All-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update: Jefferson County - East

Transcription

REGIONAL ALL-HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
UPDATE
JEFFERSON COUNTY
And
PARTICIPATING COMMUNITIES AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS*
Prepared by the East-West Gateway Council of Governments
October 2009
*See Updated Community Participation List for 2010 for most recent
information on communities and school districts which have adopted
Resolution of Support and Participation.
All Hazard Mitigation Plan
Community Participant Update
July 2010
Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan
Jefferson County Communities
Jurisdiction
Arnold
Byrnes Mill
Cedar Hill Lakes
Crystal City
De Soto
Festus
Herculaneum
Hillsboro
Kimmswick
Olympian Village
Parkdale
Pevely
Scotsdale
Continuing
Pending
X
X
X
X
X
X
New
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
No Longer
Participating
i
Participating Communities AllAll-Hazard Mitigation Plan
Jurisdiction
Arnold
Byrnes Mill
Cedar Hill Lakes
Crystal City
De Soto
Festus
Herculaneum
Hillsboro
Kimmswick
Olympian Village
Parkdale
Pevely
Scotsdale
Continuing
Pending
New
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
No Longer
Participating
ii
PARTICIPATING SCHOOL DISTRICTS ALLALL-HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN
District
Affton 101 District
Bayless District
Brentwood District
Clayton District
Crystal City 47 District
DeSoto 73 District
Dunklin R-V District
Ferguson-Florissant R-II
Festus R-VI District
Fort Zumwalt R-II District
Fox C-6 District
Francis Howell R-III
Franklin County R-II
District
Grandview R-II District
Hancock Place District
Hazelwood District
Hillsboro R-3 District
Jefferson County R-VII
District
Jennings District
Kirkwood R-VII District
Ladue District
Lindbergh R-VIII District
Lonedell R-XIV District
Mehlville R-IX District
Meramec Valley R-III
District
MRH District(Maplewood
Richmond Heights)
New Haven District
Normandy District
Northwest R-I District
Orchard Farm R-5
District
Parkway District
Pattonville R-III District
Ritenour District
Riverview Gardens
District
Rockwood R-VI District
Continuing
Pending
New
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
No Longer
Participating
District
Special School District of
St. Louis County
Reorganized R-XV
District (Spring Bluff)
St. Charles R-VI District
St. Clair R-XIII District
St. Louis Board of
Education
Strain-Japan R-16
District
Sullivan District
Sunrise R-IX District
Union R-XI District
University City District
Valley Park District
Washington District
Webster Groves District
Wellston District
Wentzville R-IV District
Windsor C-1District
Continuing
iii
Pending
New
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
No Longer
Participating
JEFFERSON COUNTY
Table of Contents
Section 1 County/Community Profiles ................................................................
........................................................................
........................................1
........1
Community Profiles...................................................................................................... 1
Jefferson County Profile ............................................................................................... 1
Development/History……………… .............................................................................. 1
Geography, Geology and Climate................................................................................. 2
Form of Government…................................................................................................ 8
Community Partnerships .............................................................................................. 8
Public Awareness ......................................................................................................... 8
Media Relations ........................................................................................................... 9
Demographic Information.......................................................................................... 10
Age ........................................................................................................................... 10
Per Capita Income and Persons Below the Federal Poverty Level .................................. 10
Education Levels ........................................................................................................ 10
Diversity..................................................................................................................... 11
Economy, Employment and Industry .......................................................................... 12
Labor Force ............................................................................................................... 12
Average Wage Rate ................................................................................................... 13
Primary Employers and Industries ............................................................................... 13
Access to Employment; Incommuting and Outcommuting ......................................... 14
Codes/Regulations for Building, Stormwater, Zoning, Fire........................................... 15
Existing Community Plans .......................................................................................... 15
Land Use Information.. .............................................................................................. 16
Development Trends and Annexation......................................................................... 17
Floodplain Management ............................................................................................ 18
Wetlands Issues ......................................................................................................... 20
NFIP Participation ...................................................................................................... 21
Environmental Concerns ............................................................................................ 21
Endangered Species, Historic Properties/Districts, Archaeological Sites ........................ 22
Identified Assets ........................................................................................................ 23
Inventory of Critical/Key/Essential Facilities .................................................................. 23
Medical Facilities........................................................................................................ 23
Long Term Care Facilities............................................................................................ 24
Day Care Centers ....................................................................................................... 25
Schools...................................................................................................................... 27
Government Facilities................................................................................................. 29
Recreation Facilities.................................................................................................... 32
Inventory of Infrastructure ......................................................................................... 35
Roadways/Transportation........................................................................................... 37
Motor Freight Transportation..................................................................................... 38
Railroads ................................................................................................................... 38
Airports ..................................................................................................................... 39
Public Transportation................................................................................................. 40
iv
Communications ....................................................................................................... 40
Water and Sewer Facilities ......................................................................................... 42
Electricity and Natural Gas ......................................................................................... 48
Solid Waste Disposal.................................................................................................. 51
Law Enforcement....................................................................................................... 52
Emergency Services (911)........................................................................................... 52
Emergency Medical Services....................................................................................... 53
Fire Protection ........................................................................................................... 53
Underground Infrastructure ....................................................................................... 54
Inventory of Housing Structures ................................................................................. 55
Number of Dwelling Units.......................................................................................... 55
Average Unit Cost...................................................................................................... 56
Total Inventory of Structures ...................................................................................... 56
Cities and Villages Profiles……………………………………………………….…………56
Section 2 – Risk Assessment ................................................................
......................................................................................
......................................................1
......................1
Natural Hazard Identification and Elimination Process .................................................. 1
Community Wide Hazard Profile and List of Hazards Identified ..................................... 1
Flood........................................................................................................................... 2
Levees ................................................................................................................ 36
Earthquake ................................................................................................................ 54
Tornado/Severe Thunderstorm ................................................................................... 76
Severe Winter Weather .............................................................................................. 94
Drought .................................................................................................................. 102
Heat Wave............................................................................................................... 114
Dam Failure ............................................................................................................. 128
Wildfire ................................................................................................................... 141
Multi-Jurisdictional Risk Assessment ......................................................................... 146
Worksheets ..………………………………………………………………………………149
Section 3 – Jefferson County Capability Assessment ....................................................
....................................................1
....................1
Mitigation Management Policies .................................................................................. 1
Existing Plans............................................................................................................... 1
Mitigation Programs .................................................................................................... 1
Jefferson County Capabilities (Organization, Staffing, Training) .................................... 3
Responsibilities and Authorities.................................................................................... 3
Intergovernmental and Interagency Coordination......................................................... 4
Vulnerability Assessment of County Policies and Development Trends…. ...................... 4
Commitments to a Comprehensive Mitigation Program................................................ 4
Laws, Regulations, and Policies Related to Development in Hazard-Prone Areas ............ 4
County Laws, Regulations and Policies Related to Hazard Mitigation in General ............ 4
How Local Risk Assessments are Incorporated and Prioritized into Local Planning ......... 5
Current Criteria Used to Prioritize Mitigation Funding................................................... 5
Integration of Hazard Mitigation with the County Department’s Plans……………….…5
How the County Determines Cost-Effectiveness of Mitigation Programs………………...6
v
Mitigation Funding Options, Including Current and Potential Sources of Federal, State,
Local and Private Funds................................................................................................ 6
How Governments Meet Requirements for Hazard Mitigation Funding Programs.......... 6
Recommendations for Improvement ............................................................................ 6
County and Municipal Policies and Development Trends............................................... 7
Funding Sources .......................................................................................................... 8
Worksheets………………………………………………………………………………….15
Section 4 - Mitigation ................................................................
...............................................................................................
...............................................................1
...............................1
Introduction to Mitigation ........................................................................................... 1
Definition of Mitigation ............................................................................................... 1
Categories of Mitigation .............................................................................................. 1
Mitigation Versus Preparedness.................................................................................... 2
Mitigation Versus Response and Recovery .................................................................... 3
Mitigation Plan Benefits ............................................................................................... 3
Hazard Mitigation Goals, Objectives, Strategy and Coordination................................... 3
Surveys ........................................................................................................................ 5
Evaluation ................................................................................................................. 11
Strategic Implementation........................................................................................... 16
Cities with Higher Exposure to County Hazards……………………………………….….17
Analysis and Prioritization of Mitigation Actions ......................................................... 17
Monitoring, Evaluating and Updating the Plan........................................................... 18
Worksheets. ........………………………………………………………………………..... 20
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Section 1 – County/Community Profiles................................
Profiles ................................................................
......................................................................
......................................1
......1
TABLE J1
TABLE J2
TABLE J3
TABLE J4
TABLE J5
TABLE J6
TABLE J7
TABLE J8
TABLE J9A
TABLE J9B
TABLE J10
TABLE J11A
TABLE J11B
TABLE J12
TABLE J13
TABLE J14
TABLE J15
TABLE J16
TABLE J17
TABLE J18
TABLE J19
TABLE J20
TABLE J21
TABLE J22
TABLE J23
TABLE J24
TABLE J25
TABLE J26
JEFFERSON COUNTY INCOME AND POVERTY LEVEL...........................................................10
JEFFERSON COUNTY EDUCATION ......................................................................................11
JEFFERSON COUNTY DEMOGRAPHICS ...............................................................................11
JEFFERSON COUNTY EMPLOYMENT STATUS ......................................................................13
JEFFERSON COUNTY TOP EMPLOYERS 2007 ......................................................................13
JEFFERSON COUNTY EMPLOYMENT BY INDUSTRY .............................................................14
JEFFERSON COUNTY COMMUTING TO WORK....................................................................14
JEFFERSON COUNTY NFIP INSURANCE PARTICIPATING MUNICIPALITIES.............................21
JEFFERSON COUNTY MEDICAL FACILITIES ..........................................................................23
JEFFERSON COUNTY LONG TERM HEALTHCARE FACILITIES ................................................24
JEFFERSON COUNTY CHILDCARE CENTERS .........................................................................25
JEFFERSON COUNTY PRIVATE SCHOOLS ............................................................................28
JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS ................................................................28
JEFFERSON COUNTY GOVERNMENT FACILITIES..................................................................29
RECREATIONAL FACILITIES IN JEFFERSON COUNTY ............................................................33
JEFFERSON COUNTY FREIGHT CARRERS .............................................................................38
AIRPORT OPERATIONS: ST. LOUIS REGION .........................................................................39
PRIMARY LOCAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS.......................................................40
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES IN ST. LOUIS COUNTY............................................42
ST. LOUIS REGIONAL AREA SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ........................................................51
ST. LOUIS REGIONAL AREA LANDFILLS ..............................................................................52
JEFFERSON COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICTS AND RESOURCES ..................................53
UNDERGROUND INFRASTRUCTURE....................................................................................54
JEFFERSON COUNTY INVENTORY OF HOUSEING UNITS .....................................................55
JEFFERSON COUNTY HOUSING UNITS BREAKDOWN..........................................................55
JEFFERSON COUNTY MEDIAN VALUE OF HOMES...............................................................56
INVENTORY OF STRUCTURES .............................................................................................56
INDIVIDUAL PROFILE: MUNICIPALITIES LOCATED IN JEFFERSON .........................................57
.....................................................................................
.....................................................1
.....................1
TABLE J27A
TABLE J27B
TABLE J27C
TABLE J27D
TABLE J28
TABLE J29A
TABLE J29B
TABLE J30A
TABLE J30B
TABLE J30C
TABLE J30D
TABLE J31
TABLE J32
TABLE J33
TABLE J34
TABLE J35
TABLE J36
TABLE J37
TABLE J38
PROBABILITY OF HAZARDS FROM NATUREAL DISASTERS.....................................................2
MISSISSIPPI AND MERAMEC RIVER STAGES: JEFFERSON COUNTY ......................................22
JEFFERSON COUNTY NFIP INSURANCE PARTICIPATING MUNICIPALITIES.............................25
JEFFERSON COUNTY UNMITIGATED PROPERTIES – REPETITIVE LOSSES ..............................26
SEASONAL PATTERN FOR RAIN EVENTS FOR ST. LOUIS REGION.........................................36
LIST OF LEVEES .................................................................................................................41
DAMAGE ASSESSMENT OF TOTAL LEVEE FAILURE ............................................................46
LARGEST EARTHQUAKES IN CONTIGUOUS UNITED STATES ...............................................60
RECENT EARTHQUAKE EVENTS 1.0 OR GREATER ...............................................................60
HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKE EVENTS....................................................................................62
LANDSLIDE, SINKHOLE ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN REGION ...............................................63
JEFFERSON COUNTY BRIDGES ............................................................................................66
FREQUENCY OF EARTHQUAKES .........................................................................................70
FUJITA TORNADO MEASUREMENT SCALE ..........................................................................81
TORNADO EVENTS IN JEFFERSON COUNTY ........................................................................83
SEVERE THUNDERSTORM EVENTS IN JEFFERSON COUNTY .................................................84
TORNADOES: JEFFERSON COUNTY 1950-1998 ..................................................................90
STORM INTENSITIES: JEFFERSON COUNTY REGION (FUJITA SCALE) ....................................90
JEFFERSON COUNTY TORNADO PROBABILITY .....................................................................93
vii
TABLE J39
TABLE J40
TABLE J41
TABLE J42
TABLE J43
TABLE J44
TABLE J45
TABLE J46
TABLE J47
TABLE J48
TABLE J49
TABLE J50
JEFFERSON COUNTY WINTER STORMS 1994-2003 ............................................................96
JEFFERSON COUNTY WINTER STORMS 1994 TO 2007 .......................................................97
PALMER CLASSIFICATIONS ...............................................................................................105
RIVER LEVEL STAGES IN DROUGHT CONDITIONS IN JEFFERSON COUNTY ........................108
PALMER DROUGHT SEVERITY INDEX MONTHLY ................................................... 108
TOP FIFTEEN CONSECUTIVE DAYS 90 DEGREES OR HIGHER .............................................120
HEAT MORBIDITY BY LOCATION 1989 TO 2002...............................................................121
ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN REGION HEAT WAVE DAMAGES ............................................122
SUMMARY OF MISSOURI DAMS BY HAZARD CLASSIFICATION ................................. 133
JEFFERSON COUNTY HIGH HAZARD DAMS ......................................................... 133
RECENT DAM FAILURES IN MISSOURI ................................................................ 137
REASONS FOR FIRES IN MISSOURI .................................................................... 141
Section 4 – Mitigation ................................................................
..............................................................................................
..............................................................1
..............................1
LIST OF EMD AUTHORITIES .............................................................................. 4
LOCAL JURISDICTIONS .................................................................................... 5
SCHOOL DISTRICTS ......................................................................................... 6
SURVEY RESULTS ........................................................................................... 8
2009 ALL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SURVEY 1 ........... 9
2009 ALL HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN UPDATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT SURVEY 2 ..........10
TABLE J51A
TABLE J51B
TABLE J51C
TABLE J51D
TABLE J51E
TABLE J51F
TABLE J52
JEFFERSON COUNTY PROPOSED MITIGATION ACTION EVALUATION ................................11
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Section 1 – County/Community Profiles................................
Profiles ................................................................
......................................................................
......................................1
......1
FIGURE J2
FIGURE J3
FIGURE J4
FIGURE J6
FIGURE J9
FIGURE J10
FIGURE J11
FIGURE J12
FIGURE J13
TOPOGRAPHIC RELIEF MAP OF MISSOURI ............................................................................3
GENERALIZED GEOLOGIC MAP OF MISSOURI.......................................................................4
SURFICIAL MATERIALS IN MISSOURI ....................................................................................6
JEFFERSON COUNTY LAND USE..........................................................................................16
JEFFERSON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTS ............................................................................28
TRANSPORTATION MAP JEFFERSON COUNTY.....................................................................36
ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS .................................................................................39
AMEREN UE ELECTRIC COVERAGE .....................................................................................49
NATURAL GAS COVERAGE .................................................................................................50
.....................................................................................
.....................................................1
.....................1
FIGURE J14 SATELLITE IMAGE ST LOUIS AREA FLOODING 1993 ...........................................................3
FIGURE J15 AERIAL IMAGE ST LOUIS AREA FLOODING 1993 .................................................................3
FIGURE J16 1993 MIDWEST FLOOD........................................................................................................7
FIGURE J17 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ........................................................................................10
FIGURE J18 PUBLIC FACILITIES ..............................................................................................................12
FIGURE J19 RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ...................................................................................................14
FIGURE J20 TRANSPORTATION .............................................................................................................16
FIGURE J21A UTILITIES DAMAGES ..........................................................................................................18
FIGURE J21B EMERGENCY EXPENSES.....................................................................................................20
FIGURE J22A LEVEE DESIGN ...................................................................................................................37
FIGURE J22B UNDERSEEPAGE .................................................................................................................38
FIGURE J22C LEVEE DSITRICT CONCERN EXAMPLE..................................................................................39
FIGURE J22D ST. ALBANS AND AUGUSTA BOTTOMS LEVEE SYSTEM ......................................................42
FIGURE J22E ST. PETERS AND CHESTERFIELD VALLEY LEVEE SYSTEM ......................................................43
FIGURE J22F CONFLUENCE LEVEE SYSTEM .............................................................................................44
FIGURE J22G ST. LOUIS REGIONAL MAP OF LEVEES................................................................................45
FIGURE J22H ST. LOUIS AND ST. CHARLES COUNTY LEVEE MAP.............................................................46
FIGURE J25 LANDSLIDE POTENTIAL.......................................................................................................56
FIGURE J27 EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE INTERIOR BUILDING .....................................................................59
FIGURE J28 EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE EXTERIOR BUILDING ....................................................................59
FIGURE J29 PEAK ACCELERATION .........................................................................................................68
FIGURE J30 MODIFIED MERCALLI SCALE...............................................................................................69
FIGURE J31 EARTHQUAKES IN MISSOURI .............................................................................................71
FIGURE J32 VIEW OF TORNADIC THUNDERSTORM ...............................................................................77
FIGURE J33 HAIL PICTURE.....................................................................................................................79
FIGURE J34 FLOODING PICTURE ...........................................................................................................79
FIGURE J35 LIGHTNING PICTURE...........................................................................................................79
FIGURE J36 WIND ZONES ....................................................................................................................80
FIGURE J37 FUJITA TORNADO MEASUREMENT DAMAGE F1.................................................................82
FIGURE J42 TORNADO SEASONAL PATTERN .........................................................................................89
FIGURE J43 PERCENTAGE BREAKDOWN OF TORNADOES BY CATEGORY ..............................................91
FIGURE J44 REGIONAL TORNADO STORM TRACKS ...............................................................................91
FIGURE J46 MISSOURI DROUGHT REGIONS ........................................................................................106
FIGURE J47 DROUGHT SEVERITY INDEX BY YEAR................................................................................110
ix
FIGURE J48
FIGURE J49
FIGURE J50
FIGURE J52
PALMER DROUGHT INDEX ...............................................................................................113
HEAT INDEX CHART .........................................................................................................117
1980 MIDWEST HEAT WAVE ...........................................................................................126
WILDFIRE PICTURE ...........................................................................................................141
Volume 2 contains Figures J1, J5, J7, J8, J10, J23, J24, J26, J45, J51 and J54
x
xi
A Regional Overview All-Hazard Mitigation Plan
1
SECTION 1
Community Profiles
Natural hazards impact not only the citizens of the East-West Gateway Council of
Governments (EWG) planning region, but also their property, the environment and the
economy. Natural hazards, defined here as flooding, windstorms, severe winter storms,
earthquakes, heat waves, drought, dam failure and wildfires, have exposed the region’s
residents and businesses to the financial and emotional costs of recovering after disasters.
The risk associated with hazards increases as more people move to areas affect by hazards.
The inevitability of hazards and growing population and activity within the planning region
create an urgent need to develop strategies, coordinate resources and increase public
awareness to reduce risk and prevent loss from future hazard events. Identifying risks
posed by hazards, as well as developing strategies to reduce the impact of a hazard event
can assist in protecting life and property of citizens and communities. Local residents and
businesses are encouraged to work together to implement a Hazard Mitigation Plan that
addresses the potential impact of hazard events.
Below is a description and profile of Jefferson County within the EWG planning region.
County Profile: Jefferson County
Development/History
Development/History
Jefferson County is located in eastern Missouri, just west of the Mississippi River. It is
bordered on the north by St. Louis County and the Meramec River, on the south by Ste.
Genevieve and St. Francois Counties, and on the west by Washington and Franklin
Counties. The county is part of the St. Louis Metropolitan Statistical Area as defined by the
United States Census Bureau. The county has an area of about 425,280 acres that includes
about 2,176 acres of water in the Meramec, Mississippi and Big Rivers and other large
impoundments. Interstate I-55 runs north and south through the county. Jefferson
County was separated from St. Louis and St. Genevieve Counties and established in 1818
(effective January 1, 1819). Prior to settlement by Europeans, Native Americans including
the Delaware, Missouri, Osage and Shawnee tribes inhabited the region. Charles III, the
King of Spain, encouraged settlements by offering land grants. John Hildebrand,
recognized as the first settler, settled on Saline Creek in 1774, later known as the Meramec
Settlement. Lead, silica, zinc, barite, limestone and other mineral deposits lured settlers to
the area. The first lead shot tower west of Pennsylvania was erected in 1809 in the
southern part of Herculaneum. Sandstone mined from the St. Peter Sandstone Formation
was used to manufacture glass. See Figure J1 in the back of the Technical Appendix.
The county had a population of 213,600 as of the 2007 Census. There are 78,867
households in the county with an average size of 2.87 persons and the median age of
2
Jefferson County – Section 1
residents is 30.7 years. Median household income is $32,281 annually. Six percent of
county families and 7.4 percent of the total population have incomes below the poverty
level. There are 1,290 miles of roadways in Jefferson County with 75 percent maintained
by municipal and county governments, and 25 percent maintained by the state of Missouri.
Approximately 80 percent of workers drive to work alone and 0.3 percent take public
transportation to work.
While urbanization in the northern part of Jefferson County has been increasing, much of
the remainder of the county retains its rural, small town character. Once predominantly
rural, Jefferson County has experienced more than 50 years of growth pressure from the St.
Louis area. This growth has influenced the county, putting pressure on existing land uses,
natural resources and infrastructure. In 1997, the increase in sales tax revenues was only
3.27 percent, while for the last three years the increase has averaged over 7 percent per
year. This growth in sales tax increases not only impacts the general revenue monies, but
also has a tremendous effect on the budgets for the Sheriff’s department and the highway
department.
Geography, Geology and Climate
Jefferson County is divided into seven distinct physiographic regions. From the northeast
to the south these regions include: a small area of Dissected Till Plains, the River Hills, the
Zell Platform, the Burlington Escarpment, the Crystal Escarpment, the Salem Plateau and
the Avon Escarpment. These regions have landscape shapes controlled by separate
geologic units with variable bedding, thickness, weatherability and time of deposition. The
Dissected Till Plains consist of rolling and partially dissected basin with low hills and broad
ridges adjacent to the lower Meramec and Mississippi Rivers. Thick layers of alluvium and
loess have covered glacial till and outwash materials. The River Hills consist of a narrow
band of uplands bounded on the east by the Mississippi River and on the west by the
Burlington Escarpment. The Glaize, Joachim, Plattin, Pomme and Rock Creeks dissect this
area. Ridges and north and east slopes are covered with loess. West and south slopes
consist of upper cherty red clays and limestone outcrops on the lower slopes. The Zell
Platform is a small valley with rolling topography east of Selma south to Ste. Genevieve
County.
The River Hills are on the east and the Crystal Escarpment is on the west. The Burlington
Escarpment is a band that borders the River Hills and the Crystal Escarpment. The Salem
Plateau is the largest area in the county and borders the Crystal Escarpment to the north
and east and the Avon Escarpment to the south. The Avon Escarpment is the highest area
in the county located in the southwest corner. The Salem Plateau is on the north. Major
soils in this area are Goss and Wrengart. The highest point in the county is Vinegar Hill
about 1,060 feet above sea level. The lowest point is about 385 feet above sea level in the
Mississippi River bottoms. Floodplains of the Big, Meramec and Mississippi Rivers and their
tributaries are the most fertile of the county. Topography varies considerably throughout
Jefferson County. Much of the county can be classified as rugged. Large areas, with
greater than 20 percent slopes are common throughout northern and southern portions of
3
the county. The central one-third of the county consists of wider and flatter crests and
shallower valleys. The three largest rivers in Jefferson County are the Mississippi River,
Meramec River and Big River. These waterways offer commercial and recreational
opportunities, but a significant portion of the county is subject to flooding.
Due to the amount of waterways, as well as fluctuations in water levels the Big River drains
about 37 percent of the county; the Meramec River drains approximately 15 percent of the
county. Smaller streams draining directly into the Mississippi River make up about 48
percent of the county. Big River flows into Meramec River, which then flows into
Mississippi River. Both Joachim and Plattin Creeks flow into the Mississippi River. Refer to
Figure J2 below.
FIGURE J2 MISSOURI TOPOGRAPHY
Source: Missouri Department of Natural Resources
4
FIGURE J3 GEOLOGIC MAP OF MISSOURI
MISSOURI
There are 22 geologic formations exposed in Jefferson County, which range from Cambrian
to Pennsylvanian systems in age (Missouri Geological Survey, 1961). The Cambrian system
has the oldest rocks that crop out, and are composed of massive dolostone. Lead and zinc
ores and barite have been mined from Cambrian formations that occur in areas bordering
Big River and larger creeks in the southern part of the county. The Ordovician system is
exposed in almost three fourths of the county and has had a significant role in the
economic growth and development of the area. Limestone and dolostone quarries have
furnished building stones, aggregate and cement for highways, bridges, and buildings.
Sand mined in the St. Peter Sandston is used by the glass industry.
The Devonian system is represented by a narrow band of sandstone, shale and limestone
that crosses the northeastern part of the county. The Mississippian system is
predominantly limestone and cherty limestone. The limestone weathers easily and
produces deep cherty soils (in the northeastern part of the county). The Pennsylvanian
system consists of reddish-brown sandstone and bluish-gray to purple shale found in
sinkholes and vertical bedrock joints. Geologic units consist of flat to gently dipping
bedrock dominated by dolostone, sandstone and limestone formations. Several zones of
high angle faults that are downthrown are considered to be extensions of the Ste.
Genevieve Fault System. They are the Crystal City anticline, the Plattin Creek anticline, the
Roselle lineament, the Rugley School fault block, the Summit Park structure and the Valles
Mines-Vineland fault zone. A structure known as the Eureka-House Springs anticline has
been traced from the Mississippi River to near Wright City (McCracken, 1971). The
potential for landslide or slump occurs in areas of the Maquoketa and Warsaw shales.
Sinkholes are numerous in the Kimmswick limestone. Refer to Figure J3 above.
5
6
FIGURE J4
SURFICIAL MATERIALS
MATERIALS MAP
Soils - There are a total of six soil associations in Jefferson County including the HaynieTice-Waldron Association, the Sonsac-Useful Association, the Wrengart-Goss Association,
the Menfro-Gasconade Association, the Minnith-Pevely Association, and the HaymondFreeburg-Horsecreek-Bloomdale Association.
The Haynie-Tice Waldron Association includes zero to two percent slopes, formed in
Mississippian River alluvium. It covers one percent of the county and is present mainly on
natural levees, bottomlands and old meanders. It consists of 48 percent well drained
Haynie soils (silty loam), 29 percent somewhat poorly drained Tice soils (silty loam), 20
percent somewhat poorly drained Waldron soils (silty loam) and three percent minor soils.
7
The Sonsac-Useful-Moko Association ranges from three to 55 percent slope. It covers
approximately 58 percent of the county. These soils are most commonly found on narrow
ridgetops, backslopes and summits. The parent materials are loess and residuum. Welldrained Sonsac soils (gravelly silt loam-well drained) make up 44 percent of the association.
Useful soils (silty loam-moderately well drained) make up 30 percent of the association.
Well-drained Moko soils (stony soils) make up 15 percent of the association and the
remaining 11 percent are minor soils.
The Wrengart-Goss Association ranges from three to 55 percent slope. It covers about 13
percent of the county and consists of soils located on summits, ridgetops, and backslopes.
The parent materials are loess and residuum. The moderately well drained Wrengart soils
(silty loam) make up 47 percent of the association, well-drained Goss soils (cobbly silty
loam) make up 45 percent of the association and eight percent of minor soils make up the
balance.
The Menfro-Gasconade Association ranges from three to 50 percent slope. It covers about
five percent of the county and is located mainly in the summit and backslope areas. Parent
materials consist of loess and residuum. The well-drained Menfro soils (silty loam) make up
69 percent of the association. Excessively well-drained Gasconade soils (rubbly soils) make
up 17 percent and the remaining 14 percent are minor soils.
The Minnith-Pevely Association ranges from three to 50 percent slope. It covers about
eight percent of the county. These soils are commonly found on ridgetops and backslopes.
The parent materials consist of loess and residuum. The moderately well drained Minnith
soils (silty loam) consist of 51 percent of the association. The moderately well drained
Pevely soils (silty loam) make up 32 percent of the association and minor soils make up the
remaining 17 percent.
The Haymond-Freeburg-Horsecreek-Bloomsdale Association ranges from zero to five
percent slope. It covers about 15 percent of the county. It is commonly found in the
floodplains and terraces. The parent material is alluvium. The well-drained Haymond soils
(silty loam) make up 26 percent of the association. The somewhat poorly drained Freeburg
soils (silty loam) make up 25 percent of the association. The well-drained Horsecreek soils
(silty loam) make up 25 percent of the association and the well-drained Bloomsdale soils
(silty loam) makes up about 24 percent of the association. Refer to Figure J4 above.
Climate - Surficial materials in Jefferson County consist of residuum from cherty limestone
(clay and gravel) up to 50 feet in thickness. These materials are located in the northern half
of the county. Surficial materials in the southern half of the county consist of residuum
from cherty dolomite (clay, silt and gravel). The materials are normally less than ten feet
thick, but can exceed 50 feet in thickness. Surficial materials in the southwest corner of the
county consist of residuum from sandstone and cherty dolomite (clay, silt, sand, gravel and
boulders) and can be up to 200 feet thick.
8
Form of Government
Jefferson County is classified as a first class county and has its county seat in Hillsboro.
November 2008 citizens of Jefferson County approved a Home Rule Charter. A sevenmember County Council governs the county and 13 municipalities. The county
government is divided into the following departments and divisions: Assessors office,
Auditor’s office, Circuit Court Clerk, Collector of Revenue, County Clerk, County
Commission, Data Processing, Department of Administration, Economic Development,
Jefferson County Health Center, Juvenile Office, Land Use Development and Code
Enforcement, Parks and Recreation, Public Administrator’s Office, Public Works, Recorder of
Deeds, and the Sheriff’s Department.
Community Partnerships
As part of the EWG region, Jefferson County collaborates on numerous issues including
infrastructure, law enforcement and emergency services. MoDOT, Franklin, St. Francois,
Washington, Ste. Genevieve and St. Louis Counties collaborate on county lines, as well as
transportation issues where it applies to infrastructure systems across the Meramec Rivers.
Other community partnerships include the Rock Creek Watershed Management Plan group
and the St. Louis-Jefferson County Solid Waste Management District. Jefferson County
Planning Division, along with the Missouri Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS),
and the Great Rivers Alliance of Natural-Resource Districts (GRAND) are working together
to address watershed plans for Jefferson County. Organizations that closely participate
with various hazard mitigation activities include Jefferson College, Jefferson County Soil
and Water District, Jefferson Online Information Network, and the University of Missouri
Outreach and Extension Office.
Public Awareness
Most of the communities contacted in Jefferson County have been very responsive to the
Hazard Mitigation Plan initiative. The initial meeting was held on March 31, 2009.
Approximately 8 representatives from the county and communities were invited to learn
about the advantages of developing hazard mitigation plans.
Jefferson County:
8 Partakers Represented:
Lindbergh School District, Affton School District, Jefferson County Emergency Management
Agency, Olympian Village, SEMA, University City School District, and the City of Shrewsbury.
School Concerns:
• Funding for public education
• Safe rooms from tornados being multi-purpose
• Unified Communication System for schools to work on separate network in case of an
emergency
9
•
Panorama views of inner school facilities given to emergency crews to help mitigate loss
of life in the case of a disaster
Community Concerns:
• Pre Debris-Removal to mitigate hazards in the future
• Debris removal measure in purchasing ex: chainsaws
• Strapping down moveable objects to better secure vital resources (water heater) in the
case of a natural disaster (earthquake).
• 75% government funding 25% local funding may be too much in today’s economic
stagnation to use mitigation dollars
• Contamination from methamphetamines and other illicit drugs
• Environmental impacts on the mitigation of asbestos both before and after disasters
• Build green before and after natural disasters. Ex: Rain Gardens to prevent flooding
• Reverse 911 calling dollars
• Restrict development trends: Ex: Northwest District High School flooded 3 times in past
12 months after subdivision built up stream from location
Dams:
Jefferson County has the greatest number of unregulated Dams in the State of Missouri.
• Look into mitigation measures in securing dams in high hazard areas
• Funding for public awareness in the dangers of unregulated dams
Media Relations
Newspapers published for Jefferson County are listed below:
St. Louis Post Dispatch/Jefferson County Suburban Journals
Festus - Jefferson County Leader
Hillsboro - Jefferson County Watchman
Arnold - Imperial Rock, Jefferson County Journal- Leader Publications
Meramec Journal
News Democrat Journal
A variety of radio and television stations are available which include:
Radio
Television
KDJR 100.1 FM
KGNA 89.9 FM
KTBJ 89.3 FM
KDHX 88.1 FM
KEZK 102.5 FM
KFUO 99 FM
KETC-PBS
KMOV-CBS
KPLR-Independent/WB
Cable Channel 3
KTVI-Fox
KDNL- 30
10
KHITs 96 FM
KLOU 103.3 FM
KMOX 1120 AM
KNSX 93.3 FM
KPNT 105.7 FM
KSHE 95 FM
KSLQ 104.5 FM
KTRS 550
KWMU 90.7 FM
KNLC-24
KSDK-NBC
Jefferson College JC-TV
Demographic Information
Age
According to the 2007 American Fact Finder, Jefferson County has a total of 59,867
persons under the age of 19; 132,256 persons between the age of 20 to 64 and 21,477
persons 65 years of age and older. Jefferson County has a younger population and has
fewer residents over the age of 64 years when compared to Missouri statewide population.
The median age of 36 in Jefferson County is the same as the 36.0 median age for Missouri.
Per Capita Income and Persons Below the Federal Poverty Level
Compared to statewide statistics, most data categories show that Jefferson County had
higher levels of income and lower levels of poverty. The 2000 Census noted that the per
capita income for Jefferson County was $19,435, and 13,253 persons were living below
the federal poverty level. Refer to Table J1 below.
TABLE J1
JEFFERSON COUNTY INCOME AND POVERTY LEVEL
CATEGORIES
Median money income, 1999
Persons below poverty level, percent, 1999
VALUE
$55,295
7.4
Education Levels
The 2007 American Fact Finder noted that 25,996 individuals had not completed high
school, 45,773 persons had completed high school, and 10,650 persons had graduated
from college with a Bachelor’s degree. Refer to Table J2 below.
11
TABLE J2 JEFFERSON CO EDUCATION
ATTAINMENT
Group
Less than 9th grade
2000 2007 Percent Percent
Percent
Change Total
8,247
6,754
-22.1
6.55
17,749 17,157
-3.5
14.09
45,773 49,331
7.2
36.34
30,175 32,336
6.7
23.96
8,722 13,002
32.9
6.92
10,650 14,985
28.9
8.46
4,640
31.2
3.68
9th-12th; No diploma
Highschool Graduate
Some College
Associates
Bachelor degree
Graduate/professional
6,747
Diversity
According to the 2007 American Fact Finder, 98.7 percent of Jefferson County can be
classified as Caucasian. The largest minority, African-American accounts for 2,413 people.
The largest ethnic population of the total population was Hispanic at 1.3 percent.
According to the 2007 Census, 1,890 individuals have a Native American background and
1,777 have an Asian background. Refer to Table J3.
TABLE J3 JEFFERSON COUNTY DIVERSITY
CATEGORY
One race
White
Black or African American
American Indian and Alaska Native
Asian
Asian Indian
Chinese
Filipino
Japanese
Korean
Vietnamese
Other Asian
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific I
NUMBER
NUMBER
210,789
206,404
2,413
401
1282
203
254
244
39
147
327
68
0
PERCENT
98.7
96.7
1.1
0.2
0.6
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.0
0.0
12
TABLE J3 JEFFERSON COUNTY DIVERSITY
CATEGORY
Native Hawaiian
Guamanian or Chamorro
Samoan
Other Pacific Islander
Some other race
Two or more races
Race alone or in combination with one
or more other races
White
Black or African American
American Indian and Alaska Native
Asian
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific
Islander
Some other race
Hispanic or Latino (of any race)
NUMBER
NUMBER
PERCENT
0
0
0
0
228
2,802
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
1.3
0.0
209,152
2,926
1,890
1,777
348
98.0
1.4
0.9
0.8
0.2
508
2,797
0.2
1.3
Economy, Employment and Industry
Labor Force
In 2007, Jefferson County had a labor force of 149,213 people and an unemployment rate
of 6.0 percent, up substantially from 3.2 percent in 2000. In 1990 the unemployment rate
was 7.7 percent. As of 2000, most employed county residents worked in retail, service,
and government sectors. According to the 2007 Census, 185 persons were in the Armed
Forces, 114,886 individuals were in the civilian labor force, 115,071 individuals were
employed, and 7,028 were unemployed. See Table J4 below. A total of 50,276 individuals
were not included in the labor force.
13
TABLE J4 JEFFERSON CO EMPLOYMENT STATUS
Group
2000
2007
Percent
Percent
Change
Total
Population 16 & over
In labor
Not in labor
Population 16 & over
165,347
115,071
50,276
115,071
100.0
69.6
30.4
69.6
Civilian
Armed Forces
114,886
185
69.5
0.1
Civilian Labor Force
Employed
Unemployed
114,886
107,858
7,028
69.5
65.2
4.3
Average Wage Rate
The average wage rate at the time of the 2007 American Fact Finder, according to U.S.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis was $23,787 (based on place of
work). The median wage rate, based on 1999 place of residence data from the U.S.
Census, was $25,332.
Primary Employers and Industries
The top industries in Jefferson County, based on 2007 data on employers that have 200
employees or greater, is found in Table J5 below.
TABLE J5 JEFFERSON CO TOP EMPLOYERS 2007
Company
Employees in Business Type
Name/Website
St. Louis
1,200
Health Care
Northwest R-I
School District
873
Education
Dobbs Tire and Auto
Centers Inc
700
Service
Jefferson County
550
Government
LMC Industries
400
Manufacturing
Hillsboro School
Distirict
390
Education
Jefferson Memorial
Hospital
14
TABLE J5 JEFFERSON CO TOP EMPLOYERS 2007
Company
Employees in Business Type
Name/Website
St. Louis
Sinclair and Rush,
Arnold Plant
360
Manufacturing
Windsor School
Distict
350
Education
Table J6 Employment by Industry – 2007 Percentage
Agriculture, Mining
Construction
Trade, Transp., Utilities
Manufacturing
Public Administration
Financial services
Information
Education and Health
Leisure and Hospitality
Professional Bus. Services
Other services
0.50
10.40
22.70
16.60
2.80
5.10
2.70
16.50
7.20
5.80
9.60
Access
Access to Employment; Incommuting and Outcommuting
Approximately twice as many Jefferson County citizens commuted to work outside their
county of residence, as compared to citizens that worked within the county. According to
the 2007 Census, 73.5% of individuals worked within their county of residence, and 26.5
percent worked outside of their county of residence. See Table J7 below.
TABLE J7 JEFFERSON CO COMMUTING WORK
Group
2000
2007 Change Percent
Total
Workers 16 &
over
98,030 104,574
6.7
100.0
Car, truck,
van, alone
Carpool/public
82,666 87,626
6.0
83.8
11,929 11,889
-0.3
11.4
-10.2
46.9
149.1
0.2
1.1
2.7
Walk
Other
Work at home
205
801
1,149
184
1,177
2,862
15
Codes/Regulations for Building, Stormwater, Fire, Zoning
http://www.jeffcomo.org/BuildingCode.aspx?nodeID=BuildingDivision
Following are Codes in effect for Jefferson County, which can be found for free at the
International Code Council’s website:
International Residential Code 2003
International Building Code 2003
International Fire Code 2003
International Mechanical Code 2003
International Energy Code 2003
International Plumbing Code 2003
International Private Sewage System Disposal Code 2003
National Electric Code 2002
Existing Community Plans
The Planning Division within the Department of Land Use, Development and Code
Enforcement conducts the planning efforts for the county government primarily in the area
of land use, but increasingly in the areas of infrastructure and public services. The Division
maintains and implements the County's Zoning Ordinance. This service may include
information on permitted uses for a specific piece of property, building setbacks, current
zoning, and information on processes available to change zoning. This service is generally
paid for by the citizens of Jefferson County as part of the one-half cent sales tax collected
for general government operations. The Division conducts numerous research efforts on
countywide issues as well as on site-specific issues. This research may include
environmental analyses, project feasibility studies, and reviews of project proposals.
The Planning Division is organized into three sections, each of which reports to the
Manager of the Planning Division. The Current Planning Section is responsible for daily
operations including planning and zoning issues and proposed development. The second
section is the Comprehensive Planning Section and is responsible for long-range planning
functions including watershed management plans, the Master Plan and other special area
or functional plans. The third section is the Technical Operations, which is responsible for
technical operations and inspection efforts of the Division. The Planning Division produces
plans and reports, the Comprehensive Master Plan, program guides and demographics,
maps and statistics. Planning documents released to date include Jefferson County’s
Master Plan, Rock Creek Watershed Management Plan, Jefferson County Transportation
Mobility Plan, Jefferson County Transit Needs Study and the Jefferson County Economic
Development Plan.
16
Land Use Information (most current information in accordance with
with EW Gateway)
Land use in Jefferson County, per EWG data is divided into the following categories:
residential (35,753 acres) commercial (2,491 acres), industrial (2,379 acres), public (4,137
acres), recreational (2,932 acres), transportation, and undeveloped (farmland with 376,217
acres). Refer to Figure J6 below that depicts the land use for Jefferson County (according
to Jefferson County Planning).
FIGURE J6 JEFFERSON COUNTY LAND USE MAP
Source: Jefferson County Planning
17
Development Trends and Annexation
The population of Jefferson County tripled from 1950 to 1970, with 16.9 percent of the
residents living in incorporated areas. In 1990, the population had increased to 171,380
with 27 percent of the residents living in incorporated areas. The next 25 years are
projected to see a continuation of the growth trend in Jefferson County. The county will
likely see an increase of population of 11 percent or 22,000 people over the next 10 years
and an increase of almost 28 percent over the next 25 years. Jefferson County will likely
experience less growth than St. Charles County, but more than St. Louis County. With the
steady increase in population, the county is faced with ever-increasing environmental
demands. The Jefferson County Soil, Water Conservation District, Jefferson Co Department
of County Services, and Code Enforcement are assisting with identifying and addressing
problems related to the environment.
The economy in Jefferson County has improved, as indicated by a growing labor force,
increased employment opportunities and lower unemployment rates. Growth in residential
and commercial building permits has also helped the county prosper. While the rest of the
state has been in a recession, Jefferson County has had good residential growth.
Residential building permits for 2001 were up over 15 percent. This growth is expected to
continue. Jefferson County plans to continue responsible growth patterns, while keeping a
unique identity for Jefferson County. In addition, the need for a variety of housing options
and concerns exist about increased amount of mobile homes in the county.
Moreover, growth in commercial building permits has helped to balance the economics of
the county. Since 1998, commercial building permits have continued to rise, increasing
108 percent from 1998 to 2001. In 1998, the construction cost of the commercial permits
was 4.6 million dollars, and a major benefit was the size of those commercial operations.
In 2001 the construction costs were 24.1 million dollars, an increase of almost 425
percent.
The local labor market is helping fuel increases in residential permits, and especially
commercial building permits. Jefferson County will continue to strive to provide more
employment opportunities within the county, for almost 67 percent of the workforce has
jobs outside the County. Polls on economic development indicated that efforts should be
made to attract commercial/retail development and to expand the tax base and promote
economic growth. The poll also indicates that growth needs to be planned and financially
responsible for county and that some residents do not want Tax Increment Financing to
assist developers.
An issue of concern in the county is the lack of communication among different
jurisdictions, infrastructure districts (sewer and water) and community service providers
(police, fire and ambulance), as well as a low level of communication/coordination among
the county and the other entities listed above regarding development of the county.
18
The Jefferson County Master Plan has identified the following five goals pertaining to
trends:
1. Promote growth and development that creates a quality environment, preserves
natural resources and provides community amenities. This goal will 1) include plans
for phased growth in an orderly manner, 2) promote more compact settlement
patterns that maintain overall low densities and preserve rural character of the
county, 3) promote application of site designs that are efficient and sensitive to the
environment, 4) support existing neighborhoods and develop new neighborhoods
that provide quality environments, 5) provide convenient locations for goods and
services, 6) provide economic and physical diversity of housing options, and 7)
ensure maintenance of public safety and protection of public and private property.
2. Create a housing plan for economic development to attract quality development
and jobs to the county.
3. Provide infrastructure and transportation that adequately services the community
and new development.
4. Ensure the maintenance of the environment and open space in an environmentally
sensitive development, especially in large-scale development areas.
5. To provide quality public awareness and high levels of education and
communications regarding planning and development issues.
Floodplain Management
Jefferson County adopted a new ordinance on April 22, 1999, termed “The Jefferson
County, Missouri Flood Damage Prevention Ordinance.”
The Legislature of the State of Missouri in Section 49.600 RSMo delegated the
responsibility to local governmental units to adopt floodplain management regulations
designed to protect, health, safety and welfare. Jefferson County adopted the ordinance to
establish and maintain the community’s eligibility for participation in the National Flood
Insurance Program as defined in 44 CFR 59.22(a)(3) and to meet the requirements of 44
CFR 60.3(d). The ordinance applies to lands that are unincorporated and identified as
numbered and unnumbered A zones. Jefferson County requires that no development shall
be permitted in the zones except through the issuance of a floodplain development permit
granted by the County Commission. The Jefferson County Building Official is the
Floodplain Administrator.
The duties of the Floodplain Administrator include: (1) review of applications for floodplain
development permits to assure that federal, state and local governmental agencies have
given prior approval; (2) ensure sites are safe from flooding and the floodplain
development permit requirements of this ordinance have been satisfied; (3) ensure that
manufactured home parks are safe from flooding; (4) issue floodplain development
permits; (5) notification of adjacent communities and ensure SEMA/FEMA have been
19
contacted prior to alteration or relocation of a watercourse; (6) ensure that maintenance is
provided in the altered or relocated portion of the watercourse so that the flood-carrying
capacity is not diminished; (7) verify and maintain records of actual elevations that the new
or substantially improved non-residential structures have been floodproofed; and (8) ensure
that Jefferson County Building Official obtain certification from registered professional
engineer or architect when floodproofing techniques are utilized for non-residential
structures.
Floodplain development requires a permit with specific information including: (1) a legal
description of the land; (2) description of work to be done; (3) type of use or occupancy for
which work is intended; (4) assessed value of structure and fair market value; (5)
identification if development is in flood fringe or floodway; (6) identification of existing
base flood elevation and elevation of proposed development; and (7) include plans and
signature.
Provisions for flood hazard reduction includes five sections: general standards, specific
standards, manufactured homes, floodway and recreational vehicles. General standards
require that: (1) no development will be granted in any numbered or unnumbered A zones
unless all conditions are satisfied; (2) if flood insurance studies are not available, the
community will obtain and utilize flood data; (3) until a floodway is designated, no new
construction will be permitted in any numbered A zone on the FIRM unless it is
demonstrated that the cumulative effect of the development (and all other surrounding
development) will not increase the water elevation of the base flood more than one foot;
(4) all new construction, improvements and other development will require design or
adequate anchorage; materials resistant to flooding; use of methods that minimize flood
damage; all utility/service facilities designed and located to prevent water from
entering/accumulating in the components from flooding; water supply/sanitary sewage
systems designed to minimize/eliminate infiltration of floodwaters and discharges from
systems into floodwaters located to avoid impairment or contamination; (5) storage,
material, and equipment within special flood hazard area is prohibited, and storage of
other material may be allowed if not subject to major damage by floods; (6) agricultural
structures may be constructed at grade and wet-floodproofed, provided there is no human
occupancy, is of single-wall design, no permanent retail, wholesale or manufacturing use
and a variance has been issued; (7) accessory structures such as parking areas, not larger
than 400 square feet, may be constructed at grade and wet-floodproofed, no human
habitation, is of single wall design and a variance has been issued; (8) hazardous material
storage and handling must be out of the special flood hazard area; and (9) a
nonconforming structure may be continued, subject to: if the structure is destroyed
(including through flooding), it can’t be reconstructed if the cost is more than 50 percent
of the pre-damage market value of the structure.
Specific standards of the floodplain ordinance requires the following: (1) new construction
or substantial improvement of residential structures must have the lowest floor, including
the basement, elevated to two feet above the base flood elevation. The building envelope
20
must be filled to an elevation one foot above base flood elevation; (2) new construction or
substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial or nonresidential structures,
including manufactured homes, must have the lowest floor, including basement elevated
to one foot above the base flood elevation, together with utility and sanitary facilities
floodproofed so that below the base flood elevation, the structure is watertight with walls
impermeable to water with structural components with the capability of resisting
hydrostatics and hydrodynamic loads, an engineer must certify that the structure has met
these standards; and (3) for all new construction and substantial improvements, that all
fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor used only for parking of vehicles, building
access, or storage in an area other than the basement must be designed to equalize
hydrostatic flood forces, and the design must be certified by a registered engineer or
architect.
Manufactured homes to be placed within all unnumbered and numbered A zones on the
community’s FIRM must be installed using methods to minimize flood damage. The
homes must be elevated and anchored to resist movement. These homes must be placed
on elevated permanent foundations so that the lowest floor of the home is elevated two
feet above the base flood elevation and securely attached to prevent movement.
Manufactured homes that are not subject to provisions of Article 4 Section C(2) of the
ordinance must be elevated so that the lowest floor of the home is two feet above the base
flood elevation, or the home chassis is supported by reinforced piers so that there are no
less than 36 inches above the grade and securely attached.
