 6 17 0.4 675 13 35 0.0 551 Machinery 4 117 2.6 922 17 412 0.3 657 Fabricated Metal Product 8 124 2.8 522 49 1,214 0.9 712 Nonmetallic Mineral Product 1 * * * 18 822 0.6 1,089 Printing and Related Support Activities 1 * * * 16 118 0.1 651 Paper 1 * * * 12 1,483 1.1 1,320 Wood Product 6 * * * 26 1,027 0.8 776 Apparel 1 * * * 5 141 0.1 506 Food 2 * * * 21 1,682 1.3 768 Manufacturing 30 623 14.1 686 269 12,449 9.3 948 Construction 28 185 4.2 619 521 4,847 3.6 878 Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction 4 268 6.1 1,142 22 639 0.5 1,030 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting 35 260 5.9 681 129 1,304 1.0 760 Goods-Producing 97 1,336 30.2 767 941 19,236 14.4 921 Note: *Denotes confidential data relating to individual employers and cannot be released. These data use the North American Industrial Classification System(NAICS) categories. Average weekly wage is derived by dividing gross payroll dollars paid to all employees - both hourly and salaried - by the average number of employees who had earnings; average earnings are then divided by the number of weeks in a reporting period to obtain weekly figures. Figures in other columns may not sum accurately due to rounding. All figures are annual averages of 2013. ALL INDUSTRIES - Georgia 278,502 3,917,423 899 Source: Georgia Department of Labor. These data represent jobs that are covered by unemployment insurance laws. Jefferson Jefferson Area Industry Mix - Annual Averages of 2013 INDUSTRY OF FIRMS NUMBER PERCENT WAGE OF FIRMS NUMBER PERCENT WAGE NUMBER EMPLOYMENT WEEKLY NUMBER EMPLOYMENT WEEKLY ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 3 of 7 Version 3.0 Jefferson Area Burke, GA 228 3.6 Total Residents: 6,248 100.0 Emanuel, GA 274 4.4 Other 263 4.2 Aiken, SC 77 1.2 McDuffie, GA 186 3.0 Jefferson, GA 4,184 67.0 Columbia, GA 231 3.7 Washington, GA 295 4.7 Richmond, GA 510 8.2 Note: Other category represents employment from U.S. counties only. Source: U.S. Census Bureau - 2010 County-To-County Worker Flow Files. EMPLOYED RESIDENTS OF Jefferson COUNTY WHERE EMPLOYED NUMBER 3(5&(17 2)727$/ McDuffie, GA 149 2.5 Glascock, GA 165 2.8 Total Residents: 5,844 100.0 Other 352 6.0 Aiken, SC 103 1.8 Columbia, GA 133 2.3 Jefferson, GA 4,184 71.6 Burke, GA 179 3.1 Washington, GA 181 3.1 Emanuel, GA 398 6.8 PERSONS WORKING IN &2817<2) NUMBER 3(5&(17 2)727$/ Jefferson Commuting Patterns Vero Health And Rehab Of Wadley Unihealth Post-Acute Care - Old Capitol Thiele Kaolin Co Queensborough National Bank & Trust Company Kamin Holding Co, LLC Jefferson Energy Cooperative Ingles Markets, Inc. Fulghum Industries, Inc. Floco Foods Battle Lumber Co, Inc. *Note: Represents employment covered by unemployment insurance excluding all government agencies except correctional institutions, state and local hospitals, state colleges and universities. Data shown for the Third Quarter of 2013. Employers are listed alphabetically by area, not by the number of employees. Source: Georgia Department of Labor Jefferson Xpedx Richmond Walmart Richmond University Home Health in Augusta Richmond Trinity Hospital of Augusta Richmond Textron, Inc. Richmond Southern Nuclear Operating Co Burke Sitel Operating Corporation Richmond MCG Health, Inc. Richmond Georgia Regents University Richmond Doctors Hospital of Augusta, LLC Richmond Jefferson Area COUNTY Top Ten Largest Employers - 2013* Source: See Industry Mix data on Page 2. Jefferson Industry Mix 2013 Jefferson Per Capita Income Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 4 of 7 Version 3.0 Jefferson Area 19.7% 6.2%4.0% 2.5% 3.2% 6.8% Elementary Note: Totals are based on the portion of the labor force between ages 18 - 65+. Some College category represents the percentage total 65+ 45-64 35-44 25-34 18-24 OF TOTAL Some College 21.9% 28.5% 27.4% 22.8% 19.2% 14.4% Totals 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% College Grad 2 Yr 6.1% 3.1% 8.0% 8.1% 6.8% 3.0% Post Grad Studies 5.1% 0.5% 5.5% 5.2% 6.7% 5.5% College Grad 4 Yr 9.6% 6.0% 10.9% 11.7% 10.0% 8.2% High School Grad/GED 35.3% 37.8% 32.8% 35.2% 36.7% 33.1% Elementary 6.8% 3.2% 2.5% 4.0% 6.2% 19.7% Some High School 15.2% 21.0% 12.9% 13.0% 14.5% 16.1% PERCENT DISTRIBUTION BY AGE OF TOTAL 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-64 65+ PERCENT Education of the Labor Force Source: U.S. Census Bureau - 2010 ACS 5-year estimate. Jefferson Area of workers with either Some College with no degree or an Associate degree. McDuffie 202 202 Jefferson Area 2,457 2,457 Richmond 1,369 1,369 Washington 175 175 Warren 39 39 Burke 240 240 Johnson 51 51 Emanuel 197 197 Jefferson 159 159 Glascock 25 25 6&+22/6 35,9$7( 6&+22/6 TOTAL 1RWH High School Graduates - 2013** Data shown represents Annual 2013. ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 5 of 7 Version 3.0 Jefferson Area Johnson County Adult Center (Satellite campus of Southeastern Technical College) www.southeasterntech.edu Johnson Transportation Center (Satellite campus of Oconee Fall Line Technical College) www.oftc.edu Oconee Fall Line Technical College www.oftc.edu Washington Jefferson County Center (Satellite campus of Oconee Fall Line Technical College) www.oftc.edu Jefferson East Georgia State College www.ega.edu Swainsboro Campus (Satellite campus of Southeastern Technical College) www.southeasterntech.edu Emanuel Thomson Campus (Satellite campus of Augusta Technical College) www.augustatech.edu McDuffie Waynesboro Campus (Satellite campus of Augusta Technical College) www.augustatech.edu Burke Georgia Regents University - ASU www.aug.edu Augusta Technical College www.augustatech.edu Georgia Regents University - GHSU www.georgiahealth.edu Augusta Area Dietetic Internship-University Hospital www.universityhealth.org Virginia College-Columbus Troy University augusta.troy.edu University of Phoenix-Augusta Campus www.phoenix.edu Virginia College-Augusta www.vc.edu/campus/augusta-georgia-college.cfm Savannah River College www.savannahrivercollege.edu Georgia Military College-Ft Gordon www.gmc.cc.ga.us Miller-Motte Technical College www.miller-motte.edu/campuses/georgia-campuses/augusta-ga Paine College www.paine.edu Richmond Note: The colleges and universities listed include public and private institutions. This list is updated periodically as information becomes available. Source: Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS). Colleges and Universities Jefferson Area ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 6 of 7 Version 3.0 Jefferson Area General Office Occupations and Clerical Services 21 10 8 -52.4 -20.0 Heating, Air Conditioning, Ventilation and Refrigeration Maintenance Technology/ 62 77 49 24.2 -36.4 Heavy Equipment Maintenance Technology/Technician 6 8 3 33.3 -62.5 Data Processing and Data Processing Technology/Technician 11 13 27 18.2 107.7 Early Childhood Education and Teaching 76 49 50 -35.5 2.0 Emergency Medical Technology/Technician (EMT Paramedic) 17 10 44 -41.2 340.0 Respiratory Care Therapy/Therapist 14 8 7 -42.9 -12.5 Web Page, Digital/Multimedia and Information Resources Design 35 1 1 -97.1 0.0 Welding Technology/Welder 144 89 90 -38.2 1.1 Industrial Mechanics and Maintenance Technology 44 35 16 -20.5 -54.3 Machine Shop Technology/Assistant 3 5 2 66.7 -60.0 Radiologic Technology/Science - Radiographer 11 9 7 -18.2 -22.2 Automobile/Automotive Mechanics Technology/Technician 42 25 3 -40.5 -88.0 Business Administration and Management, General 3 10 1 233.3 -90.0 Administrative Assistant and Secretarial Science, General 76 48 41 -36.8 -14.6 Electrical/Electronics Equipment Installation and Repair, General 33 27 5 -18.2 -81.5 Accounting Technology/Technician and Bookkeeping 74 47 46 -36.5 -2.1 Cosmetology/Cosmetologist, General 61 23 32 -62.3 39.1 Criminal Justice/Safety Studies 66 42 33 -36.4 -21.4 Computer Systems Networking and Telecommunications 36 5 1 -86.1 -80.0 Business Administration, Management and Operations, Other 8 8 4 0.0 -50.0 *Data shown represents Annual 2011, 2012, and 2013. Definition: All graduates except those listed as technical certificates are diploma and degree graduates. Diploma and degree programs are one to two years in length. Technical certificates are less than a year in length. Source: Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System Note - The data shown is from Oconee Fall Line Technical College Technical College Graduates - 2013* 2011 2012 2013 2011-2012 2012-2013 PROGRAMS TOTAL GRADUATES PERCENT CHANGE ---PAGE BREAK--- Page 7 of 7 Version 3.0 Jefferson Area 601 Greene Street Phone: (706) 721 - 3131 Fax: (706) 721 - 7680 Augusta GA 30901 Career Center(s) For copies of Area Labor Profiles, please visit our website at: www.dol.state.ga.us or contact Workforce Statistics & Economic Research, Georgia Department of Labor, 148 Andrew Young International Blvd N.E. Atlanta, GA. 30303-1751. Phone: [PHONE REDACTED]; Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] or Email us at [EMAIL REDACTED] Georgia Department of Labor Location(s) Subtotal Area 330 974 576 448 1,210 2,884 55 1,335 687 2,743 2,012 Washington 19 43 34 36 54 107 6 62 32 137 133 Warren 8 9 8 6 20 41 3 22 13 102 62 Richmond 207 674 410 285 793 2,012 15 761 404 1,125 1,081 McDuffie 19 74 32 35 85 200 3 91 61 249 142 Johnson 10 29 19 12 36 87 3 77 28 163 113 Jefferson 20 38 22 19 65 135 9 74 43 361 169 Glascock 0 7 2 0 3 25 0 7 10 21 23 Emanuel 23 46 25 30 89 122 13 81 47 327 135 Burke 24 54 24 25 65 155 3 160 49 258 154 Total Area 15,702 Note: For current applicant data available for a specific occupation, contact the nearest Georgia Department of Labor Career Center. Source: Georgia Department of Labor (active applicants as of June 2014). Active Applicants - Georgia Department of Labor (cont.) 6YFV Food Prep. Ground Cleaning 3HUVRQDO &DUH Sales Office Support Farm. & Forestry &RQV Installation Main. Prod. Trans. & Moving Subtotal Area 582 214 155 86 78 164 22 344 118 255 430 Washington 20 3 3 3 1 16 0 13 1 13 25 Warren 7 2 2 1 2 3 0 13 1 5 9 Richmond 395 174 124 63 52 112 18 233 95 183 297 McDuffie 51 12 8 6 3 8 1 17 8 18 23 Johnson 9 1 1 0 0 1 0 9 3 2 9 Jefferson 26 6 3 3 5 9 0 28 2 10 22 Glascock 8 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 Emanuel 38 8 6 4 7 8 1 15 5 15 29 Burke 28 7 7 6 8 7 2 15 2 8 16 Active Applicants - Georgia Department of Labor Mgt. %XV &RPSX 0DWK Arch. & Eng. /LIH 6RF6YFV &RPP 6YFV Legal $UWV +HDOWK 3UDF +HDOWK 6XSSRUW ---PAGE BREAK--- DP-1 Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010 2010 Demographic Profile Data NOTE: For more information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/dpsf.pdf. Geography: Wrens city, Georgia Subject Number Percent SEX AND AGE Total population 2,187 100.0 Under 5 years 165 7.5 5 to 9 years 156 7.1 10 to 14 years 162 7.4 15 to 19 years 160 7.3 20 to 24 years 123 5.6 25 to 29 years 137 6.3 30 to 34 years 127 5.8 35 to 39 years 107 4.9 40 to 44 years 118 5.4 45 to 49 years 139 6.4 50 to 54 years 152 7.0 55 to 59 years 155 7.1 60 to 64 years 134 6.1 65 to 69 years 118 5.4 70 to 74 years 84 3.8 75 to 79 years 60 2.7 80 to 84 years 49 2.2 85 years and over 41 1.9 Median age (years) 38.1 ( X ) 16 years and over 1,674 76.5 18 years and over 1,608 73.5 21 years and over 1,509 69.0 62 years and over 431 19.7 65 years and over 352 16.1 Male population 1,008 46.1 Under 5 years 91 4.2 5 to 9 years 91 4.2 10 to 14 years 79 3.6 15 to 19 years 87 4.0 20 to 24 years 61 2.8 25 to 29 years 56 2.6 30 to 34 years 51 2.3 35 to 39 years 49 2.2 40 to 44 years 47 2.1 45 to 49 years 67 3.1 50 to 54 years 72 3.3 55 to 59 years 60 2.7 60 to 64 years 52 2.4 65 to 69 years 53 2.4 70 to 74 years 36 1.6 1 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent 75 to 79 years 24 1.1 80 to 84 years 17 0.8 85 years and over 15 0.7 Median age (years) 33.8 ( X ) 16 years and over 730 33.4 18 years and over 696 31.8 21 years and over 636 29.1 62 years and over 170 7.8 65 years and over 145 6.6 Female population 1,179 53.9 Under 5 years 74 3.4 5 to 9 years 65 3.0 10 to 14 years 83 3.8 15 to 19 years 73 3.3 20 to 24 years 62 2.8 25 to 29 years 81 3.7 30 to 34 years 76 3.5 35 to 39 years 58 2.7 40 to 44 years 71 3.2 45 to 49 years 72 3.3 50 to 54 years 80 3.7 55 to 59 years 95 4.3 60 to 64 years 82 3.7 65 to 69 years 65 3.0 70 to 74 years 48 2.2 75 to 79 years 36 1.6 80 to 84 years 32 1.5 85 years and over 26 1.2 Median age (years) 41.3 ( X ) 16 years and over 944 43.2 18 years and over 912 41.7 21 years and over 873 39.9 62 years and over 261 11.9 65 years and over 207 9.5 RACE Total population 2,187 100.0 One Race 2,162 98.9 White 699 32.0 Black or African American 1,414 64.7 American Indian and Alaska Native 1 0.0 Asian 12 0.5 Asian Indian 7 0.3 Chinese 0 0.0 Filipino 0 0.0 Japanese 0 0.0 Korean 3 0.1 Vietnamese 2 0.1 Other Asian 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian 0 0.0 Guamanian or Chamorro 0 0.0 Samoan 0 0.0 Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Some Other Race 36 1.6 2 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent Two or More Races 25 1.1 White; American Indian and Alaska Native 3 0.1 White; Asian 2 0.1 White; Black or African American 15 0.7 White; Some Other Race 0 0.0 Race alone or in combination with one or more other races: White 719 32.9 Black or African American 1,434 65.6 American Indian and Alaska Native 7 0.3 Asian 15 0.7 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Some Other Race 37 1.7 HISPANIC OR LATINO Total population 2,187 100.0 Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 55 2.5 Mexican 39 1.8 Puerto Rican 10 0.5 Cuban 0 0.0 Other Hispanic or Latino 6 0.3 Not Hispanic or Latino 2,132 97.5 HISPANIC OR LATINO AND RACE Total population 2,187 100.0 Hispanic or Latino 55 2.5 White alone 20 0.9 Black or African American alone 1 0.0 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 0 0.0 Asian alone 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0 0.0 Some Other Race alone 34 1.6 Two or More Races 0 0.0 Not Hispanic or Latino 2,132 97.5 White alone 679 31.0 Black or African American alone 1,413 64.6 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 1 0.0 Asian alone 12 0.5 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0 0.0 Some Other Race alone 2 0.1 Two or More Races 25 1.1 RELATIONSHIP Total population 2,187 100.0 In households 2,187 100.0 Householder 860 39.3 Spouse 290 13.3 Child 676 30.9 Own child under 18 years 450 20.6 Other relatives 286 13.1 Under 18 years 124 5.7 65 years and over 24 1.1 Nonrelatives 75 3.4 Under 18 years 5 0.2 65 years and over 5 0.2 Unmarried partner 43 2.0 In group quarters 0 0.0 Institutionalized population 0 0.0 Male 0 0.0 3 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent Female 0 0.0 Noninstitutionalized population 0 0.0 Male 0 0.0 Female 0 0.0 HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE Total households 860 100.0 Family households (families) 614 71.4 With own children under 18 years 236 27.4 Husband-wife family 290 33.7 With own children under 18 years 73 8.5 Male householder, no wife present 52 6.0 With own children under 18 years 17 2.0 Female householder, no husband present 272 31.6 With own children under 18 years 146 17.0 Nonfamily households 246 28.6 Householder living alone 225 26.2 Male 96 11.2 65 years and over 29 3.4 Female 129 15.0 65 years and over 72 8.4 Households with individuals under 18 years 299 34.8 Households with individuals 65 years and over 269 31.3 Average household size 2.54 ( X ) Average family size 3.04 ( X ) HOUSING OCCUPANCY Total housing units 986 100.0 Occupied housing units 860 87.2 Vacant housing units 126 12.8 For rent 39 4.0 Rented, not occupied 1 0.1 For sale only 18 1.8 Sold, not occupied 5 0.5 For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 11 1.1 All other vacants 52 5.3 Homeowner vacancy rate (percent) 3.7 ( X ) Rental vacancy rate (percent) 9.0 ( X ) HOUSING TENURE Occupied housing units 860 100.0 Owner-occupied housing units 469 54.5 Population in owner-occupied housing units 1,167 ( X ) Average household size of owner-occupied units 2.49 ( X ) Renter-occupied housing units 391 45.5 Population in renter-occupied housing units 1,020 ( X ) Average household size of renter-occupied units 2.61 ( X ) X Not applicable. Other Asian alone, or two or more Asian categories. Other Pacific Islander alone, or two or more Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander categories. One of the four most commonly reported multiple-race combinations nationwide in Census 2000. In combination with one or more of the other races listed. The six numbers may add to more than the total population, and the six percentages may add to more than 100 percent because individuals may report more than one race. This category is composed of people whose origins are from the Dominican Republic, Spain, and Spanish-speaking Central or South 4 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- American countries. It also includes general origin responses such as "Latino" or "Hispanic." "Spouse" represents spouse of the householder. It does not reflect all spouses in a household. Responses of "same-sex spouse" were edited during processing to "unmarried partner." "Family households" consist of a householder and one or more other people related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. They do not include same-sex married couples even if the marriage was performed in a state issuing marriage certificates for same-sex couples. Same-sex couple households are included in the family households category if there is at least one additional person related to the householder by birth or adoption. Same-sex couple households with no relatives of the householder present are tabulated in nonfamily households. "Nonfamily households" consist of people living alone and households which do not have any members related to the householder. The homeowner vacancy rate is the proportion of the homeowner inventory that is vacant "for sale." It is computed by dividing the total number of vacant units "for sale only" by the sum of owner-occupied units, vacant units that are "for sale only," and vacant units that have been sold but not yet occupied; and then multiplying by 100. The rental vacancy rate is the proportion of the rental inventory that is vacant "for rent." It is computed by dividing the total number of vacant units "for rent" by the sum of the renter-occupied units, vacant units that are "for rent," and vacant units that have been rented but not yet occupied; and then multiplying by 100. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census. ---PAGE BREAK--- DP-1 Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010 2010 Demographic Profile Data NOTE: For more information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/dpsf.pdf. Geography: Wadley city, Georgia Subject Number Percent SEX AND AGE Total population 2,061 100.0 Under 5 years 144 7.0 5 to 9 years 180 8.7 10 to 14 years 149 7.2 15 to 19 years 161 7.8 20 to 24 years 131 6.4 25 to 29 years 111 5.4 30 to 34 years 120 5.8 35 to 39 years 131 6.4 40 to 44 years 105 5.1 45 to 49 years 144 7.0 50 to 54 years 145 7.0 55 to 59 years 125 6.1 60 to 64 years 130 6.3 65 to 69 years 76 3.7 70 to 74 years 68 3.3 75 to 79 years 51 2.5 80 to 84 years 44 2.1 85 years and over 46 2.2 Median age (years) 36.4 ( X ) 16 years and over 1,560 75.7 18 years and over 1,491 72.3 21 years and over 1,392 67.5 62 years and over 364 17.7 65 years and over 285 13.8 Male population 948 46.0 Under 5 years 71 3.4 5 to 9 years 95 4.6 10 to 14 years 89 4.3 15 to 19 years 76 3.7 20 to 24 years 65 3.2 25 to 29 years 52 2.5 30 to 34 years 56 2.7 35 to 39 years 65 3.2 40 to 44 years 42 2.0 45 to 49 years 67 3.3 50 to 54 years 55 2.7 55 to 59 years 55 2.7 60 to 64 years 63 3.1 65 to 69 years 34 1.6 70 to 74 years 25 1.2 1 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent 75 to 79 years 19 0.9 80 to 84 years 13 0.6 85 years and over 6 0.3 Median age (years) 32.6 ( X ) 16 years and over 682 33.1 18 years and over 655 31.8 21 years and over 601 29.2 62 years and over 132 6.4 65 years and over 97 4.7 Female population 1,113 54.0 Under 5 years 73 3.5 5 to 9 years 85 4.1 10 to 14 years 60 2.9 15 to 19 years 85 4.1 20 to 24 years 66 3.2 25 to 29 years 59 2.9 30 to 34 years 64 3.1 35 to 39 years 66 3.2 40 to 44 years 63 3.1 45 to 49 years 77 3.7 50 to 54 years 90 4.4 55 to 59 years 70 3.4 60 to 64 years 67 3.3 65 to 69 years 42 2.0 70 to 74 years 43 2.1 75 to 79 years 32 1.6 80 to 84 years 31 1.5 85 years and over 40 1.9 Median age (years) 39.8 ( X ) 16 years and over 878 42.6 18 years and over 836 40.6 21 years and over 791 38.4 62 years and over 232 11.3 65 years and over 188 9.1 RACE Total population 2,061 100.0 One Race 2,057 99.8 White 359 17.4 Black or African American 1,632 79.2 American Indian and Alaska Native 3 0.1 Asian 13 0.6 Asian Indian 3 0.1 Chinese 5 0.2 Filipino 5 0.2 Japanese 0 0.0 Korean 0 0.0 Vietnamese 0 0.0 Other Asian 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian 0 0.0 Guamanian or Chamorro 0 0.0 Samoan 0 0.0 Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Some Other Race 50 2.4 2 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent Two or More Races 4 0.2 White; American Indian and Alaska Native 0 0.0 White; Asian 0 0.0 White; Black or African American 4 0.2 White; Some Other Race 0 0.0 Race alone or in combination with one or more other races: White 363 17.6 Black or African American 1,636 79.4 American Indian and Alaska Native 3 0.1 Asian 13 0.6 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Some Other Race 50 2.4 HISPANIC OR LATINO Total population 2,061 100.0 Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 98 4.8 Mexican 88 4.3 Puerto Rican 1 0.0 Cuban 2 0.1 Other Hispanic or Latino 7 0.3 Not Hispanic or Latino 1,963 95.2 HISPANIC OR LATINO AND RACE Total population 2,061 100.0 Hispanic or Latino 98 4.8 White alone 42 2.0 Black or African American alone 3 0.1 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 0 0.0 Asian alone 4 0.2 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0 0.0 Some Other Race alone 49 2.4 Two or More Races 0 0.0 Not Hispanic or Latino 1,963 95.2 White alone 317 15.4 Black or African American alone 1,629 79.0 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 3 0.1 Asian alone 9 0.4 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0 0.0 Some Other Race alone 1 0.0 Two or More Races 4 0.2 RELATIONSHIP Total population 2,061 100.0 In households 1,972 95.7 Householder 752 36.5 Spouse 213 10.3 Child 625 30.3 Own child under 18 years 421 20.4 Other relatives 287 13.9 Under 18 years 143 6.9 65 years and over 21 1.0 Nonrelatives 95 4.6 Under 18 years 5 0.2 65 years and over 2 0.1 Unmarried partner 45 2.2 In group quarters 89 4.3 Institutionalized population 74 3.6 Male 23 1.1 3 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent Female 51 2.5 Noninstitutionalized population 15 0.7 Male 8 0.4 Female 7 0.3 HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE Total households 752 100.0 Family households (families) 510 67.8 With own children under 18 years 230 30.6 Husband-wife family 213 28.3 With own children under 18 years 77 10.2 Male householder, no wife present 42 5.6 With own children under 18 years 9 1.2 Female householder, no husband present 255 33.9 With own children under 18 years 144 19.1 Nonfamily households 242 32.2 Householder living alone 218 29.0 Male 91 12.1 65 years and over 24 3.2 Female 127 16.9 65 years and over 63 8.4 Households with individuals under 18 years 299 39.8 Households with individuals 65 years and over 188 25.0 Average household size 2.62 ( X ) Average family size 3.21 ( X ) HOUSING OCCUPANCY Total housing units 851 100.0 Occupied housing units 752 88.4 Vacant housing units 99 11.6 For rent 14 1.6 Rented, not occupied 5 0.6 For sale only 6 0.7 Sold, not occupied 3 0.4 For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 12 1.4 All other vacants 59 6.9 Homeowner vacancy rate (percent) 1.3 ( X ) Rental vacancy rate (percent) 4.4 ( X ) HOUSING TENURE Occupied housing units 752 100.0 Owner-occupied housing units 452 60.1 Population in owner-occupied housing units 1,202 ( X ) Average household size of owner-occupied units 2.66 ( X ) Renter-occupied housing units 300 39.9 Population in renter-occupied housing units 770 ( X ) Average household size of renter-occupied units 2.57 ( X ) X Not applicable. Other Asian alone, or two or more Asian categories. Other Pacific Islander alone, or two or more Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander categories. One of the four most commonly reported multiple-race combinations nationwide in Census 2000. In combination with one or more of the other races listed. The six numbers may add to more than the total population, and the six percentages may add to more than 100 percent because individuals may report more than one race. This category is composed of people whose origins are from the Dominican Republic, Spain, and Spanish-speaking Central or South 4 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- American countries. It also includes general origin responses such as "Latino" or "Hispanic." "Spouse" represents spouse of the householder. It does not reflect all spouses in a household. Responses of "same-sex spouse" were edited during processing to "unmarried partner." "Family households" consist of a householder and one or more other people related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. They do not include same-sex married couples even if the marriage was performed in a state issuing marriage certificates for same-sex couples. Same-sex couple households are included in the family households category if there is at least one additional person related to the householder by birth or adoption. Same-sex couple households with no relatives of the householder present are tabulated in nonfamily households. "Nonfamily households" consist of people living alone and households which do not have any members related to the householder. The homeowner vacancy rate is the proportion of the homeowner inventory that is vacant "for sale." It is computed by dividing the total number of vacant units "for sale only" by the sum of owner-occupied units, vacant units that are "for sale only," and vacant units that have been sold but not yet occupied; and then multiplying by 100. The rental vacancy rate is the proportion of the rental inventory that is vacant "for rent." It is computed by dividing the total number of vacant units "for rent" by the sum of the renter-occupied units, vacant units that are "for rent," and vacant units that have been rented but not yet occupied; and then multiplying by 100. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census. ---PAGE BREAK--- DP-1 Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010 2010 Demographic Profile Data NOTE: For more information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/dpsf.pdf. Geography: Stapleton city, Georgia Subject Number Percent SEX AND AGE Total population 438 100.0 Under 5 years 37 8.4 5 to 9 years 28 6.4 10 to 14 years 25 5.7 15 to 19 years 29 6.6 20 to 24 years 19 4.3 25 to 29 years 25 5.7 30 to 34 years 22 5.0 35 to 39 years 27 6.2 40 to 44 years 42 9.6 45 to 49 years 25 5.7 50 to 54 years 20 4.6 55 to 59 years 26 5.9 60 to 64 years 33 7.5 65 to 69 years 26 5.9 70 to 74 years 14 3.2 75 to 79 years 9 2.1 80 to 84 years 18 4.1 85 years and over 13 3.0 Median age (years) 40.9 ( X ) 16 years and over 340 77.6 18 years and over 329 75.1 21 years and over 313 71.5 62 years and over 98 22.4 65 years and over 80 18.3 Male population 212 48.4 Under 5 years 15 3.4 5 to 9 years 19 4.3 10 to 14 years 16 3.7 15 to 19 years 13 3.0 20 to 24 years 11 2.5 25 to 29 years 12 2.7 30 to 34 years 12 2.7 35 to 39 years 13 3.0 40 to 44 years 24 5.5 45 to 49 years 15 3.4 50 to 54 years 7 1.6 55 to 59 years 16 3.7 60 to 64 years 11 2.5 65 to 69 years 12 2.7 70 to 74 years 7 1.6 1 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent 75 to 79 years 2 0.5 80 to 84 years 4 0.9 85 years and over 3 0.7 Median age (years) 38.4 ( X ) 16 years and over 160 36.5 18 years and over 156 35.6 21 years and over 146 33.3 62 years and over 35 8.0 65 years and over 28 6.4 Female population 226 51.6 Under 5 years 22 5.0 5 to 9 years 9 2.1 10 to 14 years 9 2.1 15 to 19 years 16 3.7 20 to 24 years 8 1.8 25 to 29 years 13 3.0 30 to 34 years 10 2.3 35 to 39 years 14 3.2 40 to 44 years 18 4.1 45 to 49 years 10 2.3 50 to 54 years 13 3.0 55 to 59 years 10 2.3 60 to 64 years 22 5.0 65 to 69 years 14 3.2 70 to 74 years 7 1.6 75 to 79 years 7 1.6 80 to 84 years 14 3.2 85 years and over 10 2.3 Median age (years) 43.0 ( X ) 16 years and over 180 41.1 18 years and over 173 39.5 21 years and over 167 38.1 62 years and over 63 14.4 65 years and over 52 11.9 RACE Total population 438 100.0 One Race 429 97.9 White 290 66.2 Black or African American 135 30.8 American Indian and Alaska Native 2 0.5 Asian 1 0.2 Asian Indian 0 0.0 Chinese 0 0.0 Filipino 0 0.0 Japanese 1 0.2 Korean 0 0.0 Vietnamese 0 0.0 Other Asian 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian 0 0.0 Guamanian or Chamorro 0 0.0 Samoan 0 0.0 Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Some Other Race 1 0.2 2 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent Two or More Races 9 2.1 White; American Indian and Alaska Native 0 0.0 White; Asian 1 0.2 White; Black or African American 1 0.2 White; Some Other Race 3 0.7 Race alone or in combination with one or more other races: White 299 68.3 Black or African American 136 31.1 American Indian and Alaska Native 6 1.4 Asian 2 0.5 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Some Other Race 8 1.8 HISPANIC OR LATINO Total population 438 100.0 Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 6 1.4 Mexican 6 1.4 Puerto Rican 0 0.0 Cuban 0 0.0 Other Hispanic or Latino 0 0.0 Not Hispanic or Latino 432 98.6 HISPANIC OR LATINO AND RACE Total population 438 100.0 Hispanic or Latino 6 1.4 White alone 0 0.0 Black or African American alone 0 0.0 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 0 0.0 Asian alone 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0 0.0 Some Other Race alone 1 0.2 Two or More Races 5 1.1 Not Hispanic or Latino 432 98.6 White alone 290 66.2 Black or African American alone 135 30.8 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 2 0.5 Asian alone 1 0.2 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0 0.0 Some Other Race alone 0 0.0 Two or More Races 4 0.9 RELATIONSHIP Total population 438 100.0 In households 438 100.0 Householder 175 40.0 Spouse 77 17.6 Child 125 28.5 Own child under 18 years 93 21.2 Other relatives 41 9.4 Under 18 years 16 3.7 65 years and over 5 1.1 Nonrelatives 20 4.6 Under 18 years 0 0.0 65 years and over 3 0.7 Unmarried partner 7 1.6 In group quarters 0 0.0 Institutionalized population 0 0.0 Male 0 0.0 3 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent Female 0 0.0 Noninstitutionalized population 0 0.0 Male 0 0.0 Female 0 0.0 HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE Total households 175 100.0 Family households (families) 115 65.7 With own children under 18 years 47 26.9 Husband-wife family 77 44.0 With own children under 18 years 32 18.3 Male householder, no wife present 9 5.1 With own children under 18 years 2 1.1 Female householder, no husband present 29 16.6 With own children under 18 years 13 7.4 Nonfamily households 60 34.3 Householder living alone 54 30.9 Male 21 12.0 65 years and over 7 4.0 Female 33 18.9 65 years and over 25 14.3 Households with individuals under 18 years 53 30.3 Households with individuals 65 years and over 63 36.0 Average household size 2.50 ( X ) Average family size 3.11 ( X ) HOUSING OCCUPANCY Total housing units 197 100.0 Occupied housing units 175 88.8 Vacant housing units 22 11.2 For rent 3 1.5 Rented, not occupied 0 0.0 For sale only 4 2.0 Sold, not occupied 0 0.0 For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 1 0.5 All other vacants 14 7.1 Homeowner vacancy rate (percent) 3.2 ( X ) Rental vacancy rate (percent) 5.4 ( X ) HOUSING TENURE Occupied housing units 175 100.0 Owner-occupied housing units 122 69.7 Population in owner-occupied housing units 316 ( X ) Average household size of owner-occupied units 2.59 ( X ) Renter-occupied housing units 53 30.3 Population in renter-occupied housing units 122 ( X ) Average household size of renter-occupied units 2.30 ( X ) X Not applicable. Other Asian alone, or two or more Asian categories. Other Pacific Islander alone, or two or more Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander categories. One of the four most commonly reported multiple-race combinations nationwide in Census 2000. In combination with one or more of the other races listed. The six numbers may add to more than the total population, and the six percentages may add to more than 100 percent because individuals may report more than one race. This category is composed of people whose origins are from the Dominican Republic, Spain, and Spanish-speaking Central or South 4 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- American countries. It also includes general origin responses such as "Latino" or "Hispanic." "Spouse" represents spouse of the householder. It does not reflect all spouses in a household. Responses of "same-sex spouse" were edited during processing to "unmarried partner." "Family households" consist of a householder and one or more other people related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. They do not include same-sex married couples even if the marriage was performed in a state issuing marriage certificates for same-sex couples. Same-sex couple households are included in the family households category if there is at least one additional person related to the householder by birth or adoption. Same-sex couple households with no relatives of the householder present are tabulated in nonfamily households. "Nonfamily households" consist of people living alone and households which do not have any members related to the householder. The homeowner vacancy rate is the proportion of the homeowner inventory that is vacant "for sale." It is computed by dividing the total number of vacant units "for sale only" by the sum of owner-occupied units, vacant units that are "for sale only," and vacant units that have been sold but not yet occupied; and then multiplying by 100. The rental vacancy rate is the proportion of the rental inventory that is vacant "for rent." It is computed by dividing the total number of vacant units "for rent" by the sum of the renter-occupied units, vacant units that are "for rent," and vacant units that have been rented but not yet occupied; and then multiplying by 100. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census. ---PAGE BREAK--- DP-1 Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010 2010 Demographic Profile Data NOTE: For more information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/dpsf.pdf. Geography: Louisville city, Georgia Subject Number Percent SEX AND AGE Total population 2,493 100.0 Under 5 years 212 8.5 5 to 9 years 176 7.1 10 to 14 years 157 6.3 15 to 19 years 176 7.1 20 to 24 years 172 6.9 25 to 29 years 147 5.9 30 to 34 years 127 5.1 35 to 39 years 137 5.5 40 to 44 years 158 6.3 45 to 49 years 156 6.3 50 to 54 years 163 6.5 55 to 59 years 169 6.8 60 to 64 years 142 5.7 65 to 69 years 96 3.9 70 to 74 years 73 2.9 75 to 79 years 66 2.6 80 to 84 years 77 3.1 85 years and over 89 3.6 Median age (years) 37.8 ( X ) 16 years and over 1,917 76.9 18 years and over 1,839 73.8 21 years and over 1,744 70.0 62 years and over 475 19.1 65 years and over 401 16.1 Male population 1,127 45.2 Under 5 years 107 4.3 5 to 9 years 93 3.7 10 to 14 years 75 3.0 15 to 19 years 91 3.7 20 to 24 years 68 2.7 25 to 29 years 76 3.0 30 to 34 years 57 2.3 35 to 39 years 61 2.4 40 to 44 years 71 2.8 45 to 49 years 79 3.2 50 to 54 years 63 2.5 55 to 59 years 70 2.8 60 to 64 years 66 2.6 65 to 69 years 47 1.9 70 to 74 years 34 1.4 1 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent 75 to 79 years 27 1.1 80 to 84 years 18 0.7 85 years and over 24 1.0 Median age (years) 34.8 ( X ) 16 years and over 839 33.7 18 years and over 793 31.8 21 years and over 748 30.0 62 years and over 182 7.3 65 years and over 150 6.0 Female population 1,366 54.8 Under 5 years 105 4.2 5 to 9 years 83 3.3 10 to 14 years 82 3.3 15 to 19 years 85 3.4 20 to 24 years 104 4.2 25 to 29 years 71 2.8 30 to 34 years 70 2.8 35 to 39 years 76 3.0 40 to 44 years 87 3.5 45 to 49 years 77 3.1 50 to 54 years 100 4.0 55 to 59 years 99 4.0 60 to 64 years 76 3.0 65 to 69 years 49 2.0 70 to 74 years 39 1.6 75 to 79 years 39 1.6 80 to 84 years 59 2.4 85 years and over 65 2.6 Median age (years) 40.5 ( X ) 16 years and over 1,078 43.2 18 years and over 1,046 42.0 21 years and over 996 40.0 62 years and over 293 11.8 65 years and over 251 10.1 RACE Total population 2,493 100.0 One Race 2,486 99.7 White 711 28.5 Black or African American 1,754 70.4 American Indian and Alaska Native 1 0.0 Asian 15 0.6 Asian Indian 6 0.2 Chinese 4 0.2 Filipino 5 0.2 Japanese 0 0.0 Korean 0 0.0 Vietnamese 0 0.0 Other Asian 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian 0 0.0 Guamanian or Chamorro 0 0.0 Samoan 0 0.0 Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Some Other Race 5 0.2 2 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent Two or More Races 7 0.3 White; American Indian and Alaska Native 0 0.0 White; Asian 0 0.0 White; Black or African American 7 0.3 White; Some Other Race 0 0.0 Race alone or in combination with one or more other races: White 718 28.8 Black or African American 1,761 70.6 American Indian and Alaska Native 1 0.0 Asian 15 0.6 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Some Other Race 5 0.2 HISPANIC OR LATINO Total population 2,493 100.0 Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 17 0.7 Mexican 11 0.4 Puerto Rican 0 0.0 Cuban 0 0.0 Other Hispanic or Latino 6 0.2 Not Hispanic or Latino 2,476 99.3 HISPANIC OR LATINO AND RACE Total population 2,493 100.0 Hispanic or Latino 17 0.7 White alone 4 0.2 Black or African American alone 9 0.4 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 0 0.0 Asian alone 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0 0.0 Some Other Race alone 4 0.2 Two or More Races 0 0.0 Not Hispanic or Latino 2,476 99.3 White alone 707 28.4 Black or African American alone 1,745 70.0 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 1 0.0 Asian alone 15 0.6 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0 0.0 Some Other Race alone 1 0.0 Two or More Races 7 0.3 RELATIONSHIP Total population 2,493 100.0 In households 2,286 91.7 Householder 875 35.1 Spouse 259 10.4 Child 766 30.7 Own child under 18 years 484 19.4 Other relatives 303 12.2 Under 18 years 163 6.5 65 years and over 30 1.2 Nonrelatives 83 3.3 Under 18 years 5 0.2 65 years and over 18 0.7 Unmarried partner 45 1.8 In group quarters 207 8.3 Institutionalized population 207 8.3 Male 138 5.5 3 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent Female 69 2.8 Noninstitutionalized population 0 0.0 Male 0 0.0 Female 0 0.0 HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE Total households 875 100.0 Family households (families) 587 67.1 With own children under 18 years 255 29.1 Husband-wife family 259 29.6 With own children under 18 years 91 10.4 Male householder, no wife present 32 3.7 With own children under 18 years 10 1.1 Female householder, no husband present 296 33.8 With own children under 18 years 154 17.6 Nonfamily households 288 32.9 Householder living alone 267 30.5 Male 99 11.3 65 years and over 32 3.7 Female 168 19.2 65 years and over 78 8.9 Households with individuals under 18 years 333 38.1 Households with individuals 65 years and over 250 28.6 Average household size 2.61 ( X ) Average family size 3.26 ( X ) HOUSING OCCUPANCY Total housing units 1,006 100.0 Occupied housing units 875 87.0 Vacant housing units 131 13.0 For rent 40 4.0 Rented, not occupied 5 0.5 For sale only 10 1.0 Sold, not occupied 4 0.4 For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 13 1.3 All other vacants 59 5.9 Homeowner vacancy rate (percent) 1.9 ( X ) Rental vacancy rate (percent) 10.0 ( X ) HOUSING TENURE Occupied housing units 875 100.0 Owner-occupied housing units 519 59.3 Population in owner-occupied housing units 1,327 ( X ) Average household size of owner-occupied units 2.56 ( X ) Renter-occupied housing units 356 40.7 Population in renter-occupied housing units 959 ( X ) Average household size of renter-occupied units 2.69 ( X ) X Not applicable. Other Asian alone, or two or more Asian categories. Other Pacific Islander alone, or two or more Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander categories. One of the four most commonly reported multiple-race combinations nationwide in Census 2000. In combination with one or more of the other races listed. The six numbers may add to more than the total population, and the six percentages may add to more than 100 percent because individuals may report more than one race. This category is composed of people whose origins are from the Dominican Republic, Spain, and Spanish-speaking Central or South 4 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- American countries. It also includes general origin responses such as "Latino" or "Hispanic." "Spouse" represents spouse of the householder. It does not reflect all spouses in a household. Responses of "same-sex spouse" were edited during processing to "unmarried partner." "Family households" consist of a householder and one or more other people related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. They do not include same-sex married couples even if the marriage was performed in a state issuing marriage certificates for same-sex couples. Same-sex couple households are included in the family households category if there is at least one additional person related to the householder by birth or adoption. Same-sex couple households with no relatives of the householder present are tabulated in nonfamily households. "Nonfamily households" consist of people living alone and households which do not have any members related to the householder. The homeowner vacancy rate is the proportion of the homeowner inventory that is vacant "for sale." It is computed by dividing the total number of vacant units "for sale only" by the sum of owner-occupied units, vacant units that are "for sale only," and vacant units that have been sold but not yet occupied; and then multiplying by 100. The rental vacancy rate is the proportion of the rental inventory that is vacant "for rent." It is computed by dividing the total number of vacant units "for rent" by the sum of the renter-occupied units, vacant units that are "for rent," and vacant units that have been rented but not yet occupied; and then multiplying by 100. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census. ---PAGE BREAK--- DP-1 Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010 2010 Demographic Profile Data NOTE: For more information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/dpsf.pdf. Geography: Jefferson County, Georgia Subject Number Percent SEX AND AGE Total population 16,930 100.0 Under 5 years 1,171 6.9 5 to 9 years 1,221 7.2 10 to 14 years 1,139 6.7 15 to 19 years 1,177 7.0 20 to 24 years 1,032 6.1 25 to 29 years 1,002 5.9 30 to 34 years 960 5.7 35 to 39 years 1,019 6.0 40 to 44 years 1,100 6.5 45 to 49 years 1,207 7.1 50 to 54 years 1,153 6.8 55 to 59 years 1,220 7.2 60 to 64 years 1,031 6.1 65 to 69 years 823 4.9 70 to 74 years 574 3.4 75 to 79 years 427 2.5 80 to 84 years 358 2.1 85 years and over 316 1.9 Median age (years) 38.8 ( X ) 16 years and over 13,177 77.8 18 years and over 12,659 74.8 21 years and over 11,992 70.8 62 years and over 3,086 18.2 65 years and over 2,498 14.8 Male population 8,183 48.3 Under 5 years 607 3.6 5 to 9 years 650 3.8 10 to 14 years 573 3.4 15 to 19 years 621 3.7 20 to 24 years 510 3.0 25 to 29 years 513 3.0 30 to 34 years 459 2.7 35 to 39 years 533 3.1 40 to 44 years 520 3.1 45 to 49 years 603 3.6 50 to 54 years 510 3.0 55 to 59 years 573 3.4 60 to 64 years 486 2.9 65 to 69 years 381 2.3 70 to 74 years 240 1.4 1 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent 75 to 79 years 191 1.1 80 to 84 years 120 0.7 85 years and over 93 0.5 Median age (years) 36.6 ( X ) 16 years and over 6,242 36.9 18 years and over 5,979 35.3 21 years and over 5,608 33.1 62 years and over 1,280 7.6 65 years and over 1,025 6.1 Female population 8,747 51.7 Under 5 years 564 3.3 5 to 9 years 571 3.4 10 to 14 years 566 3.3 15 to 19 years 556 3.3 20 to 24 years 522 3.1 25 to 29 years 489 2.9 30 to 34 years 501 3.0 35 to 39 years 486 2.9 40 to 44 years 580 3.4 45 to 49 years 604 3.6 50 to 54 years 643 3.8 55 to 59 years 647 3.8 60 to 64 years 545 3.2 65 to 69 years 442 2.6 70 to 74 years 334 2.0 75 to 79 years 236 1.4 80 to 84 years 238 1.4 85 years and over 223 1.3 Median age (years) 41.1 ( X ) 16 years and over 6,935 41.0 18 years and over 6,680 39.5 21 years and over 6,384 37.7 62 years and over 1,806 10.7 65 years and over 1,473 8.7 RACE Total population 16,930 100.0 One Race 16,782 99.1 White 7,206 42.6 Black or African American 9,213 54.4 American Indian and Alaska Native 18 0.1 Asian 68 0.4 Asian Indian 30 0.2 Chinese 9 0.1 Filipino 18 0.1 Japanese 1 0.0 Korean 4 0.0 Vietnamese 4 0.0 Other Asian 2 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 2 0.0 Native Hawaiian 2 0.0 Guamanian or Chamorro 0 0.0 Samoan 0 0.0 Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Some Other Race 275 1.6 2 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent Two or More Races 148 0.9 White; American Indian and Alaska Native 20 0.1 White; Asian 7 0.0 White; Black or African American 62 0.4 White; Some Other Race 25 0.1 Race alone or in combination with one or more other races: White 7,328 43.3 Black or African American 9,303 54.9 American Indian and Alaska Native 55 0.3 Asian 91 0.5 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 8 0.0 Some Other Race 311 1.8 HISPANIC OR LATINO Total population 16,930 100.0 Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 517 3.1 Mexican 435 2.6 Puerto Rican 18 0.1 Cuban 13 0.1 Other Hispanic or Latino 51 0.3 Not Hispanic or Latino 16,413 96.9 HISPANIC OR LATINO AND RACE Total population 16,930 100.0 Hispanic or Latino 517 3.1 White alone 191 1.1 Black or African American alone 26 0.2 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 0 0.0 Asian alone 4 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0 0.0 Some Other Race alone 262 1.5 Two or More Races 34 0.2 Not Hispanic or Latino 16,413 96.9 White alone 7,015 41.4 Black or African American alone 9,187 54.3 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 18 0.1 Asian alone 64 0.4 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 2 0.0 Some Other Race alone 13 0.1 Two or More Races 114 0.7 RELATIONSHIP Total population 16,930 100.0 In households 16,403 96.9 Householder 6,241 36.9 Spouse 2,612 15.4 Child 5,043 29.8 Own child under 18 years 3,327 19.7 Other relatives 1,849 10.9 Under 18 years 892 5.3 65 years and over 180 1.1 Nonrelatives 658 3.9 Under 18 years 47 0.3 65 years and over 59 0.3 Unmarried partner 342 2.0 In group quarters 527 3.1 Institutionalized population 460 2.7 Male 340 2.0 3 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent Female 120 0.7 Noninstitutionalized population 67 0.4 Male 58 0.3 Female 9 0.1 HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE Total households 6,241 100.0 Family households (families) 4,407 70.6 With own children under 18 years 1,782 28.6 Husband-wife family 2,612 41.9 With own children under 18 years 939 15.0 Male householder, no wife present 332 5.3 With own children under 18 years 116 1.9 Female householder, no husband present 1,463 23.4 With own children under 18 years 727 11.6 Nonfamily households 1,834 29.4 Householder living alone 1,620 26.0 Male 733 11.7 65 years and over 209 3.3 Female 887 14.2 65 years and over 481 7.7 Households with individuals under 18 years 2,248 36.0 Households with individuals 65 years and over 1,813 29.0 Average household size 2.63 ( X ) Average family size 3.16 ( X ) HOUSING OCCUPANCY Total housing units 7,298 100.0 Occupied housing units 6,241 85.5 Vacant housing units 1,057 14.5 For rent 211 2.9 Rented, not occupied 23 0.3 For sale only 86 1.2 Sold, not occupied 42 0.6 For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 188 2.6 All other vacants 507 6.9 Homeowner vacancy rate (percent) 2.0 ( X ) Rental vacancy rate (percent) 9.6 ( X ) HOUSING TENURE Occupied housing units 6,241 100.0 Owner-occupied housing units 4,274 68.5 Population in owner-occupied housing units 11,130 ( X ) Average household size of owner-occupied units 2.60 ( X ) Renter-occupied housing units 1,967 31.5 Population in renter-occupied housing units 5,273 ( X ) Average household size of renter-occupied units 2.68 ( X ) X Not applicable. Other Asian alone, or two or more Asian categories. Other Pacific Islander alone, or two or more Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander categories. One of the four most commonly reported multiple-race combinations nationwide in Census 2000. In combination with one or more of the other races listed. The six numbers may add to more than the total population, and the six percentages may add to more than 100 percent because individuals may report more than one race. This category is composed of people whose origins are from the Dominican Republic, Spain, and Spanish-speaking Central or South 4 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- American countries. It also includes general origin responses such as "Latino" or "Hispanic." "Spouse" represents spouse of the householder. It does not reflect all spouses in a household. Responses of "same-sex spouse" were edited during processing to "unmarried partner." "Family households" consist of a householder and one or more other people related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. They do not include same-sex married couples even if the marriage was performed in a state issuing marriage certificates for same-sex couples. Same-sex couple households are included in the family households category if there is at least one additional person related to the householder by birth or adoption. Same-sex couple households with no relatives of the householder present are tabulated in nonfamily households. "Nonfamily households" consist of people living alone and households which do not have any members related to the householder. The homeowner vacancy rate is the proportion of the homeowner inventory that is vacant "for sale." It is computed by dividing the total number of vacant units "for sale only" by the sum of owner-occupied units, vacant units that are "for sale only," and vacant units that have been sold but not yet occupied; and then multiplying by 100. The rental vacancy rate is the proportion of the rental inventory that is vacant "for rent." It is computed by dividing the total number of vacant units "for rent" by the sum of the renter-occupied units, vacant units that are "for rent," and vacant units that have been rented but not yet occupied; and then multiplying by 100. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census. ---PAGE BREAK--- DP-1 Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010 2010 Demographic Profile Data NOTE: For more information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/dpsf.pdf. Geography: Bartow town, Georgia Subject Number Percent SEX AND AGE Total population 286 100.0 Under 5 years 14 4.9 5 to 9 years 15 5.2 10 to 14 years 21 7.3 15 to 19 years 12 4.2 20 to 24 years 22 7.7 25 to 29 years 13 4.5 30 to 34 years 11 3.8 35 to 39 years 13 4.5 40 to 44 years 25 8.7 45 to 49 years 25 8.7 50 to 54 years 28 9.8 55 to 59 years 21 7.3 60 to 64 years 14 4.9 65 to 69 years 19 6.6 70 to 74 years 12 4.2 75 to 79 years 11 3.8 80 to 84 years 5 1.7 85 years and over 5 1.7 Median age (years) 44.7 ( X ) 16 years and over 234 81.8 18 years and over 231 80.8 21 years and over 215 75.2 62 years and over 62 21.7 65 years and over 52 18.2 Male population 136 47.6 Under 5 years 6 2.1 5 to 9 years 4 1.4 10 to 14 years 12 4.2 15 to 19 years 10 3.5 20 to 24 years 12 4.2 25 to 29 years 8 2.8 30 to 34 years 6 2.1 35 to 39 years 6 2.1 40 to 44 years 11 3.8 45 to 49 years 12 4.2 50 to 54 years 10 3.5 55 to 59 years 12 4.2 60 to 64 years 5 1.7 65 to 69 years 11 3.8 70 to 74 years 3 1.0 1 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent 75 to 79 years 5 1.7 80 to 84 years 1 0.3 85 years and over 2 0.7 Median age (years) 43.3 ( X ) 16 years and over 112 39.2 18 years and over 109 38.1 21 years and over 98 34.3 62 years and over 26 9.1 65 years and over 22 7.7 Female population 150 52.4 Under 5 years 8 2.8 5 to 9 years 11 3.8 10 to 14 years 9 3.1 15 to 19 years 2 0.7 20 to 24 years 10 3.5 25 to 29 years 5 1.7 30 to 34 years 5 1.7 35 to 39 years 7 2.4 40 to 44 years 14 4.9 45 to 49 years 13 4.5 50 to 54 years 18 6.3 55 to 59 years 9 3.1 60 to 64 years 9 3.1 65 to 69 years 8 2.8 70 to 74 years 9 3.1 75 to 79 years 6 2.1 80 to 84 years 4 1.4 85 years and over 3 1.0 Median age (years) 46.8 ( X ) 16 years and over 122 42.7 18 years and over 122 42.7 21 years and over 117 40.9 62 years and over 36 12.6 65 years and over 30 10.5 RACE Total population 286 100.0 One Race 285 99.7 White 118 41.3 Black or African American 167 58.4 American Indian and Alaska Native 0 0.0 Asian 0 0.0 Asian Indian 0 0.0 Chinese 0 0.0 Filipino 0 0.0 Japanese 0 0.0 Korean 0 0.0 Vietnamese 0 0.0 Other Asian 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian 0 0.0 Guamanian or Chamorro 0 0.0 Samoan 0 0.0 Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Some Other Race 0 0.0 2 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent Two or More Races 1 0.3 White; American Indian and Alaska Native 0 0.0 White; Asian 0 0.0 White; Black or African American 0 0.0 White; Some Other Race 0 0.0 Race alone or in combination with one or more other races: White 118 41.3 Black or African American 168 58.7 American Indian and Alaska Native 0 0.0 Asian 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Some Other Race 1 0.3 HISPANIC OR LATINO Total population 286 100.0 Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 1 0.3 Mexican 0 0.0 Puerto Rican 0 0.0 Cuban 0 0.0 Other Hispanic or Latino 1 0.3 Not Hispanic or Latino 285 99.7 HISPANIC OR LATINO AND RACE Total population 286 100.0 Hispanic or Latino 1 0.3 White alone 0 0.0 Black or African American alone 0 0.0 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 0 0.0 Asian alone 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0 0.0 Some Other Race alone 0 0.0 Two or More Races 1 0.3 Not Hispanic or Latino 285 99.7 White alone 118 41.3 Black or African American alone 167 58.4 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 0 0.0 Asian alone 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0 0.0 Some Other Race alone 0 0.0 Two or More Races 0 0.0 RELATIONSHIP Total population 286 100.0 In households 286 100.0 Householder 110 38.5 Spouse 58 20.3 Child 86 30.1 Own child under 18 years 45 15.7 Other relatives 26 9.1 Under 18 years 9 3.1 65 years and over 4 1.4 Nonrelatives 6 2.1 Under 18 years 0 0.0 65 years and over 2 0.7 Unmarried partner 1 0.3 In group quarters 0 0.0 Institutionalized population 0 0.0 Male 0 0.0 3 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent Female 0 0.0 Noninstitutionalized population 0 0.0 Male 0 0.0 Female 0 0.0 HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE Total households 110 100.0 Family households (families) 81 73.6 With own children under 18 years 28 25.5 Husband-wife family 58 52.7 With own children under 18 years 18 16.4 Male householder, no wife present 2 1.8 With own children under 18 years 1 0.9 Female householder, no husband present 21 19.1 With own children under 18 years 9 8.2 Nonfamily households 29 26.4 Householder living alone 26 23.6 Male 12 10.9 65 years and over 5 4.5 Female 14 12.7 65 years and over 10 9.1 Households with individuals under 18 years 35 31.8 Households with individuals 65 years and over 37 33.6 Average household size 2.60 ( X ) Average family size 3.10 ( X ) HOUSING OCCUPANCY Total housing units 139 100.0 Occupied housing units 110 79.1 Vacant housing units 29 20.9 For rent 0 0.0 Rented, not occupied 1 0.7 For sale only 2 1.4 Sold, not occupied 3 2.2 For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 7 5.0 All other vacants 16 11.5 Homeowner vacancy rate (percent) 2.3 ( X ) Rental vacancy rate (percent) 0.0 ( X ) HOUSING TENURE Occupied housing units 110 100.0 Owner-occupied housing units 81 73.6 Population in owner-occupied housing units 220 ( X ) Average household size of owner-occupied units 2.72 ( X ) Renter-occupied housing units 29 26.4 Population in renter-occupied housing units 66 ( X ) Average household size of renter-occupied units 2.28 ( X ) X Not applicable. Other Asian alone, or two or more Asian categories. Other Pacific Islander alone, or two or more Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander categories. One of the four most commonly reported multiple-race combinations nationwide in Census 2000. In combination with one or more of the other races listed. The six numbers may add to more than the total population, and the six percentages may add to more than 100 percent because individuals may report more than one race. This category is composed of people whose origins are from the Dominican Republic, Spain, and Spanish-speaking Central or South 4 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- American countries. It also includes general origin responses such as "Latino" or "Hispanic." "Spouse" represents spouse of the householder. It does not reflect all spouses in a household. Responses of "same-sex spouse" were edited during processing to "unmarried partner." "Family households" consist of a householder and one or more other people related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. They do not include same-sex married couples even if the marriage was performed in a state issuing marriage certificates for same-sex couples. Same-sex couple households are included in the family households category if there is at least one additional person related to the householder by birth or adoption. Same-sex couple households with no relatives of the householder present are tabulated in nonfamily households. "Nonfamily households" consist of people living alone and households which do not have any members related to the householder. The homeowner vacancy rate is the proportion of the homeowner inventory that is vacant "for sale." It is computed by dividing the total number of vacant units "for sale only" by the sum of owner-occupied units, vacant units that are "for sale only," and vacant units that have been sold but not yet occupied; and then multiplying by 100. The rental vacancy rate is the proportion of the rental inventory that is vacant "for rent." It is computed by dividing the total number of vacant units "for rent" by the sum of the renter-occupied units, vacant units that are "for rent," and vacant units that have been rented but not yet occupied; and then multiplying by 100. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census. ---PAGE BREAK--- DP-1 Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010 2010 Demographic Profile Data NOTE: For more information on confidentiality protection, nonsampling error, and definitions, see http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/dpsf.pdf. Geography: Avera city, Georgia Subject Number Percent SEX AND AGE Total population 246 100.0 Under 5 years 22 8.9 5 to 9 years 10 4.1 10 to 14 years 17 6.9 15 to 19 years 19 7.7 20 to 24 years 11 4.5 25 to 29 years 17 6.9 30 to 34 years 11 4.5 35 to 39 years 24 9.8 40 to 44 years 21 8.5 45 to 49 years 18 7.3 50 to 54 years 20 8.1 55 to 59 years 14 5.7 60 to 64 years 11 4.5 65 to 69 years 10 4.1 70 to 74 years 5 2.0 75 to 79 years 8 3.3 80 to 84 years 3 1.2 85 years and over 5 2.0 Median age (years) 38.8 ( X ) 16 years and over 188 76.4 18 years and over 183 74.4 21 years and over 175 71.1 62 years and over 37 15.0 65 years and over 31 12.6 Male population 129 52.4 Under 5 years 16 6.5 5 to 9 years 7 2.8 10 to 14 years 12 4.9 15 to 19 years 10 4.1 20 to 24 years 6 2.4 25 to 29 years 7 2.8 30 to 34 years 5 2.0 35 to 39 years 12 4.9 40 to 44 years 14 5.7 45 to 49 years 6 2.4 50 to 54 years 11 4.5 55 to 59 years 8 3.3 60 to 64 years 4 1.6 65 to 69 years 3 1.2 70 to 74 years 0 0.0 1 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent 75 to 79 years 3 1.2 80 to 84 years 2 0.8 85 years and over 3 1.2 Median age (years) 36.8 ( X ) 16 years and over 89 36.2 18 years and over 87 35.4 21 years and over 84 34.1 62 years and over 13 5.3 65 years and over 11 4.5 Female population 117 47.6 Under 5 years 6 2.4 5 to 9 years 3 1.2 10 to 14 years 5 2.0 15 to 19 years 9 3.7 20 to 24 years 5 2.0 25 to 29 years 10 4.1 30 to 34 years 6 2.4 35 to 39 years 12 4.9 40 to 44 years 7 2.8 45 to 49 years 12 4.9 50 to 54 years 9 3.7 55 to 59 years 6 2.4 60 to 64 years 7 2.8 65 to 69 years 7 2.8 70 to 74 years 5 2.0 75 to 79 years 5 2.0 80 to 84 years 1 0.4 85 years and over 2 0.8 Median age (years) 42.5 ( X ) 16 years and over 99 40.2 18 years and over 96 39.0 21 years and over 91 37.0 62 years and over 24 9.8 65 years and over 20 8.1 RACE Total population 246 100.0 One Race 241 98.0 White 224 91.1 Black or African American 17 6.9 American Indian and Alaska Native 0 0.0 Asian 0 0.0 Asian Indian 0 0.0 Chinese 0 0.0 Filipino 0 0.0 Japanese 0 0.0 Korean 0 0.0 Vietnamese 0 0.0 Other Asian 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian 0 0.0 Guamanian or Chamorro 0 0.0 Samoan 0 0.0 Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Some Other Race 0 0.0 2 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent Two or More Races 5 2.0 White; American Indian and Alaska Native 0 0.0 White; Asian 1 0.4 White; Black or African American 2 0.8 White; Some Other Race 1 0.4 Race alone or in combination with one or more other races: White 229 93.1 Black or African American 20 8.1 American Indian and Alaska Native 1 0.4 Asian 1 0.4 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 0 0.0 Some Other Race 1 0.4 HISPANIC OR LATINO Total population 246 100.0 Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 0 0.0 Mexican 0 0.0 Puerto Rican 0 0.0 Cuban 0 0.0 Other Hispanic or Latino 0 0.0 Not Hispanic or Latino 246 100.0 HISPANIC OR LATINO AND RACE Total population 246 100.0 Hispanic or Latino 0 0.0 White alone 0 0.0 Black or African American alone 0 0.0 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 0 0.0 Asian alone 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0 0.0 Some Other Race alone 0 0.0 Two or More Races 0 0.0 Not Hispanic or Latino 246 100.0 White alone 224 91.1 Black or African American alone 17 6.9 American Indian and Alaska Native alone 0 0.0 Asian alone 0 0.0 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0 0.0 Some Other Race alone 0 0.0 Two or More Races 5 2.0 RELATIONSHIP Total population 246 100.0 In households 246 100.0 Householder 100 40.7 Spouse 48 19.5 Child 73 29.7 Own child under 18 years 58 23.6 Other relatives 17 6.9 Under 18 years 5 2.0 65 years and over 0 0.0 Nonrelatives 8 3.3 Under 18 years 0 0.0 65 years and over 0 0.0 Unmarried partner 6 2.4 In group quarters 0 0.0 Institutionalized population 0 0.0 Male 0 0.0 3 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- Subject Number Percent Female 0 0.0 Noninstitutionalized population 0 0.0 Male 0 0.0 Female 0 0.0 HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE Total households 100 100.0 Family households (families) 63 63.0 With own children under 18 years 33 33.0 Husband-wife family 48 48.0 With own children under 18 years 27 27.0 Male householder, no wife present 5 5.0 With own children under 18 years 2 2.0 Female householder, no husband present 10 10.0 With own children under 18 years 4 4.0 Nonfamily households 37 37.0 Householder living alone 35 35.0 Male 15 15.0 65 years and over 5 5.0 Female 20 20.0 65 years and over 15 15.0 Households with individuals under 18 years 36 36.0 Households with individuals 65 years and over 28 28.0 Average household size 2.46 ( X ) Average family size 3.19 ( X ) HOUSING OCCUPANCY Total housing units 120 100.0 Occupied housing units 100 83.3 Vacant housing units 20 16.7 For rent 6 5.0 Rented, not occupied 0 0.0 For sale only 2 1.7 Sold, not occupied 3 2.5 For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 2 1.7 All other vacants 7 5.8 Homeowner vacancy rate (percent) 2.7 ( X ) Rental vacancy rate (percent) 16.7 ( X ) HOUSING TENURE Occupied housing units 100 100.0 Owner-occupied housing units 70 70.0 Population in owner-occupied housing units 159 ( X ) Average household size of owner-occupied units 2.27 ( X ) Renter-occupied housing units 30 30.0 Population in renter-occupied housing units 87 ( X ) Average household size of renter-occupied units 2.90 ( X ) X Not applicable. Other Asian alone, or two or more Asian categories. Other Pacific Islander alone, or two or more Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander categories. One of the four most commonly reported multiple-race combinations nationwide in Census 2000. In combination with one or more of the other races listed. The six numbers may add to more than the total population, and the six percentages may add to more than 100 percent because individuals may report more than one race. This category is composed of people whose origins are from the Dominican Republic, Spain, and Spanish-speaking Central or South 4 of 5 08/03/2014 ---PAGE BREAK--- American countries. It also includes general origin responses such as "Latino" or "Hispanic." "Spouse" represents spouse of the householder. It does not reflect all spouses in a household. Responses of "same-sex spouse" were edited during processing to "unmarried partner." "Family households" consist of a householder and one or more other people related to the householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. They do not include same-sex married couples even if the marriage was performed in a state issuing marriage certificates for same-sex couples. Same-sex couple households are included in the family households category if there is at least one additional person related to the householder by birth or adoption. Same-sex couple households with no relatives of the householder present are tabulated in nonfamily households. "Nonfamily households" consist of people living alone and households which do not have any members related to the householder. The homeowner vacancy rate is the proportion of the homeowner inventory that is vacant "for sale." It is computed by dividing the total number of vacant units "for sale only" by the sum of owner-occupied units, vacant units that are "for sale only," and vacant units that have been sold but not yet occupied; and then multiplying by 100. The rental vacancy rate is the proportion of the rental inventory that is vacant "for rent." It is computed by dividing the total number of vacant units "for rent" by the sum of the renter-occupied units, vacant units that are "for rent," and vacant units that have been rented but not yet occupied; and then multiplying by 100. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Census. ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County APPENDIX C OTHER PLANNING DOCUMENTS ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- + N O V E M B E R 1 6 , 2 0 1 1 Community Wildfire Protection Plan An Action Plan for Wildfire Mitigation and Conservation of Natural Resources Jefferson County, Georgia A Program of the Georgia Forestry Commission with support from the U.S. Forest Service ---PAGE BREAK--- SIGNATURE PAGE Honorable William Rabun, Chairman Date Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners Adam Mestres Date Quitman County EMA Director Lamar Baxley Date Jefferson County Fire Chief James M. Peebles Date Jefferson County Fire Association President Reggie Morgan Date GFC, Ranger 1/Forest Tech ---PAGE BREAK--- Prepared by: Shane Barrow, Glascock/Jefferson Ranger 1 / Forest Tech Eric Mosley, Community Wildfire Protection Specialist Georgia Forestry Commission 2755 Mennonite Church Rd Stapleton GA 30823 The following report is a collaborative effort among various entities; the representatives listed below comprise the core decision-making team responsible for this report and mutually agree on the plan’s contents: County Commission Chair, Jefferson County Jefferson County Emergency Management Director Jefferson County Fire Chief Shane Barrow Ranger 1 / Forest Tech, Glascock/Jefferson County Forestry Unit Eric Mosley Community Wildfire Protection Specialist ---PAGE BREAK--- PLAN CONTENTS I. Objectives 1 II. Community Collaboration 1 III. Community Background and Wildfire 2 IV. Community Base Map 4 V. Community Wildfire Risk Assessment 5 VI. Community Hazards Maps 8 VII. Prioritized Mitigation Recommendations 10 VIII. Action Plan 15 IX. Appended Jefferson County Wildfire Pre-suppression Plan NFPA 1141 Standard for Fire Protection Infrastructure for Land Development in Suburban and Rural Areas. ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N I. OBJECTIVES A Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) provides a community with a road map to reduce its risk from wildfire. A CWPP is designed through collaboration between state and local fire agencies, homeowners and landowners, and other interested parties such as city councils, utilities, homeowners associations, environmental organizations, and other local stakeholders. The plan identifies strategic sites and methods for risk reduction and structural protection projects across jurisdictional boundaries. Comprehensive plans provide long-term guidance for growth, reflecting a community’s values and future expectations. The plan implements the community’s values and serves to protect natural and community resources and public safety. Planning also enables communities to address their development patterns in the Wildland Urban Interface and determine how they can reduce their risk through alternative development patterns. The formal legal standing of the plan and its central role in local government decision making underscores the opportunity to use this planning process as an effective means for reducing wildfire risk. The mission of the following plan is to set clear priorities for the implementation of wildfire mitigation in Jefferson County. The plan includes prioritized recommendations for the appropriate types and methods of fuel reduction and structure ignitability reduction that will protect this community and its essential infrastructure. It also includes a plan for wildfire suppression. Specifically, the plan includes community-centered actions that will: • Educate citizens on wildfire, its risks, and ways to protect lives and properties, • Support fire rescue and suppression entities, • Focus on collaborative decision-making and citizen participation, • Develop and implement effective mitigation strategies, and • Develop and implement effective community ordinances and codes. II. COMMUNITY COLLABORATION Wildfire risk reduction strategies are most effective when approached collaboratively – involving groups of residents, elected officials, community decision makers, emergency managers, and natural resource mangers –and when combined with effective outreach approaches. Collaborative approaches make sense as the initial focus of any community attempting to work toward wildfire risk reduction. In all Community Wildfire Protection Plan collaborations, the goal is to cooperatively identify problems and reach a consensus for mutual action. In the case of wildfire mitigation, a reduction in the wildfire risk to the community’s lives, houses, and property is the desired outcome. The collaborative core team convened in early February 2011 to assess risks and develop the Community Wildfire Protection Plan. The group is comprised of representatives from local county government, local fire authorities, and the Georgia Forestry Commission. P a g e 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N Below are the groups included in the task force: Jefferson County Government County Fire Department Emergency Management Board of County Commissioners Georgia Forestry Commission It was decided to conduct community assessments on the basis of the high risk communities and the individual fire districts in the county. The Chief of the Jefferson County Fire Department and the representative of the local Georgia Forestry Commission office reconvened in late August and again in late October for the purpose of completing the following: Risk Assessment Assessed wildfire hazard risks and prioritized mitigation actions. The wildfire risk assessment will help homeowners, builders, developers, and emergency personnel whether the area needs attention and will help direct wildfire risk reduction practices to the areas at highest risk. Fuels Reduction Identified strategies for coordinating fuels treatment projects. Structure Ignitability Identified strategies for reducing the ignitability of structures within the Wildland interface. Emergency Management Forged relationships among local government and fire districts and developed/refined a pre-suppression plan. Education and Outreach Developed strategies for increasing citizen awareness and action and to conduct homeowner and community leader workshops. Outreach and education programs are designed to raise awareness and improve audience knowledge of wildfire risk reduction needs and practices. In the best cases, education and outreach programs will influence attitudes and opinions and result in effective action. P a g e 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N III. COUNTY BACKGROUND AND WILDFIRE HISTORY County Background Jefferson County, in east central Georgia southwest of Augusta, was established in 1796 on land formerly a part of Burke and Warren counties. It was named after U.S. president Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of Independence and the first U.S. secretary of state. Louisville, the county seat, was the third capital of Georgia. Unlike its predecessors, Savannah and Augusta, it was founded specifically as the permanent state capital, with the first planned capitol building, which was completed in 1796. In recognition of French support during the Revolutionary War (1775-83), Georgia legislators named the town for Louis XVI, king of France (who had been executed three years earlier). The original design of Louisville was based on the squares of Philadelphia, During the brief period when Louisville was the state capital (1796-1806), the papers connected with the Yazoo land fraud were publicly burned and the Great Seal of Georgia was adopted (1799). According to the 1820 census the population of Jefferson County then included 3,932 free whites and 3,094 slaves. In 1807 Georgia government moved to its fourth capital, farther west in Baldwin County. The Jefferson County Courthouse (1904), a Neoclassical building designed by W. F. Denny, sits on the site of the original capitol. By 1860 Jefferson County had 41 free blacks, 6,045 slaves, and 4,133 whites, of whom 431 were slaveholders. During the Civil War (1861-65), Louisville was a target on General William T. Sherman's march to the sea, and stores and houses on Broad Street were burned. Jefferson County has maintained an agrarian base since its founding. In 1860 there were 475 farms. The 2002 U.S. Department of Agriculture Census showed 388 farms on a total of 137,217 acres across Jefferson County. Historically, cotton was the major cash crop. The Jefferson Energy Cooperative, based in Wrens, provides power for the area's farms, including cotton, wheat, timber, cattle, and dairy operations. The author Erskine Caldwell (1903-87), though born in Coweta County, spent his young adult years in Jefferson County, where his father, a Presbyterian minister, was posted in the town of Wrens. Though he worked as a writer for the local newspaper, his job as a driver for a country doctor had greater impact. On house calls, he saw the squalid living conditions of early-twentieth-century sharecroppers and day laborers. His two most successful novels, Tobacco Road (1932) and God's Little Acre (1933), were inspired by his observations of the hard lives they led. You Have Seen Their Faces (1937), with the photographer Margaret Bourke-White (his second wife), also reflected his experiences during this time. As a journalist, he exposed in national magazine articles the mistreatment of tenant farmers in Jefferson and adjacent counties. Other well-known residents of Jefferson County include two Georgia governors, William Schley and Jefferson County Courthouse P a g e 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N Howell Cobb, as well as Cobb's brother, jurist Thomas R. R. Cobb, who served as a general during the Civil War. Another Confederate general, Ambrose Wright, was born in Louisville and later became owner and editor of the Augusta Chronicle. Prominent twentieth-century state legislator Roy V. Harris also grew up in the county. Wildfire History Recent data show that a majority of the fastest growing areas in the U.S. are in wildfire-prone environments. It is not a surprise that some of these fastest growing areas are in Georgia. In last decade of the 20th Century, Georgia’s population increased substantially. Homeowners in Georgia must contend with natural hazards including wildfire, tornados, and flooding. This combination of factors – burgeoning population, abundant natural areas, development pressures, and lack of public awareness makes Georgia a perfect state for creating solutions to various hazards. Georgia is looked to throughout the southern region as a leader in comprehensive and hazard mitigation planning. Many of Georgia’s existing and new residents living in the urban interface are unaware of the vital role fire plays in our landscape and that their homes are extremely vulnerable to wildfire damage. Balancing development pressures with wildfire risk reduction and education creates a unique challenge for local governments, emergency managers, and wildfire management agencies such as the Georgia Forestry Commission. Over the past ten years, Jefferson County has averaged 59 reported wildfires per year. The occurrence of these fires is fairly uniform throughout the year with a slight peak in the months of February and March and a slight decrease during the fall months. These fires have burned an average of 210 acres annually. While the numbers of fires remain fairly similar every month, there is a marked difference in the acreage lost. The acres lost during the late winter through summer period show a tenfold increase over the acres lost during the fall and early winter. Additionally while the annual numbers of fires have not increased noticeably during the 10 year period that records are available, the annual acreage lost appears to have decreased in later years. This perhaps a result of the increase in the practice of prescribed burning. The local Georgia Forestry Commission office needs to be commended for their valiant work increasing their very impressive prescribed burning regiment. The Glascock / Jefferson Unit lead their district in Central Georgia for burning. Despite their work, more homes are being built outside of traditional communities into the wildland urban interface. With this migration of people to the wildland urban interface the potential for a wildfire disaster continues to increase for Jefferson County. The leading causes of these fires in Jefferson County were escaped agricultural fires and arson which came to almost 50 percent of all fires reported. Though these causes are a bit disturbing, local efforts of outreach and education can easily curb this problem. P a g e 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N County = Jefferson Cause Fires Acres Fires 5 Yr Avg Acres 5 Yr Avg Campfire Campfire 3 0.55 1.40 4.80 Children Children 11 4.46 4.40 1.68 Debris: Ag Fields, Pastures, Orchards, Etc Debris: Ag Fields, Pastures, Orchards, Etc 16 163.55 8.00 67.42 Debris: Construction Land Clearing Debris: Construction Land Clearing 1 0.65 1.00 4.28 Debris: Escaped Prescribed Burn Debris: Escaped Prescribed Burn 10 14.05 5.00 9.09 Debris: Household Garbage Debris: Household Garbage 1 0.10 1.60 4.97 Debris: Other Debris: Other 4 17.60 2.20 6.64 Debris: Residential, Leafpiles, Yard, Etc Debris: Residential, Leafpiles, Yard, Etc 14 15.76 13.60 16.56 Debris: Site Prep - Forestry Related Debris: Site Prep - Forestry Related 2 1.80 5.00 13.64 Incendiary Incendiary 1 0.20 2.40 8.17 Lightning Lightning 8 33.42 5.60 12.79 Machine Use Machine Use 17 43.39 14.80 42.64 Miscellaneous Miscellaneous 21 14.55 9.80 17.62 Railroad Railroad 1 1.90 0.40 0.45 P a g e 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N IV. COMMUNITY BASE MAP P a g e 6 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N P a g e 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N V. COMMUNITY WILDFIRE RISK ASSESSMENT The Wildland-Urban Interface There are many definitions of the Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI), however from a fire management perspective it is commonly defined as an area where structures and other human development meet or intermingles with undeveloped wildland or vegetative fuels. As fire is dependent on a certain set of conditions, the National Wildfire Coordinating Group has defined the wildland-urban interface as a set of conditions that exists in or near areas of wildland fuels, regardless of ownership. This set of conditions includes type of vegetation, building construction, accessibility, lot size, topography and other factors such as weather and humidity. When these conditions are present in certain combinations, they make some communities more vulnerable to wildfire damage than others. This “set of conditions” method is perhaps the best way to define wildland-urban interface areas when planning for wildfire prevention, mitigation, and protection activities. There are three major categories of wildland-urban interface. Depending on the set of conditions present, any of these areas may be at risk from wildfire. A wildfire risk assessment can determine the level of risk. 1. “Boundary” wildland-urban interface is characterized by areas of development where homes, especially new subdivisions, press against public and private wildlands, such as private or commercial forest land or public forests or parks. This is the classic type of wildland-urban interface, with a clearly defined boundary between the suburban fringe and the rural 2. “Intermix” wildland-urban interface areas are places where improved property and/or structures are scattered and interspersed in wildland areas. These may be isolated rural homes or an area that is just beginning to go through the transition from rural to urban land use. 3. “Island” wildland-urban interface, also called occluded interface, are areas of wildland within predominately urban or suburban areas. As cities or subdivisions grow, islands of undeveloped land may remain, creating remnant forests. Sometimes these remnants exist as parks, or as land that cannot be developed due to site limitations, such as wetlands. (courtesy Fire Ecology and Wildfire Mitigation in Florida 2004) P a g e 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N Wildland Urban Interface Hazards Firefighters in the wildland urban interface may encounter hazards other than the fire itself, such as hazardous materials, utility lines and poor access. Hazardous Materials • Common chemicals used around the home may be a direct hazard to firefighters from flammability, explosion potential and/or vapors or off-gassing. Such chemicals include paint, varnish and other flammable liquids; fertilizer; pesticides; cleansers; aerosol cans, fireworks, batteries and ammunition. In addition, some common household products such as plastics may give off very toxic fumes when they burn. Stay OUT of the smoke from burning structures and any unknown sources such as trash piles. Illicit Activities • Marijuana plantations or drug production labs may be found in wildland urban interface areas. Extremely hazardous materials such as propane tanks and flammable/toxic chemicals may be encountered, as well as booby traps. Propane tanks • Both large (household size) and small (gas grill size) liquefied propane gas (LPG) tanks can present hazards to firefighters, including explosion. See the "LPG Tank Hazards" discussion for details. Utility lines • Utility lines may be located above and below ground and may be cut or damaged by tools P a g e 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N or equipment. Don't spray water on utility lines or boxes. Septic tanks and fields • Below-ground structures may not be readily apparent and may not support the weight of engines or other apparatus. New construction materials • Many new construction materials have comparatively low melting points and may "off- gas" extremely hazardous vapors. Plastic decking materials that resemble wood are becoming more common and may begin softening and losing structural strength at 180° F, though they normally do not sustain combustion once direct flame is removed. However, if they continue to burn they exhibit the characteristics of flammable liquids. Pets and livestock • Pets and livestock may be left when residents evacuate and will likely be highly stressed, making them more inclined to bite and kick. Firefighters should not put themselves at risk to rescue pets or livestock. Evacuation occurring • Firefighters may be taking structural protection actions while evacuations of residents are occurring. Be very cautious of people driving erratically. Distraught residents may refuse to leave their property, and firefighters may need to disengage from fighting fire to contact law enforcement officers for assistance. In most jurisdictions firefighters do not have the authority to force evacuations. Firefighters should not put themselves at risk trying to protect someone who will not evacuate! Limited access • Narrow one-lane roads with no turn-around room, inadequate or poorly maintained bridges and culverts are frequently found in wildland urban interface areas. Access should be sized-up and an evacuation plan for all emergency personnel should be developed. The wildland fire risk assessments conducted in 2011 by the Jeffersn County Fire Department and the Georgia Forestry Commission returned an average score of 112, placing Jefferson County in the “very high risk” hazard range. The risk assessment instrument used to evaluate wildfire hazards to P a g e 1 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N Jefferson County’s WUI was the Hazard and Wildfire Risk Assessment Checklist. The instrument takes into consideration accessibility, vegetation (based on fuel models), roofing assembly, building construction, and availability of fire protection resources, placement of gas and electric utilities, and additional rating factors. The following factors contributed to the wildfire hazard score for Jefferson County: • Dead end roads with inadequate turn arounds • Narrow roads without drivable shoulders • Long, narrow, and poorly labeled driveways • Limited street signs and homes not clearly addressed • Thick, highly flammable vegetation surrounding many homes • Minimal defensible space around structures • Homes with wooden siding and roofs with heavy accumulations of vegetative debris • No pressurized or non-pressurized water systems available • Above ground utilities • Large, adjacent areas of forest or wildlands • Heavy fuel buildups in adjacent wildlands • Undeveloped lots comprising half the total lots in many rural communities. • High occurrence of wildfires in the several locations • Distance from fire stations • Lack of homeowner or community organizations P a g e 1 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N The Communities-at-Risk within Jefferson County that led to its Very High Hazard risk rating are: Community Score Hazard Rating Ogeechee Heights 114 Very High Hazard Taylor Lane 54 Moderate Hazard Golf Drive 105 Very High Hazard Berrien Branch 71 Moderate Hazard Casson Creek Subdivision 120 Very High Hazard Oak Hill Subdivision 101 Very High Hazard Stellaville Community 128 Extreme Hazard Mathews Community 105 Very High Hazard Red McDonald Community 156 Extreme Hazard Sitadey Oaks Community 147 Extreme Hazard Gus Perdue Community 116 Very High Hazard Country Club Circle 74 Moderate Hazard Kelly Quarter 142 Extreme Hazard Whitley Community 115 Very High Hazard Deerwood Circle 110 Very High Hazard Sylvan Grove 93 High Hazard Brown Terrace 78 High Hazard Jefferson County Average 107 Very High Hazard These hazard ratings were completed by the Georgia Forestry Commission’s local office and Community Wildfire Protection Specialist during the month of October. The Georgia Forestry Commission Hazard and Wildfire Risk Assessment Score Sheets were used. This document evaluates communities (groups of homes) based upon six criteria: community access, surrounding vegetation, building construction, fire protection, utilities and additional rating factors. The cumulative wildfire hazard rating scores range from a low rating of 0 to 50 points to an extreme hazard rating with over 120 points. The cumulative wildfire hazard rating scores help establish priorities for mitigation activities in the CWPP Action Plan. Those various mitigation recommendations are provided below the action plan created for Jefferson County. P a g e 1 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N VI. COMMUNITY HAZARDS MAPS See Attached Maps VII. PRIORITIZED MITIGATION RECOMMENDATIONS Executive Summary As Central Georgia continues to see increased growth from other areas seeking less crowded and warmer climes, new development will occur more frequently on forest and wildland areas. The County will have an opportunity to significantly influence the wildland fire safety of new developments. It is important that new development be planned and constructed to provide for public safety in the event of a wildland fire emergency. Over the past 20 years, much has been learned about how and why homes burn during wildland fire emergencies. Perhaps most importantly, case histories and research have shown that even in the most severe circumstances, wildland fire disasters can be avoided. Homes can be designed, built and maintained to withstand a wildfire even in the absence of fire services on the scene. The national Firewise Communities program is a national awareness initiative to help people understand that they don’t have to be victims in a wildfire emergency. The National Fire Protection Association has produced two standards for reference: NFPA 1144 Standard for Reducing Structure Ignition Hazards from Wildland Fire. 2008 Edition and NFPA 1141 Standard for Fire Protection Infrastructure for Land Development in Suburban and Rural Areas. When new developments are built in the Wildland/Urban Interface, a number of public safety challenges may be created for the local fire services: the water supply in the immediate areas may be inadequate for fire suppression; if the Development is in an outlying area, there may be a longer response time for emergency services; in a wildfire emergency, the access road(s) may need to simultaneously support evacuation of residents and the arrival of emergency vehicles; and when wildland fire disasters strike, many structures may be involved simultaneously, quickly exceeding the capability of even the best equipped fire departments. The following recommendations were developed by the Jefferson County CWPP Core team as a result of surveying and assessing fuels and structures and by conducting meetings and interviews with county and city officials. A priority order was determined based on which mitigation projects would best reduce the hazard of wildfire in the assessment area. P a g e 1 3 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N Proposed Community Hazard and Structural Ignitability Reduction Priorities Primary Protection for Community and Its Essential Infrastructure Treatment Area Treatment Types Treatment Method(s) 1. All Structures Create minimum of 30- feet of defensible space** Trim shrubs and vines to 30 feet from structures, trim overhanging limbs, replace flammable plants near homes with less flammable varieties, remove vegetation around chimneys. 