The floodplain ordinance also requires that the community select and adopt a regulatory
floodway, that the community prohibit encroachments (fill, construction) in the floodway,
unless it had demonstrated through standard engineering practices that the encroachment
would not result in flood levels. The community, in unnumbered A zones will obtain and
use base flood elevation data from sources in Article 4, Section A(2).
Recreational vehicles, as stipulated in the floodplain ordinance, can only be placed on sites
within unnumbered and numbered A zones on the community’s FIRM for fewer than 180
consecutive days, and fully licensed for use or meeting the permitting, elevating and
anchoring requirements for manufactured homes.
The floodplain damage prevention ordinance has variance procedures and conditions for
approving floodplain management variances, for agricultural structures, accessory
structures, and penalties for violation of the ordinance.
Jefferson County has regulations to help control stromwater runoff through the County
land Disturbance Ordinance and The Erosion Sediments Control/Design Manual.
Wetlands Issues
The Sierra Club has provided wetlands comments on various projects within Jefferson
County. Included in these comments were concerns about the loss of habitat over 14 miles
21
of new four-lane highway through rural farms, forests and streams associated with the
Highway 21 project in Jefferson County.
The United States Corps of Engineers, St. Louis District, issues Nationwide Permits for
wetlands in their jurisdiction within Jefferson County. In accordance with the St. Louis
District, and District-Designated Waters: for any discharge or excavation activity requiring
authorization, proposed under NWPs 39, 41, 42 and 43, in any ephemeral, intermittent,
and perennial streams in the following Missouri watersheds, the permittee must notify the
District Engineer in accordance with the "Notification" general condition 13 (Federal
Register, 67 FR 2090-2092). This pertains to the following watersheds in Jefferson County:
Saline/Sugar/Romaine Creeks, Rock Creek, Dulin/Bourne/Heads/Bear Creeks, La Barque
Creek, Glaize Creek, and Joachim/Sandy Creeks.
National Flood Insurance (NFIP) Participation
The National Flood Insurance Policy member number for Jefferson County is 290808.
Table J8 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAMPROGRAM- MUNICI PARTICIPATING
COMMUNITY NAME
ARNOLD, CITY OF
BYRNES MILL, CITY OF
CRYSTAL CITY,CITY OF
DE SOTO, CITY OF
FESTUS,CITY OF
HERCULANEUM, CITY OF
HILLSBORO, CITY OF
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
KIMMSWICK, CITY OF
PEVELY, CITY OF
SCOTSDALE, TOWN OF
CEDAR HILL LAKES, VILLAGE OF
INIT FHBM
06/28/74
07/29/80
03/15/74
10/18/74
05/17/74
10/22/76
07/29/80
11/01/74
10/29/76
INIT FIRM CURR EFF EMERG DAT
01/16/80 04/05/06
01/16/80
05/16/83 04/05/06
05/16/83
09/01/77 04/05/06
09/01/77
05/26/72 04/05/06
05/26/72
02/14/76 04/05/06
02/14/76
05/15/78 04/05/06
05/15/78
04/01/84 04/05/06
04/01/04
05/16/83 04/05/06
05/16/83
01/06/82 04/05/06
01/06/82
09/18/85 04/05/06
09/18/85
05/16/83 04/05/06
10/21/02
04/05/06 04/05/06
04/05/07
MUNICIPALITIES
MUNICIPALITIES NOT PARTICIPATING
Cedar Hills Lake - sanction date April 5, 2007
Environmental Concerns
The recently completed “Jefferson County Wastewater Management Report” identifies as a
concern septic system failure, including soil types within portions of the county that are not
conducive for on-site wastewater treatment systems and their leach-ate fields. Through
the growth and development of strategies identified in the Master Plan, many of the onsite wastewater treatment system problems can be remedied by the use of public systems
that are more reliable and longer lasting. Sensitivity has been given to topographic
considerations because they relate to the health of the watersheds and watercourses in the
region.
22
Air pollution is a major concern in the St. Louis metropolitan area. Numerous initiatives
continue to improve air quality including: St. Louis Community Air Project, Gateway Clean
Air Program, and the St. Louis Regional Clean Air Partnership. Sixteen air qualitymonitoring stations exist within the metropolitan area that monitors six air pollutants:
carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, particulates, lead, carbon dioxide and ozone. The Air
Quality Index (AQI) is a standardized method of reporting air pollution values. Over the
past 25 years, the air quality in St. Louis has greatly improved, and, through the
introduction of controls, ozone levels have significantly decreased.
In 2002, the St. Louis Metropolitan area (Missouri-Illinois) reached a significant air quality
milestone. Based on 2000-2002 air quality monitoring data, the area attained the onehour standard. On May 12, 2003, the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(USEPA) designated the area as in maintenance of the one-hour standard. However, this is
only one step on the road to cleaner air in the St. Louis region. The area must soon meet
the eight-hour ozone standard, as well as the fine particulate standard.
Protection and preservation of natural environment is important. This includes air quality,
water quality, streams and topography. Stormwater runoff and land erosion is a
significant issue in Jefferson County. Jefferson County plans to prepare land development
policies and regulations to address erosion during land development and construction
process.
A number of hazardous waste facilities are located in Jefferson County. These sites include:
•
•
•
Doe Run Company resource recovery facility, located in Herculaneum
Dow Company hazardous waste facility, located in Pevely, Missouri
British Nuclear Fuels Ltd., Westinghouse's parent company, owns a nuclear fuel
plant in Hematite, Missouri; potential for chemical solvents and possible traces of
technetium-99, a radioactive fission product thought to be present.
Archaeological
aeological Sites
Endangered Species, Historic Properties/Districts, Arch
The federal and state listing of endangered species in Jefferson County includes the Pink
Mucket, Gray Bat, Indiana Bat, Ozark Big Eared Bat, Flathead Chub, Crystal Darter, Bald
Eagle, Eastern Prairie Fringed Orchid, Peregrine Falcon, Northern Harrier, Lake Sturgeon
and the Red-Cockaded Woodpecker.
In accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, the Archaeological and
Historic Preservation Act of 1974 and the Antiquities Act of 1906, information regarding
specific locations of archaeological sites cannot be released. The Missouri State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) within the Outreach Office of MDNR is in the process of setting
up a GIS database that will house archaeological sites in Missouri. Individuals in need of
information may contact the SHPO for information on specific sites. Reference for further
23
information can be made to Missouri Department of Natural Resources, 1-800-361-4827
or their website at http://www.dnr.mo.gov/shpo/homepage.htm. The Missouri
Archaeological Society’s website is located at http://coas.missouri.edu/mas/ and provides
reference documents on archaeological sites in Missouri.
There are ten sites listed on the national register of historic properties in Jefferson County.
A list of these are found below and can also be found on the Missouri state website at
http://www.dnr.mo.gov/shpo/Jefferson.htm.
Beaumont-Tyson Quarry District, address restricted (10/10/74) (also in St. Louis County)
Boemler Archaeological District, address restricted (10/01/74)
Boland Archaeological District, address restricted (10/01/74)
Fletcher, Thomas C., House, Elm St. between 1st & 2nd Sts., Hillsboro (11/19/74)
Greystone-Meissner, Gustave, House, NE of Pevely off US 61/67 (12/31/74); additional
information (3/11/85)
Kimmswick Bone Bed, Mastodon State Historic Site, NW of Imperial, Kimmswick vicinity
(11/05/80)
Leight, Valentine, General Store, 4566 Main St., House Springs (8/18/92)
Moder Archaeological District, address restricted (10/16/74)
Sandy Creek Covered Bridge State Historic Site, 5 mi. N of Hillsboro off US 21 (7/08/70)
Windsor Harbor Road Bridge, Windsor Harbor Rd. at Rock Cr., Kimmswick (9/08/83)
Identified Assets
Inventory of Critical/Key/Essential Facilities
Medical Facilities
Relevant facilities include medical facilities, schools, long-term care facilities, day care
centers and government structures. These facilities represent resources for care and shelter
as well as populations requiring a higher level of care and installations critical to
community services.
The hospitals and other facilities that service Jefferson County are included in Table J9A.
Physician’s offices, clinics, and urgent care centers within the city are too numerous to list
here. See Figures J7 and J8 located in the back of the Technical Appendix.
Table J9A
JEFFERSON COUNTY MEDICAL FACILITIES
Hospitals and Other Facilities
Jefferson Memorial Hospital
Unity Health Arnold Care Ctr
Community Treatment
Disability Support Systems
Jefferson County Support for
Location
1400 US Hwy 61, Festus, MO
3619 Richardson Square
N.A
N.A
N.A
Number of Beds
225
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
24
Table J9A
JEFFERSON COUNTY MEDICAL FACILITIES
Hospitals and Other Facilities
the Handicapped
Jefferson County Health Dept
Location
Number of Beds
N.A
N.A.
Long Term Care Facilities
Long-term care facilities are more likely to be impacted in a disaster. These facilities fulfill a
range of needs including retirement, assisted living, intermediate and long term continuing
care. Residents may have mobility and/or cognitive issues that present special problems.
Refer to Table J9B below.
TABLE J9B LONG TERM CARE FACILTIES IN JEFFERSON COUNTY
FACILITY
COLONIAL HOUSE OF FESTUS I
BAISCH NURSING CENTER
COLONIAL HOUSE
CORI MANOR HEALTHCARE &
REHABILITATION CENTER
CORI MANOR HEALTHCARE &
REHABILITATION CENTER
FESTUS MANOR
FESTUS REST HOME
SOUTH COUNTY NURSING HOME, INC
TWIN CITY RESIDENTIAL CARE
ARBOR PLACE OF FESTUS, INC
COLONIAL HOUSE OF FESTUS II
STRILER'S CARE CENTER
SCENIC NURSING AND REHABILITATION
CENTER, LLC
SCENIC NURSING AND REHABILITATION
CENTER, LLC
MY PLACE RESIDENTIAL CARE
WOODLAND MANOR NURSING CENTER
CEDAR RIDGE MANOR
VILLAS, THE
VILLAS, THE
MAGNOLIA HOME, THE
AUTUMN RIDGE
LOVING CARE REST HOME, INC
ADDRESS
500 SUNSHINE DRIVE
3260 BAISCH DRIVE
3260 BAISCH DRIVE
122 EAST PRATT STREET,
PO BOX 638
560 CORISANDE HILL
ROAD
560 CORISANDE HILL
ROAD
627 WESTWOOD DRIVE
SOUTH
705 MOORE STREET, PO
BOX 51
1101 WEST OUTER 21
ROAD
#1 HOLDING LANE, PO
BOX 92
12827 HIGHWAY TT
129 GRAY STREET
134 GRAY STREET, PO
BOX 356
CITY
FESTUS
DESOTO
DESOTO
BEDS # CAP
34
No
18
No
61
No
DESOTO
27
No
FENTON
22
No
FENTON
124
No
FESTUS
120
No
FESTUS
20
No
ARNOLD
153
No
HERCULANEUM
48
No
FESTUS
FESTUS
81
25
Yes
No
FESTUS
20
No
1333 SCENIC DRIVE
HERCULANEUM
23
No
1333 SCENIC DRIVE
HERCULANEUM 166
Yes
23 NORTH SIXTH STREET
100 WOODLAND COURT
6400 THE CEDARS COURT
1550 VILLAS DRIVE
1550 VILLAS DRIVE
204 GRAND AVENUE
300 AUTUMN RIDGE
DRIVE
1107 CLARKE STREET
FESTUS
ARNOLD
CEDAR HILL
DESOTO
DESOTO
FESTUS
44
178
150
80
51
12
No
No
No
No
No
No
HERCULANEUM
69
No
DESOTO
47
No
25
TABLE J9B LONG TERM CARE FACILTIES IN JEFFERSON COUNTY
FACILITY
FOUNTAINBLEAU NURSING CENTER
FOUNTAINBLEAU NURSING CENTER
HILLCREST CARE CENTER, INC
KEATON CENTER
COLONIAL HOUSE OF CRYSTAL CITY
CRYSTAL OAKS
CRYSTAL OAKS
ADDRESS
1349 HIGHWAY 61, PO
BOX 700
1349 HIGHWAY 61, PO
BOX 700
1108 CLARKE STREET
120 NORTH MILL STREET
26 MISSISSIPPI AVENUE
1500 CALVARY CHURCH
ROAD, PO BOX 680
1500 CALVARY CHURCH
ROAD, PO BOX 680
CITY
BEDS # CAP
FESTUS
16
No
FESTUS
97
Yes
DESOTO
FESTUS
CRYSTAL CITY
120
24
52
No
No
No
CRYSTAL OAKS
60
Yes
CRYSTAL CITY
99
Yes
Day Care Facilities
Day care centers represent yet another population that needs special consideration,
especially during a disaster situation. Most day care centers cater to children ages two to
five, although some day care centers serve older adults. Those facilities represent
specialized mitigation needs. The following tables show a current population in schools,
day care, preschools and residential facilities. This list of schools and other facilities is
deemed “Facilities Requiring Special Consideration” for evacuation purposes in the
Jefferson County Emergency Operations Plans. Refer to Table J10 below.
TABLE J10
FACILITY NAME
A CHILD'S PLACE INC.
A PLACE LIKE HOME LLC
ABC PRESCHOOL OF ARNOLD
ADVENTURES IN LEARNING -DESOTO
ALL ABOARD LEARNING CENTER
ALPHA AND OMEGA CHILD CARE II
ANTONIA HEAD START
BRIGHT BEGINNING LEARNING CENTER
CHILDREN'S HOUSE OF HILLSBORO
CHILDRENS LEARNING CENTER
CHILDTIME LEARNING CENTER
CHILDTIME LEARNING CENTER
CREATIVE EXPRESSIONS LEARNING CENTER
DESOTO HEAD START
FENTON HEAD START
FENTON PLAY AND LEARN
FIRST STEP CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER
JEFFERSON COUNTY CHILDCARE CENTERS
LOCATION
8325 OLD LEMAY FERRY RD
6008 HIGHWAY B
2315 LONEDELL RD
1107 CLARKE ST
544 KAREN DR
429 MAPLE LN
6283 OLD LEMAY FERRY RD
1549 W MAIN ST
603 MAPLE ST
2713 CAPETOWN VILLAGE RD
2130 MICHIGAN AVE
17 MUNICIPAL DR
2862 SECKMAN RD
1812 ROCK ROAD
1201 SALINE RD
1051 OLD GRAVOIS RD
4215 OLD STATE ROUTE 21
CAPACITY
50
60
49
126
41
97
27
124
50
86
143
144
100
20
20
191
102
26
TABLE J10
FACILITY NAME
LOCATION
FOR KIDS ONLY CHILD CARE
HEMATITE HEAD START
HIGH RIDGE LEARNING CENTER
HOUSE SPRINGS HEAD START
ITS FUN 2 LEARN
JEFFERSON COLLEGE CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER
JEFFERSON COUNTY TELEGRAPH KIDS KORNER
JEFFERSON R SEVEN PRESCHOOL
JEFFERSON R7 KIDS KORNER
KID'S COUNTRY
KIDS KLUBHOUSE AND ACTIVITY CENTER LLC
LA PETITE ACADEMY
LIL THINKERS\BIG THINKERS, INC
MAPLE MEADOWS LEARNING CENTER
MINI SCHOOL OF JEFFERSON COUNTY INC
MISS CINDY'S LEARNING CENTER
MOMMA BEAR'S CHILD CARE
NORTHWEST PRESCHOOL PROGRAM
PRIME TIME CHILD CARE ACADEMY
THE GINGERBREAD HOUSE DAYCARE
THE GODDARD SCHOOL
THE PLAYGROUND CHILD CARE CENTER LLC
WARM HEARTS CHILD CARE CENTER LLC
WEE CARE LEARNING CENTER
YMCA JEFFERSON COUNTY ATHENA ELEMENTARY
YMCA JEFFERSON COUNTY BRANCH FESTUS
YMCA JEFFERSON COUNTY BRANCH OUR LADYS
YMCA JEFFERSON COUNTY CRYSTAL CITY ELEMENTARY
YMCA OF JEFFERSON COUNTY DUNKLIN R-V
YMCA OF JEFFERSON COUNTY HILLSBORO
YOUNG HEARTS LEARNING CENTER LLC
BEST FRIENDS LEARNING CENTER LLC
BRADLEY, PATRICIA
BURKARD, CAROL
DITTER, MARY F
EMERSON, CATHERINE
ENNIS, GLENDA
FORD, DEBORAH
GANNON, PAULA
HASKINS, SUSAN JEANNE
HODA'S MONTESSORI LLC
MALIN, DEBORAH
NUGENT, TINA
SCHMITT, CONNIE SUE
5432 B HIGHWAY 61 67
3680 HILLSBORO HEMATITE RD
3028 HIGH RIDGE BLVD
4869 SCOTTSDALE
3225 BAISCH DR
1000 VIKING DR
1265 DOOLING HOLLOW RD
2400 R-7 SCHOOL RD
2400 HWY 61
1645 MARRIOTT
38 FOX VALLEY CENTER
3607 RICHARDSON SQ
102 FOURTH STREET
510 MAPLE MEADOWS
6434 UPPER BYRNES MILL RD
1757 BIG BILL RD
8085 HIGHWAY 30
6992 RIVERMONT TRL
5181 WARREN RD
2000 EL LAGO AVE STE 7
3228 MILLER RD
1302 KENNER ST
4235 GRAVOIS RD
821 AMERICAN LEGION DR
3775 ATHENA SCHOOL RD
1515 MID MEADOW LN
1550 ST MARY'S LN
600 MISSISSIPPI
300 COUNTY RD
101 LEON HALL PKY
1420 GRAVOIS RD
3653 GAIL DR
2528 MEDFORD LN
929 NATCHEZ TRCE
2205 PARKWOOD CT
132 SOUTHMOORE
5888 TERRACE
2129 SUNSWEPT LN
714 EMIL DR
105 LAVERNEL LN
8 ENCHANTED FOREST DR
1855 BUENA VISTA DR
1109 ETHEL CT
815 VINE
CAPACITY
99
60
32
30
60
100
50
20
40
60
51
126
113
30
128
58
45
20
98
97
145
56
60
252
20
60
50
20
50
50
77
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
27
TABLE J10
FACILITY NAME
LOCATION
SCHUBERT, CONSTANCE
SHELBY, HOLLY A
SHOWERS, KATHRYN
TEDDY BEAR DAY CARE
THE LEARN & PLAY CHILDCARE CENTER
TIGHE, MARGOT M
VANCE, JANE ELLEN
WATSON, JENNIFER
COUNTRY KIDS LLC
DESOTO DAYCARE INC
TINY TOWN CHILD CARE
ANGELS IN JOYLAND
APPLE TREE LEARNING CENTER
CHILDREN OF DESTINY CHILD CARE
CHRIST THE VINE LUTHERAN SCHOOL
FELLOWSHIP BAPTIST PRESCHOOL
GOOD SHEPHERD LUTHERAN PRESCHOOL
HOPE LUTHERAN EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER
IMMANUEL LUTHERAN CHRISTIAN CHILDCARE AND PRESCHOOL
LITTLE SCHOLARS PRESCHOOL
MUSTARD SEED PRESCHOOL
NEW HOPE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH
OLYMPIAD GYMNASTICS
PEACE TABERNACLE DAYCARE
REDEEMER PRESCHOOL
ST MARTINS LEARNING CENTER
URSULINE DAY CARE CENTER
VALLEY VIEW DAY CARE
VICTORY CHILDRENS CENTER
YMCA OF JEFFERSON COUNTY LIL RASCALS PRESCHOOL
1018 CRABAPPLE DR
1520 PREHISTORIC HILL DR
2774 PINEBROOK DR
106 DELLA DR
2278 CASTLEGATE DR
4933 FERRIS CT
3163 OLD HWY A
4081 STONEY CRK
3318 HWY 61
1733 KOCH LN
13197 TIMBERWOOD LN
450 BAILEY RD
365 SALINE RD
15533 GAMEL CEMETERY RD
1615 VINE SCHOOL RD
2735 HIGH RIDGE BLVD
2211 TENBROOK RD
2308 GRAVOIS RD
19 N 3RD ST
409 DEER CROSSING DR
6439 HIGHWAY 61-67
3921 JEFFCO BLVD
215 N MILL ST
11096 HIGHWAY 21
1620 NEW BOYD ST
7890 DITTMER RIDGE RD
201 BRIERTON LN
2010 SECKMAN RD
1 VICTORY DR
1303 YMCA DR
CAPACITY
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
20
20
20
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Schools
More than 43,211 students attend various preschool, public and parochial elementary,
middle, and high schools and one community college in Jefferson County. There are 11
public school districts in Jefferson County. Schools represent yet another population that
needs special consideration, especially in a disaster situation. Most schools have students
that range from five through the age of 25. The following Figure J9 and Tables J11A and
J11B show a current population in schools and location of the districts. Some of the
districts overlap into neighboring counties. This list of schools and other facilities is
deemed “Facilities Requiring Special Consideration” for evacuation purposes in the
Jefferson County Emergency Operations Plans.
28
FIGURE J9 JEFFERSON COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS
TABLE J11A JEFFERSON CO. PRIVATE SCHOOLS ADDRESS
CENTRAL BAPTIST CHRISTIAN ACADEMY
HELIAS HIGH SCHOOL
IMMACULATE CONCEPTION SCHOOL
IMMANUEL LUTHERAN SCHOOL
KIM SCHOOL MONTESSORI
KINDERGARTEN CONNECTION
MOREAU MONTESSORI SCHOOL
ST FRANCIS XAVIER SCHOOL
ST JOSEPH CATHEDRAL SCHOOL
ST MARTIN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
ST PETER ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
ST STANISLAUS SCHOOL
TRINITY LUTHERAN EARLY CHILDHOOD
TRINITY LUTHERAN SCHOOL
1812 E MCCARTY STREET
1305 SWIFTS HIGHWAY
1208 E MCCARTY STREET
8231 TANNER BRIDGE ROAD
1022 TARA ROAD
623 OHIO STREET
900 MOREAU DRIVE
7307 ROUTE M
2303 WEST MAIN STREET
7206 SAINT MARTINS BOULEVARD
314 W HIGH STREET
6410 ROUTE W
809 SWIFTS HIGHWAY
812 STADIUM BOULEVARD
ENROLLMENT
36
895
501
97
31
41
43
195
464
226
516
310
46
327
29
TABLE J11B JEFFERSON CO PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS
DISTRICTS
PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTS
LOCATION
STUDENTS
Northwest R-I
Grandview R-II
Hillsboro R-III
Dunklin R-V
Festus R-VI
Jefferson Co. R-VII
Sunrise R-IX
Windsor C-1
Fox C-6
Crystal City 47
DeSoto 73
2843 Community Ln
11470 Hwy C
20 Hawk Dr
497 Joachim
1515 Mid-Meadow Ln
1250 Dooling Hollow Rd
4485 Sunrise School Rd
6208 Hwy 61-67
745 Jeffco Blvd
1100 Mississippi Ave
610 Vineland School Rd
7066
829
3691
1342
3103
751
326
3017
11833
718
2950
Government Facilities
Table J12 below details city, county, state and federal government centers, police stations,
fire stations, ambulance bases and the 911 Emergency Operations Center.
Table J12
GOVERNMENT FACILITIES IN JEFFERSON COUNTY
GOVERNMENT CENTERSCENTERS-CITY AND
FEDERAL
Office of Job Training
Department of Agriculture
Office of Russ Carnahan
Recruiting Office
Barnhart Post Office
Herculaneum Post Office
Cedar Hill Post Office
Crystal City Post Office
DeSoto Post Office
Dittmer Post Office
Festus Post Office
Fletcher Post Office
Grubville Post Office
Hematite Post Office
Hillsboro Post Office
Imperial Post Office
Kimmswick Post Office
Liguori Post Office
Mapaville Post Office
Peveley Post Office
Richwoods Post Office
Valle Mines Post Office
LOCATION
2 Merchants Drive
10820 Hwy 21
517 Bailey Rd
109 Walnut
1835 Marriot St
1234 Commercial Blvd
7050 State Rd BB
324 Bailey
950 Boyd
7768 Gravois Rd
109 Walnut
7682 Old State Rd H
Highway Y
3677 State Rd P
4620 Yeager Rd
6035 S. Outer Rd
Front and Market
1 Liguori Rd
4049 Highway Z
N.A.
Highway A
3225 State Rd V
30
Table J12
FEDERAL
Arnold Post Office
Fenton Post Office
High Ridge Post Office
House Springs Post Office
Arnold Recruiting Center
County Government Centers
Centers
Jefferson County Court House
Jefferson County Economic Development
Bldg
LOCATION
1314 Jeffco Blvd
10 Fenton Plaza
2829 High Ridge Blvd
Highway 30
471 Jeffco Blvd
300 2nd Street, Hillsboro
725 Maple
Jefferson County Health DepartmentArnold
3838 Jeffco Blvd.
Jefferson County Health DepartmentHillsboro
405 2nd Street
Jefferson County Parks and Recreation
Jefferson County Library
Jefferson County Juvenile Office
Jefferson County Juvenile Office
Police
Jefferson County Sheriff’s DepartmentNorth
2800 Community Drive
2101 Jeffco Blvd
3021 High Ridge
7479 Metropolitan Blvd
2101 Jeffco Blvd
3857 Gravois Rd
Jefferson County Sheriff
Jefferson County Sheriff-South
Jefferson County East
Arnold
Byrnes Mill
Cedar Hill
Crystal City
DeSoto
Festus
Herculaneum
Hillsboro
Kimmswick
Olympian Village
Peveley
34 Dillion Plaza
300 2nd St, Hillsboro
Hwy 21 & Viking Dr. Hillsboro
Hwy 61-67 & Windsor Harbor Rd
2101 Jeffco Blvd
Osage Executive Dr
7322 Springdale
130 Mississippi Ave
17 Boyd
100 Park
1 Parkwood Ct
101 Second St
3rd and Vine
205 Kronos Dr
P.O. Box 304
31
Table J12
FEDERAL
Ambulance Districts
Big River
Joachim-Plattin Township
North Jefferson County
Rock Township
Valle
Meramec
Eureka Fire Protection and Ambulance
District
Fire Departments/Districts
Departments/Districts
Antonia
Cedar Hill
Crystal City
DeSoto
Dunklin
Eureka
Goldman
Hematite
Herculaneum
High Ridge
Hillsboro
Jefferson County Fire Protection District
Mapaville
Pacific
Rock Community FPD
Shady Valley FPD
Springdale FPD
Festus
LOCATION
P.O. Box 348, Cedar Hill
619 Collins Dr, Fstus
P.O. Box 233, High Ridge
P.O. Box 629, Arnold
12363 Highway 21, Desoto
429 East Osage, Pacific
3279 Highway 100, Villa Ridge
31768 Highway O, Robertsville
1060 Hwy W
1815 W 5th St
3571 Wright Oak School Rd
3538 Highway M, Imperial
6766 Cedar Hill Rd
8800 Highway 30, Dittmer
8790 Byrnes Rd
130 Mississippi Avenue
17 Boyd Street
201 East Miller
3610 Highway V
12545 Ware
1987 Highway Z
1060 Highway W, Eureka
9001 Old Lemay Ferry Rd, Hillsboro
304 Rice Street
3067 Meyer Rd
848 Broad
1434 Gravois
6969 Wild, House Springs
120 5th Street
480 Second St
13000 Highway T, Festus
3701 Mapaville Fire Dept Rd
910 West Osage, Pacific
1533 Jeffco Blvd, Arnold
1020 Main, Imperial
3540 Londell Rd, Arnold
3889 Miller
4535 Old Hwy 21, Imperial
1691 S Hwy 141, Fenton
2198 Saline Rd, Fenton
212 N Mill St, 213 N Mill St,
Ridge Street
32
Table J12
FEDERAL
State Properties
Mapaville State School
Region Office
Service Bldg
Residence
Warehouse
Service Bldg/Office
Pit Latrine
Tidwell House
Pit Latrine
Pit Latrine
Supt Residence (New)
Storage Barn
Pole Storage
Interpretive Museum
Storage Building
Open Shelter
Desoto Armory
Festus Armory
Unheat. Stor Bldg Desoto
Festus OMS
Festus Unheat Stor Bldg
Core Building
Housing Unit A
Housing Unit B/C
Maintenance Building
Student Center Building
Arts & Science Building
Library Learning Center
Vocational Technical Building
Vo-Prep Building
Field House
Fine Arts Center
Arts And Science
Technology Center
Jefferson College- Arnold
Child Care Center
Veterinary Technology Facility
LOCATION
Highway A
2901 Hwy 61-4 Mi S Festus
20 Mi S St. Louis-Hwy 67
5 Mi N Hillsboro-Hwy 21
State Hwy E 63020
Junction Hwy A&P
State Hwy E 63020
Junction Hwy A&P
Junction Hwy A&P
10434 State Rd BB
10434 State Rd BB
10434 State Rd BB
2 Mi N Hillsboro On Hwy 21
4500 Jeffco Blvd
2mi N Hillsboro On Hwy 21
2mi N Hillsboro On Hwy 21
Recreation Facilities
Jefferson County has approximately 145 acres of parks and recreation space for public use.
This is represented in 11 county parks that include hiking trails, passive recreation space,
and fishing and boating opportunities. The Jefferson County Master Plan noted that,
33
based on Missouri Statewide Outdoor Recreation Plan, the supply of parks and recreation
space is significantly low to serve the population of the county and that future
development opportunities should include measures to remedy this situation. Refer to
Table J13 below.
TABLE J13
JEFFERSON COUNTY RECREATIONAL FACILITIES
Big River Saddle Club
10
*
Brown's Ford
Cedar Hill
Fletcher House
High Ridge Civic Center
Rockford Beach
Jefferson Winter Park
Morse Mill
Pleasant Valley
Sunridge
NW Jefferson County
Sports Complex
2
7
.6 *
2 *
8.2
40
10
40
6
20
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Morse Mill Park- The Big River is located at Morse Mill Park. This location can be
used to launch canoes or inner tubes for a 10.9-mile float to Cedar.
Brown’s Ford Park- This facility is located on the Big River. A canoe or inner tube
can be launched at the boat ramp and take 18.3-mile trip down to Morse Mill
Park.
Cedar Hill Park- This facility provides picnicking, fishing and swimming
opportunities on the Big River. The old mill and dam are overlooking the fast
flowing water dropping over rocks. This is a good location to launch a canoe or
inner tubes for a 9.8-mile float to Rockford Beach.
Fletcher House- Built in 1851 by Thomas E. Fletcher (Missouri's first native-born
Governor, and Friend of the Sixteenth President, Abraham Lincoln). The Fletcher
House is operated as a "House Museum" through the cooperative efforts of the
Jefferson County Parks and Recreation Department and the Fletcher House
Foundation.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
34
High Ridge Civic Center- A wide variety of services provided at the Civic Center.
Rockford Beach- Located on the Big River. A dam creates a cascading waterfall.
The river is commonly used for fishing, swimming and boating. Picnic facilities
provide tables, grills and volleyball court.
Jefferson County Winter Park- Facilities include volleyball courts and picnic tables
over looking the Meramec River. Swimming, personal watercrafts, powerboats
and fishing can be done.
Pleasant Valley Park Preserve – This park offers 40 acres of secluded areas, wild
flowers, wildlife and walking trails. This facility has picnic facilities, playground,
or trails.
Sunridge Park- This facility has the only tower open to the public. Shelter
houses, picnic facilities and playground are also available.
Northwest Jefferson County Sports Complex- The Jefferson County Parks and
Recreation Department acquired the Northwest Jefferson County Sports
Complex, formerly the Cedar Hill Ballfields. This 20-acre complex, which currently
provides four baseball fields with backstops, as well as a designated soccer area,
currently is the home of Youth Instructional Soccer Program and Summer Soccer
Camps.
The cities of Arnold, Pevely, Herculaneum, Crystal City, Festus, Hillsboro, and
Byrnes Mill all have city parks. In addition, there is Mastodon State Historic Site
in Imperial and several State Department of Conservation areas.
Sandy Creek Covered Bridge boasts the picture-perfect appearance of an old red
barn. It was one of six bridges built in 1872 to allow passage from the Jefferson
County seat of Hillsboro to St. Louis.
Mastodon State Historic Site contains an important archaeological and
paleontological site - the Kimmswick Bone Bed. Bones of mastodons and other
now-extinct animals were first found here in the early 1800s. The area was
identified as one of the most extensive Pleistocene ice age deposits in the
country. Archaeological history was made at the site in 1979 when scientists
excavated a stone spear point made by hunters of the Clovis culture (14,000 10,000 years ago) in direct association with mastodon bones. This was the first
solid evidence of the coexistence of people and these giant prehistoric beasts.
Today, the 425-acre property preserves this National Register of Historic Places
site and provides recreational opportunities. A museum tells the natural and
cultural story of the oldest American Indian site one can visit in the state's park
system. A full-size replica of a mastodon skeleton highlights the exhibits.
Gov. Daniel Dunklin's Grave State Historic Site, Herculaneum, houses the grave of
Missouri's fifth governor (1832-1836). The site interprets Dunklin's role as the
Father of Public Schools, and provides a scenic overlook of the Mississippi River.
Inventory of Infrastructures
County infrastructures include transportation, communications, water/sewer,
electricity and natural gas, solid waste disposal, law enforcement, fire protection,
emergency medical services and emergency management.
35
36
TransportationTransportation- FIGURE J10
37
Roadways
The road network has a great impact on Jefferson County. On the eastern side of the
county lies the primary north/south transportation route, Interstate I-55. I-55 connects the
St. Louis region to points north and south. Internally, a web of state and county roads
connects Jefferson County. State Highway 61/67 and 21 are the primary north/south
connectors. Highway 30 runs northeast/southwest through the northwest quadrant of the
county. Highways M and MM provide a major east/west connection from I-55 and
highway 30, in the northern part of the county. The county lacks major east/west
connections south of the M-MM corridor. Narrow county roads provide indirect access in
much of the southern portion of the county. Local roads that serve subdivisions and
neighborhoods are classified as privately owned and dedicated to public use. Thus, for
these subdivisions, the homeowner’s association is responsible for maintenance. See
Figure J10 located in the back of the Technical Appendix.
The County Commission convened the Transportation Advisory Committee on September
16, 1999. The overall purpose of the TAC is to serve as the source of long-range planning
and strategies and shared local transportation policy making for Jefferson County. They will
advise the County Commission on funding, administration, and operation of publicly
supported agencies involved in the delivery of services for all modes of transportation, and
they will act as a focal point for cooperation and coordination between all stakeholders in
the delivery of transportation services.
One of the immediate tasks of the Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) was to
investigate the transportation needs of the elderly, handicapped, Welfare-to-work
population and others with special medical and job service needs. The TAC found that the
transportation needs of these segments of the Jefferson County population are not being
sufficiently met. The key issues surrounding this finding are: 1) insufficient funding for
current providers; 2) communication between service providers is limited; 3) there is no
mass transit available in the County; 4) data on needed services is not available; 5) there is
no standard on data collection; and 6) the County is not accessing all the money available
to resource transportation services. All of these issues impact the physically disabled, the
elderly, and others with medical and job service needs.
The TAC has the following short term recommendations to address these issues: 1)
contract a public transit needs study; 2) create a centralized automated information center;
3) expand dialog with mass transit providers; 4) research the availability for potential
funding sources; and 5) implement strategies based on the findings of the transit needs
study.
38
Motor Freight Transportation
Approximately 550 motor freight carriers and 148 freight shipping establishments serve
Greater St. Louis. Truck terminals are located throughout Greater St. Louis and are
strategically located near rail, port and pipeline facilities. See Table J14 below.
TABLE J14
TRANSPORTATION
TRANSPORTATION CARRIERS
Sample of Motor Freight Carriers
ABF Freight Systems Inc.
Mabro Corporation
American Freightways Inc.
Overnite Transportation Company
Beelman Truck Company
Roadway Express Inc.
Cassens Corp.
Truck Transport Inc.
CF Motor Freight
USF Holland Motor Express
Creech Bros. Truck Lines Inc.
Witte Brothers Exchange Inc.
Henry Transportation Inc.
Yellow Freight Systems Inc.
Railroads: Class I
Railroads: Regional
Amtrak (Passenger)
Burlington Northern Santa Fe
CSX Transportation
Norfolk Southern
Union Pacific
Kansas City Southern
Canadian National Railway
Railroads: Switching and Terminal
Alton and Southern Railway
Manufacturers Railway Company
Terminal Railroad
Amtrak passenger service is available in the City of St. Louis
Central Midland Railway
Illinois Western Railway
39
Airports Most Up to date data for smaller aircraft facilities
TABLE J15 Year 2000 Fourth Quarter St. Louis Metropolitan Region Aircraft
Operations Summary at PublicPublic-Use Airports
St. Louis County, Missouri
St. Charles County, Missouri
Franklin County, Missouri
Jefferson County, Missouri
St. Clair County, Illinois
Madison County, Illinois
Spirit of St. Louis
Creve Coeur
St. Charles County, Smartt
St. Charles Municipal
Sullivan Regional
Washington Memorial
St. Clair Regional
Festus Memorial
St. Louis Downtown-Parks*
St. Louis Regional*
Shafer Metro-East
Total
47,447
9,555
12,045
9,490
5,824
8,918
3,185
3,731
40,195
19,435
3,913
163,738
*Aircraft operation estimates reflect activity measured after normal ATC operating hours. This activity, when
combined with ATC traffic counts results in a slightly higher total aircraft operation count for that airport, when
compared to ATC reports.
In addition to the above figures and Table J17, Lambert-St. Louis International
Airport had 4,837general aviation aircraft operations and Mid America Airport in
Illinois had 785 general aviation aircraft operations for a total of 169,360
operations. Figure J11 depicts the regional metropolitan airports.
FIGURE J11 ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS
40
1 = Creve Coeur
2 = Festus Memorial
8 = St. Charles Municipal
9 = St. Clair Regional
3 = Jefferson County (proposed) 10 = St. Louis Downtown - Parks
4 = Lambert-St. Louis Intl Airport 11 = St. Louis Regional
5 = MidAmerica
6 = Shafer Metro-East
12 = Spirit of St. Louis
13 = Sullivan Regional
7 = St. Charles County Smartt
14 = Washington Memorial
Public Transportation
Transportation
Public Transportation for Jefferson County consists of J.C. Transit (JCT) and OATS. (800)
201-6287. Attempts in the past have been made to support public transportation from the
urban St. Louis area to Jefferson County.
Communications
New infrastructures and services are enhancing county residents’ quality of lives. The
following list of communication facilities is not all-inclusive, but represents the major
providers of the county’s communication infrastructure. See Table J16 below.
TABLE
TABLE J16 TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS
Access U.S.
Advantage CTI Communications Inc.
AirTouch Paging
American Paging Inc.
AmericaNetworks
AnsaRing Corporation
Arch Communications Inc.
Associated Engineered Systems Inc.
AT&T (Jefferson City Office)
AT&T Wireless Services
Avtex Corp.
Barron Communications Inc.
Birch Telecom
Brick Network
Cable & Wireless Inc.
Centergistic Solutions
Central District Alarm Inc.
Charter Pipeline
ClearPages.com
Com Trol Company
Communications Technologies Inc.
ComTrol Company
Connell Communications Inc.
Convergent Communications of St. Louis
CTitek Inc.
Cybercon Inc.
Cybermill Communications
Advanced Satellite Systems Inc.
Advertisenet
Alpha Telecommunications LLC
American Technology Corporation
Angel Technologies Corp.
Apple A Day Inc. (An)
Ascom Nexion
Astralink Technology Inc.
AT&T (St. Louis Operations)
Auto Cellular Inc.
Axon Telecom LLC
BigWideSky
Black Box Inc.
BusComm Inc.
Capital Cellular Inc.
Central Business Communications Inc.
Centras Networks Inc.
Cingular Wireless Corporation
CMS Communications Inc.
Com-Sal Inc.
Communitronics Corporation
Concentric Network- St. Louis
Continental Cement Company LLC
CoreExpress LLC
Custom Cellular Inc.
Cyberedge Technologies
Data Wiring & Systems Inc.
TABLE
Datacomm Research Company
Dictaphone Corporation
Dietrich Lockard Group
Double Eagle LLC
Empire Paging & Cellular Inc.
ESCO Technologies Inc.
Everest Global Tech Group LLC
Executive Systems Inc.
Falcon Technologies Inc.
First Internet Alliance
Gateway City Connections
Global Crossing
GSI Inc.
ICNS Inc.
Integrated Design Engineering Inc.
Interchange Technologies Inc.
Internet Gateway Inc.
Ionex Telecommunications Inc.
JBM Electronics Inc.
Kataman Communications
Kincaid Studios
L&R Paging & Cellular Inc.
Lanier Worldwide Inc.
New Equipment Inc.
Lucent Technologies Inc.
Marconi Global Service
Mastor Telecom Equipment Inc.
MCI Worldcom
Med-Products Healthcare Inc.
Metro Tele-Communications Inc.
Mid-America Telephone Systems
Mobile Select Systems Inc.
MobileComm
Mpower Communications
National Pager Services Inc.
Next Wave Communications Corp.
Northern Telecom Inc.
Nothing But Net Inc.
Omnifax Division of Danka
ONE Inc.
Page Girls Inc.
Paging Network of St. Louis
Phoenix Networks Inc.
Phonetell Technologies Inc.
PSI Net
Roberts Wireless Communications LLC
SAVVIS Communications Corp.
SBC Advanced Solutions Inc.
Shared Technologies
Software Application Professionals Inc.
Dial-A-Page
Dielmann & Associates
Digitized Communications Systems
Ellington Telephone Co. Inc.
EPC Inc.
Everest Connections Corp.
Evoke Communications Inc.
Expressive Tek
Fidelity Communications Company
G&D Communications Inc.
Gateway Communications Group
Graybar Electric Company Inc.
Honeywell Inc.
Inlink Corp.
Inter-Tel Technology Inc.
Intermedia Communications Inc.
Intira Corporation
Jato Communications Inc.
JWC Jurisprudence Wireless Communications
Kaufman Broadcast Services
Kingdom Telephone Company
LaBarge Inc.
LDD Inc.
Lowry Computer Products
Main Net (The)
Marz Inc.
Maximum Communications
McLeod USA Information Technology Systems
Metro One Telecommunications Inc.
Metropark Communications
Midwest Telecom Resellers Inc.
Mobilecom
Moore Design Group
MVP Cellular
Net Impact (The)
Nextel Communications Inc.
NorthPoint Communications
NuVox Communications Inc.
On Hold Studios Plus
Optitek Inc.
PageNet
Partner Communications & Services Inc.
Phone Craft Inc.
PrivSystems Inc
Pulitzer Technologies Inc.
Rome Net Solutions
Diamond NET ISP Inc.
SecurityLink
Slingshott Communications
SONACOM IT Partners
41
42
TABLE
Southwestern Bell Telephone Company
Sprint Corporation
Spectrum Resources Inc.
Sprint PCS
Water/Sewer
Jefferson County consists of eight public water districts, ten public and six municipal water
districts. Table J17 below represents the wastewater treatment plants and water supply
facilities in Jefferson County.
TABLE J17 JEFFERSON CO WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILTIES
FACILITY
RECEIVING STREAMS
CITY
PACE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
SIMPSON CONST MAT-JEFFERS
ARNOLD SMALL MS4
METAL CONTAINER CORP
SINCLAIR & RUSH INC
JERRY'S SUNOCO
WMM MERAMEC
WOODGLEN APARTMENTS
BROOKSHIRE COURT APTS
NPSD RANDOLPH HILLS
ARNOLD CHURCH OF NAZARENE
MERAMEC HTS SHOPNG CENTER
TESSON HILLS APARTMENTS
GLAIZE CREEK SEWER DISTRI
KOA,SELSOR DEVELOPMNT GRP
COUNTRY TRAIL ESTATES MHP
WILLOW BEND MHP
WALLACH SEPTIC SERV, INC
MO AMERICAN, CEDAR HILL L
COUNTRY AIRE MANOR MHP
LAKES OF DEERWOOD SUBD
LAKE ADELLE SEWER DIST
BEL AIR ESTATES MHP SUBD
LAKE TAMARAC SUBD
PARADISE ESTATES MHP WWTF
EL CHAPARREL EST SUBD ASO
COUNTRY LIFE ACRES SUBD
CEDAR HILL FIRE PRO DIST
AUSTIN TRAILS WWTF
MO AMERICAN, SAND CREEK F
SECLUDED FOREST SUBD
WEDGEWOOD VILLAGE PLAT 2
SENNAWOOD VILLAGE SUBD
SUNRISE ACRES SUBDIVISION
TRIB GLAIZE CR
MERAMEC
TRIB MERAMEC RIVER
TRIB LITTLE MUDDY CR
MERAMEC RIVER
TENBROOK CR
MERAMEC R
TRIB ROMAINE CR
TRIB MERAMEC R
DUTCH BOTTOM RD BR
BR POMME CR
TRIB MERAMEC R
TRIB ROMAINE CREEK
GLAIZE CR
TRIB MISSISSIPPI R.
TRIB OF HEADS CREEK
TRIB GLAIZE CR
TRIB BIG RV
UN TR BIG R
BR ISUM CR
TRIB ISUM CR.
TRIB SKULLBONE CR
TRIB ISUM CR
TRIB SAND CR.
TRIB SKULL BONES CR
TRIB SAND CREEK
TRIB BELEW CR
TRIB BIG R
TRIB SAND CR
SAND CR
ISUM CR.
TRIB ISUM CR
ISUM CR.
TRIB BIG RIVER
ANTONIA
ARNOLD
ARNOLD
ARNOLD
ARNOLD
ARNOLD
ARNOLD
ARNOLD
ARNOLD
ARNOLD
ARNOLD
ARNOLD
ARNOLD
BARNHART
BARNHART
BARNHART
BARNHART
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
43
FACILITY
RECEIVING STREAMS
CITY
PHILLIPS PROPERTY WWTF
CEDAR HILL U-GAS
CRYSTAL CITY SAND
CRYSTAL CITY WTP
FRED WEBER INC/ASPHALT PL
TWIN CITY AUTO SALVAGE
UPS, CRYSTAL CITY
FESTUS-CRYSTAL CITY STP
FESTUS AIRPORT LAGOON
ARNOLD READY MIX CORP - D
ARCH JOHNSTON COMPANY INC
COUNTRY CORNER
TIMBER CREEK RESORT
JONES PLUMBING SERVICES
JEFFCO FEED & FERTILIZER
DE SOTO WWTP
SOUTH JEFFERSON COUNTY UT
WALKER HILL MHC
ATHENA ELEMENTARY
AUTUMN'S HAVEN
LAKE KINIPPI SUBDIVISION
SUNRISE R-9 ELEM SCHOOL
VALLE LAKE SEWER DISTRICT
OLYMPIAN VILLAGE WWTP
CAESARS MOBILE HOME PARK
TIMBER CREEK RESORT
POWER MODEL SUPPLY CO.
PINE FORD VILLAGE MHP
ATHENA CENTER
UNION PAC RR DESOTO CAR S
WALKER CAR WASH
BRIARWOOD ESTATES
WILDWOOD LAKE
AA QUICK SEWER
ABR SEPTIC SERVICE INC
DITTMER MEAT PACKING COMP
SUNSET FIREWORKS LDT/GLOB
SYCAMORE GREEN ACRES MHP
FOREST HILL MANOR MHP
MAPLE GROVE ELEM SCHOOL
CAMP SUNNYHILL ADVENTURE
CEDAR GROVE MHP
ST MARTIN'S UNITED CHURCH
TRIB SAND CR
TRIB BIG RIVER
MISSISSIPPI R
MISSISSIPPI RIVER
UNNAMED TRIB
DITCH PLATTIN CK
TRIB PLATTIN CREEK
PLATTIN CREEK
TRIB PLATTIN CR
TRIB JOACHIM CREEK
FRITZ CR
TRIB FLUCOM CR
TRIB MCMULLEN BR
TRIB JOACHIM CK
FRITZ CR
JOACHIM CR
FALLING ROCK BRANCH
TRIB JOACHIM CR
TRIB HAVERSTICK CR
BRANCH HAVERSTICK CR
MCMULLEN BR
UNNAMED BR DRY CREEK
TRIB JOACHIM CR
TRIB JOACHIM CR
UN TR PLATTIN CR
MCMULLEN/JOACHIM CR
MCMULLEN BR
TRIB FLUCOM CR
TRIB BIG R.
TRIB HAVERSTICK CR
TRIB JOACHIM CR
TRIB TANYARD BR
TRIB JOACHIM CREEK
TRIB PLATTIN CR
TRIB BIG R
TRIB BIG RIVER
TRIB BIG RIVER
W FORK TO JONES CR
TRIB SKULLBONES CR.
TRIB CALVEY CR.
TRIB BIG RIVER
TRIB DUTCH CR
TRIB CALVEY CR
TRIB SKULLBONES CR
CEDAR HILL
CEDAR HILL
CRYSTAL CITY
CRYSTAL CITY
CRYSTAL CITY
CRYSTAL CITY
CRYSTAL CITY
CRYSTAL CITY
CRYSTAL CITY
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DE SOTO
DITTMER
DITTMER
DITTMER
DITTMER
DITTMER
DITTMER
DITTMER
DITTMER
DITTMER
DITTMER
44
FACILITY
EUREKA MATERIALS COMPANY
GRAPHIC FINISHERS OF AMER
IMPERIAL ORNAMENTAL METAL
AERO METAL FINISHING INC
PRODUCTION CASTINGS, INC
SIR THOMAS MANOR APTS
BIG VALLEY MHC
MERAMEC SEWER COMPANY
NEPSD - TERRY JEAN ACRES
YOUNG SUBDIVISION
MCARTHY HOMESITES #2
KOLLER CRAFT PLASTIC PROD
NPSD, INTERIM SALINE CR
MDNR, ST.FRANCOIS MOUNTAI
ARCH JOHNSTON COMPANY INC
H SAND & GRAVEL
PLATTIN VALLEY STABLES
PLATTIN VALLEY SAND-GRAV.
CATHY JOKERST WATER TREAT
CENTERPOINT ENERGY MISSIS
MURPHY USA STORE #5775
DPC ENTERPRISES
SHAPIRO BROTHERS INC
RED-E MIX TRANSPORTATION
RIVER CEMENT CO/SELMA
AMERENUE, RUSH ISLAND PP
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COM
RIVER CEMENT COMPANY
LIFESTYLE MHP
M.C.L. MHP
EDGEWOOD HEIGHTS SUBD
RCSD-GODFREY GARDENS
MAPAVILLE MEADOWS SUBDIVI
LAKESIDE MANOR
SUNSET POINTE MHP
SELMA VILLAGE SEWER DISTR
TOULON HEIGHTS SUBD
FESTUS,LAMBERT HILLS SUBD
PLATTIN PRIMARY SCHOOL
OSCARS FAMILY RESTAURANT
ARBOR PLACE OF FESTUS
TWIN GABLES MHP
MANDERLEY COURT MOBILE HO
MAPAVILLE MEADOWS SUBDIVI
RECEIVING STREAMS
MERAMEC RIVER
TRIB MERAMEC RV
TRIB FENTON CR
TRIB SALINE CR
TRIB SALINE CREEK
TRIB SUGAR CR
ROMAINE CREEK
TRIB MERAMEC R
SUGAR CR.
TRIB FENTON CR
BR ROMAINE CR
TRIB SALINE CR
MERAMEC R
TRIB MISSISSIPPI RIV
TRIB TO MUDDY CREEK
PLATTIN CR
TRIB PLATTIN CREEK
TRIB PLATTIN CREEK
TRIB JOACHIM CR
TR PLATTIN CR
TRIB PLATTIN CK
TRIB PLATTIN CR
TRIB PLATTIN CR
TRIB MISSISSIPPI RV
CLIFFDALE HOLLOW
MISSISSIPPI RIVER
TRIB JOACHIM CR
MISSISSIPPI RIVER
TRIB TO BUCK CR
TRIB MUDDY CR.
TRIB TO SANDY CR.
TRIB JOACHIM CR
TRIB SANDY CR.
PLATTIN CR
TRIB JOACHIM CR
TRIB MUDDY CR
TRIB LITTLE CR
TRIB TO JOACHIM CR.
TRIB SELMA HOLLOW
BR SELMA HOLLOW CR
TRIB HOCUM HOLLOW
SELMA HOLLOW/MISS R.
UN TRIB PLATTEN CR
SANDY CR.
CITY
EUREKA
FENTON
FENTON
FENTON
FENTON
FENTON
FENTON
FENTON
FENTON
FENTON
FENTON
FENTON
FENTON
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
45
FACILITY
RECEIVING STREAMS
CITY
OAKLAND MANOR MHP
HAPPY HOLLOW MOBILE HOME
BERWIN BUSINESS CENTER
FESTUS, GREEN BRIER EST.
FESTUS, INTERIM WEST TP
LAKE VIRGINIA SUBD E LAG
DOE RUN, HERCULANEUM SMLT
HERCULANEUM WASTEWATER TR
SIEVEKING INC
COUNTRY CLUB OF SUGAR CR
BEAUMONT SCOUT SWIMMING
H-J ENTERPRISES INC
SIMMLER INC
TIRE SHREDDERS UNLIMITED
WOODRIDGE APARTMENTS
SUNNY ACRES II LLC
STARLIGHT APTS.
VILLAS OF WILLIAMS CREEK
LAUREL ACRES MHP
NPSD-PERE CLIFF
MURPHY ANN APARTMENTS
PEMBROKE PARK APARTMENTS
NPSD, CRYSTAL HILLS
H R ELECTRONICS
NPSD WALNUT RIDGE WWTF
ENGINEERED COIL COMPANY
NPSD, ANTIRE SPRINGS PLNT
JEFFERSON CO PWSD #2
JEFFERSON COUNTY LIBRARY
NPSD, HUNNING HILLS STP
NATCHEZ ESTATES APARTMENT
NPSD, COUNTRY CLUB OF SUG
FEED MY PEOPLE
NPSD - PARADISE VALLEY
SEVEN SPRINGS/TWIN LAKES
TEEN CHALLENGE OF ST LOUI
CONCRETE RESOURCES INC DRY CREEK MATERIALS INC
DRY CREEK MATERIALS, INC.
ALL WEATHER SEW SERV INC
JEFFERSON CNTY SMALL MS4
L W SEWER CORP
GRANDVIEW R-II SCHOOL DIS
FAWN MEADOWS SUBD WWTF
TRIB PLATTIN CR
TRIB BUCK CR
BUCK CR
TRIB BUCK CR
JOACHIM CR
TRIB JOACHIM CR
MISSISSIPPI R
JOACHIM CREEK
TRIB SALINE CREEK
TRIB SALINE CR
TRIB LITTLE ANTIRE C
TRIB SALINE CR
TRIB SALINE CREEK
TRIB SALINE R
TRIB TO WILLIAMS CR
LITTLE ANTIRE CR
TRIB OF BEAR CR
TRIB L ANTIRE CR
ANTIRE CR.
TRIB L ANTIRE CREEK
TRIB TO SALINE CR.
ANTIRE CR
TRIB SALINE CR
ANTIRE CR
ANTIRE CR
ANTIRE CR
TRIB ANTIRE CREEK
TRIB BIG RIVER
TRIB BEAR CR
TRIB SALINE CR
TRIB SALINE CREEK
TRIB SALINE CR
BR BEAR CR
WILLIAMS CR
TRIB BIG RIVER
TRIB SALINE CR
TRIB SANDY CR
DRY CREEK
DRY CR
TRIB COTTER CR
MERAMEC RIVER
TRIB DRY CR
TRIB DRY CR
TRIB OF SANDY CREEK
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
FESTUS
HEMATITE
HERCULANEUM
HERCULANEUM
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HIGH RIDGE
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
46
FACILITY
OAK RIDGE TRAILER COURT
MAPA ACRES M H P
HILLSBORO WW RECLAMATION
CHAPEL HILL MHC
FISHER COMMERCIAL AREA
PARC GREENWOOD MHP
SANDIA HEIGHTS MHP SUBD
MOCKINGBIRD SUBD WWTF
LEONARD MOBILE HOME PARK
HILLTOP MOBILE HOME ESTAT
RAINTREE PLANTATION
SWISS LODGE APARTMENTS
JEFFERSON WOODS SUBD
PIONEER TRAIL SUBD
LAKEWOOD TRAILS WWTF
GRANADA MEADOWS WWTP
PERSIMMON POINT DRWBRDG E
HILLSBORO, JAMESTOWN MOBI
HILLSBORO NORTH WWTF
LOCKEPORT LANDING WWTF
SANDY BRANCH SUBD WWTF
KING SEPTIC SERVICE
IMPERIAL PUMPING
O'BRIEN EXCAVATING
RITE NOW SEPTIC CLEANING
BONACKER FARMS INC
BIG 3 AUTO PARTS & SALVAG
NORTHWEST R-1 SCHOOL DIST
HSSC, NORTHWEST HIGH SCH
OUR LADY QUEEN OF PEACE
CREST MANOR MHP
GREEN ACRES MHP
GOLDEN ACRES MHP
ELDERLY HOUSING PARTNERSH
HSSC, HOUSE SPGS MID SCH
HSSC, ECHO VALLEY EST
HSSC, BEAR CREEK ESTATES
HSSC, WOODRIDGE ESTATES
HSSC, PINE GROVE MANOR
BYRNES MILL MOBILE HOME P
HSSC, MEADOW BROOK ESTATE
SYCAMORE SPRINGS MHP
HSSC, CEDAR SPGS ELEM SCH
BYRNES MILL SOUTH WWTP
RECEIVING STREAMS
TRIB SANDY CR
TRIB SANDY CR
BELEW CR
TRIB SANDY CR
TRIB BELEW CR
TRIB TO SANDY CR.
SANDY CR/JOACHIM CR
TRIB BIG CREEK
TRIB SANDY CR
MURRIL BR
GALLIGHER CR.
TRIB SANDY CR
TRIB BIG CR/SANDY CR
TRIB TO SANDY CR.
TRIB JOACHIM CREEK
TRIB SANDY CREEK
TRIB SANDY CREEK
TRIB MURREL BR
SANDY CR
TRIB BIG CREEK
TRIB BIG RIVER
TRIB GLAIZE CK
TRIB HEADS CR
TRIB BIG RIVER
TRIB BIG RIVER
HEADS CR
TRIB BEAR CREEK
BEAR CR
TRIB DULIN CR
TRIB TO BEAR CR.
BEAR CR
TRIB HEADS CREEK
DULIN CREEK
HEAD'S CR.
HEAD'S CR.
TRIB BEAR CREEK
TRIB HEADS CR.
TRIB BEAR CR
TRIB BIG RIVER
TRIB HEADS CR
HEADS CREEK
DULIN CREEK
BIG RIVER
CITY
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HILLSBORO
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
47
FACILITY
RECEIVING STREAMS
CITY
MEADOWBROOK VALLEY ESTATE
WINTERWOOD SUBDIVISION
HSSC, MILLER CROSSING WTF
HSSC, FISHER RD
BLUFFS WWTF
AAA ZOELLNER MATERIALS IN
ARNOLD READY MIX CORP - I
MASTERCHEM INDUSTRIES INC
NPSD ARCHVIEW SUBDIVISION
EV'S PLAZA SHOPPING CENTE
VERDA VISTA APARTMENTS
JOHN'S AUTO BODY
CEDAR GROVE MHP
RCSD, SECKMAN SCHOOL
SUBURBAN AUTO AUCTIO
LION'S DEN OUTDOOR LRNG
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF MO RCSD, KIMMSWICK WWTP
BROOKSTONE ESTATES SUBD
DISABILITY SUPPORT SYSTEM
MAPAVILLE STATE SCHOOL FO
PONY BIRD INC
BRECKENRIDGE JEFFCO PLANT
LAKE CATTAILS SUBDIVISION
LAKEWOOD CARE CENTER
PALISADES VILLAGE SUBD
H. TRAUTMAN QUARRY INC
BRECKENRIDGE PEVELY PLANT
TEAMSTERS LOC 688 HEALTH
SCORE
CARONDELET CORP
HUNT INDUSTRIAL SERVICE C
DOW CHEMICAL - RIVERSIDE
E & J AUTO SALVAGE
CHERRY LANE SUBD
PEVELY WWTP
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 688 HEALT
GRIFFITH'S FIRST ADDITION
SAINT-GOBAIN CONTAINERS
HAZELWOOD COURT MHP
VICTORY CHRISTIAN FELLOWS
SAND CASTLE SUBDIVISION
PEVELY, HUNTERS GLEN SUBD
UNIMIN CORPORATION - PEVE
TRIB BIG R
TRIB LA BARQUE CR
TRIB HEADS CR
TRIB BEAR CR
BIG RIVER
TRIB HEADS CR
TRIB ROCK CR
GLAIZE CR
TRIB ROMAINE CR
TRIB GLAIZE CR
GLAIZE CR.
TRIB TO ROCK CR.
CHESLEY ISLND SLOUGH
ROCK CREEK
TRIB TO ROCK CR
ROCK CR
ROCK CREEK
MISSISSIPPI RIVER
TRIB SANDY CR
TRIB SANDY CR
WET WEATHER BR
TRIB SANDY CR
MERAMEC R
TRIB MERAMEC RIVER
TRIB MERAMEC R
MERAMEC R
TRIB SANDY CREEK
TRIB SANDY CR
TRIB MISSISSIPPI R
TRIB MISSISSIPPI R
TRIB SANDY CREEK
TRIB JOACHIM CREEK
TRIB MISSISSIPPI R
TRIB TO JOACHIM CR
TRIB TO SANDY CR.
TRIB SANDY CR
TRIB MISSISSIPPI R
TRIB SANDY CR.
TRIB SANDY CR
TRIB TO SANDY CR.
TRIB TO JOACHIM CR
JOACHIM CR
TRIB MISSISSIPPI R
UN TR SANDY CR
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
HOUSE SPRINGS
IMPERIAL
IMPERIAL
IMPERIAL
IMPERIAL
IMPERIAL
IMPERIAL
IMPERIAL
IMPERIAL
IMPERIAL
IMPERIAL
IMPERIAL
KIMMSWICK
KIMMSWICK
MAPAVILLE
MAPAVILLE
MAPAVILLE
MAPAVILLE
MURPHY
PACIFIC
PACIFIC
PACIFIC
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
PEVELY
48
FACILITY
O'NEAIL'S SEPTIC SERVICES
COUNTRY AIR EST/RETIREMEN
RECEIVING STREAMS
TRIB PLATTIN CK
TRIB FLOCUM CR
CITY
VALLES MINES
VALLES MINES
Electricity and Natural Gas
Ameren UE operates 18 power-generating plants, with five located in the region and
Dynegy operates six, with three located in the region. Ameren IP operates the distribution
system in Illinois. The total capability for all power plants is 12,769 megawatts. Refer to
Figures J 12 and J13 below.
Electricity/Gas Providers
Ameren UE
1901 Chouteau Ave.
St. Louis, Missouri 63103
314-621-3222
Serves Missouri portion of region
FIGURE J12 AMEREN UE COVERAGE
Source: Ameren UE
49
50
FIGURE J13 LACLEDE GAS COVERAGE
Source: Laclede Gas
Laclede Gas Company
720 Olive Street
St. Louis, Missouri 63101
314-342-0500
Serves Missouri portion of region
51
Solid Waste Disposal
Jefferson County is a part of the St. Louis-Jefferson Solid Waste Management District. The
following list identifies those waste providers for the municipalities identified. See Table
J18 below.
TABLE J18
Jurisdiction
Municipal
Directory
Jefferson
Arnold
Jefferson
Jefferson
Byrnes Mill
Cedar Hill Lakes
Jefferson
Crystal City
Jefferson
De Soto
Jefferson
Jefferson
Festus
Herculaneum
Jefferson
Hillsboro
Jefferson
Jefferson
Jefferson
Kimmswick
Olympian
Village
Parkdale
Jefferson
Jefferson
Pevely
Scotsdale
Franklin
St. Clair
Franklin
Sullivan
Franklin
Union
Franklin
Washington
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
Waste Provider Provider Address
12976 St. Charles
Midwest Waste Rock Rd.
Midwest Waste,
Waste Mngt, M 12976 St. Charles
& M Hauling
Rock Rd
City of Crystal
City
Waste
Management
Waste
Management
Republic Waste
130 Mississippi Ave
Provider City
Bridgeton
Bridgeton
Crystal City
7320 Hall St
St. Louis
7320 Hall St
18716 State Hwy 177
St. Louis
Jackson
Republic Waste 18716 State Hwy 177
Midwest Waste,
Kraemer
12976 St. Charles
Hauling
Rock Rd
Jackson
Bridgeton
Republic Waste 18716 State Hwy 177
Jackson
Waste
Management
7320 Hall St
St. Louis
Solid Waste
Solutions
P.O. Box 228
St. Clair
CWI of Missouri 18716 State Hwy 177
Jackson
12976 St. Charles
Midwest Waste Rock Rd
Bridgeton
City of
Washington
405 Jefferson
Washington
52
In 1989-1990, there were 13 sanitary landfills in the St. Louis metropolitan area (MissouriIllinois), which includes the District, with an estimated remaining lifespan of 8.8 years. One
landfill was publicly owned. By 1995-1996, there were seven sanitary landfills in the
region: three in Missouri and four in Illinois. All landfills but one are now privately owned
and operated. Since 1989-1990, six sanitary landfills have closed and one has been
decommissioned. In the last two years a privately owned landfill in St. Clair County, Illinois
has opened. See Table J19 below.
TABLE J19
Landfill
Fred Weber
Veloia Oak Ridge
Roxana
WMI - Milam
WMI – Cotton Woods
2007 LANDFILLS IN REGION
County
St. Louis
St. Louis
Madison
St. Clair
St. Clair
State
Missouri
Missouri
Illinois
Illinois
Illinois
Source: St. Louis-Jefferson Solid Waste Management District
Law Enforcement
The Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department includes 196 officers. In addition, Crystal City
has 20 officers, DeSoto has 19 officers, Festus has 29 officers, Hillsboro has 14 officers,
Kimmswick has 6 officers, Pevely has 22 officers, Herculaneum has 17 officers, Byrnes Mill
has 15 officers, Arnold has 46 officers, and Olympian Village has 2 officers. The
departments participate in mutual aid agreements with all incorporated areas within the
county. Jefferson County officers working in the north zone are headquartered out of High
Ridge. Officers working in the south zone are headquartered out of Hillsboro. Officers
working out of the east zone are headquartered out of Imperial.
Emergency Services (911)
Emergency management for Jefferson County is conducted and coordinated by the
Jefferson County Emergency Management & Public Information Office. They help to
protect, preserve and enhance the quality of life of county residents by working with the
community in managing the mitigation of, preparedness for, response to, and recovery
from natural and technological disasters and intentional destructive acts. Their focus is on
the preservation of: the lives and health of citizens, the environment within which they live,
and their property. They cooperate with participating agencies, municipalities,
organizations, industries and media, then providing the citizens of the county with
information to prepare for and recover from disasters.
The Department of Administration is primarily responsible for staff functions within the
County and consists of two staff offices and three line divisions. The functional areas of the
department are the Office of the Contracts and Grants Administrator, the Office of
Emergency Management and Public Information Administrator, the Division of Human
Resources, the Division of General Services, and the Division of Animal Control. The
53
address for the Emergency Management Office is the Jefferson County Courthouse
Basement, 300 Main Street, Hillsboro, MO 63050.
Emergency Medical Services
The Joachim-Plattin Ambulance District (JPAD) protects 63000 people living in an area of
180 square miles. The district is a public department whose members are on a paid status
and operates out of two stations. Joachim Plattin Ambulance District (JPAD) provides
emergency and non-emergency medical care and transport to the south-eastern region of
Jefferson County, Missouri (approx 30 miles south of St. Louis). JPAD began providing
service in September 1975. The district includes a wide range of demographics from rural
farming areas, to small cities and areas of heavy industry. JPAD spans across nine separate
fire districts and five different police departments (including Jefferson County Sheriff's
Department).
Jefferson County has seven ambulance districts that include the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Big River Ambulance District: P.O. Box 348, Cedar Hill, MO
Joachim-Plattin Townships Ambulance District: 619 Collins Drive, Festus, Mo
North Jefferson county Ambulance District: P.O. Box 233, High Ridge, MO
Rock Township Ambulance District: P.O. Box 629, Arnold, MO
Valle Ambulance District: 12363 Highway 21, Desoto, MO
Meramec –Ambulance District- House 1 (Unit 8517) 429 East Osage, Pacific MO
63069; House 2 (Unit 8527) 3279 Highway 100, Villa Ridge MO.; House, 31768
Highway O, Robertsville, MO. 63072
Eureka Fire Protection and Ambulance District– House 1, 1060 Hwy W; House 2,
1815 W 5th; House 3, 3571 Wright Oak School Rd.
Fire Protection
Protection
Table 20 lists the 19 fire protection districts providing fire services and their resources in
Jefferson County.
The districts that service the County provide the following resources in Table J20.
TABLE J20
Fire Protection District
Antonia
Cedar Hill
Crystal City
DeSoto City
DeSoto Rural
Dunklin
Eureka
JEFFERSON COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION
PROTECTION RESOURCES 2003
Stations
Vehicles
1
3
1
1
3
1
1
4
5
6
2
12
6
N.A.
Staff (Professional &
Volunteer)
36
66
30
34
50
30
27
54
TABLE J20
JEFFERSON COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION
PROTECTION RESOURCES 2003
Fire Protection District
Goldman
Hematite
Herculaneum
High Ridge
Hillsboro
Jefferson R-7 FPD
Mapaville FPD
Pacific
Rock Community FPD
Shady Valley
Springdale
Festus
Stations
Vehicles
1
2
1
3
2
1
1
1
4
1
2
3
7
6
8
5
6
N.A.
7
N.A.
9
7
6
10
Staff (Professional &
Volunteer)
33
21
20
58
38
41
25
N.A.
64
29
N.A.
42
Underground Infrastructure
Due to homeland security concerns, underground utilities are not mapped in this plan.
According to the Missouri One Call System, Inc. as of April 4, 2003, the following
companies maintain underground utility lines within Jefferson County. Emergency
information concerning these utility lines in contained in the County’s Emergency
Operations Plan. The Jefferson County Emergency Management director’s telephone
number is 636-797-5381.
The following companies listed in Table J21 have underground lines running through
Jefferson County:
TABLE J21 UNDERGROUND INFRASTRUCTURE
Ameren UE
Broadwing Communications
Charter
City of Arnold
City of DeSoto
City of Festus
Crawford Electric Coop, Inc
Jefferson Co. Public Works
Jefferson Co. PWSD 1
KMB Utility Corp
Level 3 Communications
MCI Worldcom
Mississippi River Trans
Missouri Natural Gas
Northeast Public Sewer Dist
SBC (Southwestern Bell)
Valle Lake Sewer District
AT & T Corp
Cablevision, LLC
Citizens Electric Corp
City of Crystal City
City of Eureka
City of Pevely
House Springs Sewer Co.
Jefferson Co. CPWSD-C-1
Laclede Gas Company
Lightcore (DTI)
Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District
Missouri American Water Co.
Northeast Public Sewer Dist
Phillips Pipeline Co.
Sprint Long Distance
55
The Missouri One Call utility location telephone number is 1-800-344-7483.
Inventory of Housing Structures
Number of Dwelling Units
According to the American Fact Finder 2007 there are 84,919 households in the county
with an average size of 2.69 persons and the median age of residents is 36.2 years.
Median household income is $55,295 annually with 7.4 percent of county families and 9.1
percent of the total population with incomes below the poverty level.
Average Unit Cost
The average dwelling unit cost (including rental properties) for Jefferson County is
$147,300 up from $91,690 in 2000.
TABLE J22 JEFFERSON COUNTY HOUSING
HOUSING UNITS
Total Housing Units
84,919 Percent
Unweighted Sample HU Count
Total Housing Units (100 percent Count)
Est Occupied Housing Units (100 percent Count)
Est Vacant Housing Units (100 percent Count)
Pct of Occupied HUs in Sample
Pct of Vacant HUs in Sample
TOTAL OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS
Owner occupied units
Renter occupied units
Vacant Housing Units
84,919
78,867
6,052
92.9
7.1
78,867
66,679
12,188
6,052
TABLE J23 JEFFERSON COUNTY HOUSING
HOUSING
BREAKDOWN
Total Units Percent
Single Family Units
2 to 4 Units
5 to 19 Units
In Buildings with 20+ Units
Mobile Homes
Boat, RV, Van, etc.
65,498
3,759
2,576
290
12,115
0
77.7
4.4
3.2
0.3
14.4
0.0
84.5
15.5
7.1
56
Average Unit Cost
TABLE J24 VALUE OF
OF HOMES IN JEFFERSON
COUNTY
Home Value
House Value < $50,000
Value $50,000 to $99,999
Value $100,000 to $149,999
Value $150,000 to $199,999
Value $200,000 to $299,999
Value $300,000 to $499,999
Value $500,000 to $999,999
Value $1 million or more
Median House Value
Number
Percent
7,682
8,570
18,620
15,759
11,433
4,109
713
117
$147,300
11.5
12.9
28
24
17.2
6.2
1.1
0.02
Source: 2007 U.S. Census
Total Inventory of Structures
The total Jefferson County assessed valuation for the year 2000, including both real estate
and personal property was $1,863,308,707, according to Missouri Department of
Revenue. State assessed utilities accounted for $151,536,040.
TABLE J25 Inventory of Structures
Parcel Classification
Commercial & Agricultural
Commercial & Agricultural & Residential
Agricultural Vacant
Agricultural
Commercial
Commercial Vacant
Residential
Residential Vacant
Commercial & Residential
Total Assessed
$1,468,600
$4,333,900
$2,598,700
$630,400
$271,718,000
$15,239,400
$1,006,396,400
$44,626,200
$43,678,100
# of Records
Records Average Assessed
32
$45,893.75
30
$144,463.33
1903
$1,365.58
255
$2,472.16
2089
$130,070.85
350
$43,541.14
61942
$16,247.40
16819
$2,653.32
602
$72,554.98
Cities and Villages (No Change 2000 Census)
Below is a listing of the municipalities within Jefferson County. This information is based
on the results of the capabilities questionnaires sent out to all of the jurisdictions. Included
in this listing is demographic statistics, municipal information on mitigation policies,
programs and regulations, as well as asset data. Blanks in the database indicate that the
municipality did not respond to the question.
57
TABLE J26 Cities and Villages
Jefferson County unincorporated
Total population
Classification
Leadership structure
Median household income, 1999
Total housing units
Housing unit, median year built
Median gross rent
Median owner-occupied housing value
Master plan
Emergency Operations Plan
Zoning regulations
Building regulations
Subdivision regulations
Stormwater regulations
Floodplain regulations
Water service
Sewer service
Electric service
Natural gas service
Fire service
Ambulance service
Arnold
Total population
Classification
Total housing units
Median gross rent
Master plan
Zoning regulations
Water service
Sewer service
Electric service
Natural gas service
Fire service
Ambulance service
2000
145,820
1st Class, Home Rule
County Executive Council
$48,470
54,506
$504
$102,081
yes-'03
yes
yes
BOCA '96
yes
yes
yes- 2'
Water Districts; individual
Sewer Districts; individual
AmerenUE
MO NG
multiple
multiple
19744
City-3rd class
Mayor/Council
$47,188
7913
1972
$575
$97,500
yes
yes
yes
IBC 2000; #7.30
yes
yes
Zoning sec 6;art 5.76-5.97;ord 7.5, sec5-13
PWSD #1
PWSD #10
AmerenUE
Midwest MO Gas
RockCom FPD
RockTNAD
58
Byrnes Mill
Total population
Classification
Total housing units
Median gross rent
Master plan
Zoning regulations
Water service
Sewer service
Electric service
Natural gas service
Fire service
Ambulance
Cedar Hill Lakes
Total population
Classification
Total housing units
Median gross rent
Master plan
Zoning regulations
Water service
Sewer service
Electric service
Natural gas service
Fire service
Ambulance service
2000
1172
City-4th class
Mayor/Council
$51,211
935
1985
$484
$121,600
yes-'91
yes
yes
IBC 2000
yes
yes
yes
PWSD #1; PWSD #10
Byrnes Mill
AmerenUE
Laclede
High Ridge FPD
Big River AD
229
Village
Bd of trustees
$54,375
95
1962
$483
$67,500
community well; indiviual wells
individual
AmerenUE
none
Cedar Hill FPD
Big River AD
59
2000
Crystal City
Total population
Classification
Total housing units
Median gross rent
Master plan
Zoning regulations
Water service
Sewer service
Electric service
Natural gas service
Fire service
Ambulance service
4247
City-3rd class
Mayor/Council
$36,117
1,769
1955
$452
$85,400
yes
yes
yes
IBC 2000; #1374
yes
yes
#1096
Crystal City
Crystal City
AmerenUE
MO NG
Crystal City FD
JPT AD
Desoto
Total population
Classification
Total housing units
Median gross rent
Master plan
Zoning regulations
Water service
Sewer service
Electric service
Natural gas service
Fire service
Ambulance service
6375
City-3rd class
Mayor/Council
$30,725
2741
1954
$406
$67,200
yes-'60
yes
yes
BOCA 2000
yes
yes
yes
Desoto
Desoto
AmerenUE
MO NG
Desoto F&R
Valle AD
60
Festus
Total population
Classification
Total housing units
Median gross rent
Master plan
Zoning regulations
Water service
Sewer service
Electric service
Natural gas service
Fire service
Ambulance service
Herculaneum
Total population
Classification
Total housing units
Median gross rent
Master plan
Zoning regulations
Water service
Sewer service
Electric service
Natural gas service
Fire service
2000
9660
City-3rd class
Mayor/Council
$36,687
4,040
1966
$474
$87,300
Yes- -'03
yes
yes
IBC 2000; #716
yes
yes
Chap 11
Festus
Festus
AmerenUE
MO NG
Festus FD
JPT AD
2805
City-4th class
Mayor/Council
$40,365
1078
1964
$582
$87,400
Herculaneum
Herculaneum
AmerenUE
MO NG
Herculaneum FD
61
2000
Ambulance service
JPT AD
Hillsboro
Total population
Classification
Total housing units
Median gross rent
Master plan
Zoning regulations
Water service
Sewer service
Electric service
Natural gas service
Fire service
Ambulance service
1675
City-4th class
Mayor/Council
$36,850
620
1971
$501
$93,800
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
Hillsboro
Hillsboro
AmerenUE
MO NG
Hillsboro FPD
Valle AD
Kimmswick
Total population
Classification
Total housing units
Median gross rent
Master plan
Zoning regulations
Water service
Sewer service
Electric service
94
City-4th class
Mayor/Council
$54,688
36
pre1940
$650
$121,400
PWSD #10
AmerenUE
62
Natural gas service
Fire service
Ambulance service
Olympian Village
Total population
Classification
Total housing units
Median gross rent
Master plan
Zoning regulations
Water service
Sewer service
Electric service
Natural gas service
Fire service
Ambulance service
Parkdale
Total population
Classification
Total housing units
Median gross rent
Master plan
Zoning regulations
Water service
2000
none
RockCom FPD
RockTNAD
669
City-4th class
Mayor/Council
$41,447
232
1974
$467
$72,800
PWSD #5
Olympian Village
AmerenUE
MO NG
Jefferson R-7 FPD
Valle AD
205
Village
Bd of Trustees
$52,000
71
1958
$0
$63,900
63
Sewer service
Electric service
Natural gas service
Fire service
Ambulance service
2000
High Ridge FPD
NJC AD
Pevely
Total population
Classification
Total housing units
Median gross rent
Master plan
Zoning regulations
Water service
Sewer service
Electric service
Natural gas service
Fire service
Ambulance service
Scotsdale
Total population
Classification
Total housing units
Median gross rent
Master plan
Zoning regulations
3768
City-4th class
Mayor/Council
$34,916
1482
1980
$379
$80,200
yes-'96
yes
yes
IBC 2000; #958
yes
yes
FEMA model #956
Pevely
Pevely
AmerenUE
MO NG
Dunklin FPD
JPT AD
211
Town
Bd of Trustees
$53,750
68
1978
$563
$95,800
64
Water service
Sewer service
Electric service
Natural gas service
Fire service
Ambulance service
2000
Cedar Hill FPD
Big River AD
1
SECTION 2
Risk Assessment
Hazard Identification and Elimination Process
During the course of this study, many sources were researched for data relating to hazards.
Primary sources included FEMA, SEMA, National Climate Data Center (NCDC) and the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) and Center for Earthquake Research and Information (CERI), Central U.S.
Earthquake Consortium (CUSEC) were major sources for earthquake information. MDNR’s
Dam and Reservoir Safety Program provided major information concerning dams.
Additional research was based on data from USACE, National Park Service, National Forest
Service, other departments within Missouri Department of Natural Resources, St. Louis
University, State of Missouri Climatologist, Missouri Department of Conservation, and
University of Missouri, Columbia. Additional sources included county officials; existing
county, regional and state plans, reports on the floods of 1993 and 1995; position papers
on transportation issues and information from local officials and residents. Past State and
federal disaster designations, current Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS) and available local
mitigation plans were also utilized.