2. Applicable Structures Reduce structural ignitability** Clean flammable vegetative material from roofs and gutters, store firewood appropriately, install skirting around raised structures, store water hoses for ready access, and replace pine straw and mulch around plantings with less flammable landscaping materials. 3. Community Clean-up Day Cutting, mowing, pruning** Cut, prune, and mow vegetation in shared community spaces. 4. Driveway Access Culvert installation See that adequate of culverts are installed to allow emergency vehicle access. 5. Road Access Identify needed road improvements As roads are upgraded, widen to minimum standards with at least 50 foot diameter cul de sacs or turn arounds. Proposed Community Wildland Fuel Reduction Priorities Treatment Area Treatment Types Treatment Method(s) 1. Adjacent WUI Lands Reduce hazardous fuels Encourage prescribed burning for private landowners and industrial timberlands particularly adjacent to residential areas. County resolution to state recommending that the Ga Forestry Commission not charge for prescribed burning in WUI areas. Seek grant for WUI mitigation team. P a g e 1 4 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N 2. Railroad Corridors Reduce hazardous fuels Encourage railroads to better maintain their ROW eliminating brush and grass through herbicide and mowing. Maintain firebreaks along ROW adjacent to residential areas. 3. Existing Fire Lines Reduce hazardous fuels Clean and re-harrow existing lines. Proposed Improved Community Wildland Fire Response Priorities 1. Water Sources Dry Hydrants Inspect, maintain and improve access to existing dry hydrants. Add signage along road to mark the hydrants. Locate additional dry hydrants as needed. 2. Fire Stations Equipment Wildland hand tools. Lightweight Wildland PPE Gear. Investigate need for “brush” trucks near communities at risk. 3. Water Sources Drafting equipment Investigate need for additional drafting pumps. 4. Personnel Training Obtain Wildland Fire Suppression training for fire personnel to include S130, S190, and S215. **Actions to be taken by homeowners and community stakeholders Proposed Education and Outreach Priorities 1. Conduct “How to Have a Firewise Home” Workshop for County Residents Set up and conduct a workshop for homeowners that teach the principles of making homes and properties safe from wildfire. Topics for discussion include defensible space, landscaping, building construction, etc. Workshop will be scheduled for evenings or weekends when most homeowners are available and advertised through local media outlets. Distribute materials promoting Firewise practices and planning through local community and governmental meetings. P a g e 1 5 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N 2. Conduct “Firewise” Workshop for Community Leaders Arrange for GFC Firewise Coordinator to work with local community leaders and governmental officials on the importance of “Firewise Planning” in developing ordinances and codes as the county as the need arises. Identified “communities-at-risk” including: Kelly Quarter, Mathews Community Stellaville, and Ogeechee Heights should be sought after for inclusion in the National Firewise Communities Program. 3. Spring Clean-up Event Conduct clean-up event every spring involving the Georgia Forestry Commission, Jefferson County Fire Departments, Cities of Wrens, Louisville, Wadley and local residence of rural Jefferson County. Set up information table with educational materials and refreshments. Initiate the event with a morning briefing by GFC Firewise coordinator and local fire officials detailing plans for the day and safety precautions. Activities to include the following: • Clean flammable vegetative material from roofs and gutters • Trim shrubs and vines to 30 feet away from structures • Trim overhanging limbs • Clean hazardous or flammable debris from adjacent properties 4. Informational Packets Develop and distribute informational packets to be distributed by realtors and insurance agents. Included in the packets are the following: • Be Firewise Around Your Home • Firewise Guide to Landscape and Construction • Firewise Communities USA Bookmarks 5. Wildfire Protection Display Create and exhibit a display for the general public at the local events. Display can be independent or combined with the Georgia Forestry Commission display. 6. Press Invite the local and regional news media to community “Firewise” functions for news coverage and regularly submit press releases documenting wildfire risk improvements in Jefferson County. P a g e 1 6 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N VIII. ACTION PLAN Roles and Responsibilities The following roles and responsibilities have been developed to implement the action plan: Role Responsibility Hazardous Fuels and Structural Ignitability Reduction Jefferson County WUI Fire Council Create this informal team or council comprised of residents, GFC officials, County Fire department officials, a representative from the city and county government and the EMA Director for Jefferson County. Meet periodically to review progress towards mitigation goals, appoint and delegate special activities, work with federal, state, and local officials to assess progress and develop future goals and action plans. Work with residents to implement projects and Firewise activities. Key Messages to focus on 1 Defensible Space and Firewise Landscaping 2 Debris Burning Safety 3 Firewise information for homeowners 4 Prescribed burning benefits Communications objectives 1 Create public awareness for fire danger and defensible space issues 2 Identify most significant human cause fire issues 3 Enlist public support to help prevent these causes 4 Encourage people to employ fire prevention and defensible spaces in their communities. Target Audiences 1 Homeowners 2 Forest Landowners and users 3 Civic Groups 4 School Groups Methods 1 News Releases 2 Personal Contacts 3 Key messages and prevention tips 4 Visuals such as signs, brochures and posters P a g e 1 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N Spring Clean-up Day Event Coordinator Coordinate day’s events and schedule, catering for cookout, guest attendance, and moderate activities the day of the day of the event. Event Treasurer Collect funds from residents to cover food, equipment rentals, and supplies. Publicity Coordinator Advertise event through neighborhood newsletter, letters to officials, and public service announcements (PSAs) for local media outlets. Publicize post-event through local paper and radio PSAs. Work Supervisor Develop volunteer labor force of community residents; develop labor/advisory force from Georgia Forestry Commission, Jefferson County Fire Departments, and Emergency Management Agency. Procure needed equipment and supplies. In cooperation with local city and county officials, develop safety protocol. Supervise work and monitor activities for safety the day of the event. Funding Needs The following funding is needed to implement the action plan: Project Estimated Cost Potential Funding Source(s) 1. Create a minimum of 30 feet of defensible space around structures Varies Residents will supply labor and fund required work on their own properties. 2. Reduce structural ignitability by cleaning flammable vegetation from roofs and gutters; appropriately storing firewood, installing skirting around raised structures, storing water hoses for ready access, replacing pine needles and mulch around plantings with less flammable material. Varies Residents will supply labor and fund required work on their own properties. 3. Amend codes and ordinances to provide better driveway access, increased visibility of house numbers, properly stored firewood, minimum defensible space brush clearance, required Class A roofing materials and skirting around raised structures, planned maintenance of community lots. No Cost To be adopted by city and county government. 4. Spring Cleanup Day Varies Community Business Donations. 5. Fuel Reduction Activities $15 / acre FEMA & USFS Grants P a g e 1 8 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES: As funding is questionable in these times of tight government budgets and economic uncertainty, unconventional means should be identified whereby the need for funding can be reduced or eliminated. Publications / Brochures – • FIREWISE materials are available for cost of shipping only at www.firewise.org. • Another source of mitigation information can be found at www.nfpa.org. • Access to reduced cost or free of charge copy services should be sought whereby publications can be reproduced. • Free of charge public meeting areas should be identified where communities could gather to be educated regarding prevention and firewise principles. Mitigation – • Community Protection Grant: o USFS sponsored prescribed burn program. Communities with at risk properties that lie within 3 miles of the USFS border may apply with the GFC to have their forest land prescribed burned free of charge. • FEMA Mitigation Policy MRR-2-08-01: through GEMA - Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) and Pre Disaster Mitigation (PDM) o To provide technical and financial assistance to local governments to assist in the implementation of long term cost effective hazard mitigation measures. o This policy addresses wildfire mitigation for the purpose of reducing the threat to all-risk structures through creating defensible space, structural protection through the application of ignition resistant construction, and limited hazardous fuels reduction to protect life and property. o With a complete and registered plan (addendum to the State plan) counties can apply for pre- mitigation funding. They will also be eligible for HMGP if the county is declared under a wildfire disaster. • GFC - Plowing and burning assistance can be provided through the Georgia Forestry Commission as a low cost option for mitigation efforts. • Individual Homeowners – • In most cases of structural protection ultimately falls on the responsibility of the community and the homeowner. They will bear the cost; yet they will reap the benefit from properly implemented mitigation efforts. • GEMA Grant - PDM (See above) Ultimately it is our goal to help the communities by identifying the communities threatened with a high risk to wildfire and educate those communities on methods to implement on reducing those risks. P a g e 1 9 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N Assessment Strategy To accurately assess progress and effectiveness for the action plan, the Jefferson County WUI Fire Council will implement the following: • Annual wildfire risk assessment will be conducted to re-assess wildfire hazards and prioritize needed actions. • Mitigation efforts that are recurring (such as mowing, burning, and clearing of defensible space) will be incorporated into an annual renewal of the original action plan. • Mitigation efforts that could not be funded in the requested year will be incorporated into the annual renewal of the original action plan. • Continuing educational and outreach programs will be conducted and assessed for effectiveness. Workshops will be evaluated based on attendance and post surveys that are distributed by mail 1month and 6 months following workshop date. • The Jefferson County WUI Council will publish an annual report detailing mitigation projects initiated and completed, progress for ongoing actions, funds received, funds spent, and in-kind services utilized. The report will include a “state of the community” section that critically evaluates mitigation progress and identifies areas for improvement. Recommendations will be incorporated into the annual renewal of the action plan. • An annual survey will be distributed to residents soliciting information on individual mitigation efforts on their own property defensible space). Responses will be tallied and reviewed at the next Jefferson County WUI Council meeting. Needed actions will be discussed and delegated. This plan should become a working document that is shared by local, state, and federal agencies that will use it to accomplish common goals. An agreed-upon schedule for meeting to review accomplishments, solve problems, and plan for the future should extend beyond the scope of this plan. Without this follow up this plan will have limited value P a g e 2 0 ---PAGE BREAK--- W I L D F I R E P R O T E C T I O N P L A N : A N A C T I O N P L A N F O R W I L D F I R E M I T I G A T I O N P. O. Box 819Macon, GA 312021-800-GA- TREESGaTrees.org The Georgia Forestry Commission provides leadership, service, and education in the protection and conservation of Georgia’s forest resources. An Equal Opportunity Employer and Service Provider P a g e 2 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 GEORGIA DROUGHT MANAGEMENT PLAN 1) DROUGHT DECLARATION PROCESS 2) AGENCIES and ORGANIZATIONS 3) PRE-DROUGHT STRATEGIES 4) DROUGHT RESPONSES 5) DROUGHT INDICATORS and TRIGGERS 6) CLIMATE DIVISIONS MAP March 26, 2003 ---PAGE BREAK--- 2 GEORGIA DROUGHT MANAGEMENT PLAN Preamble The Georgia Drought Management Plan as approved by the Department of Natural Resources Board on March 26, 2003 consists of pre-drought mitigation strategies and drought response strategies. Pre-drought mitigation strategies are measures designed to minimize the potential effect of drought. They are water conservation measures predominantly. Drought response strategies are measures or actions to be implemented during various stages of drought. The Georgia General Assembly and the Board of Natural Resources have previously assigned the Environmental Protection Division director significant drought management responsibilities and mandates. The director also shall have those designated responsibilities and mandates contained herein. Divisions of DNR are required to implement provisions of this plan as soon as practicable. Non-DNR state, federal, and local agencies and other organizations identified herein are encouraged to implement those aspects of the plan identified as appropriate to the entity as soon as practicable. ---PAGE BREAK--- 3 The actions and responses contained in this document are the result of a collaboration of approximately 85 citizens with an interest and expertise in water related matters. These citizens represent a geographical and political cross section of the state, as well as a cross section of business, industry, environmental, and water management. For information about this plan, contact: Bob Kerr, Director Pollution Prevention Assistance Division, DNR Suite 451, 7 Martin Luther King, Jr. Dr. Atlanta, Ga. 30334 [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] fx. [EMAIL REDACTED] (underscore between bob and kerr) Harold Reheis, Director Environmental Protection Division, DNR Suite 1152 East, 2 Martin Luther King, Jr. Dr. Atlanta, Ga. 30334 [PHONE REDACTED] [PHONE REDACTED] fx [EMAIL REDACTED] (underscore between harold and reheis) ---PAGE BREAK--- 4 Section 1) DROUGHT DECLARATION PROCESS The following is the process for declaring drought conditions and responses: 1A): The State Climatologist’s office and EPD will routinely monitor and evaluate stream flows, lake levels, precipitation, groundwater levels, and other climatic indicators that are supplied by several cooperating entities, principally the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, the US Geological Service, and the National Drought Mitigation Center. These indicators reflect the health of the hydrologic system. They are referred to as drought indicators in this document. The indicators for each of Georgia’s nine-climate divisions are described in section six of this document. Each of the nine-climate divisions has several indicators. If any one of the indicators in any one or more of the nine climate divisions reaches or passes a certain prescribed condition for two consecutive months, a preliminary evaluation by the state climatologist and the EPD director is triggered. If the preliminary evaluation indicates the possible need for a drought response declaration for that climate division and all or part of the relative hydrologic regions in and adjacent to that climate division, the director will consult with members of the Drought Response Committee (see 1E) to determine the potential severity of the drought condition(s), and the expected impacts. The director, in consultation with the committee, will make a determination of the appropriate level of response, if any, to be made. Response guidance for each level of drought severity is provided by this plan, but particular drought conditions may require greater or lesser responses than those contained herein. The director and, as appropriate, other members of the committee will notify the local RDC’s, local governments and water supply providers as to the appropriate action to be taken. Press releases will be prepared explaining the situation and state response requirements. The State Climatologist and EPD will continue to monitor the drought indicators for indication of changing conditions, and will act in response to those changing conditions. The director will consult with the Committee as necessary and will keep the Committee apprised of changes in climate conditions. As further explained in the Drought Indicators section of this plan, as conditions improve a conservative approach is to be taken. All of the drought indicators for the climate division should be in a more favorable condition for at least four consecutive months before the director takes action to decrease the level of drought response requirements. ---PAGE BREAK--- 5 1B): Numerous agencies and organizations are tasked in this plan with some level of water resource or water related management responsibilities. EPD and those agencies and organizations shall coordinate closely and share information about their drought or water conservation concerns and solutions. 1C): The Drought Response Committee shall review this plan at least every five years, and after each drought event to evaluate the performance and suitability of the drought indicators, the effect of the pre-drought and drought responses, and to what extent the plan is being followed. Based on this evaluation, the Committee shall make appropriate changes. 1D): The pre-drought strategies contained in this plan are principally water conservation strategies. They should be implemented and followed at all times, not just during a drought situation. The DNR water conservation coordinator, as well as some agencies, RDC’s, local governments, and water supply providers have (or will develop) water conservation plans. Those plans and this drought management plan should be as seamless and non-conflicting as possible. As water conservation plans are developed, they should, at a minimum, reflect the pre-drought strategies of this plan as appropriate to the responsibilities and audience of the planning entity. As those plans are developed, they shall be provided to EPD. If appropriate, this plan shall be modified to reflect the measure(s) contained in those plans. 1E): The director shall convene as necessary a Drought Response Committee. The committee membership shall include the EPD Director as convener and chair, as well as senior managers of DNR’s WRD, P2AD, and CRD and the water conservation coordinator. Also, DCA, GDOA, GEMA, GFC, GW&PCA, OSC, ARC, GUAC, USACE, USGS, USF&WS, one RDC, one NGO, and one representative organization each of the business community and agriculture industry, shall be represented. 1F): This plan recommends incentives and actions that may require funding. Funding requests (grants and/or appropriations) shall be developed by the participating agencies and supported by the committee. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6 Section Agencies and organizations: Acronyms ACCG Association County Commissioners of Georgia ARC Atlanta Regional Commission CE Cooperating Entities CES Cooperative Extension Service CRD Coastal Resources Division, Georgia Department of Natural Resources DCA Department of Community Affairs DNR Department of Natural Resources EPD Environmental Protection Division, Georgia Department of Natural Resources FB Farm Bureau GDHR Georgia Department of Human Resources GDOA Georgia Department of Agriculture GEFA Georgia Environmental Facilities Authority GEMA Georgia Emergency Management Agency GEP Georgia Environmental Partnership GFA Georgia Forestry Association GFC Georgia Forestry Commission GMA Georgia Municipal Association GRWA Georgia Rural Water Association Georgia Soil and Water Conservation Commission GUAC Georgia Urban Agriculture Coalition GW&PCA Georgia Water and Pollution Control Association ME Marine Extension NGO Non-Government Organization OSC Office of the State Climatologist P2AD Pollution Prevention Assistance Division, Georgia Department of Natural Resources RDC Regional Development Center(s) UGA University of Georgia USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USG University System of Georgia USGS U.S. Geologic Survey WRD Wildlife Resources Division, Georgia Department of Natural Resources ---PAGE BREAK--- 7 GEORGIA DROUGHT MANAGEMENT PLAN PRE-DROUGHT STRATEGIES AND DROUGHT RESPONSES SECTION 3 - PRE-DROUGHT STRATEGIES “Pre-drought strategies” are longer-term actions, implemented before a drought, for the purposes of preparedness, mitigation, monitoring, and conservation. “Drought responses” are shorter-term actions, implemented during a drought, according to the level of drought severity. Section 3A: MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL-- PRE-DROUGHT STRATEGIES 1. State actions • Formalize the Drought Response Committee as a means of expediting communications among state, local, and federal agencies and non-governmental entities. [EPD, OSC, CE] • Establish a drought communications system between the state and local governments and water systems. [EPD, OSC] • Provide guidance to the local governments and water supply providers on long-term water supply, conservation and drought contingency planning. [DNR, EPD] • Review the local governments and water supply providers’ conservation and drought contingency plans. [EPD] • Work with the golf course and turf industry to establish criteria for drought-tolerant golf courses. [EPD, P2AD] • Encourage water re-use as opposed to additional withdrawals of raw water. [EPD, P2AD] • Work with local water systems to provide water efficiency education for industry & business. [P2AD, CES] • Through the Georgia Environmental Partnership, conduct voluntary water audits for businesses that use water for production of a product or service. [P2AD] • Identify vulnerable water dependent industries (e.g. poultry, seafood, urban horticulture), and, as necessary and as funding is available, fund research to help determine impacts and improve predictive capabilities. As a long-term strategy, develop programs to assist communities impacted by drought effects on vulnerable industries. [P2AD, USG, CE, GDCA] ---PAGE BREAK--- 8 • Develop criteria for a voluntary certification program for landscape professionals (landscapers, golf course mangers, irrigation installers). [GUAC, EPD] · The DNR water conservation coordinator is charged with developing and implementing a statewide water conservation program to encourage local and regional conservation measures. [EPD, DNR conservation coordinator, CE] · Develop and implement an incentive program to encourage more efficient use of existing water supplies. [DNR, EPD, GDCA] · At all times, including non-drought conditions, unless further restricted by the director or local authorities, outdoor watering shall follow the schedule specified in Section 4A. Exemptions to such schedule will be in accordance with Section 4A. 2. Local/regional actions · Develop and implement a drought management and conservation plan, incorporating as many of the actions as are appropriate to the local or regional entity • Assess and classify drought vulnerability of individual water systems # of days/weeks supply remaining under certain drought conditions, water source, and soil moisture). • Define pre-determined drought responses, with outdoor watering restrictions being at least as restrictive as the state minimum requirements listed below. • Establish a drought communications system from local governments and water supply systems to the public. ---PAGE BREAK--- 9 SECTION 3B: AGRICULTURE PRE-DROUGHT STRATEGIES 1. Farmer Irrigation Education • Recommend that farmers attend classes in best management practices and conservation irrigation, prior to receiving a permit, (ii) using a new irrigation system, or (iii) irrigating for a coming announced drought season. [EPD, OSC, CE] • Provide for additional continuing education opportunities for farmers throughout the year. [CES] • Distribute to existing permit holders and encourage the use of best management practices, conservation irrigation, efficient use of irrigation systems, and the Cooperative Extension Service’s water conservation guidelines. [EPD, P2AD, CES] • Collaborate with Cooperative Extension Service to develop web-based information directly linked to Stripling Irrigation Research Park and supporting faculty, the Hooks- Hanner Center, and other research facilities. [EPD] • Develop electronic database for communicating with permit holders. [EPD, CE] • Encourage the development and distribution of information on water efficient irrigation techniques. [EPD, P2AD, CES] 2. Field / Crop Type Management • Encourage the use of more drought resistant crops, subject to market conditions. [CES, CE] • Encourage the use of innovative cultivation techniques to reduce the amount of water needed or lost by a crop during summer. [CES, CE] • The appropriate agencies should conduct crop irrigation efficiency studies. [CES, UGA] • Provide farmers with normal year, real time irrigation, irrigation scheduling, and crop evaporation/transpiration information. [EPD, OSC, CES] • Monitor soil moisture and provide real time data to farmers. [EPD, CES, OSC] 3. Irrigation Equipment Management • For new systems, encourage the installation of water efficient irrigation technology. [EPD, CE, CES, ---PAGE BREAK--- 10 • For older systems, recommend retrofitting with newer and better irrigation technology travelers or water cannons replaced by spray on drops or under plastic drip irrigation for vegetable crops). Set goal for complete overhaul in 5 to 7 years. Recommend updating any system over ten years old. [EPD, CE, CES, • Provide information and encourage farmers to take advantage of available financial incentives (tax credits, BMP cost share programs, buy-back programs, etc.) for retrofitting and updating older or less efficient systems. Prepare and distribute a list of such incentives. FB] • Recommend irrigation system efficiency audits every five to seven years. CES, EPD] 4. Government Programs • Improve irrigation permit data to create a high degree of confidence in the information on ownership, location, system type, water source, pump capacity, and acres irrigated for every irrigation system in Georgia. Use this information to determine which watersheds and aquifers will be strongly affected by agricultural water use, especially in droughts. [EPD, CES] • Improve on the agriculture irrigation water measurement and accounting statewide. [EPD, • Improve communications and cooperation among farmers and relevant state and Federal agencies regarding available assistance during drought conditions. [EPD, GDOA, GEFA] • Support legislation and efforts (research, loan opportunities, and infrastructure improvements) to enhance the ability of farmers to secure adequate water supplies during drought conditions. For instance, establish low interest loan program for construction of on-farm off-stream storage facilities (ponds for surface water irrigation). [EPD, DNR, GEFA, CES, CE, ---PAGE BREAK--- 11 SECTION 3C: WATER QUALITY, FLORA, AND FAUNA PRE-DROUGHT STRATEGIES 1. State actions • Encourage all responsible agencies to promote voluntary water conservation through activities such as: ° Developing and distributing information public service announcements) to all user groups about: - Efficient irrigation methods and techniques, - Efficient home water use, - Available services audits, literature, technical information including evaporation – transpiration rates, and other information). ° Recommending and explore providing for incentives, or requiring installation and use of automatic rain shut-off devices for irrigation systems. ° Providing for and conducting “Home and Farm Assist” water conservation audits. ° Encourage and explore providing for incentives for irrigation users to have irrigation system audits performed. ° Providing updated information and incentives for water efficient/low impact landscaping. ° Establishing conservation pricing rate structures. ° Encourage agriculture and industry to maximize water use efficiency at all levels of production and services. [EPD, P2AD] • Monitor streamflow and precipitation at selected locations on critical streams [USGS, EPD,] • Monitor water quality parameters, such as temperature and dissolved oxygen at selected critical streams [USGS, EPD] • Provide the streamflow and water-quality data in real time for use by drought managers; and work with drought managers to optimize information delivery and use [USGS, EPD] • Evaluate the impact of water withdrawals on flow patterns, and the impact of wastewater discharges on water quality during drought [USGS, EPD, USF&WS, WRD] • Investigate indicators and develop tools to analyze drought impacts for waterways such as: - Coastal ecosystems (considering flows, flooding periods, salinity, and previous season’s spawning or harvest success of sensitive species) - Thermal refuges such as the Flint River - Trout streams [CRD, WRD, ME, UGA] ---PAGE BREAK--- 12 • Improve the agencies capabilities and resources to monitor land-disturbing activities that might result in erosion and sedimentation violations. This capability is important because, during drought, dry soil surfaces can increase the rate of runoff while low stream-flows make streams more vulnerable to the effects of storm-water runoff. [EPD, CES] • Identify funding mechanisms and develop rescue and reintroduction protocols for threatened and endangered species during extreme events. [USFWS, WRD] • Develop and execute an effort to identify pollutant load reduction opportunities by wastewater discharge permit holders below levels in wastewater discharge permits). These reductions will be implemented during drought flow periods as a voluntary commitment on the part of permit holders. [EPD] • Develop and execute an effort to identify opportunities for industry to decrease water use during drought periods use less water in producing products and services during drought, and thereby potentially reducing quantity of wastewater discharged). Incentives ought to be considered to encourage voluntary participation. [P2AD] • Evaluate the impact of water withdrawals on flow regimes and the impact of wastewater discharges on water quality during drought. [EPD, USGS, CE] • Develop and promote implementation of sustainable lawn care programs based on selected BMPs and/or integrated pest management practices. Educate landscape professionals and individual homeowners on proper application of pesticides and fertilizers and conservation of water in order to reduce effects on water quality. The target audiences among landscape professionals include lawn maintenance contractors, landscape installation contractors, golf course superintendents, commercial lawn care providers and retail garden centers; education could be provided as part of a voluntary certification program for landscape professionals (see pre- drought M&I strategies). [P2AD, GUAC, GDOA, UGA, CES, CE] • Encourage protection and restoration of vegetated stream buffers, including incentives for property owners to maintain buffers wider than the minimum required by state law. [EPD, CE] • Provide for protection of recharge areas through measures including land purchase or acquisition of easements. [EPD, CE] • Encourage and explore wildland fire mitigation measures (such as pre-suppression firebreaks, fuel reduction burning, mowing, and outdoor fire safety measures for homesteads and farms). [GFC, GFA] • Enhance programs to assist landowners and farmers with outdoor burning. [GFC, GFA] ---PAGE BREAK--- 13 PRE-DROUGHT STRATEGIES AND DROUGHT RESPONSES SECTION 4: DROUGHT RESPONSES “Pre-drought strategies” are longer-term actions, implemented before a drought, for the purposes of preparedness, mitigation, monitoring, and conservation. “Drought responses” are shorter-term actions, implemented during a drought, according to the level of drought severity. Section 4A: MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL DROUGHT RESPONSES 1. Outdoor Watering Reduction Schedule: · Outdoor watering other than those exempted activities is to occur only on scheduled days · Prior to onset of declared drought conditions, outdoor water use can occur during any hours on the scheduled days. · During declared drought conditions, outdoor water use will only be allowed during scheduled hours on the scheduled days. “Scheduled days are defined as follows”: · Odd-numbered addresses may water on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Sundays. · Even-numbered or unnumbered addresses may water on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Saturdays. “Scheduled weekend day is defined as follows”: · Odd-numbered addresses may water on Sundays. · Even-numbered or unnumbered addresses may water on Saturdays. Schedule for Outdoor Water Use during Declared Drought Response Levels: Declared Drought Responses: Level One: Water on scheduled days - 12 midnight to 10 a.m - and - 4 p.m. to 12 midnight. Declared Drought Response: Level Two: Water on scheduled days - 12 midnight to 10 a.m. Declared Drought Response: Level Three: Water on scheduled weekend day - 12 midnight to 10 a.m. Declared Drought Response: Level Four: Complete outdoor water use ban ---PAGE BREAK--- 14 1a. Landscape Irrigation – Established Landscapes Residential, commercial, industrial, governmental, and recreational landscapes: ° Established Landscapes using small capacity wells not requiring EPD water withdrawal permits for groundwater use are exempt from the above schedule. ° EPD will grant exemptions from the above schedule for use of recycled treated wastewater as determined on a case-by-case basis by EPD. - Irrigation of personal food gardens is exempt from restrictions. - Irrigation of landscapes (turf, ornamentals, annuals, and containerized plants) follows declared drought response levels schedule (above). 1b. Landscape Irrigation – Newly Installed Landscapes (in place less than 30 days) Residential, commercial, industrial, governmental, and recreational landscapes - Irrigation of landscapes (turf, ornamentals, annuals, and containerized plants) allowed any day of the week, during allowed hours for the level in effect, for a period of 30 days following installation. After this 30-day period, irrigation of newly installed landscapes follows schedule for established landscapes. - For landscapes installed by licensed professionals, please see commercial exemptions below. 1c. Golf Courses - Irrigation of fairways shall follow landscape irrigation schedules above, for unnumbered addresses. o Golf course using small capacity wells not requiring EPD water withdrawal permits for groundwater use are exempt from the above schedule o EPD will grant exemptions from the above schedule for use of recycled treated wastewater as determined on a case-by-case basis by EPD. - Irrigation of greens and tees are exempt from restrictions. 1d. Other Restricted Outdoor Water Uses Follow Basic schedule for Levels One and Two: Listed Activities are prohibited for Levels Three and Four. - Filling installed swimming pools (except when necessary for health care or structural integrity) - Washing vehicles, such as cars, boats, trailers, motorbikes, airplanes, golf carts - Washing buildings or structures (except for immediate fire protection) - Non-commercial fund-raisers, such as car washes - Using water for ornamental purposes, such as fountains, reflecting pools, and waterfalls (Except when necessary to support aquatic life) Basic schedule for Level One: Prohibited for Levels Two, Three, and Four. - Washing hard surfaces, such as streets, gutters, sidewalks, driveways (Except when necessary for public health and safety) Prohibited during all Levels - Using hydrants for any purpose other than firefighting, public health, safety, or flushing. ---PAGE BREAK--- 15 ---PAGE BREAK--- 16 2: Commercial Uses Exempt from State-Mandated Outdoor Water Use Restrictions - Professional licensed landscapers, golf course contractors, and sports turf landscapers: during installation and 30 days following installation only. Professional landscapers must be licensed for commercial exemptions to apply. - Irrigation contractors: during installation and as needed for proper maintenance and adjustments only - Sod producers - Ornamental growers - Fruit and vegetable growers - Retail garden centers - Hydro-seeding - Power-washing - Construction sites to re-implement vegetation after earth moving) - Producers of food and fiber - Car washes - Other activities essential to daily business Prudent water management will be expected of all commercial uses. Note that some of these state allowed exemptions may be curtailed in drought response levels 3&4 by locally imposed restrictions 3: Local and Regional Options: In the event of an emergency at the local water supply provider or government level, contact EPD and GEMA for assistance as appropriate. In addition to the mandated requirements outlined above, local and regional authorities retain the option of going beyond the State’s minimum provisions and specifying additional pre-drought strategies or drought responses within their jurisdiction. Action items to consider at the local/regional level include, but are not limited to, the following: developing system integration and interconnection to reduce drought vulnerability, placing additional water use restrictions on specific commercial uses, and placing additional restrictions on outdoor watering. Water conservation and drought mitigation strategies should include conservation pricing. Local governments and water supply providers are strongly encouraged to evaluate a number of conservation pricing options and select the one that most readily satisfies their goals for water conservation. DNR’s Water Conservation Manager, EPD and P2AD, as well as DCA, ARC and the RDC's can provide assistance in this effort. • Non-conservation pricing: Defined, as decreasing or flat pricing as quantity used increases - should be eliminated. ---PAGE BREAK--- 17 • Conservation pricing: Defined as; 1) rates in which the unit price increases as the quantity used increases – or- 2) seasonal rates or excess-use surcharges to reduce peak demands during summer months - should replace non-conservation pricing. • The conservation pricing base price should be sufficient to cover the costs of operating and maintaining the system. Income above this amount derived from increased charges to heavy users should be used to fund incentive programs to effect efficiency in water use. ---PAGE BREAK--- 18 Section 4B: Agriculture Drought Response: - Implement the Flint River Drought Protection Act whenever severe drought conditions are predicted in the Flint River Basin. Measure and improve the effectiveness of the protective activities called for in the Act. [EPD] ---PAGE BREAK--- 19 Section 4C: WATER QUALITY, FLORA, AND FAUNA DROUGHT RESPONSES 1. Declared Drought Response Level One: a. State actions • Maintain minimal water quality parameters by: ° Providing special releases from reservoirs and implementing innovative reservoir management to meet critical needs alternative release patterns, controlling temperature of releases, changing storage purposes/authorized uses). (Implement only when not in violation or conflict with Federal Energy Regulatory Commission or Congressional authorizations.) ° Reducing water withdrawals through implementation of the municipal and industrial section of this drought management plan. ° Encouraging utilities and local governments to increase surveillance for sewer spills and leaks that may be more apparent as drought conditions worsen. [EPD, CE] • Implement voluntary pollutant load reduction opportunities below levels in wastewater discharge permits) when flows are less than the flow upon which discharge permit limits were established. [EPD] • Implement industrial water reduction opportunities previously identified use less water in producing products and services during drought, and thereby reducing quantity of water in waste stream). [P2AD, EPD] b. Local /regional actions • Require water conservation, building on on-going water conservation and education during non-drought periods and drawing on GUAC as a resource for urban irrigation. In addition to outdoor watering restrictions specified for M&I users, conservation- related drought responses at the regional or local level could include: ° Running public service announcements about proper watering techniques, frequency. ° Providing daily evaporation-transpiration rates for irrigation scheduling. • Increase fire prevention measures during drought. [GFC, GFA, CES] 2. Declared Drought Response Levels Two through Four • Continue Level one measures. • Implement rescue and reintroduction of threatened and endangered species as previously identified thresholds are met. [USFWS, WRD] • Evaluate pre-drought protocols and enhance if necessary to minimize any future drought impacts to threatened and endangered species. [USFWS, WRD] ---PAGE BREAK--- 20 SECTION 5 DROUGHT INDICATORS AND TRIGGERS March 24, 2003 5A): Drought Indicators: Drought indicators are variables that help to detect, characterize, and monitor changing climatic and drought conditions. This plan will use four primary indicators: precipitation, reservoir levels, groundwater levels, and streamflows. Indicators are selected for each of the nine climate divisions (CDs) in Georgia. CD Drought Indicators 1 SPI-3, SPI-6, SPI-12 Lake Allatoona Chattooga River at Summerville 2 SPI-3, SPI-6, SPI-12 Lake Lanier, Lake Allatoona Etowah River at Canton Chestatee River near Dahlonega 3 SPI-3, SPI-6, SPI-12 Lake Hartwell, Clark Hill Broad River near Bell Chattahoochee River near Cornelia 4 SPI-3, SPI-6, SPI-12 Flint River at Montezuma 5 SPI-3, SPI-6, SPI-12 Groundwater Wells Oconee River at Dublin Ocmulgee River at Macon 6 SPI-3, SPI-6, SPI-12 Lake Hartwell, Clark Hill Ogeechee River near Eden 7 SPI-3, SPI-6, SPI-12 Groundwater Wells Spring Creek near Iron City Ichawaynochaway Creek at Milford 8 SPI-3, SPI-6, SPI-12 Alapaha River at Statenville 9 SPI-3, SPI-6, SPI-12 Satilla River at Atkinson PRECIPITATION Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI-3, 6, 12) (Precipitation during the last 3, 6, and 12 months compared to the same months historically) RESERVOIR LEVELS Lake Allatoona Lake Lanier Lake Hartwell Clark Hill GROUNDWATER LEVELS CD5 wells: 11AA01, 21T001 CD7 wells: 13L180, 12M017, 11K003, 13J004, 12K014, 10G313, 08K001, 08G001, 09F520 ---PAGE BREAK--- 21 STREAMFLOWS Chattooga River at Summerville (02398000) Etowah River at Canton (02392000) Chestatee River near Dahlonega (02333500) Broad River near Bell (02192000) Chattahoochee River near Cornelia (02331600) Flint River at Montezuma (02349500) Oconee River at Dublin (02223500) Ocmulgee River at Macon (02213000) Ogeechee River near Eden (02202500) Spring Creek near Iron City (02357000) Ichawaynochaway Creek at Milford (02353500) Alapaha River at Statenville (02317500) Satilla River at Atkinson (02228000) ---PAGE BREAK--- 22 5B): DROUGHT TRIGGERS • Drought triggers are specific values of indicators that help to determine when each level of drought response should begin or end. This plan contains four levels of increasing severity. A level is triggered when an indicator value reaches a certain percentile. By using percentiles, multiple indicators can be compared and combined within a consistent framework. Additional triggers are developed for reservoir levels based on zones, and streamflows based on average annual discharge (AAD) and 7Q10 (M7Q10). (Analytic procedures are described in Section 5C.) • Triggers are used for both going into a drought and coming out of a drought. Note that triggers do not automatically invoke a level and required response. Rather, the triggers prompt an evaluation (described in Section IA) about the possible need to declare a certain drought response level and take appropriate measures. • Going into a drought: When any one of the triggers for any one of the CDs is at a more severe level for at least two consecutive months, then an evaluation is conducted about whether to increase the level of response. • Getting out of a drought: When all of the triggers for that CD are at less severe level for at least four consecutive months, then an evaluation is conducted about whether to decrease the level of response. Conditions Percentiles for All Triggers: Precipitation, Reservoir Levels, Groundwater Levels, Streamflows Level 1 0.20 – 0.35 Level 2 0.10 – 0.20 Level 3 0.05 – 0.10 Level 4 0.00 – 0.05 Conditions Reservoirs Levels: Rule Curves Level 1 < Zone 1 Level 2 < Zone 2 Level 3 < Zone 3 Level 4 < Zone 4 Conditions Streamflows: AAD / M7Q10 Level 1 < 80/60/50 % AAD Level 2 < M7Q10 + (2/3 ? ) Level 3 < M7Q10 + (1/3 ? ) Level 4 < M7Q10 ---PAGE BREAK--- 23 5C: ANALYTIC PROCEDURES FOR INDICATORS AND TRIGGERS The four levels of this plan were based on percentiles, relative to each month. This approach was designed to provide statistical comparability among indicators, temporal and spatial consistency, and ease of interpretation. For instance, percentiles can be related to probabilities of occurrence, and used to compare current conditions with historic conditions. The indicators were selected through an analysis of several hundred combinations, using actual data, to generate the triggering sequences that would have occurred historically. These sequences were then compared to retrospective assessments of conditions in each of the climate divisions, and in each of the sectors of municipal and industrial, agriculture, and environmental, to determine the indicators and triggers that would have performed the best for the periods before, during, and after a drought. To transform indicator data to percentiles, the following procedures were used: • For precipitation, percentiles were calculated directly from the SPI value, which is a statistical Z-score, for each climate division. The SPI-3, and -12 represents total precipitation during a 3, 6, and 12 month period, relative to those same months historically. Percentiles can also be determined by fitting a gamma distribution to the long-term record, and then determining 3, 6, and 12-month anomalies, relative to the historic record. • For reservoir levels, percentiles were calculated using an empirical cumulative distribution function, which is a ranking procedure using the historic record of data, analyzed by each month. In addition, reservoir triggers were based on reservoir rule curves, and levels were associated with each of the zones. • For groundwater, percentiles were calculated from U.S.G.S. duration analyses for probabilities of exceedance, using detrended data, and triggers were based on the most severe level for a majority of the selected wells. • For streamflows, percentiles were calculated from empirical cumulative distribution functions, using long-term and equivalent records of average flow data, analyzed by each month. In addition to percentiles, an algorithm using average annual discharge (AAD) and 7Q10 (M7Q10) was used for streamflow triggers. Here, delta is the difference between 80/60/50% AAD and M7Q10, and 80/60/50% refers to 80%AAD for January through April, 60%AAD for May, June, and December, and 50%AAD for July through November. Through evaluations of the drought plan and its performance (Section IC, it is likely that indicators, trigger levels, data sources, and calculation methods may change. This drought plan is designed to remain flexible, and to accommodate procedures that would provide the most useful guidance and ability to minimize the adverse impacts of drought. ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County Emergency Management Agency Emergency Operations Plan Plan Approved: 19-FEB-13 Revised: 14-AUG-14 ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN Local Resolution Record of Revisions Distribution List TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface 1 Basic Plan I. Introduction 4 Summary Purpose Scope and Applicability Key Concepts II. Planning Assumptions and Considerations 8 Emergency Declaration Process Flow Chart III. Roles and Responsibilities 12 Local Government Responsibilities Emergency Support Functions Nongovernmental and Volunteer Organizations Private Sector Citizen Involvement Citizen Corps Response Flow Chart Recovery Flow Chart IV. Concept of Operations 18 Phases of Emergency Management V. Direction and Control 20 Continuity of Government/Continuity of Operations VI. Incident Management Actions 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- Services and Resources Commitment of Services and Resources Local Involvement State Involvement Standard Operating Procedures Emergency Operations Local Responsibilities Response Flow Chart Recovery Flow Chart VII. Plan Development and Maintenance 25 Plan Maintenance EOP Supporting Documents National Incident Management System State and Local emergency Operations Plans Hazard Mitigation Plans Private Sector Plans Nongovernmental and Volunteer Organization Plans Planning and Operations Procedures Emergency Support Functions ESF 1 - Transportation 29 ESF 2 - Communications 36 ESF 3 - Public Works and Engineering 43 ESF 4 - Firefighting 52 ESF 5 - Emergency Management Services 60 ESF 6 - Mass Care, Housing and Human Services 71 ESF 7 - Resource Support 79 ESF 8 - Public Health and Medical Services 87 ESF 9 - Search and Rescue 95 ESF 10 - Hazardous Materials 105 ESF 11 - Agriculture and Natural Resources 113 ESF 12 - Energy 123 ESF 13 - Public Safety and Security Services 132 ESF 14 - Long-Term Recovery and Mitigation 144 ESF 15 - External Affairs 151 Appendices ---PAGE BREAK--- A. Acronyms 160 B. Authorities and References 161 C. Emergency Support Function Activation Checklist 162 D. Glossary 163 E. ESF Matrix of Primary and Support Agencies 168 F. ESF Summary of Responsibilities 170 G. Area Map 227 H. Map of School Safety Coordinator Areas 228 I. Hazmat Facilities 229 J. Emergency Shelter 231 Agency Contacts 236 ---PAGE BREAK--- PREFACE This Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) describes the management and coordination of resources and personnel during periods of major emergency. This comprehensive local emergency operations plan is developed to ensure mitigation and preparedness, appropriate response and timely recovery from natural and man made hazards which may affect residents of Jefferson County. This plan supersedes the Emergency Operations Plan dated from old eLEOP. It incorporates guidance from the Georgia Emergency Management Agency (GEMA) as well as lessons learned from disasters and emergencies that have threatened Jefferson County. The Plan will be updated at the latest, every four years. The plan: Defines emergency response in compliance with the State-mandated Emergency Operations Plan process. Establishes emergency response policies that provide Departments and Agencies with guidance for the coordination and direction of municipal plans and procedures. Provides a basis for unified training and response exercises. The plan consists of the following components: The Basic Plan describes the structure and processes comprising a county approach to incident management designed to integrate the efforts of municipal governments, the private sector, and non-governmental organizations. The Basic Plan includes the: purpose, situation, assumptions, concept of operations, organization, assignment of responsibilities, administration, logistics, planning and operational activities. Appendices provide other relevant supporting information, including terms, definitions, and authorities. Emergency Support Function Annexes detail the missions, policies, structures, and responsibilities of County agencies for coordinating resource and programmatic support to municipalities during Incidents of Critical Significance. Support Annexes prescribe guidance and describe functional processes and administrative requirements necessary to ensure efficient and effective implementation of incident management objectives. Incident Annexes address contingency or hazard situations requiring specialized application of the EOP. The Incident Annexes describe the missions, policies, responsibilities, and coordination processes that govern the interaction of public and private entities engaged in incident management and emergency response operations across a spectrum of potential hazards. Due to security precautions and changing nature of their operational procedures, these Annexes, their supporting plans, and operational supplements are published separately. Jefferson 1 Preface ---PAGE BREAK--- y The following is a summary of the 15 Emergency Support Functions: Transportation: Support and assist municipal, county, private sector, and voluntary organizations requiring transportation for an actual or potential Incident of Critical Significance. 1. Communications: Ensures the provision of communications support to municipal, county, and private-sector response efforts during an Incident of Critical Significance. 2. Public Works and Engineering: Coordinates and organizes the capabilities and resources of the municipal and county governments to facilitate the delivery of services, technical assistance, engineering expertise, construction management, and other support to prevent, prepare for, respond to, and/or recover from an Incident of Critical Significance. 3. Firefighting: Enable the detection and suppression of wild-land, rural, and urban fires resulting from, or occurring coincidentally with an Incident of Critical Significance. 4. Emergency Management Services: Responsible for supporting overall activities of the County Government for County incident management. 5. Mass Care, Housing and Human Services: Supports County-wide, municipal, and non-governmental organization efforts to address non-medical mass care, housing, and human services needs of individuals and/or families impacted by Incidents of Critical Significance. 6. Resource Support: Supports volunteer services, County agencies, and municipal governments tracking, providing, and/or requiring resource support before, during, and/or after Incidents of Critical Significance. 7. Public Health and Medical Services: Provide the mechanism for coordinated County assistance to supplement municipal resources in response to public health and medical care needs (to include veterinary and/or animal health issues when appropriate) for potential or actual Incidents of Critical Significance and/or during a developing potential health and medical situation. 8. Search and Rescue: Rapidly deploy components of the National US Response System to provide specialized life-saving assistance to municipal authorities during an Incident of Critical Significance. 9. Hazardous Materials: Coordinate County support in response to an actual or potential discharge and/or uncontrolled release of oil or hazardous materials during Incidents of Critical Significance. 10. Agriculture and Natural Resources: supports County and authorities and other agency efforts to address: Provision of nutrition assistance; control and eradication of an outbreak of a highly contagious or economically devastating animal/zoonotic 11. Jefferson 2 Preface ---PAGE BREAK--- g y g y g disease; assurance of food safety and food security and; protection of natural and cultural resources and historic properties. Energy: Restore damaged energy systems and components during a potential of actual Incident of Critical Significance. 12. Public Safety and Security Services: Integrates County public safety and security capabilities and resources to support the full range of incident management activities associated with potential or actual Incidents of Critical Significance. 13. Long Term Recovery and Mitigation: Provides a framework for County Government support to municipal governments, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector designed to enable community recovery from the long-term consequences of an Incident of Critical Significance. 14. External Affairs: Ensures that sufficient County assets are deployed to the field during a potential or actual Incident of Critical Significance to provide accurate, coordinated, and timely information to affected audiences, including governments, media, the private sector, and the populace. 15. Jefferson 3 Preface ---PAGE BREAK--- BASIC PLAN I. INTRODUCTION Summary This plan establishes a framework for emergency management planning and response to: prevent emergency situations; reduce vulnerability during disasters; establish capabilities to protect residents from effects of crisis; respond effectively and efficiently to actual emergencies; and provide for rapid recovery from any emergency or disaster affecting the local jurisdiction and Jefferson County. This Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) is predicated on the National Incident Management System (NIMS) which integrates the capabilities and resources of various municipal jurisdictions, incident management and emergency response disciplines, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and the private sector into a cohesive, coordinated, and seamless framework for incident management. The EOP, using the NIMS, is an all-hazards plan that provides the structure and mechanisms for policy and operational coordination for incident management. Consistent with the model provided in the NIMS, the EOP can be partially or fully implemented in the context of a threat, anticipation of a significant event, or the response to a significant event. Selective implementation through the activation of one or more of the systems components allows maximum flexibility in meeting the unique operational and information-sharing requirements of the situation at hand and enabling effective interaction between various entities. The EOP, as the core operational plan for incident management, establishes county-level coordinating structures, processes, and protocols that will be incorporated into certain existing interagency incident- or hazard-specific plans (such as the Hurricane Plan) that is designed to implement specific statutory authorities and responsibilities of various departments and agencies in particular contingency. Purpose The purpose of the EOP is to establish a comprehensive, countywide, all-hazards approach to incident management across a spectrum of activities including prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery. The EOP incorporates best practices and procedures from various incident management disciplines - homeland security, emergency management, law enforcement, firefighting, hazardous materials response, public works, public health, emergency medical services, and responder and recovery worker health and safety - and integrates them into a unified coordinating structure. The EOP provides the framework for interaction with municipal governments; the private sector; and NGOs in the context of incident prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery activities. It describes capabilities and resources and establishes responsibilities, operational processes, and protocols to help protect from natural and manmade hazards; save lives; protect public health, safety, property, and the environment; and reduce adverse consequences and disruptions. Finally, the EOP serves as the foundation for the development of detailed supplemental plans and procedures to effectively and efficiently implement incident management activities and assistance in the context of specific types of incidents. The EOP, using the NIMS, establishes mechanisms to: Jefferson 4 Basic Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- g Maximize the integration of incident-related prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery activities; Improve coordination and integration of County, municipal, private-sector, and nongovernmental organization partners; Maximize efficient utilization of resources needed for effective incident management and Critical Infrastructure/Key Resources protection and restoration; Improve incident management communications and increase situational awareness across jurisdictions and between the public and private sectors; Facilitate emergency mutual aid and emergency support to municipal governments; Provide a proactive and integrated response to catastrophic events; and Address linkages to other incident management and emergency response plans developed for specific types of incidents or hazards. A number of plans are linked to the EOP in the context of disasters or emergencies, but remain as stand-alone documents in that they also provide detailed protocols for responding to routine incidents that normally are managed by County agencies without the need for supplemental coordination. The EOP also incorporates other existing emergency response and incident management plans (with appropriate modifications and revisions) as integrated components, operational supplements, or supporting tactical plans. This plan consists of the following components: Scope and Applicability The EOP covers the full range of complex and constantly changing requirements in anticipation of or in response to threats or acts of terrorism, major disasters, and other emergencies. The EOP also provides the basis to initiate long-term community recovery and mitigation activities. The EOP establishes interagency and multi-jurisdictional mechanisms for involvement in and coordination of, incident management operations. This plan distinguishes between incidents that require County coordination, termed disasters or emergencies, and the majority of incidents that are handled by responsible jurisdictions or agencies through other established authorities and existing plans. In addition, the EOP: Recognizes and incorporates the various jurisdictional and functional authorities of departments and agencies; municipal governments; and private-sector organizations in incident management. Jefferson 5 Basic Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- Details the specific incident management roles and responsibilities of the departments and agencies involved in incident management as defined in relevant statutes and directives. Establishes the multi-agency organizational structures and processes required to implement the authorities, roles, and responsibilities for incident management. This plan is applicable to all departments and agencies that may be requested to provide assistance or conduct operations in the context of actual or potential disasters or emergencies. Disasters or emergencies are high-impact events that require a coordinated and effective response by an appropriate combination of County, municipal, private-sector, and nongovernmental entities in order to save lives, minimize damage, and provide the basis for long-term community recovery and mitigation activities. Key Concepts This section summarizes key concepts that are reflected throughout the EOP. Systematic and coordinated incident management, including protocols for: Coordinated action; Alert and notification; Mobilization of County resources to augment existing municipal capabilities; Operating under differing threats or threat levels; and Integration of crisis and consequence management functions. Proactive notification and deployment of resources in anticipation of or in response to catastrophic events in coordination and collaboration with municipal governments and private entities when possible. Organizing interagency efforts to minimize damage, restore impacted areas to pre- incident conditions if feasible, and/or implement programs to mitigate vulnerability to future events. Coordinating worker safety and health, private-sector involvement, and other activities that are common to the majority of incidents (see Support Annexes). Organizing ESFs to facilitate the delivery of critical resources, assets, and assistance. Departments and agencies are assigned to lead or support ESFs based on authorities, resources, and capabilities. Providing mechanisms for vertical and horizontal coordination, communications, and information sharing in response to threats or incidents. These mechanisms Jefferson 6 Basic Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- g facilitate coordination among municipal entities and the County Government, as well as between the public and private sectors. Facilitating support to County departments and agencies acting under the requesting department or agencys own authorities. Developing detailed supplemental operations, tactical, and hazard-specific contingency plans and procedures. Providing the basis for coordination of interdepartmental and municipal planning, training, exercising, assessment, coordination, and information exchange. Jefferson 7 Basic Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- II. PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS The EOP is based on the planning assumptions and considerations presented in this section. Incidents are typically managed at the lowest possible organizational and jurisdictional level. Incident management activities will be initiated and conducted using the principles contained in the NIMS and the ICS. The combined expertise and capabilities of government at all levels, the private sector, and nongovernmental organizations will be required to prevent, prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters and emergencies. Disasters and emergencies require the Jefferson County Emergency Management Agency to coordinate operations and/or resources, and may: Occur at any time with little or no warning in the context of a general or specific threat or hazard; Require significant information-sharing at the unclassified and classified levels across multiple jurisdictions and between the public and private sectors; Involve single or multiple jurisdictions; Have significant regional impact and/or require significant regional information sharing, resource coordination, and/or assistance; Span the spectrum of incident management to include prevention, preparedness, response, and recovery; Involve multiple, highly varied hazards or threats on a regional scale; Result in numerous casualties; fatalities; displaced people; property loss; disruption of normal life support systems, essential public services, and basic infrastructure; and significant damage to the environment; Impact critical infrastructures across sectors; Overwhelm capabilities of municipal governments, and private-sector infrastructure owners and operators; Attract a sizeable influx of independent, spontaneous volunteers and supplies; Require extremely short-notice asset coordination and response timelines; and Require prolonged, sustained incident management operations and support activities. Jefferson 8 Basic Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- Top priorities for incident management are to: Save lives and protect the health and safety of the public, responders, and recovery workers; Ensure security of the county; Prevent an imminent incident, including acts of terrorism, from occurring; Protect and restore critical infrastructure and key resources; Conduct law enforcement investigations to resolve the incident, apprehend the perpetrators, and collect and preserve evidence for prosecution and/or attribution; Protect property and mitigate the damage and impact to individuals, communities, and the environment; and Facilitate recovery of individuals, families, businesses, governments, and the environment. Deployment of resources and incident management actions during an actual or potential terrorist incident are conducted in coordination with the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Departments and agencies at all levels of government and certain NGOs, such as the American Red Cross, may be required to deploy to disaster areas or emergency events on short notice to provide timely and effective mutual aid and/or intergovernmental assistance. The degree of County involvement in incident operations depends largely upon the specific authority or jurisdiction. Other factors that may be considered include: The municipal needs and/or requests for external support, or ability to manage the incident; The economic ability of the affected entity to recover from the incident; The type or location of the incident; The severity and magnitude of the incident; and The need to protect the public health or welfare or the environment. Departments and agencies support these mission in accordance with authorities and guidance and are expected to provide: Initial and/or ongoing response, when warranted, under their own authorities and funding; Jefferson 9 Basic Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- Alert, notification, pre-positioning, and timely delivery of resources to enable the management of potential and actual disasters or emergencies; and Proactive support for catastrophic or potentially catastrophic incidents using protocols for expedited delivery of resources. For disasters or emergencies that are Presidentially declared, state and/or Federal support is delivered in accordance with relevant provisions of the Stafford Act. (Note that while all Presidentially declared disasters and emergencies under the Stafford Act are considered incidents of critical significance, not all incidents necessarily result in disaster or emergency declarations under the Stafford Act.) Jefferson 10 Basic Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson 11 Basic Plan ---PAGE BREAK--- ESF MATRIX OF PRIMARY AND SUPPORT AGENCIES Jefferson County ESF 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Avera Fire Department s s s Bartow Fire Department s s s Bartow Police Department s City of Avera s s s s s s s City Of Bartow s s s s s s s City Of Louisville s s s s s s s s City Of Stapleton s s s s s s s City Of Wadley s s s s s s s s City Of Wrens s s s s s s s s Code Enforcement County Extension Service P GA Forestry GA Power Louisville Gold Cross EMS s Hillcrest Fire District s s s Jefferson County 911 P Jefferson County C.I. Jefferson County Commissioner s s s s Jefferson County Coroner s s Jefferson County DeFACS P Jefferson County EMA P s P P s P P Jefferson County Health Dept P Jefferson County Public Works P P Jefferson County School System P s Jefferson County Sheriff Department s P Jefferson County Transit s Jefferson Energy s Jefferson Hospital Louisville Fire Department P s P Louisville Police Department s s Matthews Fire District s s s Ogeechee Veterinary Associates PC s Priority Care EMS s Pro Gas Company Jefferson 168 ESF Matrix of Primary & Support Agencies ---PAGE BREAK--- Red Cross Emergency Service Director s s Stapleton Fire Department s s s Town Country Gas Wadley Fire Dept s s s Wadley Police Department s s Wrens Fire Department s s s Wrens Police Department s P = PRIMARY AGENCY: Responsible for Management of the ESF; Devise, coordinate, and implement disaster recovery plans for the ESF. S = SUPPORT AGENCY: Responsible to provide expertise, experience, and assts to the ESF as needed or requested by the Primary Agency. ESF's: 1 = TRANSPORTATION 2 = COMMUNICATIONS 3 = PUBLIC WORKS / ENGINEERING 4 = FIREFIGHTING 5 = EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT 6 = MASS CARE 7 = RESOURCE SUPPORT 8 = PUBLIC HEALTH / MEDICAL 9 = SEARCH AND RESCUE 10 = HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 11 = AG / NATURAL RESOURCES 12 = ENERGY 13 = PUBLIC SAFETY 14 = LONG TERM RECOVERY 15 = EXTERNAL AFFAIRS Jefferson 169 ESF Matrix of Primary & Support Agencies ---PAGE BREAK--- Emergency Shelter Details Louisville U. M.C Address: 301 West 7th St City: Louisville Ga Zip: 30434 Contact: Pastor Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Max Capacity: 103 Size: Shower: N Bathroom: Y Cook: Y Handicap: Y Animals: 24 Hour: Y Jefferson County High School Address: Mennonite Church Rd City: Louisville Ga Zip: 30434 Contact: Molly Howard Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Max Capacity: 328 Size: Shower: Y Bathroom: Y Cook: Y Handicap: Y Animals: 24 Hour: Y South Jefferson Community Center Address: College St City: Wadley Zip: 30477 Contact: Sally Adams Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Max Capacity: 300 Size: Shower: N Bathroom: Y Cook: Y Handicap: Y Animals: Y 24 Hour: Y Wrens Baptist Church Address: 500 North Main St. NE City: Zip: 30833 Contact: Scott McKenny, Pastor Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Max Capacity: 125 Size: Jefferson 231 Emergency Shelters ---PAGE BREAK--- Shower: Y Bathroom: Y Cook: Y Handicap: Y Animals: 24 Hour: Y Louisville Academy Address: 901 Mimosa Dr City: Zip: 30434 Contact: Hullet Kitterman Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Max Capacity: 200 Size: Shower: N Bathroom: Y Cook: Y Handicap: Y Animals: 24 Hour: Y Louisville Middle School Address: 1200 School St City: Zip: 30434 Contact: Ken Hilderbrant Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Max Capacity: 250 Size: Shower: Y Bathroom: Y Cook: Y Handicap: Y Animals: 24 Hour: Y Carver Elementary School Address: Bedingfield St City: Zip: 30434 Contact: Tiffany Pitts Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Max Capacity: 150 Size: Shower: N Bathroom: Y Cook: Y Handicap: Y Animals: 24 Hour: Y Jefferson 232 Emergency Shelters ---PAGE BREAK--- Wrens Middle School Address: 101 Griffin St City: Wrens Zip: 30833 Contact: Julia Wells Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Max Capacity: 150 Size: Shower: N Bathroom: Y Cook: Y Handicap: Y Animals: 24 Hour: Y Jefferson County Leisure Center Address: 201 East 7th St City: Louisville Zip: 30434 Contact: Tammie Bennett Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Max Capacity: 50 Size: Shower: N Bathroom: Y Cook: Y Handicap: Y Animals: 24 Hour: Y Jefferson County Service Center Address: 1114 Clarksmille Rd City: Louisville Zip: 30434 Contact: Vicky Saxson Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Max Capacity: 50 Size: Shower: N Bathroom: Y Cook: Y Handicap: Y Animals: 24 Hour: Y Thomas Jefferson Academy Address: 2264 Hwy 1 North City: Louisville Zip: 30434 Contact: Chuck Wimberly Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Max Capacity: 100 Size: Shower: Y Bathroom: Y Jefferson 233 Emergency Shelters ---PAGE BREAK--- Cook: Y Handicap: Y Animals: 24 Hour: Y Bartow Community Center Address: Academy Center City: Bartow Zip: 30413 Contact: Dewayne Morris, Mayor Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Max Capacity: 150 Size: Shower: N Bathroom: Cook: N Handicap: Y Animals: 24 Hour: Y Wrens Elementary School Address: 1711 Hwy17 North City: Wrens Zip: 30833 Contact: Sharon Dye Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Max Capacity: 100 Size: Shower: N Bathroom: Y Cook: Y Handicap: Y Animals: 24 Hour: Stapleton Baptist Church Address: 360 Harvey St. City: Stapleton Zip: 30823 Contact: Pastor Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Max Capacity: 50 Size: Shower: N Bathroom: Y Cook: Y Handicap: Y Animals: 24 Hour: Y Pleasant Grove Baptist Church Address: 1350 Church St. City: Avera Zip: 30803 Contact: Donald Lumpkin Phone: [PHONE REDACTED] Jefferson 234 Emergency Shelters ---PAGE BREAK--- Max Capacity: 50 Size: Shower: N Bathroom: Y Cook: Y Handicap: Y Animals: 24 Hour: Y Jefferson 235 Emergency Shelters ---PAGE BREAK--- GEORGIA EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN 2013 ---PAGE BREAK--- Georgia Emergency Operations Plan 2013 1 of 71 Table of Contents Preface 3 Basic Plan 8 Introduction 8 I. Purpose 8 II. Scope 8 III. Situation Overview 9 IV. Concept of Operations 16 A. General 22 B. Plan 22 C. National Incident Management System 23 V. Organization and Assignment of Responsibilities 24 VI. Direction, Control and Coordination 34 VII. Information Collection, Analysis and Dissemination 37 VIII. Communications 38 IX. Administration, Finance and Logistics 40 X. Plan Development and Maintenance 41 XI. Authorities and References 43 XII. State Agencies, Boards, Authorities and Partner Private Sector and Non- governmental Organizations with GEOP Responsibilities 44 XIII. Glossary of ---PAGE BREAK--- Georgia Emergency Operations Plan 2013 3 of 71 PREFACE The Georgia Emergency Operations Plan (GEOP) outlines how state agencies in Georgia prepare for and responds to various types of natural and manmade disasters. This document is in keeping with decades of planning and coordination between local, state, federal and non-governmental partners operating within or in support of the State of Georgia. The GEOP is specifically written to be consistent the National Response Framework and to support the local emergency operations plans for the 159 counties in Georgia to ensure seamless integration of federal and state resources when necessary. The (GEOP) is written for all executives, private sector and non-governmental organization (NGOs) leaders, local emergency managers and any other individuals or organizations expected to work in or for Georgia performing emergency management functions. The GEOP is intended to clarify expectations for an effective response. The GEOP is based on the authority of the State Government of Georgia, specifically that portion of the Official Code of Georgia, Title 38, Section 3, Articles 1 through 3, known as the Georgia Emergency Management Act of 1981, and is compliant with the National Incident Management System and supports the National Response Framework. It is promulgated by State Executive order and supports the Georgia Emergency Operations Command. This plan consists of five components, which in aggregate outline the state emergency management program. These components include: 1. Basic Plan 2. Emergency Support Function and GaDoD Annexes 3. Support Annexes 4. Hazard, Threat and Incident Specific Annexes 5. Companion Documents ---PAGE BREAK--- 2011 State of Georgia 2011 State of Georgia 2011 State of Georgia Hazard Mitigation Strategy Hazard Mitigation Strategy Hazard Mitigation Strategy ---PAGE BREAK--- Georgia Hazard Mitigation Strategy Standard and Enhanced Effective April 1, 2011– March 31, 2014 Prepared by the Georgia Emergency Management Agency ---PAGE BREAK--- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The State of Georgia remains committed to reducing the devastating impacts of natural hazard events on the citizens of this state. Because of Georgia’s potential to experience a wide range of natural disasters, the Georgia Emergency Management Agency (GEMA) envelops the concept of all-hazards planning. Not only does all-hazards planning apply to natural disasters such as meteorological, hydrological, and geophysical events but also to anthropogenic hazards such as social disruption, technological, biological and man-made events. In response to this potential for disaster and in response to federal requirements, an aggregation of applicable state and federal agencies, county and local public officials, emergency management personnel, and GEMA concertedly pursues solutions to reducing or eliminating Georgia’s future losses to hazard events. The result of these efforts of ensuring a safer Georgia lies within this document. Georgia's Hazard Mitigation Strategy or Standard Plan, is a result of the State of Georgia's continued efforts to reduce the State's exposure to losses from natural hazards and to maintain eligibility for the full range of disaster assistance available under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act as amended by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA2K). Georgia's initial Hazard Mitigation Strategy under DMA2K, which met approval in April of 2005, chronicled the original state planning efforts as well as presented a statewide hazard risk assessment and mitigation strategy. Due to new Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) guidelines for the strategy’s update, the mitigation planning effort has been updated with a more detailed account of the state planning process; a more detailed and methodical assessment of Georgia’s hazard history, hazard risk, and social vulnerability; and an updated version of specific mitigation goals and objectives as well as a progress report of previously proposed actions. The updated Standard Plan continues to provide more information derived from local participation in mitigation efforts including a local capability assessment and the local mitigation plan development process. Also, the plan updates information regarding the maintenance of the strategy throughout the eligible years and regarding the next three year update process. As demonstrated through this and previous plan updates, the State of Georgia is committed to the promotion of hazard mitigation. By reviewing its previous efforts of hazard mitigation through the plan development process, the state recognizes that effective mitigation begins with local participation and eventually leads to the modification of the hazard event and/or to the reduction of human vulnerability, which ultimately lead to the reduction of losses. By developing this document as a structure for implementing hazard mitigation efforts, the State of Georgia has been given the opportunity to adjust and adapt the strategy to remain relevant. In essence, Georgia’s Standard Plan remains a living document that evolves throughout each three year cycle to protect Georgia from all hazard events. ---PAGE BREAK--- CSRA REGIONAL PLAN 2035 REGIONAL ASSESSMENT COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION PLAN REGIONAL AGENDA ---PAGE BREAK--- CSRA REGIONAL PLAN 2035 Regional Plan I CSRA Regional Commission Table of Contents A. Regional Assessment 1. Introduction 4 2. Potential Regional Issues and 8 2.1 Population 8 2.2 Housing 9 2.3 Economic Development 9 2.4 Land Use 10 2.5 Transportation and Community Facilities 11 2.6 Natural and Environmental Resources 12 2.7 Intergovernmental Coordination 12 3. Regional Development Patterns 14 3.1 Projected Development Patterns 15 3.2 Analysis 17 3.3 Areas Requiring Special Attention 17 4. Supporting Data 21 4.1 Population 21 4.2 Housing 25 4.3 Economic Development 27 4.4 Land Use 50 4.5 Transportation and Community Facilities 52 4.6 Natural and Environmental Resources 58 B. Stakeholder Involvement Program 74 C. Regional Agenda 78 Introduction 81 1. Regional Vision 82 1.1. Vision Statement 82 1.2. Regional Development Maps 83 1.3. Defining Narrative 86 ---PAGE BREAK--- CSRA REGIONAL PLAN 2035 Regional Plan I CSRA Regional Commission Areas of Significant Natural or Cultural Resources Likely to be Impacted by Development 87 Areas of Rapid Development 90 Areas in Need of Redevelopment 93 Areas with Significant Infill Opportunities 97 Areas of Significant Disinvestment or Poverty 100 Fort Gordon and Surrounding Areas 103 Areas on the Regionally Important Resources Map not Previously Addressed 105 2. Regional Issues and Opportunities 108 Population 108 Housing 108 Economic Development 109 Land Use 109 Transportation 109 Community Facilities 110 Natural and Cultural Resources 110 Intergovernmental Coordination 111 3. Implementation 112 3.1 Guiding Principles 112 3.2 Performance Standards 114 3.3 Strategies and Regional Work Program 123 4. Evaluation and Monitoring 130 Appendix A: Quality Community Objectives i Appendix B: Analysis of Quality Community Objectives ii ---PAGE BREAK--- CSRA Regional Plan 2035 Regional Assessment and Stakeholder Involvement Program I CSRA Regional Commission I 2 CSRA REGIONAL PLAN 2035 Regional Assessment ---PAGE BREAK--- CSRA Regional Plan 2035 Regional Assessment and Stakeholder Involvement Program I CSRA Regional Commission I 3 Section 1: INTRODUCTION ---PAGE BREAK--- CSRA Regional Plan 2035 Regional Assessment and Stakeholder Involvement Program I CSRA Regional Commission I 4 1.1 Regional Plan Overview The CSRA Regional Plan 2035 (hereinafter ‘the Plan’) is the long-range plan for the management of the region’s projected growth by local governments and the CSRA Regional Commission. The Plan’s horizon is twenty years but will be updated in ten years to address changing regional conditions. The process is divided into three distinct parts, per the Regional Planning Requirements established by the Georgia Department of Community Affairs (DCA):  Regional Assessment: Identification and analysis of existing conditions using available data  Stakeholder Involvement Program: Strategy for public participation in the development of the Regional Agenda  Regional Agenda: Regional vision and implementation program The resulting analysis will assess the state of the region’s socioeconomic, land use, and environmental opportunities and threats. The CSRA’s vision and goals, together with an appraisal of the region, will set the strategic direction for the regional agenda. The regional agenda establishes program priorities for implementation. This document contains the Regional Assessment and the Stakeholder Involvement Program, which will set the stage for the development of the Regional Agenda. 