In order to identify the hazards relevant to Jefferson County, the above information sources
were searched for incidents of all possible hazards occurring within the county. Some
hazards are regional in scope and included in the hazard profiles. Location-specific hazards
not found through the information search were further investigated to determine whether
there would be a future possibility of occurrence. Hazard event histories, repetitive loss
information and conversations with local residents were used to identify relevant hazards.
Community
Communityty-Wide Hazard Profile and List of Hazards Identified
The largest disaster to impact Jefferson County in the recent past was the Great Flood of
1993. The loss of homes, businesses and infrastructures, as well as the temporary closing
of some local businesses, contributed to economic losses throughout the County and
beyond. Several hazards can affect Jefferson County. History indicates that Jefferson
County could be at risk of tornadoes and severe thunderstorms, riverine flooding (including
flash flooding), severe winter weather (snow, ice, extreme cold), drought, heat wave,
earthquakes, wildfires and dam failures. Worksheet #1, Jefferson County Hazard
Identification and Analysis, is included at the end of the Technical Appendix and shows
earthquakes as the hazard with the greatest possible impact. Jefferson County has
experienced a number of slight tremors from the New Madrid Fault Zone. Disasters ranked
in descending order after earthquakes include flood, dam, severe windstorms, winter
weather, drought, wildfires, and heat wave.
2
These disasters can precipitate cascading hazards or those hazards caused as a result of
disasters. Cascading hazards could include interruption of power supply, water supply,
business and transportation. Disasters also can cause civil unrest, computer failure and
environmental health hazards. Any of these, alone or in combination, could possibly
impact emergency response activities. Table J27A shows the relationships found between
Jefferson County’s disasters and categories of possible cascading disasters. Examples of
specific disasters include nuclear power plant damage, hazardous materials release, mass
transportation accidents and disease outbreak due to unsanitary conditions.
Hazards Not Included and Reasons For Elimination
Elimination
Based on the lack of documented historical occurrence and research, it was determined
that the following hazards would not be evaluated for the purposes of this Hazard
Mitigation Plan: coastal storms, hurricanes, tsunamis, avalanche and volcanic activity.
These hazards do not exist within Jefferson County due to its geographic location and
geologic conditions.
Health &
Environmental
Hazard
Tornado/
X
X
X
X
X
Windstorm
Flood
X
X
X
X
Winter
X
X
X
X
Drought
X
Heat
X
X
Earthquake/
X
X
X
X
X
Landslide
Landslide
Dams
X
X
X
X
Fires
X
X
X = More than 50% chance of a side effect in the case of a disaster
Transportation
Interruption
Computer Failure
& Loss of Records
Civil Unrest
Business
Interruption
Water Supply
Interruption
Disaster
Power &
Communications
Interruption
TABLE J27A CASCADING HAZARDS RESULTING FROM DISASTERS
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Flood Hazard Profile
The Mississippi River is the eastern boundary of the County. Jefferson County is just
downstream from the Missouri River. Jefferson County is highly susceptible to annual
flooding events in the spring. Flooding poses a threat to lives and safety and can cause
severe damage to public and private property. With the exception of fire, floods are the
most common and widespread of all disasters. Most communities in the United States
have experienced some kind of flooding, after spring rains, heavy thunderstorms or winter
snow thaws. Refer to Figures J14 and J15 below.
FIGURE J14
Satellite image of flooding at
Missouri/Mississippi River confluence.
3
FIGURE J15
Aerial photo along the Mississippi River 1993
Background
The first step to floodplain management as a nonstructural alternative to flood control was
incorporated into the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. This was 40 years after the
Flood Control Act of 1928 that authorized the United States Corps of Engineers (USACE) to
control the Mississippi River with dams, levees and diversion channels. This Act authorized
the USACE to undertake a structural approach to reducing flood damages (thus keeping
water from people). After numerous floods, and having spent billions of dollars on floods
and disasters, Congress looked at another approach to reduce flood losses, adding a nonstructural approach in the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968. The National Flood
Insurance program (NFIP) required local governments to adopt regulations governing new
development activities in identified flood plains in order to be eligible for the sale of flood
insurance within their jurisdictions.
Description of Hazard
Flooding is a natural event and has been characteristic of rivers throughout history. It
becomes a disaster when it is of such magnitude that both man-made and natural
landforms and human lives are destroyed or seriously damaged (Gaffney). Through
analysis of existing federal Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) and Flood Insurance Studies,
the Hazard Mitigation Plan Unit of EWG has determined that the counties included in the
EWG planning region including St. Louis County, St. Charles County, Franklin County,
Jefferson County and the City of St. Louis have 100-year floodplains (in addition to 500year floodplains) and may be affected by flooding hazards. A variety of factors affect the
type and severity of flooding throughout the planning region, including urban
development and infrastructure and topography.
4
A flood is defined as an overflow or inundation that comes from a river or other body of
water (Barrows, 1948) and causes or threatens damage or any relatively high streamflow
overtopping the natural or artificial banks in any reach of a stream (Leopold and Maddock,
1954). A flood is defined by the National Flood Insurance Program as: “A general and
temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of two or more acres of normally
dry land area or of two or more properties from:
•
•
•
Overflow of inland or tidal waters,
Unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any source, or
A mudflow.
Characteristics
Riverine flooding includes headwater, backwater, and interior drainage. Floods can be
slow or fast rising, depending on the intensity of the rainstorms in the watershed over a
certain length of time, or from rapid snowmelt or icemelt. Floods generally develop over a
period of days. During heavy rains from storm systems (including severe thunderstorms),
water flows down the watershed, collecting in, and then overtopping, valley streams and
rivers.
Flash flooding is characterized by rapid accumulation or runoff of surface waters from any
source. This type of flooding can occur within six hours of a rain event, after a dam or
levee failure, or the sudden release of water held by an ice or debris dam. Because flash
flood can develop in just a matter of hours, flash floods can catch people unprepared and
most flood-related deaths result from this type of flooding. Most flash flooding is caused
by slow-moving thunderstorms or heavy rains.
Several factors contribute to both riverine and flash flooding. Two key elements are rainfall
intensity (the rate of rainfall) and duration (length of time that the rainfall lasts). Type of
ground cover, soil type and topography all play important roles in flooding.
Flooding potential is further exacerbated in urban areas (disturbed lands) by the increased
runoff up from two to six times over what would occur on undisturbed terrain. Soils lose
their ability to absorb rain as land is converted from fields or woodlands to buildings and
pavement. During periods of urban flooding, streets become rivers, and basements and
viaducts become death traps as they fill with water.
Floodplains are located in relatively flat lowland areas and adjoin rivers and streams. These
lowland areas adjacent to rivers and stream banks serve to carry excess floodwater during
rapid runoff. Floodplains are a vital part of a larger entity called a watershed basin. A
watershed basin is defined as all the land drained by a river and its branches. In some
cases, flooding may not be attributed to a river, stream or lake. It may be the combination
of excessive rainfall, snowmelt, saturated ground and inadequate drainage.The term “base
flood” or 100-year flood is the area in the floodplain that is subject to a one percent or
greater chance of flooding in any given year, based on historical records. A 500-year flood
5
is defined as the area in the floodplain that has a .2% probability of occurring in any given
year. While unlikely, it is possible to have two 100 or even 500 year floods within years or
months of each other. The primary use for these terms is for the determination of flood
insurance rates in flood hazard areas. Using historic weather and hydrograph data the
estimated rate of flow or discharge of a river or creek is derived. After extensive study and
coordination with Federal and State agencies, this group recommended that the 1-percentannual-chance flood (also referred to as the 100-year or “Base Flood”) be used as the
standard for the NFIP.
The 1-percent-annual-chance flood was chosen on the basis that it provides a higher level
of protection while not imposing overly stringent requirements or the burden of excessive
costs on property owners. The 1-percent-annual-chance flood (or 100-year flood)
represents a magnitude and frequency that has a statistical probability of being equaled or
exceeded in any given year, or the 100-year flood has a 26 percent (or 1 in 4) chance of
occurring over the life of a 30-year mortgage.
Likely Locations
In certain areas of Jefferson County, steep slopes can induce high velocities as the water
flows downhill and downstream, in many cases producing flash flooding conditions.
Because some areas in Jefferson County are located in low areas, and therefore, often in
the floodplain, floodwaters have the potential to affect or even severely harm portions of
the community, especially if the floodwalls or levees fail.
There is a 3.2 mile 500-year federal levee in the Festus-Crystal City area on the Missouri side
of the Mississippi River in Jefferson County; however there are federal levees on the Illinois
side that extend as far south as Ste. Genevieve County, Missouri. During floods, these
levees would force higher floodwaters to inundate the Missouri side of the river. The
failure of the federal levees would lower the floodwaters and reduce the flooding impact
on the Missouri side. These conditions that exist in areas where flash floods are a problem
make response operations and evacuation very difficult, adversely affecting the safety of
the residents.
Type of Damage
Damage incurred as a result of flooding includes the inundation of residences,
outbuildings, businesses, churches stormwater, mud, rock, trees, debris, trash, and
chemical pollutants. Depending upon the severity of the flood and the volume and rate of
flow of the water, floodwaters may be capable of carrying vehicles, whole or parts of
buildings, etc.
During spring and summer 1993, record flooding inundated much of the upper Mississippi
River Basin. The magnitude of the damages -- in terms of property, disrupted business, and
personal trauma -- was unmatched by any other flood disaster in United States history .
Property damage alone was over $20 billion. Damaged highways and submerged roads
6
disrupted overland transportation throughout the flooded region. The Mississippi and the
Missouri Rivers were closed to navigation before, during, and after the flooding. Millions of
acres of productive farmland remained under water for weeks during the growing season.
and severe erosion occurred. The banks and channels of many rivers were severely eroded,
and sediment was deposited over large areas of the basin's flood plain. Record flows
submerged many areas that had not been affected by previous floods. Industrial and
agricultural areas were inundated, which caused concern about the transport and fate of
industrial chemicals and sewage effluent in the floodwaters . The extent and duration of
the flooding caused numerous levees to fail.
Hazard Event History
The largest disaster to impact Jefferson County in recent years was the flood of 1993. Its
size and impact was unprecedented and has been considered the most costly and
devastating flood to ravage the U.S. in modern history. The number of record river levels,
its aerial extent, the number of persons displaced, amount of property damage and the
flood’s duration surpassed all earlier U.S. floods in modern times.
The following gives an account of locations and areas that were affected by the inundation
of water during the 1993 flood. Based on a workshop meeting held on October 17, 2003
with Jefferson County officials and other community emergency management agencies, the
following locations were specifically identified as locations that become flooded during
various rainfall events in 1993. In DeSoto, Joachim Creek and North Main along Cedar
Street became inundated from floodwaters and flash flooding occurred near the high
school. In Festus, the community flooded in 1993 and has experienced problems with
storm drainage and creeks. Also in 1993, Rock Creek in Kimmswick flooded Highway K
and Highway K Bridge. Other areas of Jefferson County experienced significant flooding at
the confluence of the Big River and Meramec River, including Highway BB, West Old
Highway 21, Highway 61/67 and Highway 55. Several areas in community of Arnold
experienced significant flooding impacts, including Twin River Road, Big Bend Road,
Meadow Drive, Riffle Island, State Road BB, and River Bend Acres. West of Pevely on
Highway Z between Sandy Creek and Cherry Lane, 1993 floodwaters inundated the bridge;
mitigation for this stretch entailed the raising of the road and replacement of the bridge.
Refer to Figure J16 below.
FIGURE J16 1993 MIDWEST FLOOD
Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
7
8
Areas hardest hit by the 1993 flooding were along the Mississippi and Meramec Rivers in
the eastern and northern portions of Jefferson County. The existing levee system (federal
levees along the Illinois side of the Mississippi River) intended to aid in protecting the
Illinois side from the potential of flooding endured extreme pressures from extended
duration of the high river levels. The presence of the Illinois federal levees resulted in the
inundation of floodwaters on the Missouri side of the Mississippi River. Illinois levee
failures resulted in the relief from floodwaters on the Missouri side of the Mississippi River.
During the 1993 flood, commuting was interrupted when various bridges north of the
Jefferson County area over the Mississippi River were closed due to flooding. Commuting
was also heavily interrupted when Highway 40-64 was closed due to the overtopping of
the Monarch Levee in Chesterfield, Missouri. Prolonged flooding on the Highway 40-61
created economic loss and hardship impacts on the St. Louis metropolitan region. They
provided critical access to employment, healthcare, emergency services, education, retail
and commerce activities and transportation of goods and services. They provide critical
access to employment, healthcare, emergency services, education, retail and commerce
activities and transportation of goods and services.
Approximately 138 homes were bought out as a result of flooding in Jefferson County.
FEMA estimated the total dollar loss for housing units alone was $3,483,868 for Jefferson
County as of January 9, 2001. While some households carried adequate flood insurance
on their dwellings, about 82 percent of the dwellings in the affected areas were either
underinsured or not insured for flood. Unfortunately this left a portion of the county’s
labor force homeless for a period of time, adding to the economic loss. From the Disaster
Declaration of 1993 (DR-0995), Jefferson County received $1,527,199 in public assistance.
From the 1995 disaster (DR-1054), Jefferson County received $89,928 in public assistance.
From the 2000 disaster (DR-1328), Jefferson County received $483,511.22 in individual
assistance, $473,000 in SBA assistance and $574,002.26 in public assistance. From the
2002 disaster (R-1412), Jefferson County received $31,192.35 in individual assistance and
$20,000 in SBA assistance. In the 2003 disaster (DR-1463), Jefferson County received
$2,082,045.99 in individual assistance, $3,411,600 in SBA assistance and $353,632.20 in
public.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) produced a set of maps showing damage
estimates for the 1993 flood. According to the maps, Jefferson County damages included:
Greater than $10 million in commercial properties damages
Between $1 and $5 million in public facilities damages
Between $1 and $5 million in residential damages
Greater than $10 million in transportation system damage
Between $500,000 and $10 million in utilities damages
Greater than $1 million is emergency expenses
Statewide data was collected by USACE for seven specific areas of damages and costs and
for one general area. Information was collected for residential, commercial/industrial,
9
public facilities, transportation, utilities, agriculture and emergency services. The general
area was an attempt to cover what might be thought of as secondary costs of the
flooding. These were the costs of buyout, mitigation, mission, unemployment assistance
and crisis counseling.
Buyout and relocation costs were typically received from local officials. These costs are
typically included in the mitigation costs rather than presented separately. USACE derived
mitigation costs from the FEMA DSRs, from SBA reports and from Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) officials. In most cases, the mitigation costs were well reported and
include monies that went for buyouts. Unemployment costs, including both
unemployment and food aid assistance costs, were derived from FEMA and USDA reports.
The commercial variable included all commercial and industrial damages for the Missouri
area. The figures for all parts of the commercial/industrial damages were derived from
FEMA, SBA, and state and local sources. Refer to Figure J17 below. The equipment
damages for both commercial and industrial are found in the commercial equipment
damages variable. These estimates come from FEMA, SBA and local sources. Commercial
and industrial revenues lost under the commercial variable. These estimates come from SBA
and local sources.
10
FIGURE J17 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL (1993)
11
FEMA Damage Survey Reports (DSRs) and local sources were used for the various
categories of damage to public facilities. The variables included under this category were
number of and damages to public structures, public equipment damage, costs of public
restoration and debris clearance, damages to parks and recreation facilities, and damages
to water control facilities. The latter variable was drawn from U.S. Department of
Agriculture and USACE sources as well as those sources used for the other public variables.
Refer to Figure J18 below.
12
FIGURE J18 PUBLIC FACILITIES (1993)
13
USACE gathered residential data on the numbers of residences damaged, structure
damage and content damage. This category included residential damage figures for both
structure and content unseparated in Missouri. Refer to Figure J19 below.
14
FIGURE J19 RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES (1993)
15
Variables for railroad damages were miles of lines flooded, amount of damages, and
revenues lost. These were determined by contacting the private railroad companies, local
officials, and the Federal Railroad Administration. Refer to Figure J20 below. Variables for
trucking damages were the number of trucking companies experiencing damage, the
amount of damages, and revenues lost. Only in Kansas City and St. Louis USACE Districts
were damages in this category reported. Damages to airports included numbers of airports
damaged, amounts of that damage, and revenues lost by airports. Transportation damages
were also acquired on miles of roads flooded; traffic rerouting costs, and damages to roads
and bridges.
16
FIGURE J20 TRANSPORTATION (1993)
17
The utilities damages covered water, sewer, electric and general utilities in Missouri. Data
regarding utilities damage was sought from state departments of natural resources or
environmental protection, the FEMA DSRs and local officials. Names of some water
facilities, evidently those that suffered some damage, are included in the records. Numbers
of water customers affected and dollar amounts of water facilities damage were more
frequently reported. Very few areas reported lost water revenues. Refer to Figure J21
below. More information is available on sewerage systems as both the numbers damaged
and the dollar amounts of that damage are available.
Flood damages to the electrical power distribution system were collected through
discussions with local, regional and state officials, the FEMA DSRs and officials of the
involved electric companies. Variables are presented for number of companies affected,
number of customers affected, dollar damages to the companies and revenues lost. The
final utilities variable, utility systems - general, was specifically used in the USACE St. Louis
District counties to report gas utility company damages. That information was obtained
from gas company officials. Otherwise, the FEMA DSRs were the primary sources for utility
damages not specifically assignable.
18
FIGURE J21A UTILITIES DAMAGES (1993)
19
The two emergency cost variables are the emergency preparedness and response costs and
the evacuation costs. The former was primarily derived from the FEMA DSRs, with
supplemental data coming from some local and regional officials. The latter variable came
from these same sources, as well as the Red Cross and FEMA Disaster Field Offices. The
final variable, crisis counseling, was derived from FEMA reports and state sources. Refer to
Figure J22 below.
According to the Department of Economic Development and Department of Labor and
Industrial Relations, employment impact and the occurrence of the 1993 floods did not
show a direct correlation in the Jefferson County area. July, August, September, October
and November’s unemployment rate are as follows: 6.6, 6.4, 5.4, 5.2, and 5.1,
respectively. The region was just recovering from a recession and the rates reflect a higher
than normal unemployment rate due to the recession. The decrease in the unemployment
rate from August to September was the result of the student population going back to
school. In addition, manufacturing industries were closed for up to two weeks and
incurred damages.
Infrastructure problems included contaminated wells, collapsed wells, destroyed pumping
equipment, failed sewage treatment facilities or private septic systems, contaminated
ground and drinking water, sewage backups and treatment facilities seriously purged by
the floodwaters.
20
FIGURE J21B EMERGENCY EXPENSES (1993)
21
Frequency of Occurrence
The East-West Gateway Council of Governments planning region has many river and small
tributaries in both the unincorporated and incorporated areas that are susceptible to
flooding. Major floods have affected the citizens of the planning region as early as 1785.
Table J28 below illustrates major flood events on the Mississippi and Meramec Rivers. In
1993, 1994 and 2001, major flood events occurred in the planning region and
surrounding areas. There have been 14 major flood events since 1785. The history of river
crest levels along the Mississippi River north of Jefferson County at St. Louis helps to
illustrate the risk, severity and repetitiveness and along the Meramec River.
TABLE J27B MISSISSIPPI AND MERAMEC RIVER FLOOD STAGES NEAR JEFFERSON
COUNTY
Station
Mississippi River at St. Louis
Stage (Flood Stage 30 ft)
42.0
40.3
40.2
43.23
39.27
39.0
33.8
33.5
39.13
49.58
36.6
41.89
35.35
Date
4/1/1785
7/2/1947
7/22/1951
4/28/1973
12/7/1982
5/4/1983
4/24/1984
4/8/1985
10/9/1986
8/1/1993
4/15/1994
5/221995
6/2/1996
Station
Meramec River at Eureka
34.79
33.4
42.9
36.6
31.3
26.8
29.2
34.6
25.1
25.2
35.9
35.6
30.4
29.9
6/10/2001
Date
4/14/1979
12/6/1982
5/3/1983
2/26/1985
4/2/1985
6/21/1985
11/22/1985
12/29/1987
5/28/1990
9/26/1993
11/17/1993
5/20/1995
4/30/1996
Station
Meramec River at Valley Park
26.33
34.4
39.73
5/11/2002
Date
2/1/1916
12/6/1982
22
TABLE J27B MISSISSIPPI AND MERAMEC RIVER FLOOD STAGES NEAR JEFFERSON
COUNTY
Station
Meramec River at Arnold
Station
Big River at Byrnes Mill
Source: NOAA
33
28.5
24.3
26
31.7
22.2
22.8
22.5
32.4
37.4
29.3
24
24.2
Stage (Flood Stage at 24 ft)
38.9
38
43.9
39.8
35.7
36.2
36.4
32.9
34.3
45.3
33.9
41.7
41.1
36.7
30.2
24.37
29.37
27.61
21.55
20.08
15.31
17.72
16.08
19.99
20.65
22.44
17.9
22.5
5/3/1983
2/26/1985
4/1/1985
6/21/1985
11/22/1985
10/5/1986
12/29/1987
5/29/1990
9/26/1993
4/14/1994
5/21/1995
5/8/2000
5/11/2002
Date
4/28/1973
4/16/1979
12/6/1982
5/4/1983
2/27/1985
11/22/1985
10/9/1986
5/20/1990
4/18/1993
8/1/1993
11/18/1993
4/14/1994
5/21/1994
5/18/2002
Date
8/21/1915
5/27/1990
9/25/1993
11/16/1993
4/30/1994
4/24/1996
5/15/1996
11/27/1996
1/29/1997
2/28/1997
6/23/1997
5/7/2000
12/19/2001
5/10/2002
Since 1979 there have been 14 major flood events on the Meramec River at Eureka. Since
1916, there have been 14 major flood events on the Meramec River at Valley Park. Since
1973, there have been 14 major floods on the Meramec River at Arnold and 14 major
23
floods on the Meramec at Byrnes Mill. The properties in and near the floodplains of the
planning region Jefferson County are subject to flooding events almost annually. Since
flooding is such a pervasive problem throughout the county, many residents have
purchased flood insurance to help recover form losses incurred from flooding events, have
sold property, or have rebuilt structures to reflect construction standards. Flood insurance
covers only the improved land, or the actual building structures. Although flood insurance
assists in recovery, it can provide an inappropriate sense of protection from flooding.
Many residents and businesses that have flood damage rebuilt in the same vulnerable
areas, only to be flooded again. These properties are termed repetitive loss properties and
continue to expose lives and property to flooding hazards. Local governments, as well as
federal agencies such as FEMA, recognize this problem of floodplain insurance and attempt
to remove the risk from repetitive loss properties though projects such as acquiring land
and relocating homes or by elevating the structures.
Continued repetitive loss claims from flood events lead to an increased amount of damage
caused by floods, higher insurance rates, and contribute to the rising cost of taxpayerfunded disaster relief for flood victims.
Intensity or Strength
The largest disaster to impact Jefferson County in recent years was the flood in 1993. Its
size and impact was unprecedented and has been considered the most costly and
devastating flood to ravage the U.S. in modern history, as evidenced by Table J28 above.
The number of record river levels, its aerial extent, the number of persons displaced,
amount of property damage and its duration surpassed all earlier U.S. floods in modern
times. In the 2001 flood, a total of $1.9 billion dollars in damage and costs and at least
three deaths over a 14-state area including Missouri occurred. In the 1993 flood
approximately $21 billion dollars in damage and costs and 50 deaths resulted (NOAA). In
the 1997 flooding, 9 states including Missouri were impacted and an estimated $1 billion
dollars in damage and costs and 11 deaths resulted. The report also stated that floods at
the second most likely type of weather event to occur (based on 46 weather events from
1980 to 1999).
Lives Lost, Injuries, Property Damage, Economic Losses/Other Losses
Due to flooding of many of the major roadways and interstates in 1993, 'commuting'
distances grew from several miles to over 200 miles in some instances. From July 16-20,
there were no bridge crossings over a 212-mile span between Burlington, Iowa and St.
Louis, Missouri. Also, there was no Mississippi River traffic over a 585-mile span from
Cairo, Illinois through St. Louis, Missouri to St. Paul, Minnesota from late June through
early August, resulting in over 5,000 loaded barges being halted, and an estimated $3
million per day in lost revenue. Similarly, the Missouri River was closed from late June
through early August over a 535-mile span stretching from its confluence with the
Mississippi River to near Sioux City, Iowa. Eleven commercial airports were closed at one
24
time or another due to the flooding. Over 4000 miles of railroad track was either flooded
or idled, and over $200 million in estimated losses.
In 1993 well over 20 million acres were flooded, covering parts of nine states. More than
50,000 homes were damaged or destroyed, and over 85,000 residents had to evacuate
their homes. More than 75 small towns near the rivers were completely flooded and had
to be abandoned or relocated. Some of the flooding occurred as levees collapsed after
being weakened by constant pressure from rising water levels. However, some levees, such
as the 52-foot floodwall protecting St. Louis, held back the rising waters. It is interesting
to note that the St. Louis levee was built to a level 9 feet higher than the previous record
crest for the Mississippi River, but less than 3 feet higher than the 49.6-foot crest recorded
on August 1. Over 6,500 National Guard members were called in to assist in levee work.
A recent report on the various levees on the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers indicates the
following: In 1993 over 16,000 square miles of farmland were flooded, and crop losses
exceeded $5 billion. Many farm animals perished in the rising waters. Total crop losses due
to flooding or saturated fields exceeded 35 million acres. The national soybean yield was
forecast to be 13 percent below 1992’s level, while the national corn yield was down by 22
percent. Soybean prices moved to 4- year highs on July 10, 1993 due to the damage
assessments.
Overall damage estimates exceeded $12 billion. Local power plants were damaged in
many cities, with electrical service lost as a result. Business districts were flooded in
Davenport, Dubuque, Burlington, and many other smaller towns.
The Missouri River, normally no more than a half-mile wide, expanded to 5-6 miles wide
north of St. Joseph, Missouri, and 8-10 miles wide east of Kansas City. Just north of St.
Louis, it reached 20 miles wide near its confluence with the Mississippi, as the merging of
the 2 rivers occurred 20 miles north of their normal point of confluence. As a result,
almost half of the 620 square miles of St. Charles County, Missouri were underwater.
Four hundred and four counties in the Midwest were declared federal disaster areas
including 62 percent of Missouri counties. The waters in some areas remained above flood
stage for many weeks, and receded rather slowly. Many locations experienced not one,
but two record crests during the flooding. Mississippi River watershed 1993 precipitation
was the greatest since 1895 for the following periods: July, June-July, May-July, and AprilJuly.
Over 1,000 flood warnings and statements, five times the normal, were issued to notify the
public and need-to-know officials about river levels. In St. Louis, river levels were nearly 20
feet above flood stage, the highest in the city’s 150-year history. The 52-foot St. Louis
Flood wall, built to handle the volume of the 1844 flood, was able to keep the 1993 flood
out with just over two feet to spare. On the Missouri River it was estimated that nearly all
of the 700 privately built agricultural levees were overtopped or destroyed.
25
The Mississippi River at St. Louis crested at 49.6 feet on August 1, nearly 20 feet above
flood stage and had a peak flow rate of 1.08 million cubic feet per second. The old record
was 43.2 feet in 1973. Some locations on the Mississippi River were in flood for almost
200 days while locations on the Missouri neared 100 days of flooding. On October 7, 103
days after it began, the Mississippi River at St. Louis finally dropped below flood stage.
According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (as noted in the NOAA National Weather
Service disaster survey report) 40 of 229 federal levees and 1,043 of 1,347 non-federal
levees were over-topped or damaged. Every breeched levee contributed to the amount of
floodwater flowing outside the main drainages. The flood eroded more than 600 billion
tons of topsoil and deposited great amounts of sand and silt on valuable farmland. In large
areas inundated by the flood, the harvest of 1993 was a total loss and some farmers lost
any chance for a 1994 harvest.
National Flood Insurance (NFIP) Participation
The National Flood Insurance Policy member number for Jefferson County is 290808.
TABLE J27C NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAMPROGRAM- MUNICI
MUNICI PARTICIPATING
COMMUNITY NAME
ARNOLD, CITY OF
BYRNES MILL, CITY OF
DE SOTO, CITY OF
FESTUS,CITY OF
HILLSBORO, CITY OF
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
KIMMSWICK, CITY OF
PEVELY, CITY OF
SCOTSDALE, TOWN OF
CEDAR HILL LAKES, VILLAGE OF
INIT FHBM INIT FIRM CURR EFF
06/28
07/29
03/15
10/18
05/17
10/22
07/29
11/01
10/29
01/16
05/16
09/01
05/26
02/14
05/15
04/01
05/16
01/06
09/18
05/16
04/05
04/05
04/05
04/05
04/05
04/05
04/05
04/05
04/05
04/05
04/05/06
04/05
04/05
EMERGENCY
DATE
01/16
05/16
09/01
05/26
02/14
05/15
04/01
05/16
01/06
09/18
10/21
04/05
MUNICIPALITIES NOT PARTICIPATING
Cedar Hills Lake – sanction date April 5, 2007
* REPRESENTS COUNTY
Locations/Areas Affected
Owners of repetitive loss properties clearly have knowledge that there is a highly likely
chance of being flooded in future rain events. The largest single drain on flood insurance
reserve funds is repetitive claims from repetitive loss properties (Galloway report). Missouri
ranks first among non-coastal states in repetitive losses. Missouri has 3,268 repetitive loss
buildings that have resulted in 10,038 loss claims.
26
During the 1993 flood the following gives an account of Jefferson County areas that were
affected by the inundation. Based on a workshop meeting with Jefferson County and
other community emergency management agencies held on October 17, 2003, the
following locations were specifically identified as locations that become flooded during
various rainfall events. In DeSoto, Joachim Creek and North Main along Cedar Street
became inundated from floodwaters in 1993 and there was flash flooding near the high
school. During the 1993 floods, Festus experienced problems with storm drainage and
creeks. In Kimmswick, Rock Creek flooded Highway K. Other areas of Jefferson County
experienced significant flooding at the confluence of the Big River and Meramec River,
Highway BB, West Old Highway 21, Highway 61/67 and Highway 55. The community of
Arnold experienced significant flooding impacts from the 1993 flood. Areas flooded
included Twin River Road, Big Bend Road, Meadow Drive, Riffle Island, State Road BB, and
River Bend Acres. West of Pevely on Highway Z between Sandy Creek and Cherry Lane
floodwaters inundated the bridge; mitigation for this stretch entailed the raising of the
road, property buyouts and replacement of the bridge.
In Festus, all but one of the north-south roads and most of the major streets in the
community were closed due to the 1993 floodwaters including 61/67 and Highway A. The
community was inundated by floodwaters for approximately 5 months during this major
flood event.
Pevely was impacted only slightly during the 1993 flood. Ancient Oaks subdivision, located
in the southwest portion of the community was affected when floodwaters from nearby
Sandy Creek inundated the sewage treatment system (lagoon) for the subdivision. Further,
in 1993 west of Pevely along Highway Z, Sandy Creek flooded the roadway. The Missouri
Department of Transportation subsequent to the flooding event raised the roadbed and
replaced the bridge above the 100-year event. As a result of the 1993 flood, Pevely placed
one of their lift stations at a higher elevation to prevent impacts from flooding. There were
no buyouts from the 1993 or subsequent flooding events.
TABLE J27D Unmitigated Properties
– Repetitive Losses
Community Name
Occupancy Date of Loss Date Date Date Date Date Date Date Date
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
06/08/2001
05/13/2002
03/21/2008
07/15/1993
06/25/1993
05/19/1995
04/13/1994
04/14/1994
05/03/1983
08/01/1993
06/08/1982
02/25/1985
M-95
M-95
M-02
D-82
O-86
J-93
J-93
J-93
D-82
A-81
A-81
M-83
J-93 D-82
D-82
M-83
M-83
D-82
A-79
D-82
A-79
D-82 A-79
D-82
A-79
27
Community Name
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF
ARNOLD, CITY OF Count
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
24
11/19/1985
04/12/1983
07/10/1993
06/17/2008
07/31/1993
04/13/1994
07/31/1993
05/20/1995
05/20/1995
05/19/1995
04/13/1994
05/16/2002
D-82
D-82
M-83
M-02
J-93
S-93
J-93
A-94
A-94
A-94
S-93
J-01
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Single-Family
ASSMD CONDO
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Nonresidential
05/12/2002
06/10/2003
10/06/1986
05/04/1983
05/04/1983
04/11/1984
05/04/1983
05/04/1983
05/01/1983
10/04/1986
04/30/1983
04/09/1983
05/01/1983
05/19/1995
05/21/1995
05/03/1983
05/24/1983
08/22/1983
04/30/1983
10/04/1986
04/30/1983
04/09/1983
10/04/1986
07/10/1993
05/17/1995
05/18/1995
06/01/1995
05/19/1995
05/23/1995
07/06/1993
05/21/2002
M-95
M-03
F-85
D-82
D-82
A-83
D-82
A-83
A-83
M-83
D-82
D-82
A-83
J-93
J-93
D-82
D-82
M-83
D-82
M-83
D-82
D-82
M-83
O-86
J-93
J-93
A-93
J-93
J-93
A-93
M-95
J-96 M-95 J-93 A-93 O-86 D-85
A-93
J-90
M-97 J-96 J-93 M-90
M-95
A-96
M-83
A-79
A-79
D-82
A-79
D-82
A-79
A-79
A-79
A-79
D-82
O-86
M-83
A-94 S-93 J-93 O-86 M-83 D-82
A-83 D-82 A-79 A-79
A-79
A-79
A-79
M-83 D-82
D-82 A-79
A-78
D-82
D-82
D-82
A-79
O-86
S-93 J-93
28
Community Name
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
34
05/18/1995
05/20/2002
05/16/2002
J-93
M-95 D-82
M-95 S-93 J-93
FESTUS,CITY OF
FESTUS,CITY OF
FESTUS,CITY OF
FESTUS,CITY OF
FESTUS,CITY OF
FESTUS,CITY OF
FESTUS,CITY OF
FESTUS,CITY OF
FESTUS,CITY OF
FESTUS,CITY OF
FESTUS,CITY OF Count
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
Single-Family
ASSMD CONDO
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
10
06/28/1993
05/06/2003
05/06/2003
05/02/1983
05/06/2003
05/06/2003
05/16/1995
06/18/2004
06/18/2004
05/06/2003
O-86
M-95
M-95
D-82
M-95
M-95
A-93
M-03
M-03
A-96
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Single-Family
8
04/07/1983
07/04/1993
04/06/1983
04/06/1983
03/28/1979
05/22/1995
05/18/1995
05/19/1995
D-82 D-82 A-79 A-79
A-93 O-86
D-82
D-82
M-79
J-93
J-93
J-93
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Other Residential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
04/12/1994
04/12/1994
04/12/1994
04/11/1994
04/12/1994
04/11/1994
11/17/1993
05/07/2000
05/07/2000
07/19/2006
07/02/2000
07/01/2000
05/05/2000
07/05/2000
11/15/1993
09/22/1993
03/19/2008
11/14/1993
N-93
S-93
N-93
N-93
N-93
N-93
S-93
A-96
A-98
M-00
A-96
A-96
M-98
A-96
S-93
M-90
A-96
S-93
A-93 A-93
J-93
M-95 A-93
M-95 A-93
J-93 S-86
S-93
N-85
S-93
S-93
S-93
S-93
A-94 N-93 S-93
29
Community Name
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Two to Four-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
09/22/1993
03/19/2008
05/07/2000
03/19/2008
04/22/2005
03/18/2008
03/20/2008
05/13/2002
03/19/2008
04/28/1996
04/21/2005
11/17/2003
04/21/2005
04/20/2005
04/21/2005
04/21/2005
04/21/2005
04/11/1994
03/20/2008
04/09/1994
02/25/1985
12/04/1982
05/05/1983
03/19/2008
05/01/1983
03/21/2008
04/12/1994
09/28/1993
09/23/1993
05/01/1983
02/23/1985
10/07/1986
06/24/2003
12/03/1982
05/01/1983
09/25/1993
09/23/1993
11/21/1985
12/03/1982
05/01/1983
09/25/1993
12/03/1982
05/01/1983
05/02/1983
11/21/1985
M-90
A-94
M-95
A-94
J-01
M-06
M-02
J-01
M-02
M-95
M-03
M-02
M-00
M-00
M-95
M-00
M-00
N-93
M-06
N-93
M-83
A-79
M-79
M-06
D-82
S-93
N-93
N-85
J-93
D-82
D-82
N-85
M-03
A-79
D-82
N-85
N-85
M-83
A-81
D-82
N-85
A-79
D-82
D-82
D-82
N-93
A-94
N-93
J-97
M-02
M-00
S-93 N-85 M-83 D-82 A-79
N-93 S-93 M-90
S-93 N-85
M-00
M-00 F-99 D-90 M-90 M-90
A-94 S-93 J-93 J-93 M-90
M-00
S-93
J-05 M-02 M-00 A-96 A-96 M-95 A-94
S-93
D-82 A-79
M-02
N-85 D-82 A-79
S-93 M-90 N-85 A-85 F-85 N-84
J-93
A-79
M-85 M-83 D-82 A-79
J-98 A-93 O-86 M-83 D-82 A-79 A-79
A-79
F-85
M-83
D-82
A-79
A-79
M-83
A-79
M-83 D-82 A-79
D-82 A-79
A-79
D-82 A-79
30
Community Name
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Other Residential
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
ASSMD CONDO
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Other Residential
Single-Family
Single-Family
ASSMD CONDO
Single-Family
Single-Family
11/22/1985
11/21/1985
11/22/1985
12/03/1982
05/02/1983
04/14/1994
11/20/1985
04/14/1994
09/24/1993
07/04/1993
11/20/1985
11/23/1985
04/15/1978
12/03/1982
05/04/1983
11/18/1993
02/27/1985
05/01/1983
12/03/1982
11/22/1985
05/03/1983
12/03/1982
11/21/1985
09/25/1993
04/14/1994
05/27/1990
04/14/1994
05/02/1983
03/21/2008
05/04/1983
05/02/1983
11/18/1985
09/23/1993
02/25/1985
05/02/1983
04/08/1983
05/02/1983
04/12/1994
11/22/1985
03/20/2008
03/19/2008
11/21/1985
03/22/2008
03/21/2008
04/30/1983
D-82
M-83
M-83
A-79
D-82
N-93
D-82
N-93
M-90
A-93
F-85
M-83
M-78
A-79
D-82
S-93
M-83
A-79
A-79
F-85
D-82
A-79
M-83
J-90
N-93
N-85
N-93
A-83
S-93
D-82
A-79
F-85
M-90
M-83
D-82
D-82
D-82
N-93
M-83
A-94
A-94
M-83
M-95
A-94
D-82
A-79
D-82 A-79
D-82 A-79
S-93
A-79
S-93
N-84
O-86
M-83
D-82
M-90
M-83 D-82 A-79
N-85 F-85 M-83 D-82 A-79
D-82 A-79
A-79
A-79
N-85 F-85 D-82
D-82 A-79
D-82 A-79
A-79
A-79
N-85
S-93
F-85
S-93
D-82
F-85
A-79
N-85 N-84
N-84
M-90 N-85
M-81 A-79
M-83 D-82 D-82 F-82 A-79
N-85 F-85 M-83 D-82
D-82
S-93
D-82
S-93
S-93
D-82
M-95
S-93
D-82
N-85 M-83
M-83
A-94 J-93 N-85 M-83 D-82
D-82
31
Community Name
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
ASSMD CONDO
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Nonresidential
ASSMD CONDO
Single-Family
ASSMD CONDO
03/21/2008
09/25/1993
07/08/1993
07/08/1993
04/30/1983
05/02/1983
04/14/1994
04/14/1994
04/13/1994
09/24/1993
08/30/1981
05/02/1983
12/03/1982
05/02/1983
05/03/1983
11/22/1985
11/19/1985
05/02/1983
11/25/1985
11/19/1985
11/22/1985
11/28/1985
05/01/1983
05/02/1983
05/02/1983
11/15/1993
02/26/1985
05/04/1983
11/21/1985
11/21/1985
05/15/1990
05/03/1983
04/14/1994
05/02/1983
11/21/1985
03/19/2008
06/24/1985
11/20/1985
02/25/1985
11/18/1985
11/19/1985
05/02/1983
09/04/1991
11/27/1983
05/01/1983
A-96
J-90
O-86
N-85
D-82
D-82
N-93
N-93
S-93
M-90
J-81
D-82
A-81
D-82
D-82
D-82
D-82
D-82
M-83
M-83
M-83
M-83
D-82
D-82
D-82
S-93
D-82
D-82
F-85
F-85
S-86
D-82
S-93
D-82
M-83
A-94
S-81
M-83
D-82
A-83
M-83
D-82
J-89
D-82
D-82
M-95
A-83
F-85
F-85
A-94 J-93 M-83 D-82
D-82
D-82
M-83 D-82
S-93
S-93
N-85
N-85
J-80
N-85
N-85
M-83
F-85
M-83 D-82
M-83 D-82
D-82
D-82
D-82
N-85 M-83
D-82
M-83 D-82
J-82
J-93
D-82
A-94 N-93 N-93 S-93 S-93 N-85 N-85
D-82
D-82
J-85 S-84
F-82
32
Community Name
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Two to Four-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Two to Four-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Two to Four-Family
Single-Family
Two to Four-Family
Single-Family
09/24/1993
11/19/1985
11/19/1985
11/23/1985
11/14/1985
04/20/1984
11/20/1985
05/01/1983
05/02/1983
05/02/1983
11/22/1985
11/22/1985
03/23/2008
11/21/1985
11/20/1985
11/21/1985
11/23/1985
03/19/2008
11/02/1985
04/12/1994
04/13/1994
09/24/1993
04/13/1994
09/25/1993
07/08/1993
11/23/1985
11/21/1985
09/28/1993
05/04/1988
04/12/1994
07/10/1993
06/21/1985
03/20/2008
04/12/1994
11/21/1985
06/06/1997
11/14/1993
03/20/2008
04/13/1994
03/21/2008
04/12/1994
03/22/2008
03/21/2008
05/20/1995
03/21/2008
D-82
M-83
M-85
M-85
M-83
D-82
M-83
D-82
D-82
D-82
M-83
M-83
A-94
M-83
M-83
M-83
M-83
A-94
A-83
S-93
S-93
M-90
A-93
N-85
N-85
F-85
F-85
N-85
N-85
N-93
O-86
J-85
A-94
N-93
J-85
A-96
S-93
A-94
N-93
M-02
N-93
A-94
A-94
A-94
A-96
D-82
M-83 D-82
D-82
D-82
J-93 M-83
S-93 N-85 M-83
N-85
N-85
N-85
M-90
M-83
M-83
M-83
M-83
F-85
S-93 N-85
N-93 S-93
S-93
A-85
M-95 A-94 N-93 S-93 J-93
S-93
S-93
M-95
S-93
S-93
N-93
S-93
M-95
N-85
A-94 S-93 J-93
J-93 D-82
S-93
A-93
A-94 J-93 M-83 D-82
33
Community Name
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Two to Four-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Two to Four-Family
Single-Family
Two to Four-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Other Residential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
09/25/1993
05/19/1995
03/20/2008
03/19/2008
03/19/2008
03/22/2008
03/19/2008
04/14/1994
04/13/1994
04/09/1994
04/13/2008
04/14/1994
03/20/2008
04/12/1994
04/14/1994
04/11/1994
04/14/1994
04/11/1994
04/13/1994
04/13/1994
04/14/1994
04/12/1994
04/11/1994
04/12/1994
05/18/1995
03/20/2008
04/11/1994
04/12/1994
03/20/2008
04/12/1994
04/18/1994
04/18/1994
04/09/1994
03/21/2008
04/15/1994
04/09/1994
04/09/1994
03/20/2008
04/11/1994
03/17/2008
04/11/1994
04/14/1994
03/23/2008
04/29/1996
04/13/1994
M-90
J-93
A-94
A-94
A-96
M-95
A-94
A-93
J-93
S-93
M-95
S-93
A-94
N-93
S-93
S-93
J-93
S-93
S-93
J-93
S-93
S-93
S-93
S-93
A-94
M-08
N-93
N-93
A-94
S-93
S-93
N-93
J-93
A-94
J-93
N-93
S-93
A-94
S-93
A-94
S-93
S-93
A-94
M-95
S-93
N-85
J-93
S-93
N-93
M-95
A-94
S-93
J-93
M-83
A-94 J-93
J-93
A-94 J-93
S-93
N-93
M-00 A-94 N-93
A-94
S-93
S-93 N-85
N-93
S-93
A-94 S-93
34
Community Name
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Two to Four-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Two to Four-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Other Residential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
ASSMD CONDO
Single-Family
ASSMD CONDO
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
04/11/1994
04/13/1994
04/12/1994
04/29/1996
04/12/1994
04/19/1994
03/20/2008
03/20/2008
04/12/1994
03/22/2008
04/13/1994
04/14/1994
05/17/1995
05/20/1995
05/20/1995
05/19/1995
05/07/2000
03/22/2008
05/07/1995
04/15/1998
04/28/1996
04/24/1996
07/01/1995
04/28/1996
09/14/2008
05/02/1996
04/29/1996
05/07/2000
03/19/2008
04/28/1996
04/28/1996
04/28/1996
04/28/1996
03/25/2008
05/03/2000
04/12/1994
07/02/2000
04/30/1996
03/20/2008
04/11/1994
11/15/1993
06/22/1997
03/19/2008
04/11/1994
04/12/1994
S-93
S-93
S-93
A-94
S-93
S-93
A-94
A-94
A-93
M-95
M-90
J-93
J-93
A-94
J-93
A-94
F-99
M-95
A-94
A-96
M-95
M-95
A-94
J-95
A-94
M-95
A-94
A-98
M-06
M-95
M-95
J-93
S-93
A-94
S-93
N-93
A-96
M-95
M-00
N-93
S-93
A-94
M-00
N-93
N-93
J-93
S-93
S-93
N-93 S-93
A-94 J-93
J-97 A-96 M-95 A-94
A-94
M-95 S-81
J-93
A-94
J-94 N-93 S-93
S-93 J-93
A-96 M-95 M-95
M-02 M-00 F-99 M-98 J-97 A-96 M-95
A-94 A-94 N-93 S-93 S-93 S-93 N-85
J-90
S-93
J-93
S-93 M-90 N-85 A-83 D-82
S-93
A-96 M-95 A-94 N-93 S-93 M-90 N-85
S-93
S-93
35
Community Name
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
JEFFERSON COUNTY*
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Nonresidential
Two to Four-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
Single-Family
302
05/18/1995
05/18/1995
04/28/1996
06/22/1997
03/20/1998
04/12/1994
04/12/1994
04/12/1994
05/07/2000
04/28/1996
06/27/1998
05/07/2000
05/07/2000
04/12/1994
A-94
A-94
A-94
F-97
J-97
N-93
N-93
N-93
A-96
J-93
S-93
A-98
A-98
N-93
DE SOTO, CITY OF
DE SOTO, CITY OF Count
Single-Family
1
05/06/2003
M-00
Grand Count
379
N-93
N-93
N-93
A-96
N-93
S-93
S-93
S-93
M-95
S-93
S-93
S-93
M-95 M-95 A-94 N-93 S-93 J-93
S-93 J-93
A-94 N-93 S-93
A-96
A-96
S-93
* REPRESENTS COUNTY
Source: SEMA
Other areas that are in the 100 and 500-year floodplain that are susceptible to flooding
include the following areas within Jefferson County:
DeSoto
Joachim Creek flash flooding along Cedar St. & near high school
Valley St. Culvert flooding
N. Main St. Artery
Festus
Flooding on Highway BB
Flooding on Highway W. Old 21
Flooding on Highway 61/67
Flooding on Highway 55
Kimmswick
Rock Creek floods Hwy K under 33 feet of water.
36
Seasonal Pattern
The East-West Gateway Council of Governments planning region (namely, Jefferson
County) typically obtains most of its wet weather in the spring months (April, May, June
and July). Seasonal patterns are depicted on the Table J28 below.
TABLE J28 SEASONAL FLOODING PATTERNS IN/NEAR
JEFFERSON COUNTY ALONG MISSISIPPI RIVER
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Number of Events
0
0
0
5
2
2
2
1
0
1
0
1
Therefore, the floodplain areas are highly likely to experience one or more flood events
during the months of April through July.
What are Levees?
Man-made levee systems usually consist of earthen embankments and wall structures
which are designed and constructed to contain, control, or divert the rising flow of water
so as to protect low lying areas from periodic flooding. For stability, an earthen levee is
constructed in pyramid fashion so that its bottom width is several times its height.
Therefore, constructed levees have a large footprint requiring considerable land area. In
urban areas where land is limited, concrete and masonry floodwalls are often used. A long
levee system, such as those of Southwestern Illinois, may include a combination of earthen
levees and floodwalls. Also, earthen levees are generally constructed with compacted clay
materials and an impervious clay base to prevent water infiltration (see Figure J22A).
37
FIGURE J22A LEVEE DESIGN
Figure 4: CrossCross-Sectional View of an Earthen Levee
Generally, levees are specifically designed and constructed to withstand a certain flood
frequency. A ten to a fifty-year levee is usually considered to be an agricultural levee
designed to protect floodplain in agricultural areas from floods that may occur once every
ten or fifty years. These areas will experience flooding during major flood events (e.g.,
100-year flood events). Urban levees protect floodplains from 100-year floods or higher.
Other levee structures in the system include tie back or lateral levees, which extend from
the main stem levee to bluff lines (high ground) and are part of the line of protection
against backflow during periods of high water (FIGURE J30C). Other key components of a
levee system include pumping stations, gravity drains or outlets, street closure gates and
relief wells. Gravity drains or outlets are openings built through the base of the levees and
are designed to drain and convey floodwaters. These gravity structures permit the
outflow of stormwater that comes off the bluffs to the east when the river stage is low.
Gravity drains are equipped with closure gates to prevent the river flows from entering the
protected area during time of high river stages. Pump stations may be also operated to
drain the protected area from interior flooding (FIGURE J30C).
Figure 5: Schematic of Standard Levee System Source: FEMA
The four general ways a levee may fail include: overtopping; piping; saturation; and
underseepage (FIGURE J22B). During an extreme flood situation, floodwaters may actually
exceed the designed water level of the levee and overtop it. For example, the Metro East
levees have a design water level of 52.0 feet. In 1993 floodwaters reached a level of 49.6
feet, which approached but did not reach overtop conditions. Piping, or internal levee
erosion, occurs when floodwaters enter the levee through animal burrows and/or plant and
tree root channels. Saturation failure is attributable to a levee that is saturated with
floodwaters for an extended period of time. Floodwater permeates and weakens the core
of the levee, making it unstable. Underseepage refers to floodwater that travels under the
38
base of the levee via an unstable layer of sand and gravel and weakens the base foundation
of the levee from below (FIGURE J22B).
To control for underseepage, relief wells are drilled on the interior side of the levee, and
operated during flood events to depress and eliminate seepage under the levee. Another
method for eliminating or controlling levee seepage is the construction of pressure berms.
These berms are designed as horizontal strips of materials built contiguous to the levee
base on the interior sides of the levee for the purpose of providing protection from seepage
and resulting levee erosion.
FIGURE J22B UNDERSEEPAGE
UNDERSEEPAGE
Source: FEMA
The size and height of the St. Louis urban levee system has grown over the years to its
current configuration to protect from the 500-year flood, a flood that has 0.2 percent
chance of occurring in any given year. Major levee improvements were completed with the
passage of the Flood Control Act of 1938. Today’s urban levee system consists of riverside
levees and tie back or wing-levees, canals, conduits, pumping stations, gravity drains and
seepage relief wells. The urban levee system has proven effective in protecting the
American Bottoms from major flooding events, including the flood of record in 1993 (a
300-year flood) and a 200-year flood in 1995.
Below is a brief description of each the levee districts of concern in this report. The maps
show the location of the levees and protected areas.
FIGURE J22C LEVEE DISTRICT CONCERN EXAMPLE
39
40
Public Law 8484-99
Public Law 84-99 is the authority by which the Army Corps of Engineers responds to
emergencies within the District boundary. Under PL 84-99 authorities are delegated to
the Corps Districts for disaster preparedness, emergency operations, rehabilitations,
emergency water supplies and drought assistance, advance measures and hazard
mitigation. The St. Louis District encompasses approximately 28,000 square miles, almost
equally divided between Illinois and Missouri, and ten riverine watersheds.
Eighty-nine levees in the St. Louis District participate in the PL 84-99 program.
Inclusion in the program requires submittal of as-built drawings and current geotechnical
and survey information, as well as an onsite inspection by Army Corps engineers and
specialists.
Once accepted into the program, levee districts must pass annual operation and
maintenance inspections with an acceptable or minimum acceptable rating. If the levee
district maintains its eligibility, the levee district qualifies for federal funds to repair
damages that occur to the levee during a declared federal emergency.
St. Louis
Flood Risk Management
Management
The 1993 Midwest flood was one of the most damaging natural disasters ever to affect the
United States up to that time. Total impact of damages approximated $15 billion,
thousands of people were evacuated, fifty people died and hundreds of levees failed. The
flood and its path of devastation lasted for several months. The magnitude of this flood
event seemed overwhelming. Just twelve years later Hurricane Katrina and storm surges
that followed caused more than fifty levee breaches, resulting in catastrophic flooding
damage over large portions of southern Mississippi and Louisiana. More than fourteen
hundred people died and over 80% of New Orleans was flooded. The losses devastated an
entire multistate region and, for a time, adversely affected the whole United States
economy.
Katrina has focused great attention on the flood protection systems across the United
States. Under the current circumstances, competition for limited federal funding, limited
financial capacity of local sponsors and delays in appropriations conspire to compromise
public safety and welfare.
The St. Louis District’s flood risk management system is comprised of three major
components: urban levees or floodwalls, agricultural levees and multi-purpose
reservoirs.
Urban levees are built high to protect cities and towns against floods of great magnitude.
41
Agricultural levees are smaller levees that provide relatively lower levels of protection to
thousands of acres of cropland against more frequent, less severe floods. There are over
700 miles of levee structures within the St. Louis District, protecting approximately 578,365
acres.
Multi-purpose reservoirs are an important part of the flood risk management system. They
provide flood storage capacity and support other Corps’ missions, such as water supply,
hydropower, environmental stewardship and recreation. During the Great Flood of 1993,
the water held back by Army Corps reservoirs decreased the crest in St. Louis by four feet.
When performance of a flood damage reduction system is evaluated, all components
must be considered and evaluated as a whole system and not as separate features. Since
1960 the overall system has prevented more than $11 billion in damages within the St.
Louis District.
Located below is a list of levees based upon ratings by the US Army Corp of Engineers.
There are also figures depicting levee location. Volume 2 contains additional maps of levee
systems in the St. Louis area which were developed by the US Army Corps of Engineers.
TABLE J29A LIST OF LEVEES
LEVEES
Levee
Acceptable:
Federal/NonFederal/Non-Fed
St. Charles
St. Peters No. 1
Non-Federal Levee
Dutzow Bottom Levee Association Non-Federal Levee
Augusta Bottom Levee Association Non-Federal Levee
Protection
Miles
Acres Protected
10 Year Protection .5 Miles
300 Acres
25 Year Protection 14.1 Miles 6,700 Acres
St. Louis Flood Protection Project
City of St. Louis
Federal Levee
Valley Park D&L District
Riverport Levee District
Earth City Levee District
St. Louis County
Federal Levee
Non-Federal Levee
Non-Federal Levee
100 Year Protection 3.2 Miles
500 Year Levee
1.1 Miles
500 Year Levee
2.6 Miles
365 Acres
440 Acres
1,900 Acres
Festus/Crystal City
Jefferson County
Federal Levee
365 Acres
Darst Bottom L.D. (Sec. 2)
Missouri University Levee
Greens Bottom L.D. (Sec. 1&2)
St. Charles
Non-Federal Levee
Non-Federal Levee
Non-Federal Levee
3,500 Acres
450 Acres
3,100 Acres
Monarch/Chesterfield*
St. Louis County
Federal Levee
Minimum Acceptable:
42
TABLE J29A LIST OF LEVEES
LEVEES
Levee
Missouri Bottoms Levee District
Columbia Bottoms Levee District
Howard Bend Levee Dist.
Old Town St. Peters Levee
Elm Point Levee
Consolidated North County L.D.
Kuhs Levee District
Cora Island Levee
*Design Deficiency
Federal/NonFederal/Non-Fed
Non-Federal Levee
Non-Federal Levee
Non-Federal Levee
Protection
Miles
5 Year Protection 8 Miles
Acres Protected
2,530 Acres
4,000 Acres
6,000 Acres
St. Charles
Federal Levee
Non-Federal Levee
Federal Levee
Non-Federal Levee
Non-Federal Levee
100 Year Protection .9 Miles
644 Acres
390 Acres
30,000 Acres
1,980 Acres
1,000 Acres
FIGURE J22D St. Albans & Augusta Bottoms Levee System
FIGURE J22E St. Peters & Chesterfield Valley Levee Systems
43
44
FIGURE J22F Confluence Levee System
FIGURE J22G St. Louis Regional
Regional Map of Levees
45
46
FIGURE J22H St. Louis and St. Charles County Levee Map
US Army Corps of Engineers
TABLE J29B DAMAGE ASSESSMENT OF TOTAL LEVEE FAILUREFAILURE- ST. LOUIS REGION
ST. LOUIS COUNTY
Land Use
Parcel Improve- Tax Value Total Assessment % Improved Assessment
Commercial
240,594,370
293,651,610 32%
753,715,637.31
Common Ground
2,720
26,140 31%
8,917.52
Duplex/Townhome
110,770
121,780 19%
583,502.67
Industrial/Utility
241,072,170
326,184,830 32%
754,152,200.93
Institution
7,220,560
8,195,570 31%
23,215,018.83
Multi-Family
19,860
23,430 19%
104,512.93
Park
945,250
3,862,750 25%
3,842,128.33
Recreation
11,753,470
20,832,080 30%
38,810,957.61
Single Family
1,950,880
2,201,010 19%
10,544,897.24
Vacant/Agriculture
1,733,590
17,841,190 30%
5,859,094.79
Total:
505,403,640
672,940,390
1,590,836,868.16
Total Value
919,929,300.00
85,700.00
641,500.00
1,020,412,300.00
26,349,800.00
123,300.00
15,700,800.00
68,789,300.00
11,896,900.00
60,298,700.00
2,124,227,600.00
Land
166,213,662.69
76,782.48
57,997.33
266,260,099.07
3,134,781.17
18,787.07
11,858,671.67
29,978,342.39
1,352,002.76
54,439,605.21
533,390,731.84
47
CITY OF ST. LOUIS
Land Use
Commercial
616
60,499,110
86,503,490 32%
189,059,718.75
Industrial
660
52,425,020
78,589,100 32%
163,828,187.50
Institutional
21
1,911,720
6,048,770 32%
5,974,125.00
Multi-Family
290
1,440,580
1,688,810 19%
7,582,000.00
R.O.W.
41
42,400
1,471,800 12%
353,333.33
Recreation
14
28,000
4,112,590 12%
233,333.33
Single Family
343
1,636,000
2,248,950 19%
8,610,526.32
Vacant Undeveloped
76
3,601,700
7,271,880 12%
30,014,166.67
Vacant Residential
321
1,090,920
1,411,490 19%
5,741,684.21
Total:
2,382
122,675,450
189,346,880
411,397,075.11
Total Value
270,323,406.25
245,590,937.50
18,902,406.25
8,888,473.68
12,265,000.00
34,271,583.33
11,836,578.95
60,599,000.00
7,428,894.74
670,106,280.70
ST. CHARLES CO
Land Use
Agriculture
Commercial
Government
Industrial
Multi-Family
Recreational
Single Family
Utility
Total:
Total Value
Land
128,216,477
40,835,810
37,088,218
10,776,030
51,967,611
43,781,830
122,790,570
16,456,070
13,632,889
18,310
5,040,847
1,342,680
70,515,585
22,041,690
580,100
40,850
429,832,295.77 135,293,270.00
958
10,485,680
15,385,977.20 12%
87,380,667
103
8,419,900
11,868,229.60 32%
26,312,188
352
2,619,450
16,629,635.60 32%
8,185,781
44
34,027,040
39,292,982.40 32%
106,334,500
64
2,586,770
2,590,248.90 19%
13,614,579
7
443,780
604,901.60 12%
3,698,167
566
9,210,040
13,397,961.10 19%
48,473,895
7
64,710
69,612.00 12%
539,250
2,101
67,857,370
99,839,548.40
294,539,025.77
Land
81,263,687.50
81,762,750.00
12,928,281.25
1,306,473.68
11,911,666.67
34,038,250.00
3,226,052.63
30,584,833.33
1,687,210.53
258,709,205.59
Flood Fight Teams
The St. Louis District has seven flood fight teams assigned to watershed sectors within the
District’s area of responsibility. Flood fight teams are activated once river stages reach a
pre-determined level. They provide technical assistance to effected levee districts and act as
a liaison between the District’s emergency operations center and impacted communities.
The District’s Readiness Branch ensures that the teams remain properly staffed and ready
for emergency response.
FEMA Floodplain maps
The Federal Emergency Management Agency is responsible for administering the
National Flood Insurance Program. The NFIP is an agreement between the Federal
government and local communities and has three components: flood risk mapping,
floodplain management and flood insurance availability.
Flood Insurance Risk Maps are used to manage development with the goal of reducing risk.
Many FIRMS across the country were published in the late 1970s and early 1980s. FEMA is
in the midst of a multi-year, $1 billion map modernization effort to update all floodplain
48
maps across the country.
The goal is to provide up-to-date, accurate flood risk info to the public, provide data so
individuals and communities can make informed risk management decisions and promote
and enhance public safety.
B. Restoration Zone (AR Zone) Designation
The National Flood Insurance Program requires FEMA to map areas that are not certified to
protect against a 100-year flood as Special Flood Hazard Areas, but it also allows FEMA to
map areas previously shown as protected by a levee as a “Restoration Zone” (AR Zone).
Because the American Bottoms has historically been protected by levees and work has
begun to continue to provide that protection, FEMA suggests that an AR designation
would provide many short-term benefits. In a letter sent to all affected communities, dated
October 5, 2007, FEMA suggested that the levees might meet requirements for AR Zone
designation (Appendix B). AR Zone indicates that the increased flood hazard is considered
temporary and that restoration of protection is underway. An application to FEMA that is
submitted before January 30, 2008 would allow sufficient time for FEMA to make a
determination and incorporate the designation in FEMA’s preliminary maps.
The application process requires that communities currently designated as protected make
a written request to be considered for AR Zone. According to FEMA, “communities”
means all of the communities participating in the National Flood Insurance Program. The
communities include cities, villages and counties representing the unincorporated areas. In
an area such as the American Bottoms where there are many communities, FEMA will
accept a joint application as long as it includes a request letter signed by the chief elected
9
official from each of the cities, villages and counties. The request will need to include
technical information about how the plan to correct design deficiencies will be
implemented over a period not to exceed ten years, if being done in cooperation with a
federal agency (or five years if a non-federal project). Each community will also be
responsible for adopting a resolution passed by the city or county legislative body – saying
they want to apply for the AR Zone designation, that they have not applied before, that
they are not in litigation over levees, and that they have a plan to meet requirements for
federally supported restoration. The communities must also be certified by the Corps that
they are protected against a 33- year flood, a requirement that the Corps has indicated will
likely be met, based on a survey currently underway.
For the purpose of determining future development restrictions, the law makes a
distinction between “developed” and “undeveloped” areas. A community must adopt a
map or legal description designating the developed area, to be submitted with the AR
Zone request. As defined in the rule at 44 CFR 59.1(a)-(c) the developed area encompasses
the larger urbanized area as well as isolated developed subdivisions beyond the urbanized
area. Developed area also recognizes vested land development interests by identifying land
that is planned and permitted and where construction is underway. FEMA indicates that
49
while the communities will need to include a map of developed areas in the initial
application, the map may be later amended to include any additional areas that are
developed (or where construction has begun) during the time before the map becomes
official. After FEMA sends the letter of final determination on the AR Zone, the
communities will then have time to legally adopt their official map.
C. Benefits of AR Zone
The AR Zone designation helps eligible communities establish levee restoration plans that,
when implemented properly, will allow the communities to remove the SFHA designation
from the previously protected areas as soon as the levee system is restored. With this AR
Zone designation indicating that a restoration plan is in place, developers will be more
confident in the long-term success of their investments.
There are other significant benefits. The flood insurance premium rates are lower in
SFHAs designated AR Zone than the rates in SFHAs with other flood insurance risk zone
designations. Rates in the AR Zone are similar to the rates available to people who have
purchased insurance while the area is recognized as protected and grandfathered into
the required program. The structure elevation requirements in AR Zone areas are more
10
relaxed than the elevation requirements in other SFHAs . The designation of AR Zone
areas also provides a strong incentive for communities to expeditiously restore base flood
protection in at-risk areas.
In areas designated as AR Zone, the minimum elevation required for all new construction in areas identified
as developed is 3 feet above the highest adjacent grade or the AR Zone Base Flood Elevation, whichever is
lower. For new construction in AR Zone that is outside areas already designated as developed, the
requirement is 3 feet in areas where base flood depth are projected to be less than five feet or the AR Zone
Base Flood Elevation for any areas where the projected flood depths exceed 5 feet.
D. Zone A99
As adequate progress is made on any levee reconstruction project, a community may
request FEMA to revise the AR Zone designation to A99. Zone A99 designation indicates
that for insurance rating purposes, the levee is considered complete. However, NFIP
11
insurance requirements still apply. Adequate progress includes: 100% project funding
authorized; 60% appropriated; 50% project cost expended and all critical features as
determined by FEMA are under construction and at least 50% completed. The Zone A99
designation is based on the protection from base flood (100-year flood). As soon as FEMA
is notified that the project is complete, FEMA can remap the area to delineate a floodprotection zone.
50
Recent Levee Projects
St. Louis Flood Protection Project
Authorized level of protection: 500 year Length: 10.67 miles Protects: 3,160 acres of
industrial and commercial development, and residential areas Concern: Inadequate
seepage controls and deteriorated metal closure gates Solution:
• Replace swing gates at 20 closure structures and permanently close openings at 13
closure structures
•
Install 70 new relief wells, replace 103 existing relief wells
Status: Nearing completion of preconstruction engineering
and design City of St. Louis has its cost share. Require
Construction General funds to begin relief wells and closure
structures construction
Monarch Chesterfield Levee District
Authorized level of protection: 500 year Length: 11.5 miles Protects: 4,240 acres; $660
million in economic value Concern: Ensure levee provides 500 year level of protection
Project:
Levee raise, installation of relief wells and sheet pile cutoff, and construction of berms
Status:
Project Cooperation Agreement being executed between Corps and sponsor.
Army Corps initial construction contract expected to be Baxter Road closure structure.
Sponsor-constructed levee raise completed. Sponsor constructing berm to address
underseepage issue along 7,500 feet of levee.
Flood and Decertification of Levee Risks
When the FEMA maps are finalized (currently predicted to occur in March 2009), property
in flood risk areas will be required to have federal flood insurance to qualify for a mortgage
from a federally regulated institution. Flood insurance purchased now (and over the next
year before the new maps are officially adopted by FEMA) is significantly less expensive
than it will be once the maps are finalized, because the property is still officially behind a
protected levee.
Potential levee decertification will cause massive costs to individuals and businesses and
potentially cripple economic growth and investment in the region. Federally regulated
financial institutions will not be able to issue loans to homeowners or businesses that
do not carry adequate flood insurance, and communities will need to adopt
development ordinances that include strict requirements for building in flood zones.
51
Many homeowners will not be able to afford flood insurance, even at the current
favorable rate, putting them at future financial risk. A secondary impact to
homeowners and small businesses is a potential decline in property values, since sales
of property that require bank financing will be conditioned on the purchase of costly
flood insurance.
This potential action will directly affect almost a third of the population of the Illinois
portion of the St. Louis area and many critical businesses that are the foundation of the
local economy. Inadequate levees threaten to disrupt all who travel on interstate highways
55, 64 and 70. The consequences will be felt not only by areas that could be in jeopardy
of flooding, but also by all communities that have a stake in the economic vitality of the
region..
Speed Of Onset And /Or Existing Warning Systems
Depending upon the weather forecasts, the speed of onset of flash floods can be almost
instantaneous. Existing warning systems are issued by the National Weather Service and
the local media (television stations, the Weather Channel and local radio stations); USACE,
USGS river stages warnings are given that enable communities to plan for flood events.
The National Weather Service prepares its forecasts and other services in collaboration with
agencies like the U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Natural Resource Conservation Service, National Park Service, ALERT Users
Group, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and many state and local emergency managers across the
country.
Hazard Map for Flood Events
Refer to Figures J23 and J24 (located in the Technical Appendix) that depict the areas of
the county susceptible to the 100 and 500-year floods.
Statement of Probable Future Severity
According to SEMA’s Severity Ratings Table, the 1993 floods would qualify as critical.
During the 1993 floods, some facilities were closed for more than 24 hours. Other flood
events had minimal impact on quality of life, no critical facilities or services were shut down
for more than 24 hours, and property damage for the county was about 11percent.
Therefore, the probable severity of future floods could range from critical in the floodplain
areas to negligible in the areas outside of the floodplains.
Statement of Probable Risk
Flooding in Jefferson County is likely to occur in the future. Jefferson County faces two
major factors for flooding. First, the land that forms Jefferson County is included the area
52
that drains to the Mississippi and Meramec River. Secondly, according to the FIRM, 11
percent of the land for the Jefferson County lies within the 100-year floodplain. The
majority of that land lies adjacent to the Mississippi River levees and the Meramec River.
The Mississippi River has experienced 14 major flood events since 1785. The Meramec
River has experienced 15 flood events in the last 22 years.
Statement of Next Disaster’s Likely Adverse Impact on the Community
The next flood to invade Jefferson County would follow the pattern of the 1993 floods.
However, post-1993 mitigation measures already have been tested in the 1995 and 2001
flooding along the Mississippi and Meramec River. Despite high river levels, damages were
relatively minimal due to relocation of many homes and businesses. Adverse impacts of
future Mississippi and Meramec River floods are discussed below.
Without Mitigation Measures:
Life:
Limited
Property:
Limited
Emotional: Limited
Financial:
Limited
Comments: The above impacts assume conditions at the time of the 1993 floods over
the entire county. Impacts within the floodplain would be catastrophic; impacts outside of
the floodplain would be negligible.
With Mitigation Measures:
Life:
Negligible
Property:
Negligible
Emotional: Negligible
Financial:
Negligible
Comments: Mitigation measures have already begun in the wake of the 1990s floods.
Further mitigation measures should be directed at improving land use practices and
redesigning vulnerable highways.
Recommendation
In 1996, MDNR/DGLS, Dick Gaffney prepared a Flood Analysis Report, based on four
documents: The Report and Recommendations of the Governor’s Task Force on Flood Plain
Management on behalf of Governor Carnahan, July, 1994; The Floods of ’93, State of
Missouri -- The Federal Interagency Hazard Mitigation Team, Report For the Three
Presidential Disaster Declarations in Missouri, April, 1994, as set up by FEMA under 1988
Stafford Act; Sharing the Challenge: Floodplain Management into 21st Century -- The
Report of the Interagency Floodplain Management Review Committee to the
Administration (Whitehouse) Floodplain Management Task Force; A Blueprint for Change,
June, 1994 and National Flood Policy in Review-1994 by Association of State Floodplain
Managers (ASFPM). Recommendations made by these documents are summarized below:
53
All four post-flood reports recommend that the state should take an active role in
flood plain management, determine state flood plain management, determine state
flood plain management policy and implement it.
The reports generally agreed that the hydrology of the Missouri and the Mississippi
rivers should be reviewed, with the possible result that base flood elevations should
be recalculated and new flood maps issued.
The encouragement of participation in the National Flood Insurance Program, both
by communities and individual property owners was stressed to the point that
recommendations stated that post-flood disaster assistance to those not insured
should be limited, reduced or withheld. The problems of mortgage lenders and
borrowers were addressed and escrow of premiums for flood insurance was
emphasized.
Maintaining flood insurance purchase requirements behind levee protection works
was recommended. Further, it was recommended that the state develop a
definition of market value to assure compliance with flood insurance regulations,
dealing with substantial damages.
Levees, levee districts, levee protection systems, state levee permits, levee
construction criteria, levee repairs and levee heights were addressed by the four
reports as a result of the levee failures in the 1993 flooding. More state
involvement in this topic was universally recommended, especially with regard to
oversight and permits. These recommendations imply that it is critical with respect
to property owners and their lives that the flood stages remain stable (does not
fluctuate as a result of levees built upstream). The aggregate result will be to
increase the flood danger by increasing the height and velocity of river flow during
floods.
Greater environmental sensitivity and increased state government involvement in
flood plain matters was stressed in the post-flood reports. Public health and safety
during flood events was also stressed, especially in regard to hazardous materials.
Government agencies should inventory their property to determine their
vulnerability to future flooding.
Federal agencies should collaborate on an assessment of effectiveness of stream
gauging network and flood forecasting/models.
Insurance should be purchased behind levees to protect citizens against future flood
losses.
Need of a state definition of market value due to 1) NFIP rules not providing a
definition and 2). FEMA not abiding by its definition of market value.
Remove substantially and repetitively damaged structures from flood plains.
Acquire easements on lands through Emergency Wetlands Reserve program,
Conservation Reserve program, USFW.
Ensure that placement/security of hazardous materials on floodplains is done.
54
Earthquake Hazard Profile
Background
The State of Missouri established the Missouri Seismic Safety Commission (MSSC) through
the authority of the Seismic Safety Commission Act also known as (RSMo) Sections 44.225
through 44.237, the main office being within SEMA. The purpose of MSSC is to review
Missouri’s current preparedness for major earthquakes and to make recommendations to
mitigate their impact. In 1997 MSSC developed a plan A Strategic Plan for Earthquake
Safety that documented successes, opportunities and concerns including
recommendations: 1) that educational efforts continue to be developed and expanded and
that the MSSC take the lead; 2) that continued and increased cooperation of State agencies
with nationally funded programs (National Science Foundation funding the Mid-America
Earthquake Center); 3) that stable State funding be provided for the Missouri earthquake
mitigation and preparedness program; 4) that SEMA review and recommend hiring a
person to train and tract the Community Emergency Response Teams [CERT]; and 5) to
assess the impact of National Hazard Earthquake Reduction Program maps on the state
and that scientific investigations be conducted to evaluate assumptions upon which maps
are based.
The MSSC prepared the A Strategic Plan for Earthquake Safety as the result of a legislative
mandate, Senate Bill No. 142 in 1993. The MSCC notes that preparation following the
Strategic Plan will yield significant reduction in fatalities, casualties, damaged structures,
business failures and state infrastructure losses from earthquakes and will reduce the
impact from other hazards. Key issues identified by MSSC are: 1) Earthquake threat is real
and addressing the problem now will yield significant long-term benefits; 2) Reduction of
earthquake risk required combined efforts of individuals, businesses, industry, professional
and volunteer organizations and all levels of government [promote adoption and
enforcement of appropriate building codes]; 3) Strategies identified in the report for
reducing earthquake risk can be implemented through proactive, voluntary community
participation; others will require legislation or funding, [promote community emergency
response teams-CERTs; 4) MSSC accepts responsibilities to advance earthquake planning
and mitigation in state at outlined in plan. Objectives include: 1) increase earthquake
awareness and education; 2) reduce earthquake hazard through mitigation, 3) create
response efforts that are well-coordinated, fast, efficient to reduce injury, loss of life and
property destruction; 4) improve recovery from seismic event [identify earthquake resistant
shelters]; 5) assess earthquake hazard [develop response team to evaluate post-earthquake
effects].
55
Description
Earthquake is a term used to describe both sudden slip on a fault (the resulting ground
shaking and radiated seismic energy caused by the slip). Result of volcanic or magmatic
activity, or other sudden stress changes in the earth. The Earth’s crust is made up of large
plates, also known as tectonic plates. These plates are the large, thin, relatively rigid plates
that move relative to one another on the outer surface of the Earth. The lithosphere is the
outer solid part of the earth, including the crust and uppermost mantle. The lithosphere is
about 100 km thick. The lithosphere below the crust is brittle enough at some locations to
produce earthquakes by faulting, such as within a subducted oceanic plate. Much of
Earth's internal heat is relieved through a movement of plates and many of Earth's large
structural and topographic features are consequently formed. Continental rift valleys (the
nearby New Madrid Fault Zone is considered a buried rift valley) and vast plateaus of basalt
are created at plate break up. Plates collide and are destroyed as they descend at
subduction zones to produce deep ocean trenches, strings of volcanoes, extensive
transform faults, broad linear rises, and folded mountain belts. Earth's lithosphere
presently is divided into eight large plates with about two dozen smaller ones that are
drifting above the mantle at the rate of 5 to 10 centimeters (2 to 4 inches) per year. There
are eight large plates; the New Madrid Fault Zone is located in the North American Plate.
Earthquakes include landslides and dam failure/levee failure. Secondary earthquake
hazards that occur from ground shaking. Damage resulting from landslides is similar to
that from earthquakes. Damage resulting from dam failure/levee failure is similar to that
with flash flooding. Landslides and other types of earth movements, including sinkhole
and mine shaft collapse, have occurred in the St. Louis metropolitan area. Landslides result
from a disturbance in the natural stability of a slope. It is another form of earth
movement. They can be small or large in extent, slow or rapid to occur. Triggering events
can be sinkhole collapses or earthquakes.
56
FIGURE J25 LANDSLIDE POTENTIAL
Source: United States Geological Survey
Landslides constitute a major geologic hazard because they are widespread, occurring in all
50 states, and cause $1-2 billion in damages and more than 25 fatalities on average each
year. Landslides pose serious threats to highways and structures that support fisheries,
tourism, timber harvesting, mining, and energy production as well as general
transportation. Landslides commonly occur with other major disasters such as earthquakes
and floods that exacerbate relief and reconstruction efforts and expanded development
and other land use has increased the incidence of landslide disasters. Refer to Figure J25
above and J26 (located in the back of the Technical Appendix).
Landslides and other types of earth movements including sinkhole and mine shaft collapse
have occurred in the St. Louis metropolitan. The Shaley Warsaw Formation and the
Maquoketa Shale are the two geologic strata present in the region in which landslides
57
occur. Unstable shales are subject to lateral movement, especially if the natural slope is
disturbed by construction. A foreseeable consequence of construction in this geologic
setting would be disturbance of natural moisture drainage on the slope that could
lubricate the shales interlayered with limestone. The resultant loss of resistance to lateral
movement in the shale beds would have a tendency to accelerate the downhill creep of
associated limestone beds that could be followed by a landslide. Table J30D below
summarizes landslide, sinkhole and underground mine shaft earth movements in the St.
Louis metropolitan region, including Jefferson County. In its early history, areas in Jefferson
County had been mined for silica and limestone, and has a lead smelter located in
Herculaneum.
The term landslide includes a wide range of ground movement, such as rock falls, deep
failure of slopes, and shallow debris flows. Although gravity acting on an over steepened
slope is the primary reason for a landslide, there are other contributing factors include:
erosion; soil saturation; earthquakes; volcanic activity; and excessive weights on steep
slopes.
Slope materials that become saturated with water may develop a debris flow or mud flow.
The resulting slurry of rock and mud may pick up trees, houses, and cars, thus blocking
bridges and tributaries causing flooding along its path. Features that might be noticed
prior to major landsliding:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Springs, seeps, or saturated ground in areas that have not typically been wet before.
New cracks or unusual bulges in the ground, street pavements or sidewalks.
Soil moving away from foundations.
Ancillary structures such as decks and patios tilting and/or moving relative to the
main house.
Tilting or cracking of concrete floors and foundations.
Broken water lines and other underground utilities.
Leaning telephone poles, trees, retaining walls or fences
Offset fence lines.
Sunken or down-dropped road beds.
Rapid increase in creek water levels, possibly accompanied by increased turbidity
(soil content).
Sudden decrease in creek water levels though rain is still falling or just recently
stopped.
Sticking doors and windows, and visible open spaces indicating jambs and frames
out of plumb.
Characteristics
The characteristics of earthquakes include the rolling or shaking of the surface of the
ground, landslides, liquefaction and amplification. The severity of these hazards depends
on several factors, including soil and slope conditions, proximity to the fault, earthquake
magnitude and type of earthquake.
58
Likely Locations
Earthquakes occur all the time all over the world, both along plate edges and along faults.
Most earthquakes occur along the edge of the oceanic and continental plates. Likely
locations of earthquakes that would affect Jefferson County would come from the New
Madrid Fault Zone, the Wabash Valley Fault and the fault zones in the vicinity of
Farmington (including Big River Fault and the St. Genevieve Fault Zone) because of their
close proximity and the geologic setting of Jefferson County.
Type of Damage
Buildings on poorly consolidated and thick soils will typically have more damage than
buildings located on consolidated soils and bedrock. Soils and soft sedimentary rocks near
the earth’s surface and landfills can modify ground shaking caused by earthquakes. One of
these modifications is amplification. Amplification increases the magnitude of the seismic
waves generated by the earthquake. The amount of amplification is influenced by the
thickness of geologic materials and their physical properties. Buildings and structures built
on soft and unconsolidated soils can face greater risk. Damage on buildings can range
from minor foundation cracks to complete leveling of the structure. Refer to Figures J27
and J28 below. Building contents can be broken from being knocked onto the floor or
being crushed by the ceiling, walls and floor failing. Dams and levees have the potential to
fail, resulting in the flooding of downstream regions including residentially populated
areas.
Liquefaction occurs when ground shaking causes wet granular soils to change from a solid
state to a liquid state. This results in the loss of soil strength and the soil’s ability to
support weight. Buildings and their occupants are at risk when the ground can no longer
support these structures. Damage from liquefaction can destroy the buildings and the
foundations the buildings rest on. Liquefaction has been documented from the New
Madrid Fault Zone earthquake activity.
The St. Louis Metropolitan region is 150 miles or so from the New Madrid Fault Zone. If
there was an earthquake of magnitude 6.6 or so, Jefferson County would feel it; a lot of
the damage would be minor, and not many collapses. If there was an earthquake of
magnitude 8, there would be a good bit of damage, but the region would not be leveled.
Earthquakes and landslides have the potential to destroy roads, bridges, buildings
(especially older buildings constructed of masonry or those buildings that are not designed
to seismic standards), utilities (including those that are not designed to seismic standards)
and other critical facilities (including those that are not designed to seismic standards).
Earthquake induced landslides are secondary earthquake hazards that occur from ground
shaking. Damage resulting from landslides is similar to that from earthquakes.
FIGURE J27 INTERIOR DAMAGE
59
FIGURE J28 EXTERIOR DAMAGE
Source for both photographs: United States Geological Survey website
The central Mississippi Valley has more earthquakes than any other part of the United
States east of the Rocky Mountains. Between 1811 and 1812, four catastrophic
earthquakes, with magnitude estimates greater than 7.0, occurred during a three month
period. Hundreds of aftershocks followed over a period of several years. These magnitude
8 quakes, centered near the town of New Madrid (Missouri), devastated the surrounding
region and rang church bells 1,000 miles away in Boston. The quakes locally changed the
course of the Mississippi River and created Reelfoot Lake. In recent decades, earth
scientists have collected evidence that strong earthquakes in the central Mississippi Valley
have occurred repeatedly in the geologic past. Small earthquakes occur in the region
frequently. Scientists refer to the area in which most of these quakes occur as the New
Madrid seismic zone (NMSZ). It lies within the central Mississippi Valley, extending from
northeast Arkansas, through southeast Missouri, western Tennessee, and western Kentucky
to southern Illinois. Historically, this area has been the site of some of the largest
earthquakes in North America. The largest earthquakes to have occurred since then were
on January 4, 1843 and October 31, 1895 with magnitude estimates of 6.0 and 6.2
respectively. In addition to these events, seven events of magnitude 5.0 and greater have
occurred in the area. In 1974 instruments were installed in and around this area to closely
monitor seismic activity. Since then, more than 4000 earthquakes have been located, most
of which are too small to be felt. On average one earthquake per year will be large enough
to be felt in the area.
The most recent earthquake event affecting the East-West Gateway planning region was
on June 6, 2003. The epicenter of the 4.0 magnitude earthquake was 4 miles southeast of
Blandville, Kentucky and residents in the surrounding area felt the tremor. While impacts
of this quake were inconsequential, Missouri has had three of the largest earthquakes in
the contiguous United States; the three ranking #1, #2 and #4 in magnitude ranging
from 7.9 to 8.1. Projected losses, based on losses from recent earthquake activity in Loma
Prieta, California, losses exceeded $6 billion dollars with over 28,000 homes and businesses
destroyed and 63 lives lost and 3800 injuries in the event of a magnitude 6 earthquake.
Earthquakes pose a serious threat to many Missouri communities. Local governments,
60
planners, and engineers must consider the threat as they seek to balance development and
risk. Identifying locations susceptible to seismic activity generated by nearby faults,
adopting strong policies and implementing measures and using other mitigation
techniques are essential to reducing risk from seismic hazards in the East-West Gateway
planning region. Table J30A below depicts the history of the large earthquakes in the
region.
TABLE J30A THE LARGEST EARTHQUAKES IN CONTIGUOUS U.S.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Location
New Madrid, Missouri
Fort Tejon, California
Imperial Valley, California
San Francisco, California
Owens Valley, California
Gorda Plate, California
N Cascades, Washington
California - Oregon Coast
Charleston, South Carolina
West of Eureka, California
Kern County, California
Hebgen Lake, Montana
Date Time UTC
1811 12 16 08:15 UTC
1812 02 07 09:45 UTC
1857 01 09 16:24 UTC
1812 01 23 15:00 UTC
1892 02 24 07:20 UTC
1906 04 18 13:12 UTC
1872 03 26 10:30 UTC
1980 11 08 10:27 UTC
1872 12 15 05:40 UTC
1873 11 23 05:00 UTC
1886 09 01 02:51 UTC
1922 01 31 13:17 UTC
1952 07 21 11:52 UTC
1959 08 18 06:37 UTC
Magnitude
Magnitude
8.1
8
7.9
7.8
7.8
7.8
7.6
7.4
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.3
Table J30B below illustrates seismic events from various eastern Missouri seismic sampling
facilities that have been documented by St. Louis University and Southeast Missouri State
University, CERI and CUSEC. To better understand the earthquake hazard, the scientific
community has looked at historical records. Historical earthquake records can be divided
into pre-instrumental and the instrumental period. In the absence of instruments, the
detection of earthquakes is based on observations and felt reports, and is dependent upon
population density and distribution. Newspapers and books from various cities around the
nation (list) provide a good source of historical documentation of the 1811-1812
earthquake. The seismic risk is more severe today than in the past because population is
increasing.
mb
1.5
1.9
1.2
1.8
1.4
2.3
2.9
1.8
1.5
TABLE J30B RECENT EARTHQUAKE EVENTS 1.0 OR GREATER
Date time UTC
Lat.
Lon.
Depth
km/Location
06/28/2008 10:22
06/27/2008 9:27
06/26/2008 11:03
06/26/2008 10:02
06/26/2008 4:27
06/24/2008 22:40
06/24/2008 22:20
06/23/2008 4:53
06/19/2008 6:44
36.48
36.6
35.49
36.6
36.45
36.46
38.45
36.54
36.6
-89.54
-89.56
-85.12
-89.56
-89.53
-89.76
-87.86
-89.62
-89.57
8.2
5.4
17.2
5.7
6.1
3.5
14.7
8.6
15.1
8 km ( 5 mi) ESE of Marston, MO
3 km ( 2 mi) WNW of New Madrid, MO
6 km ( 4 mi) NW of Graysville, TN
9 km ( 6 mi) NNW of Tiptonville, TN
6 km ( 4 mi) WNW of Portageville, MO
8 km ( 5 mi) NNE of Bellmont, IL
3 km ( 2 mi) NNW of Marston, MO
1.8
1.5
1.5
2.1
1.3
3.6
1.9
1.5
1.3
1.6
2
1.6
2.8
2.7
1.6
1.6
1.4
3.3
2.6
2.3
1.7
1.8
1.7
3.7
1.9
2.5
2.6
1.8
2
2.4
2.1
2.4
2
1.6
2.2
4
2.3
1.3
1
1.7
2.8
1.7
2.8
1.7
1.3
06/17/2008 21:45
35.84
-90.16
4.1
5 km ( 3 mi) S of Manila, AR
06/16/2008 18:57
36.53
-89.59
8.9
2 km ( 1 mi) NE of Marston, MO
06/15/2008 3:21
36.49
-89.56
8.9
5 km ( 3 mi) SE of Marston, MO
06/11/2008 20:31
36.33
-89.44
5
6 km ( 4 mi) SSE of Tiptonville, TN
06/11/2008 20:31
36.33
-89.45
3.1
6 km ( 4 mi) SSE of Tiptonville, TN
06/05/2008 7:13
38.444 -87.839
5
7 km ( 4 mi) WNW of Mount Carmel, IL
06/05/2008 6:34
36.9
-89.41
3.8
4 km ( 2 mi) ESE of Bertrand, MO
06/03/2008 1:03
36.51
-89.56
7.6
5 km ( 3 mi) E of Marston, MO
06/01/2008 22:39
36.5
-89.57
9.2
06/01/2008 14:56
38.45
-87.85
14.2
05/29/2008 10:49
38.44
-87.86
14.1
7 km ( 5 mi) NE of Bellmont, IL
05/12/2008 13:19
36.5
-89.53
6.7
05/09/2008 8:40
35.88
-89.99
11.2
5 km ( 3 mi) ENE of Dell, AR
05/05/2008 11:25
38.486 -90.408 22.9
6 km ( 3 mi) S of Sunset Hills, MO
05/03/2008 14:54
36.14
-89.41
8.4
11 km ( 7 mi) NNW of Dyersburg, TN
05/03/2008 4:27
36.54
-89.6
6.5
3 km ( 2 mi) NNE of Marston, MO
05/03/2008 0:34
38.45
-87.86
16.2
05/01/2008 5:30
38.459 -87.831
5
7 km ( 5 mi) NW of Mount Carmel, IL
04/30/2008 19:29
38.45
-87.87
15.4
04/29/2008 22:56
36.09
-89.77
7.4
5 km ( 3 mi) E of Steele, MO
04/28/2008 21:46
38.45
-87.85
14.2
04/26/2008 13:09
36.5
-89.53
7.2
04/26/2008 12:17
36.5
-89.53
7.2
04/25/2008 17:31
38.45
-87.87
13.2
04/25/2008 1:17
35.77
-90.15
0.4
9 km ( 5 mi) W of Victoria, AR
04/25/2008 0:45
35.91
-89.95
12.2
4 km ( 2 mi) SW of Blytheville, AR
04/24/2008 11:44
38.45
-87.9
18.3
7 km ( 5 mi) N of Bellmont, IL
04/23/2008 22:54
36.52
-89.58
7.1
3 km ( 2 mi) E of Marston, MO
04/23/2008 7:21
36.27
-89.5
7.2
2 km ( 1 mi) WNW of Ridgely, TN
04/23/2008 7:11
36.27
-89.5
7.1
2 km ( 1 mi) WNW of Ridgely, TN
04/23/2008 1:32
38.46
-87.86
14.4
04/22/2008 23:24
36.11
-89.75
8.2
8 km( 5 mi) ENE of Steele, MO
04/22/2008 10:49
36.48
-89.55
8.7
7 km ( 4 mi) SE of Marston, MO
04/22/2008 8:01
38.46
-87.9
13.7
04/21/2008 7:58
38.45
-87.88
17.3
04/21/2008 5:38
38.473 -87.823
10
04/20/2008 10:34
38.44
-87.9
16.9
04/20/2008 9:59
38.46
-87.84
13.7
04/20/2008 6:32
38.44
-87.85
17.1
04/20/2008 5:31
38.45
-87.88
14.2
04/20/2008 5:02
38.44
-87.85
16.3
04/19/2008 23:19
36.55
-89.65
7.6
5 km ( 3 mi) WSW of Howardville, MO
04/19/2008 16:55
38.44
-87.9
14.9
04/19/2008 12:45
38.45
-87.91
15.4
04/19/2008 9:46
38.44
-87.85
14.4
61
62
2.7
4.6
2.6
1.2
1.5
2.2
1.6
2.1
3.4
2.5
1.9
2.2
2.6
5.2
04/19/2008 3:05
38.474 -87.795
2.9
7 km ( 4 mi) NNW of Mount Carmel, IL
04/18/2008 15:14
38.478 -87.869
10
04/18/2008 11:55
38.465 -87.854
10
04/18/2008 11:25
38.45
-87.88
15.4
04/18/2008 10:57
38.43
-87.92
17.3
04/18/2008 10:46
38.44
-87.88
17.8
04/18/2008 10:44
38.45
-87.85
15.9
04/18/2008 10:37
38.48
-87.85
14.2
04/18/2008 10:36
38.46
-87.86
17.8
04/18/2008 10:15
38.464 -87.846
10
04/18/2008 10:06
38.44
-87.88
19.2
04/18/2008 10:04
38.45
-87.86
13.2
04/18/2008 9:59
38.469 -87.795
10
6 km ( 4 mi) NNW of Mount Carmel, IL
04/18/2008 9:37
38.45
-87.89
11.6
TABLE J30C
DATE OF SEISMIC
EVENT
December 16, 1811
February 7, 1812
June 9, 1838
January 4, 1843
October 8, 1857
October 31, 1895
August 21, 1905
April 9, 1917
June 29, 1947
April 9, 1955
November 25, 1956
October 20, 1965
November 9, 1968
September 20, 1978
February 5, 1994
January 15, 1998
HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKE EVENTS
SEISMIC EVENT
Earthquake occurred 195 miles south of
EWG region
EWG region
EWG region*
EWG region*
EWG region*
EWG region*
EWG region*
EWG region*
EWG region*
EWG region*
EWG region*
EWG region*
EWG region*
Earthquake occurred 4.7 miles south of
EWG region**
Earthquake occurred 101 miles south**
MAGNITUDE OF
SEISMIC
SEISMIC EVENT
8.0
FREQUENCY1
8.2
1
5.7
26
6.0
7
5.3
14
6.2
38
4.8
10
5.0
12
4.2
30
4.5
8
4.4
1
4.8
9
5.5
3
3.1
10
4.2
2.4
16
4
-
TABLE J30C
DATE OF SEISMIC
EVENT
63
HISTORICAL EARTHQUAKE EVENTS
SEISMIC EVENT
MAGNITUDE OF
SEISMIC
SEISMIC EVENT
FREQUENCY1
EWG region**
Earthquake occurred 10 miles southeast
4.0
of Cairo, Ill; felt here
Source:* Earthquake History of the United States;
** Cooperative New Madrid Seismic Network Earthquake Bulletin, St. Louis
University (Compiled by M. Whittington, Earthquake Center, St. Louis
University)
*** USGS Earthquake Hazard Program
1 Number of years between seismic events
June 6, 2003
5
TABLE J30D LANDSLIDE, SINKHOLE AND UNDERGROUND MINE SHAFT EARTH
MOVEMENTS IN ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN REGION
LOCATION
TYPE
INSPECTION DATE
Grubville
Sinkhole collapse
Jefferson County
Landslide
Fenton
Landslide
High Ridge
Sinkhole collapse
Franklin County
Sinkhole collapse
St. Charles County
Sinkhole collapse
St. Charles County
Sinkhole collapse
House Springs
Sinkhole collapse
Franklin County
Sinkhole collapse
Imperial
Landslide
Herculaneum
Sinkhole collapse
Herculaneum
Landslide
Green Jade Estates, Jefferson County
Landslide
Imperial
Landslide
Franklin County
Sinkhole collapse
Mehville
Sinkhole collapse
Hillsboro
Underground mine shaft
Franklin County
Sinkhole collapse
Franklin County
Sinkhole collapse
Stanton
Sinkhole collapse
Arnold
Landslide
Sulfur Springs
Landslide
Sullivan
Sinkhole collapse
Imperial
Landslide
House Springs
Rock Collapse
Jefferson County
Landslide
Washington
Underground mine shaft
08/08/1967
07/09/1968
06/14/1971
10/03/1974
05/06/1976
06/29/1977
12/14/1977
04/06/1978
03/05/1982
05/19/1983
11/23/1983
02/25/1985
05/27/1990
06/12/1990
07/31/1990
03/17/1991
03/27/1991
01/02/1992
03/23/1993
02/08/1994
12/16/1994
04/18/1997
12/23/1997
07/14/1998
12/19/2002
N.A.
N.A.
64
Seismic scientists cannot predict the frequency of occurrence of earthquakes, although
some have tried. Iben Browning predicted the onset of large-scale seismic events would
take place on December 3, 1990 but did not. Since 1811, (182 years) there have been 16
recorded earthquake events occurring in a random frequency as can be seen on Table J32
above. While estimates of the recurrence intervals of the large 1811-1812 earthquakes are
about 500-1000 years, smaller, but still destructive earthquakes are event more likely. The
recurrence interval for a magnitude-6 earthquake is about 100 years. The last such
earthquake was in 1895 near Charleston, Missouri.
However, scientists estimate that there is a 9-in-10 chance of a magnitude 6 to 7 tremblor
occurring in the NMSZ within the next 50 years. Because of differences in the geology east
and west of the Rocky Mountains, the effects of a magnitude 7 quake in the mid-continent
United States could be far worse than those of the 1989 magnitude 7 Loma Prieta,
California, earthquake.
In response to this threat, the USGS has been spearheading an effort to understand the
causes of earthquakes in the Mississippi Valley. Initiated in the 1980's, this ongoing
cooperative endeavor among universities, private agencies, state governments, and Federal
agencies has two goals--to evaluate the level of the earthquake hazard and to help reduce
the risk to lives and property from future quakes in the region. The USGS is currently
working with the Missouri and Illinois geological surveys to study soil conditions in and
around the St. Louis region. They are utilizing soil samples from borings taken from public
construction projects such as highways, bridges and sewers.
With respect to earth movements including landslides, sinkhole and mineshaft collapse,
these incidents have occurred on a fairly frequent basis; over 27 reports were made to the
Missouri Geological Survey over a period of 36 years.
Recent research suggests that the New Madrid Fault Zone is capable of producing
magnitude 8 earthquakes. Contemporary newspaper accounts of the 1811-1812
Mississippi Valley earthquake sequence are used to construct a generalized isoseismal map
of the first of three principal shocks of the sequence, that of December 16, 1811.
Earthquakes can be measured by intensity or by magnitude. The Richter magnitude scale
was developed in 1935 by Charles F. Richter of the California Institute of Technology as a
mathematical device to compare the size of earthquakes. The magnitude of an earthquake
is determined from the logarithm of the amplitude of waves recorded by seismographs.
Adjustments are included for the variation in the distance between the various
seismographs and the epicenter of the earthquakes. Because of the logarithmic basis of
the scale, each whole number increase in magnitude represents a tenfold increase in
measured amplitude; as an estimate of energy, each whole number step in the magnitude
65
scale corresponds to the release of about 31 times more energy than the amount
associated with the preceding whole number value. The Richter Scale is not used to
express damage, it measures the size of an earthquake at its sources.
Intensity scales, like the Modified Mercalli Scale measure the amount of shaking at a
particular location. The Mercalli Scale is based on observable earthquake damage. The
Richter scale is considered scientifically more objective and therefore more accurate. For
example a level I-V on the Mercalli scale would represent a small amount of observable
damage. At this level doors would rattle, dishes break and weak or poor plaster would
crack. As the level rises toward the larger numbers, the amount of damage increases
considerably. The higher number, 12, represents total damage. Refer to Figure J30.
They do not depend on where the measurement was made. The intensity of earth
movements including landslides, sinkhole and mineshaft collapse in the St. Louis
Metropolitan area are not as intense and widespread as the landslides in the western
portion of the U.S. Earth movements in the St. Louis Metropolitan area are usually
localized.
Lives Lost, Injuries,
Injuries, Property Damage, Economic Losses/Other Losses
Another earthquake as powerful as the great quakes of 1811-12 may not occur for many
years. Because of differences in the geology east and west of the Rocky Mountains, the
effects of a magnitude 7 quake in the mid-continent United States could be far worse than
those of the 1989 magnitude 7 Loma Prieta, California, earthquake. Property damage
could range from minor cracks in structures to complete destruction. Infrastructure
including roads, bridges, water and gas lines may rupture, resulting in an abrupt halt to
electricity, heat/cooling source, communication, transportation, rescue and emergency
response services. Ruptured gas lines and power lines could potentially cause explosions
and fires. Cascading emergencies such as these will compound the initial disaster. Lives
lost, injuries, property damage and economic losses could potentially be in the same range
as the earthquake that struck San Francisco.
Landslides constitute a major geologic hazard because they are widespread, occurring in all
50 states, and cause $1-2 billion in damages and more than 25 fatalities on average each
year. Landslides pose serious threats to highways and structures that support fisheries,
tourism, timber harvesting, mining, and energy production as well as general
transportation. Landslides commonly occur with other major disasters such as earthquakes
and floods that exacerbate relief and reconstruction efforts and expanded development
and other land use has increased the incidence of landslide disasters.
If the New Madrid fault were to quake at a range of 6.7, such as the Northridge, CA in
1994, it would cause nearly $70 to $90 billion in direct building losses. (According to
Shannon Marquez, project manager with IEM). The entire infrastructure of communication
66
lines, electricity, bridges, and roads would be out of commission. According to Col. Mark
McCaster the residents would be on their own for the first 72 to 96 hours following a
major quake. According to Marquez, models have shown over 30,000 highway bridges
and 86,000 miles of highways could be damaged profoundly disrupting transcontinental
commerce. A 25% reduction in natural gases just “in the Chicago area alone could be
disrupted” (Marquez). Refineries producing over 300,000 barrels of oil a day could also be
affected. According to the Mid-America Earthquake Center at the University of Illinois at
Urbana Champaign: more than 250,000 buildings would suffer severed damage, 260,000
displaced, and over 60,000 casualties would result.
Refer to Figure J29 below that depicts the Peak Acceleration (%g) with a 10 percent
probability of exceedance within 50 years within the EWG planning region. As can be
seen, Jefferson County lies in four peak acceleration zones running northeast to southwest
ranging from a low of 7 in the northwestern corner to almost 15 %g of severity in the
southeastern corner of the county. The term Acceleration is used because the building
codes prescribe how much horizontal force a building should be able to withstand during
and earthquake.
Bridge Integrity/Mitigation Efforts
An earthquake of 6.7 could affect between 230 to 700 counties in eight states.
Retrofitting of bridges and buildings are one way to decrease the potential economic,
socio, and lives lost. Located below is a list of bridges in Jefferson County rated by their
structural integrity. According to Patrick Martens of the Missouri Department of
Transportation there is currently no program to address seismic upgrades with the
exception of the Popular street approach double-decker complex. “There is just no money
for that type of program, and the expenses are too great to address this. It almost
becomes cheaper to replace the bridge then to try and retrofit them” (Martens). MODOT
assesses seismic needs in replacing bridges and in major rehab projects.
TABLE J31 JEFFERSON
COUNTY BRIDGES
Jefferson County
Bridge
RT M
ANTIRE CR
TRIB OF SALINE CR
SUGAR CR
TRIB MERAMEC RVR
SUGAR CR
TRIB MERAMEC RVR
UP RR
TRIB OF PLATTIN CR
Status
Latitude Longitude
Not Deficient
38.37167 -90.501667
Structurally Deficient
38.48
-90.565
38.46 -90.451667
Structurally Deficient 38.46833 -90.426667
38.48
-90.43
38.455
-90.465
Structurally Deficient 38.21833
-90.375
TABLE J31 JEFFERSON
COUNTY BRIDGES
Jefferson County
Bridge
JOACHIM CR
TRIB OF JOACHIM CR
TANYARD BR
JOACHIM CR
TRIB OF GLAIZE CR
TRIB OF GLAIZE CR
HEADS CR
TRIB OF BELEWS CR
TRIB OF BELEWS CR
TRIB OF BIG RVR
JOACHIM CR
GLAIZE CR
TRIB OF SANDY CR
JOACHIM CR
LITTLE CR
LITTLE CR
TRIB OF COTTER CR
TRIB OF COTTER CR
DRY CR
TRIB OF BIG RVR
TRIB OF BIG RVR
TRIB OF BIG RVR
FLUCOM BR
TRIB OF FLUCOM BR
TRIB OF PLATTIN CR
TRIB OF FLUCOM BR
DRY CR
ROCKY BR
PLATTIN CR
CST SUNSHINE DR, BNSF RR
KOCHS CR
JOACHIM CR
SANDY CR
DUTCH CR
ROCK CR
MAUPIN CR
DITCH CR
MUDDY CR
Status
Latitude Longitude
38.35 -90.478333
38.33
-90.45
-90.57
38.335
-90.57
-90.385
-90.515
-90.5
38.23
-90.485
38.185 -90.576667
38.19
-90.58
-90.67
38.085 -90.621667
38.1 -90.443333
38.09 -90.426667
38.115 -90.441667
38.07 -90.418333
38.07 -90.416667
38.265 -90.388333
38.22 -90.756667
-90.305
67
68
FIGURE J29 PEAK ACCELERATION
Source: United States Geological Survey
Franklin County lies in five peak acceleration zones running northeast to southwest ranging
from a high of almost 9 in the southeastern corner to a low of 4%g of severity in the
northwestern corner. St. Charles County lies within four peak acceleration zones running
northeast to southwest ranging from a high of 8 in the easternmost portion of the county
to a low of about 5%g severity in the northwestern corner of the county. St. Louis County
lies in four peak acceleration zones running northeast to southwest ranging from a high of
15 in the southeastern portion to a low of about 7%g severity in the northern and western
portions of the county. The City St. Louis lies in two peak acceleration zones ranging
between 26-28%g severity.
FIGURE J30
MODIFIED MERCALLI SCALE
69
70
Seasonal Pattern
There is no data that supports the relationship between the occurrence of earthquakes and
seasonal weather patterns.
There is data that supports the relationship between the occurrence of landslides, sinkhole
and mineshaft collapse and seasonal weather patterns. Rainfall events would introduce
moisture into the earth and geologic strata, thus creating the potential for earth
movement.
Speed of Onset And/Or Existing Warning Systems
Earthquake prediction is a future possibility. Just as the Weather Bureau now predicts
hurricanes, tornadoes, and other severe storms, the National Earthquake Information
Center (NEIC) may one day issue forecasts on earthquakes. Earthquake research was
stepped up after the Alaska shock in 1964. Today, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and
other federal and state agencies, as well as universities and private institutions are
conducting research. Earthquake prediction may some day become a reality, but only after
much more is learned about earthquake mechanisms. The speed of onset is immediate.
See Table J32 below. An earthquake can occur at anytime with most not receiving emergency
care for the first 72 to 96 hours.
TABLE J32 FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCES OF EARTHQUAKES
DESCRIPTOR
MAGNITUDE
Great
8 and higher
Major
7 - 7.9
Strong
6 - 6.9
Moderate
5 - 5.9
Light (estimated)
4 - 4.9
Minor (estimated)
3 - 3.9
Very Minor (estimated)
2 - 2.9
¹ Based on observations since 1900.
² Based on observations since 1990.
ANNUAL AVERAGE
1¹
17 ²
134 ²
1319 ²
13,000
130,000
1,300,000
The USGS estimates that several million earthquakes occur in the world each year.
Many go undetected because they hit remote areas or have very small magnitudes.
The NEIC now locates about 50 earthquakes each day, or about 20,000 a year.
Map of Hazards
Figure J31 below shows earthquakes that have occurred in the proximity of the St. Louis
Metropolitan area. Also please refer to Figure J26 (located in the back of the Technical
Appendix) that depicts areas that are susceptible to earthquakes. Areas outside of the soil
liquefaction zone will most likely be impacted from an earthquake, but probably to a lesser
degree. The figure also shows areas in the St. Louis region that would be predisposed to
71
earth movements including landslides, sinkhole and mine shaft collapse. A map showing
sinkholes and areas of Karst topography in the St. Louis region can be found in Volume 2.
FIGURE J31 EARTHQUAKES IN MISSOURI
Source: United States Geological Surve
The magnitudes of the historic earthquakes listed above in the New Madrid Fault Zone
range from 2.4 to 8.2. These most recent earthquakes did not affect Jefferson County.
The United States Geological Survey and the Center for Earthquake Research and
Information at the University of Memphis (CERI) have issued a new forecast. The estimated
probability of a magnitude 6.0 or greater earthquake is 25-40% through the year 2053.
The January estimates show a 7-10% chance of magnitudes between 7.5 and 8.0 in a 50year period through 2053. The probability of an earthquake event is rated as moderate
and the severity is rated as high.
MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE
MMI VALUE FULL DESCRIPTION
I
II
III
IV
People do not feel any earth movement
Felt by persons at rest, on upper floors of tall buildings
Felt by people indoors. Hanging objects swing back and forth.
Vibration from the earthquake may seem like the passing of light
trucks. May not be recognized as an earthquake.
Hanging objects swing. Vibration may seem like he passing of heavy
trucks or a jolt, like heavy ball striking the walls. Parked vehicles may
72
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
XI
XII
rock noticeably. Windows, dishes, doors may rattle and glasses clink.
In the upper range of IV, walls of wood frame buildings may creak.
Almost everyone feels movement whether inside or outdoors.
Sleeping people are awakened. Liquids in containers are disturbed;
some are spilled. Small unstable objects are displaced or overturned.
Doors swing, close or open. Shutters, pictures on the wall move.
Felt by all; some are frightened and take cover. People have difficulty
walking due to motion. Objects fall from shelves and dishes,
glassware and ceramics may be broken. Pictures fall off walls.
Furniture moves or is overturned. Weak plaster and masonry cracked.
Damage slight in poorly constructed buildings. Trees, bushes shaken
visibly or are heard rustling.
People have difficulty standing. Drivers on the road feel their cars
shaking. Furniture may be overturned and broken. Loose bricks fall
from buildings a masonry walls and cracks in plaster and masonry
may appear. Weak chimneys may break at the roofline. Damage is
slight to moderate in well-built structures; considerable in poorly
constructed buildings and facilities.
Drivers have trouble steering. Tall structures such as towers,
monuments may twist and fall. Wood frame houses that are not
bolted to their foundations may shift and sustain serious damage.
Damage is slight to moderate in well-constructed buildings,
considerable in poorly constructed buildings. Branches are broken
and fall from trees. Changes occur in flow or temperature of springs
and wells. Cracks appear in wet ground and steep slopes.
Masonry structures and poorly constructed buildings suffer serious
damage or collapse. Frame structures, if not bolted, shift off
foundations. Serious damage to reservoirs. Underground pipes
broken. Conspicuous cracks in the ground. In alluvial areas, sand and
mud ejected and sand craters are formed.
Some well built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and
frame structures destroyed with foundations.
Few, if any masonry structures remaining standing. Bridges
destroyed. Rails bent greatly. Serious damage to dams, dikes and
embankments. Large landslides occur. Water thrown on the banks of
canals, rivers and lakes
Damage total. Line of sight and level are distorted. Objects thrown
in air.
According to the SEMA map above, Jefferson County is at a risk for a Level VII impact on
the Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale from a 7.6 earthquake. Secondary effects of such an
earthquake could include fire, building collapse, utility disruption, flooding, hazardous
materials release, environmental impacts and economic disruptions and losses. Based on
the projected Earthquake Intensities map and the Modified Mercalli damage scale, the
future probably severity for each level is shown below.
Modified Mercalli Levels I-V
Modified Mercalli Levels VI
Modified Mercalli Levels VII
Modified Mercalli Levels VII-XIII
73
Negligible
Limited
Critical
Catastrophic
Landslides have been categorized by the USGS based on incidence and susceptibility. After
discussions with Missouri Geological Survey, there are have been no categories developed
for landslide, sinkhole and underground mine collapse.
Statement of Probable Risk/Likeliness of Future Occurrence
Jefferson County, as well as other counties in the East-West Gateway Council of
Governments planning region and the Midwest, is located in proximity to the New Madrid
Fault Zone. The other fault zones mentioned above including the Wabash and faults in the
vicinity of Farmington are also known to produce earthquakes in recent history, with a
lesser magnitude and intensity. Instruments were installed in and around this area in 1974
to closely monitor seismic activity. Since then, more than 4000 earthquakes have been
located, most of which are too small to be felt. On average one earthquake per year will
be large enough to be felt in the area.
The magnitudes of the historic earthquakes listed above in the New Madrid Fault Zone
range from 2.4 to 8.2. Based on the history of the New Madrid Fault Zone, the estimated
probability of a magnitude 6.0 or greater earthquake is 25-40 percent through the year
2053. The January estimates show a 7-10 percent chance of magnitudes between 7.5 and
8.0 in a 50-year period through 2053.
Recommendation
The State of Missouri had its first earthquake exercise in 10 years last year. Allen Lehmen
of the State Emergency Management Agency stated the state is “enormously prepared.”
Though he does state “he does not know if we’re ever ready for anything.” A disaster of
this nature needs to be addressed on a National, State, and Local level for local
governments to understand “state assets are available to them.” Though most in the
region such as U.S. Republican Jo Ann Emerson R-Cape Girardeau blame Congress for
being slow in earmarking monies to address the potential of a major disaster.
Emergency preparedness is key in all-major disasters. The retrofitting of buildings and
transportation routes is a necessity but in the large part not economical. The National,
State, and Local governments must work together to create a annual plan on how the area
would respond to a major earthquake.
Probable Risk of Modified Mercalli Levels
I-V
Highly Likely
74
VI
VII
VIII-XIII
Highly Likely
Highly Likely
Likely
Landslides have been categorized by the USGS based on incidence and susceptibility.
These categories are found below. The probable risk of future occurrence in the St. Louis
metropolitan area would be ranked as low, less than 1.5% of the area involved, with a
moderate susceptibility and low incidence.
Landslide Incidence
LowModerateHigh-
less than 1.5% of area involved
1.5% to 15% of area involved
Greater than 15% of area involved
Landslide Susceptibility/Incidence
Moderate susceptibility/low incidence
High susceptibility/low incidence
High susceptibility/moderate incidence
In the USGS Map, Figure J25, susceptibility is not indicated with the same or lower
incidence. Susceptibility to landsliding was defined as the probable degree of response or
the rocks and soils to natural or artificial cutting or loading of slopes, or to anomalously
high precipitation. High, moderate, and low susceptibility are delimited by the same
percentages used in classifying the incidence of landsliding. Some generalization was
necessary at the map scale and several small areas of high incidence and susceptibility were
slightly exaggerated.
Statement of Next Disaster’s Likely Adverse Impact on Community
The next disaster’s likely adverse impact on Jefferson County could be critical in terms of
amount of damage to infrastructure (utilities, communications) buildings, deaths and other
cascading disasters including fire and explosions from natural gas and oil pipeline ruptures.
At the time of the New Madrid earthquake in 1811-1812, St. Louis and other major cities
in the central U.S. were sparsely settled and there were few man-made structures. Today,
this region is home to millions of people, including the populations of large cities, such as
St. Louis, Missouri, and Memphis, Tennessee. A repeat today of the earthquakes of 181112 would cause widespread loss of life and billions of dollars in property damage. The
potential for the recurrence of such earthquakes and their impact today on densely
populated cities in and around the seismic zone has generated much research devoted to
understanding earthquakes. By closely monitoring the earthquake activity, scientists can
hope to understand their causes, recurrence rates, ground motion and disaster mitigation.
75
Earthquakes pose a serious threat to many Missouri communities. Local governments,
planners, and engineers must consider the threat as they seek to balance development and
risk. Identifying locations susceptible to seismic activity generated by nearby faults,
adopting strong policies and implementing measures and using other mitigation
techniques are essential to reducing risk from seismic hazards in the East-West Gateway
Coordinating Council planning region.
Based on the January 2003 estimates, Jefferson County is at most risk for Modified Mercalli
Level VII (7.6 level) as likely adverse impacts. However, due to the geologic setting in
Jefferson County in terms of alluvial soils along the Missouri River, Level VIII should be used
for planning purposes. The possible effects at Level VIII are shown below.
Without Mitigation Measures
Life
Critical
Property
Critical
Emotional
Critical
Financial
Critical
Comments Jefferson County is considered a high-risk area for damages from an
earthquake as a result of the population density, condition of existing buildings and
infrastructure and the geologic setting.
With Mitigation Measures
Life
Limited
Property
Limited
Emotional
Critical
Financial
Limited
Comments With mitigation measures in place, this will assist with current and future
construction. Older masonry buildings will still be at risk.
Landslide, Sinkhole and Underground Mine Collapse
Collapse Mitigation Measures
The next disaster’s likely adverse impact on Jefferson County could be limited to negligible
in terms of amount of damage to infrastructure (utilities, communications) buildings,
deaths and other cascading disasters including fire and explosions from natural gas and oil
pipeline ruptures. These types of hazards occur on a much smaller scale than do
earthquakes. The affected area may include one or two homes in a subdivision that have
been constructed on a failing hillside, or on the side of a sinkhole or mine tunnel. Clearly,
there are mitigation measures that can be taken to reduce or eliminate the risk of future
impact of the destruction of homes and structures located in areas that are predisposed to
these types of hazards.
Without
Life
Limited
Property
Limited
Emotional
Limited
76
Financial
Comments
Limited
none
Life
Negligible
Property
Negligible
Emotional
Negligible
Financial
Negligible
Comments none
Recommendation
Increased education, concern and subsequent action can reduce the potential effects of
earthquakes can be done in conjunction with preparations for other hazards. A program
that recognizes the risk of flooding, landslides and other dangers that incorporate
earthquake issues will be of most benefit to citizens. Individuals and government have
roles in reducing earthquake hazards. Individuals can reduce their own vulnerability by
taking actions in their own households. Local government can take action to lower the
threat through the proper use of poor sites, assuring that vital or important structures
(police, fire, school buildings) resist hazards and developing infrastructures in a way that
decreases risk. State agencies and legislature can assist the other levels of action and
provide incentives for minimizing hazards.
Communities and developers coordinate with NRCS, Division of Geology and Resource
Assessment regarding appropriate sitings of subdivisions and other structures.
Tornado/Severe Thunderstorm
Thunderstorm Hazard Profile
Background
When severe storms hit a community, they leave behind a distinctive trail. Toppled trees,
damaged buildings and cars, downed power lines crossing roadways and widespread
power outages are signs that a storm has struck. After such events, it can take
communities weeks to return to normal. These storms result in costly structural damages,
personal injury, property damage and death.
Tornado intensity is determined by using the F-Scale (Fujita 1981), as listed in Storm Data.
This study follows the accepted nomenclature that F2 and F3 tornadoes are strong and F4
are violent. Ostby (1993) found that the occurrence of weak tornadoes (F0-F1) has shown
a dramatic increase since 1980, while the number of strong and violent tornadoes have
either remained steady or decreased. Reasons for this include improved verification efforts
by local NWS offices and the marked increase in storm chasing. Since strong and
violent tornadoes produce a more stable long-term data set, these categories were the
main focus of this study.
77
Description of Hazard
A tornado is a vortex of rapidly rotating air that extends from a thunderstorm to the
ground. Supercell thunderstorms are often the producers of violent tornadoes. These
thunderstorms can also produce other dangerous weather conditions such as large hail
severe wind, lightning and flash floods. To be a tornado, the swirling winds must be at the
surface, capable of doing damage. If there is debris (dust and other objects swirling in the
winds), it is definitely a tornado, even if there is no visible funnel cloud. A tornado can
move over a surface with few objects to be picked up and swirled about it. All funnel
clouds should be treated as if they are potential tornadoes. See Figure J32 below.
FIGURE J32 VIEW OF TORNADIC THUNDERSTORM
Source: NOAA
78
When storms influence a large area, the chances for significant hazards increase. The
majority of windstorms in a convective system are of marginal severity, with only isolated
events reaching high intensity. The most threatening situation would be for a very intense
convective wind event that also affected a large area. It appears that a few times each year
in North America, extreme convective wind events of this sort do occur. To date, no such
storm has struck a major city during a vulnerable time (e.g., the morning or evening rush
hours). When such storms are accompanied by large hail (e.g., > 5 cm in diameter), the
damage potential soars to even greater heights than when the wind occurs alone. The
occurrence of hail has resulted in some of the costliest storms in United States history;
joining a fall of large hail with winds approaching 50 m s-1 could produce incredible
damage in a populated area. Economic losses to agriculture from such storms are already
high, but do not attract much public attention, and such losses would be very difficult to
mitigate with a 20-30 min warning. Nevertheless, major property losses can result when
such storms cover a large area.
A timely forecast may not be able to do much to mitigate the property loss, but could
reduce the casualties. It appears possible to forecast these extreme events with some skill,
but further research needs to be done to test the existing hypothesis about the interaction
between the convective storm and its environment that produces the extensive swath of
high winds.
Convective winds do considerable damage and occasionally generate many casualties.
Most convection produces some straight-line wind as a result of outflow generated by the
convective downdraft. On rare occasions, the intensity of the wind achieves the potential
for doing damage. Whether or not damage actually occurs is the dependent on whether
structures are in the path of the wind that can sustain damage. Although engineered
structures typically are quite resistant to wind damage, many homes and outbuildings are
quite vulnerable to damage from even relatively modest windstorms. In the United States,
it is assumed that the potential for wind damage begins at around 56 miles per hour.
Wind damage is graded according to its character: e.g., damage to tree limbs is considered
non-severe, but uprooted trees are considered to represent a severe event. Refer to Figures
J33, J34, and J35 below.
Various human activities place people at risk from convective winds, notably aircraft
operations and recreation. Most casualties from convective windstorms in the United
States arise from such situations. Given the high vulnerability of aircraft operations during
takeoff and landing procedures (the aircraft are operating on the margins of their flight
"envelope" during such times); it does not take a particularly intense event from a
meteorological standpoint to create many casualties. Commercial aircraft are less
vulnerable than private aircraft, but their high occupancy means that rare events can have
a large impact on casualty figures. Recreational boating also can account for many
casualties in relatively modest windstorms, whereas most commercial craft are unlikely to
be affected by marginal convective wind events.
79
SEVERE THUNDERSTORMS
FIGURE J33
FIGURE J34
Source: NOAA
Source: NOAA
Hail
Flooding
FIGURE J35
Source: NOAA
Lightening
Characteristics
Severe windstorms range in type from downdrafts to tornadoes. The most frequent
surface winds in Missouri originate from the west and southwest. These winds are
associated with storms moving into the region from Kansas and Oklahoma. Tornadoes
range in size and severity. The dimensions of the storm can be measured by the size of the
damage path. The typical tornado damage path is about one or two miles, with a width of
about 50 yards. The largest tornado path widths can exceed one mile, and the smallest
widths can be less than 10 yards. Widths can vary considerably during a single tornado,
because the size of the tornado can change considerably during its lifetime. Path lengths
can vary from what is basically a single point to more than 100 miles. Tornado intensity
(the peak wind speeds) is not necessarily related to the tornado size. Detailed statistics
about the time a tornado is on the ground are not available. This time can range from an
instant to several hours. Five minutes on the ground or so is typical. Detailed statistics
80
about forward speed of tornadoes are not available. Movement can range from virtually
stationary to more than 60 miles per hour, typical storms move at roughly 10-20 miles per
hour.
Likely Locations
Whenever and wherever conditions are right, tornadoes are possible, but they are most
common in the central plains of North America, east of the Rocky Mountains and west of
the Appalachian Mountains. Refer to Figure J36 for a map of the U.S. that identifies the
wind speeds in various regions; the study area has a high likelihood of severe winds.
Statistically, Jefferson County has had 23 tornadoes. St. Charles County with 35 tornadoes
has had the most tornado outbreaks, with St. Louis County second with 28. St. Louis City
has the least with nine. However, these statistics do not necessarily predict future likely
locations of tornadoes since St. Louis and St. Charles Counties cover larger areas of land.
FIGURE J36 WIND ZONES
Source: FEMA
81
Type of Damage
The damage from tornadoes comes from the strong winds they contain. It is generally
believed that tornadic wind speeds can be as high as 300 mph in the most violent
tornadoes. Wind speeds that high can cause automobiles to become airborne, rip ordinary
homes to shreds, and turn broken glass and other debris into lethal missiles. The biggest
threat to living creatures (including humans) from tornadoes is from flying debris and from
being tossed about in the wind. It was once thought that the low pressure in a tornado
contributed to the damage by making buildings "explode" but this is no longer believed to
be true. Tornadoes are classified according to the F-Scale developed by Theodore Fujita.
The F-scale ranks tornadoes according to wind speed, and the severity of damage caused
within the wind speed ranges. Table J33 below shows the Fujita Tornado Measurement
Scale.
TABLE J33
FUJITA TORNADO MEASUSREMENT SCALE
Category F0
Gale Tornado (40-70 mph)
Category F1
Moderate tornado (73-112
mph)
Category F2
Significant tornado (113-157
mph)
Category F3
Severe tornado (158-206 mph)
Category F4
Devastating tornado (207-260
mph)
Category F5
Incredible tornado (261-318
mph)
Light damage. Some damage to chimneys;
break branches off trees; push over shallow
rooted trees; damage to sign boards
Moderate damage. The lower limit is the
beginning of hurricane wind speed; peel
surface off roofs; mobile homes pushed off
foundations or overturned; moving autos
pushed off roads
Considerable damage. Roofs torn off frame
houses; mobile homes demolished; boxcars
pushed over; large trees snapped or
uprooted; light-object missiles generated.
Severe damage. Roofs and some walls torn
off well-constructed houses; trains
overturned; most trees in forest uprooted;
cars lifted off ground and thrown.
Devastating damage. Well- constructed
houses leveled; structure with weak
foundation blown off some distance; cars
thrown and large missiles generated.
Incredible damage. Strong frame houses
lifted off foundations and carried
considerable distance to disintegrate;
automobile-sized missiles fly through the air
in excess of 100 yards; trees debarked;
incredible phenomena will occur.
Figures J37 through J41 below depict the Fujita Scale as described in Table J35 above.
82
FIGURE J37
FIGURE J38
F1
FIGURE J39
F2
FIGURE J40
F3
F4
FIGURE J41
F5
The May 27th, 1896 tornado categorized as an F-4 that hit St. Louis was third on the list of
10 top weather events of the century. This storm killed 255 people and injured 1,000. The
estimated damage from these storms totals $1.365 million dollars. Missouri is considered
to be in the top ten lists for total number of tornadoes and number of killer tornadoes
(ranking number seven).
83
Since 1950,according to the NCDC, Jefferson County has had 23 tornadoes, three of which
have resulted in 48 injuries and five deaths. The estimated damage from these storms cost
approximately $9.7 million dollars. The most recent tornado in May 2003 in Jefferson
County resulted in one death and approximately $1million dollars in damage. The
tornadoes occurred between April and December. Jefferson County has had one F3
tornado in 1981. Tornado occurrences are found in Table J34.