1.2 Regional Assessment Overview This Regional Assessment includes a thorough analysis of issues and opportunities backed by extensive data gathering and analysis. It contains a map of Projected Development Patterns and an assessment of Areas Requiring Special Attention, which includes a range of categories, such as areas where rapid development is occurring or where infill or redevelopment is desirable. Finally, it includes an assessment of the region’s development patterns in light of the state’s Quality Community Objectives. 1.3 Stakeholder Involvement Program This program outlines the process for participation by stakeholders in the creation of the Regional Agenda. It identifies stakeholders, outlines participation techniques and includes a schedule for the completion of the Regional Agenda. 1.4 Regional Agenda The Regional Agenda is the culmination of the planning process. It will include a vision of the CSRA’s future, along with an implementation program for how to get there. 1.5 How to Use This Plan The CSRA Regional Plan is intended to serve as a reference and implementation point for potential users. A number of companion planning documents should be used in conjunction with the Regional Plan. These include:  CSRA Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy  Augusta Area Diversification Initiative  Fort Gordon Joint Land Use Study  CSRA Regionally Important Resources Plan  County and City Comprehensive Plans ---PAGE BREAK--- CSRA Regional Plan 2035 Regional Assessment and Stakeholder Involvement Program I CSRA Regional Commission I 5  Statewide Plans 1.6 The Central Savannah River Area The Central Savannah River Area (CSRA) encompasses an area nearly 6,500 square miles — the largest political region in the state. Located in the east-central Georgia, along the Savannah River, the CSRA includes 13 counties: Burke, Columbia, Glascock, Hancock, Jefferson, Jenkins, Lincoln, McDuffie, Richmond, Taliaferro, Warren, Washington, and Wilkes (Figure The largest city in the CSRA is Augusta – the economic core of the region. Figure 1: CSRA Location Map ---PAGE BREAK--- CSRA Regional Plan 2035 Regional Assessment and Stakeholder Involvement Program I CSRA Regional Commission I 6 1.6 About the CSRA Regional Commission The CSRA Regional Commission (CSRA RC) serves thirteen counties and 41 municipalities in east- central Georgia, providing services in the areas of planning and land-use development, grant writing and administration, economic development, historic preservation, and geographic information systems development and implementation to member jurisdictions. Additionally, the CSRA RC serves as the state-designated Area Agency on Aging (AAA) for the region. In this capacity, the CSRA RC works with local providers to ensure that services for the elderly are provided and monitored. By utilizing pass-through funds from state and federal sources, the Commission’s AAA serves as a gateway for programs and resources aimed at helping senior citizens improve the quality of their lives during their retirement years. The CSRA RC is also the parent company of the CSRA Business Lending. CSRA Business Lending makes loans to small and start-up businesses for the purposes of creating jobs and economic development opportunities within its service area. ---PAGE BREAK--- CSRA Regional Plan 2035 Regional Assessment and Stakeholder Involvement Program I CSRA Regional Commission I 7 Section 2: POTENTIAL REGIONAL ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES ---PAGE BREAK--- CSRA Regional Plan 2035 Regional Assessment and Stakeholder Involvement Program I CSRA Regional Commission I 8 2. Potential Issues and Opportunities This section provides an objective, professional analysis (not based on public or stakeholder input) of the region. This section, presented in divisions relating to classical planning analysis areas such as housing and transportation, presents a preliminary catalog of potential focal points to be examined during the development of Plan. The Georgia Department of Community Affairs (DCA) publishes a list of typical issues and opportunities as part of the State Planning Goals and Objectives. This list, in addition to an evaluation for the region’s consistency with the DCA’s Quality Community Objectives, was used as the starting point for developing the Potential Issues and Opportunities list (please refer to the Appendix of this document for an assessment of the region based on these objectives). Further issues and opportunities were identified as part of a thorough analysis of regional datasets and regional development patterns. The issues and opportunities compiled in this Regional Assessment are preliminary in nature; they will be reexamined and a final list will be assembled as part of the Regional Agenda planning process. 2.1 Population The population growth illustrated in historical trends is expected to continue over the twenty-year period. However, this growth is not uniform across the CSRA.  By 2035, the 13-county region’s population is projected at 575,304, an increase of approximately 26.5 percent over the 2010 population and 67.4 percent from 1980. This increase will have implications for housing, jobs, transportation, land use, environmental resources, and infrastructure.  While the urbanized area (Augusta-Richmond and Columbia Counties) has enjoyed population growth, the rural areas continue to lag. Eight of eleven rural counties lost population since the last census. What little population growth is occurring in rural areas is further away from incorporated municipalities, where infrastructure is already established. Should this trend continue, county governments will have to pay more to extend and maintain public services in these areas.  Household incomes continue to lag the state average. Most concerning, nearly a third of CSRA households are at income levels near or below the poverty line.  The CSRA is aging rapidly. The proportion of residents 45 years and older has increased 10 percent since 1990, while the proportion of residents under 29 years declined by 8 percent. Needs associated with an aging population (affordable housing, transportation, and medical services) are anticipated to increase over the next twenty years. Detailed data on population can be found on pages 21 through 25. ---PAGE BREAK--- CSRA Regional Plan 2035 Regional Assessment and Stakeholder Involvement Program I CSRA Regional Commission I 9 2.2 Housing The CSRA’s housing stock is both a strength and weakness for residents.  The region’s housing stock contains a good balance of owner and rental units (55 percent and 30 percent respectively).  Housing stocks are plentiful in the urbanized area but inadequate in rural counties. Although the official vacancy rate stands at 15 percent, over a third of vacant units are unavailable for purchase or rent. Another 17.2 percent of the region’s housing is valued at less than $50,000, an indicator of poor housing conditions.  Median ($99,937) and average ($127,997) housing values are among the lowest in the state and nation. Low housing costs are a major reason for the CSRA’s low cost of living, and a major strength for new residents and business attraction.  While affordable housing values are a benefit for the region, sprawl threatens county budgets by requiring public services further away from established municipalities. Sprawl also makes it more likely that transportation costs will increase for residents as they have to commute farther to work. Detailed data on housing can be found on pages 25 through 27. 2.3 Economic Development The CSRA region’s economy is diverse, and communities typically make concerted efforts to attract new business. However, coordinated economic development planning and promotion could be strengthened, both on a region-wide scale and between proximately-located communities.  The CSRA RC serves as the region’s Economic Development District in coordination with the U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA), and encourages cooperation between local government officials, community-based organizations, and the private sector. Per EDA requirements, the CSRA RC developed a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) in 2011.  The CSRA’s job base has shifted significantly in the last two decades. The service sector now accounts for 60 percent of all CSRA jobs, an increase of 20 percent since 1990. The goods-producing sector has declined from 35 percent in 1990 to less than 15 percent of employment today. State Planning Housing Goal: To ensure that all residents of the state have access to adequate and affordable housing. State Planning Economic Development Goal: To achieve a growing and balanced economy, consistent with the prudent management of the state's resources, that equitably benefits all segments of the population. ---PAGE BREAK--- CSRA Regional Plan 2035 Regional Assessment and Stakeholder Involvement Program I CSRA Regional Commission I 10  The region’s jobs balance is heavily slanted towards the urbanized area. Augusta-Richmond and Columbia Counties account for 78 percent of the CSRA’s 233,147 jobs. The urbanized area also accounted for over 90 percent of job growth since 1990. Seven of 11 rural CSRA counties have fewer jobs today than they did in 1990. This corresponds to trends in population, which saw eight of those counties lose residents since 2000.  Unemployment levels in the CSRA’s rural counties have been chronic during the last decade. All rural counties have unemployment rates above the state average (9.7 percent). Three counties (Hancock, Jenkins, and Warren) have unemployment rates of 17 percent or higher. All rural counties meet the criteria of Economically Distressed Areas, according to the federal Public Works and Economic Development Act. The rapid increase in rural unemployment was caused by the closure of major manufacturing employers, which had sustained local economies.  The CSRA lags behind the state in educational performance, raising concerns about workforce readiness in the new service economy. CSRA scores on the Scholastic Aptitude Test, Georgia High School Graduations Tests, and End-of-Course Assessments all fall below the state average. Detailed data on economic development can be found on pages 27 through 50. 2.4 Land Use The CSRA is a primarily rural region, with an urban core in the Augusta-Richmond County and Columbia County area. Approximately 88 percent of the region’s land area is rural.  The vast majority of the region’s housing and commercial growth has occurred in the urbanized area. This corresponds to population trends, which saw the two urban counties gain 35,509 residents since 2000, while the 11 rural counties saw a net gain of only 433 people. Even that figure masks population decline in much of the area. In fact, eight counties - Hancock, Jefferson, Jenkins, Lincoln, Taliaferro, Warren, Washington and Wilkes – combined to lose 2,550 residents since 2000.  The growth effect that has occurred in the last three decades (development away from established municipalities) resulted in sprawl beyond cities and city centers.  While cities and downtown areas still have the largest densities, this is quickly eroding as residents locate into unincorporated areas. Revitalization efforts are critical in stemming city population decline.  If the trend of growth in unincorporated areas continues, this will result in the region’s county governments incurring additional costs of providing public infrastructure (such as water & sewer lines, parks, libraries, etc.) further away from established population centers. State Planning Land Use and Transportation Goal: To ensure the coordination of land use planning and transportation planning throughout the state in support of efficient growth and development patterns that will promote sustainable economic development, protection of natural and cultural resources and provision of adequate and affordable housing. ---PAGE BREAK--- CSRA Regional Plan 2035 Regional Assessment and Stakeholder Involvement Program I CSRA Regional Commission I 11 Detailed data on land use can be found on pages 50 through 52. 2.5 Transportation and Community Facilities The region’s physical infrastructure is extensive and diverse, featuring state and federal highways, hospitals, facilities to manage solid waste and wastewater, and other resources. Most community facilities are locally operated and maintained.  The CSRA has a small network of interstates and four-lane U.S. highways that provide east- west and north-south access to regional and national markets. Interstates 20 and 520, as well as U.S. 1 and U.S. 25 link the CSRA’s major cities to each other as well as to the state’s major cities, such as Atlanta, Macon, and Savannah (Figure 25). However, the highway system does not fully meet needs throughout the region. Combined, the interstates and U.S 1 and U.S. 25 serve only portions of the CSRA, leaving large areas in the northern and southern part of the region without adequate highway infrastructure.  While the transportation system serves automobiles relatively well, it is less friendly to other users. Many streets are designed only with vehicle traffic in mind, making them unsafe or unpleasant for pedestrians and cyclists. Moreover, development patterns in many cases continue to separate uses and rely on arterial roads to make connections. These two factors limit mobility for many residents and contribute to inactivity and growing obesity levels for children and adults in the region.  The region’s two primary rail freight carriers: Norfolk Southern and CSX Rail Service carry among the lowest volumes of rail freight in the state. Only Augusta-Richmond and Warren Counties have direct connections to major rail freight hubs in Atlanta and Macon.  Augusta Regional Airport provides regularly-scheduled commercial flights. The airport currently has 21 daily departures and 22 daily arrivals to three major hubs (Atlanta, Charlotte and Dallas) from three carriers (Delta, U.S. Air and American). In calendar year 2010, the annual passenger volume at the Augusta airport was 246,587, compared to 198,489 (24.2 percent increase) in 2009. Between 2005 and 2010, Augusta Regional’s growth rate was 57.9 percent, making it one of the fastest growing small commercial services airports in the nation. Air freight information is unavailable.  Fixed-route public transit in the CSRA is limited to Augusta-Richmond County. Augusta Public Transit operates nine routes from Monday through Saturday, with daily ridership averaging approximately 3,000. The rest of the CSRA is served with demand-response service.  Most areas of the CSRA outside of the urbanized parts of Columbia and Augusta-Richmond Counties lag in both choice and quality of broadband service. Most of these areas are not served by any land broadband service provider, making slower satellite internet service the only option. The CSRA RC considers broadband the region’s top infrastructure priority and has been aggressively pursuing state and federal funding to remedy this deficiency by extending broadband infrastructure to areas of the region that currently lack it. State Planning Community Facilities and Services Goal: To ensure the provision of community facilities and services throughout the state to support efficient growth and development patterns that will protect and enhance the quality of life of Georgia's residents. ---PAGE BREAK--- CSRA Regional Plan 2035 Regional Assessment and Stakeholder Involvement Program I CSRA Regional Commission I 12  Local community facilities such as parks, water and sewage services, public water, libraries, and medical facilities, are mostly located within incorporated municipalities. Access to some public facilities, however, remains a concern as rural county populations are widely dispersed. Detailed data on transportation and community facilities can be found on pages 52 through 58. 2.6 Natural and Environmental Resources The CSRA contains a wealth of natural and environmental resources that provide the region with numerous social, economic, and environmental benefits. However, these same resources are in need of protection if they are to continue providing these benefits.  Timber resources account for 2.3 million acres in the CSRA, and are a major driver of the region’s forest products industry.  Kaolin, a type of clay, is the major mineral extracted in the region, providing substantial employment in Jefferson and Washington counties. This sector is under pressure from South American kaolin, which is now being exported around the world.  Farmland accounts for 22.1 percent of the CSRA’s land mass, and sustains approximately 5 percent of the region’s employment. The number of farms in the region today is less than half the number of farms in operation in 1982, highlighting a trend towards large, industrial-scale farming.  The CSRA contains a number of protected watershed areas in Lincoln, Wilkes, McDuffie, Warren, Burke, and Augusta-Richmond counties. The region’s watersheds will need to be monitored to ensure future development does not render them vulnerable.  The region’s river basins and major lakes ensure adequate water supplies. However, continued growth of the urbanized area and out-of-region impacts over the next twenty years will place pressure on these supplies, as well as pollution threats from growth.  The CSRA has a rich history and counts no less than 184 properties and districts listed in the National Register of Historic Places, including National Historic Landmarks, State Historic Parks and Sites. Most of these resources, however, lack preservation plans. Detailed data on natural and environmental resources can be found on page 58 through 73. 2.7 Intergovernmental Coordination State Planning Natural and Cultural Resources Goal: To conserve and protect the environmental, natural and cultural resources of Georgia's communities, regions and the state. State Planning Intergovernmental Coordination Goal: To ensure the coordination of local planning efforts with other local service providers and authorities, with neighboring communities and with state and regional plans and programs. ---PAGE BREAK--- CSRA Regional Plan 2035 Regional Assessment and Stakeholder Involvement Program I CSRA Regional Commission I 13 The CSRA RC, founded in 1962, offers member governments avenues to coordinate planning, economic development, workforce development, and aging services. Other instances of intergovernmental coordination takes place between municipalities within a given county, between counties, from region to region, and with state and federal government agencies.  The CSRA RC Area Agency on Aging provides consolidated services for seniors (including transportation) for the CSRA.  The CSRA RC serves as the Economic Development District for the region.  The CSRA RC serves as the coordinating mechanism for CSRA Unified Development Council (UDC). The UDC is a project-oriented volunteer organization comprised of economic, industrial, and regional development organizations, as well as service and educational institutions representing the entire CSRA. The UDC serves as the marketing arm for the CSRA.  The CSRA RC serves as the coordinating mechanism for CSRA Unified Development Authority (UDA). The UDA promotes the economic development of the CSRA and encourages cooperation among economic development organizations within the member counties.  The CSRA RC reviews and comments on applications for federal and state grant, loan, and permit assistance submitted by local governments and other applicants within the region. This is known as the Georgia Intergovernmental Consultation Process (Executive Order 12372), and is intended to offer comment on a proposed project’s consistency with local and regional comprehensive plans.  The CSRA RC develops and maintains the CSRA Regionally Important Resources Plan and the CSRA Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy. ---PAGE BREAK--- The U.S. Endowment for Forestry and Communities The Jefferson County Assets Index Katie Premo August 2012 ---PAGE BREAK--- i TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 MAPS MAP 1: JEFFERSON COUNTY 2 MAP 2: SELECTED COUNTIES 3 MAP 3: SELECTED COUNTIES CLOSE-­‐UP 3 MAP 4: JEFFERSON COUNTY CENSUS TRACTS 4 SECTION SUMMARIES SUMMARY OF BASELINE DATA 5 SUMMARY OF TREND DATA 7 SUMMARY OF TARGET DATA 9 BASELINE DATA 11 CHARITABLE GIVING AVERAGE ITEMIZED CHARITABLE GIVING, BY COUNTY 12 CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS IN JEFFERSON COUNTY 12 MAP 5: ITEMIZED CHARITABLE GIVING BY COUNTY 13 SOCIAL CAPITAL 14 SOCIAL CAPITAL FACTORS 14 EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT 15 GRADUATION RATES IN 2010 AND 2011 15 FIGURE 1: GRADUATION RATES FROM 2003-­‐2011 15 CONSERVATION EASEMENTS 16 CONSERVATION EASEMENTS IN JEFFERSON AND SURROUNDING COUNTIES 16 CONSERVATION EASEMENT HOLDERS IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA 16 MAP 6: CONSERVATION EASEMENTS IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA 17 LAND USE 18 DISTRIBUTION OF LAND USE IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA 18 FIGURE 2: DISTRIBUTION OF LAND USE IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA 18 LAND OWNERSHIP 19 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 19 MAP 7: LAND COVER IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA 20 MAP 8: DEVELOPED LAND IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA 21 MAP 9: FOREST LAND COVER IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA 22 ---PAGE BREAK--- ii TREND DATA 23 POPULATION CHANGE 24 CHANGES IN POPULATION FROM 2000 TO 2010 24 POPULATION CHANGE FOR ADULTS 45 AND OLDER 24 CHANGE IN PERCENTAGE OF ADULT GROUPS 25 POPULATION CHANGE IN FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS 25 CHANGE IN PERCENTAGE FOR FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS 25 RACE DISTRIBUTION 26 DISTRIBUTION OF RACE 26 PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF RACE 26 EMERGING / DOMINANT ECONOMIC SECTORS 27 CHANGES IN PERSONAL INCOME 27 CHANGE IN PERCENTAGE FOR ECONOMIC SECTORS 28 LARGEST INDUSTRY COMPARISON 29 TOP 5 INDUSTRY COMPARISONS 30 LABOR FORCE STABILITY 31 CHANGES IN THE LABOR FORCE FROM 2000 TO 2010 31 EMPLOYMENT CHANGE FROM 2000 TO 2010 31 RETIREMENT INCOME 32 RETIREMENT INCOME AND AGGREGATE INCOME 32 CHANGE IN RETIREMENT INCOME AND AGGREGATE INCOME FROM 2000 TO 2010 32 MAP 10: AVERAGE RETIREMENT INCOME BY CENSUS TRACT FOR JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA 33 TARGET DATA 34 FARM AND TIMBER PROPRIETORS 35 NUMBER OF FARM PROPRIETORS 35 FARM PROPRIETORS INCOME 35 NUMBER OF TIMBER PROPRIETORS 36 TIMBER PROPRIETOR INCOME 36 PROSPERITY 37 AVERAGE EARNINGS PER JOB 37 INCOME STATISTICS 38 MEDIAN AND PER CAPITA INCOME 38 PERCENT BELOW THE POVERTY LEVEL 38 MAP 11: MEDIAN INCOME BY CENSUS TRACT FOR JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA 39 MAP 12: PER CAPITA INCOME BY CENSUS TRACT FOR JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA 40 MAP 13: PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS BELOW THE LINE OF POVERTY BY CENSUS TRACT FOR 41 JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA AFFLUENT AND MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES 42 NUMBER OF AFFLUENT AND MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES 42 NUMBER OF HIGH INCOME HOUSEHOLDS ABOVE $100,000 42 NUMBER OF HIGH INCOME HOUSEHOLDS ABOVE $200,000 43 MAP 14: NUMBER OF AFFLUENT AND MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES BY CENSUS TRACT 44 MAP 15: PERCENT OF TOTAL FAMILIES AFFLUENT AND MIDDLE CLASS BY CENSUS TRACT 45 MAP 16: NUMBER OF HIGH INCOME HOUSEHOLDS ABOVE $100,000 BY CENSUS TRACT 46 MAP 17: NUMBER OF HIGH INCOME HOUSEHOLDS ABOVE $200,000 BY CENSUS TRACT 47 DISPOSABLE INCOME 48 MEDIAN AND AVERAGE DISPOSABLE INCOME BY COUNTY 48 FIGURE 3: MEDIAN AND AVERAGE DISPOSABLE INCOME 48 ---PAGE BREAK--- iii FIGURE 4: DISPOSABLE INCOME RETENTION OVER TIME 49 MAP 18: MEDIAN DISPOSABLE INCOME BY COUNTY 50 MAP 19: AVERAGE DISPOSABLE INCOME BY COUNTY 51 MAP 20: MEDIAN DISPOSABLE INCOME BY CENSUS TRACT IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA 52 MAP 21: AVERAGE DISPOSABLE INCOME BY CENSUS TRACT IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA 53 NET WORTH 54 MEDIAN AND AVERAGE NET WORTH BY COUNTY 54 FIGURE 5: MEDIAN AND AVERAGE NET WORTH 54 FIGURE 6: TOTAL NET WORTH BY AGE 55 MAP 22: MEDIAN NET WORTH BY COUNTY 56 MAP 23: AVERAGE NET WORTH BY COUNTY 57 MAP 24: MEDIAN NET WORTH BY CENSUS TRACT IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA 58 MAP 25: AVERAGE NET WORTH BY CENSUS TRACT IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA 59 HOUSEHOLD OWNERSHIP 60 FAMILY HOME-­‐OWNERSHIP 60 FAMILY OWNED HOMES VALUES 60 MAP 26: MEDIAN HOME VALUE BY CENSUS TRACT IN JEFFERSON COUNTY, GA 61 REPORT MATERIALS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I APPENDIX A II APPENDIX B X ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 Jefferson County Assets Index Executive Summary The Jefferson County Assets Index analyzes the economic and social trends within the county in order to determine the importance of certain community aspects. Information was gathered from a variety of sources including the most recent Censes and the International Revenue Service. The report analyzes Jefferson County (Map 1) on multiple levels; these levels include a comparison of Jefferson to its eight immediately surrounding counties (Maps as well as on a more specified level of census tracts within Jefferson County (Map The report separates the indicators into three sections – baseline, trend, and target – that describe economic and social characteristics. Baseline Data Charitable Giving Social Capital Educational Attainment Conservation Easements Land Use Trend Data Population Change Race Distribution Emerging / Dominant Economic Sectors Labor Force Stability Retirement Income Target Data Farm and Timber Proprietors Prosperity Income Statistics Affluent and Middle Class Families Disposable Income Net Worth Household Ownership ---PAGE BREAK--- 2 Jefferson County Assets Index___ Map 1: Jefferson County ---PAGE BREAK--- 3 Jefferson County Assets Index___ Maps 2 and 3: Jefferson County and Surrounding Counties ---PAGE BREAK--- 4 Jefferson County Assets Index___ Map 4: Jefferson County Census Tracts ---PAGE BREAK--- 5 Jefferson County Assets Index Summary of Baseline Data____ This section outlines community variables to measure civic spirit, residential roots, and land use. By presenting this collected information and data before the beginning of a project, we can later use it to assess the program’s impact. While some of this data is closely related to the goals and objectives of the program, other data may not necessarily be directly related, but still provide useful background information regarding the social context in which the program is set. Defining Key Values and Presenting Findings: Charitable Giving – this section identifies the average itemized charitable giving for each county as well as the aggregate, or total average, charitable giving. This data is important in the understanding of the amount of donations individuals are making in a year in comparison to surrounding counties, and State/National averages. In addition, Charitable Organizations who have awarded money to groups within Jefferson County are listed.  Methodology – collecting this data on the county level allowed a comparison to be made depicting the average amount of donations being made in a year.  Findings – in the county comparison, Jefferson County gives more than some counties, but less than most, however, as a percentage of income, Jefferson County residents on average give roughly 6% of their income. Social Capital – these indicators represent social capital in the late 1990’s, and were compiled by sociologists to measure civic spirit and residential roots.  Methodology – collecting data on the county level from various sources for each social capital indicator and ranking the counties in order to determine Jefferson County’s rank in comparison to the other counties in Georgia.  Findings – Jefferson County ranked highest in the category of “Small manufacturing operations per capita”, coming in at 9th place out of the 159 counties in Georgia. Educational Attainment – comparing Jefferson County to eight directly surrounding counties provided insight to the level of educational attainment in Jefferson County in relation to surrounding counties and the State of Georgia.  Methodology – data was collected from the Georgia Department of Education. The graduation rates from high schools in each county were taken from years 2010 and 2011 in order to compare the changes in recent graduation rates.  Findings – Jefferson County has seen the largest improvement in high school graduation rates from 2010 to 2011, with nearly a 10% increase. The trend of graduation rates from 2003 to 2011 was mostly positive in Jefferson County, but the largest increase was from 2010 to 2011, surpassing the state of Georgia’s graduation rate by over 10%. ---PAGE BREAK--- 6 Jefferson County Assets Index Summary of Baseline Data (cont’d)___ Conservation Easements – legally enforceable land preservation agreements, conservation easements provide insight in to the amount of land a county has that is protected from development. Conservation easements can protect both working and non-working land.  Methodology – taken from the National Conservation Easement Database, the number of easements in Jefferson County and its eight surrounding county neighbors was collected. After determining the average number of easements in counties in Georgia, each of the 9 selected counties was assessed.  Findings – with Burke County being the only one of the nine selected counties being above the county average with 16 easements, Jefferson County holds three conservation easements, which is more easements than six other of its county neighbors. The holder of the three easements in Jefferson County is the US Fish and Wildlife Service, protecting nearly 52 acres of land. Land Use – this section outlines the current use of land in Jefferson County as well as land ownership and residential development. This provides us with important data regarding how the land of Jefferson County has changed over the years, specifically from 1980 to 2000, and what types of land are most valued within the community.  Methodology – first analyzing the current use of land in acres, data tables, graphs, and maps were created to represent the current state of land in Jefferson County. Next, looking at land ownership, data was collected to determine the distribution of owned land throughout the county. Lastly, comparing residential development from 1980 to 2000, it was possible to see how much the land in Jefferson County has changed over the past 30+ years.  Findings – with the highest percentage of land total at 84.5% and almost 300,000 acres, forested land is the largest portion of Jefferson County. Looking at land ownership, 98.9% of all lands in Jefferson County are privately owned, totaling 335,126 acres. The only other types of land ownership that hold acreage in Jefferson County are federal lands and military lands. Residential development in Jefferson County from 1980 to 2000 has seen a 130.4% increase, with 38,353 acres in residential land. ---PAGE BREAK--- 7 Jefferson County Assets Index___ Summary of Trend Data_____ This section examines important socioeconomic trends in Jefferson County, GA over the past decade with focus on population shifts, changes in economic sectors, and growth or loss of retirement income. Changes in these factors impact economic and social welfare options. Defining Key Values and Presenting Findings: Population Changes – Changes in the population of Jefferson County from 2000 to 2010 are reviewed.  Methodology – Examination of the U.S. Census Database allows comparison of population trends from 2000 to 2010. Comparing the population trends in Jefferson County to its immediately surrounding counties, Georgia, and the nation provides a context for understanding changes in Jefferson.  Findings – While Jefferson County was one of the only two counties that experienced decrease in their populations from 2000 to 2010, we see that static concentrated in children and young adults, whereas mature adults and seniors both experienced increases of 15% and 31% respectively. The overall change in population for Jefferson County is 1.9%. Race Distribution – The distribution of racial groups within Jefferson County is compared to the surrounding counties.  Methodology – Data from the 2010 Census provided the distribution of racial groups in Jefferson County as well as its surrounding counties, the state of Georgia, and the United States.  Findings – Jefferson County is predominantly African American at 54.42%. The percentage of whites closely follows at 42.56%, with the remaining small percentages, making up Asian, some other race, and two or more races, accounts for less than 5% of the population. ---PAGE BREAK--- 8 Jefferson County Assets Index___ Summary of Trend Data Emerging / Dominant Economic Sectors – understanding the economy and industries important to the vitality of Jefferson County.  Methodology – With data from a variety of sources such as the Decennial Census, the Regional Economic Information System, and the Georgia Department of Labor, industries most important to the economy of Jefferson County are identified. Analyzing factors such as largest industries, changes in personal income (in regards to industries) and changes in the labor force, identified the industries that have been important to Jefferson County over the past decade.  Findings –Overall, Jefferson County saw an increase of 5% in earnings from 2000 to 2010. The economic sectors that grew were Agriculture/Forestry, Resource Extraction, Trade, and Government. In contrast, Manufacturing, Construction, and High Value Services all experienced decreases. The two industries that stood out as valued were Agriculture/Forestry and Manufacturing. For example, the manufacturing industry brought in $38,232,000 in annual payroll in 2000. The sources of payroll are highly concentrated in Jefferson County. The top 5 industry sectors represent nearly 75% of annual payroll, whereas the state of Georgia and the United States only account for 50% of their payroll with their top 5 industry sectors. Jefferson County saw an increase of 0.81% in its labor force from 2000 to 2010 along with an increase of 6.53% in unemployment. The latest reported unemployment rate is 13.4% in Jefferson County, above rates of most surrounding counties, Georgia, and the United States. Retirement Income – This section analyzes the aggregate and average retirement incomes for households in Jefferson County, and the changes in those factors from 2000 to 2010.  Methodology – Data from the 2000 and 2010 Decennial Census is used to compare retirement income data in Jefferson County and its surrounding counties. A map comparing average retirement income within Jefferson County was generated to represent the distribution and value of retirement income within the county.  Findings – In Jefferson County, only 961 out of 6,302 households have retirement income. Although that number has increased by nearly 8% from 2000 to 2010, it is still well below the state and national averages. ---PAGE BREAK--- 9 Jefferson County Assets Index Summary of Target Data_____ This section of data outlines the economic side of household trends in relation to income, jobs, and ownership in order to analyze the holding of assets in the community of Jefferson County, Georgia. By looking at aspects of household data in regards to jobs, income, and ownership of homes, it was possible to begin to establish a baseline of assets within the community. Defining Key Values and Presenting Findings: Farm and Timber Proprietors – this data provides insight in to the industries that are important to Jefferson County.  Methodology - The collection of employment and income data for the nine selected counties in these two industries shows the value to each county’s economies. Found from Headwaters Economic 2012, the data collected showed the importance of each sectors’ employment and income.  Findings – Proprietary sectors of farm and timber employ over 8,000 people in the 9 counties and brought in over $220,000,000 in income this past year. While the manufacturing industry employs the most people in Jefferson County, farm and timber remain important to the economy. Prosperity – the average earnings per job and unemployment rate in 2011  Methodology – The data for average earnings per job along with the unemployment rate in 2011 for the selected counties were collected from Headwaters Economics. This data illustrates the earnings of an average employee in each county as well as the rate of unemployment.  Findings – While Richmond County had the highest value of average earnings per job in the year of 2011 at $52,380, the average earnings per job in Jefferson County was very similar to surrounding counties such as Emanuel, McDuffie, and Washington; these four counties were all within $5,000 of each other in their averages. The rate of unemployment was overall similar from one county to the next, with the Jefferson County unemployment rate at 13.4%. Income Statistics – this data set looks at median and per capita income in addition to poverty to further determine the demographics of prosperity mentioned above.  Methodology – Collected from the 2000 Census, this data provides us with an in depth look at the comparison of the selected counties in regards to earnings and poverty. These data sets allow us to begin to understand household earning demographics. ---PAGE BREAK--- 10 Jefferson County Assets Index Summary of Target Data (cont’d)__  Findings – with the Jefferson County poverty level percentage among the top three of the 9 counties compared at 26.9%, all of the counties are above the poverty level percentages of the State of Georgia and the United States. Median and Per Capita Income illustrated that the counties compared are similar in their averages, while all are below the averages of Georgia and the United States. Affluent and Middle Class Families – beginning to determine the demographics of wealthier families within each county, this data set allows us to compare the selected counties in regards to high income .  Methodology – this data was collected from the 2000 Census Database, and then modified to represent the percentages of households with high income in the selected categories. Affluent and middle class families are identified as households with income above $50,000 per year, and high-income households are identified as households with income above $100,000 and $200,000 per year respectively.  Findings – while Jefferson County is among the lowest of the counties with percentages of households that are categorized as affluent/middle class and high income, like trends seen above, all counties compared were below the percentages of the State of Georgia and the United States. 20% of households in Jefferson County are categorized as affluent and middle class, while only 4% and 1.3% of households were categorized as above $100,000 and $200,000 per year respectively. Disposable Income and Net Worth – defined as the income left over after taxes and personal expenditures respectively, these demographics further illustrate true income and personal assets.  Methodology – this data was downloaded from the ESRI Business Online Analyst, giving us median and average disposable income and net worth for each county. Further analyzing this data, we were able to graph the retention of disposable income over time for each defined age group, which illustrates the change in disposable income as people age, as well as the total net worth by age.  