TABLE
TABLE J34
Location or
County
Date
1 JEFFERSON 05/06/1961
10
07/27/1976
JEFFERSON
11
05/12/1978
JEFFERSON
12
04/22/1981
JEFFERSON
13
07/20/1981
JEFFERSON
14
12/02/1982
JEFFERSON
15
11/09/1984
JEFFERSON
16 Cedar Hill 04/15/1994
To
17 Ottoville To 04/15/1994
18 Barnhart To 04/15/1994
19 Crystal City 04/26/1994
20 De Soto
04/16/1995
21 Ware
05/06/2003
22 De Soto
05/06/2003
23 Hillsboro
05/27/2004
24 Festus
03/11/2006
25 Festus
03/11/2006
Time
TORNADO EVENTS IN JEFFERSON COUNTY
FROM 1954 TO 2001
Type
Mag1
Dth2
Inj3
PrD4
CrD5
1615 Tornado
1615 Tornado
1930 Tornado
1650 Tornado
1700 Tornado
1055 Tornado
1800 Tornado
1940 Tornado
2100 Tornado
1330 Tornado
F1
F1
F1
F2
F2
F1
F1
F1
F1
F1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
25K
3K
3K
25K
25K
25K
25K
25K
0K
0K
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1700 Tornado
F
0
0
250K
0
1754 Tornado
F3
1
0
2.5M
0
1448 Tornado
F1
0
0
3K
0
12:00 AM Tornado
F1
0
0
250K
0
12:00 AM Tornado
F0
0
0
0K
0
12:00 AM Tornado
F0
0
0
500K
5K
12:00 AM Tornado
12:00 AM Tornado
2035 Tornado
1557 Tornado
6:25 PM Tornado
6:30 PM Tornado
7:10 PM Tornado
9:40 PM Tornado
9:42 PM Tornado
F0
F1
F0
F0
F0
F0
F0
F0
F3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50K
5.0M
5K
0K
0
0
0
0
0
1K
5K
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
84
26 Fletcher
09/22/2006
27 Fletcher
09/22/2006
1
Magnitude
2
Death
3
Injuries
4
Property Damage
5
Crop Damage
Source: NCDC
2:20 PM Tornado
4:05 PM Tornado
F1
F1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Additional data on significant Jefferson County thunderstorms (downbursts, lightening,
hail, heavy rains and wind) indicated a total impact of $877,000 in property damages from
113 storm events between 1950 and 2002. Severe thunderstorms and high winds are
summarized on Table J35 below.
TABLE J35
Location or County
Date
1 JEFFERSON
2 JEFFERSON
3 JEFFERSON
4 JEFFERSON
5 JEFFERSON
6 JEFFERSON
7 JEFFERSON
8 JEFFERSON
9 JEFFERSON
10 JEFFERSON
11 JEFFERSON
12 JEFFERSON
13 JEFFERSON
14 JEFFERSON
15 JEFFERSON
16 JEFFERSON
17 JEFFERSON
18 JEFFERSON
19 JEFFERSON
20 JEFFERSON
21 JEFFERSON
22 JEFFERSON
23 JEFFERSON
24 JEFFERSON
25 JEFFERSON
26 JEFFERSON
27 JEFFERSON
28 JEFFERSON
29 JEFFERSON
05/16/1960
06/24/1962
07/01/1966
06/10/1967
08/09/1970
05/26/1973
07/09/1973
08/12/1973
12/04/1973
04/03/1974
06/09/1974
06/09/1974
06/09/1974
06/09/1974
03/07/1975
03/07/1975
07/31/1976
06/21/1977
04/07/1980
07/02/1980
07/03/1980
10/17/1980
04/03/1981
04/03/1981
06/02/1981
04/16/1982
04/16/1982
04/16/1982
06/08/1982
SEVERE THUNDERSTORM EVENTS IN
JEFFERSON COUNTY
Type
Magnitude Death
02/08/1904
05/14/1903
11/30/1903
05/30/1904
04/19/1900
07/27/1905
03/09/1904
03/09/1904
11/25/1900
05/25/1903
06/03/1900
07/18/1900
07/28/1900
07/28/1900
01/15/1900
01/30/1900
11/27/1900
01/30/1906
02/02/1906
11/20/1903
09/01/1900
11/25/1900
03/04/1906
04/18/1906
09/06/1903
04/13/1905
04/13/1905
04/23/1905
04/16/1902
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
0 kts.
0 kts.
50 kts.
70 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
69 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
61 kts.
0 kts.
50 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Injury
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
PrD1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
CrD2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
TABLE J35
85
JEFFERSON COUNTY
Type
Magnitude Death
Injury
PrD1
CrD2
Location or County
Date
30 JEFFERSON
31 JEFFERSON
32 JEFFERSON
33 JEFFERSON
34 JEFFERSON
35 JEFFERSON
36 JEFFERSON
37 JEFFERSON
38 JEFFERSON
39 JEFFERSON
40 JEFFERSON
41 JEFFERSON
42 JEFFERSON
43 JEFFERSON
44 JEFFERSON
45 JEFFERSON
46 JEFFERSON
47 JEFFERSON
48 JEFFERSON
49 JEFFERSON
50 JEFFERSON
51 JEFFERSON
52 JEFFERSON
53 JEFFERSON
54 JEFFERSON
55 JEFFERSON
56 JEFFERSON
57 JEFFERSON
58 De Soto
59 De Soto
60 High Ridge
61 Cedar Hill
62 MOZ009 - 010 - 018 019 - 026 - 027 - 034>036
- 041 - 042 - 047>052 059>065 63 Victoria
64 Otto
65 St. Louis City
66 Hillsboro
67 MOZ061>063 - 065
68 Arnold
69 Pevely
70 MOZ009>010 -
06/15/1982
12/02/1982
06/27/1983
07/24/1983
08/22/1983
10/04/1983
03/15/1984
05/25/1984
09/08/1984
07/31/1985
08/06/1985
05/21/1987
07/05/1987
07/05/1987
04/05/1988
05/08/1988
06/08/1988
11/15/1988
03/11/1990
06/13/1991
06/15/1991
08/03/1991
08/03/1991
08/08/1991
11/29/1991
06/24/1992
07/10/1992
09/07/1992
04/25/1993
04/25/1993
08/23/1993
04/26/1994
04/18/1995
09/02/1903 Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Tstm Wind
12:00 AM Thunderstorm
12:00 AM High Winds
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
52 kts.
52 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
52 kts.
61 kts.
52 kts.
0 kts.
52 kts.
61 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
52 kts.
52 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
52 kts.
0 kts.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50K
5K
5K
700K
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
05/18/1995
07/04/1995
07/04/1995
04/19/1996
04/28/1996
07/19/1996
07/19/1996
04/05/1997
4:30 PM Tstm Wind
8:00 AM High Wind
7:00 PM Tstm Wind
7:20 PM Tstm Wind
3:00 PM High Wind
52 kts.
0 kts.
0 kts.
55 kts.
61 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
50 kts.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0K
1K
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
86
TABLE J35
Location or County
018>019 - 026>027 034>036 - 052 - 060>065
- 073>075
71 MOZ009>010 018>019 - 026>027 034>036 - 052 060>065
72 Byrnes Mill
73 De Soto
74 De Soto
75 Hillsboro
76 Arnold
77 Hillsboro
78 Dittmer
79 Arnold
80 High Ridge
81 Cedar Hill
82 House Spgs
83 Hillsboro
84 Imperial
85 MOZ018>019 026>027 - 034>036 041>042 - 047>050 050>052 - 059>065 072>075 - 084>085 - 099
86 MOZ018>019 026>027 - 034>036 041>042 - 047>052 059>065 - 072>075 084>085 - 099
87 MOZ018>019 026>027 - 034>036 041>042 - 047>052 059>065 - 072>075 084>085 - 099
88 Cedar Hill
89 Hillsboro
90 Imperial
91 Arnold
92 MOZ018>019 026>027 - 034>036 041>042 - 049>052 - 059
- 061>065
93 Hillsboro
94 Festus
95 Hillsboro
Date
04/30/1997
JEFFERSON COUNTY
Type
Magnitude Death
1:00 PM High Wind
Injury
PrD1
CrD2
45 kts.
0
0
0
0
05/25/1997
05/25/1997
06/21/1997
03/27/1998
07/22/1998
11/10/1998
06/08/1999
07/09/1999
06/24/2000
09/11/2000
09/11/2000
09/11/2000
09/11/2000
12/16/2000
7:45 PM
8:00 PM
6:20 PM
5:25 PM
6:30 PM
4:00 AM
2:40 PM
6:10 PM
1:20 PM
10:48 PM
10:58 PM
11:10 PM
11:10 PM
8:00 PM
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Extreme
Windchill
50 kts.
50 kts.
61 kts.
50 kts.
61 kts.
56 kts.
55 kts.
52 kts.
52 kts.
56 kts.
56 kts.
56 kts.
56 kts.
N/A
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100K
0
5K
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
02/25/2001
12:00 AM High Wind
40 kts.
0
0
0
0
03/13/2001
9:00 AM High Wind
45 kts.
0
0
0
0
07/18/2001
07/18/2001
09/08/2001
09/08/2001
03/09/2002
1:05 PM
1:15 PM
9:15 PM
9:29 PM
6:00 AM
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
High Wind
55 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
43 kts.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
05/07/2002
05/07/2002
05/07/2002
2:55 AM Tstm Wind
3:00 AM Tstm Wind
3:00 AM Tstm Wind
55 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
TABLE J35
Location or County
Date
96 De Soto
97 High Ridge
98 Cedar Hill
99 Hillsboro
100 Festus
101 Cedar Hill
102 High Ridge
103 Otto
104 De Soto
105 De Soto
106 Crystal City
107 Herculaneum
108 Pevely
109 Imperial
110 Arnold
111 Barnhart
112 Arnold
113 High Ridge
114 House Spgs
115 De Soto
116 Pevely
117 Cedar Hill
118 Cedar Hill
119 High Ridge
120 Hillsboro
121 De Soto
122 Arnold
123 Festus
124 Hillsboro
125 High Ridge
126 House Spgs
127 Grubville
128 Crystal City
129 Pevely
130 Festus
131 Festus
132 High Ridge
133 House Spgs
134 High Ridge
135 De Soto
136 De Soto
137 Barnhart
138 Imperial
07/03/2002
07/10/2002
07/10/2002
07/10/2002
07/10/2002
07/22/2002
07/22/2002
07/22/2002
05/06/2003
05/06/2003
05/06/2003
05/06/2003
05/06/2003
06/10/2003
06/10/2003
06/10/2003
07/18/2003
07/18/2003
07/18/2003
08/01/2003
09/26/2003
05/27/2004
05/27/2004
05/27/2004
05/27/2004
05/27/2004
05/30/2004
06/18/2004
08/24/2004
08/24/2004
08/24/2004
08/27/2004
05/19/2005
05/19/2005
05/19/2005
06/06/2005
06/09/2005
07/04/2005
08/13/2005
11/27/2005
11/27/2005
04/02/2006
04/02/2006
87
JEFFERSON COUNTY
Type
Magnitude Death
2:35 PM
1:47 PM
1:50 PM
2:00 PM
2:10 PM
6:45 PM
6:49 PM
6:55 PM
6:30 PM
6:47 PM
7:05 PM
7:05 PM
7:05 PM
4:50 PM
5:00 PM
5:00 PM
9:10 AM
9:10 AM
9:10 AM
2:35 PM
6:30 PM
6:54 PM
6:54 PM
6:55 PM
7:20 PM
7:25 PM
3:52 PM
2:00 PM
1:05 PM
12:50 PM
12:50 PM
3:30 PM
11:25 PM
11:25 PM
11:30 PM
12:00 PM
5:40 PM
1:05 PM
3:05 PM
10:36 PM
10:48 PM
4:00 PM
4:00 PM
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
55 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
75 kts.
87 kts.
60 kts.
60 kts.
60 kts.
60 kts.
55 kts.
60 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
56 kts.
60 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
52 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
50 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
52 kts.
53 kts.
53 kts.
53 kts.
50 kts.
55 kts.
52 kts.
57 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
55 kts.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Injury
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
PrD1
10K
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
CrD2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
88
TABLE J35
Location or County
Date
139 Pevely
140 Byrnes Mill
141 Arnold
142 Arnold
143 De Soto
144 De Soto
145 De Soto
146 Festus
147 Murphy
148 Hillsboro
149 High Ridge
150 Horine
151 Hematite
152 Hillsboro
153 Oakvale
04/02/2006
04/02/2006
07/19/2006
07/19/2006
07/19/2006
08/07/2006
08/07/2006
08/07/2006
07/19/2007
10/18/2007
05/25/2008
06/21/2008
06/21/2008
07/12/2008
08/05/2008
JEFFERSON COUNTY
Type
Magnitude Death
4:00 PM
4:01 PM
6:35 PM
7:00 PM
7:25 PM
3:05 PM
4:30 PM
4:50 PM
16:10 PM
12:00 AM
20:25 PM
14:40 PM
15:17 PM
14:50 PM
17:30 PM
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
Tstm Wind
55 kts.
55 kts.
61 kts.
61 kts.
70 kts.
50 kts.
52 kts.
52 kts.
52 kts.
52 kts.
52 kts.
52 kts.
52 kts.
52 kts.
52 kts.
TOTALS:
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Injury
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
PrD1
CrD2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0K
0K
5K
0K
0K
0K
0K
882K
1
Property Damage
Crop Damage
Source: NCDC
2
The frequency of severe windstorms and tornadoes is difficult to predict. See Figure J42
below. They usually occur mostly during the spring and summer; the tornado season
comes early in the south and later in the north because spring comes later in the year as
one moves northward. Storms usually occur during the late afternoon and early evening,
but they have been known to occur in every state in the United States, on any day of the
year, and at any hour. Table J38 below depicts tornado occurrences are most commonly
seen in the spring months. In the southern states, tornado frequency peaks in March
through May; while in the northern states, peak frequency is during the summer months.
Along the gulf coast, a secondary tornado maximum occurs during the fall. In the western
states, the total number of tornadoes is higher than indicated. Sparse population reduces
the number reported. The map illustrates months of peak tornado activity by state (19501991). (NOAA/NWS)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0K
0K
0K
0K
0K
0K
0K
0
FIGURE J42
TORNADO OCCURRENCES
Source: NOAA
89
90
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
Dec
December
ember
OCCURRENCES OF TORNADOES IN JEFFERSON COUNTY
FROM 1950 TO 1998
January
TABLE J36
0
0
0
8
7
2
2
0
1
1
1
1
Storms in Jefferson County range from F0 to F4. There have been no recorded F5 storms.
Refer to Table J37 and Figure J43 below.
TABLE J37 STORM INTENSITIES FOR JEFFERSON COUNTY
JURISDICTIONS
St. Louis City
St. Louis County
St. Charles County
Jefferson County
Franklin County
Total
F0
0
2
6
5
6
19
F1
2
8
10
11
6
37
F2
3
11
11
4
8
37
F3
2
5
7
2
0
16
F4
2
2
1
1
0
6
Total
9
28
35
23
20
115
Lives Lost, Injuries, Property Damage, Economic Losses/Other
Losses/Other Losses
Even though only about 10 percent of tornadoes are significant, these tornadoes are
responsible for the majority of deaths caused by tornadoes in the country, with violent
tornadoes claiming 67 percent of the total casualties. Furthermore, the US suffers millions
of dollars in damage costs in the aftermath of such events- an important consideration for
the insurance industry.
Jefferson County has had 23 tornadoes, three of which have resulted in 48 injuries and
five deaths. The estimated damage from these storms cost approximately $9.7 million
dollars. The most recent tornado in May 2003 located in Desoto, Jefferson County resulted
in one death and approximately $1million dollars in damage. Missouri is considered to be
in the top ten lists for total number of tornadoes and number of killer tornadoes (ranking
number seven).
91
FIGURE J43 BREAKDOWN OF CATEGORY TORNADOES
Source: NOAA; U.S. data
Based on available data, there is no predictable pathway that tornadoes and windstorms
follow. In general, however, these storms run in a southwest to northeast direction.
Figure J44 below depicts the distribution of storms across the planning region. Based upon
Table J39 above, one can see that each jurisdiction has had multiple tornadoes. Jefferson
County has had the third largest number of storms in the EWG planning region.
FIGURE J44 REGIONAL TORNADO STORM TRACKS
Source: NOAA
92
Seasonal Pattern
Tornadoes occur mostly during the spring and summer; the tornado season comes early in
the south and later in the north because spring comes later in the year as one moves
northward. Tornadoes and storms usually occur during the late afternoon and early
evening, but they have been known to occur in every state in the United States, on any day
of the year, and at any hour.
Based on Table J38, in Jefferson County, most of the storms occurred in the month of April
with 8 tornadoes. May had a total of 7 tornadoes, both June and July had 2, and
September, October, November and December had 1 each per month.
Tornadoes and other severe windstorms can occur instantly. The National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Agency and other agencies (National Weather Service) have prioritized the
research and understanding of the development of these types of storms in order to
protect citizens and their property. Doppler Radar could help the National Weather Service
provide a much-improved severe thunderstorm and tornado warnings.The new Radar, or
NEXRAD for Next Generation Radar (officially WSR-88D), provides forecasters with a
detailed look at storms through reflectivity and velocity displays. Reflectivity indicates
rainfall or precipitation intensity and velocity displays the speed and direction of the winds
within the storm. Tornado warning lead times has increased in the last 10 years from less
than 5 minutes to nearly 12 minutes (NWS).
Phased Array Radar - NSSL will soon begin adapting SPY-1 radar technology for use in
spotting severe weather.
The mission of the Severe Weather Warning Applications and Technology Transfer (SWAT)
team is to develop severe weather warning applications and transfer them to users to
enhance their capability to warn of severe weather. There are two focus groups within
SWAT:
•
•
National Weather Service Focus Group Staff Listing (SWAT-NWS)
Federal Aviation Administration Focus Group Staff Listing (SWAT-FAA)
Map of Hazards
Refer to Figure J45 (located in the back of the Technical Appendix) that depicts those areas
in Jefferson County that are susceptible to severe windstorms.
93
Based on the previous twenty-three events in the Jefferson County, the future probable
severity is shown below.
Future Probable Severity By FF-Scale
F0
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
Negligible
Limited
Limited
Critical
Catastrophic
Catastrophic
Statement of Probable Risk
The risk of tornadoes in Jefferson County is moderate with twenty-three tornadoes.
Surrounding counties such as St. Louis County and St. Charles County have greater
numbers: 28 and 35. By nature, tornadoes strike randomly. Based in information from the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, tornadoes occur between five to seven
times per 10,000 square miles per year and downbursts occur between 14 to 17 times per
10,000 square miles per year within the EWG planning region. There are between 40 to
60 thunderstorm days per year and approximately five to eight annual events of hail per
10,000 square miles within the EWG planning region. These figures are different from the
Federal Emergency Management agency (FEMA) data. FEMA indicates that there are
between six to ten tornadoes per 1,000 square miles in the EWG planning region. Refer to
Table J38 below for risk.
TABLE J38 TORNADO RISK
F#
Events Risk
F0
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
22%
48%
17%
9%
4%
0
Probable Risk of
Occurrence
F0
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
By FF-Scale
Likely
Likely
Likely
Possible
Possible
Unlikely
Tornadoes have enormous power and destructive ability. Injuries, property damage and
risk of death remain high. Technological advances that facilitate earlier warning, combined
with public education and improved construction techniques, provide the opportunity for
reductions in the number of injuries, reduction in property damage and loss of life. Based
on history from 198 years, the likely adverse impact of future Jefferson County tornado and
thunderstorm events is shown below. The next tornado or severe windstorm will most
94
likely have a detrimental impact on the community in terms of injuries, property damage
(up to millions dollars in damages from property damage) and death, based upon the past
historic storm events. This is due to the dense population of residents and workers who
live and work in the planning region, as well as the construction methods and standards
used.
Life
Catastrophic
Property
Catastrophic
Emotional
Catastrophic
Financial
Catastrophic
Comments: None
Life
Limited
Property
Limited
Emotional
Limited
Financial
Limited
Comments: None
Recommendations
That the County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee initiate a mitigation activity to
convince county residents to construct Tornado Saferooms to help reduce the loss of life
caused by tornadoes.
Severe Winter
Winter Weather Hazard (Snow, Ice and Extreme Cold) Profile
Description
Winter weather is different than other hazards in that the hazard tends to occur over a
much larger area, often times affecting areas from several counties to multiple states.
Winter weather includes heavy snow, ice, freezing rain/sleet and extreme cold
temperatures.
Characteristics
Snow can range from blizzard conditions to snow flurries and can accumulate to several
inches, resulting in dangerous driving conditions. Ice conditions including sleet and
freezing rain can result in roadways being covered in sheets of ice and ice jams resulting in
flooding. Sleet can accumulate like snow and cause a hazard to motorists. Freezing rain is
rain that falls onto a surface with a temperature below freezing. It then freezes to surfaces,
such as trees, cars, and roads, forming a glaze of ice. Even small accumulations of ice can
cause a significant hazard. An ice storm occurs when freezing rain falls and freezes
95
immediately on impact. Heavy accumulations of ice can bring down trees, electrical wires,
telephone poles and lines, and communication towers. Communications and power can be
disrupted for days while utility companies work to repair the extensive damage.
Sometimes winter storms are accompanied by strong winds creating blizzard conditions
with blinding wind-driven snow, severe drifting and dangerous wind chill. Strong winds
with these intense storms and cold fronts can knock down trees, utility poles and power
lines. Extreme cold often accompanies a winter storm or is left in its wake. Prolonged
exposure to the cold can cause frostbite or hypothermia and become life-threatening.
Infants and elderly people are most susceptible to extremely cold weather conditions. What
constitutes extreme cold and its effect varies across different areas of the United States. In
areas unaccustomed to winter weather, near freezing temperatures are considered
"extreme cold." Freezing temperatures can cause severe damage to citrus fruit crops and
other vegetation. Pipes may freeze and burst in homes that are poorly insulated or without
heat. In the north, below zero temperatures may be considered as "extreme cold." Long
cold spells can cause rivers to freeze, disrupting shipping, and Ice jams may form and lead
to flooding.
Extreme cold temperatures are ranked based upon a wind chill chart that figures the
temperature on how the wind and cold feel on exposed skin. As the wind increases, heat is
carried away from the body at a faster rate, driving down the body temperature. Frostbite,
hypothermia and death can result from winter weather. Seventy percent of snow injuries
result from vehicle accidents, 25 percent occur in people getting caught in the weather.
Cold injuries occur to 50 percent of people over 60 years old, 75 percent happen to males
and 20 percent occur in the home.
Likely Locations
Winter weather in the St. Louis region moves in an west to east direction. Late winter
storms that have a tendency to be intense tend to generate in the southwest portion of the
United States and move northeast, dependent upon the meteorology and the storm track.
The hazard tends to occur over a much larger area.
Type of Damage
Types of damage that could occur in the EWG planning affect both property, as well as
injury and death to individuals. Each year dozens of people die due to exposure to cold. In
addition, vehicle accidents and fatalities, fires due to dangerous use of heaters and other
winter weather fatalities (heart attacks from shoveling snow, for example) result in a threat.
Threats such as hypothermia and frostbite can lead to the loss of fingers and toes or cause
permanent kidney, pancreas, liver damage and death. People can become trapped in their
homes and cars without utilities or assistance. Other damage can include rooftop collapse
due to the weight of a heavy snowfall event, automobile accidents and downed power
lines/power outages from ice storms. Heavy snow can strand commuters, close airports,
stop the flow of supplies and disrupt emergency and medical services. Livestock may be
96
lost on farms. The cost of snow and debris removal, repairing damages and the loss of
business can have a severe impact on the region.
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Total
Jefferson County
Injuries/Damage
1996
St. Charles County
Injuries/Damage
1995
St. Louis City
Injuries/Damage
St. Louis County
Injuries/Damage
1994
TABLE J39 JEFFERSON COUNTY WINTER STORMS
2*
15/500K
3*
/.3 M
3*
4
3
2*
4
1
4
1
27
2*
15/500K
3*
/.3M
3*
4
4
2*
4
1
4
2
35
2*
15/500K
5*
/2.7M
3*
4
4
2*
4
1
4
2
31
1
500K
3*
/.3 M
2*
4
4
3*
3
1
4
1
26
5*
/2.7M
19
/2.7M
3*
4
3
2*
3
0
4
1
27
14
20
18
11
18
4
20
7
Franklin
County
2*
Injuries/Damage
15/500K
Total
9
Injuries/Damage
15/500K
* Denotes ice storm event
• Source NCDC/NOAA
The numbers in the table denote the number of winter storms that occurred in each year
listed. The winter storms listed include snow and ice events. Data from Table J41was
provided by the NCDC within NOAA. The report query noted that the data represent ice
and snow events between January 1, 1950 and February 28, 2003. However, no dates
prior to 1994 were displayed in the query results. It is for this reason that the data
provided in Table J41 and J42 above and below should be used with limited reliability in
depicting all events, related injuries and property damage during this time frame. NOAA
does not track winter weather to the same degree it has for severe Midwest spring storms.
This is mainly due to the fact that winter weather and winter storms are more "subjective"
and this kind of information has not been summarized (graphically or otherwise). The
Aviation Weather Service, a part of the NOAA maintains a list of historic weather facts. The
database noted that on November 6, 1951, St. Louis received 12.5 inches of snow, and on
January 31, 1982, regions surrounding St. Louis received 25 inches of snow and left
approximately 4,000 motorists stranded for two days.
97
NOAA weather data shows that winter weather most commonly occurs in January (44% of
storms occurred in this month), followed by December (22%). Records show that
temperatures drop to zero or below an average of two or three days per year, and
temperatures as cold as 32 degrees or lower occur less than 25 days in most years.
Snowfall has averaged a little over 18 inches per winter season, and snowfall of an inch or
less is received on five to ten days in most years.
TABLE J40
Location
Location or County
JEFFERSON COUNTY WINTER STORMS 1994 TO 2007
Date
Time
Type Magnitude Death Injury PrD1 CrD2
1 Central And Eastern M
04/05/1994
2 MOZ052 - 059>065 - 071>076
3 Southeast Mo
4 Central And East Cent
01/06/1995
12/08/1995
12/18/1995
5 MOZ041>042 - 047>052 - 059>065 072>075 - 084>085 - 099
6 MOZ041 - 047>052 - 059>065 - 072>073 084
7 MOZ009>010 - 018>019 - 026>027 034>036 - 041>042 - 047>052 - 099
8 MOZ009>010 - 018>019 - 026>027 034>036 - 041>042 - 047>052
9 MOZ009>010 - 018>019 - 026>027 034>036 - 041>042 - 047>052
10 MOZ009>010 - 018>019 - 026>027 034>036 - 041>042 - 047>052 - 059>065
11 MOZ035>036 - 051>052 - 060>061 - 063
- 065
12 MOZ009>010 - 018>019 - 026>027 034>036 - 041>042 - 047>052
13 MOZ009>010 - 018>019 - 026>027 034>036 - 041>042 - 047>052
14 MOZ009>010 - 018>019 - 026>027 034>036 - 041>042 - 047>052 084>085
15 MOZ041>042 - 047>052 - 059>065
01/02/1996
11/25/1996
01/08/1997
01/15/1997
01/27/1997
04/10/1997
01/08/1998
01/12/1998
03/08/1998
12/21/1998
01/01/1999
16 MOZ052 - 060>065 - 072>075 - 084>085 01/13/1999
- 099
17 MOZ065 - 072>075 - 084>085 - 099
03/13/1999
18 MOZ052 - 060>065 - 072>075 - 084>085 01/28/2000
- 099
19 MOZ041>042 - 049 - 052 - 059>065 - 072 03/11/2000
20 MOZ026>027 - 034>036 - 041>042 -
12/13/2000
Winter
Storm
Glaze Ice
Snow
Winter
Storm
3:00 AM Winter
Storm
12:00 PM Ice Storm
N/A
0
0
500K
0
N/A
N/A
N/A
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.3M 1K
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
3:00 PM Winter
Storm
10:00 PM Winter
Storm
4:00 AM Winter
Storm
6:00 AM Winter
Storm
8:00 AM Winter
Storm
2:00 AM Winter
Storm
10:00 PM Winter
Storm
12:00 AM Winter
Storm
6:00 PM Winter
Storm
4:30 AM Ice Storm
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
10:00 PM Winter
Storm
6:00 PM Winter
Storm
4:00 AM Winter
Storm
6:00 AM Heavy
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
98
TABLE J40
Location
Location or County
JEFFERSON COUNTY WINTER STORMS 1994 TO 2007
Date
Time
Type Magnitude Death Injury PrD1 CrD2
047>052 - 059>065 - 072>075 - 084>085
21 MOZ052 - 060>061 - 063>065
01/26/2001
22 MOZ027 - 034>036 - 042 - 048>052 02/25/2002
059>065 - 072>075
23 MOZ041>042 - 049 - 051>052 - 059>065 03/25/2002
24 MOZ041 - 047>048 - 050 - 059>065
12/04/2002
25 MOZ065 - 072>075 - 084>085 - 099
12/24/2002
26 MOZ041 - 047>052 - 059>065 - 073
02/23/2003
27 MOZ051>052 - 060>065 - 072>073
12/13/2003
28 MOZ018>019 - 026>027 - 034>036 041>042 - 047>052 - 059>
29 MOZ018>019 - 026>027 - 034>036 041>042 - 047>052 - 059>065
30 MOZ052 - 059>065 - 072
01/25/2004
12/08/2005
11/30/2006
31 MOZ018 - 026>027 - 034>036 - 041>042 12/01/2006
- 047>052
32 MOZ018 - 026>027 - 034>036 - 041>042
- 047>052 - 059>065 - 072
01/12/2007
33 MOZ062>065 - 072>075 - 084 - 099
12/08/2007
34 MOZ036 - 052 - 060>065 - 072
35 MOZ041 - 047>050 - 059 - 062 - 065 072>075 - 084>085 - 099
12/15/2007
02/23/2008
Snow
1:00 AM Winter
Storm
8:00 PM Winter
Storm
6:00 PM Winter
Storm
1:00 AM Winter
Storm
1:00 AM Winter
Storm
5:00 PM Winter
Storm
12:00 PM Winter
Storm
6:00 AM Winter
Storm
6:00 AM Winter
Storm
4:00 AM Winter
Storm
12:00 AM Winter
Storm
Ice Storm
22:00 PM
Winter
20:00 PM Weather
Heavy
5:00 AM Snow
Winter
20:00 PM Weather
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0
0
N/A
2
0
0
0
N/A
0
0
0K
0K
N/A
0
0
0K
0K
N/A
0
0
0K
0K
N/A
0
0
0K
0K
N/A
0
0
0K
0K
N/A
TOTALS:
0
0
2
0K
0K
15 800K 500
Winter storms in the EWG planning region, as compared to winter storms to the north and
west, are relatively mild. Severe winter weather is rare. Based on records maintained from
1900 through 2002, the region has experienced total annual snowfall over the average of
18 inches per year. Of these years, only six years experienced annual snowfall of over 40
inches.
Based on queries for St. Louis City, St. Louis County, St. Charles County, Jefferson County
and Franklin County to NOAA, no deaths were reported due to winter storms. However,
99
fifteen injuries were noted from 1994 to 2003 and property damage totaled $800,000.
No other information was available from NOAA.
Winter storms are considered deceptive killers because most deaths are indirectly related to
the storm. People die in traffic accidents on icy roads and of hypothermia from prolonged
exposure to cold. Everyone is potentially at risk during winter storms. The actual threat
depends on the specific situation. Recent observations indicate the following:
•
•
Related to ice and snow:
o About 70 percent occur in automobiles.
o About 25 percent are people caught out in the storm.
Related to exposure to cold:
o 50 percent are people over 60 years old.
o Over 75 percent are males.
o About 20 percent occur in the home.
There are a variety of transportation impacts due to cold weather. Diesel engines are
stressed and fuel often gels in extreme cold weather impacting trucking and rail traffic.
Rivers and lakes freeze, stopping barge and ship traffic. Subsequent ice jams threaten
bridges and can close major highways. Cold temperatures take their toll on vehicle
batteries. Shear cold temperatures stress metal bridge structures. Transportation losses for
the winter of 1976 -77 came to $6.5 billion (in 1980 dollars) (NOAA, 1982).
Cold temperature impacts on agriculture are frequently discussed in terms of frost and
freeze impacts early or late in growing seasons. Absolute temperature and duration of
extreme cold can have devastating effects on trees and winter crops as well. Prolonged
cold snaps can impact livestock not protected from the frigid temperatures.
Energy consumption rises significantly during extreme cold weather. In the winter of 197677 additional energy consumption cost $3.8 billion (1980 dollars). This includes increase
costs of electricity, fuel oil, and coal.
Extreme cold temperatures can cause significant ground freezing problems, especially if
there is little snow cover. Buried water pipes can burst causing massive ice problems and
loss of water pressure in metropolitan areas. This poses a variety of public health and
public safety problems. One case of a broken water main in Denver, Colorado forced the
entire evacuation in sub-zero temperatures of the medically fragile patients of the Veteran's
Hospital. Other cases of broken water mains have shut down subway systems and financial
centers.
Schools often close during extreme cold snaps to protect the safety of children who wait
for school buses.
100
Winter weather in the St. Louis region moves in a west to east direction. Late winter
storms that have a tendency to be intense tend to generate in the southwest portion of the
United States and move northeast, dependent upon the meteorology and the storm track.
Winter weather is different than other hazards such as tornadoes in that the hazard tends
to occur over a much larger area, often times affecting from several counties to multiple
states.
Seasonal Pattern
Missouri’s geographic location has the potential to experience severe winter weather
during the months of December through February, although winter weather has been
known to also occur in mid-November and into March.
Speed Of Onset And/Or Existing Warning Systems
Winter weather typically does not hit the region without warning. The NOAA Weather
Radio, commercial radio, and television track and announce the latest winter storm
watches, warnings, and advisories. The National Weather Service sets up winter weather
warnings in stages of severity. These warnings are found below.
WIND CHILL ADVISORY:
Notice that wind chill conditions will be present and to dress appropriately
WINTER STORM WATCH:
Severe winter conditions, such as heavy snow and/or ice, are possible within
the next day or two. Prepare.
WINTER STORM WARNING:
Severe winter conditions have begun or are about to begin in your area. Stay
indoors!
BLIZZARD WARNING:
Snow and strong winds will combine to produce a blinding snow (near zero
visibility), deep drifts, and life-threatening wind chill. Seek refuge
immediately
WINTER WEATHER ADVISORY:
Winter weather conditions are expected to cause significant inconveniences
and may be hazardous. If caution is exercised, these situations should not
become life- threatening. The greatest hazard is often to motorists.
FROST/FREEZE WARNING:
Below freezing temperatures are expected and may cause significant damage
to plants, crops, or fruit trees. In areas unaccustomed to freezing
temperatures, people who have homes without heat need to take added
precautions.
101
Map of Hazards
Refer to Figure J45, located in the back of the Technical Appendix, for a map depicting
potential regions of Jefferson County that are susceptible to severe winter weather.
The probable future severity of severe winter weather will most likely be similar to the
climatologic past. Based on the climatic history of Jefferson County, winter weather and
extreme cold events are highly likely to occur. The future probably severity for each
category of winter events is shown below:
Winter Event
Heavy Snow
Ice Event
Extreme Cold
Probable Severity
Limited
Critical
Critical
Based upon Jefferson County’s climatic history, there is a highly likely risk of impacts in the
county due to severe winter weather.. Based in information from the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration and FEMA, severe winter weather occurs between two to
three times per year in the EWG planning region. NOAA has data from EWG planning
region indicating that during the winter months the probability of measurable snowfall
ranges between 91 and 100 percent, depending on the reporting weather station.
Records show that temperatures drop to zero or below an average of two or three days per
year, and temperatures as cold as 32 degrees or lower occur less than 25 days in most
years. The coldest day reported in the region from 1941 through 2001 was minus 18
degrees Fahrenheit on January 20, 1985. Snowfall has averaged a little over 18 inches per
winter season, and snowfall of an inch or less is received on five to ten days in most years.
Winter Event
Heavy Snow
Ice Event
Extreme Cold
Probable Risk
Likely
Likely
Likely
Statement of Next Disaster’s Likely Adverse Impact on Community
The next severe winter storm will possibly have a detrimental impact on the community in
terms of injuries, property damage and death, based upon the past historic storm events.
This is due to the dense population of residents and workers who live and work in the
planning region. Based on recent history, the likely impact on Jefferson County is shown
below.
102
Life
Catastrophic
Property
Critical
Emotional
Catastrophic
Financial
Critical
Comments: none
Life
Limited
Property
Limited
Emotional
Limited
Financial
Limited
Comments Public education about winter hazards and health dangers can reduce
deaths and injuries
Recommendation
Mitigation activities for Jefferson County should include the education of its workers and
residents about prevention of injuries and deaths from severe winter weather.
Drought Hazard Profile
Description
Drought is defined as the deficiency of precipitation over an extended period of time,
usually a season or more. This deficiency results in a water shortage for some activity,
group or environmental sector. Drought should be considered relative to some long-term
average condition of balance between precipitation and evapotranspiration (i.e.,
evaporation + transpiration) in a particular area, a condition often perceived as “normal”.
It is also related to the timing (i.e., principal season of occurrence, delays in the start of the
rainy season, occurrence of rains in relation to principal crop growth stages) and the
effectiveness (i.e., rainfall intensity, number of rainfall events) of the rains. Other climatic
factors such as high temperature, high wind, and low relative humidity are often
associated with drought in many regions of the world and can significantly aggravate its
severity.
Drought should not be viewed as merely a physical phenomenon or natural event. Its
impacts on society result from the interplay between a natural event (less precipitation than
expected resulting from natural climatic variability) and the demand people place on water
supply. Human beings often exacerbate the impact of drought. Recent droughts in both
developing and developed countries and the resulting economic and environmental
impacts and personal hardships have underscored the vulnerability of all societies to this
hazard.
103
There are two main kinds of drought definitions: conceptual and operational. Conceptual
definitions, formulated in general terms, help people understand the concept of drought.
Drought is a protracted period of deficient precipitation resulting in extensive damage to
crops, resulting in loss of yield. Operational definitions help define the onset, severity, and
end of droughts. No single operational definition of drought works in all circumstances,
and this is a big part of why policy makers, resource planners, and others have more
trouble recognizing and planning for drought than they do for other disasters. In fact,
most drought planners now rely on mathematic indices to decide when to start
implementing water conservation or drought response measures. Conceptual definitions
may also be important establishing when drought conditions are beyond those that could
be considered part of normal risk management.
In the early 1980s, research by Donald A. Wilhite, director of the National Drought
Mitigation Center, and Michael H. Glantz, of the National Center for Atmospheric
Research, uncovered more than 150 published definitions of drought. The definitions
categorized in terms of four basic approaches to measuring drought: meteorological,
hydrological, agricultural, and socioeconomic. The first three approaches deal with ways to
measure drought as a physical phenomenon. The last approach deals with drought in
terms of supply and demand, tracking the effects of water shortfall as it ripples through
socioeconomic systems.
Meteorological drought is usually an expression of precipitation’s departure from normal
over some period of time. These definitions are usually region-specific, and presumably
based on a thorough understanding of regional climatology. Meteorological measurements
are the first indicators of drought.
Agricultural drought occurs when there is not enough soil moisture to meet the needs of a
particular crop at a particular time. Agricultural drought happens after meteorological
drought but before hydrological drought. Agriculture is usually the first economic sector to
be affected by drought. Agricultural drought links various characteristics of meteorological
(or hydrological) drought to agricultural impacts, focusing on precipitation shortages,
differences between actual and potential evapotranspiration, soil water deficits, reduced
ground water or reservoir levels, and so forth. A good definition of agricultural drought
should be able to account for the variable susceptibility of crops and soil moisture during
different stages of crop development, from emergence to maturity.
Hydrological drought refers to deficiencies in surface and subsurface water supplies. It is
measured as streamflow and as lake, reservoir, and groundwater levels. There is a time lag
between lack of rain and less water in streams, rivers, lakes, and reservoirs. When
precipitation is reduced or deficient over an extended period of time, this shortage will be
reflected in declining surface and subsurface water levels. Hydrological drought is
associated with the effects of shortfall in periods of precipitation (including snowfall) on
surface or subsurface water supply (i.e., streamflow, reservoir and lake levels, ground
water). The frequency and severity of hydrological drought is often defined on a watershed
or river basin scale. It takes longer for precipitation deficiencies to show up in components
104
of the hydrological system such as soil moisture, streamflow, and ground water and
reservoir levels. As a result, these impacts lag behind impacts in other economic sectors. For
example, a precipitation deficiency may result in a rapid depletion of soil moisture that is
almost immediately discernible to agriculturalists, but the impact of this deficiency on
reservoir levels may not affect hydroelectric power production or recreational uses for many
months. Also, water in reservoirs or rivers is often used for multiple and competing
purposes (e.g., flood control, irrigation, recreation, navigation, hydropower, wildlife
habitat). This further complicates the sequence and quantification of impacts. Competition
for water in these storage systems escalates during drought and conflicts between water
users increase significantly.
Hydrological Drought and Land Use
Although climate is a primary contributor to hydrological drought, other factors such as
changes in land use (e.g., deforestation), land degradation, and the construction of dams
all affect the hydrological characteristics of the basin. Because regions are interconnected
by hydrologic systems, the impact of meteorological drought may extend well beyond the
borders of the precipitation-deficient area. Similarly, changes in land use upstream may
alter hydrologic characteristics such as infiltration and runoff rates, resulting in more
variable streamflow and a higher incidence of hydrologic drought downstream.
Bangladesh, for example, has shown an increased frequency of water shortages in recent
years because land use changes have occurred within the country and in neighboring
countries. Land use change is one of the ways human actions alter the frequency of water
shortage even when no change in the frequency of meteorological drought has been
observed.
For the purposes of drought response planning, all three categories (meteorologic,
hydrologic and agriculture) can be regarded as equivalent, since each one relates to the
occurrence of drought to water shortfalls in some component of the hydrologic cycle. The
most commonly used drought severity indicators are the Palmer Drought Severity Index
(PDSI) and the Crop Moisture Index, published by NOAA and the USDA. The PDSI is more
widely used than any other single indicator. It provides a standardized means of depicting
drought severity throughout the US. It measures the departure of water supply (in terms
of precipitation and stored soil moisture) from demand (the amount of water required to
recharge soil and keep rivers, lakes and reservoirs at normal levels). By relating these
figures to the previous regional index a continuous stream of data is created reflecting
long-term wet or dry tendencies.
Socioeconomic drought occurs when physical water shortage starts to affect people,
individually and collectively.
The Palmer Drought Severity Index relates climate and weather to prolonged and abnormal
soil moisture deficiencies affecting water sensitive economies in the US. The index is useful
in delineating disaster areas and indicating the availability of irrigation water supplies,
105
reservoir levels, range conditions, amount of stock water, and potential intensity of forest
fires.
Missouri has six regions that display similar climatic characteristics. For each region,
drought severity can be determined according to the following Table J41:
TABLE J41 PALMER CLASSIFICATIONS
Palmer Classifications
4.0 or more
3.0 to 3.99
2.0 to 2.99
1.0 to 1.99
0.5 to 0.99
0.49 to -0.49
-0.5 to -0.99
-1.9 to -1.99
-2.0 to -2.99
-3.0 to -3.99
-4.0 or less
extremely wet
very wet
moderately wet
slightly wet
incipient wet spell
near normal
incipient dry spell
mild drought
moderate drought
severe drought
extreme drought
City of St. Louis, St. Louis, St. Charles and Franklin counties are included in the northeast
Region 2 that displays similar climatic characteristics. Jefferson County is included in the
southeast Region 5. See Figure J46 below.
106
FIGURE J46 MISSOURI DROUGHT REGIONS
Characteristics
Drought characteristics include economic, social and environmental. The 1930s drought’s
direct effect is most often remembered as agricultural. Deficient rainfall, high
temperatures, and high winds, as well as insect infestations and dust storms that
accompanied these conditions damaged many crops. Although records focus on other
problems, the lack of precipitation would also have affected wildlife and plant life, and
would have created water shortages for domestic needs. The severity and aerial coverage
of the event played a part in making the 1930s drought the widely accepted drought of
record for the United States.
Likely Locations
According to the State Drought Plan, Missouri is broken up into six climate divisions.
Franklin, St Charles, St. Louis City and St. Louis Counties are all found in the southeastern
section of climate Division 2. Jefferson County is in the northeast corner of climate Division
5. Based on the NDMC historic drought mapping of Regions 2 and 5, the most common
area for drought conditions to occur is within Region 2 (including St. Louis City, St. Louis,
St. Charles, and Franklin counties).
107
The State of Missouri has a State Drought Plan in place. Missouri’s plan is such that it
divides the state into three regions according to their susceptibility to drought depending
on the characteristics of surface and ground water supplies. Regions were judged to have
slight, moderate or high susceptibility to drought. Poor groundwater resources, surface
water supplies that become inadequate during extended drought and inadequate irrigation
water supplies characterize areas within Region C, considered to have severe drought
vulnerability. This region includes most of St. Louis County just south of the juncture of the
Missouri and Mississippi Rivers. Areas in this region are designated as "Priority Drought
Management Areas”. Areas within western St. Charles County, southern Franklin County
and most of central/western Jefferson County are included in Region B: Moderate
Susceptibility to Drought. Areas along the Mississippi and Missouri River valley floodplain
areas in the counties in this study are within Region A: Slight Susceptibility.
Information obtained from the Missouri Drought Response Plan (Water Resources Report
No. 44) has a map that depicts a similar concept of drought susceptibility. However, the
NDMC and the Missouri Plan are not in total agreement on common areas of drought.
The Missouri Drought Response Plan divides the state into three categories based on a
slight, moderate or high susceptibility to drought. The Missouri Plan depicts St. Louis City
as having a high susceptibility to drought, and St. Louis, Franklin, Jefferson, St. Charles
Counties with a moderate susceptibility to drought. Certain Region A areas in St. Charles,
St. Louis, and Franklin Counties that are underlain by alluvial sands and gravels have a low
susceptibility to drought.
The plan complements and supports the State Consolidated Plan and the State Emergency
Operations Plan. Actions within the drought plan are triggered when the Palmer Drought
Index reaches certain levels. The Drought Assessment Committee (DAC), chaired by the
Director of the Department of Natural Resources, is activated in the Drought Alert Stage.
The DAC then activates the Impact Task Forces, which cover the following topics:
agriculture, natural resources and environmental recreation, water supplies, wastewater,
health, social, economic and post drought evaluation.
Type of Damage
The drought of 1988-89 cost the U. S. an estimated $39 billion. To provide perspective,
estimated damages of the record flood of 1993 were in the range of $20 billion. The
social and economic costs of drought are substantial. Given the extent to which the U. S.
relies on acceptable water supply for health and well- being, the need for advanced
drought planning is obvious. Types of damage can include the increasing incidence of
range fires, depletion of groundwater supplies, poor crop growth, and a decrease in hay
for cattle (overgrazing) conditions. A shortage of hay forces ranchers to sell cattle at low
prices and food prices increase due to lower production levels for milk, meat, produce, and
other foodstuffs. Drought also results in reduced revenues from recreational areas,
environmental damages, contaminant levels in surface and groundwater rise due to
decrease in volume of stream flow. There can be a loss in revenues from agriculturally
108
related industries such as harvesting, trucking, and food processing. Reduced irrigation
water led to a reduction in vegetable production, with concomitant losses in jobs and
income.
Some of the worst droughts on record to affect Region 2 in Missouri occurred in 1901-02,
1913-14, 1930-31, 1934, 1936, 1940-41, 1953-56, 1963-64, 1980-81, 1988-89, 19992000 and 2005-2007. The 1953-56 drought is considered to be the worst on record for
Region 2.
Droughts on record to affect Region 5 in Missouri occurred in 1900-09, 1940-49, 195059, 1964-66, 1980 and 2005-2007. The drought from 1954-56 was the worst on record
for Region 5. Table J42 below shows the Big River level stage during drought conditions.
TABLE J42
RIVER LEVEL STAGES IN DROUGHT CONDITIONS IN JEFFERSON
COUNTY
Station
1.5
1.5
1.4
Date
8/30/1936
9/13/2000
10/05/2001
An overall excellent drought resource on the Internet is the National Drought Mitigation
Center (NDMC). The NDMC provides historical drought information for the U.S. from 1895
through current. Linking to the following address will provide drought information:
http://www.drought.unl.edu/whatis/what.htm
Table J43 identifies, using the Palmer Drought Severity Index, the monthly average for the
period of record for the study area.
TABLE J43 PALMER DROUGHT SEVERITY INDEX MONTHLY
AVERAGE FOR PERIOD OF RECORD
1895 TO 1995
Month
Month
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
Division 2
-0.06
-0.42
-0.66
-0.99
-1.23
-1.17
1.24
1.68
1.48
0.65
0.81
Division 5
-0.04
-0.94
-1.16
-1.70
-1.62
0.57
1.64
1.65
-0.40
-0.93
0.30
109
TABLE J43 PALMER DROUGHT SEVERITY INDEX MONTHLY
AVERAGE FOR PERIOD OF RECORD
1895 TO 1995
December
2.37
1.79
Within the past few years, the National Drought Mitigation Center has created a U.S.
drought map that utilizes numerous indicators to determine the severity of a drought.
These indicators include the Palmer Index, Crop Moisture Index, Standardized Precipitation
Index, Percent of Normal Rainflow, Daily Streamflow, Snowpack, Soil Moisture, Vegetative
Index, and Fire Danger Classifications. There is also a lot of subjectivity that goes into the
map. The drought authors take heavily into consideration the input they receive from local
experts in terms of the impacts that are being felt.
The NDMC has developed a graphic historic representation of the frequency of occurrence
of areas within the upper Mississippi River Basin experiencing severe to extreme drought
from 1895 to 1995. The graph below depicts the percentage of areas of the upper
Mississippi River Basin that were impacted by drought, including climatic zones 2 and 5.
Based on the NCDC 1980 report, heat and drought events result in the highest damage (in
the range of 120 billion dollars from 1980 to 1999 based on 46 weather related events)
when compared to other natural weather hazards. See Figure J47 below.
110
FIGURE J47
SEASONAL DROUGHT
The Palmer Drought Severity Index can be utilized to determine the intensity or strength of
droughts. Table J45 above lists the average monthly Palmer Drought Severity Index from
1895 to 1995 for Regions 2 (St. Louis City, St. Louis County, St. Charles County, Franklin
County) and 5 (Jefferson County).
The drought of 1988-89 cost the U.S. an estimated $39 billion. To provide perspective,
estimated damages of the record flood of 1993 were in the range of $12-$16 billion. The
social and economic costs of drought are substantial. Given the extent to which the U.S.
relies on acceptable water supply for health and well- being, the need for advanced
drought planning is obvious.
111
Although the 1988–89 drought was the most economically devastating disaster in the
history of the United States (Riebsame et al., 1991), a close second is undoubtedly the
series of droughts that affected large portions of the United States in the 1930s.
Determining the direct and indirect costs associated with this period of droughts is a
difficult task because of the broad impacts of drought, the event’s close association with
the Great Depression, the fast revival of the economy with the start of World War II, and
the lack of adequate economic models for evaluating losses at that time. However, broad
calculations and estimates can provide valuable generalizations of the economic impact of
the 1930s drought. In 1937, the Works Progress Administration (WPA) reported that
drought was the principal reason for economic relief assistance in the Great Plains region
during the 1930s (Link et al., 1937). The first federal funds marked specifically for drought
relief were not released until the fall of 1933. In all, assistance may have reached $1 billion
(in 1930s dollars) by the end of the drought (Warrick et al., 1980).
According to the WPA, three-fifths of all first-time rural relief cases in the Great Plains area
were directly related to drought, with a disproportionate amount of cases being farmers
(68%) and especially tenant farmers (70% of the 68%). However, it is not known how
many of the remaining cases (32%) were indirectly affected by drought. The WPA report
also noted that 21% of all rural families in the Great Plains area were receiving federal
emergency relief by 1936 (Link et al., 1937); the number was as high as 90% in hard-hit
counties (Warrick, 1980). Thus, even though the exact economic losses are not known for
this time period, they were substantial enough to cause widespread economic disruption
that affected the entire nation.
Seasonal Pattern
Based on Table J45 above from Missouri Regions 2 and 5, a trend emerges of mild drought
occurring from January through May from the period of record from 1895 to 1995.
By nature, drought occurs very slowly. Existing warning systems have been developed by
Missouri Department of Natural Resources (Missouri Drought Response Plan). The function
of the plan is to assist in the response, monitoring and prediction, communication, and
planning in the event of a drought. The plan provides for operations and administrative
procedures that activate the Drought Assessment Committee, Impact Task Forces,
Governor's Drought Executive Committee, and the State Emergency Operations Center. The
Governor's declaration empowers state agencies to implement water shortage emergency
actions. The statute or authority that regulates this activity is the State Water Resources
Plan (Revised statutes of Missouri Chapters 640.415). The primary agencies involved in
drought activities include: Missouri Dept. of Natural Resources (primary), Missouri Dept. of
Agriculture, Missouri Dept. of Public Safety, Missouri Dept. of Conservation, Missouri Dept.
of Social Services, University of Missouri-Columbia, DOC, USDA, US Army, DOI, EPA, and
FEMA. The drought plan serves the following groups: water supply systems of individual
ranchers and farmers, local governments, federal agencies, domestic water users, health
112
care facilities, public uses such as electric power generation, firefighting, key military
facilities, communications, and wastewater systems.
As a part of the plan, monthly drought monitoring (consisting of water monitoring data
and weather data) is provided to the State Emergency Management Agency by the
Department of Natural Resources and the National Weather Service. MDNR utilizes the
Palmer Drought Index as a trigger to determine drought phases and actions to be taken.
Palmer greater than or equal to -1.0: Phase 1 (Advisory Phase)
Palmer -1.0 to -2.0: Phase 2 (Drought Alert)
Palmer -2.0 to -4.0: Phase 3 (Conservation Phase)
Palmer less than or equal to -4.0: Phase 4 (Possible Local Rationing Phase)
Once the data demonstrates that there is a Phase 2 drought condition, the Water
Resources Program Director declares drought alert for any region of the state and the
Director of the Department of Natural Resources may activate and chair the Drought
Assessment Committee (DAC). The DAC then activates the Impact Task Forces that include
the following Departments:
Agriculture
Natural Resources and Environmental Recreation
Water Supplies and Wastewater
Health
Social
Economic
Post Drought Evaluation
The state drought plan still has unmet needs at federal, state, local levels. These needs
include changes from customer or "provider" perspective: 1) lack of U.S. coordinated
response to meld with state response plan, 2) need for state climatologist to be available
for consultation, and 3) lack of a permanent source or mechanism of drought response
and mitigation funds at the federal or state level.
There are program limitations to the state drought plan: 1) early stages are voluntary
conservation measures, 2) state mitigation grant or loan funds are limited and may be
available only through mechanisms not well coordinated with emergency response plan.
Map of Hazards
Figure J48 below depicts the percent of time the various regions spent in severe and
extreme drought conditions from 1895 to 1995. This is defined as the percentage of time
when the Palmer Drought Severity Index was less than or equal to –3.0. Refer to Figure J45
(located in the back of the Technical Appendix) for another map of the hazard area.
113
FIGURE J48 PALMER DROUGHT INDEX
Utilizing MDNR’s drought response system as outlined above, the probable severity levels
of future drought are as follows.
Phase
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Phase 4
Probable Severity
Negligible
Limited
Critical
Critical
Occurrence
The probable risk or likeliness of future occurrences of drought will most likely be similar to
the climatologic past. However, the past number and severity of events is not necessarily a
114
predictor of future occurrences. Based on information from the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration and FEMA, droughts occur approximately every 10 years in the
EWG planning region.
Phase
Phase 1
Phase 2
Phase 3
Phase 4
Probable Risk
Likely
Likely
Possible
Possible
Statement of Next Disaster’s Likely
Likely Adverse Impact on Community
The next drought will possibly have a detrimental impact on the community in terms of
agricultural (lawns), economic (social) and environmental based upon the past historic
drought events.
Life
Negligible
Property
Limited
Emotional
Limited
Financial
Critical
Comments
None
Life
Property (crop damage)
Emotional
Financial
Comments
Negligible
Negligible
Limited
Limited
Education of city residents on watering restrictions of
lawns
Recommendation
Education of city residents on watering restrictions of lawns.
Heat Wave Hazard Profile
Description
Heat wave is defined as a prolonged period of excessive heat and humidity with more than
48 hours of high heat (90oF or higher) and high humidity (80 percent relative humidity or
higher) are expected. The National Weather Service steps up its procedures to alert the
public during these periods of excessive heat and humidity. Based on the NCDC 1980
report, heat and drought events result in the highest damage (in the range of $120 billion
115
from 1980 to 1999 based on 46 weather related events) when compared to other natural
weather hazards.
Although heat waves are not often taken as seriously as other forms of severe weather, the
mortality from these weather events in the U. S. from 1979 to 1998 is greater than the
number of lives claimed by lightning, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and earthquakes
combined (National Center for Environmental Health). Even during a normal year without
a catastrophic heat wave, the National Weather Service claims that an average of about
175 people succumb to summer heat. This number does not include deaths of people
already in poor health, whose deaths may have been advanced by exposure to extreme
heat. Despite the presence of improving technology (e.g., air conditioning, architectural
design, and improved accuracy in weather forecasting), heat waves continue to take many
lives. From the early 20th century to the present time, Americans have experienced a
significant rise in the cost of property damage from severe weather events, while at the
same time the number of lives lost has decreased. Unfortunately, it appears that heat
waves have not followed the same trend.
Like all other major weather events, a heat wave cannot be prevented from developing.
Serious consideration should be given to how our communities deal with heat waves when
they occur. First, it is often the case that many fatalities during even the most severe heat
waves occur after the first day of extreme heat. This means that there is time to help
people who do not have, or cannot afford, air conditioning. People in the U. S. over 65
years old are especially vulnerable to extreme heat, and this population is expected to grow
in the very near future.
Heat waves of the past have often been more intense in urban areas. More people would
be at risk when a heat wave occurs in the region and power companies would be heavily
stressed trying to keep more people cool.
Scientists have observed that the average global temperature increased by the end of the
20th century. This could pose an even greater problem for northern cities in the U.S.,
where people are not accustomed to long periods of high heat. Finally, there are a few
other societal impacts to be considered such as: water usage (heat waves often occur
during droughts), air pollution building up during heat waves, and the economic impact of
keeping millions of people cool.
Social conditions are major players in the hazards posed by heat waves. People most
affected by heat waves are the elderly and low income. In addition, there are still problems
with getting heat wave information out to all members of the public. Often, as with any
nature disaster impacted a city, it is not considered that many U.S. cities where English is
not their primary language.
Because problems still exist when dealing with heat waves in U.S. cities at the community
level, further solutions should come from the community level. In the case of Philadelphia,
both the NWS and Department of Public Health cooperate to reduce heat wave impacts,
116
and in Chicago the city government and human services departments also work hard to
reduce impacts. Additional solutions may come from community organizations working to
reduce heat wave impacts. An example of this can be seen in San Leandro, California's
"Triad Alliance" where community-based organizations, emergency management
departments, and the city government work together to mitigate disasters associated with
earthquakes. In the case of heat waves, the city government or mayor's office could still
facilitate the registering of people for well-being checks, but then distribute the lists of
people to be checked to the community organizations.
The challenge with developing community heat wave response organizations is finding
enough dedicated members to assist during heat waves or keeping the organization
prepared and ready to mobilize during the warmer parts of the year in U.S. cities. More
people may start to care the next time a heat wave threatens their community.
Education programs could also be given in schools. Children and young adults can
participate in the community organizations and become aware of the risks of excessive
heat exposure to young people (for example, overexertion during excessive heat periods).
Of course, some younger people and employers would have to make sacrifices during a
heat wave to put work aside and mobilize the community organizations to deal with the
situation. Looking at a whole city during a heat wave, we can compare it to a person.
When there is excessive heat a doctor would probably tell a person to rest and "take it
easy." The same could be said for a city as a whole, continue to function, but to slow down
during a heat wave and allow communities to come together to keep their people safe
during a heat wave. Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley mentioned the importance of the
whole city's cooperation in his 1996 Summer Heat Preparedness Speech: "I want to
continue to stress, however, that the city's efforts alone cannot prevent the tragedies
related to extreme heat. We need everyone to get involved." (Daley 1996).
Extreme heat is a hazard that could rapidly increase in magnitude in the 21st century. The
increasingly urbanization of the world’s population results in increasing numbers of
vulnerable people. Global warming also dictates a need to improve heat wave mitigation
and response systems.
Heat kills by taxing the human body beyond its abilities. In a normal year, about 175
Americans succumb to the demands of summer heat. Among the large continental family
of hazards, only the cold of winter--not lightning, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, or
earthquakes-- takes a greater toll. In the 40-year period from 1936 through 1975, nearly
20,000 people were killed in the United States by the effects of heat and solar radiation. In
the disastrous heat wave of 1980, more then 1,250 people died. These are just the direct
casualties of heat waves. It is not known how many more deaths are advanced by heat
wave weather.
North American summers are hot; most summers see heat waves in one section or another
of the United States. East of the Rockies, and especially in the St. Louis Metropolitan area,
117
they tend to combine both high temperature and high humidity, although some of the
worst heat waves have been catastrophically dry.
In response to the tragic death toll of 1980, the National Weather Service (NWS) has
stepped up its efforts to more effectively alert the general public and appropriate
authorities to the hazards of heat waves.
Based on the latest research findings, the NWS has devised the "Heat Index"(HI),
(sometimes referred to as the "apparent temperature"). The HI, given in degrees F, is an
accurate measure of how hot it really feels when the relative humidity (RH) is added to the
actual air temperature.
To find the HI, look at the Heat Index Chart in Figure J49 below. As an example, if the air
temperature is 95 degrees F (found on the left side of the chart) and the RH is 55% (found
at the top of the chart), the HI- or how hot it really feels-- is 110 degrees F. This is at the
intersection of the 95-degree row and the 55% column.
FIGURE J49 HEAT INDEX
Source: National Weather Service
The stagnant atmospheric conditions of a heat wave trap pollutants in urban areas and
add the stresses of severe pollution to the already dangerous affects of hot weather,
creating a health problem of undiscovered dimensions. A map of heat related deaths in St.
Louis during 1966, for example, shows a heavier concentration in the crowded alleys and
towers of the inner city, where air quality would also be poor during a heat wave.
118
The high inner-city death rates also result from poor access to air-conditioned rooms. While
air-conditioning may be a luxury in normal times, it can be a lifesaver during heat wave
conditions. Indications from the 1978 Texas heat wave suggest that some elderly people
on fixed incomes, many of them in buildings that could not be ventilated without air
conditioning, found the cost too high, turned off their units, and ultimately succumbed to
the stresses of heat.
Characteristics
A heat wave moves over an area as a large, deep air mass with descending air, retarding
the development of any significant precipitation that would provide relief to the ground
surface's rising temperatures. As this air mass moves slowly or just sits over one area for
days or even weeks, its rising surface temperatures begin to take its toll on the people who
are trapped in it.
Likely Locations
Heat wave weather in the St. Louis Region is different that other hazards such as tornadoes
in that the hazard tends to occur over a much larger area, often times affecting from
several counties to multiple states.
Type of Damage
Heat kills by taxing the human body beyond its abilities. Normally, the body has ways of
keeping itself cool, by letting heat escape through the skin, and by evaporating sweat
(perspiration). If the body does not cool properly, the victim may suffer a heat-related
illness. Anyone can be susceptible although the very young and very old are at greater risk.
Heat-related illnesses can become serious or even deadly if unattended. Damage to the
body ranges from heat cramps to death.
•
•
•
Heat Cramps: Heat cramps are muscular pains and spasms due to heavy exertion.
They usually involve the abdominal muscles or the legs. It is generally thought that
the loss of water and salt from heavy sweating causes the cramps.
Heat Exhaustion: Heat exhaustion is less dangerous than heat stroke. It typically
occurs when people exercise heavily or work in a warm, humid place where body
fluids are lost through heavy sweating. Fluid loss causes blood flow to decrease in
the vital organs, resulting in a form of shock. With heat exhaustion, sweat does not
evaporate as it should, possibly because of high humidity or too many layers of
clothing. As a result, the body is not cooled properly. Signals include cool, moist,
pale, flushed or red skin; heavy sweating; headache; nausea or vomiting; dizziness;
and exhaustion. Body temperature will be near normal.
Heat Stroke: Also known as sunstroke, heat stroke is life-threatening. The victim's
temperature control system, which produces sweating to cool the body, stops
working. The body temperature can rise so high that brain damage and death may
result if the body is not cooled quickly. Signals include hot, red and dry skin;
119
changes in consciousness; rapid, weak pulse; and rapid, shallow breathing. Body
temperature can be very high--sometimes as high as 105oF.
The St. Louis Metropolitan area experienced a heat wave in July 1980. It was the first real
prolonged period of extreme heat for the metropolitan area since 1966 when 246 heat
deaths were reported. The heat began around the 4th of July. By July 12th, it was apparent
that there was a very real crisis in the City of St. Louis. Emergency Medical Services (EMS)
crews were finding dead or very ill persons in many areas of the city. Most were elderly
persons living alone and many had been dead for several days before being discovered. City
officials recommended to the mayor that a heat emergency be declared. The Governor
mobilized the National Guard. They searched door-to-door for victims. The Army Reserve
supplied portable air-conditioning to non-air-conditioned parts of City Hospital. The
American Red Cross opened emergency shelters. In 1980, 113 heat deaths were reported.
In August 1980, a team of researchers from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control was sent
to St. Louis and Kansas City, Missouri, to find out why, when the July 1980 heat wave
affected a quarter of the country (the southeast), the death rates were excessively high in
these two cities. A case-control study outlined the reasons found and the risk factors for
heat illness and death in two articles published in the Journal of the American Medical
Association in June 1982.
Early in l981, city officials and representatives began meeting to form an organization to
prevent the crisis of 1980 from happening again. The first community-wide meeting was
held in December l981 after an announced cut in federal energy assistance funds. This was
the beginning of Operation Weather Survival (OWS).
At the same time, the City of St. Louis Department of Health and Hospitals put together a
heat illness prevention plan, titled "The Lion in Summer," that included a slide/sound show
and speakers (health educators and EMS personnel) that was marketed to community and
senior citizens' groups throughout the summer of l981 and again in 1982. Heat and cold
illnesses were also made reportable, first by the St. Louis City Health Commissioner and
eventually by the Missouri Department of Health.
By 1982, health officials in the City of St. Louis and St. Louis County had developed a joint
plan to monitor summer temperatures that would quickly warn citizens of anticipated
periods of excessive heat. This was done through the Wet Bulb Glove Temperature that was
used in St. Louis until 1997 when the protocol was changed at the request of the National
Weather Service (NWS) to reflect the terminology used across the nation by the NWS.
OWS began as a formal contract in 1982 between the City and several social service
agencies to provide necessary assistance during periods of extreme heat or cold. It
eventually became a broad group of public health, government, human service, utilities,
and for-profit companies and agencies that worked together to prevent illness or death
120
from either extreme heat or cold. In l996, a more formal structure was initiated to assure
the continuation of the organization because of many changes in the community and a
drop in attendance at meetings. OWS is staffed by the United Way and now includes all
the major counties in Missouri and Illinois that are considered part of the Metropolitan St.
Louis area.
St. Louis region experienced additional heat waves in l993, 1988 and in 1995 without
again experiencing death rates close to those in 1980. The major challenges of the ongoing
heat illness prevention program are, first, reaching the truly isolated elderly, high risk
person who has no meaningful interaction with anyone, and second, convincing many
seniors that they are at risk and that air-conditioning will save lives.
The major programs of heat illness prevention through NWS, in addition to the monitoring,
warning, education and data collection system of the health departments, are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A very successful air-conditioner loan program, funded by Union Electric Company
(now Ameren UE). The window air-conditioners are loaned, installed and
maintained for individuals who apply to the program with a medical "prescription."
At least 50 new air-conditioners are purchased each year.
A program to weatherize homes for low-income elderly and disabled persons.
Programs to provide energy assistance for low-income elderly and disabled persons.
Information and referral for help, including home visits to high-risk individuals and
transportation to services, by a number of agencies.
Emergency shelter through the St. Louis Homeless Network.
Monitoring of weather by representatives of the National Weather Service.
A free telephone reassurance program offered to all high-risk individuals during
declared periods of unusual heat or cold by a for-profit company, called TelAssure.
A system of neighborhood institutions, primarily senior citizen centers, that offers
air-conditioned relief from the heat for the hottest part of the day.
A well-informed media in St. Louis that provide invaluable assistance with
dissemination of needed information throughout the community.
Refer to Table J44 for a history of heat wave occurrences.
TABLE J44 TOP FIFTEEN CONSECUTIVE DAYS WITH TEMPERATURES 90
DEGREES OR HIGHER IN ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN AREA
DATES
June-August, 1980
July 2-July 29, 1936
July 20- August 11, 1941
July 11- July 31, 1916
August 8-August 28, 1936
June 17-July 7, 1954
June 28-July 17, 1921
July 8-July 26, 1934
CONSECUTIVE DAYS
28+ days
28 days
23 days
21 days
21 days
21 days
20 days
20 days
19 days
TEMPERATURE RANGES
100+
108
N.A.
N.A.
108
110-115
100+
N.A.
108-111
121
TABLE J44 TOP FIFTEEN CONSECUTIVE DAYS WITH TEMPERATURES 90
DEGREES OR HIGHER IN ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN AREA
DATES
July 2- July 20, 1937
June 19-July 6, 1901
August 3- August 9, 1930
July 9- July 14, 1966
June 27- July 1, 1931
CONSECUTIVE DAYS
19 days
18 days
7 days
7 days
6 days
5 days
TEMPERATURE RANGES
N.A.
106-107
100+
100+
100+
100
Heat waves are sporadic phenomena. Frequency, intensity, and duration of heat waves,
however, vary drastically from year to year. As can be seen from the Table J46 above, there
have been 14 periods of heat waves ranging from a minimum of five consecutive days to a
maximum of 28 days, all over 90 degrees.
Heat waves are sporadic phenomena that occur throughout the United States and
specifically the St. Louis metropolitan area. Frequency, intensity, and duration of heat
waves, however, vary drastically from year to year. The highest temperature documented
during the longest heat wave of 28 days was 108 degrees.
Compared to other meteorological hazards that pose threats to property and human
health (e.g., floods, hurricanes, and tornadoes), heat waves rank first as the cause of
human mortality. Extremes of heat have a broad and far-reaching set of impacts on the
nation. These include significant loss of life and illness, economic costs in transportation,
TABLE J45
HEAT MORBIDITY IN ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN
METROPOLITAN REGION
Year
St. Louis City
St. Louis County
Outstate MO
TOTAL
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
13
6
4
3
4
9
26
2
5
2
38
4
10
0
2
4
2
1
0
6
1
1
3
5
2
7
5
5
2
0
1
5
18
0
3
4
29
11
17
18
13
10
5
6
14
50
3
9
9
72
17
34
122
TABLE J45
HEAT MORBIDITY IN ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN
METROPOLITAN REGION
Year
St. Louis City
St. Louis County
Outstate MO
TOTAL
2002
7
5
9
21
Source: Missouri Department of Health and Social Services City of St Louis Department of Health
agriculture, production, energy and infrastructure. In June to September 1980 the nation
saw a devastating heat wave and drought that claimed at least 1,700 lives and had
estimated economic costs $20 billion in 1980 dollars. Tables J45 above and J46 below
identifies specific damages to the St. Louis metropolitan area
TABLE J46 ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN REGION HEAT
WAVES 1994
1994 TO 2008 AND ASSOCIATED DAMAGES
Date
Deaths
Injuries
Property
Damage
Crop
Damage
06/12/1994
07/17/1995
07/28/1995
08/01/1995
05/17/1996
06/18/1996
06/22/1996
06/30/1996
07/07/1996
07/18/1996
06/25/1997
4
20
0
9
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
55
225
120
230
25
0
0
0
8
11
0
0
75K
15K
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
50K
0.4M
25K
400K
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
07/12/1997
07/20/1997
08/17/1997
06/23/1998
07/18/1998
08/23/1998
09/04/1998
07/18/1999
07/02/2000
08/28/2000
09/01/2000
06/18/2001
07/07/2001
07/17/2001
07/21/2001
07/29/2001
08/01/2001
0
1
1
3
0
0
0
42
4
1
1
1
5
0
3
0
0
14
0
0
143
137
10
13
397
103
125
38
0
61
19
71
4
34
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
123
TABLE J46 ST. LOUIS METROPOLITAN REGION HEAT
WAVES 1994
1994 TO 2008 AND ASSOCIATED DAMAGES
Date
08/07/2001
08/12/2001
08/21/2001
05/31/2002
06/01/2002
06/25/2002
07/08/2002
07/17/2002
07/20/2002
07/26/2002
08/01/2002
08/26/2002
07/03/2003
08/15/2003
08/24/2003
07/09/2004
07/20/2004
06/06/2005
06/23/2005
07/20/2005
07/13/2006
07/29/2006
08/01/2006
08/07/2006
05/12/2007
05/13/2007
08/04/2007
07/20/2008
Totals
Deaths
1
3
0
2
0
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
3
2
0
1
0
1
0
4
4
1
0
1
0
0
2
0
128
Injuries
Property
Damage
10
0
0
0
14
0
0
0
14
0
0
0
26
0
0
0
47
0
185
0
59
0
0
0
93
0
54
0
0
0
45
0
25
0
0
0
0
0
65
0
437
0
14
0
59
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
519
0
60
0
3571
5.09M
Source: NCDC
Crop
Damage
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
875K
There are several impacts on transportation documented in case studies. Aircraft lose lift at
high temperatures. The Phoenix airport has been closed due to periods of extreme heat
that made aircraft operations unsafe. Highways and roads are damaged by excessive heat.
Asphalt roads soften. Concrete roads have been known to "explode" lifting –three to four
foot pieces of concrete. During the 1980 heat wave hundreds of miles of highways buckled
(NOAA, 1980). Stress is placed on automobile cooling systems, diesel trucks and railroad
locomotives. This leads to an increase in mechanical failures. Train rails develop sun kinks
124
and distort. Refrigerated goods experience a significant greater rate of spoilage due to
extreme heat.
Various sectors of the agriculture community are affected by extreme heat. Livestock are
severely impacted by heat waves. Millions of birds have been lost during heat waves. Milk
production and cattle reproduction also decreases during heat waves. Pigs are also
adversely impacted by extreme heat. In terms of crop impacts in the summer of 1980, it is
unclear what the impacts are of very high temperatures for a few days, versus the above
average summer temperatures or the drought. High temperatures at the wrong time can
inhibit crop yields. Wheat, rice, corn, potato, and soybean crop yields can all be
significantly reduced by extreme high temperatures at key development stages.
The electric transmission system is impacted when power lines sag in high temperatures. In
2002 a major west coast power outage impacting four states was blamed in part on
extreme high temperatures causing sagging transmission lines to short out. The
combination of extreme heat and the added demand for electricity to run air conditioning
causes transmission line temperatures to rise.
The demand for electric power during heat waves is well documented. In 1980, consumers
paid $1.3 billion more for electric power during the summer than the previous year. The
demand for electricity, 5.5 percent above normal, outstripped the supply, causing electric
companies to have rolling black outs.
The demand for water increases during periods of hot weather. In extreme heat waves,
water is used to cool bridges and other metal structures susceptible to heat failure. This
causes a reduced water supply and pressure in many areas. This can significantly contribute
to fire suppression problems for both urban and rural fire departments.
The rise in water temperature during heat waves contributes to the degradation of water
quality and negatively impacts fish populations. It can also lead to the death of many other
organisms in the water ecosystem. High temperatures are also linked to rampant algae
growth, causing fish kills in rivers and lakes.
Impacts from heat waves are widespread, not selective. Impacts and areas where there are
impacts are dependent upon the weather systems, which affect wide expanses of land.
Seasonal
Seasonal Pattern
Heat waves typically occur during the warm summer months including June, July and
August as seen on Table J48 above.
125
Speed of Onset and/or Existing Warning Systems
Heat wave weather in the St. Louis region slowly descends into the area. It is different that
other hazards such as tornadoes in that the hazard tends to occur over a much larger area,
often times affecting from several counties to multiple states.
The NWS will initiate alert procedures when the Heat Index is expected to exceed 105
degrees F to 110 degrees F (depending on the local climate) for at least two consecutive
days. The expected severity of the heat determines whether advisories or warnings are
issued. A common guideline for the issuance of excessive heat alerts is when the maximum
daytime HI is expected to equal or exceed 105°F and a nighttime minimum HI of 80°F or
above for two or more consecutive days. Some regions and municipalities are more
sensitive to excessive heat than others. As a result, alert thresholds may vary substantially
from these guidelines. Excessive heat-alert thresholds are being tailored at major
metropolitan centers based on research results that link unusual amounts of heat-related
deaths to city-specific meteorological conditions.
The alert procedures are:
• Include HI values in zone and city forecasts.
• Issue Special Weather Statements and/or Public Information Statements presenting
a detailed discussion of (1) the extent of the hazard including HI values, (2) those
individuals most at risk, (3) safety rules for reducing the risk.
• Assist state and local health officials in preparing Civil Emergency Messages in severe
heat waves. Meteorological information from Special Weather Statements will be
included as well as more detailed medical information, advice, and names and
telephone numbers of health officials.
• Release to the media and over NOAA's own Weather Radio all of the above
information.
Operation Weather Survival was created in l981 to address the needs of the community
during extreme weather conditions. It is comprised of public and private organizations
working together to prevent illness or death from extreme heat, cold conditions and
ground level ozone. The phone number is 1-800-427-4626
OWS Summer Outreach Programs that work to prevent HEAT-related illness through OWS
are:
• Health Departments: Preventive education, temperature monitoring, alerts,
warnings, and data collection
• OWS Air-Conditioner Program: Provides air conditioners to individuals who are
medically at risk. Air conditioners are purchased with funds primarily donated by
AmerenUE.
• Cooling Sites: Cooling sites are open year-round. During severe heat, hours and
services are extended.
• TelAssure Telephone Reassurance Services: Complimentary service at-risk individuals
during weather emergency Agency referrals needed. TelAssure Telephone
126
Reassurance Services Utility Assistance: Assistance is provided through OWN
member agencies to prevent electrical disconnection for individuals and families atrisk.
Map of Hazards
Figure J45 (located in the back of the Technical Appendix) depicts the potential heat wave
areas in the county. In addition, Figure J50 below depicts the Heat Wave Hazard Impact
areas in the St. Louis Metropolitan area during the heat wave from 1980.
FIGURE J50 1980 MIDWEST HEAT WAVE
Source: National Climatic Data Center
127
Heat waves are sporadic phenomena that occur throughout the United States. Frequency,
intensity, and duration of heat waves, however, vary drastically from year to year.
The levels of severity, by Heat Index apparent temperature are found below.
Extreme Danger (heat stroke or sunstroke highly likely at 130 degrees F or
higher).
• Danger (sunstroke, muscle cramps, and/or heat exhaustion likely at 105 degrees F
to 129 degrees F).
• Extreme Caution (sunstroke, muscle cramps, and/or heat exhaustion possible at
90 degrees F to 104 degrees F)
• Caution (fatigue possible at less than 90 degrees F).
The future probably severity for Jefferson County is shown below according to the Heat
Index levels of severity.
•
Heat Index
Probable Severity
Heat Index of 130°F or higher
Catastrophic
Critical
Heat Index of 105°F to 129°F
Limited
Heat Index of less than 90°F
Negligible
Heat waves are sporadic phenomena that occur throughout the United States. Frequency,
intensity, and duration of heat waves, however, vary drastically from year to year.
Based in information from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and
FEMA there have been at least fifteen heat wave related events from 1901 to 1980 and 43
periods of heat wave related events from 1994 to 2003. In the St. Louis metropolitan area,
days with temperatures of 90 degrees or greater generally occur from June through August
based on Table J48 above. The future probable risk for Jefferson County is shown below
according to the Heat Index levels of severity.
Heat Index
Probable Risk
Heat Index of 130°F or higher
Unlikely
Possible
Likely
Heat Index of less than 90°F
Highly Likely
Community
mmunity
Statement of Next Disaster’s Likely Adverse Impact on Co
The next heat wave will possibly have a detrimental impact on the community in terms of
agricultural, economic (social) and environmental based upon the past historic heat wave
occurrences. The adverse impacts of future heat waves affecting Jefferson County is shown
below.
128
Life
Catastrophic
Property
Limited
Emotional
Catastrophic
Financial
Limited
Comments
Based on worst case scenario
Life
Property
Emotional
Financial
Comments
Limited
Negligible
Limited
Negligible
Jefferson County has been proactive in protecting those
At-risk residents by organizing OWS.
Recommendation
Educate those people who work outdoors of the dangers of extended exposure to a
combination of high temperatures and high humidities. The people to be educated are
those at risk including:
•
•
•
"Homeless" living outside
Poor, elderly, chronically ill persons living alone
Individuals working outside in extreme heat
Dam Failure Hazard Profile
The purpose of a dam is to impound (store) water, wastewater or liquid borne materials for
any of several reasons, including flood control, human water supply, irrigation, livestock
water supply, energy generation, containment of mine tailings, and recreation or pollution
control. Many dams fulfill a combination of the above functions.
Manmade dams may be classified according to the type of construction material used, the
methods used in construction, the slope or cross-section of the dam, the way the dam
resists the forces of the water pressure behind it, the means used for controlling seepage
and, occasionally, according to the purpose of the dam. The materials used for
construction of dams include earth, rock, tailings from mining or milling, concrete,
masonry, steel, timber, miscellaneous materials (such as plastic or rubber) and any
combination of these materials. Dams can be owned and operated by individuals, private
and public organizations and the government. Associated works include spillways, water
supply facilities, and lake drain structures. Most dams have an earth embankment and one
or two spillways.
129
Embankment dams are the most common type of dam in use today. In Missouri 99
percent of all dams in Missouri are made of earthen materials, the remaining are
constructed of concrete. Materials used for embankment dams include natural soil or rock,
or waste materials obtained from mining or milling operations. An embankment dam is
termed an “earthfill” or “rockfill” dam depending on whether it is comprised of compacted
earth or mostly compacted or dumped rock. The ability of an embankment dam to resist
the reservoir water pressure is primarily a result of the mass weight, type and strength of
the materials from which the dam is made.
Concrete dams may be categorized into gravity and arch dams according to the designs
used to resist the stress due to reservoir water pressure. Typical concrete gravity dams are
the most common form of concrete dam. Because the purpose of a dam is to retain water
effectively and safely, the water retention ability of a dam is of prime importance. Water
may pass from the reservoir to the downstream side of a dam by:
•
•
•
•
•
Passing through the main spillway or outlet works
Passing over an auxiliary spillway
Overtopping the dam
Seepage through the abutments
Seepage under the dam
Overtopping of an embankment dam is very undesirable because the embankment
materials may be eroded away. Additionally, only a small number of concrete dams have
been designed to be overtopped. Water normally passes through the main spillway or
outlet works; it should pass over an auxiliary spillway only during periods of high reservoir
levels and high water inflow. All embankment and most concrete dams have some
seepage. However, it is important to control the seepage to prevent internal erosion and
instability. Proper dam construction, and maintenance and monitoring of seepage provide
this control.
Description
Thousands of people have been injured, many killed and billions of dollars of property
damaged by dam failures in the United States, including the catastrophic dam failure
upstream from Johnstown, Pennsylvania that killed 2,209 people in May 31, 1889 as a
result of a poor and inappropriate maintenance of a poorly constructed dam. The problem
of unsafe dams in Missouri was underscored by dam failures at Lawrenceton in 1968 (just
south of Jefferson County), Washington County in 1975 and a near failure in Franklin
County in 1978.
Safety is of paramount importance to the effectiveness of a dam. Dam failures can be
devastating for the dam owners, to the dam’s intended purpose and, especially, for
downstream populations and property. Property damage can range in the thousands to
billions of dollars. No price can be put on the lives that have been lost and could be lost in
130
the future due to dam failure. Inundation from a dam failure could affect several states and
large populations.
Although the majority of dams in the U.S. have responsible owners and are properly
maintained, still many dams fail every year. In the past several years, there have been
hundreds of documented failures across the nation (this includes 250 after the Georgia
Flood of 1994). Dam and downstream repair costs resulting from failures in 23 states
reporting in one recent year totaled $54.3 million.
Early in the twentieth century, as many dams failed due to lack of proper engineering and
maintenance, it was recognized that some form of regulation was needed. One of the
earliest state programs was enacted in California in the 1920s. Federal agencies, such as
the Corps of Engineers and the Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation built many
dams during the early part of the twentieth century and established safety standards
during this time. Slowly, other states began regulatory programs. But it was not until the
string of significant dam failures in the 1970s that awareness was raised to a new level
among the states and the federal government.
In Missouri, the first state legislation aimed at regulating dams was passed in 1889 and
was called the Dam Mills and Electric Power Law. The law was concerned only with
damaged caused by construction and lake formation. It did not address the engineering
aspects of design or downstream safety of dams.
In 1972, Congress passed the National Dam Safety Act (P.L. 92-367) that called for an
inventory of dams in the U.S. and one time inspection of dams that would result in loss of
life from a failure. In 1986, Congress enacted the Water Resources Development Act (P.L.
99-662). Title XII-Dam Safety authorized the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to
maintain and periodically update the inventory of dams. In 1988 funds were appropriated
for this effort. FEMA and USACE developed a Memorandum of Agreement where FEMA
assumed responsibility for maintaining and updating the inventory using the funds
authorized. The Water Resources Development Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-303) Section 215 reauthorized periodic update of the National Inventory of Dams (NID) by USACE and
continued a funding mechanism. For the 1998 update, the USACE resumed the lead
responsibility and worked with FEMA and other agencies. There are about 77,000 dams in
the inventory.
The 1996 Act does not apply to any such artificial barrier which is not in excess of six feet
in height, regardless of storage capacity, or which has a storage capacity at a maximum
water storage elevation not in excess of fifteen acre-feet, regardless of height (P.L. 92-367;
Dam Safety Act of 1972) unless such barrier, due to its location or other physical
characteristic, is likely to pose a significant threat to human life or property in the event of
its failure.” (P.L. 99-662, Water Resources Development Act of 1986).
131
Criteria for dams in the NID are as follows:
•
•
•
All high hazard potential classification dams
All significant hazard potential classification dams
Low hazard or undetermined potential classification dams which
• Equal or exceed 25 feet in height and which exceed 15 acre-feet in storage
• Equal or exceed 50 acre-feet storage and exceed 6 feet in height.
The NID has definitions for downstream hazard potential. These definitions are different
from the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Geological Survey and Resource
Assessment, Dam and Reservoir Safety Program. The NID definitions, as accepted by the
Interagency Committee on Dam Safety are as follows:
1. Low Hazard Potential
Dams assigned the low hazard potential classification are those where
failure or disoperation results in no probable loss of human life and low
economic and/or environmental losses. Losses are principally limited to
the owner’s property.
2. Significant Hazard Potential
Dams assigned the significant hazard potential classification are those
dams where failure or disoperation results in no probable loss of human
life but can cause economic loss, environmental change, disruption of
lifeline facilities, or impact other concerns. Significant hazard potential
classification dams are often located in predominantly rural or agricultural
areas but could be located in areas with population and significant
infrastructure.
3. High Hazard Potential
Dams assigned the high hazard potential classification are those where
failure or disoperation will probably cause loss of human life.
In September 1979, the first state legislation was passed, the Missouri House Bill 603
(called the Dam Safety Law) and became effective in September 1979. As a result of the
USACE inspection program in Missouri led the country in total number of unsafe dams.
House Bill 603 (now contained in Sections 236.400 through 236.500 of the revised statues
of Missouri) excluded regulation-dams less than 35 feet high, and allowed exemptions for
others used for agricultural purposes and those regulated by other state or federal
agencies. The law requires that a construction permit application be made to construct
new dams or modify, remove or alter existing dams. Owners of existing dams 35 feet or
more in height must obtain a registration permit and owners of new dams 35 feet or more
in height must obtain a safety permit after construction to operate the structures. All
132
regulated dams must be inspected periodically to assure that their continued operation
does not constitute a hazard to public safety, life and property. The Missouri Department
of Natural Resources, Geological Survey and Resource Assessment, Dam and Reservoir
Safety Program inspects the dams. The Dam and Reservoir Safety Program operates under
the general guidance of the Dam and Reservoir Safety Council. The Council is responsible
for the development of the rules and regulations and the determination of enforcement
procedures to make the law operative. The Governor appoints all seven council members.
There are around 4,000 dams in Missouri of which approximately 600 are regulated under
the Missouri law.
The Missouri Dam and Reservoir Safety Program is responsible for ensuring that all new
and existing non-agricultural, non-federal dams 35 feet or more in height meet minimum
safety standards. The program reviews engineering plans and specifications; conducts
hydrologic, hydraulic and structural analysis of dams; monitors construction of new dams
and modification of existing dams; performs safety inspections of existing dams; responds
to dam safety emergencies so that public safety, life and property are protected. The
program also prepares inundation mapping, which is provided to recorder of deeds for
each county showing areas impacted by dam failure.
Dam owners are solely responsible for the safety and the liability of the dam and for
financing its upkeep, upgrade and repair. While most infrastructure facilities (roads,
bridges, sewer systems, etc.) are owned by public entities, the majority of dams in the
United States are privately owned. Many different types of people and entities own and
operate dams. About 58 percent are privately owned. Local governments own and
operate the next largest number of dams, about 16 percent. State ownership is next with
about four percent; the federal government, public utilities and undetermined interests
each own smaller numbers of dams (5 percent).
Contact:
Chief Engineer
MO Department of Natural Resources
Dam and Reservoir Safety Program
PO Box 250
Rolla, MO 65402-0250
Phone: 573/368-2175
Fax: 573/368-2111
Web: http://www.dnr.state.mo.us/geology/damsft/damsfthp.htm
2003 Statistics:
Number of Missouri state-regulated dams: 638
Number of Missouri dams in National Inventory of Dams: 4,096
133
Characteristics
Characteristics
The characteristics of a dam failure, based on the International Commission of Large Dams
(ICOLD) include following the three major categories of dam failure: (1) overtopping by
flood; (2) foundation defects; and (3) piping. For earthen dams, the major reason for
failure is piping or seepage. For concrete dams, the major reasons for failure are associated
with foundations. Overtopping has been a significant cause of dam failure primarily in
cases where there was an inadequate spillway. Dam failures are most likely to happen for
one of five reasons:
•
•
•
•
•
Overtopping caused by water spilling over the top of a dam
Structural failure of materials used in dam construction
Cracking caused by movements like the natural settling of a dam
Inadequate maintenance and upkeep
Piping—when seepage through a dam is not properly filtered and soil particles
continue to progress and form sink holes in the dam
Likely Locations
The National Inventory of Dams, the State of Missouri, and FEMA have summarized the
status of dams in Missouri by hazard classification. Refer to Figure JF51 (located in the
back of the Technical Appendix) that shows the location of the high hazard dams in
Jefferson County, based on MDNR’s inventory. High hazard potential is defined as dams
that are more than 30 years old, have a high ratio of maximum storage to dam height
and/or high population density downstream. Table J47 identifies the national and state
inventory of dams. Table J48 lists Jefferson County high hazard potential dams.
TABLE
TABLE J47 SUMMARY STATUS OF MISSOURI DAMS BY HAZARD
CLASSIFICATION
NATIONAL INVENTORY
STATE REGULATED
Hazard Classification
Hazard Classification
Total
High
Significant
Low
Total
4095
607
912
2576
630
TABLE J48
High
440
Significant
127
Low
63
JEFFERSON COUNTY HIGH HAZARD DAMS
DAM NAME
RECEIVING RIVER
BUILT
LENGTH
Fondulac Dam
Glen Rose Lake Dam
Steeger Lake Dam
Lake Kearney Dam
Tr- Saline Creek
Tr to Rock Creek
Trib-Sugar Creek
Tr to Sugar Creek
1954
1962
1976
1800
0
0
0
0
DAM
HEIGHT
28
30
33
25
STATE
VOLUME REGULATED
296
N
46
N
58
N
16
N
134
TABLE J48
DAM NAME
RECEIVING RIVER
Tributary to Belew
Lake Tishomingo Dam Creek
Lake Wauwanoka
Dam
Dry Creek
Lake Montowese Dam Tr Big River
Lembeck Lake Dam
Whitehead Creek
Upper Valle Mines
Dam
Tr To Joachim Creek
Williams Dam
Tr-Joachim Creek
Lake Briarwood Dam Ball Branch
Spring Lake Dam
Tr Ball Branch
Hickory Hills Golf Club
Dam
Tr Joachim Creek
West Fork Plattin
Creek
Laguna Palma Dam
Kinnippi Lake Dam
Tr to Dry Creek
Tributary to Butcher
Anderson Lake Dam Branch.
Lake Adelle Dam
Tr-Skullbones Creek
Conservation Club
Lake Dam
Tr. to Mississippi River
River Cement
Tributary to
Company Dam
Mississippi Riv.
Dehner Lake Dam
Tr to Sandy Creek
Hideout Lake Dam
Tr to Sandy Creek
Lake Virginia Dam
Tr Joachim Creek
Leonard,Glen Dam
Tr-Heads Creek
Lake Ararat Dam
Heads Creek
Tributary of Sandy
Creek
Lake Lorraine Dam
Lake Bono Del Dam
Tr to Belew Creek
Tributary to Belew
Becker Lake Dam
Creek
Sweetwater Dam Noname 251
Tr-Dulin Creek
Clear Lake Dam
Tr to Joachim Creek
Lower Valle Mines
Dam
Tr to Joachim Creek
Liguori Lake Dam Tributary to Glaize
Nonane 255
Creek
Tributary to Rock
Creek
Autumn Lake Dam
Pine Lake Dam
Tr-Rock Creek
Weber Hill Terrace
Lake Dam
Tr-Bear Creek
Land Of Lakes Dam
Tr-Bear Creek
BUILT
LENGTH
DAM
HEIGHT
STATE
VOLUME REGULATED
1950
870
68
2376
Y
1942
1942
1958
1045
1000
0
50
54
26
2370
606
117
Y
Y
N
1958
1965
1970
1970
0
0
1400
0
34
26
57
20
142
93
1398
33
N
N
Y
N
1965
0
25
19
N
1947
1960
530
0
26
27
98
64
N
N
1958
1950
0
0
26
29
57
73
N
N
1951
0
30
135
N
1965
1958
1945
1954
1956
1960
605
0
0
0
0
0
57
29
33
25
29
34
300
27
69
176
75
248
Y
N
N
N
N
N
1957
1954
1100
0
46
27
400
35
Y
N
1965
0
28
80
N
1960
1961
0
0
29
34
74
144
N
N
1952
0
22
54
N
1950
0
25
28
N
1962
1961
0
0
32
33
81
77
N
N
1957
1946
519
0
36
30
117
26
Y
N
TABLE J48
135
RECEIVING RIVER
Tr-Sand Creek
Tr to Joachim Creek
Tr to Joachim Creek
Falling Rock Branch
BUILT
1964
1961
1961
1974
LENGTH
0
0
480
1200
DAM
HEIGHT
29
32
38
59
Trib-Isom Creek
1960
0
25
30
N
Tr-Isum Creek
1967
Tributary to La Barque
Glenwilfern Lake Dam Creek
1953
Cedar Hill Lake No. 3 Tributary to
Dam
Skullbones Creek
1949
Fisherman's Lake Dam Tr Ball Branch
1970
Dresser No. 10 Dam Tr Big River
1974
Atwood Lake Dam
Tr to Sandy Creek
1969
Sunrise Lake Upper
Dam
Tr to Joachim Creek
1961
Winter Haven Lake
Dam
Falling Rock Branch
1978
Spring Lake Dam
Tr-Falling Rock Branch 1976
Siesta Lake Dam
Tr to Fritz Creek
1957
Gwenmil Lake Dam
Tr to Isum Creek
1957
Francois Lake Dam
Tr to Mississippi River 1979
Highway 21 Lake Dam Trib-Heads Creek
1940
Dresser No. 11
Tr to Big River
1975
Silver Lake Dam
Ditch Creek
1981
Raintree Dam #2
Belew Creek Tributary 1989
Stonehenge #1 Dam Trib to Sugar Creek
1990
Brian Haskins Lake
Dam
1990
Ralph McNail Lake
Dam
1988
0
31
31
N
540
38
93
Y
0
0
765
0
28
34
100
27
60
167
1118
43
N
N
Y
N
360
37
175
Y
730
600
0
0
470
0
500
1600
1000
360
49
42
30
29
38
28
90
80
55
41
224
133
58
23
19
47
50
0
988
13
Y
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
0
22
0
N
0
24
0
N
DAM NAME
Tamarack Dam
Little Lake Dam
Sunrise Big Lake Dam
Summer Set Lake Dam
Deerwood Lake No.3
Dam
Bequette Dam Noname 262
STATE
VOLUME REGULATED
141
N
24
N
97
Y
1336
Y
Information on the extent of inundation resulting from dam failure is not available at this
time. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), Dam and Reservoir Safety
Program, has begun an effort to map and analyze potential inundation areas for all stateregulated dams in Missouri. This effort will be done on an county-by-county basis. An
inundation map is to be part of the Emergency Action Plan prepared by all dam owners. In
2010, MNDR will work with dam owners to understand their responsibilities and to
develop Emergency Action Plans. It is anticipated that inundation information should be
available for the next update.
For more information go to: http://www.damsafetyaction.org/about-eaps/mapping.php .
136
Type of Damage
When dams fail, the results can be catastrophic. Dams are innately hazardous structures.
Failure or disoperation can result in the release of the reservoir contents--this includes
water, mine wastes or agricultural refuse--causing negative impacts upstream or
downstream or at locations remote from the dam. Negative impacts of primary concern
are loss of human life, economic loss including property damage, lifeline disruption and
environmental damage.
While the definition varies from place to place, it generally means if failure of a high-hazard
dam occurs, there probably will be loss of life. I t must be emphasized that this
determination does not mean that these dams are in need of repair--these dams could be
in excellent condition or they could be in poor condition. "High-hazard" just reflects the
dam's potential for doing damage downstream should it fail. The current issue and debate
is over the increasing number of these high-hazard structures--not because more highhazard dams are being built, but that more development is occurring downstream. Dam
and reservoir safety regulators generally have no control over local zoning issues or
developers' property rights.
Some dams are considered to have a greater hazard potential than others. There are
approximately 10,000 state-regulated "high-hazard" potential dams in the U.S. "Highhazard" is a term used by a majority of state dam safety programs and federal agencies as
part of a three-pronged classification system used to determine how hazardous a dam's
failure might be to the downstream area. Historically, dams that failed had some
deficiency, as characterized above, which caused the failure. These dams are typically
termed "unsafe." Currently, there are about 2,000 "unsafe" dams in the U.S. There are
unsafe dams in almost every state. (A majority of states and federal agencies define an
"unsafe" dam as one that has been found to have deficiencies that leave it more susceptible
to failure.)
Thousands of people have been injured, many killed, and billions of dollars of property
damaged by dam failures in the United States. Dam failures at Lawrenceton in 1968,
Washington County in 1975, Fredericktown in 1977, and a near failure in Franklin County
underscored the problem of unsafe dams in Missouri in 1978.
Table F49 below summarized the frequency of dam failures in Missouri. Four dams failed
in ten years.
TABLE J49
137
RECENT DAM FAILURES IN MISSOURI
Community
Lawrenceton
Washington County
Frederickton
Franklin County (near failure)
Date
1968
1975
1977
1978
The intensity or strength of resultant damages from dam failures is dependent upon the
amount of water stored behind the dam as well as the weather. A large rain event can
exacerbate an already critical emergency situation. Damage from dam failures can be
catastrophic.
The cost of a dam failure is difficult to assess because flooding can affect large areas. Local
communities may be directly impacted due to building damage, injuries fatalities, lost
water supply, damaged transportation and infrastructure and lost recreational assets. The
extent of an owner’s liability will vary from state to state depending on the statutes and
case law precedents. The concept of strict liability imposes liability on a dam owner for
damages that occur regardless of the cause of failure. The alternative theory of negligence
considers the degree of care employed by the owner in constructing, operating and
maintaining a dam. Historically, courts have sought to compensate those injured by a dam
failure. When assessing liability, the standard of care exercised by an owner will be closely
examined and should be in proportion to the downstream hazards involved. Where the
risk is great, owners must be cautious. In many cases, dams regulated by the federal
government or a state dam safety program must be designed to withstand an
unprecedented flood or earthquake. Thousands of people have been injured, many killed,
and billions of dollars of property damaged by dam failures in the United States.
1972-Buffalo Creek Dam, West Virginia-125 dead, $400 million in damages.
1976-Teton Dam, Idaho-14 dead, over $1 billion in damages
1977-Laurel Run Dam, Pennsylvania-40 dead, $5.3 million in damages
1977-Kelly Barnes Dam, Georgia-39 dead, $30 million in damages
1982-Lawn Lake Dam, Colorado-3 dead, $25 million in damages
1988-Quail Creek Dam, Utah-$12 million in damages
The failures of Teton Dam and the Kelly Barnes Dam focused national attention to the
problem of unsafe dams. Dam failures, however, continue to occur with destructive and
sometimes fatal results.
138
Locations affected by dam failure will be low-lying areas that are below dams, near a creek,
stream or river valley. Residents, businesses and infrastructure in the path of the dam
waters can become quickly inundated and destroyed.
Seasonal Pattern
There is no seasonal pattern to dam failure. However, various climatic conditions and other
situations may result in dam failure including such elements of risk as natural phenomena
such as floods and landslides during wet weather seasons. These hazards threaten dam
structures and their surroundings. Floods that exceed the capacity of a dam's spillway and
then erode the dam or abutments are particularly hazardous, as is seismic activity that may
cause cracking or seepage. Similarly, debris from landslides may block a dam's spillway and
cause an overflow wave that erodes the abutments and ultimately weakens the structure.
Speed of Onset And/Or Existing
Existing Warning Systems
A few large Missouri dams have monitoring systems, emergency action plans and warning
systems. However, most dams in Missouri do not.
Map of Hazards
Refer to Figure J51in the back of the Technical Appendix that depicts the regulated dams in
the EWG planning region.
Information on the extent of inundation resulting from dam failure is not available at this
time. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), Dam and Reservoir Safety
Program, has begun an effort to map and analyze potential inundation areas for all stateregulated dams in Missouri. This effort will be done on an county-by-county basis. An
inundation map is to be part of the Emergency Action Plan prepared by all dam owners. In
2010, MNDR will work with dam owners to understand their responsibilities and to
develop Emergency Action Plans. It is anticipated that inundation information should be
available for the next update.
For more information go to: http://www.damsafetyaction.org/about-eaps/mapping.php .
Missouri Geological Survey and Resource Assessment Division has defined three levels of
hazard potential: high, significant and low hazard, as accepted by the Interagency
Committee on Dam Safety.
High:
Failure or disoperation will probably cause loss of human life
Significant:
Low:
139
Failure or disoperation results in no probable loss of human life, but can
cause economic loss, environmental damage, disruption of lifeline facilities,
or impact other concerns. Significant hazard potential classification dams
are often located in predominantly rural or agricultural areas but could be
located in areas with population and significant infrastructure.
Failure or disoperation results in no probably loss of human life and low
economic and/or environmental losses. Losses are principally limited to the
owner’s property.
According to MDNR’s Dam and Reservoir Safety Program, Jefferson County has 145 dams.
The mean dam height is 36 feet with the mean storage capacity of 247 acre-feet. Many
are less than 35 feet high and are not regulated by MDNR. People living in low-lying areas
downstream of the smaller unregulated dams, depending upon the safety of the dams may
be at risk if these dams should fail. Of the dams in Jefferson County, 60 are rated by
MDNR as “high risk”. Only nineteen are regulated by MDNR. The oldest dam on this list
was built in 1800, the most recent one was built in 1990.
The probably future severity of a dam failure for Jefferson County is below.
Hazard Level
High
Significant
Low
Future Probable Severity
Catastrophic
Critical
Negligible
Statement of Probable Risk/Likeliness
Risk/Likeliness Of Future Occurrence
According to the Dam and Reservoir Safety Program within MDNR, the likeliness of a future
occurrence of dam failure is very likely, due to the conditions of dams in Missouri. While
the definition varies from place to place, it generally means if failure of a high-hazard dam
occurs, there probably will be loss of life. It must be emphasized that this determination
does not mean that these dams are in need of repair--these dams could be in excellent
condition or they could be in poor condition. "High-hazard" just reflects the dam's potential
for doing damage downstream should it fail.
High-hazard potential dams exist in every state and affect the lives of thousands
downstream. The current issue and debate is over the increasing number of these highhazard structures--not because more high-hazard dams are being built, but that more
development is occurring downstream. Dam and reservoir safety regulators generally have
no control over local zoning issues or developers' property rights. So this issue continues to
worry regulators as the trend persists.
Hazard
azard Level
Probable Risk
High
Significant
Likely
Likely
140
Low
Likely
Statement Of Next Disaster’s Likely Adverse Impact On Community
The impact on the downstream community, dependent upon what is downstream could
be very serious. The adverse impacts of future dam failures affecting Jefferson County at
the high hazard level are shown below. Intersecting almost all the issues above is the issue
of public education about dams. The ordinary citizen is unaware that the lakes on which
they use are only there because of manmade dams. Developers build in dam break flood
inundation areas unaware of the potential that an upstream dam has, to cause devastation
should it fail. Even if everyone understands and are aware of dams, they still can be overly
confident in the infallibility of these manmade structures. Living in dam break flood-prone
areas is a risk. Many dam owners do not realize their responsibility and liability toward the
downstream public and environment.
Life
Catastrophic
Property
Catastrophic
Emotional
Catastrophic
Financial
Catastrophic
Comments
None
Life
Negligible
Property
Negligible
Emotional
Negligible
Financial
Negligible
Comments None
Recommendation
Implementation of dam safety actions with dam owners and jurisdictions downstream.
141
Wildland Fires Hazard Profile
Description
The term wildfire is defined as "a highly destructive, uncontrollable fire." During a wildfire,
the fire produces the same amount of energy in 10 minutes as a nuclear bomb.
FIGURE J52
Fires that burn forest plants can be classified in three ways: ground
fires, surface fires, and crown fires. Ground fires burn the humus
layer of the forest floor, surface fires burn forest undergrowth and
surface litter, and crown fires advance through the tops of trees.
Atmospheric factors such as temperature, humidity, and rainfall
are important factors in determining the combustibility of a given
forest. See Figure J52.
Humans, either through negligence, accident, or intentional arson,
have caused approximately 90 percent of all wildfires in the last
decade in the U.S. Accidental and negligent acts include
unattended campfires, sparks, burning debris, and irresponsibly
discarded cigarettes. Refer to Table 52 below. The remaining 10
percent of fires are mostly caused by lightning, but may also be
caused by other acts-of-nature such as volcanic eruptions or
earthquakes.
During March and April 2000 Missouri sustained devastating fire damage to thousands of
acres resulting from wildland fires. Warm temperatures and low humidity increased the
occurrence and fueled the flames scorching many areas of the state. In an attempt to raise
the public’s awareness of the hazardous situations, the Governor and the State Fire
Marshal issued a statewide voluntary burn ban, urging citizens to refrain from conducting
any open burning. In addition, the Missouri Department of Conservation and U.S. Forestry
Service issued burn bans throughout state and federally owned land.
TABLE J50
REASONS
REASONS FOR FIRES IN MISSOURI
Lightning
Camping
Smoking
>1%
Debris Burning
Arson
58%
Equipment Use
Railroads
Children
3%
Miscellaneous Causes
12%
1%
4%
20%
1%
1%
142
The Missouri Division of Fire Safety has urged that fire service agencies and local
governments begin planning for this situation by adopting a local ordinance to prohibit
open burning during a high fire hazard time period. Missouri statutes do not allow the
state to issue a MANDATORY burn ban at the state level.
One responsibility of the Forestry Division is protecting state and private land from the
destructive effects of wildfires. The Forestry Division works closely with rural fire
departments to assist with fire suppression activities. Nearly 900 rural fire departments
have mutual aide agreements with the division. Forestry personnel provide training,
equipment and grants to rural fire departments to help them become a more effective firefighting team.
Statutory authority is given to fire protection districts via RSMo 321.220 (12) to "adopt and
amend bylaws, fire protection and fire prevention ordinances, …". However, coordination
with the county prosecuting attorney’s office is strongly recommended before
implementing such an ordinance to ensure enforcement ability. Voluntary fire service
associations should also coordinate similar efforts at the local level to adopt open burning
laws.
Not only is the land affected, but also personnel throughout many fire service agencies are
pushed to their limit battling these types of fires. These situations place Missouri citizens
and responding fire fighters at risk.
Fire danger is based upon the burning index (BI). The burning index takes into account the
fuel moisture, relative humidity, wind speed, temperature and recent precipitation. The
burning index is the basis for fire suppression crew staffing levels. The vegetative types and
fuel types are different than in the western U.S. As compared to the western U.S., with the
humid climate of the Midwest, fuel decomposes much faster. As a result of this, the
wildfires in Missouri are rare and are nearly not as severe as the fires that the western states
experiences.
Characteristics
Fires in the counties of Franklin, Jefferson, St. Louis City, St. Louis and St. Charles Counties
are different than those in the West as described above; Missouri does not have large
conflagrations and crown fires, where embers from the fire are thrown a long way from
the fire that results in fire ignition of other dry areas. Damage may result in the burning of
outbuildings, possibly a home and nearby grassy areas. Missouri fires consist of grassy
areas, leaves, ground letter, plants, shrubs, and trees.. However, as new housing
development in forested rural areas, the likelihood of fires will increase, especially in
Jefferson County.
143
Likely Locations
Fires typically occur in highway medians and shoulders, near homes and outbuildings.
People who live at the edge of the woods and vegetative debris, especially in Jefferson
County are at a higher risk of having a fire affect their homes and property.
Type of Damage
Damage may result in the burning of outbuildings, maybe a home. Missouri does not have
large crown fires like the West has, where embers from the fire are thrown a long way
results in fire ignition of other dry areas. Missouri Department of Conservation and Public
Safety recommend that homes in these types of areas should not be built with cedar shake
shingles. Typically homes catch on fire when dry brush, bushes and trees are very close to
the house.
In accordance with Missouri Statute 254.230 and 321.220(12), the state is currently
setting up a central fire reporting system. In the past, it was the responsibility of volunteer,
local and district fire departments are supposed to report wildland fires to the state.
However, this is rarely done. MDC is preparing an online central reporting system that will
keep track of fires. As a result, an historical summary of fires was impossible due to the
way in which MDC currently has their records stored.
No Missouri fires are listed among the significant wildfires in the U.S. since 1825. Fires
covering more than 300 acres are considered large in Missouri. Based on limited MDC
data, it was reported that during March and April 2000 all of Missouri sustained
devastating fire damage to thousands of acres resulting from wildland fires. Each year,
about 3,700 wildfires burn more than 55,000 acres of forest and grassland. Missouri's
wildfire season is in the spring and fall, unlike the Western states that have a summer fire
season. Dead vegetation, combined with the low humidities and high winds typical of
these seasons, makes wildfire risk greater at these times.
According to the MDC-Forestry Office, in the past twenty years, there have been only about
five fires in the State of Missouri that MDC has been involved with in the St. Louis
Metropolitan area. For the most part the rural fire departments fight their own fires.
Some areas of land are not covered even by volunteer fire departments. In this event, the
MDC will cover fires in these areas. Missouri has very few fires that occur as a result from
lightening. Most fires result from arson, campers and from residents that burn trash.
144
Frequency Of Occurrence
Due to the timing factor and the stage of the MDC database development, frequency of
occurrences was not obtained. Generally, occurrences of fires are based on the weather,
humidity and available fuel.
Intensity Or Strength
Fires that due occur are neither intense nor strong as a result of the weather and fuel
conditions found in Missouri, as compared to the fires in the West.
Due to the timing factor and the stage of the MDC database development, specific
information on lives lost, injuries, property damage and economic losses was not obtained.
Fires typically occur in highway medians and shoulders, near homes and outbuildings.
People who live at the edge of the woods and vegetative debris, especially in Jefferson
County are at a higher risk of having a fire affect their homes and property.
Seasonal Pattern
The season for wildfires in Missouri is between the end of February and the end of April, or
whenever the environment is dry from lack of rain. Due to the lack of moisture throughout
many areas Missouri, from late winter (February) through spring (May) often times the
conditions are favorable for the high risk of wildland fires.
Speed Of Onset And /Or Existing Warning Systems
Systems
The Department of Conservation relies upon the news media to help warn citizens of high
fire danger. A set of standardized fire danger adjectives has been developed for fire
warnings. These adjectives include a brief description of burning conditions, open burning
suggestions for homeowners and fire crew staffing levels. Residents should always check
with their local fire department or District Forester for local burning conditions.
Map Of Hazards
Refer to Figure J53 (located in the back of the Technical Appendix) for a map that depicts
areas of potential wildfire hazard. These would include those areas of rural homes near
forested areas.
145
Location
Buffer areas
Forests
Grassy areas
Future Probable Severity
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
Statement Of Probable Risk/Likeliness Of Future Occurrence
There is a somewhat greater likelihood of future occurrences in Jefferson County as a result
of the influx of greater numbers of residents moving into rural areas where the homes are
close to forested areas and vegetative debris. Dry weather, available fuel and fires are
sporadic phenomena that occur throughout the United States. Frequency, intensity, and
duration of these conditions vary drastically from year to year.
Based upon Jefferson County’s lack of a great number of wildfires, a conflagration similar
to those out West is unlikely, especially in light of the fact that the humidity and fuel
source is not available. Fires will possibly occur, but on a much smaller scale. These will
consist of grass fires along side roads and railroad tracks and fires near homes in rural
areas. The following fire danger index used by MDC will be the criteria by which an
evaluation of probable risk for Jefferson County will be developed.
Level
Probable Risk of Occurrence
Low Fire Danger
Possible
Moderate Fire Danger
Possible
High Fire Danger
Unlikely
Extreme Fire Danger
Unlikely
Statement Of Next Disaster’s Likely Adverse Impact On Community
Missouri Department of Conservation does not believe that Missouri, much less the EWG
planning region as being included in a wildland fire disaster category. It may be a disaster
to an individual, but it is not a disaster to a community. There is a somewhat greater
likelihood of future occurrences in Jefferson County as a result of the influx of greater
numbers of residents moving into rural areas where the homes are close to woods and
vegetative debris.
Life
Negligible
Property
Negligible
Emotional
Negligible
Financial
Negligible
146
Life
Negligible
Property
Negligible
Emotional
Negligible
Financial
Negligible
Recommendation
Missouri Department of Conservation and Jefferson County Fire Districts to develop an
education outreach program for communities that have a greater chance of future fires.
MDC has an ongoing educational effort in certain at risk areas. This effort includes visiting
schools, local fairs and other events to educate and pass out fire prevention pamphlets in
terms of seasonal or broad fire prevention approach. Establishing local ordinances to
prohibit open burning during hazardous conditions is a proactive approach and will help
reduce the number of wildland fires in the future.
MultiMulti-Jurisdictional Risk Assessment
Assessment In Jefferson County and Communities
Jefferson County hazards tend to be either geographically random or regional in nature.
Some areas of the County have experienced affects from some tornadoes and localized
flash flooding. The historic floods along the Mississippi River, especially the 1993 flood,
greatly impacted the County. The County is also susceptible to impacts from earthquakes
due to the proximity to the New Madrid Fault Zone, density of population, condition of the
buildings, and geological environment. The County has experienced only scattered damage
from winter storms, thunderstorms, and drought.
Certain incorporated communities within Jefferson County that exhibit a unique flooding
hazard profile, due to its location on the Mississippi and Meramec River floodplains include
the following jurisdictions:
Arnold
Byrnes Mill
Cedar Hill Lakes
Crystal City
DeSoto
Festus
Herculaneum
Kimmswick
Pevely
Scotsdale
Consequences from riverine and flash flooding could be catastrophic in terms of safety of
lives and property. Riverine flooding is considered a primary hazard for the County.
Significant Mississippi River flooding inundated the above communities in July 1947, July
1951, August 1993, and May 1995. Significant Meramec River flooding also inundated
147
Byrnes Mill and Arnold in May 1973, December 1982, August 1993, and April 1994.
During the 1993 flood, in Jefferson County, $1,527,199 in public assistance was paid to
claimants as a result of flood damage. In one community, the wastewater treatment plant
was inundated by floodwaters; the community is currently constructing a levee and
floodwall to protect the new infrastructure. Significant flash flooding occurred in the
Meramec, Bourbeuse and Big River basins from an intense rainfall on May 7, 2000. The
flooding resulted in two deaths, extensive damage to structures, roads and bridges and
major economic losses from communities and businesses throughout the area.
Communities including Byrnes Mill and Eureka (St. Louis County) were overwhelmed by the
deluge that consisted of a thunderstorm that delivered up 15 inches of rain in 13 hours. A
Federal Disaster declaration was made (DR-1328); damages and losses incurred totaled
$483,511.22 in individual assistance, $473,000 in small business loans, and $574,002.26
in public assistance. In 2003, flash flooding and a severe tornado resulted in inundation,
one death and property storm damage in DeSoto with an estimated at $1 million dollars in
damage.
Consequences from earthquakes (and cascading hazards) could also be catastrophic in
terms of human lives and property in the event of a larger magnitude earthquake (in the
range of 6.7 to 8.6). The nearby New Madrid Fault Zone has the potential to produce an
earthquake of this magnitude and cause damage similar to the earthquake that struck the
San Francisco Bay region during the World Series. The nearby the Wabash Valley Fault and
the fault zones in the vicinity of Farmington (including Big River Fault and the St. Genevieve
Fault Zone) are also capable of producing lesser magnitude earthquakes. The earthquake
hazard is also considered a primary hazard. Certain regions within the County are more
susceptible to greater damage from earthquakes due to their position within the soil
liquefaction zone, as identified by Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Geological
Survey Resource Assessment Division, Earthquake Hazards Map of the St. Louis Metro Area.
Areas outside of the soil liquefaction zone will most likely be impacted from an earthquake,
but probably to a lesser degree. These incorporated communities within Jefferson County
that exhibit a unique earthquake hazard profile, due to its location on the Mississippi and
Meramec River floodplains include the following jurisdictions:
Arnold
Byrnes Mill
Cedar Hill Lakes
Crystal City
DeSoto
Festus
Herculaneum
Kimmswick
Pevely
Scotsdale
Refer to Figure J54 (located in the back of the Technical Appendix), which identifies the
combined hazards for Jefferson County.
148
Vulnerability Assessment Worksheets for Jefferson County are located in the back of the
Technical Appendix. These worksheets represent the loss estimates for each hazard
affecting the county, including the communities listed above.
Loss estimates were calculated using a combination of information found below. Rough
economic estimates were also included.
•
The number of buildings was based on the recorded number of buildings from the
assessor’s database.
•
Values of buildings represent the market value, rather than the dollar loss likely to
result from a given event. Building damages could range from minimal to total
devastation.
•
The number of people was derived from the 2000 U.S. Census, EWG, and Office of
Social and Economic Development (OSEDA) databases.
•
Dollar figures were based on county assessor’s data and Saylor Construction Cost
Index data.
•
Sources for these worksheets include the Missouri Department of Elementary and
Secondary Education, Economic Development, Missouri Department of
Conservation, Missouri Office of Economic Data Analysis; county assessor’s data,
Saylor Construction Cost Index, and EWG databases.
•
Projected figures were calculated using the above numbers and factoring in
population projection percentages from the community profile.
For purposes of this assessment, “Developed Land” and “Undeveloped Land” categories
EWG used the definition of the National Resources Conservation Service’s National
Resources Inventory, 2001 (NRI).
WORKSHEETS
JEFFERSON COUNTY HAZARD ANALYSIS NARRATIVE WORKSHEETS
JEFFERSON COUNTY HAZARD
HAZARD PROFILE WORKSHEETS
JEFFERSON COUNTY RISK ASSESSMENT WORKSHEETS
JEFFERSON COUNTY RISK INDEX WORKSHEETS
JEFFERSON COUNTY VULNERABILITY WORKSHEETS
Municipality and School District Risk Analysis/Mitigation Measure(s)/
Benefit Cost Review can be found in Volume
Volume 2
149
150
HAZARD ANALYSIS NARRATIVE
Hazard: Dam Failure
Description of Hazard (Type of hazard, pathways/areas likely affected, type of damage,
etc.)
A dam failure is defined as structural failure of materials used in dam construction,
inadequate maintenance, overtopping by flood, foundation defects and piping/cracking
caused by movements from settling of dam.
Damage occurs downstream from a failing dam to lives of residents and their property,
businesses, infrastructure. Depending upon volume of water released, damage could be
catastrophic in a limited area.
Historical Statistics (Frequency, strength, # of lives lost, # of injuries, economic losses, etc.)
Based on the National Dam Inventory maintained by the USCOE, Missouri has 607
dams that are considered a high hazard. Historic dam failures have occurred just
south of the EWGCC region near Lawrenceton in 1968 (Ste. Genevieve County),
Washington County in 1975, in Fredericktown in 1968 (Madison County) and a near
failure in Franklin County in 1978. The EWGCC region has the largest number of