Findings – average disposable income was always higher than median disposable income; median disposable income gives us a more accurate representation since it is not skewed by higher values within one county. The median disposable income for households in Jefferson County is $25,269. Jefferson’s median disposable income is higher than only two surrounding counties but within a very close range (within $3,000) with Burke, Emanuel, Glascock, Johnson, and Warren. Similarly, average net worth is higher than median net worth, with both median and averages below those of Georgia and the United States. ---PAGE BREAK--- 11 Jefferson County Assets Index Baseline Data Charitable Giving Social Capital Educational Attainment Conservation Easements Land Use ---PAGE BREAK--- 12 Jefferson County Assets Index___ Baseline Data_____ 1 Charitable Giving Key Value: Average itemized charitable giving for each county (Map 5) Geography Average Itemized Gifts by All Returns Average Charitable Gifts Itemized on 1040 A Total Itemized Charitable Gifts Jefferson County $874 $4,302 $6,648,000 Burke County $811 $4,008 $7,166,000 Emanuel County $673 $3,639 $6,032,000 Glascock County $582 $4,577 $714,000 Johnson County $768 $3,709 $2,346,000 McDuffie County $1,048 $5,618 $9,872,000 Richmond County $1,119 $5,192 $93,871,000 Washington County $1,650 $6,104 $13,404,000 Georgia $1,387 $9,001 $5,906,644,000 United States $1,127 $9,359 $155,103,000,000 Key Value Charitable Organizations City Name of Foundation Type of Grant-­‐ maker Total Assets Total Giving Bartow Dr. J. Harold Harrison Foundation, Inc. Independent foundation $22,651,138 $983,354 Louisville George E. Crouch Foundation Independent foundation $1,648,500 $90,200 Louisville George E. Crouch Foundation Charitable Trust Independent foundation $467,309 $200 Thomson The Watson Brown Foundation Independent foundation $109,574,234 $3,449,554 Sources: The Internal Revenue Service The National Center for Charitable Statistics, 2008 The Foundation Center, 2009 ---PAGE BREAK--- 13 Jefferson County Assets Index___ Map 5: Average Itemized Charitable Giving (in thousands) ---PAGE BREAK--- 14 Jefferson County Assets Index___ Baseline Data_____ 2 Social Capital Key Value: Jefferson County on 6 social capital factors* Jefferson County Only No. Rank in GA** Category Description Source Coverage Year First Available 1 77th Historic sites per capita Buildings, sites, and structures on the National Register of Historic Places, maintained by the National Park Service National Register Information System Current, online registry N.A. 2 19th Percent Church Adherents Number of adherents or church members identified from 149 religious denominations, associations and affiliations Religious Congregations & Membership in the U.S. 2010 1980 3 153rd Churches per capita Number of churches / congregations identified from 149 religious denominations, associations and affiliations Religious Congregations & Membership in the U.S. 2010 1980 4 66th Associations per capita Exempt organizations master list Internal Revenue Service 2012 N.A. 5 9th Small manufacturing operations per capita The number of manufacturing firms with 20 or fewer employees County Business Patterns 2000 2004 6 77th Percent of non-­‐ movers to residents Number of residents who live in the same residence in 2000 that they did in 1995 Census 2000 2000 2002 *These are updated indicators, which were originally determined by the Home Town Index (see www.ePodunk.com) to represent social capital in the late 1990’s. The Hometown Index was compiled by sociologists to measure civic spirit and residential roots. The rank is based on the comparison of all 159 counties on a per capita or percent of the population basis. ---PAGE BREAK--- 15 Jefferson County Assets Index___ Baseline Data_____ 3 Educational Attainment Key Value: Percentage of educational attainment and ranking in GA Key Value: Graduation rates from 2003-­‐2011 Sources: Georgia Department of Education 50.0% 55.0% 60.0% 65.0% 70.0% 75.0% 80.0% 85.0% 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Graduation Rate Year Figure 1: Graduation Rates from 2003-­‐2011 Jefferson County State of Georgia Area Graduation Rate in 2010 Graduation Rate in 2011 Percent Change Jefferson 71.90% 81.30% 9.40% Burke 72.00% 79.60% 7.60% Emanuel 81.70% 78.70% Glascock 79.50% 84.80% 5.30% Johnson 67.60% 76.50% 8.90% McDuffie 85.40% 86.00% 0.60% Richmond 74.70% 79.30% 4.60% Warren 75.50% 74.50% Washington 76.50% 74.50% Georgia 80.80% 67.50% -­‐13.30% ---PAGE BREAK--- 16 Jefferson County Assets Index Baseline Data_____ 4 Conservation Easements Key Value: Identify protected lands in each county and their ranking in GA (2012) Key Value: Identify current easements held in Jefferson County (Map 6) Jefferson County Only Source: The Conservation Registry Easement Database (2012), State of Georgia Area Number of Easements Ranking in Georgia Jefferson County 3 below average Burke County 16 above average Emanuel County 3 below average Glascock County 0 below average Johnson County 0 below average McDuffie County 2 below average Richmond County 1 below average Warren County 0 below average Washington County 2 below average Georgia 707 Ranking County Average 5.75 County Median 4 Easements in Georgia Holder Acreage Percent of County Piedmont NWR US Fish and Wildlife Service 30.33 0.0089% Piedmont NWR US Fish and Wildlife Service 18.95 0.0056% Piedmont NWR US Fish and Wildlife Service 2.55 0.0008% TOTALS 51.8 0.0153% ---PAGE BREAK--- 17 Jefferson County Assets Index Map 6: Conservation Easements ---PAGE BREAK--- 18 Jefferson County Assets Index Baseline Data_____ 5 Land Use (Map 7) Key Value: Identify the uses of land and their percentages of total acreage (Figure 1, Maps Jefferson County Only Land Use Acres Percent of Total Residential (Map 9) 16,916 5% Commercial 1,470 0.40% Industrial 5,166 1.50% Public/Institutional 7,041 2% Parks/Recreation/Conservation 168 0.10% Transportation/Communication/Utilities 7,197 2.10% Agricultural 14,847 4.40% Forestry (Map 10) 287,186 84.50% Totals 339,991 100% Source: Jefferson County Comprehensive Plan, Tax Assessor’s Office, 2009 Figure 2: Land Use in Jefferson County, GA (Acres) Residential Commercial Industrial Public/Institutional Parks/Recreation/Conservation Transportation/Communication/Utilities Agricultural Forestry ---PAGE BREAK--- 19 Jefferson County Assets Index Baseline Data_____ 5 Land Use (cont’d) Key Value: Land Ownership 98.9% of land in Jefferson County, Georgia is privately owned Key Value: Residential Development Source: Headwaters Economics 2012 Census Bureau 2000 Land Type Jefferson County, GA Total Area 338,843 Private Lands 335,126 Federal Lands 3,717 Forest Service 0 BLM 0 National Park Service 0 Military 3,680 Other Federal 37 State Lands 0 State Trust Lands* 0 Other State 0 Tribal Lands 0 Water 0 City, County, Other 0 Land Type Jefferson County, GA Total Private Land 335,126 Total Residential, 1980 16,647 Urban/Suburban, 1980 1,035 Exurban, 1980 15,612 Total Residential, 2000 38,353 Urban/Suburban, 2000 1,829 Exurban, 2000 36,525 Percent Change in Total Residential 130.4% ---PAGE BREAK--- 20 Jefferson County Assets Index Map 7: Land Use – Land Cover (2009) ---PAGE BREAK--- 21 Jefferson County Assets Index Map 8: Land Use – Developed Land (2009) ---PAGE BREAK--- 22 Jefferson County Assets Index Map 9: Land Use – Forest Cover (2009) ---PAGE BREAK--- February 2014 Ice Storm – GFC Timber Impacts Assessment Page 1 BACKGROUND A winter storm impacted multiple southern states and more than 90 Georgia counties experienced some form of winter precipitation, beginning February 11 th and lasting through the 13 th. Northern tier counties recorded snowfalls of up to 13” (Rabun County), and although some timber / tree impacts occurred in this “snow zone,” they were not widespread or considered severe. During the storm, ice accumulation was measured from between a tenth of an inch and one inch (or possibly higher) in a zone from roughly north metro Atlanta to Augusta in northern Georgia, and from Macon to Sylvania in central Georgia. Because ice is much heavier than snow, widespread tree damage occurred, resulting in power disruption to nearly a million customers. Governor Deal declared a state of emergency on Monday, February 10 th, and a presidential declaration of emergency was issued as the storm hit the state. The map below depicts this zone (Figure The National Weather Service provided estimates of ice accumulations, and this information, coupled with field observation reports, helped define the area surveyed by the Georgia Forestry Commission for timber impact accounts. Small amounts of ice are known to affect trees, and higher amounts (especially exceeding three-fourths of an inch) can cause serious damage to certain timber types and age classes. Another factor that affects tree damage is wind. Once ice accumulations peaked, a cold front moved through the state. Although wind speed varied, some areas reported winds of up to 35mph. Even minor winds during ice-loading can break or uproot trees. These occurrences were a major factor in the timber / tree damage associated with this storm, and may account for some of the variability detected. Figure 1: Counties included in the presidential declaration zone TIMBER IMPACT ASSESSMENT Georgia Ice Storm, February 11-13, 2014 By: James Johnson, Chip Bates & Gary White, Georgia Forestry Commission ([EMAIL REDACTED]; [EMAIL REDACTED] ; [EMAIL REDACTED]) ---PAGE BREAK--- February 2014 Ice Storm – GFC Timber Impacts Assessment Page 2 OBSERVATIONS A team of Georgia Forestry Commission foresters surveyed the zone believed to have endured the greatest impacts to our forests, and developed the map below. Please note that damage was observed beyond these counties, but it tended to be less intense than those shown by the map’s shaded areas. Some of the highlighted counties had tremendous variations in the amount of damage observed. In addition, timber damage evaluation surveys were separated into rough categories of damage (at the county level), isolated timber stands within counties in the two lesser categories may have severe damage, and stands in the severe counties may only have minor damage. The variability of damage to similar stands even a few miles apart was extreme, so mangers should carefully evaluate timber throughout this broad region. This survey examined landscape-level impacts and classifies them accordingly. The categories of damage are based upon field observations about:  Occurrence (frequency) of damage within a county.  Levels of damage within two types of pine that were most frequently damaged (young pine stands, and pine stands on which a first- thinning had recently occurred.) Ice Damage Intensity: Light to moderate damage – Only branches and limbs broken from the tree, with minor damage to the overall stand and trees bent less than 45 degrees. No salvage operation will be necessary and the stand should recover with no additional management requirements, though long term yields will likely be impacted. Moderate to severe damage – Branches and limbs broken from the trees with damage to the overall stand. More than 25% of stems broken and a salvage operation should be considered to minimize losses and remove trees that likely will not survive. Severe damage – More than 30% of stems broken, tops broken out across the stand, limbs stripped, and trees bent more than 45 degrees. A salvage operation must be considered and a clearcut may be the prudent management decision. Figure 2: Counties with widespread Ice Damage ---PAGE BREAK--- February 2014 Ice Storm – GFC Timber Impacts Assessment Page 3 Ice damage was not detected on most timber types but was concentrated on two types of pine: recently thinned pine stands, and younger stands less than 25 feet in height. Recently thinned pine stands: These are primarily pine plantations that were thinned for the first time within the past several years. Trees adjust to the amount of space and competition within a stand, and those that have been thinned for the first time are adjusting to reduced protection from neighboring trees and are growing in diameter, which strengthens the main stem. They also respond by accelerating root growth which helps anchor the tree and aids in the increased moisture uptake needed to support larger live crowns. Depending on residual stand-density after thinning, it takes trees about five years to fully respond to the increased growing space. In the meantime, they are more prone to wind (and ice) damage. These stands were particularly hard hit, which is unfortunate for landowners who have invested 15 to 20- plus years of growth getting their trees to this size. First-thinnings typically remove lower value wood (such as pulpwood / fuel wood), with the objective of allowing the residual stand to produce higher value products (such as sawtimber, plywood, and poles). From an investment standpoint, timber growth following a first thinning maximizes profits, so salvaging an ice-damaged stand is a devastating blow to expected returns. Photo (left) – Twenty-one year old loblolly stand in Burke County; suffered over 30% stem breakage. Thinning likely occurred two years ago. Photo (right) – Nineteen year old loblolly stand in Jefferson County; suffered almost 50% stem breakage. Thinning occurred within the past year. ---PAGE BREAK--- February 2014 Ice Storm – GFC Timber Impacts Assessment Page 4 Numerous older pine stands that had been thinned twice (or more) were also examined. Although some had damage, most would be considered minor, with many not requiring a salvage operation. The damage in these stands tended to be uprooted trees rather than stem breakage. This type of wind throw (tree that is completely uprooted) in older stands seemed prevalent throughout the region. Landowners and managers of storm-damaged stands are highly encouraged to read and understand the implications of ice on different types of stands. Web links which provide detailed guidance are provided on the last page of this document. Young pine stands: Pine plantations (of most species) that were 25 feet and taller - and had never been thinned - seemed to weather this ice storm well. The ability of dense stands to provide tree-to-tree support and prevent winds from uprooting individual trees was a big factor in these stands’ withstanding minimal damage. Younger (and shorter) stands, however, didn’t fare as well. One of the critical factors seemed to be that the trees still had many live branches almost to ground level, which likely accumulated so much ice that breaking points were reached for limbs and main stems. Young stands of about six feet in height also seemed to fair well. Some of these have many bent stems (with some breakage), but young trees tend to correct this problem. Some younger loblolly stands were damaged (especially in the counties noted as “Severe” on the map on page but more damage occurred on longleaf and slash pine. Longleaf stands suffered the worst damage with stem and limb breakage but no stands seen were completely leveled. The resiliency of nature can be surprising, and the fate of these stands will become evident over the next few years. When tops break out, a lateral branch will assume dominance and there will be variation in long-term stem straightness. Careful examination will be needed to determine the amount of permanent problems this storm has inflicted on each stand. Re-evaluation after the next growing season should give managers a better perspective on what lies ahead. Photo (Left) – Five year old slash pine stand in Burke County showing many bent and leaning trees, with some breakage. Note the many leaning trees with limb breakage. Photo (Right) – Nine year old longleaf pine stand in Burke County showing top and limb breakage. Note the many tops broken and some limb breakage. ---PAGE BREAK--- February 2014 Ice Storm – GFC Timber Impacts Assessment Page 5 EXTENT OF DAMAGE GFC foresters evaluated the counties noted on the previous map and developed estimates of damage based upon a combination of this field work combined with a geospatial analysis of this region. These estimates do not include areas outside this zone, nor do they include hardwood, which was also impacted. Most hardwood damage consisted of limb and top breakage with most trees retaining enough live branches to support survival. Damage can be expected in the growth form of these trees and possibly in sluggish growth rates. For pine type timber, an estimated 70,000+ acres were impacted, valued in excess of $65 million. The majority of these acres (61,000+) were in the recently thinned pine category. This estimate doesn’t include damage outside of the zone shown on the map (page and it does not account for hardwood damage acreages or values, so it should be considered conservative. Some of the merchantable pine will likely be salvaged, which could reduce the damage estimate somewhat. However, the values used were based upon landowners intending to grow these stands for at least 30 years, with the growing objective of solid wood products (sawtimber, plywood, and poles). So even if salvage occurs, part of the “loss” is in the future growth of these higher value products. RECOMMENDATIONS With the wide range of damage inflicted by this ice storm, there will likely be three distinct categories by which landowners make their evaluations: 1) Light damage or losses that may not warrant a salvage operation. This could include merchantable stands (trees are large enough to sell), which simply don’t have enough timber damage to warrant a commercial harvest, or pre-merchantable stands where there is a good chance they will recover over time. 2) Stands with significant damage, mandating a salvage operation to recoup whatever value can be obtained from the stand. This might include a complete harvest for widespread damage, or a partial harvest of damaged timber to provide a commercial harvest. 3) Situations falling between the two scenarios above, in which a good bit of the timber is damaged but there might be enough timber to leave growing. In these cases, landowners are encouraged to use the services of a professional forester to help make the best decision for the situation. Immediately following a storm, it is difficult for landowners to accurately gauge how well a stand may recover, or to measure the amount of timber that could be allowed to remain for future growth and income. For landowners facing a complete harvest to salvage their damaged timber, please consider reforesting the area. The Farm Service Agency has a cost share program that can assist with site preparation and planting costs called the Emergency Forest Restoration Program (EFRP). Apply at your local office. Special thanks to other GFC foresters who helped develop this information: Jeff Kastle, Chris Thompson, Chris Howell, Chris Barnes, Jeremy Hughes and Charles Bailey ---PAGE BREAK--- February 2014 Ice Storm – GFC Timber Impacts Assessment Page 6 URBAN TREE ASSESSMENTS Georgia Forestry Commission certified arborist/foresters surveyed damage and storm-generated tree debris left to be removed from urban and rural communities. Survey results showed counties that experienced the most damage to their rural stands also suffered the most damage to their urban trees. The highest amount of damage, as one might expect, was found in Burke County. Neighborhoods with large pine trees experienced the most loss, with the bulk of damage to branches and tree tops which were broken by the weight of ice. Additionally, "leaf on" trees, such as magnolia and cherry laurel, and old water oaks with structural issues, made up a large component of community forest tree failure. Crews observed very few trees that were completely destroyed or uprooted by the storm. Much debris remains to be cut and stacked by homeowners and tree care companies before its removal from community rights-of-way can begin. Many trees that have lost more than 50% of their limbs, and trees that have been uprooted or split so that heartwood of the main trunk is evident, will need to be removed. Otherwise, impacted trees will require pruning, with particular attention being paid to higher risk trees with “hangers” (limbs broken, but not yet detached) and split limbs (see photo below). This will likely increase beyond initial assessments the total biomass that will eventually be collected. Although the tree at left suffered minor ice damage, notice the branches that are broken and still hanging in the tree. These could impact the structure, the vehicle or humans. These “hangers” should be removed. The pine tree at right lost half of the living portion of its crown and pruning is needed to remove branch stubs. Special thanks to GFC foresters who helped with field work: Gary White, Joe Burgess, Joan Scales, Mark McClellan, Jeremy Hughes, Keith Murphy, Chris Howell and also Mark Millirons. ---PAGE BREAK--- February 2014 Ice Storm – GFC Timber Impacts Assessment Page 7 These resources can help forest landowners learn more about options and considerations for situations in which trees have been damaged by winter weather: TIMBERLAND WIND / ICE DAMAGE: How to Evaluate and Manage Storm-Damaged Forest Areas: http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/foresthealth/pubs/storm_damage/contents.html Evaluating wind / ice damage stands: http://www.forestry.uga.edu/outreach/pubs/pdf/forestry/assessing_tornado_damaged_forest_stands 5-30-08_1.pdf Wind Wood Utilization (this has numerous documents and links that are beneficial): http://www.windwoodutilization.org/salvage.asp URBAN AND HAZARD TREE SAFETY: http://www.gatrees.org/community-forests/management/trees-storm-safety/ Excellent site for Storm Damage…with an Urban Forestry angle: http://hort.ifas.ufl.edu/treesandhurricanes/ TAXES: National Timber Tax website (Master Index has good list of subject areas): http://www.timbertax.org/ TIMBER SALES: General information: http://www.gatrees.org/forest-management/private-forest-management/timber-selling/ Landowners are encouraged to utilize professional foresters and arborists to help with decisions about timber management or potentially hazardous trees around homes and urban environments. Seeking independent advice is a sound way to reduce hasty judgments and insure all available options are considered. ---PAGE BREAK--- 64 FLOODS IN GEORGIA SAVANNAH .RIVER BASIN Little River near Lincolnton, Ga. Location.--Lat. 33039r, long. 020291, at Raysville Bridge on State Highwa7 70, half a mile down~ stream from Big Creek, 2t miles south of Amity, and 10 miles south of Lincolnton, Lincoln · County. Drainage area.--574 square miles. Gage.~Non-recording gage. Datum of gage is 27.17 feet above mean sea level (unadjusted). Stage-discharge relation.-:-Defined by current-meter measurements below 17,000 seoond-teet. Historical data.--Flood of Sept. 28, 1929 reached a stage of 44.3 feet according to information from local residents. Annual Flood Peaks CALEN- GAGE DISCHARlE DAR MONTH DAY HEIGHT (second-feet) YEAR (feet.) 1929 Sept. 28 44.3 54,000 1943 Jan. ·19 20.0 9,580 1944 Mar. 23 26.4 16,900 1945 Apr. 25 12.4 5,040 1945 Dec. 25 12.2 4,920 1947 Mar. 8 20.4 9,920 1948 Feb. 10 20.2 9,750 1948 Nov. 29 22.9 12,300 (10) Brier Creek at Millhaven~ Ga. Location.~Lat. 32°56', long. 81°39', at Savannah & Atlanta Railway trestle at Millhaven, Screven County, Si miles upstream frOm. Beaverdam Creek. Drainage area.~656 square miles. Gage.~Non-recording gage. Datum of gage is 95.88 feet above mean sea level, datum of 1929, _sup- plementary adjustme,nt of 1936. Stage-discharge relation.~Defined by current-m~ter measurements below 20,000 second-feet. Histori~al data.~Flood of October 1929 was the greatest in the recollection· of Burke County's olde3t inhabitants according to the October 5, 1929 issue of nTrue Citizen•. Local planta- tion owners believe this was the greatest flood since white men settled in this area. Annual Flood Peaks CA LEN- GAGE DISCHAFGE DAR MONTH DAY HEIGHT YEAR (tee.t) (second-feet) CA LEN- GAGE DISCHARlE DAR MONTH DAY HEIG~ (second-feet) YEAR {feet.) 1929 Oct. 25.J. 64,000 1943 Mar. 2a 10.9 4,100 1944 Mar. 28 12.4 6,360 1938 Apr. 13 10.0 3,220 1945 Mar. 3 6.0 997 1939 Mar. 3 12.2 5,900 1946 Jan. l 8.3 2,040 1940 Aug. 16 17.4 25,400 1947 Mar. 13 10.6 3,800 1941 July 22 9.4 2,720 1948 Sept. 11 11.6 4,980 1942 Mar. 26 10.9 4,100 1948 Dec. 3 H.4 4,700 ---PAGE BREAK--- GAGING STATION RECORDS 65 OGE]I)HBB RIVER BAS IN (11) Ogeechee River near Louisville, Ga. Location.-.Lat. 32°58', long. 82023 1 , at bridge on u.S~ Highway 1, 1 mile fro. Louis- ville and Wadley ~ilroad br~dge, 2 miles south of Louisville, Jefferson County. Drainage area.--800 square miles. ~-Non-recotding gage prior t.o August 30, 1941, and recording gage thereafter. Datum of gage is 199.24 feet above mean s·ea level, datum of 1929, supplementary adjustment of 1936 (levels by Corps of Engineers). Stage-discharge relation.-Defined by current-met·er measurements below 17,000 second-feet and by slope-conveyance study above 17;000 second-feet. Historical data.-Flood of October 1929 reached a stag.e of 21.3 feet (from information by Central or Georgia Hailroad Company), and is the highest flood known to residents of the area. Annual Flood Peaks CALER• GAG I DISCHARll DAR MONTH DAY HBIGHT (second-tee\) YBAR (teet) CALER• GAG I DISCHARll DAR MONTH DAY BliGHT YBAR (teet) (aeoon4-teet) l929 Oct. 21 3 46,000 1937 May 2 16.1 12,800 1938 Apr. 10 16.2 8,900 1939 Mar. 2 16 1 12,800 1942 Mar. 24 16.2 13,000 1943 Mar. 24 15.4 9,500 1944 i'4ar. 23 16.9 16,500 1945 Feb. 28 10.6 1,650 1946 Dea. 30 13.2 4,030 1940 A:ug. 16 17.6 "20,600 1941 July 19 12.2 2,880 1947 liar 10 16.7 10,700 1948 Feb. 12 14.8 7,600 1948 Dee. 1 16.6 14,600 (12) Ogeeohee River at Scarboro, Ga. Location.--Lat. 32043', long. 81063', at county higuyay bridge at Scarboro, Jenkins Couritr, 3i miles from Sculls Creek, 6t miles upstream from Horse Creek, and 7t a1lea south- east of Millen. Drainage area.--1,940 square miles. ~--Non-recording gage prior to December 1941 and recording gage thereafter. Datum of gage is ---rll.81 feet above mean sea level, datum of 1929, supplementary adjustment of 1936 (levels by Corps of Engir,eers) • · Stage-discharge relation.--Defined by current-meter measurements below 24,000 second-feet. Annual Flood Peaks CALER- GAGE DISCHAHJE DAR. MONTH DAY HEIGHT (second-teet) YEAR (teet) CALER• GAG I DISCHAHJI DAR MONTH DAY BliGHT YEAR (teet) (second-tee~) . 1937 May 6 10.7 12,90'::> 1938 Apr. 14 10.4 11,600 1939 Mar. 6 12.1 20,600 1940 Aug. 17 12.8 24,800 1941 July 24 8.9 6,320 1943 Mar. 28 10.6 11,900 1944 Mar. 27 12.8 24,800 1946 Feo. as 7.6 3,030 1946 Jan. 20 9.1 6,540 1947 Mar. 11 10.0 9,450 1942 Mar. 28 10.9 14,000 1948 Apr. 4 11.2 16,600 1948 Dec. 6 11.2 -15,500 ---PAGE BREAK--- Flood of October 11-20, 1990, in East-Central Georgia By Timothy C. Stamey Torrential rain occurred in east-central Georgia on October 10-12,1990. In places, rainfall totaled as much as 19.89 inches for the 3-day period, although most areas received from 7.0 to 10.0 inches of rain. The largest 24-hour rainfall amount recorded was 16.42 inches at Louisville, about 50 miles southwest of Augusta (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, written commun., 1990). Severe flooding caused by the intense rain on already saturated ground occurred in several tributaries to the Ogeechee, Ohoopee, and Savannah Rivers. The most severely affected flood area is shown in figure 45. The rains were the result of the convergence of a slow-moving cold front from the northwest, Tropical Storm Klaus from the east, and Tropical Storm Marco from the south. The resulting excessive rains approached or exceeded several long-standing rainfall records in Georgia. The most notable record was a 3-day rainfall of 19.89 inches in Louisville (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, written commun., 1990). The flood of October 11-20 was the third severe flood to occur in Georgia in 1990, and the President of the United States declared nine counties in east-central Georgia flood-disaster areas. At least four people lost their lives after being swept away by floodwaters. Damage to roads and bridges was substantial and resulted in millions of dollars in damages to public and private property. Numerous dam failures were reported, and several hundred residents were evacuated (Federal Emergency Management Agency, written commun., 1990). Maximum discharges of streams in east-central Georgia had recurrence inter- vals ranging from 2 years to more than 100 years. Record-high stages and dis- charges occurred at 14 sites in east-central Georgia where stage and discharge data were collected during October 1990 (table 38). The most severe flooding occurred on Big Creek near Louisville (site 13), Brushy Creek near Wrens (site and Buckhead Creek near Waynesboro (site 19), where the maximum discharges were much greater than the respective 100-year discharges. Known dam failures upstream of the gaged sites on Big Creek and Brushy Creek contributed to the severity of the flooding at these two sites. Also, there were at least six other streams within about a 50-mile radius of Augusta that experienced maximum discharges equal to or greater than those hav- ing a 100-year recurrence interval (fig. 45, table 38). All sites where discharge equalled or exceeded the 100-year discharge within this 50-mile radius had drainage areas of less than 100 square miles, except sites on the Ogeechee River. The Ogeechee River experienced maximum discharges having recurrence intervals ranging from 10 to more than 100 years. The maxi- mum discharge of 27,000 cubic feet per second for the Ogeechee River near Louisville (site 12) was the largest since 1929 at that site. The maximum stage for Ogeechee River at Scarboro (site 22) was 13.42 feet, which is the highest since March 1944 and the third highest stage since 1935 (flood stage is 8 feet). Maximum discharges attenuated as the flood progressed (table 38). The upstream reaches of the Ohoopee and Little Ohoopee Rivers and some small tributaries in the Swainsboro area also had maximum discharges equal to or in excess of the 100-year discharge. The maximum discharges on these streams also attenuated as the flood progressed (table 38). Flood of October 11-20,1990, in East-Central Georgia 133 ---PAGE BREAK--- GEORGIA 33°30'- Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:2,000.000,1994 Albers Equal-Area Conic projection Standard parallels 29°30' and 45°30', central meridian -96°00' 30 40 KILOMETERS EXPLANATION 2 A Flood-determination site Number corresponds to that in table 38 Figure 45. Location of flood-determination sites for flood of October 11-20,1990, in east-central Georgia. 134 Summary of Floods in the United States During 1990 and 1991 ---PAGE BREAK--- Table 38. Maximum stages and discharges prior to and during flood of October 11-20,1990, in east-central Georgia '[mi2, square mile; ft, feet above arbitrary datum; ft3/s, cubic feet per second; greater than; less than; , not determined. Source: Recurrence intervals calculated from U.S. Geological Survey data. Other data from U.S. Geological Survey reports or data bases] Maximum prior to October 1990 Site no. (fig. 45) Station no. Stream and place of determination Drain- age area (mi2) Period Year Dis- Stage charge (ft) (ft3/s) Maximum during October 1990 Day Stage (ft) Dis- charge (ft3/s) Discharge recurrence interval (years) Savannah River Basin n o a Oa0 nIo (O (Op5' V 1 (D!o9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 02195150 02196760 02196820 02197190 02197520 02197600 02197810 02197830 02198000 02198100 Kiokee Creek at Appling Rocky Creek tributary at Augusta Butler Creek at Fort Gordon McBean Creek near McBean Brier Creek near Thomson Brushy Creek near Wrens Walnut Branch near Waynesboro Brier Creek near Waynesboro Brier Creek near Millhaven Beaverdam Creek near Sardis 43.9 1.56 7.5 41.4 55.0 28.0 11.9 473 646 30.8 1984-90 1979-90 1929-90 1929-90 1797- 1990 1959-90 1796-1990 1796- 1990 1929-90 1987-90 1985 1988 1929 1929 1929 1971 1966 1929 1929 1987 10.27 1,900 6.31 519 12.40 2,300 14.80 4,300 12,000 8.03 1,200 8.89 598 23.00 48,000 25.10 64,000 6.64 600 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 13 15 13 15.53 9.60 13.30 7.52 13.53 14.02 11.48 14.24 15.58 7.60 11,500 1,110 4,700 3,160 2,210 hi, 400 2,300 14,200 14,600 1,850 >100 100 100 10 >100 >100 50 50 5 Ogeechee River Basin 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 02200400 02200500 02200900 02200930 02200950 02201000 02201110 02201250 Rocky Comfort Creek near Grange Ogeechee River near Louisville Big Creek near Louisville Spring Creek near Louisville Ogeechee River near Wadley Williamson Swamp Creek at Davisboro Nails Creek near Bartow Seals Creek tributary near Midville 188 800 95.8 14.2 990 109 8.36 .99 1979-90 1840- 1990 1948-90 1961-90 1840-1990 1929-90 1964-90 1964-74 1980 1929 1948 1980 1929 1929 1972 1964 14.82 4,020 21.30 46,000 12.00 19,000 7.35 1,130 50,000 15.0 9,200 4.21 654 2.44 82 12 13 12 12 13 12 12 12 12.08 16.82 12.70 10.38 17.33 9.74 9.36 3.56 1,840 27,000 !28,400 2,200 29,500 2,110 3,260 165 5 >100 >100 >100 100 10 >100 50 ---PAGE BREAK--- £ Table 38. Maximum stages and discharges prior to and during flood of October 11-20,1990, in east-central Georgia Continued Summary of F 0)5' 3 (Dc 3 S Q. I (D 0) O 5" (O _L 013 Q.i _L Maximum prior to October 1990 Site no. (fig- 45) Station no. Stream and place of determination Drain- age area (mi2) Period Year Dis- Stage charge (ft) (ft3/s) Maximum during October 1990 Day Stage (ft) Dis- charge (ft3/s) Discharge recurrence interval (years) Ogeechee River Basin Continued 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 02201350 02201800 02201830 02202000 02202500 02202820 02202910 Buckhead Creek near Waynesboro Richardson Creek near Millen Sculls Creek near Millen Ogeechee River at Scarboro Ogeechee River near Eden Reedy Creek near Metter Ten Mile Creek tributary at Pulaski 64.0 43.0 4.38 1,940 2,650 3.41 1.14 1929-90 1963-84 1965-90 1840-84 1840-90 1965-80 1963-90 1929 1980 1966 1929 1929 1966 1966 11.60 9,000 6.04 2,400 3.73 278 17.00 75,000 20.00 78,000 6.74 278 7.67 599 12 12 12 15 20 12 12 13.33 2.02 2.92 13.42 14.41 4.18 4.32 13,000 100 20 37,300 26,800 20 140 >100 <2 <2 25 10 <2 2 Altamaha River Basin 26 27 28 29 30 31 02225100 02225210 02225250 02225320 02225350 02225500 Cobb Creek near Lyons Hurricane Branch near Little Ohoopee River near Swainsboro Ohoopee River near Aline Pendleton Creek tributary no. 2 near Soperton Ohoopee River near Reidsville 69 3.53 216 698 1.68 1,110 1929-90 1965-90 1925-90 1925-90 1965-90 1886-1990 1966 1973 1929 1980 1973, 1984 1925 9.90 3,500 4.28 650 14.00 13,500 17.25 15,200 3.47 290 28.40 47,000 12 12 13 12 12 16 3.50 6.52 13.40 18.81 3.00 20.34 300 1,100 15,800 22,000 210 16,400 <2 >100 >100 100 5 25 'Discharge affected by dam failure. ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County Georgia 2012 2007 % change Number of Farms 358 315 + 14 Land in Farms 145,588 acres 108,932 acres + 34 Average Size of Farm 407 acres 346 acres + 18 Market Value of Products Sold $72,877,000 $29,324,000 + 149 Crop Sales $52,999,000 (73 percent) Livestock Sales $19,878,000 (27 percent) Average Per Farm $203,566 $93,092 + 119 Government Payments $2,695,000 $2,569,000 + 5 Average Per Farm Receiving Payments $11,516 $13,380 - 14 Farms by Size, 2012 Farms 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Acres 1-9 10-49 50-179 180-499 500-999 1,000+ Land in Farms, 2012 by Land Use Cropland 51.3% Woodland 35.0% Pastureland 9.4% Other uses 4.3% ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County – Georgia Ranked items among the 159 state counties and 3,079 U.S. counties, 2012 Item Quantity State Rank Universe 1 U.S. Rank Universe 1 MARKET VALUE OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS SOLD ($1,000) Total value of agricultural products sold Value of crops including nursery and greenhouse Value of livestock, poultry, and their products VALUE OF SALES BY COMMODITY GROUP ($1,000) Grains, oilseeds, dry beans, and dry peas Tobacco Cotton and cottonseed Vegetables, melons, potatoes, and sweet potatoes Fruits, tree nuts, and berries Nursery, greenhouse, floriculture, and sod Cut Christmas trees and short rotation woody crops Other crops and hay Poultry and eggs Cattle and calves Milk from cows Hogs and pigs Sheep, goats, wool, mohair, and milk Horses, ponies, mules, burros, and donkeys Aquaculture Other animals and other animal products TOP CROP ITEMS (acres) Cotton, all Upland cotton Peanuts for nuts Wheat for grain, all Winter wheat for grain TOP LIVESTOCK INVENTORY ITEMS (number) Cattle and calves Goats, all Sheep and lambs Pullets for laying flock replacement Layers 72,877 52,999 19,878 21,013 - 11,669 866 - 16,419 4 10,310 9 43 14,288 14,288 11,470 10,101 10,101 15,963 686 313 310 251 47 30 65 3 - 33 34 - 25 137 6 10 50 42 7 129 35 35 28 2 2 15 23 19 53 122 159 159 159 151 29 84 152 156 144 65 157 153 158 67 124 154 143 57 135 84 84 75 120 120 158 155 120 116 156 1,460 1,122 1,621 1,210 - 153 893 - 198 2,716 490 2,156 2,028 181 180 48 677 587 1,533 883 1,792 945 2,682 3,077 3,072 3,076 2,926 436 635 2,802 2,724 2,678 1,530 3,049 3,013 3,056 2,038 2,827 2,988 3,011 1,366 2,924 635 635 364 2,537 2,480 3,063 2,996 2,897 2,637 3,040 Other County Highlights, 2012 Economic Characteristics Quantity Farms by value of sales: Less than $1,000 $1,000 to $2,499 $2,500 to $4,999 $5,000 to $9,999 $10,000 to $19,999 $20,000 to $24,999 $25,000 to $39,999 $40,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $99,999 $100,000 to $249,999 $250,000 to $499,999 $500,000 or more Total farm production expenses ($1,000) Average per farm Net cash farm income of operation ($1,000) Average per farm 125 11 32 36 31 9 8 4 21 20 11 50 49,860 139,273 27,418 76,586 Operator Characteristics Quantity Principal operators by primary occupation: Farming Other Principal operators by sex: Male Female Average age of principal operator (years) All operators by race 2: American Indian or Alaska Native Asian Black or African American Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander White More than one race All operators of Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino Origin 2 145 213 315 43 55.7 - - 40 - 450 - 6 See “Census of Agriculture, Volume 1, Geographic Area Series” for complete footnotes, explanations, definitions, and methodology. - Represents zero. Withheld to avoid disclosing data for individual operations. 1 Universe is number of counties in state or U.S. with item. 2 Data were collected for a maximum of three operators per farm. ---PAGE BREAK--- Jefferson County, Georgia Summary II EWG Farm Subsidy Database http://farm.ewg.org/region.php?fips=13163 1 of 2 8/24/2014 11:38 AM ---PAGE BREAK--- Search Jefferson County, Georgia Disaster Payments II EWG Farm Subsidy Dat... http://farm.ewg.org/progdetail.php?fips=13163&progcode=total_dis 1 of 2 8/24/2014 11:37 AM ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County APPENDIX D WORKSHEETS USED IN PLANNING PROCESS ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #1 Identify the Hazard Step 1 Date: What kinds of natural hazards can affect you? Use this space to record information you find for each of the hazards you will be researching. Attach additional pages as necessary. Note: Bolded hazards are addressed in this How-to Guide. Task Task A B Avalanche Coastal Erosion Coastal Storm X Dam Failure X X Drought X X Earthquake X Expansive Soils Extreme Heat X Flood X X Hailstorm X Hurricane X Land Subsidence Landslide Severe Winter Storm X X Tornado X X Tsunami Volcano Wildfire X X Windstorm Lightning X X Tropical Storms X X Thunderstorm Winds X X Hazard or Event Description (Type of hazard, date of event, number of injuries, cost and types of damage, etc.) Source of Information Map Available for this Hazard? Scale of Map Dam Failure See Appendix A for this complete information USGS, The Jefferson Reporter, NCDC Only map of dams is available See Appendix A Drought See Appendix A for complete information USDA, NCDC, SHELDUS, The Jefferson Reporter, Palmer Index Maps area available for the state as a whole from the Palmer Index See Appendix A Flood See Appendix A for this complete information USGS, NCDC, SHELDUS, The Jefferson Reporter, Flood Plain Maps are available See Appendix A Severe Winter Weather See Appendix A for this complete information SERRC, NCDC, SHELDUS, The Jefferson Reporter, Maps are available in Appendix A Hail See Appendix A for this complete information NCDC, SHELDUS, No map is available Tornado See Appendix A for this complete information Tornado History Project, NCDC, SHELDUS, The Jefferson Reporter, Map is available See Chapter II. Section V. Lightning See Appendix A for this complete information NCDC, SHELDUS, No map is available Tropical Storms See Appendix A for this complete information NCDC, SHELDUS, No map is available Thunderstorm Winds See Appendix A for this complete information NCDC, SHELDUS, No map is available Map is available for wind zone Wildfire See Appendix A for this complete information GFC Map is available for fire danger zones Task A. List the hazards that may occur. 1. Research newspapers and other historical records 2. Review existing plans and reports. 3. Talk to the experts in your community, state, or region. 4. Gather information on Internet Websites. 5. Next to the hazard list below, put a check mark in the Task A boxes beside all hazards that may occur in your community or state. Task B. Focus on the most prevalent hazard in your community or state. 1. Go to hazard Websites. 2. Locate your community or state on the Website map. 3. Determine whether you are in a high-risk area. Get more localized information if necessary. 4. Next to the hazard list below, put a check mark in the Task B boxes beside all hazards that post a significant threat. ---PAGE BREAK--- GEMA Worksheet #2 Profile Hazard Events Step 2 County: Date: How Bad Can It Get? Task A. Obtain or create a base map. GEMA will be providing you with a base map, USGS topos and DOQQ as part of our deliverables to local government for the planning process. Additionally, we will be providing you with detailed hazard layer coverages. These data layers originate from state or nationwide coverage or datasets. Therefore, it is important for local government to assess what you already have at the local level. It is important for you at the local level to have an idea of what existing maps you have available for the planning process. Some important things to think about: 1) What maps do we already have in the county that would be relevant to the planning process? 2) Have other local plans used maps or mapping technology where there is specific data that is also needed in my local plan? 3) What digital maps do we have? 4) Do we have any Geographic Information System (GIS) data, map themes or layers or databases here at the local level (or regional) that we can use? 5) If we do have any GIS data, where is it located at, and who is our local expert? 6) Are there any ongoing GIS or mapping initiatives at the local level in other planning or mapping efforts? If so, what are they, and what are the timetables for completion? 7) Are there mapping needs that have been identified at the local level in the past? If so, what are they and when were they identified? 8) Of the existing maps, GIS data and other digital mapping information, what confidence do we have at the local level that it is accurate data? Please answer the above questions on a separate sheet of paper and attach to this worksheet. It is important to realize that those counties that already have GIS and digital mapping, (ie: parcel level data, GPS fire hydrants, etc) higher levels of spatial accuracy and detail will exist for some data layers at the local level. However, for this planning process, that level of detail will not be needed on all layers in the overall mapping and analysis. You can use existing maps from: • Road Maps • USGS topographic maps or Digital Orthophoto Quarter Quads (DOQQ) • Topographic and/or planimetric maps from other agencies • Aerial topographic and/or planimetric maps • Field Surveys • GIS software • CADD software • Digitized paper map Title of Map Scale Date Local Plan Template – March 2003 Replaces FEMA “How-To” Worksheet #2 1 ---PAGE BREAK--- Task B. Obtain a hazard event profile. Task C. Record your hazard event profile information. Avalanche Coastal Storm / Coastal Erosion 1. Get a copy of your FIRM. 2. Verify that the FIRM is up-to-date and complete. 3. Determine the annual rate of coastal erosion. 4. Find your design wind speed. 1. Transfer the boundaries of your coastal storm hazard areas onto your base map. 2. Transfer the BFEs onto your base map. 3. Record the erosion rates on your base map: 4. Record the design wind speed here and on your base map: Dam Failure Drought Earthquake 1. Go to the http://geohazards.cr.usgs.gov Website. 2. Locate your planning area on the map. 3. Determine your PGA. 1. Record your PGA: 2. If you have more than one PGA print, download or order your PGA map. Expansive Soils Extreme Heat Flood 1. Get a copy of your FIRM. 2. Verify the FIRM is up-to-date and complete. 1. Transfer the boundaries from your firm onto your base map (floodway, 100-yr flood, 500-yr flood). 2. Transfer the BFEs onto your base map. Hailstorm Hurricane Land Subsidence Landslide 1. Map location of previous landslides. 2. Map the topography. 3. Map the geology. 4. Identify thee high-hazard areas on your map. 1. Mark the areas susceptible to landslides onto your base map. Severe Winter Storm Tornado 1. Find your design wind speed. 1. Record your design wind speed: 2. If you have more than one design wind speed, print, download or copy your design wind speed zones, copy the boundary of your design wind speed zones on your base map, then record the design wind speed zones on your base map. Tsunami Wildfire 1. Map the fuel models located within the urban- wildland interface areas. 2. Map the topography. 3. Determine your critical fire weather frequency. 4. Determine your fire hazard severity. 1. Draw the boundaries of your wildfire hazard areas onto your base map. Other 1. Map the hazard. 