dams in Missouri. No lives have been lost as a result of these dam failures. No data
is available on the number of injuries or economic losses as a result of these failures.
Statement of Future Probable Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible). Severity
of future dam failures will be catastrophic in the path of the released waters. For
topographically higher areas surrounding the failed dam, negligible impacts will occur.
Statement of Probable Risk (Likeliness of future occurrence- (Highly
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely). According to Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Dam
and Reservoir Safety Program, it is likely that future occurrences of dam failures will occur
based on the poor conditions of the existing dams.
(Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible). Severity of future dam failures will be catastrophic
in the path of the released waters. For topographically higher areas surrounding the failed
dam, negligible impacts will occur.
Without mitigation measures: Life
Property
Emotional
Financial
Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic Catastrophic
Comments:
With mitigation measures:
Life
Property
Emotional
Financial
Negligible Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
151
Comments:
Recommendation: EWGCC Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee to initiate mitigation
activity to convince legislators to provide adequate funding to staff the Dam and Reservoir
Safety Program for inspections, permit issuance in order to protect human life and property.
152
Hazard: Drought
etc.) Drought is defined as the deficiency of precipitation over an extended period of time,
usually a season or more; resulting in extensive damage to crops. Meteorological drought is
the expression of precipitation’s departure from normal over some time period. Agricultural
drought occurs when there isn’t enough soil moisture to meet the needs of a particular
crop at a particular time. Hydrologic drought refers to the deficiencies in surface and
subsurface water supplies; measured as stream flow, lake and groundwater levels.
Socioeconomic drought occurs when physical water shortage starts to affect people.
Drought characteristics include economic, social and environmental. The amount of
damage depends on 1). The length/severity of the drought, 2). Damage can range from very
slight to total.
Historical Statistics (Frequency, strength, # of lives lost, # of injuries, economic losses,
etc.) Droughts are classified according to various classifications. The National Drought
Mitigation Center created a drought map that uses the Palmer Index, Crop Moisture Index,
Standardized Precipitation Indices, Percent of Normal Rainflow, Daily Streamflow,
Snowpack, Soil Moisture, Vegetative Index and Fire Danger Classifications. According to
The Missouri Climate Center at UMC, the Drought Monitor map is the drought indicator of
choice and is superior to the Palmer Index. The Palmer Index is good for past droughts.
However, the NDMC drought monitor map is the best tool to use.
The EWGCC planning region is divided into two climate divisions (CD): St. Louis City, St.
Louis, St. Charles, and Franklin counties are within CD #2. Jefferson County is located in
CD #5. According to the Missouri Climate Center, the worst droughts on record to affect
CD#2 occurred in 1901-1902, 1913-14, 1930-31, 1934, 1936, 1940-41, 1953-56, 196364, 1980-81, 1988-89 and 1999-2000. Droughts on record that affected CD#5 occurred
in 1900-09, 1940-49, 1950-59, 1964-66 and 1980. In addition, MDNR divided the state
into three regions, prioritized according to drought susceptibility, slight, moderate and
severe. The EWGCC region is within all three regions. St. Louis city and northern Jefferson
County is in region C (high susceptibility). East half of St. Chalres County and northern
portions (floodplain areas) of St. Louis and Franklin Counties are within Region A (slight
susceptibility). The western half of St. Charles County is included in Region B (moderate
susceptibility).
On average, drought costs the U.S. economy about $7-$9 billion a year according to the
National Drought Mitigation Center. Losses from the drought from 1988 to 1989 are
estimated to have cost $39 billion dollars.
Statement of Future Probable Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)Catastrophic to limited.
Statement of Probable Risk (Likeliness of future occurrence-Highly
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely)- Likely
153
(Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)-Catastrophic to limited
Without Mitigation Measures: Life
Property
Negligible Limited
Emotional
Limited
Financial
Critical
Comments:
Life
Limited
Property
Limited
Emotional
Limite
Limited
Financial
Limited
Comments
Recommendations:
That the County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee
initiate a mitigation activity to convince state and local government, and county residents to
help reduce the impacts caused by droughts, by implementing the state drought plan.
154
Hazard: Earthquake
etc.)
The characteristics of earthquakes include the rolling or shaking of the ground surface,
landslides, liquefaction and amplification. The severity depends on several factors including
soil/slope conditions, closeness to the fault, earthquake magnitude and type of earthquake.
Any person or structure that is present in the land closest to the epicenter will be most
severely affected. Persons or structures farther away from the epicenter will be less severely
affected, dependent upon the geology of the area. The amount of damage depends on 1).
The intensity/strength of the earthquake, 2). The proximity of the earthquake, 3). The
strength/construction of the structure, 4). How well a person is sheltered. Damage can
range from very slight to total.
Historical
etc.)
Since 1811 there have been 16 earthquakes affecting the EWGCC ranging in magnitude
from 2.4 to 8.2 on the Richter scale. The earthquakes have caused multiple deaths,
.injuries, and damaged properties in the past. The Center for Earthquake Studies estimated
that from a 7.6 scale earthquake, there will be over 1400 deaths, and $2.5 million dollars in
property damage and $500K in utility damage. This data excludes St. Charles and Franklin
Counties due to unavailability.
Statement of Future Probable Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)
Catastrophic
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely)
Possible
(Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)-Catastrophic
The Center for Earthquake Studies estimated that from a 7.6 scale earthquake, there will be
over 1400 deaths, and $2.5 million dollars in property damage and $500K in utility
damage. This data excludes St. Charles and Franklin Counties due to unavailability.
Property
Emotional
Catastrophic Catastrophic
Catastrophic Catastrophic
Life
Limited
Property
Limited
Emotional
Critical
Financial
Catastrophic
Financial
Limited
155
Recommendation: The County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee to initiate a
mitigation activity to convince various government agencies, businesses, county
residents to retrofit buildings/infrastructure, businesses and homes in earthquake
prone areas to help reduce the loss of life caused by earthquakes.
156
Hazard: Flood
etc.) A flood is defined as an overflow or inundation that comes from a river or other
body of water or causes or threatens damage, or any relatively high streamflow that
overtops the natural or artificial banks in any reach of stream. The National Flood Insurance
Program defines a flood as a general and temporary condition of partial or complete
inundation of two or more acres of normally dry land or of two or more properties from
inland waters, unusual and rapid accumulation or runoff of waters from any source or a
mudflow. Floods are most likely to occur in the spring, but can occur in any time of the
year. Any person or structure that is present in the path of floodwaters as described above
could be damaged. Damage is most likely to occur within the flood insurance rate map
designated 100 and 500-year areas. The amount of damage depends on 1). The
intensity/strength of the flood, 2). The proximity of the flood to the person/structure.
Damage can range from very slight to total. Hazards range from death to total property
damage from floodwaters.
etc.) The East-West Gateway Coordinating Council planning region has many river and
small tributaries in both the unincorporated and incorporated areas that are susceptible to
flooding. Catastrophic floods have occurred in the EWGCC region in 1927, 1951, 1973,
1979, 1982, 1984, 1986, 1993, 1994, 1994, 1995, 1998, 1999 and 2000. In the
Chesterfield Valley of St. Louis County alone, damage from the 1993 flood totaled $200
million. (In the 1993 flood approximately $21 billion dollars in damage and costs and 48
deaths resulted (NOAA.) Multiple lives have been lost from flooding; 49 deaths were
recorded from the 1993 Flood.
Statement of Future
Future Probable Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible) Critical
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely)-Highly Likely to occur in future
Statement of Next Disaster’s Likely Adverse Impact
Impact on the Community
(Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)
Catastrophic
Life
Limited
Property
Catastrophic
Property
Limited
Emotional
Catastrophic
Emotional
Limited
Financial
Catastrophic
Financial
Limited
157
Recommendation: The County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee to initiate a
mitigation activity to convince county residents to build, move to higher ground or
to retrofit homes in flood prone areas to help reduce the loss of life caused by
floods.
158
Hazard: Heat Wave
etc.) A heat wave is defined as a prolonged period of excessive heat and humidity (three
consecutive days of 90 degrees plus, Fahrenheit). This usually occurs in June, July and
August. This can result in heat related deaths and damage to infrastructure. The amount of
damage depends on 1). The intensity/length of the heat wave, 2). How well a person is
sheltered.
etc.)
Heat wave are likely to occur as frequently as in past history, or between 10 and
100% in the next 10 years. In 1966, 246 individuals were reported to have died as
a result of the heat in the St. Louis metropolitan area. St. Louis experienced heat
waves in 1993, 1988, 1995, without experiencing death rates close to the total of
113 in 1980. A total of 134 heat related deaths have occurred in St. Louis City from
1989 through 2003. Thirty-nine deaths in this same time period occurred in St.
Louis County. No information was available for the other counties. St. Louis ranks
in the top five in the U.S. for heat related deaths.
Statement of Future Probable Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)
Negligible to catastrophic dependent upon the location within the EWGCC
region. The EWGCC region has a history of having multiple heat related
deaths.
Statement of Probable
Probable Risk (Likeliness of future occurrence- (Highly
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely). It is highly likely that heat waves will occur in the future.
(Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible). Catastrophic
Catastrophic
Life
Limited/Critical
Property
Critical
Property
Negligible
Emotional
Catastrophic
Emotional
Limited
Financial
Limited
Financial
Negligible
Recommendation: The EWGCC Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee will support
continuation of mitigation activity Operation Weather Survival that will assist at risk
residents during heat waves in the region.
159
Hazard: Tornadoes/Severe Storms (Downbursts, Lightening, Hail,
Hail, Heavy Rains,
Wind)
etc.) Tornadoes are cyclical windstorms or violently rotating column of air. Accompanying
storm activities include severe thunder/electrical storms, down-bursts, straight-line winds,
lightning, hail and heavy rain. The average forward speed of a tornado is about 30 m.p.h.
but may vary from nearly stationary to 70 m.p.h. The average pathway may vary in any
direction, but the average tornado moves from southwest to northeast. Tornadoes are
most likely to occur between 3:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. but may ensue at any hour of the
day. Any person or structure at any location could be damaged by a tornado. The amount
of damage depends on 1). The strength of the tornado, 2) the tornado’s proximity to the
person/structure, 3) the strength the structure, 4) how well a person is sheltered. Damage
can range fro very slight to total. On average, tornadoes stay on the ground 30 minutes,
covers 15 miles, is up to 300 years wide, although NOAA determined that the mean path
length was 2.27 miles long and .14 square mile path in length. Most storms move from
southwest to northeast and occur between 3 and 9 in the afternoon hours in the spring
months.
etc.) Tornadoes are classified according to the F-scale (developed by Dr. Theodore Fujita).
The F-scale ranks tornadoes according to its wind speed based on the severity of damage it
caused. On May 27, 1896, 18 tornadoes struck St. Louis, resulting in 306 deaths and $15
million dollars in damages. On May 9, 1927 two tornadoes struck St. Louis, the first killing
306 people and causing $13 million in damages (between Missouri and Illinois). The
second tornado killed 79 people and resulted in $23 million in damages. In November 1988
a tornado struck the St. Charles community. Businesses were able to obtain Small Business
Loans to recover from this disaster. Since 1950, St. Louis County has had 23 tornadoes, St.
Charles has had 24, St. Louis City has had 3, Jefferson County has had 23 and Franklin has
had 16 tornadoes. Since 1950, 11 deaths in St. Louis City have resulted from tornadoes. In
this same period for St. Louis County, 13 deaths have resulted, one death in Jefferson
County, and none in St. Charles and Franklin Counties.
F-SCALE SPEED IN M.P.H.
FO
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
40-72
73-112
113-157
158-206
207-260
261-318
COUNTY TORNADOES BY F-SCALE
SINCE 1950?
F0
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
16 %
32
32
14
5
0
160
Statement of Future Probable Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)Catastrophic
FO
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
SINCE 1950?
40-72
73-112
113-157
158-206
207-260
261-318
F0
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
16%
32
32
14
5
0
Statement of Probable Risk (Likeliness of future occurrence-(Highly
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely)- highly likely
FO
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
SINCE 1950?
40-72
73-112
113-157
158-206
207-260
261-318
F0
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
16%
32
32
14
5
0
(Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)-Catastrophic
Emotional
Financial
Catastrophic
Catastrophic
Catastrophic
Life
Property
Emotional
Limited
Limted
Catastrophic
Recommendations:
Property
Limited
Limited
Financial
Limited
That the County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee
initiate a mitigation activity to convince county residents to construct Tornado Saferooms to
help reduce the loss of life caused by tornadoes.
161
Hazard: Wildland Fire
etc.)
A wildland fire is defined as any nonstructure fire, other than prescribed fire, that
occurs in the wildland. Wildland fires impact areas where a common urban/forest
boundary, prairie and grassland is present. The line, area or zone where structures
and other human development meet or intermingle with undeveloped wildland or
vegetative fuels. The type of damage depends on the size of the fire. Typically in
the EWGCC region, wildland fires are not a concern. Damage may be a partially
burned outbuilding.
etc.)
Fires usually occur in the spring and fall seasons. According to Missouri Department
of Conservation, Forestry staff, in the past 20 years, approximately 4 to 5 fires have
erupted in the EWGCC region. Most firefighting work in Missouri is done in
regions that have large stands of trees and as support to fires in the western United
States.
Statement of Future Probable Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible)Negligible
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely)-Possible
Negligible
Life
Negligible
Property
Negligible
Property
Negligible
Emotional
Negligible
Emotional
Negligible
Financial
Negligible
Financial
Negligible
Recommendation: The EWGCC Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee recommends
mitigation activity to convince county residents to help reduce the damage to property and
the potential loss of life caused by wildfires.
162
Hazard: Severe Winter Weather
etc.) Severe winter weather is defined as sleet, freezing rain, and heavy snow. This can be
accompanied by strong winds creating blizzard conditions, severe drifting and dangerous
wind chill. Ice storms cause significant hazards as well. Communications and power can be
disrupted for days, resulting in residents using alternate fuel sources that are likely to start
fires. Strong winds with intense storms and cold fronts knock down trees, utility poles,
power lines. Extreme cold often accompanies a winter storm in its wake. Winter weather
can result in injuries, death, and property damage. Prolonged exposure to cold can cause
frostbite, hypothermia can become life-threatening. The average pathway may vary in any
direction, but the average winter storm moves from west to east. Winter storms are most
likely to occur in November through February but may ensue from October through April.
Any person or structure at any location could be damaged by a winter storm.
etc.) Economic losses are difficult to measure. Local governments, home and business
owners can be faced with spending millions of dollars for snow removal, restoration of
services, debris removal and landfill hauling. NOAA weather indicates that the Missouri
counties north of the Missouri River receive an average snowfall of 18-22 inches, and
counties south of the river receive an average of 8-12 inches. Historical statistics for the
EWGCC include the winter storm in January 1994 that resulted in temperatures dropping to
–20 F degrees below zero, with wind chills to –50 degrees F below zero. In January 1977,
the EWGCC region received the maximum snowfall for the area at 23.9 inches of snow with
temperatures hovering around –14 degrees F below zero. Also in January 1982, the
EWGCC region received a 24 maximum snowfall of 13.9 inches with temperatures around –
15 degrees F below zero. In February 1914, the EWGCC received the maximum snowfall for
the area for this month at 23.5 inches of snow. In December 1973, the EWGCC region
received its maximum snowfall for the area for this month at 26.3 inches. The coldest
December on record was 1983 with temperature average of 20.5 degrees F. Multiple
homes and businesses had water pipes break, people were admitted to hospitals for
hypothermia/frostbite and schools were closed.
Statement of Future Probable Severity (Catastrophic/Critical/Limited/Negligible). Ice
storms could be limited to catastrophic
Statement of Probable Risk (Likeliness of future occurrence-(Highly
Likely/Likely/Possible/Unlikely) Winter/ice storms are likely to occur in the future.
Critical
Life
Limited
163
Property
Critical
Property
Limited
Emotional
Critical
Emotional
Limited
Financial
Critical
Financial
Limited
Recommendations: That the County Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee initiate a
mitigation activity to convince county local governments, residents to help reduce the loss
of life and property damage caused by winter storms by preparing for the storms and
adhering to NOAA winter storm weather warnings.
164
JEFFERSON COUNTY EARTHQUAKE HAZARD PROFILE WORKSHEET
EARTHQUAKES
EARTHQUAKES
POTENTIAL MAGNITUDE (Percentage of jurisdiction that can be affected):
X
_
_
_
Catastrophic:
Catastrophic More than 50%
Critical: 25% to 50%
Limited: 10 to 25%
Negligible: Less than 10%
FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE:
_
_
X
_
Highly Likely: Near 100% probability in next year
Likely: Between 10 and 100% probability in next year, or at least one chance in 10
years
Possible: Between 1 and 10% probability in next year or at least one chance in next
100 years..
Unlikely: Less than 1% probability in next 100 years
SEASONAL
SEASONAL PATTERN:
There is no known relationship between the occurrence of earthquakes and seasonal
weather patterns.
AREAS LIKELY TO BE AFFECTED MOST (BY SECTOR):
All areas in county(s) will be affected due to the widespread nature of earthquakes. Those
counties farther south (Jefferson, southern, central St. Louis County and City will most likely
be impacted more than farther counties north and west (Franklin and St. Charles) due to
the closer proximity to the New Madrid Fault zone.
PROBABLE DURATION:
Initial earthquakes and subsequent aftershocks have been known to last in the range of
three or more months (1811-1812 New Madrid Earthquake).
POTENTIAL SPEED OF ONSET
(Probable amount of warning time)
X
Minimal (or no) warning
_
6 to 12 hours warning
_
_
More than 24 hours warning
EXISTING WARNING SYSTEMS:
None
COMPLETE VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS: Based on a Mercalli Scale Level VII earthquake, with
an estimated damage in 80% of the county, it was estimated that in the developed
165
portions of the county approximately 129,000 people would be impacted, 30,000
buildings affected valued at $3 billion dollars. Projected risk for undeveloped areas: 54,450
persons in 21,000 buildings valued at $1.5 billion dollars.
COMMUNITIES: Arnold, Byrnes Mill, Cedar Hill Lakes, Crystal City, DeSoto, Festus,
Herculaneum, Kimmswick, Pevely, Scotsdale.
166
FLOOD HAZARD PROFILE WORKSHEET
FLOOD HAZARD
COMMUNITIES: Arnold, Byrnes Mill, Cedar Hill Lakes, Crystal City, DeSoto, Festus,
Herculaneum, Kimmswick, Pevely, Scotsdale
_
X
_
_
Catastrophic:
Limited: 10 to 25%
_
X
years
_
100 years..
_
SEASONAL
SEASONAL PATTERN:
Floods can occur anytime of the year; however, the most likely time of the year is in the
spring due to winter thaw and spring rains.
Areas likely to be affected are areas designated on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Areas
likely to be affected are dependent upon weather systems and storm track.
PROBABLE DURATION:
Duration of flood can last a few hours up to three or more months of inundation.
X
_
_
_
National Weather Service
COMPLETE VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS: Based on a 100-year flood causing damage in 11%
of the county (including Arnold, Byrnes Mill, Cedar Hill Lakes, Crystal City, DeSoto, Festus,
Herculaneum, Kimmswick, Pevely, Scotsdale), in the developed portions of Jefferson
167
County, approximately 36,000 persons and 5,400 buildings valued at $$540 million dollars
could be affected. In the undeveloped portions of the county, approximately 11,000
persons, and 3,800 buildings values at $280 million dollars could be impacted.
168
JEFFERSON COUNTY HAZARD PROFILE WORKSHEET
HAZARD:
Dam Failure
X
Catastrophic:
_
_
Limited: 10 to 25%
_
_
X
years
_
100 years..
_
SEASONAL PATTERN:
Dam failures would be related to seasonal patterns in terms the inability of a dam to
withhold/withstand the deluge of a catastrophic rain event (spring rains) hitting a
weakening dam infrastructure.
Areas most likely affected will be downstream from dams; torrential floodwaters from
failed dam descending upon residential homes, businesses, schools, agricultural lands, and
outbuildings.
PROBABLE DURATION:
By the nature of dam failures, the duration of the event will be instantaneous and the
duration of the failure could last up approximately six hours dependent upon the size of
the reservoir.
X
_
_
_
A few large Missouri dams have monitoring systems, emergency action plans and warning
systems. However, most dams in Missouri do not.
169
COMPLETE VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS: Based on a single dam failure causing damage in
½% of the county, in the developed portion of the county, it has been estimated that
approximately 1,050 persons and 250 buildings valued at $25 million dollars may be
impacted from water inundation. In the undeveloped portion of the county, it has been
estimated that approximately 200 persons and 75 buildings valued at $80,000 may be
impacted from water inundation.
170
HAZARD:
Drought
_
X
_
_
Catastrophic
Catastrophic:
tastrophic More than 50%
Limited: 10 to 25%
_
X
years
_
100 years..
_
SEASONAL PATTERN: Droughts usually occur over an extended period of time, usually a
season or more. Droughts can begin during any season in a year.
All areas will most likely to be affected by drought including agricultural, hydrologic
(streamflow, reservoir, groundwater resources) impacts (associated uses including
irrigation, recreation, navigation, hydropower/utilities, wildlife habitat).
PROBABLE DURATION:
Droughts have been known to last up to ten years in duration.
The onset of drought is very slow.
_
_
_
X
EXISTING WARNING SYSTEMS: Missouri Department of Natural Resources has a warning
system in place.
COMPLETE VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS:
ANALYSIS: Based on regional drought statistics, the county
could represent 1% of those damages. In the developed portion of the county, it was
estimated that approximately 2,100 persons and 500 buildings/properties valued at $50
million dollars could be impacted from the drought. In the undeveloped portion of the
county, it was estimated that approximately 200 persons and 75 buildings/properties
valued at $75,500 could be impacted from the drought.
171
172
HAZARD:
Wildland fires
_
_
_
X
Catastrophic:
Limited: 10 to 25%
_
_
years
X
100 years..
_
SEASONAL PATTERN:
Typically occur in warm months of year. Commonly occurs when there has been little
rainfall.
Areas most likely to be affected are in rural areas where buildings, homes are next to
forest.
PROBABLE DURATION:
DURATION:
Wildland fires in Missouri are typically short lived due to the type of fuel and climatic
conditions. Fires that do occur may last up a couple of days.
X
_
_
_
EXISTING WARNING SYSTEMS: Local fire department.
The EWGCC region is not vulnerable to wildland fires in Missouri are typically short lived
due to the type of fuel and climatic conditions. Fires may concentrate near the grasses
along roadsides or where rural homes are adjacent to forested areas. Based on a large
wildfire causing damage in 1% of the county, in the developed portion of the county, it
173
was estimated that approximately 1,050 people and 250 buildings valued at $25 billion
dollars in damage could be impacted from a fire. In the undeveloped portion of the
county, it was estimated that approximately 250 persons and 75 buildings valued at
$79,000 dollars in damage could be impacted from a fire.
174
HAZARD:
Heat Wave
_
X
_
_
Catastrophic:
Limited:
Limited: 10 to 25%
_
X
years
_
100 years..
_
SEASONAL PATTERN:
Heat waves typically occur in the summer months of June, July and August.
Every sector of the entire planning region will be affected by a heat wave.
PROBABLE DURATION:
Heat wave occurrences have been known to last approximately one month.
_
_
X
_
National Weather Service
The EWGCC region is extremely vulnerable to heat wave hazard based upon the summer
weather characteristics; St. Louis has been included in the top five cities in the U.S. for
having the largest number of heat related deaths. Based on regional heat wave statistics,
the county could represent 5% of those damages. In the developed portion of the county,
it was estimated that approximately 2,100 persons and 500 buildings valued at $49 million
dollars could be impacted by a heat wave. In the undeveloped portion of the county, it
175
was estimated that approximately 200 persons and 75 buildings valued at $79,000 dollars
could be impacted by a heat wave.
176
HAZARD:
Tornado
_
_
_
X
Catastrophic:
Limited: 10 to 25%
Negligible:
_
X
years
_
100 years..
_
SEASONAL PATTERN:
months.
Tornadoes normally occur in the spring and early summer
Areas most likely to be affected are dependent upon weather system and storm track.
PROBABLE DURATION:
hour.
Tornadoes move through at an average speed on 30 miles per
X
_
_
_
National Weather System and tornado weather sirens.
The EWGCC region is extremely vulnerable for tornado hazards, with 115 total tornadoes
recorded by the National Weather Service. St. Louis has a history of six F4 devastating
tornadoes. This analysis is based on an F4 tornado causing damage in 5% of the county.
In the developed portion of the county, it was estimated that 10,500 persons and 2,500
buildings valued at $245 million dollars could be affected by this disaster. In the
undeveloped portion of the county, it was estimated that 4,500 persons and 1,750
buildings valued at $131million dollars could be affected by this disaster.
177
178
JEFFERSON COUNTY HAZARD
HAZARD PROFILE WORKSHEET
HAZARD:
Winter Weather
_
_
X
_
Catastrophic:
Limited: 10 to 25%
_
Highly Likely:
Likely: Near 100% probability in next year
X
years
_
100 years..
_
SEASONAL PATTERN:
Late fall, winter and early spring months
Areas most likely to be affected are dependent upon weather patterns and track of storms.
PROBABLE DURATION:
Two to three days
_
_
_
X
EXISTING WARNING SYSTEMS: National Weather Service
ANALYSIS: This analysis is based on regional severe winter
statistics; the analysis assumes that the county could represent 1% of those damages. In
the developed portion of the county, it was estimated that approximately 2,100 persons
and 500 buildings valued at $50 million dollars could be affected by this disaster. In the
undeveloped portion of the county, it was estimated that approximately 3 persons and
1building valued at $1million dollars could be affected by this disaster.
179
RISK ASSESSMENT WORKSHEETWORKSHEET- JEFFERSON COUNTY
Dam Failure
Sector
Essential Facilities at Risk
Buildings downstream from failed dam
Population at Risk
Individuals living downstream from dams
that are failing
Infrastructure at Risk
Roads, bridges, utilities
Property at Risk
Risk
Expected Extent of
Percent of Sector
Damage
Property
CatastrophicCatastrophic- in areas
5
affected, damage could
be catastrophic in path
of released waters
Critical
LimitedLimited-topographically
higher areas
Negligible
5
10
80
RISK ASSESSMENT WORKSHEETWORKSHEET- JEFFERSON
JEFFERSON COUNTY
Drought
Sector
All essential facilities that depend on water
will be at risk.
Population at Risk
In severe drought, entire population living
and working in Jefferson County, the health
and welfare of humans and animals is at risk.
Entire infrastructure pertaining to water
supply, water treatment, utility operations
will be affected.
Property at Risk
Expected Extent of
Percent of Sector
Damage
Property
CatastrophicCatastrophic45
Critical
Criticalal-Damage to
45
essential facilities,
180
JEFFERSON COUNTY
Drought
population,
infrastructure,
agricultural industry will
be critical to catastrophic
Limited
Negligible
5
5
Earthquake
Sector
Worst case scenario-older buildings or those
not constructed to building code, near total
devastation from New Madrid earthquake
Population at Risk
Entire population at risk in older buildings or
those not constructed to building code
Entire infrastructure at risk in older facilities
or those not constructed to building code
Property at Risk
Expected Extent of
Percent of Sector
Damage
Property
CatastrophicCatastrophic-near total
45
devastation
Critical
Limited
Negligible
45
5
5
Flood
Sector
Those facilities in low lying areas within 100
or 500 year floodplains not constructed to
building code.
Population at Risk
181
Flood
Those living and working in low lying areas
within 100 or 500-year floodplains in
buildings not constructed to building code.
Infrastructure in poor condition or located in
low-lying areas within 100 or 500-year
floodplains in facilities not constructed to
building code.
Property at Risk
Expected Extent of
Percent of Sector
Damage
Property
Catastrophic
Critical
LimitedLimited-11%
Negligible
11% area of county
subject to flooding risk
to 100-year event
89%
Heat Wave
Sector
All facilities affected by heat (no air
conditioning) are at risk
Population at Risk
Entire population at risk; elderly, young, ill,
homeless people
All infrastructure affected by heat (roads,
bridges, rail lines) is at risk
Property at Risk
Expected Extent of
Percent of Sector
Damage
Property
CatastrophicCatastrophic-limited to
Approximately 14%
elderly, ill population
Critical
Limited
Negligible
3
3
80
182
JEFFERSON COUNTY
Tornado
Sector
Buildings in path of storm not constructed to
building code.
Population at Risk
Populations that do not have safe rooms to
seek refuge
Infrastructure in path of storm
Property at Risk
Expected Extent of
Percent of Sector
Damage
Property
Catastrophic-in
Catastrophic path of
storm; dependent upon
magnitude of storm,
damage could be
catastrophic
Critical-in
Critical path of storm;
dependent upon
magnitude of storm,
damage could be critical
Limited-in
Limited path of storm;
dependent upon
magnitude of storm,
damage could be limited
NegligibleNegligible-in path of
storm; dependent upon
magnitude of storm,
damage could be
negligible
1%
4%
5%
90%
Wildland Fire
Fire
Sector
Buildings in path of fire may be burned
Population at Risk
Residents living and working near forested
areas
May burn utility lines
Property at Risk
183
Wildland Fire
Fire
Expected Extent of
Damage
Percent
Percent of Sector
Property
Catastrophic
Critical
Limited
NegligibleNegligible-wildfires
possible, limited to
negligible magnitude
1
99
Winter Weather
Sector
Some buildings in path of storm may have
power outages.
Population at Risk
Dependent upon where storm hits, entire
population, especially those who work
outdoors, drive for a living, homeless people.
Utility poles downed by ice storms; roads,
bridges impassible
Property at Risk
Expected Extent of
Percent of Sector
Damage
Property
Catastrophic
1%
Critical
1%
Limited
90%
Negligible
8%
184
RISK INDEX WORKSHEETWORKSHEET- Jefferson County
HAZARD
FREQUENCY
MAGNITUDE
WARNING
TIME
SEVERITY
Dam
Failure
Highly likely4
Likely3
Possible2
Unlikely1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
2
11
Drought
Highly likely4
Likely3
Possible2
Unlikely1
Catastrophic
Minimal4
6-12 hours
12-24
hours
24+ hours1
Minimal4
6-12 hours
12-24
hours
24+ hours1
Minimal4
6-12 hours
12-24
hours
24+ hours1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
4
8
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
1
14
Catastrophic4
Critical3
2
11
Earthquake Highly likely4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
Likely3
Possible2
Unlikely1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
Highly likely4
Likely3
Possible2
Unlikely1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
Heat Wave
Highly likely4
Likely3
Possible2
Unlikely1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
Tornado
Highly likely4
Likely3
Possible2
Unlikely1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
Highly likely4
Likely3
Possible2
Unlikely1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
Highly likely4
Likely3
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
Flood
Wildland
Fire
Winter
Weather
Possible2
Unlikely1
Ranking is top bold number
Score is bottom number
Minimal4
6-12 hours
12-24
hours
24+ hours1
Minimal4
6-12 hours
1212-24
hours
24+ hours1
Minimal4
6-12 hours
12-24
hours
24+ hours1
Minimal4
6-12 hours
1212-24
hours
24+ hours1
Minimal4
6-12 hours
1212-24
hours
24+ hours1
SPECIAL
CHARACTERISTICS
& PLANNING
CONSIDERATIONS
RISK
PRIORITY
Limited2
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
5
7
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
2
11
Catastrophic4
Critical3
4
8
Limited2
Negligible1
Catastrophic4
Critical3
Limited2
Negligible1
3
9
185
TORNADO: JEFFERSON COUNTY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
(The estimates below are based on an F4 tornado causing damage in 5% of the county.)
DEVELOPED
DEVELOPED LAND
# of
# of People Buildings
Residential
Commercial / Industrial
Key Non-profit public service facilities
Public buildings and critical facilities
Sewage treatment plant
Water treatment plant
Roads
Police
Fire
Schools/colleges
Utilities/communications
Hospital/medical/dental
Nursing homes
Hazardous facilities
Other county, state, and federal government
TOTAL
Note: Emergency shelters (see key non-profits)
5,725
2,040
15
30
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
4
3
2,000
25
30
160
N.A.
450
10,482
2,260
140
1
2
1
N.A.
N.A.
1
1
5
1
1
2
N.A.
30
2445
Approx. Value
$160,295,000
$44,470,000
$250,000
$500,000
$100,000
N.A.
$2,500,000
$180,000
$150,000
$22,925,500
$1,000,000
$1,180,000
$2,298,750
N.A.
$9,000,000
$242,849,250
UNDEVELOPED LAND
# of
# of
People
Buildings Approx. Value
4,200
230
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
4430
1,725
15
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1740
$125,000,000
$5,065,000
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
$192,500
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
$305,000.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
$130,562,500
The entire county is vulnerable to tornado and severe thunderstorm hazards. Data limitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of
this project, GIS analysis in Jefferson County was conducted using an interim product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to
georeferencing shortcomings and attribute data limitations, results were incomplete. MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and data.
186
FLOOD: JEFFERSON COUNTY VULNERABILITY
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
(The estimates below are based on a 100100-year flood causing damage in 11% of the county)
DEVELOPED LAND
UNDEVELOPED LAND
# of
# of
# of People Buildings Approx. Value # of People Buildings Approx. Value
Residential
Roads
Police
Fire
Schools/colleges
Nursing/disability homes
TOTAL
12,600
4500
35
70
150
150
N.A.
10
7
4,500
55
70
360
N.A.
1,000
36,437
5,000
300
2
4
1
1
N.A.
1
1
15
2
1
4
N.A.
65
5,397
$352,650,000
$98,500,000
$550,000
$110,000
$220,000
$220,000
$5,475,000
$400,000
$330,000
$50,450,000
$2,200,000
$2,600,000
$5,100,000
N.A.
$19,800,000
$538,605,000
10,130
510
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
10,640
3,805
35
N. A.
N. A.
N. A.
N. A.
N. A.
N. A.
N. A.
N. A.
N. A.
N. A.
N. A.
N. A.
N. A.
3840
$270,000,000
$12,000,000
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
$415,000
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
$670,000
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
$283,085,000
Specific riverine and/or flash flood hazard areas include the Meramec, Mississippi Rivers. Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time
limitations of this project, GIS analysis in Jefferson County was conducted using an interim product/"work in progress" property map and database; due
to georeferencing shortcomings and attribute data limitations, results were incomplete. MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and
data.
187
SEVERE WINTER STORM: JEFFERSON COUNTY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
represent
esent 1% of those damages.)
(Using regional severe winter statistics, the county could repr
DEVELOPED LAND
SEVERE WINTER STORM
Residential
Roads
Police
Fire
Schools/colleges
TOTAL
# of
1145
410
3
6
5
0
0
1
1
400
5
6
30
0
90
2102
450
30
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
6
495
UNDEVELOPED LAND
# of
Approx. Value # of People Buildings Approx. Value
$32,060,700
$8,950,200
$50,000
$100,000
$20,000
0
$498,800
$36,000
$30,000
$4,585,100
$200,000
$235,500
$459,750
0
$1,800,000
$49,026,050
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
$71,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$865,000
0
0
0
0
$936,000
The entire county is vulnerable to severe winter storm hazards. Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of this project, GIS
analysis in Jefferson County was conducted using an interim product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to georeferencing
shortcomings and attribute data limitations, results were incomplete. MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and data.
188
DROUGHT: JEFFERSON COUNTY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
(Using regional drought statistics, the county could represent 1% of those damages.)
DEVELOPED LAND
UNDEVELOPED LAND
# of
# of
Approx.
Value
Buildings Approx. Value # of People Buildings
Residential and/or agricultural
1145
450
$32,060,700
195
75
$38,000
410
30
$8,950,200
0
0
$40,500
3
6
1
1
$50,000
$100,000
N.A.
N.A.
N. A.
N. A.
N.A.
N.A.
5
1
$20,000
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
0
0
0
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
Roads
0
0
$498,800
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
Police
1
1
$36,000
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
Fire
1
1
$30,000
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
400
1
$4,585,100
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
5
1
$200,000
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
6
1
$235,500
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
30
1
$459,750
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
0
0
0
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
90
6
$1,800,000
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
2102
495
$49,026,050
195
75
$75,500
Schools/colleges
TOTAL
The entire county is vulnerable to the effects of drought. Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of this project, GIS analysis in
Jefferson County was conducted using an interim product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to georeferencing shortcomings and
attribute data limitations, results were incomplete. MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and data.
189
HEAT WAVE: JEFFERSON COUNTY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
(Using regional heat wave statistics, the county could represent 1% of those damages.)
DEVELOPED LAND
LAND
# of
Residential
1145
410
3
6
5
0
Roads
0
Police
1
Fire
1
Schools/colleges
400
5
6
30
N.A.
90
TOTAL
2102
Note: Emergency shelters (see key non-profits and schools)
450
30
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
N.A.
6
495
UNDEVELOPED LAND
# of
Approx.
Approx. Value # of People Buildings
Value
$32,060,700
$8,950,200
$50,000
$100,000
$20,000
0
$498,800
$36,000
$30,000
$4,585,100
$200,000
$235,500
$459,750
N.A.
$1,800,000
$49,026,050
195
0
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
195
75
0
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
75
$38,000
$40,500
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
$78,500
The entire county is vulnerable to the effects of heat wave. Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of this project, GIS analysis
in Jefferson County was conducted using an interim product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to georeferencing shortcomings and
190
EARTHQUAKE: JEFFERSON COUNTY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
(Based on a Level VII earthquake causing damage in 80% of the county)
county)
DEVELOPED LAND
# of
UNDEVELOPED LAND
# of
Approx.
Value
Residential
70,000
28,000
$2,000,000,000
51,700
20,800
$1,470,000,000
24,480
1,600
$536,775,000
2,750
180
$60,800,000
180
15
$3,000,000
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
360
25
$6,000,000
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
1090
N.A.
2
N.A.
$1,200,000
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N. A.
N. A.
N.A.
N.A.
Roads
-
-
$30,000,000
N.A.
N. A.
$2,280,000
Police
50
2
$2,160,000
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
Fire
40
2
$1,800,000
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
25,000
60
$275,110,000
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
300
15
$12,000,000
N.A.
N. A.
$3,650,000
375
1
$14,135,000
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
2000
25
$30,000,000
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
0
0
0
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
5,400
360
$108,000,000
N.A.
N. A.
N.A.
Schools/colleges
TOTAL
129,275
30,107
$3,050,180,000
54,450
20,980 $1,536,730,000
The entire county is vulnerable to critical damage severity due to earthquake hazards. The eastern portion of the county is especially vulnerable to the
threat of liquefaction due to the alluvial soils in the Mississippi River. Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of this project, GIS
analysis in Jefferson County was conducted using an interim product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to georeferencing
shortcomings and attribute data limitations, results were incomplete. MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and data.
191
DAM FAILURE: JEFFERSON COUNTY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
(Based
(B
ased on a single dam failure causing damage in 1/2% of the county)
DEVELOPED LAND
# of
UNDEVELOPED LAND
# of
Approx.
Value
Residential
570
225
$16,025,350
195
75
$38,000
200
1
15
1
$4,475,100
$25,000
0
N.A.
0
N.A.
$40,500
N.A.
3
1
$50,000
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Roads
Police
Fire
Schools/colleges
2
0
0
1
1
200
1
0
0
1
1
1
$10,000
0
$250,000
$18,000
$15,000
$2,292,550
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
2
1
$100,000
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
3
1
$117,750
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
15
1
$229,875
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
0
0
0
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
45
1043
3
252
$900,000
$24,508,625
N.A.
195
N.A.
75
N.A.
$78,500
TOTAL
Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of this project, GIS analysis in Jefferson County was conducted using an interim
product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to georeferencing shortcomings and attribute data limitations, results were incomplete.
MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and data.
192
WILDFIRE: JEFFERSON COUNTY VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT
(Based on a large wildfire causing damage in 1% of the county.)
DEVELOPED
DEVELOPED LAND
WILDFIRE
Residential
Roads
Police
Fire
Schools/colleges
TOTAL
# of
570
200
1
3
2
0
0
1
1
200
2
3
15
0
45
1043
225
15
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
3
252
UNDEVELOPED LAND
# of
Approx.
Value
$16,025,350
$4,475,100
$25,000
$50,000
$10,000
0
$250,000
$18,000
$15,000
$2,292,550
$100,000
$117,750
$229,875
0
$900,000
$24,508,625
195
0
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
195
75
0
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
75
$38,000
$40,500
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
$78,500
There is a very low threat of wildfire across the county. Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of this project, GIS analysis in
Jefferson County was conducted using an interim product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to georeferencing shortcomings and
193
TOTAL JEFFERSON COUNTY VULNERABILITY SUMMARY
DEVELOPED LAND
UNDEVELOPED LAND
Total # Total #
# of Total #
# of
of
of
of
Combined Totals Represent All Natural
Total Approx. Critical
Total # of Total Approx. Critical
Hazards Occurring in Jefferson County People Buildings
Value
Facilities People Buildings
Value
Facilities
Residential
92,900
32,650
241
37,060
2160
23
$2,641,177,800
$715,545,800
$4,000,000
185
10
1
66,813
920
N.A.
26,561
230
N.A.
$1,865,223,000
$78,027,000
N.A.
132
1
N.A.
Roads
Police
Fire
Schools/colleges
TOTAL
483
36
$701,000
1
N.A.
1259
9
$1,600,000
1
N.A.
1240
3
$1,420,000
1
N.A.
$39,971,400
N.A.
69
9
$2,884,000
1
N.A.
55
9
$2,400,000
1
N.A.
33,700
85
$366,825,900
1
N.A.
399
23
$16,000,000
1
N.A.
499
8
$18,857,000
1
N.A.
2640
36
$39,237,750
3
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
7210
476
$124,200,000
2
N.A.
173,345 39,940 $3,938,846,394
210
67,733
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
26,791
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
$2,887,500
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
$5,490,000
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
$1,951,627,500
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
1
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
134
Data llimitations: Because of the timeframe and time limitations of this project, GIS analysis in Jefferson County was conducted using an interim
product/"work in progress" property map and database; due to georeferencing shortcomings and attribute data limitations, results were incomplete.
MDNR is updating Hazardous Waste Facilities locations and data.
1
SECTION 3
County Capability Assessment
Mitigation Management Policies
The Jefferson County Emergency Management Agency is charged with preparing for
disasters. That duty includes advising the County Commission on mitigation measures and
implementing those measures deemed appropriate by the Commission. In general, the
County’s policies encourage cooperation and coordination within the Jefferson County
agencies; as well as cooperation, including mutual aid compacts, between neighboring
counties and the municipalities within Jefferson County. The Emergency Operations Plan
(EOP) provides for an integrated countywide emergency preparedness and response plan,
utilizing public, nonprofit, and private resources.
Existing Plans
The County has recently completed the Jefferson County Official Master Plan with the
anticipation that it will be formally adopted in the near future. The Plan was developed to
provide the framework for planned supportable growth, including promoting best practice
policies relating to stormwater and floodplain management. The Plan identifies a Preferred
Growth Alternative, with the intent to “achieve a balance of growth with preservation of
existing natural features and protection of the rural character of the county.” In general,
growth will be targeted around currently developed areas, utilizing existing transportation
corridors and extending utility and transportation infrastructure in a logical and progressive
manner, thereby ensuring capacity to service new development.
The County’s Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) is approved by the County Commission.
The Plan identifies facilities and resources that require special security during a disaster;
promotes the development and maintenance of mutual aid agreements with nearby
agencies; requires participation in drills and exercises; identifies human and capital
resources available throughout the county for disaster response; and includes an
evacuation plan. The EOP includes hazard mitigation measures and a damage assessment
plan.
Mitigation Programs
The main mitigation programs are the County’s floodplain management regulations and
participation in and administration of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The
county coordinates with Mississippi River levee districts through the U.S. Corps of
Engineers. Additional programs include the following:
•
The County’s floodplain regulations are aimed at restricting any new development in
the floodplain. The current ordinance requires two feet of additional freeboard for
2
•
•
•
•
•
•
new structures and requires an increase, if necessary, to that elevation when
structures are significantly reconstructed within the floodplain. Minimum elevation
is one foot above for structures in the identified regional floodplains.
The county has participated in floodplain property acquisition, funded through
FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Program.
Stormwater management and sedimentation and erosion control standards that
comply with Phase II Federal Stormwater Regulations was implemented in 2004.
Development is prohibited in identified floodways and wetlands.
Development can occur on slopes steeper than 3 feet to one foot only after
geotechnical analysis and receipt of an engineer’s recommendation.
The county is able to receive NWS warnings; equipment is radio-activated. During
waking hours, using all available communications, less than 50 percent of the
county’s population could be alerted within 30 minutes; responders and key
executive officials could be alerted within 5 minutes.
The Emergency Management Agency’s director and key personnel have completed
substantial training in all facets of emergency management. Emergency response
personnel, EOC operations staff, and volunteer agencies have received training and
education within the last five years.
Jefferson County is located in a Modified Mercalli Zone VII area. Missouri statutes require
school districts in a Modified Mercalli Zone VII or above at a magnitude 7.6 earthquake to
provide for public view each year, an earthquake preparedness and safety information,
such as earthquake procedures and a disaster plan; and conduct earthquake drills twice
each year. Missouri statutes RSMo 260.451, 160.453, 160.455, and 160.457 provide that
“the governing body of each school district shall request assistance from the State
Emergency Management Agency and any local emergency management agency located
within its district boundaries to develop and establish the earthquake emergency procedure
system.”
The questionnaire asked responders to summarize their regulations effectiveness in
reducing potential losses from hazards and the effectiveness of their measures to increase
public awareness of measures to reduce potential losses from hazards. The questions were
answered on a scale of “O” to “4”, with “0” being not effective and “4” being very
effective. In answer to the question: How effective would you rate the regulations
employed by your local government to reduce potential losses from hazards, one
municipality answered “1”, three answered “2”, and one answered “3”. In response to the
question: How effective would you rate the measures employed by your local government
to increase public awareness of measures that can be used to reduce potential losses to
existing development in areas subject to hazards, two municipalities answered “2”, and
three answered “3”.
3
County Capabilities (Organization, Staffing, Training)
The capabilities of emergency management, fire protection, law enforcement, and
emergency medical services are detailed at the end of Section I.
The EOC is located in the Jefferson County Courthouse in Hillsboro. The facility is well
equipped for sustained operations over an extended period of time. A primary alternate
EOC is located at the 911 Center in Hillsboro. Other alternate sights are identified. The
EOC has survivable communications for operating forces, the Emergency Alert System,
commercial and public broadcast stations, the State Emergency Management Agency,
cities within the county, and neighboring jurisdictions. Communication and warning
systems are tested on a regular basis. Five municipalities responding to the questionnaire
have sirens, tested on a monthly basis. A substantial amount of the county’s
unincorporated area is not within hearing range of sirens.
Countywide, substantial emergency response equipment is available to respond to events.
Within the county, there are a total of nineteen fire protection districts or fire departments
and seven ambulance districts. In addition to the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Department,
there are ten municipal police departments. Substantial vehicle and heavy equipment is
available through municipal and county public works departments. American Red Cross
has a service center in the county. One hospital is located in the county, and most St.
Louis metropolitan area medical facilities are located within a one-hour drive from any
location in Jefferson County.
The county has conducted at least one full-scale EOP exercise within the last four years
including testing and evaluating alert notification, coordination and control, and
communications.
Responsibilities and Authorities
Jefferson County government and their municipal governments responding to the
questionnaire indicated the following:
•
•
•
•
•
County does not have legal basis for authority to order an evacuation.
Municipalities: Six have legal basis.
County has legal basis for redirecting funds for emergency use.
Municipalities: Five have legal basis; one answered not applicable.
County does not have legal basis for ordering a curfew.
Municipalities: Five have legal basis.
County does not have legal basis for commandeering facilities, equipment,
and materials.
Municipalities: Five have legal basis; one does not.
County does not have legal basis to authorize lines of succession to carry out
emergency activities.
4
•
•
•
•
•
•
Municipalities: Six have legal basis; two do not know.
County has system to safeguard records to conduct emergency operations
Municipalities: Five have system to safeguard; one does not.
County has system to safeguard vital records to reconstitute local
government.
Municipalities: Six have system to safeguard.
County has not developed an all-hazard vulnerability analysis to access
potential consequences of disasters.
Municipalities: Five have done analysis; one has not.
County has a multi-hazard emergency operations plan.
Municipalities: Six have a multi-hazard plan.
County has mutual aid compacts with other jurisdictions
Municipalities: Six have mutual aid compacts.
County EOP addresses the protection of people with special needs.
Municipalities: Four address the protection; two do not.
Intergovernmental and Interagency Coordination
The County Emergency Management Agency interacts with the municipalities and single
purpose governments on a regular basis to maintain communication and coordination of
policy related to emergency management.
Vulnerability Assessment of County Policies and Development Trends
Commitments to a Comprehensive Mitigation Program
Jefferson County has a well-established Emergency Management Agency. It regularly
updates the EOP, addressing mitigation measures for hazards, both natural and manmade, incorporating any changes to the plan necessitated by changes in transportation
infrastructure and land use.
Laws, Regulations
Regulations and Policies Related to Development in HazardHazard-Prone Areas
The floodplain management ordinances of the county and municipalities are based on
policies to protect health and welfare of people and minimize damage to public
infrastructure and physical structures. They also restrict avoidable increases in flood height
or velocity and protect individuals from buying land unsuited for the intended use due to a
flood hazard.
County Laws, Regulations and Policies Related to Hazard Mitigation in General
General
Zoning and floodplain ordinances, coupled with the enforcement of building codes and
the approval process for subdivisions and new or reconstructive development assures that
5
hazards are addressed in the proposal and planning stages of the development process.
Stormwater regulations that the county will soon be adopting and those of seven
responding municipalities are designed to minimize the harmful physical and economic
effects of erosion, sedimentation, and flooding from stormwater runoff. This is
accomplished through the requirement of measures to mitigate erosion, both during and
after construction; the detention and controlled discharge of the differential runoff from
the development; coupled with a well-designed stormwater conveyance system.
Missouri statute RSMo 319.203 requires that cities and counties in the Level VII earthquake
zone pass “an ordinance of order” regarding earthquake preparedness and building
requirements demonstrating compliance with 319.207 for certain types of structures. This
statute applies to Jefferson County.
How Local Risk Assessments are Incorporated and Prioritized into Local Planning
Of the hazard risks the county has exposure to, riverine and flash flooding hazard risks are
foremost in frequency and potential magnitude in loss of people and property.
Enforcement of zoning, floodplain, stormwater ordinances, and placement of public
infrastructure provide the most effective tools to minimize known risks.
The county and municipalities recognize the danger and economic impact of severe winter
storms. Clearing of snow and ice from roadways is a main priority during these events.
The Missouri Department of Transportation has responsibility for the interstate and state
designated highways within the county. The County Highway Department and
municipalities clear their respective roadways, prioritizing known hazardous stretches of
roadways, school bus stops, and intersections in efforts to reduce accidents and maintain
the movement of people and goods.
Current Criteria Used to Prioritize Mitigation Funding
Mitigation funding is based upon the combination of expected damage, the assumed
frequency of damage, and the likelihood of death or injury to people.
Integration of Hazard Mitigation with the City/County Department’s
Department’s Plans
A city or county EOP and its floodplain, zoning, subdivision, and building code ordinances
developed and enforced in an integrated fashion insure that avoidable disasters are
prevented, and the vulnerability of people and property to the effects of disasters is
reduced.
6
How the County Determines CostCost-Effectiveness of Mitigation Programs
Cost-effectiveness is considered on a case-by-case basis; dependent upon the scope of
damages, estimated savings in future hazard events, the type of mitigation project, and the
probable hazard to human life in future events. A FEMA cost/benefit analysis is required
for FEMA funded projects.
Mitigation Funding Options (including current and potential sources of federal, state, local,
private funds)
The county and municipalities have utilized federal or state funds when disaster
declarations have been made in the case of heavy widespread damages. Sources have
included FEMA, SEMA, the Missouri Department of Natural Resources and Department of
Economic Development. In addition to local government general revenue funds, the
County and many of the municipalities have either a dedicated transportation and/or
capital improvements sales/use tax that can be used to fund mitigation projects. These
projects are generally reactive or reconstructive in nature. In some cases, private property
owners cost share in these projects. Private funds are expended when necessary mitigation
measures are incorporated into a development plan.
How Governments Meet Requirements for Hazard Mitigation Funding Programs
Governmental jurisdictions meet the requirements for hazard mitigation funding programs
if the project conforms to Missouri’s Hazard Mitigation Plan, provides a beneficial impact
on the disaster area, meeting environmental requirements, solves the problem
independently, and is cost-effective. Adoption of the Resolution of Intent to Participate in
All-Hazard Mitigation will insure that a county or municipality is eligible for hazard
mitigation funding programs.
Recommendations
Recommendations for Improvement
Recommended improvements include working with watershed groups and engineering
consultants to assess and maintain watersheds, marking flood prone areas, working with
the wastewater and stormwater management districts to control runoff issues and address
growth issues, address soil erosion in parks, improve stormwater ordinances, and conduct
mitigation property buyouts. Additional recommendations pertaining to education and
training include upgrade and install warning and communications systems (through
assistance from business sponsors), create Emergency Management Center (for
communities of Festus, Pevely, Herculaneum, Crystal City), coordination between
communities and planners/cooperative technical agreements, education for public safety
(earthquake proof historic buildings), prioritize assistance to smaller communities (training),
and use of municipal league as nexus for coordination. Further recommendations consist
of collaboration of communities and local emergency services with Highway departments
regarding construction of roads and bridges pertaining to stability/earthquake hazard proof
7
structures, performing retrofits of one or two emergency rooms to withstand earthquake,
assist with the full implementation of the MDNR dam safety program, and installation of
back-up power systems for critical facilities and/or burying critical power lines.
The Missouri Seismic Safety Commission (under Missouri statutes RSMo 44.227, 44.229,
44.231, 44.233, 44.235, and 44.277) has developed a Strategic Plan for earthquake safety
in Missouri. This plan contains recommendations for earthquake mitigation. Use of the
Strategic Plan by the County would facilitate mitigation planning.
Missouri has an organization called Structural Assessment and Visual Evaluation (SAVE)
coalition. The Coalition's objective is to assist the Missouri State Emergency Management
Agency (SEMA) in the execution of its responsibilities with respect to the use of qualified
volunteers in the emergency assessment of buildings following catastrophic events.
S.A.V.E. volunteers consist of architects, professional engineers, and other qualified
professionals that assist SEMA in assessing buildings and vertical structures following
catastrophic events. The S.A.V.E. Coalition also includes the American Institute of
Architects/Missouri (AIA/MO), the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), the
Consulting Engineers Council of MO (CECMO), and the Missouri Society of Professional
Engineers (MSPE).
County and Municipal Policies and Development Trends
At present, the county is more densely developed in the northern third of the county; along
Interstate 55, located along its eastern boundary; and the State Highway 21 and State
Highway 30 corridors. Jefferson County’s population was 198,099 in 2000, increasing by
15.6 percent in the last decade. It is predicted that the county will see an increase of 11
percent by 2010, and about 28 percent by 2025, with a population of about 253,000. Of
the county population of 198,099 in year 2000, almost 74 percent lived outside
incorporated areas.
Jefferson County has a current master plan, zoning, subdivision regulations, and a building
code. Of the municipalities in the county, seven answered that they have master plans and
six did not answer. Seven have zoning, subdivision, stormwater, and building codes; six
did not answer.
Jefferson County’s capability assessment is summarized at the end of this section.
Funding Sources
There are several sources of funding for both pre- and post-disaster hazard mitigation
policies and projects. While all mitigation techniques will likely save money by avoiding
losses, the cost of implementing mitigation efforts can be substantial and well beyond the
local government’s capacity to fund the mitigation activity. There are existing federal and
state funding programs that can be utilized for funding assistance. The following is a list
8
of some sources of funding presently available. This list is not comprehensive, as new
programs can be developed or existing programs can be eliminated or modified.
State Mitigation Resources:
http://sema.dps.mo.gov/Mitigation.htm
Federal Sources
TITLE:
PREPRE-DISASTER MITIGATION PROGRAM
AGENCY: FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA)
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/pdm/index
The Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program provides funds to states, territories, Indian
tribal governments, communities, and universities for hazard mitigation planning and the
implementation of mitigation projects prior to a disaster event.
Funding these plans and projects reduces overall risks to the population and structures,
while also reducing reliance on funding from actual disaster declarations. PDM grants are
to be awarded on a competitive basis and without reference to state allocations, quotas, or
other formula-based allocation of funds.
The FY 2009 grant application was due FEMA by Dec. 19th, 2008, by midnight.
TITLE:
FLOOD MITIGATION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
AGENCY: FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/fma/index
FEMA’S Flood Mitigation Assistance Program (FMA) provides funding to assist states and
communities in implementing measures to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood
damage to buildings, manufactured homes, and other structures insurable under the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). FMA was created as part of the National Flood
Insurance Reform Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 4101) with the goal of reducing or eliminating
claims under the NFIP. FMA is a pre-disaster grant program, and is made available to
states on an annual basis. This funding is exclusively available for mitigation planning and
implementation of mitigation measures. There are three such grants: planning grants,
project grants, and technical assistance grants. Planning grants include assessing risk and
developing a mitigation plan to reduce risks. Project grants include the purchase,
relocation, or destruction of NFIP insured buildings to reduce flood losses. Technical
assistance grants help communities develop and implement projects.
•
Planning Grants to prepare Flood Mitigation Plans. Only NFIP-participating
communities with approved Flood Mitigation Plans can apply for FMA Project grants
•
Project Grants to implement measures to reduce flood losses, such as elevation,
acquisition, or relocation of NFIP-insured structures. States are encouraged to
prioritize FMA funds for applications that include repetitive loss properties; these
9
include structures with 2 or more losses each with a claim of at least $1,000 within
any ten-year period since 1978.
•
Technical Assistance Grants
Grants for the State to help administer the FMA program and
activities. Up to ten percent (10%) of Project grants may be awarded to states.
TITLE:
HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT PROGRAM
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/hmgp/index
The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) was created in November 1988 through
Section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act. The
HMGP assists states and local communities in implementing long-term mitigation measures
following a Presidential disaster declaration.
Criteria: Project must conform with State’s Hazard Mitigation Plan, provide a beneficial
impact on the disaster area, meet environmental requirements, solve a problem
independently, and be cost-effective.
TITLE:
REPETITIVE FLOOD CLAIMS PROGRAM
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/rfc/index
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/rfc/index
The Repetitive Flood Claims (RFC) grant program was authorized by the Bunning-BereuterBlumenauer Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2004 (P.L. 108–264), which amended the
National Flood Insurance Act (NFIA) of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4001, et al).
Up to $10 million is available annually for FEMA to provide RFC funds to assist States and
communities reduce flood damages to insured properties that have had one or more claims
to the National Flood Insurance Program
Eligible Mitigation Activities
Activities:
ities
•
•
•
•
Acquisition of properties, and either demolition or relocation of flood-prone
structures, where the property is deed restricted for open space uses in perpetuity.
Elevations (Elevating structures from floodplains).
Dry Floodproofing of non-residential structures
Minor localized flood control projects (funding limited to $1M per project).
Federal / NonNon-Federal Cost Share:
FEMA may contribute up to 100 percent of the total amount approved under the RFC
grant award to implement approved activities, if the Applicant has demonstrated that the
proposed activities can not be funded under the Flood Mitigation program due to lack of
10
State or local capacity, which includes either inability to manage the subgrant or lack of
25% match.
The FY 2009 grant application was due FEMA by Dec. 19th, 2008, by midnight.
TITLE:
SEVERE REPETITIVE FLOOD CLAIMS PROGRAM
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/srl/index
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/srl/index
The Severe Repetitive Loss (SRL) grant program was authorized by the Bunning-BereuterBlumenauer Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2004, which amended the National Flood
Insurance Act of 1968 to provide funding to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk of flood
damage to severe repetitive loss (SRL) structures insured under the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP).
The definition of severe repetitive loss as applied to this program was established in
section 1361A of the National Flood Insurance Act, as amended (NFIA), 42 U.S.C. 4102a.
An SRL property is defined as a residential property that is covered under an NFIP flood
insurance policy and:
(a) That has at least four NFIP claim payments (including building and contents)
over $5,000 each, and the cumulative amount of such claims payments exceeds
$20,000; or
(b) For which at least two separate claims payments (building payments only) have
been made with the cumulative amount of the building portion of such claims
exceeding the market value of the building.
For both (a) and (b) above, at least two of the referenced claims must have occurred within
any ten-year period, and must be greater than 10 days apart.
Eligible flood mitigation project
project activities:
•
•
•
•
Acquisition and demolition or relocation of at risk structures and conversion of the
property to open space;
Elevation of existing structures to at least the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) or an
Advisory Base Flood Elevation (ABFE) or higher. For the SRL program only,
mitigation reconstruction is permitted only when traditional elevation cannot be
implemented;
Minor physical localized flood reduction projects; and
Dry floodproofing (historic properties only).
Federal / NonNon-Federal cost share: 75 / 25 %; up to 90 % Federal cost-share funding for
projects approved in States, Territories, and Federally-recognized Indian tribes with FEMAapproved Standard or Enhanced Mitigation Plans or Indian tribal plans that include a
strategy for mitigating existing and future SRL properties.
11
TITLE:
SBA DISASTER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
AGENCY: U. S. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
http://www.sba.gov/services/disasterassistance/index.html
The purpose of the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Loan Program is to make low-interest, fixed rate
loans to eligible small businesses for the purpose of implementing mitigation measures to
protect business property from damage that may be caused by future disasters. The
program is a pilot program, which supports FEMA’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program.
SBA’s Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program is available to businesses whose proposed mitigation
measure conforms to the priorities and goals of the mitigation plan for the community, as
defined by FEMA, in which the business is located. Because the program has been
approved only for limited funding, approved loan requests will be funded on a first-come,
first-served basis up to the limit of the program funds and may not exceed 20% of the total
amount of disaster damage.
TITLE:
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS
AGENCY: U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
http://www.hud.gov/grants/index.cfm
The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program provides grants to local
governments for community and economic development projects that primarily benefit
low-and moderate-income people. The CDBG program also provides grants for postdisaster hazard mitigation and recovery following a Presidential disaster declaration.
CBDG eligible communities (generally communities with under 50,000 population and
counties under 200,000 population) are located within a Presidential disaster declaration
area.
TITLE:
DISASTER MITIGATION PLANNING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
AGENCY: DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
http://oamweb.osec.doc.gov/aboutOAM_organization_GMD.html
http://oamweb.osec.doc.gov/aboutOAM_organization_GMD.html
These grants are primarily designed for economic development initiatives, but are
applicable to hazard mitigation when the focus is on creating disaster resistant jobs and
workplaces. Also, these monies are applicable because often projects related to developing
infrastructure are also making the community more disaster resistant.
TITLE:
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM GRANT
AGENCY: M ISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (Section 319)
www.dnr.mo.gov/env/wpp/wpcnpsmp.htm
•
•
•
Completed Watershed Management Plans must contain the critical watershed
elements.
The watershed or water body must be on the Targeted Nonpoint Source 303(d) List
Funds are available to public institutions of higher education, units of government
and nonprofit organizations with 501(c)(3) status.
12
•
•
•
•
The grant award maximum is $15,000.
Projects may be up to two years in length.
Non-federal match required in a ratio of 60 percent 319 funds to 40 percent nonfederal funds. Matching support may include “in-kind” contributions. (Soil and
Water Conservation Districts are not required to document match on agricultural
projects.)
Completed watershed management plans must be designed to achieve the load
reductions called for in any completed Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL). If no
TMDL has been completed, the plan must be designed to reduce pollutant loads to
meet water quality standards.
Application Criteria
1. The project must meet the requirements of this Request for Proposals.
2. The project must demonstrate a high likelihood of success based on quality of the
proposal, previous successes, appropriateness of goals, support of important
partners, an area of manageable size, appropriate practices, adequate funding,
competent management, etc.
3. Projects should encompass a complete watershed or sub-watershed of manageable
size and address all significant nonpoint pollutant sources.
4. Involve interagency coordination and cooperation. Locally led projects are preferred.
Letters of support should be included with the application.
5. Cost-effectiveness of the project will be a significant factor. Projects that include
higher percentages of funds for administrative, overhead or indirect costs will be
considered a lower priority. Indirect rates cannot exceed 13 percent.
TITLE: CONSERVATION EFFECTS ASSESSMENT PROJECT
AGENCY: DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Natural Resources
http://www.csrees.usda.gov/fo/fundview.cfm?fonum=1160
http://www.csrees.usda.gov/fo/fundview.cfm?fonum=1160
The Integrated Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grants Program Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) is to develop research and extension
projects aimed at improving the watershed health of grazing land watersheds. The goal of
this program area is to build a knowledge base that can be used to evaluate the impacts of
conservation projects and programs on grazing land watershed health, improve the
management of grazing lands to achieve environmental goals and inform policy decisions.
Grant monies range from 0-$650,000.
13
State Sources
TITLE:
WATER AND SEWER GRANT PROGRAMS
AGENCY: MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
FROM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/communitydevelopment/programs/
The Department of Economic Development offers grants to enhance infrastructure such as
water and sewer lines. These grants might be particularly helpful in protecting against
drought by connecting disparate water sources and thereby providing multiple water
sources to isolated communities. These monies might also be helpful in providing
adequate protection of sewage treatment plants from the risk of flood or separation of
storm water from combined sewer lines.
TITLE:
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT/MITIGATION TRAINING
AGENCY: STATE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
http://www.sema.dps.mo.gov/
The State Emergency Management Agency (SEMA) offers grants for training jurisdictions in
hazard mitigation, preparedness, and planning. These funds are used for training
appropriate staff in identifying projects best suited for mitigation.
TITLE:
PREPRE-DISASTER MITIGATION
MITIGATION PROJECT IMPACT
http://sema.dps.mo.gov/PDMC2007FEMAGuidanceOverview.pdf
SEMA funds are provided to assist communities with technical assistance in the
development of a sustained pre-disaster mitigation program. Funds can be used for
planning mitigation initiatives and for providing technical “know-how” in the construction
of mitigation projects.
TITLE:
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/pa/index.shtm
These SEMA grants are designed to provide funds to repair damaged infrastructure and
public facilities. Funds can also be used to reinstate government services impacted by a
hazard event. Also, this program can fund the repair of damaged components of a
structure.
The Federal share of assistance is not less than 75% of the eligible cost for emergency
measures and permanent restoration. The grantee (usually the State) determines how the
non-Federal share (up to 25%) is split with the sub grantees (eligible applicants).
14
TITLE:
DISASTER RECOVERY INITIATIVE
AGENCY: MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
http://www.hud.gov/info/disasters.cfm
The Missouri Department of Economic Development (DED) provides this grant program to
bridge funding gaps in recovery assistance after a disaster. These funds can also be used to
fund gaps in a mitigation development program.
TITLE:
SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION PROGRAM
AGENCY: MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
http://www.dnr.mo.gov/financial.htm
http://www.dnr.mo.gov/financial.htm
The Missouri Department of Natural Resources (DNR), through the Soil and Water
Conservation Program, offer grants, cost share programs, and low interest loans to
agencies and property owners to plan and implement best practices to reduce soil erosion
and improve water quality. Practices that facilitate slower release of water upstream
mitigate downstream flood hazards. The programs are generally applicable to rural and
agricultural environments.
OTHER SOURCES IN THE FUNDING OF MITIGATION
MITIGATION PROJECTS
Local Sources
Municipal and county governments can provide funds for projects through their general
revenue fund and through a dedicated capital improvement and/or transportation, sales,
and use taxes. Special taxing districts, such as a Neighborhood Improvement District (NID),
can be formed if practical, to assess property owners for a portion of the cost of
improvements.
NonNon-governmental
Other potential sources of revenue for implementing local mitigation projects are monetary
contributions from nonprofit organizations such as the American Red Cross, community
relief funds, churches, charitable trusts, and land trusts.
Conclusion
There are many sources of funding available for hazard mitigation projects. Those
identified here, while they are significant, do not comprise all potential sources. It should
be noted that new programs can become available, and existing programs can be modified
or dropped. Many funds available are leveraged with “local” matching funds at various
contribution percentages. In order to take advantage of state and federal funding,
community diligence in keeping abreast of changes in funding opportunities will be
necessary for implementing hazard mitigation projects.
WORKSHEET
JEFFERSON COUNTY CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
15
16
CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
Policies and
Programs
(ex. Zoning
Ordinance)
Document
Reference
(ex.
Comprehensive
Plan & page
number)
EffectiveEffectiveness for
Mitigation
(ex. low,
medium,
high)
Rationale for Effectiveness
(ex. low because allows
development in floodplain)
New construction and improvements are
not allowed without extensive mitigation
requirements. Any encroachments such as
fill, new construction, or other
developments within in the floodway must
not create any increase in flood levels
within the community during a base flood
discharge.
Requires 2 feet freeboard.
Floodplain
management
County Floodplain
Management
Ordinance
High
Multi-hazard
emergency plan
County Emergency
Operations Plan
Medium
Consider more formal mutual aid
agreements, improve the Emergency
Operations Center, warning systems in rural
areas, emergency response equipment,
training for volunteer agencies and the
private sector, and public preparedness
education.
Stormwater
regulations
County Stormwater
and Subdivision
Regulations
Medium
Stormwater runoff, sediment and erosion
management provides effective measures to
deal with increasing development trends.
Building
regulations
County
Medium
The county has building inspectors that
ensure construction is built to code.
High
The county administers and participates
fully in the NFIP.
Medium
Coordination with county jurisdictions
through US Corps of Engineers.
BOCA
2003
Flood insurance
Joined NFIP
5/16/83
#290808
Mississippi River
Levee issues
Levee districts
1
SECTION 4
Introduction to Mitigation
The East-West Gateway Council of Governments is subject to many types of hazards:
flooding, tornado/severe windstorm, winter storm, earthquake/landslide, dam failure,
drought, heat wave, and an occasional wildfire. All-hazard mitigation planning is the
process associated with devising strategies needed to mitigate the damages associated
with these natural disasters.
Definition of Mitigation
Mitigation is defined as “sustained action that reduces or eliminates long-term risk to
people and property from hazards and their effects.” It describes the ongoing efforts at
the Federal, State, local and individual levels to lessen the impact of disasters upon families,
homes, jurisdictions and the economy.
Mitigation includes avoiding the development of hazard prone sections of the jurisdiction,
and making existing development in hazard-prone areas safer. Certain areas in some
jurisdictions are susceptible to damage from hazards. As such, steps are taken to make
these areas less vulnerable through flood buyouts.
Jurisdictions can steer growth to less risky areas, through non-structural measures such as
avoiding construction in flood-prone areas. Keeping buildings and people out of harm’s
way is the essence of mitigation. Incorporating mitigation into decisions relating to a
jurisdiction’s growth can result in a safer, more resilient jurisdiction, and one that is more
attractive to families and businesses.
Categories of Mitigation
Mitigation categories are grouped into six categories.
•
Prevention - Prevention measures are intended to keep a hazard risk problem from
getting worse; it ensures future development does not increase losses. Some
examples include: planning and zoning, open space preservation, land development
regulations, and storm water management.
•
Property Protection - These measures are used to modify buildings and other
surroundings subject to hazard risk or their surroundings, rather than prevent the
hazard from occurring. These measures protect people and property at risk. Some
examples include: acquisition/public procurement and management of lands that
are vulnerable to damage from hazards; relocation/permanent evacuation of hazard
prone areas to safer areas; rebuilding and modifying structures to reduce damage
2
by future hazard events; floodproofing or protection of floodprone buildings, using
various methods.
•
Natural Resource Protection - These measures are intended to reduce the intensity
of hazard effects and to improve the quality of the environment and wildlife. Parks,
recreation, conservation agencies and similar organizations implement these
activities. Some examples of this mitigation measure include: erosion and sediment
control, and wetlands protection.
•
Emergency Services - Emergency services measures protect people before and after a
hazard event. Most counties and many cities have emergency management offices
to coordinate warning, responses and recovery during disasters. Emergency services
include warning, capacity of response, critical facilities protection and health and
safety maintenance.
•
Structural Projects - These measures directly protect people and property at risk.
They are called structural because they involve construction of manmade structures
to control hazards. Structural projects for flood control include reservoirs,
levees/floodwalls, diversions, channel modifications, and storm sewers.
•
Public Information - Public information activities inform and remind citizens about
hazardous areas and measures needed to avoid damage and injury. This
information is directed to present and future property owners, present and future
business owners, and visitors. Some examples of public information activities
include providing hazard maps and other information; outreach hazard mitigation
programs through newspapers, radio/TV/videotape, mass mailings, notices/displays,
property owner handbook, presentations; real estate disclosure, public library,
technical assistance, and school age and adult education classes.
Mitigation Versus Preparedness
Preparedness
Mitigation differs from preparedness in that it is designed to address long term activities
that reduce or eliminate a hazard and/or a hazard’s damages, such as development and
implementation of a hazard mitigation plan, promoting/developing tornado saferooms,
promoting/developing business continuity plans, rerouting transportation of HAZMAT
materials, development/enforcement of building/fire seismic and flood codes and
promoting flood buyouts or retrofit projects. Preparedness activities occur at the predisaster stage and addresses activities that develop response and recovery activities. These
activities include an inventory of local resources, development/implementation of training
citizens, design/conduct and evaluate responder exercises; development of resource lists
and procurement resources; development of unified incident command agreements and
development of mutual aid agreements.
3
Mitigation Versus Response and Recovery
Mitigation differs from response and recovery in that mitigation is designed to address
long-term activities that reduce or eliminate a hazard and/or a hazard’s damages.
Response and recovery activities occur at the disaster onset and during the post disaster
time frames. Response activities include immediate actions that save lives, protect property
and stabilize the situation and include alerting, securing and aiding the public, mobilizing
emergency personnel and equipment, implementing plans and protective actions,
assessment of the disaster, activating the incident command system and response and
react to the disaster’s effects. Recovery activities occur after the disaster has occurred.
They ensure that all systems return to normal. Such activities include implementation of
damage assessment procedures, remove debris, develop after action reports, develop
disaster assistance grants and rebuild better.
Mitigation Plan Benefits
Hazard mitigation planning offers many benefits. These include: saving lives and property,
meeting the needs/policies of each specific jurisdiction, educates jurisdiction officials, public
and partners, reduces vulnerability to future hazards, guide and speed post disaster
recovery, enhance funding opportunities (HMGP, flood mitigation plan credit for FMA and
CRS programs, NOAA/NWS StormReady credit, NRCS/DNR/COE/CDBG grants), promotes
public participation, helps place mitigation project in the budget cycle, helps keep projects
and spending on track, focuses jurisdiction disaster mitigation efforts, guides post disaster
recovery, employs pro-active approach to minimize adverse effects of disasters, evaluates
hazards and risks, and determines mitigation needs and capabilities, solutions, activities
and projects.
Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Goals, Objectives, Strategies and Coordination
This section contains strategies that promote achievement of hazard mitigation, impact
reduction and other hazard mitigation jurisdiction goals. This section will address
mitigation strategies for hazards including flooding, tornado/severe windstorm, winter
storm, earthquake/landslide, dam failure, drought, heat wave and wildfire.
Jefferson County’s mitigation goals were derived from conferences with emergency
managers, jurisdiction stakeholders as well as the key planning documents (i.e. Emergency
Operations Plan, Official Master Plan, floodplain and building ordinances).
The mitigation goals include the following:
•
•
•
Prevent the loss of life, minimize illness and injury
Preserve property, infrastructure, business, maintain jurisdiction integrity
Develop sustainable long-range growth strategy
4
This section is organized with general goals that are to be met by accomplishing the
accompanying objectives, actions and subsequent strategies. An action matrix has been
included for Jefferson County. It provides a reference for the jurisdiction during the
implementation process. It identifies each goal, objective and strategy, identifies the
hazards addressed by each strategy, type of strategy, target completion date, responsible
party/organization for implementation, potential funding source, prioritization, as well as
monitoring and evaluation indicators. Specific information on potential funding sources is
in found in Section 3 of Jefferson County Hazard Mitigation Plan.
The goals, objectives, actions and strategies identified here were developed through a
multi-step process.
•
•
•
Hazard identification and analysis (identification of the hazards most prevalent of
the area and following the area).
Area vulnerability assessment (identification the areas of the jurisdiction most
vulnerable to the previously identified hazards).
Jurisdiction capability assessment questionnaire (assessment identified the steps the
jurisdiction had taken toward reducing their vulnerability to hazards by reviewing
the jurisdiction’s legal, institutional, political, technical and fiscal capability. This
step identified the jurisdiction’s capability to implement future mitigation measures.)
Community Emergency Management Directors and Locations are listed below:
TABLE J51A LIST OF EMD
EMD AUTHORITIES
Community Salutation Title
First Name Last Name Address1
Jefferson
EMD
Ms.
Susan
Green
P.O. Box 100
Phone
(636) 7975381
Festus
EMD
Mr.
Donald D.
DeClue
711 West
Main
(639) 9376646
Kimmswick
EMD
Mr.
Jerome
Selsor
P.O. Box 27
(636) 4647407
Arnold
EMD
Mr.
Robert
Shockey
2101 Jeffco
Blvd.
(636) 2963204
Pevely
EMD
Lt.
Terry
Thomas
P.O. Box 304
(636) 4755301
Herculaneum
EMD
Chief
Christopher J. Pigg
1 Parkwood
Ct.
(636) 4754447
Crystal City
EMD
Mr.
Karry
Friedmeyer 130
Mississippi
Ave.
(636) 9312905
5
Surveys
Public input was sought during the planning process. Missouri has a requirement for an
open meeting process called the Sunshine Law. Section 610.011 of the Sunshine Law
states: "It is the public policy of this state that meetings, records, votes, actions, and
deliberations of public governmental bodies be open to the public unless otherwise
provided by law." Meetings, discussions and mitigation recommendations have been
documented. The Hazard Mitigation Plan process called for 30-day public comment period
to solicit comments for this plan. Public input was gathered through three workshops held
in St. Louis, Franklin, Jefferson, and St. Louis County. There were also surveys sent to each
municipality and school district in the area with around a 50% return rate. East West
Gateway Council of Governments will file the surveys and be available upon request.
Municipalities and School Districts who did not respond were sent the letter with two
follow up calls to retrieve the information.
TABLE J51B LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS
Old
Survey Received Resolution
City of Ballwin
Yes
City of Bellefontaine Neighbors Yes
City of Black Jack
Yes
City of Breckenridge Hills
Yes
City of Chesterfield
Yes
City of Clarkson Valley
Yes
City of Clayton
Yes
City of Cool Valley
Yes
City of Country Club Hills
Yes
City of Crestwood
Yes
City of Creve Coeur
Yes
City of Des Peres
Yes
City of DeSoto
Yes
City of Ellisville
Yes
City of Eureka
Yes
City of Glendale
Yes
City of Hazelwood
Yes
City of Herculaneum
Yes
City of Ladue
Yes
City of Lakeshire
Yes
City of Moline Acres
Yes
City of New Melle
Yes
City of Olivette
Yes
City of Olympian Village
Yes
City of Pagedale
Yes
City of Pevely
Yes
City of Richmond Heights
Yes
City of St. Charles
Yes
City of St. Clair
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
6
TABLE J51B LOCAL
JURISDICTIONS
Old
Survey Received Resolution
City of St. Louis
City of St. Peters
City of Sullivan
City of Sunset Hills
City of University City
City of Vinita Park
City of Warson Woods
City of Washington
City of Webster Groves
City of Weldon Spring
Village of Champ
Village of Hanley Hills
Village of Parkdale
Village of Riverview
Village of Twin Oaks
City of Lake Saint Louis
City of Bella Villa
City of Berkeley
Village of Wilbur Park
City of Cottleville
City of Florissant
City of Jennings
City of Kirkwood
City of Manchester
City of Maplewood
City of Maryland Heights
City of New Haven
City of Oakland
City of Overland
City of Portage Des Sioux
City of St. George
City of Union
City of Velda City
City of Wentzville
City of Wildwood
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
TABLE J51C SCHOOL DISTRICTS
Survey Received
Bayless School District
Brentwood School District
DeSoto 73 School Dist.
Dunklin R-V School Dist.
Fort Zumwalt R-II School Dist.
Francis Howell R-III
Hillsboro R-3 School District
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
TABLE J51C SCHOOL DISTRICTS
7
Survey Received
Jefferson County R-VII School
Yes
Ladue School Dist.
Yes
Mehlville R-IX School Dist.
Yes
Northwest R-I School Dist.
Yes
Parkway School District
Yes
Rockwood R-VI School District
Yes
Special School District of St. Louis Co
Yes
St. Charles R-VI School Dist.
Yes
St. Clair R-XIII School
Yes
Strain-Japan R-16 School Dist.
Yes
Sullivan School District
Yes
University City School Dist.
Yes
Washington School District
Yes
*School Districts not included in 2004 All Hazard Mititgation Resolution Signoff
Survey Results
Each county and one by school jurisdiction broke down the survey results.
St. Louis County had the highest return rate of surveys at 46.9% or 45 of 96 municipalities.
Most of the municipalities who were involved in Hazard Mitigation projects pertained to
flooding or in adopting Emergency Management Programs. Most of the projects
implemented since 2004 were mostly in response to CERT training and Emergency
response service and not to mitigation project itself. Only 22% of county municipalities
have ever applied for mitigation funding with only 6.7% successful in receiving funding.
The county seems to not have concerns with the original mitigation plan and is adequate in
educating the public on most natural disasters.
St. Charles County had a low survey response rate of 33.3% as in comparison with St. Louis
County. There were only 6 survey responses from the 18 municipalities, which may skew
the percentages with such a low return rate. Every municipality was given a survey via mail
and two phone calls to respond. 83.3% of municipalities in St. Charles County responded
to not being involved in Mitigation Projects at the time. Only 16.7% responded to
implementing projects since 2004 with two responses in floodplain management and levee
construction near 370. Municipalities in St. Charles County have applied for mitigation
funding in the past yet unsuccessful in every case (according to the surveys). None of the
municipalities have concerns in mitigation and most believe their public output concerning
mitigation preparedness is sufficient. In relation to repetitive loss properties in the St.
Charles County these survey responses seem skewed. Some of the flood prone
municipalities and/or unincorporated did not respond to the survey which may give
reasoning in not having mitigation plan update concerns.
8
Franklin County had the lowest response rate at 25% or 2 surveys out of the 12
municipalities. The one response yes to migration projects involved brush clearance from
Busch Creek to prevent future flooding. One municipality wanted to apply for funding
from the government for generators and feels this is vital need in mitigating the effects of
power outages due to ice, wind, and flooding. Mitigation funding does not cover
generators, which denied the request before put forth. Except for the generator request,
all three municipalities did not see mitigation funding as concern. None of the
municipalities have concerns in mitigation and most believe their public output concerning
mitigation preparedness is sufficient.
Jefferson County had a better response rate at 46.2% or 6 out of 13 municipalities.
Jefferson County and Herculaneum both responded to hazard mitigation projects at of
2008 for a spring flood damaging a section of a high school and some residential
properties. Mitigation funding was applied for in the housing buyout yet is still pending
and private insurance covered damages at the high school. Two of the six responses were
concerned with mitigation funding and with the care of special needs persons yet believed
public education and emergency preparedness was satisfactory.
The School Districts, new to the All Hazard Mitigation Update, had a 35.3% response rate
with 18 of 51 responding. Nearly ever school responded to having a basic emergency
safety plan in the case of a natural and/or terrorist event. Only one spoke of building a
section of the school in a floodplain. Most have implemented emergency plans but have
not taken advantage of funding given for specific mitigation funding pertaining to this
update. Though one of the schools have applied and received funding for the removal of
mercury from their facility. School districts had the highest percentage at 44% of concern
with the mitigation update. In being new to the update most do not have the knowledge
of grants and funding options one would have for federal funding. The school districts feel
they take care of their students yet half do have concerns in educating the public
concerning mitigation procedures in the case of natural or man made disasters.
Survey responses are located below with an asterisk explaining the number of surveys
received in comparison with the percentages.
TABLE J51D
SURVEY
RESULTS
St. Louis County
Jurisdiction
Involved in
Hazard Mit.
Projects
NoNo-N/A
Yes
Pending
Applied for
Projects
Mitigation
Implement-ed Funding Fed,
Since 2004
State, Local
Successful
Funding
Request
Mitigation
Concerns or
Update Plan
Jurisdiction's
EOP Protect
People w/
Needs
Educ. Public
Concerning Mit.
& Preparedness
71.1%
48.9%
77.8%
86.7%
60.0%
28.9%
26.7%
28.9%
51.1%
22.2%
6.7%
40.0%
68.9%
71.1%
6.7%
*45 survey responses out of 96 municipalities (46.9%)
9
St. Charles County
Jurisdiction
Involved in
Hazard Mit.
Projects
NoNo-N/A
Yes
Pending
Projects
Implemented
Since 2004
Applied for
Mitigation
Funding Fed,
State, Local
83.3%
83.3%
83.3%
16.7%
16.7%
16.7%
Successful
Funding
Request
Mitigation
Concerns or
Update Plan
Jurisdiction's
EOP Protect
People w/
Needs
Educ. Public
Concerning Mit.
& Preparedness
83.3%
100.0%
66.7%
33.3%
0.0%
0.0%
33.3%
66.7%
16.7%
*6 survey responses out of 18 municipalities (33.3%)
Franklin County
Jurisdiction
Involved in
Hazard Mit.
Projects
NoNo-N/A
Yes
Pending
Projects
Implemented
Since 2004
Applied for
Mitigation
Funding Fed,
State, Local
Successful
Funding
Request
Mitigation
Concerns or
Update Plan
Jurisdiction's
EOP Protect
People w/
Needs
Educ. Public
Concerning Mit.
& Preparedness
66.7%
66.7%
100.0%
100.0%
100.0%
33.3%
33.3%
33.3%
33.3%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
66.7%
66.7%
0.0%
*3 survey responses out of 12 municipalities (25%)
Jefferson County
Jurisdiction
Involved in
Hazard Mit.
Projects
NoNo-N/A
Yes
Projects
Implemented
Since 2004
Applied for
Mitigation
Funding Fed,
State, Local
Successful
Funding
Request
Mitigation
Concerns or
Update Plan
Jurisdiction's
EOP Protect
People w/
Needs
Educ. Public
Concerning Mit.
& Preparedness
50.0%
50.0%
66.7%
83.3%
66.7%
50.0%
33.3%
50.0%
50.0%
33.3%
0.0%
33.3%
50.0%
66.7%
TABLE J51E 2009 All Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Local Government Survey
Survey
Jurisdiction Involved in Projects Implemented
Hazard Mit. Projects
Since 2004
Municipality
City of Arnold
City of Byrnes Mill
Village of Cedar Hill Lakes
City of DeSoto
No.
No.
City of Festus
City of Herculaneum
Storm water at Barclay
street that is flooding
and damaging the
high school locker
room and track.
Emergency notification
system
Village of Parkdale
No.
Applied for Mitigation
Funding Fed, State,
Local
No.
No.
No.
No.
Emergency warning
sirens have been
ordered. Waiting for
delivery and
installation.
Sewer/Manhole/Flood
Plain Mitigation
No.
No.
10
City of Hillsboro
Jefferson County
Scotsdale
City of Pevely
Yes. Resulting from
Property Buy-outs
2008 spring flood we under Mitigation
are working in
Program.
residential home buyout programs.
Fed/State Programs for
buy-outs.
Yes.
No.
Adopting more
stringent building
codes to meet
earthquake and high
wind standards.
Adding more
emergency sirens.
TABLE J51F
J51F 2009 All Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Local Government Survey
Successful Funding
Request
Municipality
City of Arnold
City of Byrnes Mill
Village of Cedar Hill Lakes
City of DeSoto
N/A.
Mitigation Concerns or
Update Plan
Jurisdiction's EOP
Protect People w/
Needs
Educ. Public
Concerning Mit. &
Preparedness
No.
Yes.
Through newspaper,
newsletter, activity
participation
City of Festus
City of Herculaneum
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
Storm Water ProjectAt the high school
adding an additional
18" storm drain, a
double curb catch
basin and repairing
previous detention
ponds.
Yes.
media and quarterly
news letter
Village of Parkdale
City of Hillsboro
Jefferson County
No.
No.
No.
No.
Yes.
Yes. Training for core
services, education for
public- workshops and
media releases.
No.
Through newspaper,
newsletter, activity
participation.
Scotsdale
City of Pevely
For 2008 funding
request still pending. I
do not know about
previous years.
No.
No.
11
Evaluation
Several mitigation actions were proposed and discussed by all of the participants at the
mitigation workshops for inclusion into the Hazard Mitigation Plan. The following table
provides an analysis of the County’s proposed mitigation actions. Each action was
reviewed according to the STAPLEE criteria. STAPLEE criteria include: Social, Technical,
Administrative, Political, Legal, Economic and Environmental considerations. The asterisks
in the columns on the right indicate the action would have a positive effect.
TABLE J52
JEFFERSON COUNTY PROPOSED MITIGATION ACTION
EVALUATION
Proposed Action
Objective 1.1: Raise public awareness.
Encourage development of public outreach programs
Encourage organizations to develop hazard measures for
employees/visitors
Encourage development of emergency management
curriculum in schools.
Encourage agencies to identify, develop outreach program
for special needs population and hazard mitigation
measures
Encourage education and construction of saferooms in
mobile home parks
Objective 1.2:
1.2: Establish warning systems for all hazards.
Encourage jurisdictions, LEPC, EMA to determine, report
warning system data gaps for all hazards.
Encourage development of evacuation plan for all disasters
Encourage placement of flood warning signs
Encourage special needs population to obtain NOAA radios,
saferooms
Objective 1.3: Decrease occurrence and impacts of flooding.
Encourage participation in NFIP, CRS
Encourage residents, jurisdictions, developers to protect
rivers and corridors
Encourage residents, etc. to design, build stormwater
systems that replicate water movement
Encourage residents, stakeholders to participate in
watershed plans to prevent flooding.
Encourage jurisdictions to identify, purchase remaining
repetitive flood buyout properties.
Revise flood fighting plans as needed.
Encourage jurisdictions to strengthen floodplain
regulations.
Objective 2.1: Reduce or prevent impacts from hazards on
private properties.
Encourage education of residents on property protection
from hazards (checklists, preparedness kits).
Jurisdiction planning departments encouraged to use
hazard maps with developers, home buyers, construction
and engineers.
S
T
A
P
L
E
E
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
12
TABLE J52
JEFFERSON COUNTY PROPOSED MITIGATION ACTION
EVALUATION
Proposed Action
Encourage utilities, communications, developers to
construct underground lines
Objective 2.2: Reduced or prevent impacts from hazards on
public properties.
Encourage jurisdictions to adopt, enforce most current
codes, ordinances for all hazards.
Encourage those responsible for special needs population to
take FEMA structural safety classes for building integrity
Encourage emergency response agencies and districts to
relocate facilities away from geographically redundant
areas.
Encourage jurisdictions to adopt open burning control
ordinances.
Encourage jurisdiction agencies to coordinate
communications plans.
Encourage jurisdictions, state, federal agencies to review,
prioritize emergency routes, retrofit infrastructure used for
hazard events
Encourage upgrade of lifeline facilities to meet most current
building seismic codes
Objective 3.1: Develop collaborative hazard mitigation
efforts across jurisdictional boundaries.
Encourage jurisdictions to implement Hazard Mitigation
Plan
Encourage partnering with local, county, region, state
governments
Encourage coordination between levee districts to protect
those living up and downstream.
Highly recommend pertinent jurisdictions conduct proper
record keeping for all documents related to disasters.
Objective 3.2: Reduce impacts and promote protection of
natural resources.
Encourage development of jurisdiction land use plans,
zoning, regulations to protect downstream residents from
dam failure.
Encourage jurisdiction educate residents on proper disposal
of yard, commercial and household waste.
Encourage jurisdictions, residents to maintain streams,
corridors.
Encourage jurisdictions assist MDNR in full implementation
of dam safety program.
Encourage jurisdictions to develop greenways for flood
protection that parallels streams, rivers.
Encourage jurisdictions to become familiar and comply with
drought, water restrictions.
Encourage jurisdictions, stakeholders to work together to
protect watersheds, encourage stormwater practices for
flood protection
S
*
T
*
A
*
P
*
L
*
E
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
E
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
13
Workshop participants discussed suggestions, added suggestions and deleted some for
various actions by using the STAPLEE evaluation. The following actions were eliminated for
various reasons as shown on the following list:
•
•
A comment was made pertaining to coordination between local stakeholders and
various state agencies on design and construction of roadways that were being
rebuilt from severe flooding. The local stakeholders felt that the state agencies were
not taking their suggestions and expertise into advisement.
A comment was made regarding the need for specialty equipment for response and
recovery activities. This was discarded as not being directly relevant to hazard
mitigation planning.
The final mitigation recommendations include the six categories of mitigation: prevention,
property protection, natural resource protection, emergency services, structural projects
and public information. Recommendations include, but are not limited to those listed
below.
GOAL #1: Prevent the loss of life; minimize illness and injury on a local, countywide and
regional basis.
Objectives:
1. Raise public awareness concerning hazards, including measures that can be taken to
promote mitigation and increase disaster preparedness, response and recovery
capabilities.
Actions
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
Develop public outreach programs that ensure all members of the jurisdiction
have access to information on hazards, consequences, and steps to be taken
to reduce risk at home and work.
Businesses, governments and special districts to develop and distribute
pertinent hazard mitigation measures for employees and visitors
Develop emergency management curriculum in public and private schools,
colleges and universities to develop hazard mitigation measures (for
incorporation into emergency plans) for schools; post plans on school
internet site.
Appropriate jurisdiction agencies to identify all special needs populations in
the jurisdiction, and develop a special outreach program for those at risk,
and coordinate hazard mitigation plans (including backup power,
evacuation, and warning plans for all hazards).
Educate and construction of saferooms in all mobile
home parks.
14
2. Establish warning systems for all disasters for businesses, schools, special districts
and special needs populations and governments.
Actions
a.
b.
c.
d.
Jurisdictions to work with local emergency planning committee and
emergency management agency to determine and report on warning system
gaps for all hazards, including dam failures, tornadoes and flash floods;
make recommendations and act on them.
Develop evacuation plan for all disasters.
Place flash flood warning signs.
Special needs population to develop hazard measures to include distribution
of NOAA weather radios; encourage placement of saferooms (in strategic
locations).
3. Decrease occurrence and impact of flooding.
Actions
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Appropriate jurisdictions to participate in National Flood Insurance Program,
CRS, Hazard Mitigation Plan.
Residents, jurisdictions and developers to protect and maintain natural river
and stream channels and corridors.
Residents, jurisdictions and developers to utilize, design and/or build systems
to detain stormwater in ways to promote infiltration and replicate natural
movement of water.
Local governments and stakeholders to participate in watershed planning
that protect streams against flooding.
Jurisdictions to identify remaining repetitive flood loss properties for buyout
purposes; prioritize and implement buyouts.
Review and revise flood-fighting plans as appropriate.
Jurisdictions to strengthen floodplain regulations.
GOAL # 2: Preserve and maintain property, infrastructure, businesses, and jurisdiction
vitality on local, countywide and regional basis.
Objectives:
Objectives:
1. Reduce or prevent impacts from hazards on private properties
Actions
a.
Educate residents, businesses and jurisdictions on hazards by circulating
brochures, checklist and preparedness kits to prepare structures for disasters
(such as tiedowns, gas shutoff valves and other utilities).
b.
c.
15
Jurisdiction planning departments to work with home builders associations,
realtors’ associations, developers; encourage use of hazard maps by public
for purchasing, construction, improvement of properties.
Utilities and communications businesses and developers to
consider installation of underground electric and communications lines.
2. Reduce or prevent impacts from hazards on public properties.
Actions
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
Jurisdictions adopting and enforcing most current
codes, ordinances, policies for all hazards, especially floods, earthquakes and
tornadoes.
Those who are responsible for special needs populations to take
FEMA structural safety training classes for building integrity.
Emergency response agencies and districts to locate facilities
away from all geographically redundant hazard areas
Jurisdictions to adopt open burning control ordinances
Utilize municipal leagues as nexus for coordination
Appropriate jurisdiction agencies to coordinate communications plan for
hazard events.
Appropriate jurisdictions, state and federal agencies to review, prioritize
emergency route and retrofit infrastructure (roads, bridges, buildings,
emergency medical facilities) that will be utilized for disasters.
Upgrade lifeline facilities to meet current building code seismic standards
GOAL #3: Encourage growth that is compatible with hazard mitigation strategies
identified in this plan on a local, countywide and regional basis.
Objectives:
1. Develop collaborative hazard mitigation efforts across jurisdictional boundaries.
Actions
a.
b.
c.
d.
Jurisdictions and local emergency management agencies to implement the
All-Hazard Mitigation programs.
Partner with local, county and region-wide governments and encourage
legislation to collaborate and promote best management practices in local,
regional and state planning.
Coordinate levee districts in order to protect upstream and downstream
interests.
Highly recommend participating jurisdictions maintain proper recordkeeping
of pertinent documents related to disasters.
16
2. Reduce impacts and promote protection to natural resources.
Actions
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Develop land use plans, zoning and regulations to protect downstream
residents from impacts of storm water as well as levee and dam failure.
Jurisdictions to educate residents on proper disposal of yard, commercial and
household waste (not in sewer system or streams).
Jurisdictions, residents to clean up creeks and streams.
Jurisdictions to assist MDNR in full implementation of dam safety program.
Jurisdictions to develop greenways for flood protection that parallel streams,
rivers
Jurisdictions to become familiar and comply with drought/water
restrictions
Jurisdictions and local stakeholders to work together to protect watersheds
and encourage sound stormwater practices for flood protection.
Strategic Implementation
The State of Missouri SEMA requires that the Hazard Mitigation Plan contain a description
of the jurisdiction’s mitigation strategy for reducing disaster damages and implementing
mitigation activities.
Adoption of the plan demonstrates Jefferson County’s commitment to working toward
fulfilling the mitigation goals and objectives outlines in the plan. This also legitimizes the
plan and authorizes the various responsible agencies to incorporate mitigation as a part of
their job duties. Adoption fulfills requirements of several Federal programs (CRS, FMS) that
require local governments to adopt mitigation strategy. Adoption mechanisms provide a
better opportunity for the mitigation planning activities to be ingrained into regular
government operations. Jefferson County’s Hazard Mitigation Plan will be implemented by
various departments and agencies within Jefferson County. The implementation process
will include coordination among the County departments and coordinated with other
relevant agencies or districts though Jefferson County’s Emergency Management Agency.
Jefferson County will set up a system to monitor progress and evaluate the effectiveness of
implemented actions with revisions as needed. Every five years, the county will review the
plan and include any needed updates. The updated plan will be submitted for
SEMA/FEMA approval. Copies of the signed adoption resolutions are included in the
Regional Overview. The plan will be reviewed for any updates following any major
disasters that occur within the county.
17
Cities with Higher Exposure to County Hazards
The cities of Arnold, Byrnes Mill, Cedar Hill Lakes, DeSoto, Festus, Herculaneum,
Kimmswick, Pevely, Crystal City, and Scotsdale are the incorporated areas within Jefferson
County that are found to have a significantly higher exposure to those hazards affecting
the County. The County’s goals, objectives, and actions encompass those needed to deal
with the issues found in these cities; especially targeting repetitive flood loss properties for
buyout. It is recommended that Jefferson County work with these cities to incorporate
county actions into these jurisdictions specific hazard mitigation concerns.
Analysis and Prioritization of Mitigation Actions
Jefferson County’s mitigation actions promote and/or support the development of local
hazard mitigation plans, projects and activities. Examples of actions include instituting
watershed plans, encouraging adoption of the most current codes and ordinances,
development of flood fighting plans, prioritizing flood buyout properties.
The following matrix provides an analysis and prioritization of the county’s hazard
mitigation goals, objectives and actions. The matrix distinguishes between the identified
hazards and the county’s mitigation actions. It is recommended that the County will place
an emphasis on cost-benefit analysis for further mitigation project prioritization purposes
when the budget analyses are conducted. The matrix also identifies those agencies
responsible for implementation along with the respective funding sources. It is
recommended that actions be coordinated, where applicable with Missouri’s mitigation
actions.
Criteria for prioritization are:
Historically, Jefferson County has been most affected by flooding hazards followed in
severity by tornado/thunderstorm, severe winter storm, heat wave, and drought. The risk
of earthquake, dam failure and wildfire must be addressed, even though the County has
not yet experienced these hazards.
Some actions may be high priorities, but will require a lengthy planning process. These
types of actions will be designated as a “high priority” with a future target date for
completion.
Certain hazards can impact incorporated areas more than the County as a whole. The
incorporated areas that could be specifically affected are identified as follows:
1= Arnold
2=Byrnes Mill
3=Cedar Hill Lakes
4=Crystal City
5=DeSoto
18
6=Festus
7=Herculaneum
8=Kimmswick
9=Pevely
10=Scotsdale
11=Hillsboro
12=Olympian Village
13=Parksdale
14= All communities
Jefferson County involvement is assumed for all of the items on the following Action
Matrix.
Monitoring, Evaluating and Updating the
the Plan
The narrative below describes the process to follow for monitoring, evaluating,
maintaining, updating and obtaining SEMA/FEMA’s approval of the Hazard Mitigation Plan
every five years and on an as needed basis.
In the course of their duties, emergency managers, in collaboration with their respective
Emergency Management Committee should meet annually and on an informal and routine
basis to focus on monitoring and evaluating as well as updating the Hazard Mitigation
Plan. In addition, a regional meeting could also be organized by Emergency Managers on
an annual basis to provide cross-jurisdictional information sharing federal and state
updates and opportunities for project development, implementation, and funding with
jurisdictions and stakeholders. It is recommended that the Emergency Management
Committee include County Commissioners, municipal officials, fire, law enforcement,
emergency medical and public health officials for various objectives of this plan. It is
recommended that the County public notice these meetings and encourage the public to
participate.
It is recommended that the committee review each goal and objective to determine the
relevance to local, regional, statewide and federal disaster situations and to ensure that
they are addressing current and expected conditions. The committee should review the risk
assessment portion of the plan to determine if this information should be updated. The
parties responsible for the various implementation actions should report on the status of
their projects and will include which implementation processes worked well, difficulties
encountered, coordination efforts and which strategies should be revised.
The Emergency Management Committee should take three months to update the plan
before submitting it to the State Hazard Mitigation Officer. If no changes are necessary,
the State Hazard Mitigation Officer should be given a justification for this determination.
Copies of the plan should be catalogued and kept on hand at the main Jefferson County
library branch. In addition, a copy of the plan will be available on the East-West Gateway
Council of Governments website (www.ewgateway.org), the Office of Emergency
Management and at the Jefferson County Clerk’s Office. The existence and location of
these copies should be publicized by the daily local newspaper, and listed on the county
website. Contained in the plan is the address and telephone number of the Office of
Emergency Management responsible for keeping track of public comments on the plan.
Copies of the plan and proposed changes will be posted on the county website. The site
will contain an email address and telephone number to which people can direct their
comments. A link to this site will be provided on the East-West Gateway Council of
Governments website.
19
20
WORKSHEET
JEFFERSON COUNTY FIVEFIVE-YEAR ACTION MATRIX WORKSHEET
21
Jefferson County's Proposed FiveFive-Year Action Matrix
Drought
Heat Wave
Earthquake
Dam Failure
Wildfire
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Flood
x
Winter
Action
Type of
New,
Estimated Probable Lead
Strategy Revision/Ongoing Target
Organizer
Target Date
Tornado
Community
Identified Natural Hazards
High
Program
completed and
distributed
x
x
x
Low
Program
completed and
distributed
x
x
High
Curriculum
completed and
implemented
x
High
Program
completed,
distributed and
implemented
x
High
Program
completed,
distributed and
implemented
x
High
Program
completed,
distributed and
implemented
x
Potential
Funding
Sources Priority
Evaluation
Goal #1: Prevent loss of life, minimize illness, injury on local, countywide and regional basis.
1.1 Raise public awareness.
14
14
14
14
14
fed, state,
County
local govt.
Public
2009 &
Information/
program
Information New & Ongoing Continuing Planning Officer
funds
Develop public
outreach program
Encourage
development of
hazard measures for
Public
2009 &
visitors, employees Information New & Ongoing Continuing
County EMA
internal
funds
fed &
state govt.
program
funds/
private
funding
Develop emergency
management
curriculum in
Public
2009 &
schools
Information New & Ongoing Continuing
Schools
Agencies to identify
and develop
fed, state,
jurisdiction outreach
County
local govt.
plan for special
Public
2009 &
Information/
program
needs population
funds
Information
New
Continuing Planning Officer
govt.
Educate, need,
program
construct saferooms
funds/
in mobile home
Public
2009 &
American Red
private
parks
Information
New
Continuing
Cross
funding
1.2 Establish warning systems for all hazards.
Jurisdictions to
work with LEPC,
EMA to determine
and report on
warning system
data gaps including Emergency
14
dam failure,
Services
New
2009 &
Annually
County EMA
fed, state,
local govt.
program
funds
x
22
tornadoes, flash
floods
14
Encourage
development of
evacuation plan for Emergency
2009 &
all natural disasters
Services New & Ongoing Continuing
Encourage
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, placement of flood
10,11,12,13 warning signs
Special needs
population obtain
NOAA weather
radios, saferooms
(in strategic
14
locations)
Emergency
Services
Ongoing
Continuing
Emergency
2009 &
Services New & Ongoing Continuing
County EMA
govt.
program
funds Medium
Program
completed,
distributed and
implemented
County EMA
fed, state,
local govt.
program
funds Medium
Signs placed
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
County EMA
govt.
program
funds/
private
funding
High
Program
completed,
distributed and
implemented
County
Floodplain
manager
internal
funds
High
Status Improved
x
x
Watershed
Advisory
Committee
internal
funds Medium Status Improved
x
x
University
Engineering
Department
govt.
program
funds/
private
funding
x
x
x
x
x
x
1.3 Decrease occurrence and impacts of flooding.
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, Participate in NFIP,
10,11,12,13 CRS
Encourage
residents,
jurisdictions,
developers to
protect, maintain
14
rivers, corridors
Residents,
jurisdictions,
developers to use,
design, build
systems to detain
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, stormwater that
10,11,12,13 replicates natural
Prevention
Ongoing
2009 &
Continuing
Prevention
New and
ongoing
2009 &
Continuing
2009 &
Structural New & Ongoing Continuing
High
Design
Plans/Construction
of Structures
x
23
water movement
Jurisdictions,
stakeholders to
participate in
watershed planning
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, to protect against
2009 &
10,11,12,13 floods
Prevention New & Ongoing Continuing
Watershed
Advisory
Committee
govt.
program
funds/
private
funding
Jurisdictions to
identify, purchase
remaining repetitive
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, flood loss buyout
Property
10,11,12,13 properties
Protection
2009 &
Continuing
Floodplain
manager
govt.
program
funds
2009 &
Annually
County
Floodplain
manager
fed, state,
local govt.
program
funds
High
Attendance
Records
x
x
High
Repetitive Loss
Properties
Mitigated
x
x
High
Updated Plans
Revised and
Adopted
x
x
County
Commission
fed, state,
local govt.
program
funds
High
Revised
Regulations in
Place
x
x
Goal #2: Preserve and maintain property, infrastructure, businesses, jurisdiction vitality.
2.1 Reduce or prevent impacts from hazards on private properties.
Educate residents
on property
protection from
hazards (checklists,
Public
preparedness kits) Information
14
Ongoing
Ongoing
County EMA
fed, state,
local govt.
program
funds
High
Status Improved
Revise flood1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, fighting plans as
10,11,12,13 needed
Jurisdictions to
strengthen
floodplain
regulations to
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, reduce impacts
10,11,12,13 from flooding
Emergency
Services
Prevention
Ongoing
Ongoing
Ongoing
2009 &
Continuing
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
24
14
Jurisdiction
planning
department to use
hazard maps with
developers, home
buyers,
construction,
engineers
Utilities,
communications,
developers to
installation of
underground lines
Prevention
New
14
Prevention
New
2.2 Reduce or prevent impacts from hazards on public properties.
Jurisdictions to
adopt, enforce most
current codes,
ordinances for all
hazards
14
Prevention
New
Those responsible
for special needs
population to take
FEMA structural
safety classes for
New and
14
Prevention
building integrity
ongoing
Emergency response
agencies and
districts to locate
facilities away from
geographically
Property
14
redundant areas
New
Protection
Jurisdictions to
adopt open burning
14
control ordinances Prevention
Ongoing
Jurisdictions to
coordinate
communications
plans
14
Prevention
Ongoing
14
Jurisdictions, state,
federal agencies to
review, prioritize
emergency routes,
County
2009 & Planning/Building internal
Continuing
Department
funds
High
County
2009 & Planning/Building internal
Continuing
Department
funds
Low
Completed and
publicized
Inquiries and
Design
Plans/Construction
of Underground
Infrastructure
County
Commission
internal
funds
High
Revised
Regulations in
Place
County EMA
fed &
state govt.
program
funds
High
Attendance
Records
2009 &
Continuing
County EMA
fed, state,
local govt.
program
funds
High
2009 &
Continuing
County
Commission
2009 &
Continuing
County EMA
internal
funds
Low
fed &
state govt.
program
funds Medium Status Improved
County EMA
fed &
state govt.
program
funds Medium
2009 &
Continuing
2009 &
Continuing
2009 &
Prevention New & Ongoing Continuing
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
At Risk Facilities
Relocated
Revised
Regulations in
Place
Completed and
Implemented
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
25
retrofit
infrastructure
14
Upgrade of lifeline
facilities to meet
seismic codes
Prevention
New
2009 &
Continuing
County EMA
fed &
state govt.
program
funds Medium
Construction
Complete
Encourage growth that is compatible with hazard mitigation strategies identified in this plan on local, countywide and regional basis.
3.1 Develop collaborative multimulti-interest committee to develop and achieve multimulti-jurisdictional goals.
Jurisdictions to
implement hazard
2009 and
internal
Plan Completed
14
mitigation plan
Prevention
New
annually
County EMA
funds
High and Implemented x
Partner with local,
county, regionwide, state
governments;
encourage
legislation to
promote, establish
Establishment of
state planning
2009 &
internal
State Planning
department
Department
14
Prevention
New
Continuing
Legislature
funds
High
x
State planning
department to
coordinate levee
districts to protect
those living
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, upstream and
2009 &
State Planning
internal
Levee Districts
10,11,12,13 downstream
Continuing
Department
funds
inventoried
Prevention
New
High
Recommend
pertinent
jurisdictions
conduct proper
recordkeeping for
all documents
related to natural
Public
2009 &
internal
Documents
14
disasters
Information
New
Continuing
County
funds
Low
Archived
x
3.2 Reduce impacts and promote protection of natural resources.
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
26
Develop
jurisdictions' land
use plans, zoning,
regulations to
protect downstream
residents from
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, impacts of dam
10,11,12,13 failure
Jurisdictions to
educate residents
on proper disposal
of yard,
commercial,
14
household waste
Jurisdictions,
residents to
maintain creeks,
14
streams
Jurisdictions to
assist MDNR in full
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, implementation of
10,11,2,13
dam safety program
Jurisdictions to
develop greenways
for flood protection
that parallel streams
and rivers
14
Jurisdictions to
become familiar
and comply with
drought, water
14
restrictions
Jurisdictions,
stakeholders to
work together
together to protect
watersheds and
encourage
stormwater
14
practices for flood
Natural
resource
protection
Natural
resource
protection
Natural
resource
protection
Natural
resource
protection
New
Ongoing
Ongoing
New
Natural
resource
protection New & Ongoing
Natural
resource
protection
New
County
2009 & Planning/Zoning
Continuing
Officer
internal
funds
High
Regulations in
place
x
x
Ongoing
County
Department of
Environment
internal
funds
Low
Status Improved
x
x
Ongoing
Watershed
Advisory
Committee
internal
funds
Low
Status Improved
x
x
High
Status
Improved/Risk
Reduced
x
x
x
x
County
Potential
2009 & Planning/Zoning Funding
Continuing
Officer
Sources
Ongoing
2009 &
Continuing
Natural
resource
2009 &
protection New & Ongoing Continuing
Watershed
Advisory
Committee
NRCS
Watershed
Advisory
Committee
Design
internal
Plans/Construction
funds Medium of Greenways
fed &
state govt.
program
funds
internal
funds
Low
Status Improved
High
Establishment of
Sustainable
Watershed
committees
x
x
x
x
27
protection
1 Arnold
Hillsboro
2 Byrnes Mill 3 Cedar Hill Lakes
12 Olympian Village 13 Parkdale
4 Crystal City 5 DeSoto
14 All Communities
6 Festus
7 Herculaneum
8 Kimmswick
9 Pevely
10 Scotsdale
11

All-Hazard Mitigation Plan Update: Jefferson County - East

Transcription

Similar documents

Jefferson Journal - Jamestown Public Schools

JEFFERSON CENTER JHS ALUMNI NEWS

Jefferson Memory Care Hosts Community Events

`Massive outbreak` kills 63

Welcome Spring!!! - Jefferson Memory Care

The Jeffersonian Ideal - Washington State University

the 2-sided map - Naperville

The Advisor - September 24, 2012

Flyer

2016 Ashe County Driving Map