1. Record hazard event info on your base map. Local Plan Template – March 2003 Replaces FEMA “How-To” Worksheet #2 2 ---PAGE BREAK--- JCOUNTY-WIDE INCLUDES ALL JURISDICTIONS HAZARD FREQUENCY TABLE Hazard Number of Events in Historic Record Number of Years in Historic Record Number of Events in Past 10 Years Number of Events in Past 20 Years Number of Events in Past 50 Years Historic Recurrence Interval (years) Historic Frequency % chance/year 20 year Historic Frequency % chance/year Past 10 Year Record Frequency Per Year Past 20 Year Record Frequency Per Year Past 50 Year Record Frequen cy Per Year Hurricane Surge - Cat 1 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 2 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 3 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 4 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 5 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Wind #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Floods 10 85 3 4 9 8.50 11.76 20.00 0.3 0.2 0.18 Wildfire 168 57 52 91 161 0.34 294.74 455.00 5.2 4.55 3.22 Earthquake #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tornado 13 64 3 6 13 4.92 20.31 30.00 0.3 0.3 0.26 Thunderstorm Wind 85 64 27 52 84 0.75 132.81 260.00 2.7 2.6 1.68 Hail 53 64 18 31 41 1.21 82.81 155.00 1.8 1.55 0.82 Drought 25 64 8 24 25 2.56 39.06 120.00 0.8 1.2 0.5 Extreme Heat #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Snow & Ice 41 122 7 16 25 2.98 33.61 80.00 0.7 0.8 0.5 Lightning 187 64 53 95 170 0.34 292.19 475.00 5.3 4.75 3.4 Dam Failure 1 64 0 0 1 64.00 1.56 0.00 0 0 0.02 Tropical Storm 18 64 10 13 18 3.56 28.13 65.00 1 0.65 0.36 HazMat Release (fixed) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 HazMat Release (trans) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Radiological Release #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 NOTE: The historic frequency of a hazard event over a given period of time determines the historic recurrence interval. For example: If there have been 20 HazMat Releases in the County in the past 5 years, statistically you could expect that there will be 4 releases a year. Realize that from a statistical standpoint, there are several variables to consider. 1) Accurate hazard history data and collection are crucial to an accurate recurrence interval and frequency. 2) Data collection and accuracy has been much better in the past 10-20 years (NCDC weather records). 3) It is important to include all significant recorded hazard events which will include periodic updates to this table. By updating and reviewing this table over time, it may be possible to see if certain types of hazard events are increasing in the past 10-20 years. ---PAGE BREAK--- COUNTY UNICORPORATED AREAS HAZARD FREQUENCY TABLE Hazard Number of Events in Historic Record Number of Years in Historic Record Number of Events in Past 10 Years Number of Events in Past 20 Years Number of Events in Past 50 Years Historic Recurrenc e Interval (years) Historic Frequenc y % chance/ye ar 20 year Historic Frequenc y % chance/ye ar Past 10 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Past 20 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Past 50 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Hurricane Surge - Cat 1 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 2 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 3 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 4 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 5 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Wind #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Floods 10 85 3 4 9 8.50 11.76 20.00 0.3 0.2 0.18 Wildfire 168 57 52 91 161 0.34 294.74 455.00 5.2 4.55 3.22 Earthquake #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tornado 13 64 3 6 13 4.92 20.31 30.00 0.3 0.3 0.26 Thunderstorm Wind 56 64 8 23 55 1.14 87.50 115.00 0.8 1.15 1.1 Hail 26 64 4 4 14 0.15 650.00 20.00 0.4 0.2 0.28 Drought 25 64 8 24 25 2.56 39.06 120.00 0.8 1.2 0.5 Extreme Heat #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Snow & Ice 41 122 7 16 25 2.98 33.61 80.00 0.7 0.8 0.5 Lightning 185 64 52 93 168 0.35 289.06 465.00 5.2 4.65 3.36 Landslide #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Dam Failure 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tropical Storm 18 64 10 13 18 3.56 28.13 65.00 1 0.65 0.36 HazMat Release (fixed) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 HazMat Release (trans) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Radiological Release #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 NOTE: The historic frequency of a hazard event over a given period of time determines the historic recurrence interval. For example: If there have been 20 HazMat Releases in the County in the past 5 years, statistically you could expect that there will be 4 releases a year. Realize that from a statistical standpoint, there are several variables to consider. 1) Accurate hazard history data and collection are crucial to an accurate recurrence interval and frequency. 2) Data collection and accuarcy has been much better in the past 10-20 years (NCDC weather records). 3) It is important to include all significant recorded hazard events which will include periodic updates to this table. By updating and reviewing this table over time, it may be possible to see if certain types of hazard events are increasing in the past 10-20 years. ---PAGE BREAK--- Avera HAZARD FREQUENCY TABLE Hazard Number of Events in Historic Record Number of Years in Historic Record Number of Events in Past 10 Years Number of Events in Past 20 Years Number of Events in Past 50 Years Historic Recurrenc e Interval (years) Historic Frequenc y % chance/ye ar 20 year Historic Frequenc y % chance/ye ar Past 10 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Past 20 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Past 50 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Hurricane Surge - Cat 1 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 2 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 3 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 4 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 5 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Wind #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Floods 10 85 3 4 9 8.50 11.76 20.00 0.3 0.2 0.18 Wildfire #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Earthquake #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tornado 1 64 1 1 1 64.00 1.56 5.00 0.1 0.05 0.02 Thunderstorm Wind 57 64 8 23 56 1.12 89.06 115.00 0.8 1.15 1.12 Hail 26 64 3 4 14 2.46 40.63 20.00 0.3 0.2 0.28 Drought 25 64 8 24 25 2.56 39.06 120.00 0.8 1.2 0.5 Extreme Heat #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Snow & Ice 41 122 7 16 25 2.98 33.61 80.00 0.7 0.8 0.5 Lightning 15 64 0 0 5 4.27 23.44 75.00 0 0 0.1 Landslide #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Dam Failure 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tropical Storm 18 64 10 13 18 3.56 28.13 65.00 1 0.65 0.36 HazMat Release (fixed) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 HazMat Release (trans) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Radiological Release #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 NOTE: The historic frequency of a hazard event over a given period of time determines the historic recurrence interval. For example: If there have been 20 HazMat Releases in the County in the past 5 years, statistically you could expect that there will be 4 releases a year. Realize that from a statistical standpoint, there are several variables to consider. 1) Accurate hazard history data and collection are crucial to an accurate recurrence interval and frequency. 2) Data collection and accuarcy has been much better in the past 10-20 years (NCDC weather records). 3) It is important to include all significant recorded hazard events which will include periodic updates to this table. By updating and reviewing this table over time, it may be possible to see if certain types of hazard events are increasing in the past 10-20 years. ---PAGE BREAK--- Bartow HAZARD FREQUENCY TABLE Hazard Number of Events in Historic Record Number of Years in Historic Record Number of Events in Past 10 Years Number of Events in Past 20 Years Number of Events in Past 50 Years Historic Recurrenc e Interval (years) Historic Frequenc y % chance/ye ar 20 year Historic Frequenc y % chance/ye ar Past 10 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Past 20 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Past 50 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Hurricane Surge - Cat 1 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 2 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 3 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 4 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 5 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Wind #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Floods 10 85 3 4 9 8.50 11.76 20.00 0.3 0.2 0.18 Wildfire #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Earthquake #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tornado 1 64 0 1 1 64.00 1.56 5.00 0 0.05 0.02 Thunderstorm Wind 57 64 9 23 56 1.12 89.06 115.00 0.9 1.15 1.12 Hail 27 64 4 5 15 2.37 42.19 25.00 0.4 0.25 0.3 Drought 25 64 8 24 25 2.56 39.06 120.00 0.8 1.2 0.5 Extreme Heat #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Snow & Ice 41 122 7 16 25 2.98 33.61 80.00 0.7 0.8 0.5 Lightning 15 64 0 0 5 4.27 23.44 75.00 0 0 0.1 Landslide #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Dam Failure 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tropical Storm 18 64 10 13 18 3.56 28.13 65.00 1 0.65 0.36 HazMat Release (fixed) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 HazMat Release (trans) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Radiological Release #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 NOTE: The historic frequency of a hazard event over a given period of time determines the historic recurrence interval. For example: If there have been 20 HazMat Releases in the County in the past 5 years, statistically you could expect that there will be 4 releases a year. Realize that from a statistical standpoint, there are several variables to consider. 1) Accurate hazard history data and collection are crucial to an accurate recurrence interval and frequency. 2) Data collection and accuarcy has been much better in the past 10-20 years (NCDC weather records). 3) It is important to include all significant recorded hazard events which will include periodic updates to this table. By updating and reviewing this table over time, it may be possible to see if certain types of hazard events are increasing in the past 10-20 years. ---PAGE BREAK--- Bartow HAZARD FREQUENCY TABLE Hazard Number of Events in Historic Record Number of Years in Historic Record Number of Events in Past 10 Years Number of Events in Past 20 Years Number of Events in Past 50 Years Historic Recurrenc e Interval (years) Historic Frequenc y % chance/ye ar 20 year Historic Frequenc y % chance/ye ar Past 10 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Past 20 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Past 50 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Hurricane Surge - Cat 1 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 2 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 3 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 4 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 5 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Wind #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Floods 10 85 3 4 9 8.50 11.76 20.00 0.3 0.2 0.18 Wildfire #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Earthquake #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tornado 1 64 0 1 1 64.00 1.56 5.00 0 0.05 0.02 Thunderstorm Wind 57 64 9 23 56 1.12 89.06 115.00 0.9 1.15 1.12 Hail 27 64 4 5 15 2.37 42.19 25.00 0.4 0.25 0.3 Drought 25 64 8 24 25 2.56 39.06 120.00 0.8 1.2 0.5 Extreme Heat #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Snow & Ice 41 122 7 16 25 2.98 33.61 80.00 0.7 0.8 0.5 Lightning 15 64 0 0 5 4.27 23.44 75.00 0 0 0.1 Landslide #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Dam Failure 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tropical Storm 18 64 10 13 18 3.56 28.13 65.00 1 0.65 0.36 HazMat Release (fixed) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 HazMat Release (trans) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Radiological Release #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 NOTE: The historic frequency of a hazard event over a given period of time determines the historic recurrence interval. For example: If there have been 20 HazMat Releases in the County in the past 5 years, statistically you could expect that there will be 4 releases a year. Realize that from a statistical standpoint, there are several variables to consider. 1) Accurate hazard history data and collection are crucial to an accurate recurrence interval and frequency. 2) Data collection and accuarcy has been much better in the past 10-20 years (NCDC weather records). 3) It is important to include all significant recorded hazard events which will include periodic updates to this table. By updating and reviewing this table over time, it may be possible to see if certain types of hazard events are increasing in the past 10-20 years. ---PAGE BREAK--- Louisville Hazard Number of Events in Historic Record Number of Years in Historic Record Number of Events in Past 10 Years Number of Events in Past 20 Years Number of Events in Past 50 Years Historic Recurrenc e Interval (years) Historic Frequenc y % chance/ye ar 20 year Historic Frequenc y % chance/ye ar Past 10 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Past 20 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Past 50 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Hurricane Surge - Cat 1 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 2 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 3 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 4 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 5 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Wind #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Floods 10 85 3 4 9 8.50 11.76 20.00 0.3 0.2 0.18 Wildfire #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Earthquake #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tornado 1 64 1 1 1 64.00 1.56 5.00 0.1 0.05 0.02 Thunderstorm Wind 66 64 14 33 65 0.97 103.13 165.00 1.4 1.65 1.3 Hail 40 64 10 18 28 1.60 62.50 90.00 1 0.9 0.56 Drought 25 64 8 24 25 2.56 39.06 120.00 0.8 1.2 0.5 Extreme Heat #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Snow & Ice 41 122 7 16 25 2.98 33.61 80.00 0.7 0.8 0.5 Lightning 16 64 0 1 6 4.00 25.00 80.00 0 0.05 0.12 Landslide #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Dam Failure 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tropical Storm 18 64 10 13 18 3.56 28.13 65.00 1 0.65 0.36 HazMat Release (fixed) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 HazMat Release (trans) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Radiological Release #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 NOTE: The historic frequency of a hazard event over a given period of time determines the historic recurrence interval. For example: If there have been 20 HazMat Releases in the County in the past 5 years, statistically you could expect that there will be 4 releases a year. Realize that from a statistical standpoint, there are several variables to consider. 1) Accurate hazard history data and collection are crucial to an accurate recurrence interval and frequency. 2) Data collection and accuracy has been much better in the past 10-20 years (NCDC weather records). 3) It is important to include all significant recorded hazard events which will include periodic updates to this table. By updating and reviewing this table over time, it may be possible to see if certain types of hazard events are increasing in the past 10-20 years. ---PAGE BREAK--- Stapleton HAZARD FREQUENCY TABLE Hazard Number of Events in Historic Record Number of Years in Historic Record Number of Events in Past 10 Years Number of Events in Past 20 Years Number of Events in Past 50 Years Historic Recurrenc e Interval (years) Historic Frequenc y % chance/ye ar 20 year Historic Frequenc y % chance/ye ar Past 10 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Past 20 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Past 50 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Hurricane Surge - Cat 1 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 2 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 3 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 4 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 5 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Wind #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Floods 10 85 3 4 9 8.50 11.76 20.00 0.3 0.2 0.18 Wildfire #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Earthquake #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tornado 1 64 1 1 1 64.00 1.56 5.00 0.1 0.05 0.02 Thunderstorm Wind 58 64 9 25 57 1.10 90.63 125.00 0.9 1.25 1.14 Hail 26 64 4 5 14 2.46 40.63 25.00 0.4 0.25 0.28 Drought 25 64 8 24 25 2.56 39.06 120.00 0.8 1.2 0.5 Extreme Heat #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Snow & Ice 41 122 7 16 25 2.98 33.61 80.00 0.7 0.8 0.5 Lightning 15 64 0 0 5 4.27 23.44 75.00 0 0 0.1 Landslide #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Dam Failure 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tropical Storm 18 64 10 13 18 3.56 28.13 65.00 1 0.65 0.36 HazMat Release (fixed) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 HazMat Release (trans) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Radiological Release #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 NOTE: The historic frequency of a hazard event over a given period of time determines the historic recurrence interval. For example: If there have been 20 HazMat Releases in the County in the past 5 years, statistically you could expect that there will be 4 releases a year. Realize that from a statistical standpoint, there are several variables to consider. 1) Accurate hazard history data and collection are crucial to an accurate recurrence interval and frequency. 2) Data collection and accuarcy has been much better in the past 10-20 years (NCDC weather records). 3) It is important to include all significant recorded hazard events which will include periodic updates to this table. By updating and reviewing this table over time, it may be possible to see if certain types of hazard events are increasing in the past 10-20 years. ---PAGE BREAK--- Wadley HAZARD FREQUENCY TABLE Hazard Number of Events in Historic Record Number of Years in Historic Record Number of Events in Past 10 Years Number of Events in Past 20 Years Number of Events in Past 50 Years Historic Recurrenc e Interval (years) Historic Frequenc y % chance/ye ar 20 year Historic Frequenc y % chance/ye ar Past 10 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Past 20 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Past 50 Year Record Frequenc y Per Year Hurricane Surge - Cat 1 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 2 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 3 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 4 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 5 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Wind #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Floods 10 85 3 4 9 8.50 11.76 20.00 0.3 0.2 0.18 Wildfire #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Earthquake #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tornado 1 64 1 1 1 64.00 1.56 5.00 0.1 0.05 0.02 Thunderstorm Wind 62 64 10 29 61 1.03 96.88 145.00 1 1.45 1.22 Hail 28 64 5 6 16 2.29 43.75 30.00 0.5 0.3 0.32 Drought 25 64 8 24 25 2.56 39.06 120.00 0.8 1.2 0.5 Extreme Heat #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Snow & Ice 41 122 7 16 25 2.98 33.61 80.00 0.7 0.8 0.5 Lightning 15 64 0 0 5 4.27 23.44 75.00 0 0 0.1 Landslide #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Dam Failure 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tropical Storm 18 64 10 13 18 3.56 28.13 65.00 1 0.65 0.36 HazMat Release (fixed) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 HazMat Release (trans) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Radiological Release #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 NOTE: The historic frequency of a hazard event over a given period of time determines the historic recurrence interval. For example: If there have been 20 HazMat Releases in the County in the past 5 years, statistically you could expect that there will be 4 releases a year. Realize that from a statistical standpoint, there are several variables to consider. 1) Accurate hazard history data and collection are crucial to an accurate recurrence interval and frequency. 2) Data collection and accuarcy has been much better in the past 10-20 years (NCDC weather records). 3) It is important to include all significant recorded hazard events which will include periodic updates to this table. By updating and reviewing this table over time, it may be possible to see if certain types of hazard events are increasing in the past 10-20 years. ---PAGE BREAK--- Wrens HAZARD FREQUENCY TABLE Hazard Number of Events in Historic Record Number of Years in Historic Record Number of Events in Past 10 Years Number of Events in Past 20 Years Number of Events in Past 50 Years Historic Recurrenc e Interval (years) Historic Frequency % chance/yea r 20 year Historic Frequency % chance/year Past 10 Year Record Frequen cy Per Year Past 20 Year Record Frequency Per Year Past 50 Year Record Frequency Per Year Hurricane Surge - Cat 1 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 2 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 3 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 4 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Surge - Cat 5 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Hurricane Wind #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Floods 10 85 3 4 9 8.50 11.76 20.00 0.3 0.2 0.18 Wildfire #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Earthquake #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tornado 2 64 1 2 2 32.00 3.13 10.00 0.1 0.1 0.04 Thunderstorm Wind 59 64 11 26 58 1.08 92.19 130.00 1.1 1.3 1.16 Hail 30 64 6 8 18 1.21 82.81 40.00 1.8 1.55 0.82 Drought 25 64 8 24 25 2.56 39.06 120.00 0.8 1.2 0.5 Extreme Heat #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Snow & Ice 41 122 7 16 25 2.98 33.61 80.00 0.7 0.8 0.5 Lightning 16 64 0 1 6 4.00 25.00 80.00 0 0.05 0.12 Landslide #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Dam Failure 0 0 0 0 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Tropical Storm 18 64 10 13 18 3.56 28.13 65.00 1 0.65 0.36 HazMat Release (fixed) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 HazMat Release (trans) #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 Radiological Release #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.00 0 0 0 NOTE: The historic frequency of a hazard event over a given period of time determines the historic recurrence interval. For example: If there have been 20 HazMat Releases in the County in the past 5 years, statistically you could expect that there will be 4 releases a year. Realize that from a statistical standpoint, there are several variables to consider. 1) Accurate hazard history data and collection are crucial to an accurate recurrence interval and frequency. 2) Data collection and accuarcy has been much better in the past 10-20 years (NCDC weather records). 3) It is important to include all significant recorded hazard events which will include periodic updates to this table. By updating and reviewing this table over time, it may be possible to see if certain types of hazard events are increasing in the past 10-20 years. ---PAGE BREAK--- Facility Name Address 1: Address 2: (PO BOX) City: Zip: Jurisdiction: Latitude Longitude Area Sq Ft: Essential Facility Transportation Facility Lifeline System High Potential Loss HazMat Facility Important Facility Vulnerable Population Economic Asset Special Consideration Historical Consideration Other Facility Other Details: Facility Type: Bldg Value: Valuation Year: Contents Description: Contents Value: Contents Value Year: Functional Use Value: Displacement Cost Per Day: [ ] Pre-kindergarten [ ] Kindergarten [ ] Primary School [ ] Elementary School [ ] Middle School [ ] Middle/High School [ ] High School, Public [ ] Private School [ ] Other School [ ] Alternative Division [ ] Alternative School [ ] Private Two-Year College [ ] Public Two-Year College [ ] Private Four-Year College [ ] Public Four-Year College [ ] Private University [ ] Public University [ ] Public Vocational Technical School [ ] [ ] Adult Edu. Center [ ] Airport [ ] City Hall [ ] City Jail [ ] County Correctional Institution [ ] County Jail [ ] Courthouse [ ] Federal Penitentiary [ ] Fire Station [ ] Wastewater Treatment Plant [ ] Water System [ ] C and D Construction and Demolition Landfill [ ] L (Dry Trash) Landfill [ ] MSWL (Municipal Solid Waste Landfill) [ ] SL (Sanitary Waste) Landfill [ ] Recycling Center [ ] Transfer Station [ ] Hospital, Admissions Entrance [ ] Hospital, Emergency Entrance [ ] Library [ ] Marshals Office [ ] Police Station [ ] Sheriffs Office [ ] Emergency Services [ ] State Prison [ ] Other Year Constructed: Number of Stories: Daytime Occupancy: Night Occupancy: [ ] 0 = Unknown [ ] 1 = Market Value [ ] 2 = Assessed Value [ ] 3 = Replacement Value [ ] 99 = Other Page 1 Location Method: [ ] Geocode [ ] GPS [ ] GPS-closed [ ] GPS - dnr [ ] Manual add Location Building Valuation Type: Building Value See back of page for codes. *Choose Only One Faciltiy Type *Mark any or all that apply. See back of page for details. Building Type Code: Occupancy Code: Pre-Disaster Mitigation Field Data Collection Form FY2003 ---PAGE BREAK--- [ ] C1 = Concrete Moment Frame [ ] C2 = Concrete Shear Walls [ ] C3 = Concrete Frame with Unreinforced Masonry Infill Walls [ ] MH = Manufactured Housings [ ] O = Other Building Type [ ] P1 = Precast Concrete Tilt-Up Walls [ ] P2 = Precast Concrete Frames with Cast-in-Place Concrete Shear Walls [ ] RM1 = Reinforced Masonry Bearing Walls with Wood or Metal Deck Diaphragms [ ] RM2 = Reinforced Masonry Bearing Walls with Precast Concrete Diaphragms [ ] S1 = Steel Moment Frame [ ] S2 = Steel Braced Frame [ ] S3 = Steel Light Frame [ ] S4 = Steel Frame with Cast-in-Place Concrete Shear Walls [ ] S5 = Steel Frame with Unreinforced Masonry Infill Walls [ ] URM = Unreinforced Masonry Bearing Walls [ ] UNK = Unknown Building Type [ ] AGR1 = Agriculture Facilities and Offices [ ] COM1 = Retail Trade [ ] COM2 = Wholesale Trade [ ] COM3 = Personal and Repair Services [ ] COM4 = Professional/Technical Services [ ] COM5 = Banks [ ] COM6 = Hospital [ ] COM7 = Medical Office and Clinic [ ] COM8 = Entertainment Recreation [ ] COM9 = Theaters [ ] COM10 = Parking Garages [ ] EDU1 = Grade Schools and Admin. Offices [ ] EDU2 = Colleges and Universities [ ] GOV1 = Government - General Services [ ] GOV2 = Government - Emergency Response [ ] UNK = Unknown Page 2 Building Type Code: Occupancy Code: Essential Facility An essential facility is a critical facility that is essential to the health and welfare of the population. The potential consequences of losing functions or services from this type of facility are higher than any other type of structures. Interruption or loss of function from these types of facilities would jeopardize human life and public safety. Essential facilities include: hospitals and other medical facilities, police and fire stations, emergency operations centers, evacuation shelters and schools, and other structures that house first responder equipment or personnel. Transportation Systems Transportation infrastructure or facilities. Examples include: Airways: airports, heliports, Highways: bridges, tunnels, roadbeds, overpasses, transfer stations. Railways: tracks, tunnels, bridges, rail yards, depots, switching stations. Waterways: canals, locks, ports, ferries, dry-docks, piers. Lifeline System Corridors of flow for equipment, supplies and services. Transportation systems can also be Lifeline Systems. The best physical example of a lifeline would be a bridge and right-of-way that could include utilities and communication. Examples include: potable water, wastewater, oil, natural gas, electric power, and communication. High Potential Loss Facility Facilities that would have a high human loss associated with their damage or failure. Examples include: nuclear power plants, dams and military installations. Hazardous Materials Facility Facilities that produce or house industrial/hazardous materials, such as corrosives, explosives, flammable materials, radioactive materials, and toxins. Check to see if your county has a Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) and an existing Hazardous Material listing. Important Facility These types of facilities are vital for overall day to day community functions, and ensure full recovery in the wake of a hazard or disaster event. Examples include: government buildings and functions, major employers in the area, bank and financial institutions, non-nuclear power generators, certain commercial establishments such as grocery stores, hardware stores and gas stations, technical schools, colleges, and universities. Vulnerable Population Is there a vulnerable human population that occupies the structure that would need special assistance, medical care or other actions before, during or after a hazard event or disaster? Examples include: elderly people, jail populations, people with mental, physical or mobility problems, and non-English speaking populations. Economic Assets Larger economic assets that are vital to the prosperity of the community. Examples include major employers and financial centers in your community or area that impact the local or regional economy if significantly disrupted. Special Considerations High-density areas (residential or commercial development), if damaged or impacted in a hazard event or disaster, could result in high death tolls or injury rates. Examples include: larger factories or industries, large vertical apartment or housing complexes. Historic Considerations Historic, cultural or natural resources, including structures and areas that are identified and protected under state or federal law. Examples include: state parks, federal parks, museums and historic districts. Other Facilities Any other significant locally identified facility that does not fit into another category of those listed above. Comments: Definitions: [ ] IND1 = Heavy Industrial [ ] IND2 = Light Industrial [ ] IND3 = Food/Drugs/Chemicals [ ] IND4 = Metals/Minerals Processing [ ] IND5 = High Technology [ ] IND6 = Construction Facilities and Offices [ ] REL1 = Churches and Non-Profit Organizations [ ] RES1 = Single Family Dwellings [ ] RES2 = Manufactured Housing [ ] RES3A = Duplex [ ] RES3B = 3 to 4 Units [ ] RES3C = 5 to 9 Units [ ] RES3D = 10 to 19 Units [ ] RES3E = 20 to 49 Units [ ] RES3F = > 50 Units [ ] RES4 = Temporary Lodging [ ] RES5 = Institutional Dormitories [ ] RES6 = Nursing Homes Pre-Disaster Mitigation Field Data Collection Form FY2003 ---PAGE BREAK--- JEFFERSON COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE Documentation of Labor Match NAME (Please Print): ORGANIZATION: DATE(S): EVENT: __Hazard Mitigation Plan HOURS CONTRIBUTED (Include travel time): HOURLY SALARY: TOTAL LABOR MATCH (Hours Contributed X Hourly SIGNATURE: (FORM IS NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE) ---PAGE BREAK--- STAPLEE Criteria Considerations → for Alternative Actions ↓ Community Acceptance Effect on Segment of Population Technical Feasibility Long‐term Solution Secondary Impacts Staffing Funding Allocated Maintenance / Operations Political Support Local Champion Public Support State Authority Existing Local Authority Potential Legal Challenge Benefit of Action Cost of Action Contributes to Economic Goals Outside Funding Required Effect on Land / Water Effect on Endangered Species Effect on HAZMAT / Waste Sites Consistent with Community Environmental Goals Consistent With Federal Laws Alternative actions Comments FLOODING Update floodplain maps X X X X X X X X X X Costly expenditure all jurisdictions need to participate Jefferson County, all muncipalities: Continue to assess stormwater runoff. X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Funding needs to be allocated is quite costly but long term benefit Jefferson County, all muncipalities: Assess and construct as needed, more storm water retention facilities, storm drain improvements and channel improvements to protect existing and new developments. X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Jefferson County: Review set back requirements from top of banks of creeks and from top of banks of major rivers. X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Jefferson County, all muncipalities: Clear run-off and water retention ditches. X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Jefferson County, all muncipalities: Seek funding for communication towers and voter repeater systems X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Jefferson County: Install flood alarms and measuring devices in creeks, ponds, etc. to provide a warning when water levels become dangerously high. Jefferson County, all muncipalities: Determine the elevation of all critical facilities in known flood areas and mitigate if necessary. completed Jefferson County, all muncipalities: Identify property owners who are located in areas continually subject to flooding and relocate or mitigate. x X X X Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Review existing comprehensive, development and land use plans to address flood prone areas. completed Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Adopt ordinances to control building and development in known flood prone areas. None Jefferson County: Promote the preservation of areas in and around watercourses. x x x x x x x x x Jefferson County: add greenspace to known flood prone areas. x x x x x x x x Jefferson County: Cap wells not in use and increase wellhead waterproofing. x L E (Technical) (Political) (Legal) (Economic) (Environmental) (Administrative) (Social) E S T A P ---PAGE BREAK--- STAPLEE Criteria Considerations → for Alternative Actions ↓ Community Acceptance Effect on Segment of Population Technical Feasibility Long‐term Solution Secondary Impacts Staffing Funding Allocated Maintenance / Operations Political Support Local Champion Public Support State Authority Existing Local Authority Potential Legal Challenge Benefit of Action Cost of Action Contributes to Economic Goals Outside Funding Required Effect on Land / Water Effect on Endangered Species Effect on HAZMAT / Waste Sites Consistent with Community Environmental Goals Consistent With Federal Laws Alternative actions Comments L E (Technical) (Political) (Legal) (Economic) (Environmental) (Administrative) (Social) E S T A P Jefferson County: Ensure well head elevations are above known flooding levels. x Jefferson County, all muncipalities: Evaluate existing water systems. x x x x x x x x x x x x Ongoing Jefferson County, all muncipalities: Investigate methods to reduce non-point source pollution. DAM FAILURE Jefferson County: Conduct dam breach analysis to identify assets and population at risk in the event of a failure. Jefferson County: Draft ordinance prohibiting development in dam breach zone. X X X X Jefferson County: Perform field survey including dams, spillways, cross section, and structures within dam breach zone. x x x x Jefferson County: Install dam failure alert systems. x x x x remove state function Jefferson County: Update inventory of dams, record GPS coordinates, and conduct initial assessment of dam safety. x x x x x remove state function Jefferson County: Inspect all dams and document any deficiencies to include taking photographs, taking field measurements, and fill out a visual inspection checklist of key items. x DROUGHT Jefferson County: Identify and inventory all vulnerable agricultural properties to include livestock and develops a protective action plan. Jefferson County: Conduct a study on the range of federal support programs available to assist Jefferson County’s agriculture. Jefferson County: Promote increased surface water usage and surface artesian flow for irrigation. Jefferson County: Conduct a study of proactive measures for Jefferson County’s agriculture to include livestock watering ponds and capturing storm water runoff. X X X X X ---PAGE BREAK--- STAPLEE Criteria Considerations → for Alternative Actions ↓ Community Acceptance Effect on Segment of Population Technical Feasibility Long‐term Solution Secondary Impacts Staffing Funding Allocated Maintenance / Operations Political Support Local Champion Public Support State Authority Existing Local Authority Potential Legal Challenge Benefit of Action Cost of Action Contributes to Economic Goals Outside Funding Required Effect on Land / Water Effect on Endangered Species Effect on HAZMAT / Waste Sites Consistent with Community Environmental Goals Consistent With Federal Laws Alternative actions Comments L E (Technical) (Political) (Legal) (Economic) (Environmental) (Administrative) (Social) E S T A P Jefferson County: Seek funding for private wells that have gone dry. Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Enact a program to educate residents about water conservation. X X X X X X X X Jefferson County, all muncipalities: Increase public awareness of watering restrictions and bans. X X X X X X X X WILDFIRE Jefferson County, Waynesboro:Review previous firefighter training and implements a schedule for the ongoing training of all firefighters to include wildland fire training. X X X X X X X X x Jefferson County, Waynesboro: seek funding for better firefighting equipment. X X X X X X X X x Jefferson County, all muncipalities: Inventory and install more fire hydrants as needed. X X X X X X X X x Jefferson County the Cities of Waynesboro: Seek funding for more fire tankers (2000 to 3000 gallons) for local fire departments. X X X X X X X X x Jefferson County, all muncipalities: Ensure that a defensible space (30-ft minimum setbacks) between buildings and flammable brush and forestland. X X X X X X X X x Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Strictly follows Georgia Forestry Commission’s (GFC) guidelines for control burns and permits. X X X X X X X X x Jefferson County: Continue following GFC service of construction and maintenance of firebreaks around forests and structures, along abandoned roadbeds. X X X X X X X X x Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Seek funding for communication towers and voter repeater systems. X X X X X X X X x Jefferson County: Seek funding for a reverse 911 or Voice-Over-Internet Protocol system. removed have CODE RED Jefferson County, all muncipalities: Implement the Firewise Community Initiative. X X X X X X X X x Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Improve public awareness of wildfire techniques and awareness of wildfire dangers X X X X X X X X x SEVERE WEATHER Jefferson County: Seek funding for a reverse 911 or Voice-Over-Internet Protocol system. removed have CODE RED ---PAGE BREAK--- STAPLEE Criteria Considerations → for Alternative Actions ↓ Community Acceptance Effect on Segment of Population Technical Feasibility Long‐term Solution Secondary Impacts Staffing Funding Allocated Maintenance / Operations Political Support Local Champion Public Support State Authority Existing Local Authority Potential Legal Challenge Benefit of Action Cost of Action Contributes to Economic Goals Outside Funding Required Effect on Land / Water Effect on Endangered Species Effect on HAZMAT / Waste Sites Consistent with Community Environmental Goals Consistent With Federal Laws Alternative actions Comments L E (Technical) (Political) (Legal) (Economic) (Environmental) (Administrative) (Social) E S T A P Jefferson County, all muncipalities: Review building codes for proper wind strength and safety regulations and for consistency with state and federal regulations. X X X x x x Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Inspect public buildings and critical facilities and retrofit to reinforce windows, doors, and roofs as needed X X X x x x Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Seek funding for communication towers and voter repeater systems. X X X x x x Jefferson County: Provide weather radios to elderly and handicap populations. X X X x x x Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Review and current Emergency Response Plan and update when needed. x x x x x x Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Review current evacuation plans paying particular attention to vulnerable populations and update as needed. x x x x x x Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Inventory all critical facilities and assess generator needs and install generators where needed. x x x x x x Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Seek funding to ensure all emergency shelters have back-up generators. x x x x x x Jefferson County: Request that all new education facilities be designed to serve as public shelters for emergency purposes. x x x x x x Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Promote and participate in the following American Red Cross Programs x x x x x x x x x Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Educate the public on shelter locations and evacuation routes in the event of a natural disaster. x x x x x Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Develop public education and awareness programs regarding severe weather events (tornadoes, tropical storms, and thunderstorm winds) to include home safety measures, purchase of weather radio and personal safety measures before, during and after an event. x x x x x WINTER STORMS ---PAGE BREAK--- STAPLEE Criteria Considerations → for Alternative Actions ↓ Community Acceptance Effect on Segment of Population Technical Feasibility Long‐term Solution Secondary Impacts Staffing Funding Allocated Maintenance / Operations Political Support Local Champion Public Support State Authority Existing Local Authority Potential Legal Challenge Benefit of Action Cost of Action Contributes to Economic Goals Outside Funding Required Effect on Land / Water Effect on Endangered Species Effect on HAZMAT / Waste Sites Consistent with Community Environmental Goals Consistent With Federal Laws Alternative actions Comments L E (Technical) (Political) (Legal) (Economic) (Environmental) (Administrative) (Social) E S T A P Jefferson County, all muncipalities: Inventory and assess generator needs at critical facilities and install generators where needed. x x x x x x Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Seek funding for communication towers and voter repeater systems. x x x x x x Jefferson County, all muncipalities:Inspect power lines to determine if trees need to be trimmed or cut down. x x x x x x Electric Compnaies resposibilty Jefferson County the Cities of all muncipalities: Implement a winter storm education program to include winterization of home and/or business and what to do before, during and after the winter storm event. x x x x x x ---PAGE BREAK--- 2014 Multi-Hazard Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update Jefferson County APPENDIX E COPIES OF REQUIRED PLANNING DOUCMENTATIONS ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- April 30, 2013 «First_Name» «Last_Name», «Title» «Organization» «Address_2» «Address_1» «City», «State» «Zip» Dear «SUR» «Last_Name»: Protecting the health, safety and welfare of residents in our community is a critical task for public officials. Natural disasters cost billions of dollars annually throughout the United States. The loss of life, injury, and damage to homes and businesses causes incalculable hardships and emotional suffering. One way we can help our community become more disaster-resistant is by planning for disasters before they occur. A proven, successful tool to help in that effort is through Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Planning. Hazard Mitigation Planning is the process of determining how to reduce or eliminate risk of loss of life and property damage resulting from natural or human-caused hazards in advance of the event. We now have an opportunity to participate in the Hazard Mitigation Planning Program to update our current PDM Plan. This opportunity is funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. A local kick-off meeting will be held on May 15, 2013 at 10:00 am at the Senior Citizens Center 209 E. 7th Street, Louisville Georgia. By our participation in this planning process and update of our Hazard Mitigation Plan, we will continue to meet Federal guidelines for future disaster funding. An approved Hazard Mitigation Plan will also allow our community to compete favorably for other funding opportunities. The kick-off meeting will provide participants with an overview of the Hazard Mitigation Planning Program and will begin the process of updating our plan. This invitation is in accordance with FEMA requirements. We need you or someone you designate to represent your organization to participate in the planning process. Expected time commitment will be one meeting every two months for six-eight months and a review of the draft plan. Important to the process will be the attendance of the same appointed member to most meetings. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at [PHONE REDACTED] or EMA Director Jim Anderson at [PHONE REDACTED]. Sincerely, Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development ---PAGE BREAK--- AGENDA Jefferson County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Meeting May 15, 2013 10:00 AM 1. Introductions and Welcome by Jim Anderson 2. Presentation by Brain Laughlin, Hazard Mitigation Planner, Georgia Emergency Management Agency 3. Overview by Linda D. Grijalva, CSRA Regional Commission a. Identify Hazards b. Critical Facilities c. STAPLEE d. New Hazards e. New Equipment f. Projects Completed i. Flood and drainage ii. Water g. In-kind contribution forms. 4. Next meeting ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Linda Grijalva Bcc: Adam Mestres ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Anna Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Arty Thrift ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Avera; Bartow ([EMAIL REDACTED]); [EMAIL REDACTED]; [EMAIL REDACTED]; Dr. Molly Howard ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Eric L. Mosley ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Frank Parrish ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Garry A. McCord ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Janet Pilcher ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Jim Anderson; Joey May ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Larry Cheely ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Leah Lumley ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Louisa Pennington ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Marc Peebles ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Richard T. Sapp ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert Chalker ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert Hoffman ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert Morris ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Sallie Adams ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Shane Barrow ([EMAIL REDACTED]) Subject: Jefferson County PDM Date: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 8:17:42 AM Please make plans to attend the pre-disaster mitigation meeting on December 9, 2013 at 2:00 pm at the Jefferson EOC 1841 Hwy 24 W Suite A Louisville Georgia 30434 Please remember that upon completion of the plan update the county and all cities will have to adopt by resolution. Please ensure someone attends this meeting from your agency. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 River Watch Parkway, Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, copying, distribution or other use of this message or its attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. The sender has not waived any applicable privilege by sending the accompanying transmission. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by return email or by telephone at (706) 650-5694 and delete the message and all attachment(s), copies and backups from your system. P Please consider the environment before printing this email ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Linda Grijalva Bcc: Rusty Sanders; [EMAIL REDACTED]; Jim Anderson; Casey Broom ([EMAIL REDACTED]); [EMAIL REDACTED]; Mario Chapple ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Mike Lyons ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert "Bob" Fields, III ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Blake Thompson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); [EMAIL REDACTED]; Bruce Tanner ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Mie Lucas ([EMAIL REDACTED]); [EMAIL REDACTED] Subject: Jefferson County Date: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 8:28:41 AM Jefferson County has received a grant from the FEMA to update the 2009 Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan (PDM). The plan is required to be updated every five years. One of the plan requirements is to invite neighboring communities to provide input into the planning process. The Jefferson County PDM Committee would like to extend an invitation to your agency to participate in our planning process. The second planning meeting will be held on December 9, 2013 at 2:00 pm at the Jefferson EOC 1841 Hwy 24 W Suite A Louisville Georgia 30434. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 Riverwatch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, copying, distribution or other use of this message or its attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. The sender has not waived any applicable privilege by sending the accompanying transmission. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by return email or by telephone at (706) 650-5694 and delete the message and all attachment(s), copies and backups from your system. P Please consider the environment before printing this email ---PAGE BREAK--- AGENDA Jefferson County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Meeting December 9, 2013 10:00 AM 1. Items: a. STAPLEE was reviewed and discussed by strategy. b. New hazard events c. Critical Facility Updates d. In-kind contribution forms. 2. Next meeting ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Linda Grijalva To: Adam Mestres ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Anna Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Arty Thrift ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Avera; Bartow ([EMAIL REDACTED]); [EMAIL REDACTED]; [EMAIL REDACTED]; Dr. Molly Howard ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Eric L. Mosley ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Frank Parrish ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Garry A. McCord ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Janet Pilcher ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Jim Anderson; Joey May ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Larry Cheely ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Leah Lumley ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Louisa Pennington ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Marc Peebles ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Richard T. Sapp ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert Chalker ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert Hoffman ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert Morris ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Sallie Adams ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Shane Barrow ([EMAIL REDACTED]) Subject: Jefferson County PDM Date: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 10:43:00 AM Please make plans to attend the pre-disaster mitigation meeting on May 28, 2014 at 10:00 am at the Jefferson EOC located at 1841 Hwy 24 W Suite A Louisville Georgia 30434. Please remember that upon completion of the plan update the county and all cities will have to adopt by resolution. AS YOU ARE AWARE FROM MY PREVIOUS EMAILS THE PLAN MUST BE COMPLETED BY AUGUST 2014 TO QUALIFY FOR THE GRANT FUNDS THAT WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE AS A RESULT OF THE ICE STORM. IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT SOMEONE FROM YOUR AGENCY ATTENDS THIS MEETING. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 Riverwatch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, copying, distribution or other use of this message or its attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. The sender has not waived any applicable privilege by sending the accompanying transmission. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by return email or by telephone at (706) 650-5694 and delete the message and all attachment(s), copies and backups from your system. P Please consider the environment before printing this email ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Linda Grijalva Bcc: Blake Thompson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Bruce Tanner ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Casey Broom ([EMAIL REDACTED]); [EMAIL REDACTED]; Jim Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Mario Chapple ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Mie Lucas ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Mike Lyons ([EMAIL REDACTED]); [EMAIL REDACTED]; Robert "Bob" Fields, III ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Russell Riner ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Rusty Sanders; Taliaferro County ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Tommy Wolfe ([EMAIL REDACTED]) Subject: Jefferson County PDM Date: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 10:55:00 AM Jefferson County has received a grant from the FEMA to update the 2009 Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan (PDM). The plan is required to be updated every five years. One of the plan requirements is to invite neighboring communities to provide input into the planning process. The Jefferson County PDM Committee would like to extend an invitation to your agency to participate in our planning process. The second planning meeting will be held May 28, 2014 at 10:00 am at the Jefferson EOC located at 1841 Hwy 24 W Suite A Louisville Georgia 30434. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 Riverwatch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, copying, distribution or other use of this message or its attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. The sender has not waived any applicable privilege by sending the accompanying transmission. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by return email or by telephone at (706) 650-5694 and delete the message and all attachment(s), copies and backups from your system. P Please consider the environment before printing this email ---PAGE BREAK--- AGENDA Jefferson County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Meeting May 28, 2014 10:00 PM 1. Items: a. The ice storm was discussed in great detail. b. Critical Facilities Review c. In-kind contribution forms. 2. Next meeting ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Linda Grijalva To: Adam Mestres ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Anna Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Arty Thrift ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "Avera"; "Bartow ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; "[EMAIL REDACTED]"; "[EMAIL REDACTED]"; Dr. Molly Howard ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Eric L. Mosley ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Frank Parrish ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Garry A. McCord ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "Janet Pilcher ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; Jim Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Joey May ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Larry Cheely ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Leah Lumley ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Louisa Pennington ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Marc Peebles ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Richard T. Sapp ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert Chalker ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert Hoffman ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert Morris ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "Sallie Adams ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; Shane Barrow ([EMAIL REDACTED]) Subject: FW: Jefferson County PDM Date: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 10:59:00 AM Please make plans to attend the pre-disaster mitigation meeting on June 26, 2014 at 10:00 am at the Jefferson EOC located at 1841 Hwy 24 W Suite A Louisville Georgia 30434. Please remember that upon completion of the plan update the county and all cities will have to adopt by resolution. AS YOU ARE AWARE FROM MY PREVIOUS EMAILS THE PLAN MUST BE COMPLETED BY AUGUST 2014 TO QUALIFY FOR THE GRANT FUNDS THAT WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE AS A RESULT OF THE ICE STORM. IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT SOMEONE FROM YOUR AGENCY ATTENDS THIS MEETING. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 Riverwatch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, copying, distribution or other use of this message or its attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. The sender has not waived any applicable privilege by sending the accompanying transmission. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by return email or by telephone at (706) 650-5694 and delete the message and all attachment(s), copies and backups from your system. P Please consider the environment before printing this email ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Linda Grijalva Bcc: Blake Thompson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Bruce Tanner ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Casey Broom ([EMAIL REDACTED]); [EMAIL REDACTED]; Jim Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Mario Chapple ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Mie Lucas ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Mike Lyons ([EMAIL REDACTED]); [EMAIL REDACTED]; Robert "Bob" Fields III ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Russell Riner ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Rusty Sanders; Taliaferro County ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Tommy Wolfe ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "([EMAIL REDACTED])"; Adam Mestres ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Amy Cochran ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Arty Thrift ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Audrey Chalker; Avera; Bartow ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Brent Weir Camak ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Carter Crawford ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Chris Hutchings ([EMAIL REDACTED]); City of Edgehill ([EMAIL REDACTED]); City of Grovetown ([EMAIL REDACTED]); City of Hephzibah ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "City of Norwood ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; "City of Rayle ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; City of Sardis ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Crawfordville; Darrell Adams ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "David L. Tyler"; Dearing ([EMAIL REDACTED]); dnorton@thomson- mcduffie.net; Don Powers ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Dorenda Smith ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Eunice Seigel ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Gibson, City of ; Glascock County; Grady Saxon ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Hancock County ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Harrison, Town of ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "Jason M. Rizner ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; Jerry Coalson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Jerry Henry ([EMAIL REDACTED]); John Graham ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Judy McCorkle ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Ken Westbrook ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Lincolnton ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Lori Boyen ([EMAIL REDACTED]); [EMAIL REDACTED]; Michael Felts ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Midville ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Regina Freeman ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Renee Brown ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Richard T. Sapp ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Rosemary Baughman Roxanne Ashmore ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "Sallie Adams ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; Sean Kelley ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Shirley Beasley ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Sistie Hudson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); [EMAIL REDACTED]; "Town of Davisboro ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; Town of Girard ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Town of Mitchell ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Town of Tignall ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Warrenton ([EMAIL REDACTED]) Subject: FW: Jefferson County PDM June 26, 2014 meeting Date: Tuesday, June 24, 2014 10:58:00 AM Jefferson County has received a grant from the FEMA to update the 2009 Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan (PDM). The plan is required to be updated every five years. One of the plan requirements is to invite neighboring communities to provide input into the planning process. The Jefferson County PDM Committee would like to extend an invitation to your agency to participate in our planning process. The second planning meeting will be held June 26, 2014 at 10:00 am at the Jefferson EOC located at 1841 Hwy 24 W Suite A Louisville Georgia 30434. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 Riverwatch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, copying, distribution or other use of this message or its attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. The sender has not waived any applicable privilege by sending the accompanying transmission. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by return ---PAGE BREAK--- AGENDA Jefferson County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Meeting June 26, 2014 10:00 AM 1. Items: a. The ice storm discussion was continued from last meeting. b. In-kind contribution forms. 2. Next meeting ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Linda Grijalva To: "[EMAIL REDACTED]"; "[EMAIL REDACTED]" Subject: HMGP Meeting Date: Thursday, July 3, 2014 11:07:00 AM Joe and Gordon Jefferson County and all six municipalities will be meeting at the Jefferson EOC located at 1841 Hwy 24 W Suite A Louisville Georgia 30434 at 10:00 am on Thursday July 10, 2014 to discuss the upcoming 4165 DR HMGP opportunities. We would like for you to attend if at all possible. The purpose of the meeting is to ensure that we get the biggest bang for our buck. Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 Riverwatch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, copying, distribution or other use of this message or its attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. The sender has not waived any applicable privilege by sending the accompanying transmission. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by return email or by telephone at (706) 650-5694 and delete the message and all attachment(s), copies and backups from your system. P Please consider the environment before printing this email ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Joe Edenfield To: Linda Grijalva Subject: RE: HMGP Meeting Date: Thursday, July 10, 2014 8:32:35 AM Linda, I will be attending. Joe Edenfield Risk Reduction Specialist Hazard Mitigation Division Georgia Emergency Management Agency P.O. Box 12666 Statesboro, GA 30460 Phone (912) 486-7736 Fax (912) 486-7944 [EMAIL REDACTED] From: Linda Grijalva [mailto:[EMAIL REDACTED]] Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 11:07 AM To: Joe Edenfield; Gordon Lowe Subject: HMGP Meeting Joe and Gordon Jefferson County and all six municipalities will be meeting at the Jefferson EOC located at 1841 Hwy 24 W Suite A Louisville Georgia 30434 at 10:00 am on Thursday July 10, 2014 to discuss the upcoming 4165 DR HMGP opportunities. We would like for you to attend if at all possible. The purpose of the meeting is to ensure that we get the biggest bang for our buck. Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 Riverwatch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, copying, distribution or other use of this message or its attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. The sender has not waived any applicable privilege by ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Linda Grijalva To: Arty Thrift ([EMAIL REDACTED]); City of Sardis ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Avera; Sallie Adams ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Richard T. Sapp ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Joey May ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Adam Mestres ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Town of Bartow Cc: Jim Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]) Subject: Grant Meeting Date: Thursday, July 3, 2014 11:16:00 AM Please make plans to attend the meeting at 10:00 am on July 10, 2014 at the Jefferson EOC located at 1841 Hwy 24 W Suite A Louisville Georgia 30434 meeting to discuss the upcoming 4165 DR HMGP opportunities available as a result of the ice storm. The purpose of the meeting is to ensure that we get the biggest bang for the buck and to ensure we order the correct equipment and that all equipment applied for is compatible. This way, if during our next disaster one jurisdiction does not need their equipment they can loan to another. GEMA has been invited to attend. If you have any questions, please call. Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 Riverwatch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, copying, distribution or other use of this message or its attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. The sender has not waived any applicable privilege by sending the accompanying transmission. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by return email or by telephone at (706) 650-5694 and delete the message and all attachment(s), copies and backups from your system. P Please consider the environment before printing this email ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Linda Grijalva To: Arty Thrift ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Avera; Sallie Adams ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Richard T. Sapp ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Joey May ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Adam Mestres ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Town of Bartow; Stapleton ([EMAIL REDACTED]) Cc: Jim Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]) Subject: RE: Grant Meeting Date: Thursday, July 10, 2014 8:37:00 AM Remember our meeting this morning at 10:00. Joe Edenfield from GEMA will be attending to help us with the grant process. I will see everyone shortly. Linda From: Linda Grijalva Sent: Thursday, July 3, 2014 11:17 AM To: Arty Thrift ([EMAIL REDACTED]); City of Sardis ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Avera; Sallie Adams ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Richard T. Sapp ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Joey May ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Adam Mestres ([EMAIL REDACTED]); 'Town of Bartow' Cc: Jim Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]) Subject: Grant Meeting Please make plans to attend the meeting at 10:00 am on July 10, 2014 at the Jefferson EOC located at 1841 Hwy 24 W Suite A Louisville Georgia 30434 meeting to discuss the upcoming 4165 DR HMGP opportunities available as a result of the ice storm. The purpose of the meeting is to ensure that we get the biggest bang for the buck and to ensure we order the correct equipment and that all equipment applied for is compatible. This way, if during our next disaster one jurisdiction does not need their equipment they can loan to another. GEMA has been invited to attend. If you have any questions, please call. Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 Riverwatch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, copying, distribution or other use of this message or its attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. The sender has not waived any applicable privilege by sending the accompanying transmission. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by return email or by telephone at (706) 650-5694 and delete the message and all attachment(s), copies and backups from your system. ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Linda Grijalva To: Stapleton ([EMAIL REDACTED]) Subject: FW: Grant Meeting Date: Thursday, July 3, 2014 12:21:00 PM I left you off the email. Linda From: Linda Grijalva Sent: Thursday, July 3, 2014 11:17 AM To: Arty Thrift ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Avera; Sallie Adams ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Richard T. Sapp ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Joey May ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Adam Mestres ([EMAIL REDACTED]); 'Town of Bartow' Cc: Jim Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]) Subject: Grant Meeting Please make plans to attend the meeting at 10:00 am on July 10, 2014 at the Jefferson EOC located at 1841 Hwy 24 W Suite A Louisville Georgia 30434 meeting to discuss the upcoming 4165 DR HMGP opportunities available as a result of the ice storm. The purpose of the meeting is to ensure that we get the biggest bang for the buck and to ensure we order the correct equipment and that all equipment applied for is compatible. This way, if during our next disaster one jurisdiction does not need their equipment they can loan to another. GEMA has been invited to attend. If you have any questions, please call. Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 Riverwatch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, copying, distribution or other use of this message or its attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. The sender has not waived any applicable privilege by sending the accompanying transmission. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by return email or by telephone at (706) 650-5694 and delete the message and all attachment(s), copies and backups from your system. P Please consider the environment before printing this email ---PAGE BREAK--- AGENDA Jefferson County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Meeting July 10, 2014 10:00 AM 1. Items: a. HMGP with GEMA b. In-kind contribution forms. 2. Next meeting ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Linda Grijalva To: Adam Mestres ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Anna Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Arty Thrift ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "Avera"; "Bartow ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; "[EMAIL REDACTED]"; "[EMAIL REDACTED]"; Dr. Molly Howard ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Eric L. Mosley ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Frank Parrish ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Garry A. McCord ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "Janet Pilcher ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; Jim Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Joey May ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Larry Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Larry Cheely ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Leah Lumley ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Louisa Pennington ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Marc Peebles ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Richard T. Sapp (richard- [EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert Chalker ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert Hoffman ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert Morris ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "Sallie Adams ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; Sam Dasher ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Shane Barrow ([EMAIL REDACTED]) Subject: FW: Jefferson County PDM Date: Wednesday, August 6, 2014 1:01:00 PM Just a reminder about our meeting tomorrow. Please ensure someone from your jurisdiction is there to pick up a copy of the draft plan. Please make plans to attend the pre-disaster mitigation meeting on August 7, 2014 at 10:00 am at the Jefferson EOC located at 1841 Hwy 24 W Suite A Louisville Georgia 30434. Please remember that upon completion of the plan update the county and all cities will have to adopt by resolution. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 Riverwatch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, copying, distribution or other use of this message or its attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. The sender has not waived any applicable privilege by sending the accompanying transmission. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by return email or by telephone at (706) 650-5694 and delete the message and all attachment(s), copies and backups from your system. P Please consider the environment before printing this email ---PAGE BREAK--- AGENDA Jefferson County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Meeting August 7, 2014 10:00 AM 1. Items: a. Review Draft Plan. b. In-kind contribution forms. 2. Next meeting ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- AGENDA Jefferson County Pre-Disaster Mitigation Meeting August 18, 2014 10:00 AM 1. Items: a. Review Plan to submit to GEMA. b. Discussed Review Period and Resolution Adoption Process c. In-kind contribution forms. 2. Next meeting ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- 1 Linda Grijalva From: Linda Grijalva Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2014 1:27 PM Subject: FW: Jefferson County PDM final Meeting Just a reminder about the meeting tomorrow. December 18, 2014 at 10:00 am in the Jefferson EOC located at 1841 Hwy 24 W Suite A, Louisville, Georgia The link below is the final plan. Signed resolutions will be added once completed. It is 587 pages. Do not print out. Read at your leisure. Linda From: Linda Grijalva Sent: Sunday, December 7, 2014 12:04 PM To: Adam Mestres ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Anna Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Arty Thrift ([EMAIL REDACTED]); 'Avera'; 'Bartow ([EMAIL REDACTED])'; '[EMAIL REDACTED]'; '[EMAIL REDACTED]'; Dr. Molly Howard ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Eric L. Mosley ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Frank Parrish ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Garry A. McCord ([EMAIL REDACTED]); 'Janet Pilcher ([EMAIL REDACTED])'; Jim Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Joey May ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Larry Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Larry Cheely ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Leah Lumley ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Louisa Pennington ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Marc Peebles ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Richard T. Sapp (richard‐[EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert Chalker ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert Hoffman ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Robert Morris ([EMAIL REDACTED]); 'Sallie Adams ([EMAIL REDACTED])'; Sam Dasher ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Shane Barrow ([EMAIL REDACTED]) Subject: Jefferson County PDM final Meeting FEMA has Approved Pending Adoption by all jurisdictions the Pre‐Disaster Mitigation Plan Update. Please ensure that the hard copy I provided you earlier is available for review. The Pre‐disaster Committee will hold its final meeting on December 18, 2014 at 10:00 am in the Jefferson EOC located at 1841 Hwy 24 W Suite A, Louisville, Georgia 30434 Please ensure that someone is there to represent your agency or jurisdiction. Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 River Watch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Linda Grijalva Bcc: Blake Thompson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Bruce Tanner ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Casey Broom ([EMAIL REDACTED]); [EMAIL REDACTED]; Jim Anderson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Mario Chapple ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Mie Lucas ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Mike Lyons ([EMAIL REDACTED]); [EMAIL REDACTED]; Robert "Bob" Fields III ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Russell Riner ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Rusty Sanders; Taliaferro County ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Tommy Wolfe ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "([EMAIL REDACTED])"; Adam Mestres ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Amy Cochran ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Arty Thrift ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Audrey Chalker; Avera; Bartow ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Brent Weir Camak ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Chris Hutchings ([EMAIL REDACTED]); City of Edgehill ([EMAIL REDACTED]); City of Grovetown ([EMAIL REDACTED]); City of Hephzibah ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "City of Norwood ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; "City of Rayle ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; City Of Sardis - New; City of Vidette ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Crawfordville; Darrell Adams ([EMAIL REDACTED]); David Crawley ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "David L. Tyler"; Dearing ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Don Powers ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Dorenda Smith ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Gibson, City of ; Glascock County; Grady Saxon ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Harold Moore; Harrison, Town of ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "Jason M. Rizner ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; Jerry Coalson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Jerry Henry ([EMAIL REDACTED]); John Graham ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Judy McCorkle ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Ken Westbrook ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Lajuana Givens ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Lincolnton ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Lori Boyen ([EMAIL REDACTED]); [EMAIL REDACTED]; Michael Felts ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Midville ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Regina Freeman ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Renee Brown ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Richard T. Sapp (richard- [EMAIL REDACTED]); Rosemary Baughman Roxanne Ashmore ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "Sallie Adams ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; Sean Kelley ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Sherri Bailey ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Shirley Beasley ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Sistie Hudson ([EMAIL REDACTED]); [EMAIL REDACTED]; Tameka Allen ([EMAIL REDACTED]); "Town of Davisboro ([EMAIL REDACTED])"; Town of Girard ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Town of Mitchell ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Town of Tignall ([EMAIL REDACTED]); Warrenton ([EMAIL REDACTED]) Subject: Jefferson County PDM Date: Sunday, December 7, 2014 12:06:00 PM Jefferson County has received a grant from the FEMA to update the 2009 Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan (PDM). The plan is required to be updated every five years. FEMA has Approved Pending Adoption by all jurisdictions of the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan Update. The Jefferson County PDM Committee would like to extend an invitation to your agency to review the plan before all jurisdictions adopt. The final meeting will be held on December 18, 2014 at 10:00 am in the Jefferson EOC located at 1841 Hwy 24 W Suite A, Louisville, Georgia. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 River Watch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, copying, distribution or other use of this message or its attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. The sender has not waived any applicable privilege by sending the accompanying transmission. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by return email or by telephone at (706) 650-5694 and delete the message and all attachment(s), copies and backups from your ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Linda Grijalva To: "[EMAIL REDACTED]" Subject: HAZUS Date: Monday, August 4, 2014 9:47:00 AM Jon WE have been trying to install HASUZ to use with our regions mitigation plans. WE can download and unzip but we cannot install. The error message we get is that it must be used with GIS 10.0 SP2. We are running GIS 10.2. Is this our problem? Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 Riverwatch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, copying, distribution or other use of this message or its attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. The sender has not waived any applicable privilege by sending the accompanying transmission. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by return email or by telephone at (706) 650-5694 and delete the message and all attachment(s), copies and backups from your system. P Please consider the environment before printing this email ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Janowicz, Jon To: Linda Grijalva; [EMAIL REDACTED] Cc: Berman, Eric; Mccoy, Subject: RE: HAZUS Date: Monday, August 4, 2014 10:15:31 AM Hi Linda: I have added the Hazus help desk to this email. Hopefully, you’ll hear from them soon. Thanks and good luck. Jon From: Linda Grijalva [mailto:[EMAIL REDACTED]] Sent: Monday, August 04, 2014 9:47 AM To: Janowicz, Jon Subject: HAZUS Jon WE have been trying to install HASUZ to use with our regions mitigation plans. WE can download and unzip but we cannot install. The error message we get is that it must be used with GIS 10.0 SP2. We are running GIS 10.2. Is this our problem? Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 Riverwatch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] Direct: [PHONE REDACTED] Fax: [PHONE REDACTED] [EMAIL REDACTED] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this email message and all attachments are the property of the CSRA Regional Commission and contains information that may be confidential, proprietary, copyrighted and/or legally privileged and protected by state and federal laws. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in the e-mail. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any reading, dissemination, copying, distribution or other use of this message or its attachments is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. The sender has not waived any applicable privilege by sending the accompanying transmission. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by return email or by telephone at (706) 650-5694 and delete the message and all attachment(s), copies and backups from your system. P Please consider the environment before printing this email ---PAGE BREAK--- From: [EMAIL REDACTED] To: [EMAIL REDACTED] Cc: [EMAIL REDACTED]; Linda Grijalva Subject: Re: [Request ID :##9841##] : RE: HAZUS Date: Monday, August 4, 2014 10:39:01 AM Hello Jon, Thank you for submitting this request. Your request has been assigned to a technician. We will contact soon. Please let us know if you have any questions. Thanks, Waise Sekander Hazus Support Team [EMAIL REDACTED] Category : Description : Hi Linda: I have added the Hazus help desk to this email. Hopefully, you’ll hear from them soon. Thanks and good luck. Jon From: Linda Grijalva [mailto:[EMAIL REDACTED]] Sent: Monday, August 04, 2014 9:47 AM To: Janowicz, Jon Subject: HAZUS Jon WE have been trying to install HASUZ to use with our regions mitigation plans. WE can download and unzip but we cannot install. The error message we get is that it must be used with GIS 10.0 SP2. We are running GIS 10.2. Is this our problem? Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development CSRA Regional Commission 3023 Riverwatch Parkway Suite A Augusta, GA 30907 Main: [PHONE REDACTED] ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Mccoy, To: Janowicz, Jon; Linda Grijalva; [EMAIL REDACTED] Cc: Berman, Eric Subject: RE: HAZUS Date: Monday, August 4, 2014 10:24:58 AM Linda, The problem is that you are running Arc 10.2 . HAZUS currently operates on 10.0 only. You will either need to install the older version of Arc, or wait for the next release of HAZUS which will operate on 10.2. I am currently at the annual HAZUS conference and I can provide you with more details about the next release when I return. Thank you, Sent from my iFEMA mobile device. From: Janowicz, Jon Sent: Monday, August 04, 2014 2:10:11 PM To: Linda Grijalva; [EMAIL REDACTED] Cc: Berman, Eric; Mccoy, Subject: RE: HAZUS Hi Linda: I have added the Hazus help desk to this email. Hopefully, you’ll hear from them soon. Thanks and good luck. Jon From: Linda Grijalva [mailto:[EMAIL REDACTED]] Sent: Monday, August 04, 2014 9:47 AM To: Janowicz, Jon Subject: HAZUS Jon WE have been trying to install HASUZ to use with our regions mitigation plans. WE can download and unzip but we cannot install. The error message we get is that it must be used with GIS 10.0 SP2. We are running GIS 10.2. Is this our problem? Linda Linda D. Grijalva Director of Community Development ---PAGE BREAK--- From: Linda Grijalva To: Mccoy, Subject: Re: HAZUS Date: Monday, August 4, 2014 11:05:53 AM We will wait for the next release. We really cannot go backwards. Thanks. Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID "Mccoy, wrote: Linda, The problem is that you are running Arc 10.2 . HAZUS currently operates on 10.0 only. You will either need to install the older version of Arc, or wait for the next release of HAZUS which will operate on 10.2. I am currently at the annual HAZUS conference and I can provide you with more details about the next release when I return. Thank you, Sent from my iFEMA mobile device. From: Janowicz, Jon Sent: Monday, August 04, 2014 2:10:11 PM To: Linda Grijalva; [EMAIL REDACTED] Cc: Berman, Eric; Mccoy, Subject: RE: HAZUS Hi Linda: I have added the Hazus help desk to this email. Hopefully, you’ll hear from them soon. Thanks and good luck. Jon From: Linda Grijalva [mailto:[EMAIL REDACTED]] Sent: Monday, August 04, 2014 9:47 AM To: Janowicz, Jon Subject: HAZUS Jon WE have been trying to install HASUZ to use with our regions mitigation plans. WE can download ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK--- ---PAGE BREAK---